Christians cancel christmas

[Northstander]

Why didn't the wise men get some beer and strippers in, dunno how much I have spent every year so I can come bearing friggin gifts!!!

 

[Juan Albion]

One is a fairly accurate statement of facts regarding names at the time.

Really? I guess Cleopatra met Bob Anthony then...

 

[Lokki 7]

Really? I guess Cleopatra met Bob Anthony then...

I would bet a large sum no one called him Mark

 

[Brovion]

Which is why I'm still waiting for you to support your claim that "the date [of Easter] is picked on a distinctly pagan basis."

OK, we're not going to agree. I'm an Anglican and I'm guessing you're a Fundementalist. My 'distinctly pagan' view is because:

a) Easter is a movable feast. It's date is decided by lunar cycles and the spring equinox. The date of Passover played a part which is why I said 'distinctly' pagan not 'totally' pagan.

b) The word 'Easter' is of non-Christian origin. I accept that the word for 'Easter' is based on Passover in other European languages (Paque in French for example) but you are left with the awkward fact that we have a word of Pagan origin describing a Christian festival. How do you account for that?

c) Eggs and Bunnies have always been associated with Easter. This is because they were used to represent fertility and re-birth. Like the Cross they were not originally Christian symbols but like the Cross we've adopted them. Why are they there?

I think we're going to have to call it quits. I believe that Easter and Christmas are Christian adaptions of earlier festivals whereas you believe they are not. I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me.

 

[Titanic]

c) Eggs and Bunnies have always been associated with Easter. This is because they were used to represent fertility and re-birth. Like the Cross they were not originally Christian symbols but like the Cross we've adopted them.

Can you tell me where in any Anglican liturgical worship there are references to the significance of eggs or bunnies ??

 

[Brovion]

Can you tell me where in any Anglican liturical worship there are references to the significance of eggs or bunnies ??

Oh don't you start! You know full well there isn't! You and Juan will also know that apart from the Mass (described in the Last Supper) the Gospels are pretty open as to what constitutes 'worship'. Consequently we've invented it (and adpated existing customs) as we go along. The practise of decorating eggs and using them as part of the Easter Service certainly takes place in the Eastern church. Also an old British custom was that any eggs laid during Lent were hard-boiled and painted red (for the blood of Christ) and given as gifts on Easter Sunday. Later, eggs also came to symbolise the oval stone that was rolled away from the tomb of Jesus.

Things like that weren't just invented by the Church - they were adapted.

 

[Titanic]

Oh don't you start!

Merry Advent one and all ! Ho, Ho Ho !

 

[Juan Albion]

You know, I think you are looking at this in a rather parochial way. It may be the case that the date of Easter coincidentally coincided with a pagan festival in England, but that wouldn't be that surprising. However, Easter is a worldwide event not just an English one. You cannot comment on the dating of Easter simply based on the English situation. The date of Easter, as you yourself told us, was originally settled at the Council of Nicaea, with further modifications regarding exactly when the equinox was. If this is the case, you can hardly imagine that a clash of dates with anything in England was more than coincidental. Try expanding your view of Easter globally just a little. When I think of Easter I don't happen to think of England at all.

And the use of the moon in setting the date of Easter was simply because that followed how Passover was set. Nothing pagan at all. Not 'distinctly' or 'totally.'

And I'm about as far from a fundamentalist as you could get.

And no, personally I've never thought of bunnies in connection with Easter. Nor did anyone before the sixteenth century as far as I know.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Jesus birth is historical fact. Whether he was the son of god and whether you believe in him and/or god is your choice, but he was born. The only calender used at the time was the jewish one. Still used to this day. We are in year 5000 or something.

So when Christians using the new gregorian calendar in 1752 needed a date to celebrate the birth, death and resurrection they borrowed pagan festival dates. No doubt to convert those followers. They needed dates so why

Also it was not the Romans that wanted jesus crucified but the jews. Hence the term 'washing my hands of it' reportedly said by Pilate to the jewish kings when they asked for jesus to be crucified for saying he was the son of god. This is also documented

Even now the church is starting to recognise that alot of stuff in the bible are parables and extensions of the truth, such as the valley of dry bones and the feeding of thousands etc.

 

[Lokki 7]

Jesus birth is historical fact. Whether he was the son of god and whether you believe in him and/or god is your choice, but he was born.

Historical fact my arse. Who are you to say with confidence that ANY event actually took place 2,000 years ago. Were you there?
Of course the evidence may lead us to the conclusion that he was born, but you cannot know, that is just your interpretation of the known evidence.

Am I a man dreaming I am a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming that I am a man?

 

[Brovion]

You know, I think you are looking at this in a rather parochial way. ....

Parochial or not - it's been superimposed on existing Pagan festivals and borrowed Pagan imagery!

However I've done some research and I will concede that the link between Passover and Easter (as far as setting the date is concerned) is more similar than I had thought. I knew that Passover was computed using tables based on the Hebrew calendar and I knew Easter was based on the Equinox. However it transpires that the Church uses something called 'Ecclesiastical full moons' which are different from Astronomnical full moons.

So as far as the date setting goes I accept it is more closely, but not 100%, based on the Jewish faith.

............ but I was right about everything else!

 

[readingstockport]

You know, I think you are looking at this in a rather parochial way. It may be the case that the date of Easter coincidentally coincided with a pagan festival in England, but that wouldn't be that surprising. However, Easter is a worldwide event not just an English one.

Sorry but that is just pure rubbish. The spring festival is celebrated all over the world. Gearmany and central Europe have always celebrated a festival at that time. The native Americans have long celebrated festivals at that time, as did the Inca and Mayans. They even celebrated festivals at that time of the year in Africa long before christianity was invented. Wrap it up like you like but Easter is held on or around the date of pre-christian festivals. To continue denying this simply shows you to be unwilling to accept you can be wrong about these things.

 

[Donny Osmond]

Is Jesus actually Jesus's correct name. I am sure I read somewhere that he was actually called Esa.
I wont add anything productive to this thread because as far as religion is concerned, I have got a clue.
What really annoys me is that Jesus has allways been described to me as white when he is of middle eastern origin.
Oh and all R.E teachers should be inpartial to any religion and not preachy, so that kids growing up can make up there own minds.

 

[Chicken Run]

Another major mistake of popular Christianity is concerning the birthday of Jesus. The shepherds were sleeping in the fields with their flocks at the time of Christ's birth (Luke 2:8); they would not have been doing this at Christmas time, during the winter. Christ lived for 33.5 years and then died at the feast of Passover, which is at Easter time. He must therefore have been born six months the other side of Easter - i.e. around September/October.

December 25 was originally the date of a pagan feast in pre-Christian Europe. The Acts of the Apostles records how the true Christians were badly persecuted by the pagans because of their beliefs. Time and again the apostles warned that because of this, some Christians would adopt pagan beliefs, to enable them to make their religion more palatable to the pagans around them (e.g. Acts 20:30; 1 John 2:18; 2 Thess. 2:3; 2 Peter 2:1-3). The adoption of December 25 as a Christian festival is a prime example of this. Christmas trees, mistletoe etc. can all be traced back to pagan rites practiced on December 25.

It follows from this that true Christians should not celebrate the birth of Christ on December 25. In practice, true believers will make use of most public holidays, e.g. Christmas, to fellowship together wherever possible.

As a christian I find the thread offensive please remove moderators

 

[dougdeep]

All this fuss over a story book.

 

[Juan Albion]

............ but I was right about everything else!

That's fine - I wasn't arguing about anything else. You were the only one doing that.

 

[Juan Albion]

Sorry but that is just pure rubbish. The spring festival is celebrated all over the world. Gearmany and central Europe have always celebrated a festival at that time. The native Americans have long celebrated festivals at that time, as did the Inca and Mayans. They even celebrated festivals at that time of the year in Africa long before christianity was invented. Wrap it up like you like but Easter is held on or around the date of pre-christian festivals.

Yes but that is purely coincidental. Easter has to be held then because, if you actually bother to read the story, it happened at the Passover. Which just happens to be in the spring. Which is when a lot of people also celebrate the arrival of, err, spring. What did you want them to do? Move it to August?

Obviously your understanding of this issue is about on a par with your taste in football teams.

 

[Yorkie]

Is Jesus actually Jesus's correct name. I am sure I read somewhere that he was actually called Esa.
I wont add anything productive to this thread because as far as religion is concerned, I have got a clue.
What really annoys me is that Jesus has allways been described to me as white when he is of middle eastern origin.
Oh and all R.E teachers should be inpartial to any religion and not preachy, so that kids growing up can make up there own minds.

Joshua or Jeshua is the Hebrew equivalent.

The problem with the white depiction is that in the Middle Ages and the Reformation, most of the painters were European and so painted Biblical scenes with European faces.
A lot of Jewish people do look white.

As far as I am aware most RE teachers are not Christian (unless at a specific church school) and don't have any bias at all. Even when I was at school we learned about other religions too.

 

[Chicken Run]

Joshua or Jeshua is the Hebrew equivalent.

The problem with the white depiction is that in the Middle Ages and the Reformation, most of the painters were European and so painted Biblical scenes with European faces.
A lot of Jewish people do look white.

As far as I am aware most RE teachers are not Christian (unless at a specific church school) and don't have any bias at all. Even when I was at school we learned about other religions too.

V.Sensible response

 

[Juan Albion]

Is Jesus actually Jesus's correct name. I am sure I read somewhere that he was actually called Esa.
I wont add anything productive to this thread because as far as religion is concerned, I have got a clue.
What really annoys me is that Jesus has allways been described to me as white when he is of middle eastern origin.
Oh and all R.E teachers should be inpartial to any religion and not preachy, so that kids growing up can make up there own minds.

I'd go along with what Yorkie said. I have Jewish friends and you couldn't tell they were Jewish from their complexion.

But that is rather beside the point anyway. You tend to see white faces because you are in a predominantly white country. People have always been influenced by their own culture. Over here I have seen plenty of pictures of Jesus as a native north American. There are also plenty of pictures in which he is protrayed as black. It hardly matters as we don't exactly have a polaroid snap to compare it with.

BTW, this is rather like Brovian's problem with pagan traditions lingering in England at Easter (and other places). Local culture has always been absorbed and reflected in beliefs wherever you go, and there is nothing surprising or wrong about that. It is as it should be. I, for example, take great pleasure in sharing Smudging ceremonies with my Christian native friends. This doesn't make them (or me) any less Christian.