The True Meaning of Christmas

[Accountable]

I don't think there's any question Christmas has pagan roots. The Catholic church hijacked and renamed the holiday. This was a good move on their part. Interestingly, Christmas was not a legitimate holiday in America at first. I imagine this was largely due to the protestant rebellion against catholicism. It was actually illegal to celebrate Christmas in Massachusetts at one time. I believe it was Pepsi who turned the tide and gave Christmas it's wide acclaim in America. None of this matters to me. I enjoy the holiday and will continue to do so.

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, or whatever makes you festive!

I don't think there's any question, either, but Doom is all bent out of shape that people are agreeing with him, as if anybody that would do that must be an idiot. Hell, he may have a point.

 

[Panacea]

Touche... but I'm still not going to watch the video.

Just out of curiosity, you feel the statements made in videos drawing comparisons between the claimed facts of jesus and other gods of history are untrue?

 

[darkcgi]

I think its amazing how people take everthing so seriously

 

[BornReady]

Just out of curiosity, you feel the statements made in videos drawing comparisons between the claimed facts of jesus and other gods of history are untrue?

There definitely are comparisons. But these sorts of videos (maybe not this one, John's point is valid) and articles that I've watched/read before have overstated their case. They make assertions they don't back up with passages from ancient texts. If you investigate many of the claims they don't pan out. Also they paint a picture where Christianity did all the borrowing and that's unlikely. The borrowing probably went both ways.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Also they paint a picture where Christianity did all the borrowing and that's unlikely. The borrowing probably went both ways.

How could the ancient religions borrow from the more "modern" religion of Christianity?

 

[BornReady]

How could the ancient religions borrow from the more "modern" religion of Christianity?

The ancient religions didn't stop when Christianity started. They continued to evolve. Many times it's not possible to tell exactly when a particular pagan belief started. This all happened a very long time ago.

I don't disagree with you. It's just some of the arguments I've heard go too far. They claim there is absolutely nothing unique about Christianity. I find that a hard pill to swallow. I'm not saying you think that. We're probably pretty much in agreement with each other and I'm just not communicating well.

 

[Johnfromokc]

The ancient religions didn't stop when Christianity started. They continued to evolve. Many times it's not possible to tell exactly when a particular pagan belief started. This all happened a very long time ago.

Most ancient religions are no longer practiced. Here are the predominant world religions practiced by percentage of global population today according to the CIA:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html

Christian 33.35% (of which Roman Catholic 16.83%, Protestant 6.08%, Orthodox 4.03%, Anglican 1.26%), Muslim 22.43%, Hindu 13.78%, Buddhist 7.13%, Sikh 0.36%, Jewish 0.21%, Baha'i 0.11%, other religions 11.17%, non-religious 9.42%, atheists 2.04% (2009 est.)

I don't disagree with you. It's just some of the arguments I've heard go too far. They claim there is absolutely nothing unique about Christianity. I find that a hard pill to swallow. I'm not saying you think that. We're probably pretty much in agreement with each other and I'm just not communicating well.

Religion goes back as far as human civilizations. Nobody knows what the first religion was. The Egyptians predate the Jews, The Mesopotamians predate them. The Chinese predate them... Who knows what religions might have been practiced deep in the jungles of ancient Africa?

Religions with a creation story often claim to be the oldest, since the world began with that creation and with the god or gods of that religion. While there are "unique" stories in Christianity, as there are unique stories in all religions - Christianity in and of itself has far too many similarities to other religions that predate it to even remotely consider it a unique religion.

 

[Accountable]

Who knows what religions might have been practiced deep in the jungles of ancient Africa?

Tarzan?

 

[Panacea]

^A teacher would have that image on hand, wouldn't they

 

[Johnfromokc]

Tarzan?

:umnoTarzanism was created circa 1912 Mr. homo sapien educator.





And the movie was circa 1918:

 

[darkcgi]

 

[doombug]

Damn Doomy......If Tacitus did not personally witness the life of the alleged life of Jesus, it is hearsay. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

So all history books written are not valid if the person researching and writing it didn't actually witness the events for themselves? That is just silly John and shows how desperately you try and ignore reasonable information that is contrary to what you believe.

Again, you completely miss the point. You went to the same web sites and repeated the same old lines that Christians always go to in an futile attempt to discredit the fact that no historical evidence of Jesus exists. There is only hearsay.

Here is an interesting web site about various religions and their similarities:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

You see Doomy, the similarities between Christianity and other ancient religions are numerous - far too numerous to ignore or shrug off. You can try and split hairs on birth dates of the various deitys - and Krishna is traditionally believed to have been born during August - not July. The festival Janmashtami is held in honor of this birth. Christians argue over the alleged birth date of Jesus as well - but it is still celebrated December 25 in the Pagan tradition. All religions have merged to some extent.

All religion stems from some earlier version of a man made tale to explain human existence - and Christianity is no exception. Christianity is only one of the latest re-creations of ancient religion.

Religion of any kind is an evolving work of fiction until some deity actually makes an appearance on planet Earth and begins creating humans and causing amputees to sprout new limbs before live audiences.

John, your link relies on Kersey Graves, a proven fraud. This is common knowledge he was a fake. Here is a link about him:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kersey_Graves&mobileaction=view_normal_site

In this link it is said:
"Graves massaged his data to fit his thesis, and where he had no data he falsified it."

So your YouTube video is nothing but false information.

 

[Johnfromokc]

So all history books written are not valid if the person researching and writing it didn't actually witness the events for themselves? That is just silly John and shows how desperately you try and ignore reasonable information that is contrary to what you believe.

What history book written with first hand eye witness accounts states that Jesus - the Son of God - ever existed?

Which one of these "history" books is used in any college level religious studies curriculum to prove what you claim?

John, your link relies on Kersey Graves, a proven fraud. This is common knowledge he was a fake. Here is a link about him:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kersey_Graves&mobileaction=view_normal_site

No the link does not rely on Graves. Graves work and controversy is discussed - but so are many other authors - and many other links and references are cited as well. You really should spend some quality time reading before you make such conclusions.

Graves is not the only author who has drawn the links between Christianity and other religions. Christian aplogists like to pick Graves work because they think they can successfully discredit it, and thereby prove the unprovable.

In this link it is said:
"Graves massaged his data to fit his thesis, and where he had no data he falsified it."

So your YouTube video is nothing but false information.

The video does not cite Graves Doomy. There are pages of citations in the credits if you'd care to look.

Christian believers have been trying to discredit anyone who parallels Christianity with the other religions it evolved from. Sorry Doom, but it is a simple fact that there are more similarities than differences. That video sites example after example of similar deities and religions - yet you quote web pages that only address the Krishna comparison.

Christianity and Jesus is only the latest religion in a long line of sons of god. Why can't you accept that Doomy?

 

[doombug]

What history book written with first hand eye witness accounts states that Jesus - the Son of God - ever existed?

Which one of these "history" books is used in any college level religious studies curriculum to prove what you claim?



No the link does not rely on Graves. Graves work and controversy is discussed - but so are many other authors - and many other links and references are cited as well. You really should spend some quality time reading before you make such conclusions.

Graves is not the only author who has drawn the links between Christianity and other religions. Christian aplogists like to pick Graves work because they think they can successfully discredit it, and thereby prove the unprovable.



The video does not cite Graves Doomy. There are pages of citations in the credits if you'd care to look.

Christian believers have been trying to discredit anyone who parallels Christianity with the other religions it evolved from. Sorry Doom, but it is a simple fact that there are more similarities than differences. That video sites example after example of similar deities and religions - yet you quote web pages that only address the Krishna comparison.

Christianity and Jesus is only the latest religion in a long line of sons of god. Why can't you accept that Doomy?

I chose Krishna because I am familiar with the story and that of Budda as well. But since you are so convinced could you post the Hindu text that tells the story of how Krishna came to be? That is the true source. But use the text that can only prove your premise.

 

[doombug]

I don't think that is how legends work. It's not like someone sits down and says I think I'll write a legend. No one is in control of the process. Ideas circulate and the most popular ones win. I'm not a historian but would guess the virgin birth didn't win out over the opposition until the Council of Nicaea.

I didn't watch the video but am sure you're right. I've seen that sort of video before. That idea seems to be growing in recent times. We're seeing the development of a myth before our very eyes.

This is not to say Christianity arose in a vacuum. Religion is cultural and cultures borrow from each other. But the borrowing certainly was not unidirectional. It can not be denied Christianity had a profound effect on the culture of the time and even today.

You make some good points BornReady but be careful of assumptions if you want to know the truth. For example, you gave the reasonable idea that the virgin birth of Christ could have been a product of hellenistic influence. Since this influence was around at the time of Christ that seems reasonable...but...The hellenistic period didn't begin until the death of Alexander the Great around 323bc and a virgin birth was mentioned in the bible here:
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold,a virgin shall conceive,and bear a son.

Which was written 701-681bc. So it looks like the idea of a miraculous births were taken from the bible. Even in Genesis a 90 year old woman gave birth which would seem miraculous as well.

So it is easy to make an assumption but if you want to know the truth then investigation is required. Otherwise people can be easily duped by a YouTube video.

 

[BornReady]

The hellenistic period didn't begin until the death of Alexander the Great around 323bc and a virgin birth was mentioned in the bible here:
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold,a virgin shall conceive,and bear a son.

I answered the question of why the Greek Christians would accept the idea of a virgin birth. Perhaps you have answered the question of why the Jewish Christians would. Interestingly, the word translated as virgin could also mean young woman. So it's possible the virgin birth idea was started by hellenistic Christians who then went looking for biblical support to convince their Jewish opposition.

Virgin births are the substance of legends. History is the attempt to reconstruct the most probable event. Miracles are highly improbable. I think that because a miracle has never been proven. When someone says they saw a miracle it would be more accurate to say they saw something they can't explain.

Of course a miracle-working God could work miracles by definition. But that doesn't seem to be the kind of God we have. God obeys natural law as far as we can tell. Perhaps to hide his existence for some unknown reason. Or maybe there is no God. Many people have pondered this question but it isn't something that can be answered by pondering.

 

[doombug]

I answered the question of why the Greek Christians would accept the idea of a virgin birth. Perhaps you have answered the question of why the Jewish Christians would. Interestingly, the word translated as virgin could also mean young woman. So it's possible the virgin birth idea was started by hellenistic Christians who then went looking for biblical support to convince their Jewish opposition.

Virgin births are the substance of legends. History is the attempt to reconstruct the most probable event. Miracles are highly improbable. I think that because a miracle has never been proven. When someone says they saw a miracle it would be more accurate to say they saw something they can't explain.

Of course a miracle-working God could work miracles by definition. But that doesn't seem to be the kind of God we have. God obeys natural law as far as we can tell. Perhaps to hide his existence for some unknown reason. Or maybe there is no God. Many people have pondered this question but it isn't something that can be answered by pondering.

It seems the coming of Jesus was a prophecy of the OT so that was probably the reason it was accepted by the Christians of Jesus' time. But the idea of the greek influence seems valid to me also.

 

[Alien Allen]

Is there proof of any other virgin birth in the history of mankind?

What does that indicate?

One side will say it proves the validity of the baby Jesus

Where the other side will say that it proves that this is another example of the fable that can not be supported by fact.

Common sense would tell me that mankind was around a long time before Jesus and has been around quite a time after.

And not before or after is there evidence of a virgin birth. So the premise of Jesus as told via the bible is hugely flawed from that beginning and very, very suspect if not absurd. IMO

 

[doombug]

Is there proof of any other virgin birth in the history of mankind?

What does that indicate?

One side will say it proves the validity of the baby Jesus

Where the other side will say that it proves that this is another example of the fable that can not be supported by fact.

Common sense would tell me that mankind was around a long time before Jesus and has been around quite a time after.

And not before or after is there evidence of a virgin birth. So the premise of Jesus as told via the bible is hugely flawed from that beginning and very, very suspect if not absurd. IMO

And I'm sure there are some who would also present another YouTube video that was bullshit based as well. I don't see why someone would feel the need to create such phony information if they were so sure the bible is a myth. Presenting such information that is easily proved wrong only weakens their credibility and their premise. Could it be they are not so sure after all and have to manufacture this nonsense to convince themselves?

 

[BornReady]

Is there proof of any other virgin birth in the history of mankind?

Nope. There is a process call parthenogenesis in some animals whereby an embryo can develop without being fertilized by a male. This occurs mostly in invertebrates and some reptiles. But there are very rare cases of it happening in birds and sharks. It is not known to have ever occurred naturally in a mammal. Even if it had, it wouldn't explain the virgin birth of Jesus because offspring of parthenogenesis are always female. But the virgin birth of Jesus is easily explained as legend. The earliest Christian writings don't mention the virgin birth. That was added later. This is typical of the way legends development. The Jesus legend was likely based on a historical person though. At least that's what Bart Ehrman thinks. I wouldn't know.