Nice, thanks for sharing!
The Origins of X-Mas
-
And I’m saying that no, they have become two separate holidays religious and secular.
The new secular holidays have not replaced the religious. Don’t arrogantly assume that because you, a non-christian, do not celbrate a Christian holiday, and instead celebrate a secular spin-off, that it is gone.
P.S. Donahue is an old hack who should go back to the Mausoleam they draged him out of.
-
First, GeZe, your friend is an animist (one who practices animism)
Maybe… but it could be also a polytheist. Celtics ritual are often called “withery”, and those who worship Cernunnos and Belenus often call themself “witch”, and it’s not animism, it’s polytheism. So it’s not necessarely animism.
-
First, GeZe, your friend is an animist (one who practices animism)
Maybe… but it could be also a polytheist. Celtics ritual are often called “withery”, and those who worship Cernunnos and Belenus often call themself “witch”, and it’s not animism, it’s polytheism. So it’s not necessarely animism.
I think he calls himself a wicth because of the christian prosecution
-
I may not be Christian, but my family is. All they do religiously is go to an extra mass, and the few Easter masses I’ve gone to are filled with people balancing their checkbooks.
-
That’s just wrong. I grew up Roman Catholic. Sermons can be quite interesting at times if you care to listen…
-
Okay. I try not to post huge, long reproductions of texts, but I found that I could not summarize this one to my satisfaction, so here goes.
SANTA CLAUS
Santa Claus is that jolly old fellow who appears once a year, and then only to do good by bringing toys and games to “good little children.” Is that ALL there is to “Santa?” No, my Christian friend [oh, btw, did I forget to mention I took this from the tract “Is Christmas Christian?” written for Christians? :wink: ], it is not.
Although you may not believe in “evolution,” [again, evidence of the tract I took it from :) ] Santa, as we know him today, is a product of evolution. Let us trace his origin from the ancient times.
In Egypt, where the mother and child were worshipped, the “father-god” was know as “Khons” or “Khonos.” the name means “huntsman,” or “god of the chase,” and scholars have identified him as the “Nimrod” of Genesis 10, “the mighty hunter,” and the builder of “Babel” (or Babylon). (Pagan gods are always deified humans, but that is a story far too long for this small book). He is represented in both Babylon and Egypt as a half-man and half-bull, and also half-man and half-horse (the centaur of mythology), usually with wings, and he is called “Baal-abirin,” or “the winged one.” He is called “the omnipotent one,” and also “the unknown one,” giving him the unknowable qualities that left him in the background. He would be “THE UNKNOWN GOD” worshipped in Athens in Acts 17:23.
Over the centuries, his images evolved into more human form, usually clothed in a leopard skin, signifying his hunting prowess over the swiftest of animals. This spotted garment became a mark of kings and priests in Africa and Asia. the priests of “Bacchus” in Greece were clothed in leopard skins, later adopting the spotted skin of a young fawn or dyeing their robes to look like a spotted skin.
The “spotted deer” seems to have been adopted as combining both the spots of the leopard and the bull (or calf) of idol worship. In Ninevah, the capitol of Assyria, statues of Nimrod (Baal) show him wearing a spotted deer skin, or in some cases, carrying a spotted deer, AND NOW WE ARE GETTING CLOSE TO “SANTA CLAUS!”
In the drawing of Nimrod, above left, [unfortunately, I do not know how to reproduce this drawing] the similarity to “Santa Claus” can be seen in the long, flowing, white beard, the ornate dress, the “reindeer,” the fir tree (the “Christmas” tree!), and the wings, giving him power to “fly through the air!”
The drawing (above right) [please see my previous excuse :D] is of the Greek “Bacchus” and the similarity is certain. He does not carry the spotted deer but has a spotted robe, the tree of uncertain origin, and the “cup,” the symbol of drunken revelry, so great a part of “Christmas.” [although personally, I associate drunkenness (is that how you spell it?) with New Year’s]Everything in caps and italics for emphasis in there was the author’s doing. my only input was the comments within the brackets and i change the word “deified” so it would be spelled correctly. i can’t stand finding spelling errors in stuff i read or stuff i write. silly pet peeve. oh well. I won’t accept this as ABSOLUTE fact, but it is an interesting theory. i find it harder to accept as fact because i don’t agree with other stuff in the booklet. namely is aversion to ham because the Bible forbids it. that’s old testament. in the new testament, God tells Peter that all the animals are good for food.
Anyway, sorry about the tangent. The Christmas tree is mentioned in Jeremiah 10:3-4, but not as a “Christmas” tree. Well, here I go again. I promise not to make this a habit.For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
The tree was the people’s idol.
Well, I’m pretty sure this is the longest post I’ve ever made. Hopefully, they won’t always be like this. It amkes it hard to get to reading the rest of the new posts. -
Speaking of Christian holidays, tomorrow is New Year’s and my question for all you Christians is why New Year’s is the day of Jesus’ circumcision. It seems odd to celebrate the new year from a Jewish ritual thast occured to Jesus.
Yes, Jeremiah does speak of putting trees in one’s home as a pagan ritual which is quite ironic considering Christians did this in the Middle Ages while they burned pagans and burned Jews while celebrating New Year’s.
Also, wasn’t Jesus really born in Nazareth and wasn’t his mother a prostitute? That’s what I’ve heard from some sources.
-
w.r.t. Jesus circumcision - i’m not a big celebrator of new years or circumcisions. At the same time, i don’t know anyone who celebrates this “event”. It was an important time in that a high priest who was very faithful to God announced that this was God’s answer - the Messaih, and he was blessed to see Jesus before he died, and we acknowledge it in a way that we acknowledge other events in Jesus’ life.
Also that “Jewish” ritual which Christians abandoned is still viewed as an important rite of the covenant between God and the Jews.
With regards to the Christians burning pagans - “bad Christians”. We’ll leave Jewish persecution stories out of this.
Finally i have heard nothing to indicate that Jesus was born in Nazareth. He was “from” Nazareth in the same way that if i was born in Toronto, but lived in Winnipeg from my 2nd birthday, i would be “of Winnipeg”.
With regards to the “prostitute” - you’re confusing Jesus’ mother Mary (a virgin) with Mary Magdalene - a prostitute who he befriended. -
I’m from Bulgaria, and bulgaria was under communist rule from 1943 to 1990 and they didnt allow you to have christmas because that was a religios holiday. so all the christmas stuff was moved to new year so on midnight magicly presants would appear on your doorstep and so on. so now there is no tradition for new years anymore because newyears was our christmas.
-
@cystic:
w.r.t. Jesus circumcision - i’m not a big celebrator of new years or circumcisions. At the same time, i don’t know anyone who celebrates this “event”. It was an important time in that a high priest who was very faithful to God announced that this was God’s answer - the Messaih, and he was blessed to see Jesus before he died, and we acknowledge it in a way that we acknowledge other events in Jesus’ life.
Also that “Jewish” ritual which Christians abandoned is still viewed as an important rite of the covenant between God and the Jews.
With regards to the Christians burning pagans - “bad Christians”. We’ll leave Jewish persecution stories out of this.
Finally i have heard nothing to indicate that Jesus was born in Nazareth. He was “from” Nazareth in the same way that if i was born in Toronto, but lived in Winnipeg from my 2nd birthday, i would be “of Winnipeg”.
With regards to the “prostitute” - you’re confusing Jesus’ mother Mary (a virgin) with Mary Magdalene - a prostitute who he befriended.He was from Nazareth. Do not forget that he was a Jew and Judaism and Christianity are different in telling where a baby is from. Mary had to be Jewish because Judaism is passed down through the mother, and not the father like in Christianity. However, where he is from is passed down through the father, and his father was from Nazareth. I would also like to point out something esle that is very interesting. The Hebrew word for Christians is “Notzrim” (these transliterations are not entirely accurate but very close). This word comes from the original name for the Christians which was “Natzerim”. “Natzeret” is the Hebrew word for Nazareth and “Natzerim” means the Nazarean Jews, clearly showing the original Christians as Jews from Nazareth. In regard to what the New Testament says about him, it is vewry contradictory and a very biased text. Let us also not forget that it was written many years after Jesus’ death. I trust Joesphus Falvius, the main historian who lived at the time, more than Matthew or Mark or whatever their names are. Josephus doesn’t mention Jesus at all which leads to several possible conclusions.
1. Jesus did not exist.
2. Jesus was minor and the mass crowds and stories about him that the New Testament portrays are false.
3. There were many like Jesus and he was nothing special in his claims to be the messiah (which he said indirectly).I personally believe that number 3 is the most likely answer, but also with a combination of some of number 2. I’ll let you all digest this so far before I psot anymore about Jesus.
-
and 4) he was a somewhat important religious figure who many did not believe to be the messiah
also
there is little issue with the fact that Jesus was from Nazareth. His parents were from Nazareth, he lived there for over 30 years, and he was “conceived” there, but he was born in Bethlehem.
Also it is known (and not contested) that Jesus was not a “Nazarene Jew”.
With regards to “New Testament” bias - Matthew and John may be considered “biased” as they were written by 2 of Jesus’ disciples (at the same time, i believe them to be “the word of God”), at the same time Luke and Mark were written by 3rd party observers to what had transpired. -
Luke and Mark I do not trust either, because historians of the time had to imbellish their stories in order to sell them andi n order to live off them. Josephus himself admits to doing so and points out areas that may seem like imbellishment that he assures are pure fact in order to disavoid the confusion. What makes him a stronger historian is the fact that he lived at the ver same time. Also, by what hte New Testament shows, Jesus was very popular and very well known or otherwise the crowds would not have been so huge at his death. Remember that the Romans would never ask the Jews who they wanted to be executed, that is not their style. They would kill anyone they wanted to.
-
I trust Joesphus Falvius, the main historian who lived at the time, more than Matthew or Mark or whatever their names are. Josephus doesn’t mention Jesus at all which leads to several possible conclusions.
Even if one Historian doesn’t mention him, doesn’t make him non-existant, even though if he was “world-famous”, then he would have been mentioned.
More important:
There never was an empire-wide census during Augustus reign. There only was a local one in Judaa, but that was about 60 a.d. and the governor was not the one mentioned in the bible (at the time of the census).
These inaccuracies make at least that book highly dubious in its contents concerning its historical value. -
@F_alk:
I trust Joesphus Falvius, the main historian who lived at the time, more than Matthew or Mark or whatever their names are. Josephus doesn’t mention Jesus at all which leads to several possible conclusions.
Even if one Historian doesn’t mention him, doesn’t make him non-existant, even though if he was “world-famous”, then he would have been mentioned.
More important:
There never was an empire-wide census during Augustus reign. There only was a local one in Judaa, but that was about 60 a.d. and the governor was not the one mentioned in the bible (at the time of the census).
These inaccuracies make at least that book highly dubious in its contents concerning its historical value.Are yo ureferring to the New Testament when yo usay Bible because what Christians call the Old Testament does not go to Roman times. Josephus is the historian of the time, the only one for all information regarding that time period. The procurator mentioned in Josephus’ books does correspond to history. I belive it was Florus during 60 C.E.
-
Falk, Emugod, you are assuming three things,
-
We have all the records from 2000 years ago
-
The non-biblical records from 2000 years ago are accurate
-
The records from 2000 years ago were inclusive
-
-
Are yo ureferring to the New Testament when yo usay Bible because what Christians call the Old Testament does not go to Roman times. Josephus is the historian of the time, the only one for all information regarding that time period. The procurator mentioned in Josephus’ books does correspond to history. I belive it was Florus during 60 C.E.
yes, i refer to the NT.
Why is Josephus the historian of the time, the only one for all information?…. Because he is a Jew like you or are there other reasons (like he is the only one you know)?
And what you said afterwards possibly is what i menat:
Quirinius was not ruling in the province syria at the time the NT proposes. -
… to be deleted…
-
Falk, Emugod, you are assuming three things,
-
We have all the records from 2000 years ago
-
The non-biblical records from 2000 years ago are accurate
-
The records from 2000 years ago were inclusive
Ahm… no.
I don’t think we have all records. But we have contradicting records.
The NT/biblical records were written 100 or more years after JC’s life, and they are biased, as they want to “sell” something. So, i trust the non-bliblical references a bit more than the biblical ones.
What do you mean by inclusive? -
-
WHat I am saying is that a jew and a couple of Romans writing down stories they heard are not neccessarily going to be accurate or include everything of note.
And yes, Josephus mentions Jesus.
-
And yes, Josephus mentions Jesus.
Seriously, i don’t know anymore what Jesus did, or if he even exist. I know what the christians said he did, but otherwise… About Josephus it’s not very clear, i’m pretty sure EmuGod would not agree. It’s rare we have non-christians calling Jesus the “messiah”.
Suggested Topics
