I got a email from a patriotic group this week wishing to keep, and collect money for, keeping, 'Christ back in" Christmas. I wonder if at this time of the year there will be more of a upswing in the kind of intolerance for Christians who do not wish to keep Christmas at all because of their understanding? It puts us in a funny position. On the one hand we very much do want to have Christ in our lives but because of our understanding we feel that we are more keeping Christ by NOT keeping Christmas at all. I somehow wish to be non confrontal about this but never the less wrote back trying to explain my position on this. I gougled the subject and found many websites teaching my position out there. But I realize that in this like many, many things it's more of a paridign.

Who gives a shit? It's a Pagan holiday that the christians hijacked. Christ was never in Christmas to begin with. It was the winter solstice that had been celebrated on Dec. 25 for hundreds of years before Christ. The christians knew they couldn't stop people from celebrating it, so they attached Christ's name to it and the rest is history.

The christians know Jesus wasn't born on Dec. 25, but that's the reason they chose to use the winter solstice celebration to hijack and twist it into some goofy story of 3 wise men and a manger and all that nonsense.

Call it what you want, but don't expect the rest of us to give a shit.

Attachments:

Numbers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who gives a shit? It's a Pagan holiday that the
> christians hijacked. Christ was never in Christmas
> to begin with. It was the winter solstice that had
> been celebrated on Dec. 25 for hundreds of years
> before Christ. The christians knew they couldn't
> stop people from celebrating it, so they attached
> Christ's name to it and the rest is history.
>
> The christians know Jesus wasn't born on Dec. 25,
> but that's the reason they chose to use the winter
> solstice celebration to hijack and twist it into
> some goofy story of 3 wise men and a manger and
> all that nonsense.
>
> Call it what you want, but don't expect the rest
> of us to give a shit.



"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

To the OP's point, there is nothing "Christ" about Christmas. It is a pagan holiday with pagan traditions celebrated at a time of year that was probably nowhere near when Jesus was actually born. Also, what would this group actually do with the money it is collecting? It's not like they are actually helping anyone with there "cause."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> celebrated at a time of year that was
> probably nowhere near when Jesus was actually
> born.

pff... June is rather close to December. ;P


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

O'brian: "You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.
Christmas music."

Winston: "Nooooooo, Please, please.....Anything but Christmas music. Did I tell you I really hate rats?"

How to convert heathens to Christianity:

Step 1: Demonize their pantheon
Step 2: Keep their holidays and festivals, but make them all Jesus-y.
Step 3: Burn anyone who resists and a witch and a heretic.
Step 4: ???
Step 5: PROFIT!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Step 6:Secularize the holiday by inventing a happy fat man that is also a home invader who leaves presents and asks for nothing in return but milk and cookies.

You have to wonder at a holiday spirit that has rights to reverse-burglarize your home.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

I stole the christ from Xmass but you know what? It DIDNT STOP CHRISTMAS FROM COMING!


Every Who down in Whoville, the tall and the small, was singing, without any presents at all! He hadn't stopped Christmas from coming, it came! Somehow or other, it came just the same.

Numbers, are you Wiccan?

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Numbers, are you Wiccan?


Yes, I'm secretly a warlock and on Dec. 25, me and a bunch of hot naked witches form a pentagram and cast spells on christians.

Numbers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes, I'm secretly a warlock and on Dec. 25, me and
> a bunch of hot naked witches form a pentagram and
> cast spells on christians.



Just don't sacrifice any animals.

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How to convert heathens to Christianity:
>
> Step 1: Demonize their pantheon
> Step 2: Keep their holidays and festivals, but
> make them all Jesus-y.
> Step 3: Burn anyone who resists and a witch and a
> heretic.
> Step 4: ???
> Step 5: PROFIT!!!


whats step 4?

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Just don't sacrifice any animals.


I'd sacrifice humans before I ever sacrificed any animal. I like them way more than I like humans.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To the OP's point, there is nothing "Christ" about
> Christmas. It is a pagan holiday with pagan
> traditions celebrated at a time of year that was
> probably nowhere near when Jesus was actually
> born. Also, what would this group actually do with
> the money it is collecting? It's not like they are
> actually helping anyone with there "cause."


The "Solstice" which the Pagans celebrated, was on the 21st.

Regardless, who cares? It's a Christian Holiday, and it's been that way for a long time. If you don't like it, then don't celebrate it.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Numbers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Just don't sacrifice any animals.
>
>
> I'd sacrifice humans before I ever sacrificed any
> animal. I like them way more than I like humans.


What if you were starving?

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

ThePackLeader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> What if you were starving?


All bets are off at that point. That chicken's goin down!

hmm...


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
Attachments:

Seriously, who cares. It's not like "Santa" is a big obvious symbol of Christianity. He's a symbol of consumerism.

Christians will still go to church on Christmas eve. People will still spend too much on Christmas presents for people they don't want to buy anything for (let's face it, who wants to buy presents for coworkers).

This 'war on Christmas' is manufactured. What's happening is that other religions want in on the festivities and some Christians feel threatened. I don't hear any 'war on Hanuka" or anything like that. You hardly ever hear about anything from any other religious group having a 'war on them'.

Numbers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who gives a shit? It's a Pagan holiday that the
> christians hijacked. Christ was never in Christmas
> to begin with. It was the winter solstice that had
> been celebrated on Dec. 25 for hundreds of years
> before Christ. The christians knew they couldn't
> stop people from celebrating it, so they attached
> Christ's name to it and the rest is history.
>
> The christians know Jesus wasn't born on Dec. 25,
> but that's the reason they chose to use the winter
> solstice celebration to hijack and twist it into
> some goofy story of 3 wise men and a manger and
> all that nonsense.
>
> Call it what you want, but don't expect the rest
> of us to give a shit.


Its not a Pagan holiday . Winter Solstice was a seperate holiday in of itself. But the Christians were willing to compromise and allow some of the festivities to continue, but be centered on Christ. The Christmas tree is not Pagan- contrary to popular belief, its origins are in 18th Century Germany.

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seriously, who cares. It's not like "Santa" is a
> big obvious symbol of Christianity. He's a symbol
> of consumerism.
>
> Christians will still go to church on Christmas
> eve. People will still spend too much on
> Christmas presents for people they don't want to
> buy anything for (let's face it, who wants to buy
> presents for coworkers).
>
> This 'war on Christmas' is manufactured. What's
> happening is that other religions want in on the
> festivities and some Christians feel threatened.
> I don't hear any 'war on Hanuka" or anything like
> that. You hardly ever hear about anything from
> any other religious group having a 'war on them'.


Actually, Santa Claus is a Christian symbol. He is based on St. Nicolas- the patron St. of Children.

Im the hero here. It should be The Grinchmas if you ask me.

Correction Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its not a Pagan holiday . Winter Solstice was a
> seperate holiday in of itself. But the Christians
> were willing to compromise and allow some of the
> festivities to continue, but be centered on
> Christ. The Christmas tree is not Pagan- contrary
> to popular belief, its origins are in 18th Century
> Germany.



dude... saturnalia.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

Calculating Christmas
the Story Behind December 25
William J. Tighe

Many Christians think that Christians celebrate Christ’s birth on December 25th because the church fathers appropriated the date of a pagan festival. Almost no one minds, except for a few groups on the fringes of American Evangelicalism, who seem to think that this makes Christmas itself a pagan festival. But it is perhaps interesting to know that the choice of December 25th is the result of attempts among the earliest Christians to figure out the date of Jesus’ birth based on calendrical calculations that had nothing to do with pagan festivals.

Rather, the pagan festival of the “Birth of the Unconquered Son” instituted by the Roman Emperor Aurelian on 25 December 274, was almost certainly an attempt to create a pagan alternative to a date that was already of some significance to Roman Christians. Thus the “pagan origins of Christmas” is a myth without historical substance.

A Mistake
The idea that the date was taken from the pagans goes back to two scholars from the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Paul Ernst Jablonski, a German Protestant, wished to show that the celebration of Christ’s birth on December 25th was one of the many “paganizations” of Christianity that the Church of the fourth century embraced, as one of many “degenerations” that transformed pure apostolic Christianity into Catholicism. Dom Jean Hardouin, a Benedictine monk, tried to show that the Catholic Church adopted pagan festivals for Christian purposes without paganizing the gospel.

In the Julian calendar, created in 45 B.C. under Julius Caesar, the winter solstice fell on December 25th, and it therefore seemed obvious to Jablonski and Hardouin that the day must have had a pagan significance before it had a Christian one. But in fact, the date had no religious significance in the Roman pagan festal calendar before Aurelian’s time, nor did the cult of the sun play a prominent role in Rome before him.

There were two temples of the sun in Rome, one of which (maintained by the clan into which Aurelian was born or adopted) celebrated its dedication festival on August 9th, the other of which celebrated its dedication festival on August 28th. But both of these cults fell into neglect in the second century, when eastern cults of the sun, such as Mithraism, began to win a following in Rome. And in any case, none of these cults, old or new, had festivals associated with solstices or equinoxes.

As things actually happened, Aurelian, who ruled from 270 until his assassination in 275, was hostile to Christianity and appears to have promoted the establishment of the festival of the “Birth of the Unconquered Sun” as a device to unify the various pagan cults of the Roman Empire around a commemoration of the annual “rebirth” of the sun. He led an empire that appeared to be collapsing in the face of internal unrest, rebellions in the provinces, economic decay, and repeated attacks from German tribes to the north and the Persian Empire to the east.

In creating the new feast, he intended the beginning of the lengthening of the daylight, and the arresting of the lengthening of darkness, on December 25th to be a symbol of the hoped-for “rebirth,” or perpetual rejuvenation, of the Roman Empire, resulting from the maintenance of the worship of the gods whose tutelage (the Romans thought) had brought Rome to greatness and world-rule. If it co-opted the Christian celebration, so much the better.

A By-Product
It is true that the first evidence of Christians celebrating December 25th as the date of the Lord’s nativity comes from Rome some years after Aurelian, in A.D. 336, but there is evidence from both the Greek East and the Latin West that Christians attempted to figure out the date of Christ’s birth long before they began to celebrate it liturgically, even in the second and third centuries. The evidence indicates, in fact, that the attribution of the date of December 25th was a by-product of attempts to determine when to celebrate his death and resurrection.

How did this happen? There is a seeming contradiction between the date of the Lord’s death as given in the synoptic Gospels and in John’s Gospel. The synoptics would appear to place it on Passover Day (after the Lord had celebrated the Passover Meal on the preceding evening), and John on the Eve of Passover, just when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered in the Jerusalem Temple for the feast that was to ensue after sunset on that day.

Solving this problem involves answering the question of whether the Lord’s Last Supper was a Passover Meal, or a meal celebrated a day earlier, which we cannot enter into here. Suffice it to say that the early Church followed John rather than the synoptics, and thus believed that Christ’s death would have taken place on 14 Nisan, according to the Jewish lunar calendar. (Modern scholars agree, by the way, that the death of Christ could have taken place only in A.D. 30 or 33, as those two are the only years of that time when the eve of Passover could have fallen on a Friday, the possibilities being either 7 April 30 or 3 April 33.)

However, as the early Church was forcibly separated from Judaism, it entered into a world with different calendars, and had to devise its own time to celebrate the Lord’s Passion, not least so as to be independent of the rabbinic calculations of the date of Passover. Also, since the Jewish calendar was a lunar calendar consisting of twelve months of thirty days each, every few years a thirteenth month had to be added by a decree of the Sanhedrin to keep the calendar in synchronization with the equinoxes and solstices, as well as to prevent the seasons from “straying” into inappropriate months.

Apart from the difficulty Christians would have had in following—or perhaps even being accurately informed about—the dating of Passover in any given year, to follow a lunar calendar of their own devising would have set them at odds with both Jews and pagans, and very likely embroiled them in endless disputes among themselves. (The second century saw severe disputes about whether Pascha had always to fall on a Sunday or on whatever weekday followed two days after 14 Artemision/Nisan, but to have followed a lunar calendar would have made such problems much worse.)

These difficulties played out in different ways among the Greek Christians in the eastern part of the empire and the Latin Christians in the western part of it. Greek Christians seem to have wanted to find a date equivalent to 14 Nisan in their own solar calendar, and since Nisan was the month in which the spring equinox occurred, they chose the 14th day of Artemision, the month in which the spring equinox invariably fell in their own calendar. Around A.D. 300, the Greek calendar was superseded by the Roman calendar, and since the dates of the beginnings and endings of the months in these two systems did not coincide, 14 Artemision became April 6th.

In contrast, second-century Latin Christians in Rome and North Africa appear to have desired to establish the historical date on which the Lord Jesus died. By the time of Tertullian they had concluded that he died on Friday, 25 March 29. (As an aside, I will note that this is impossible: 25 March 29 was not a Friday, and Passover Eve in A.D. 29 did not fall on a Friday and was not on March 25th, or in March at all.)

Integral Age
So in the East we have April 6th, in the West, March 25th. At this point, we have to introduce a belief that seems to have been widespread in Judaism at the time of Christ, but which, as it is nowhere taught in the Bible, has completely fallen from the awareness of Christians. The idea is that of the “integral age” of the great Jewish prophets: the idea that the prophets of Israel died on the same dates as their birth or conception.

This notion is a key factor in understanding how some early Christians came to believe that December 25th is the date of Christ’s birth. The early Christians applied this idea to Jesus, so that March 25th and April 6th were not only the supposed dates of Christ’s death, but of his conception or birth as well. There is some fleeting evidence that at least some first- and second-century Christians thought of March 25th or April 6th as the date of Christ’s birth, but rather quickly the assignment of March 25th as the date of Christ’s conception prevailed.

It is to this day, commemorated almost universally among Christians as the Feast of the Annunciation, when the Archangel Gabriel brought the good tidings of a savior to the Virgin Mary, upon whose acquiescence the Eternal Word of God (“Light of Light, True God of True God, begotten of the Father before all ages”) forthwith became incarnate in her womb. What is the length of pregnancy? Nine months. Add nine months to March 25th and you get December 25th; add it to April 6th and you get January 6th. December 25th is Christmas, and January 6th is Epiphany.

Christmas (December 25th) is a feast of Western Christian origin. In Constantinople it appears to have been introduced in 379 or 380. From a sermon of St. John Chrysostom, at the time a renowned ascetic and preacher in his native Antioch, it appears that the feast was first celebrated there on 25 December 386. From these centers it spread throughout the Christian East, being adopted in Alexandria around 432 and in Jerusalem a century or more later. The Armenians, alone among ancient Christian churches, have never adopted it, and to this day celebrate Christ’s birth, manifestation to the magi, and baptism on January 6th.

Western churches, in turn, gradually adopted the January 6th Epiphany feast from the East, Rome doing so sometime between 366 and 394. But in the West, the feast was generally presented as the commemoration of the visit of the magi to the infant Christ, and as such, it was an important feast, but not one of the most important ones—a striking contrast to its position in the East, where it remains the second most important festival of the church year, second only to Pascha (Easter).

In the East, Epiphany far outstrips Christmas. The reason is that the feast celebrates Christ’s baptism in the Jordan and the occasion on which the Voice of the Father and the Descent of the Spirit both manifested for the first time to mortal men the divinity of the Incarnate Christ and the Trinity of the Persons in the One Godhead.

A Christian Feast
Thus, December 25th as the date of the Christ’s birth appears to owe nothing whatsoever to pagan influences upon the practice of the Church during or after Constantine’s time. It is wholly unlikely to have been the actual date of Christ’s birth, but it arose entirely from the efforts of early Latin Christians to determine the historical date of Christ’s death.

And the pagan feast which the Emperor Aurelian instituted on that date in the year 274 was not only an effort to use the winter solstice to make a political statement, but also almost certainly an attempt to give a pagan significance to a date already of importance to Roman Christians. The Christians, in turn, could at a later date re-appropriate the pagan “Birth of the Unconquered Sun” to refer, on the occasion of the birth of Christ, to the rising of the “Sun of Salvation” or the “Sun of Justice.”

William J. Tighe is Associate Professor of History at Muhlenberg College in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-10-012-v


Related articles:
http://www.nctimes.com/special_reports/religion/article_02be170e-822f-5faf-8d4c-fc355b37393d.html

http://www.ancient-future.net/christmasdate.html

http://www.theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/31JdXn/Christnty/SpLf/ChYr/ChristmDat.htm

Truth seeker wrote:
"I got a email from a patriotic group this week wishing to keep, and collect money for, keeping, 'Christ back in" Christmas. I wonder if at this time of the year there will be more of a upswing in the kind of intolerance for Christians who do not wish to keep Christmas at all because of their understanding? It puts us in a funny position. On the one hand we very much do want to have Christ in our lives but because of our understanding we feel that we are more keeping Christ by NOT keeping Christmas at all. I somehow wish to be non confrontal about this but never the less wrote back trying to explain my position on this. I gougled the subject and found many websites teaching my position out there. But I realize that in this like many, many things it's more of a paridign."
____________________________

Ha! Did you actually think anyone would buy this?

Oh, wait, Numbers did.

hahaha

I believe my reaction to this was "who gives a shit?". How is that buying it?

In fact, why the fuck am I even responding to your dumb ass when you're the one that believes in unicorns, talking snakes and zombies.

Correction Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Pangloss Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Seriously, who cares. It's not like "Santa" is
> a
> > big obvious symbol of Christianity. He's a
> symbol
> > of consumerism.
> >
> > Christians will still go to church on Christmas
> > eve. People will still spend too much on
> > Christmas presents for people they don't want
> to
> > buy anything for (let's face it, who wants to
> buy
> > presents for coworkers).
> >
> > This 'war on Christmas' is manufactured.
> What's
> > happening is that other religions want in on
> the
> > festivities and some Christians feel threatened.
>
> > I don't hear any 'war on Hanuka" or anything
> like
> > that. You hardly ever hear about anything from
> > any other religious group having a 'war on
> them'.
>
>
> Actually, Santa Claus is a Christian symbol. He is
> based on St. Nicolas- the patron St. of Children.


I'm not arguing that Santa's origins were not Christian. I'm arguing that Santa is not a representation of Christian ideals. If you think he is, then please tell me how a guy in red, sporting a white beard and sipping on a Pepsi is supposed to remind us that Jesus died on the cross for our sins?

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not arguing that Santa's origins were not
> Christian. I'm arguing that Santa is not a
> representation of Christian ideals. If you think
> he is, then please tell me how a guy in red,
> sporting a white beard and sipping on a Pepsi is
> supposed to remind us that Jesus died on the cross
> for our sins?

It doesn't.

If Santa was sipping Coke, though, that'd be a different story...

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> >
> > Actually, Santa Claus is a Christian symbol. He
> is
> > based on St. Nicolas- the patron St. of
> Children.
>
>
> I'm not arguing that Santa's origins were not
> Christian. I'm arguing that Santa is not a
> representation of Christian ideals. If you think
> he is, then please tell me how a guy in red,
> sporting a white beard and sipping on a Pepsi is
> supposed to remind us that Jesus died on the cross
> for our sins?


Santa Claus is obviously Christian because he doesn't give toys to Jewish or Muslim children. He's a Christian a-hole.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Pangloss Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > >
> > > Actually, Santa Claus is a Christian symbol.
> He
> > is
> > > based on St. Nicolas- the patron St. of
> > Children.
> >
> >
> > I'm not arguing that Santa's origins were not
> > Christian. I'm arguing that Santa is not a
> > representation of Christian ideals. If you
> think
> > he is, then please tell me how a guy in red,
> > sporting a white beard and sipping on a Pepsi
> is
> > supposed to remind us that Jesus died on the
> cross
> > for our sins?
>
>
> Santa Claus is obviously Christian because he
> doesn't give toys to Jewish or Muslim children.
> He's a Christian a-hole.


And he runs a sweatshop full of elves.

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

Warhawk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> >
> >
> > Santa Claus is obviously Christian because he
> > doesn't give toys to Jewish or Muslim children.
> > He's a Christian a-hole.
>
>
> And he runs a sweatshop full of elves.


And I bet they are all Buddhists or Mormons.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Numbers wrote:
"I believe my reaction to this was "who gives a shit?". How is that buying it?

In fact, why the fuck am I even responding to your dumb ass when you're the one that believes in unicorns, talking snakes and zombies."
__________________________________

Relax, Numbers.

I was merely pointing out that the OP wrote a "fake" post and that you responded as if it were for "real."

Sometimes when we're wildly passionate about a subject as you are about your atheism and your hatred of Christians, it's easy to be fooled.

And, what's wrong with talking snakes? The white house is crawling with them.

I have a feeling if Jesus were standing around a living room on Christmas morning watching parents give their kids an X-Box 360 with Halo and saying, "This is in the spirit of Jesus," JC's head would explode.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I thought that giving gifts was supposed to be similar to the gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh that were given to Christ by the three Magi. I suppose his head would have exploded then if it was really an issue.

That's why it was called the 12 days of Christmas. It went from Dec 25th to Jan 6th (the Epiphany).

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2009 03:27PM by Registered Voter.

"Everybody here comes Jeee-sus,
And he doesn't look too haaaaa-ppy"

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

I was with you up to the part where the parents say, "This is in the spirit of Jesus."
Would parents actually say such a weird thing?

Alias Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was with you up to the part where the parents
> say, "This is in the spirit of Jesus."
> Would parents actually say such a weird thing?

Is it any weirder than, say, eating crackers and pretending they're the body of Jesus?

I'm just curious at what point consumerism starts being a sin and cannibalism stops.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Mr.Mephisto wrote:
"Is it any weirder than, say, eating crackers and pretending they're the body of Jesus?"
____________________

That is part of a religious ceremony. All religions have some form of mystical belief system. I don't care what people believe or don't believe. I was raised Catholic but I don't necessarily believe in all aspects of that religion. I do believe in God.

Maybe I misunderstood Washington, but I thought he was referring to parents handing a child an X-Box and saying, "This is in the spirit of Jesus." I don't understand why someone would say that.

Regarding the commercialization of Christmas.... I agree that it has become obscene. I have walked out of stores that have Christmas decorations up in October or even November. I don't turn on my Christmas lights until December 15th. (tonight) And, my tree goes up two nights before Christmas. I used to wait till Christmas Eve but I sacrificed that tradition a few years ago.

I do, though, contribute to the consumerism aspect of Christmas. I usually buy the mother of all trees and I also buy gifts for my family.

But, I don't hand someone a gift and say... This is in the spirit of Jesus. (I don't even know WTF that means)

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is it any weirder than, say, eating crackers and
> pretending they're the body of Jesus?

Christians who believe in the Real Presence (Catholics, Lutherans, certain Anglicans, and others) are not pretending (although, in your view, they may be deluded).

The basis for their belief is found in several passages in the New Testament, notably:

     Jesus answered and said to them... "I am the living bread that (came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh."

     Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?"

     So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.

     "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

     "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.

     "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

     "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me" (John 6:43, 51-57).

Because of this teaching, "many of His disciples turned back and no longer followed Him" (John 6:66).

In particular, Judas lost his faith on this occasion (John 6:70-71), although he was not honest enough to turn away.


> I'm just curious at what point consumerism starts
> being a sin and cannibalism stops.

Cannibalism is when one individual physically eats the human flesh off of another’s body. Christ is not received in the Eucharist in a form in which cannibalism would be possible. His body is really, truly, and substantially present, but in sacramental, not in natural form. If the priest at the altar brought down Christ from heaven in His natural state as a full-grown man (i.e., in a form consistent with the possibility of cannibalism), this would not be a sacrament at all. That's the gist of the distinction. A more complete explanation would require delving into theological and philosophical concepts and terminology.

I don't expect you to believe any of this. I am just trying to explain the belief of those who do hold this view.

Alias Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I was raised Catholic but I don't
> necessarily believe in all aspects of that
> religion. I do believe in God.


Soooo, you pick and choose what parts YOU like and leave the other stuff out? Does that mean you only believe certain parts of the bible? What aspects of catholicism don't you believe in?

You're like most people in this country, part-time religious. Christmas, Easter, funerals, weddings, the odd trauma or tragedy, but the rest of the time it's no holes barred.

Alias, why don't you use this Christmas to say goodbye to all that nonsense and deconvert. That's the time when a lot of people do. You can still celebrate like the rest of us do, but this year you can free yourself of the oppression and fear from the invisible meglomaniac in the sky. Join us, where there actually are really hot lesbians and even non missionary position sex.

Numbers wrote:

"Soooo, you pick and choose what parts YOU like and leave the other stuff out?"

Yep. That's what I do.

"Does that mean you only believe certain parts of the bible? "

No, not at all.

"What aspects of catholicism don't you believe in?"

This and that.

"You're like most people in this country, part-time religious. Christmas, Easter, funerals, weddings, the odd trauma or tragedy, but the rest of the time it's no holes barred."

I'm really into the funeral mass.

"Alias, why don't you use this Christmas to say goodbye to all that nonsense and deconvert. That's the time when a lot of people do. You can still celebrate like the rest of us do, but this year you can free yourself of the oppression and fear from the invisible meglomaniac in the sky. Join us, where there actually are really hot lesbians and even non missionary position sex."

Non missionary position sex? You almost had me, but that's over the top.

Numbers, I wish you a very merry gender free sexually organic holiday and a happy aids free culturally diverse multi partner New Year.

I really think we should keep Christ in Christmas.

That way, we're justified in keeping Tyr in Tuesday, Odin in Wednesday, and Thor in Thursday.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a feeling if Jesus were standing around a
> living room on Christmas morning watching parents
> give their kids an X-Box 360 with Halo and saying,
> "This is in the spirit of Jesus," JC's head would
> explode.


Are you kidding? He'd be arrested for breaking and entering and then deported.

Re: 'keeping" Christ in Christmas?! new
Posted by: MrMephisto ()
Date: December 16, 2009 09:26AM


I really think we should keep Christ in Christmas.

That way, we're justified in keeping Tyr in Tuesday, Odin in Wednesday, and Thor in Thursday.

-----------------------------------
I couldn't really say that I wish you were here, but thank you all the same.





+1

---------------------------------------------------
W.W.S.D. what would Scooby Doo

Truth seeker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I got a email from a patriotic group this week
> wishing to keep, and collect money for, keeping,
> 'Christ back in" Christmas. I wonder if at this
> time of the year there will be more of a upswing
> in the kind of intolerance for Christians who do
> not wish to keep Christmas at all because of their
> understanding? It puts us in a funny position. On
> the one hand we very much do want to have Christ
> in our lives but because of our understanding we
> feel that we are more keeping Christ by NOT
> keeping Christmas at all. I somehow wish to be non
> confrontal about this but never the less wrote
> back trying to explain my position on this. I
> gougled the subject and found many websites
> teaching my position out there. But I realize that
> in this like many, many things it's more of a
> paridign.


I dont think most christians know what christmas really is, it isnt a celebration of christ, its a consumer holiday. An excuse to get the economy started. Christ wasnt even born on december 25th (if he existed at all). It was an adaptation of old pagan and druidic holidays that celebrated the winter solstice. The catholic church in an effort to make the pagans feel more at ease as they forced them to convert to christianity, adopted and adapted the holiday into something they would be some what familiar with. But hey, if you take it for whats it is, a time to spend time with family and the ones you love, I say its worth it.

Kenny wrote:
"I dont think most christians know what christmas really is, it isnt a celebration of christ, its a consumer holiday."
_______________

Kenny, if you're unattached at the moment, I'd like to introduce you to this really cool guy, named Vince.