The War on Christmas

[sojourner]

it makes no difference except in a personal sense.

I'm not convinced of that, but it seems to be the prevailing attitude here.

 

[sojourner]

why is there a black jesus but no black santa?

What would you call him? "Santa Cuz?"

 

[sojourner]

Ah, Sojourner,
I agree that "There's nothing wrong with assigning meaning to cultural icons."
As long as they're YOUR own icons! You sneaky little Christians assigned YOUR meaning to OUR "icons" and then you whine that WE are demeaning the "true" meaning of this age-old, pre-Christmas celebration. I want to throw up.

Once again, I don't know why you keep insisting on "ours" and "we," when you clearly stand outside the religion. I'd like to point out that you are not truly personally offended here. If, as you say, the celebration was a Pagan celebration, it does not include you, since you eschew Pagan gods in favor of atheism.

And, once again, it was the Pagan converts, themselves, who assigned a new meaning to their cultural symbols -- not someone "on the outside."

I never said that Pagans were demeaning Christmas. I'm on record (several times) as saying that if Pagans want to celebrate the Solstice, they are more than welcome to do so. We haven't taken ANYTHING from them, as you are attempting to do to us.

Stop projecting "the bad guy" on me, when it is clearly you who is either lying about his atheistic bent, or his Pagan leanings. One cannot be both.

 

[Storm]

Stop projecting "the bad guy" on me, when it is clearly you who is either lying about his atheistic bent, or his Pagan leanings. One cannot be both.

Well, ftr, there are non-theistic pagans. However, I don't think andys is one.

 

[sojourner]

Gee, you think perhaps it might have something to do with the recession?

I don't know. But whatever the cause, it has nothing to do with the spiritual tenets of Christmas. If, indeed, it is due to the "darkness" of the recession, then Xians can assert with Isaiah that "the people who walked in darkness have seen a great light."

 

[sojourner]

Well, ftr, there are non-theistic pagans. However, I don't think andys is one.

Thanks for clearing that up. I had no idea. To me, it sounds sort of like "non-messianic Christian."

 

[Storm]

Thanks for clearing that up. I had no idea. To me, it sounds sort of like "non-messianic Christian."

Basically, they believe that the Gods are akin to archetypes, forces of consciousness. I have an excellent article describing it if you're interested (and a couple of threads for discussing it).

 

[sojourner]

Basically, they believe that the Gods are akin to archetypes, forces of consciousness. I have an excellent article describing it if you're interested (and a couple of threads for discussing it).

I am interested, however, at this point in time, I think if I have to read one more thing, my eyes will explode out of their sockets and my brain will run out my ears.

 

[Storm]

I am interested, however, at this point in time, I think if I have to read one more thing, my eyes will explode out of their sockets and my brain will run out my ears.

LOL, I'll PM you the links so you can save them for later, then.

 

[sojourner]

LOL, I'll PM you the links so you can save them for later, then.

Thanks bunches!

 

[Storm]

Thanks bunches!

You're most welcome.

 

[andys]

This is too funny...
Listen to how Sojourner responds to this remark, made by another poster,
"Since Jesus was born in the Autumn of the year, then December could not be his birth date. "
Sojourner's reply:
"Makes no difference to the validity of the holiday."

Amazing. It makes no difference that you are celebrating someone's birthday, but it's NOT his birthday. That makes sense.

Then, Sojourner is back to his old tricks, twisting the truth completely backwards again:
"There was no 'relabeling' (which is what is going on now). Christmas was a completely new holiday, begun by the Pagan converts, themselves. They now believed that Saturn was, in actuality, Jesus. Keeping the symbols that were important and meaningful to them, they assigned new meanings that were congruent with their new faith."

At least now Sojourner is acknowledging that the early Christians DID, in fact, steal the original Yuletide celebration, including the symbols and the DATE!

Hmm, I thought the date didn't matter? And how Interesting that they would choose Dec. 25... Well here is why:

"Even the date of Christmas, December 25, was borrowed from another religion. At the time Christmas was created in AD 320, Mithraism was very popular. The early Christian church had gotten tired of their futile efforts to stop people celebrating the solstice and the birthday of Mithras, the Persian sun god. Mithras’ birthday was December 25. So the pope at the time decided to make Jesus’ official birthday coincide with Mithras’ birthday. No one knows what time of year Jesus was actually born but there is evidence to suggest that it was in midsummer."
(The Pagan Origins of Christmas)

For more facts about the true origins of Christmas, use these search words "pagan origin of twelve days of christmas".

 

[sojourner]

This is too funny...
Listen to how Sojourner responds to this remark, made by another poster,
"Since Jesus was born in the Autumn of the year, then December could not be his birth date. "
Sojourner's reply:
"Makes no difference to the validity of the holiday."

Amazing. It makes no difference that you are celebrating someone's birthday, but it's NOT his birthday. That makes sense.

Then, Sojourner is back to his old tricks, twisting the truth completely backwards again:
"There was no 'relabeling' (which is what is going on now). Christmas was a completely new holiday, begun by the Pagan converts, themselves. They now believed that Saturn was, in actuality, Jesus. Keeping the symbols that were important and meaningful to them, they assigned new meanings that were congruent with their new faith."

At least now Sojourner is acknowledging that the early Christians DID, in fact, steal the original Yuletide celebration, including the symbols and the DATE!

Hmm, I thought the date didn't matter? And how Interesting that they would choose Dec. 25... Well here is why:

"Even the date of Christmas, December 25, was borrowed from another religion. At the time Christmas was created in AD 320, Mithraism was very popular. The early Christian church had gotten tired of their futile efforts to stop people celebrating the solstice and the birthday of Mithras, the Persian sun god. Mithras’ birthday was December 25. So the pope at the time decided to make Jesus’ official birthday coincide with Mithras’ birthday. No one knows what time of year Jesus was actually born but there is evidence to suggest that it was in midsummer."
(The Pagan Origins of Christmas)

For more facts about the true origins of Christmas, use these search words "pagan origin of twelve days of christmas".

Since we're not celebrating a human birthday, but the Incarnation of God, exact human birth dates don't matter.

I'm not acknowledging that we stole anything. You're deliberately misrepresenting what I said. The symbols, the date, all are still there to be celebrated or ignored as any wish to do. How many times have I said that Pagans are more than welcome to celebrate in their own way at that time? Nothing was stolen. Note the statement: Completely new holiday..."

The historical vignette is essentially true, but there were also mitigating political forces at work that need to be studied in order to gain a true perspective of why the worship of Mithras was discouraged at that time.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I celebrate the birthdays of numerous people that I don't care about throughout the year. Of course, bribing me with cake is the only thing that gets me out of my cube.

 

[Mikael]

One quite funny thing is that the ancient nordic celebration that occurred on a date closest to modern day christmas was the "alfablot", a feast for the worship of what can be called gnomes/elves (in swedish "tomtar" wich is the same word we use for santa... Like santa worship...). One folk-expression that the christening clergy of my country never managed to totally wipe out, though they tried hard for a thousand years, is to put a bowl of porridge with a big scoop of butter at the corner of the house to please the house-gnomes . Some still do it!

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I think folks should simply celebrate in whatever way makes them happy. The only thing that destroys the sanctity of the celebration is fighting over territorial rights. :sarcastic

 

[blackout]

I think folks should simply celebrate in whatever way makes them happy. The only thing that destroys the sanctity of the celebration is fighting over territorial rights. :sarcastic

I agree sweetheart. It's all very silly. All the bickering.

Just do your own thing and be happy. :rainbow1:
(and not just on X day. )

 

[Storm]

I think folks should simply celebrate in whatever way makes them happy. The only thing that destroys the sanctity of the celebration is fighting over territorial rights. :sarcastic

:clap Hear, hear! :clap

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Ownership rights over fun always get me riled up.

 

[tumbleweed41]

I think folks should simply celebrate in whatever way makes them happy. The only thing that destroys the sanctity of the celebration is fighting over territorial rights. :sarcastic

:clap:clap:clap:clap
(Standing ovation)