How many people really celebrate christmas

[YowYan]

I don't find it ironic at all. He's right after all.

OT: Pretty much every Christian I know. There's no such thing as a "international Christmas" in my country.

Except he's not .__.

 

[Marin]

Except he's not .__.

How so?

 

[YowYan]

How so?

Because Jezus is not the real meaning of christmas, contrary to popular belief.

 

[Marin]

Because Jezus is not the real meaning of christmas, contrary to popular belief.

That's why I said elaborate. You should back such big statements with something. .-.

 

[YowYan]

That's why I said elaborate. You should back such big statements with something. .-.

Can you tell the irony in those words of yours? I sure as hell can

 

[Marin]

Can you tell the irony in those words of yours? I sure as hell can

So people shouldn't back-up their arguments? Not sure I get you mate.

 

[YowYan]

So people shouldn't back-up their arguments? Not sure I get you mate.

sigh..

 

[Cornson]

Wich rules, also why 24th? Where did you get the stats?

Because christmas is the celebration of the solstace, a pagan holiday which is done on the 24'th. It's the celebration of the days becomming brigher, more sunlight and all that jazz.

christians just co-oped the holiday because it was the easiest way to spread christianity to places where there wore no christians if the original people could keep their holidays even after accepting a new god.

Also, wether Jesus existed or not isn't even debatable. He is a historically established figure.

actually, he is not, there are no proof of his existence at all, there are plenty of proof of people with the name jesus, sins it was the 6'th most common name at the time in that region, and there are also roman records on 1 jesus being crusified in the year 36.

that's all the proof there is of jesus, at best it indicates that it's plasuble that there would been a carpenter named jesus, possible even a person calling himself a profet, but there is a long, long way from that to the actual jesus of the bible being comfirmed.

 

[Bad Touch Yakushi]

Does it even matter anyway? Religion is becoming less relevant and the definition has naturally changed over the years, becoming something else. Consumerism is the real problem.

It's not sacrilege or demonic, we're just growing as a culture and keeping the holiday's positive effects like time off for family, gift-giving and goodwill. No religion can own those things.

 

[Punk Hazard]

I don't find it ironic at all. He's right after all.

OT: Pretty much every Christian I know. There's no such thing as a "international Christmas" in my country.



And what might you mean by "a strict religious sense", if I may know?



Please elaborate further, when you find time.



Wich rules, also why 24th? Where did you get the stats?



Not really.

You must be registered for see links

Also, wether Jesus existed or not isn't even debatable. He is a historically established figure.

It's ironic that he says no one remembers or celebrates the true history of Christmas, and then calls it the birth of Jesus, when the true history and celebration of Christmas isn't Jesus' birthday, or even a Christian custom. It's Pagan.

 

[System001]

It's ironic that you call it the real meaning of Christmas when:

1. It, along with much of the general concept of Jesus, was plagiarized

2. Jesus was not born on the 25th

3. Christmas was originally a Pagan custom

Ok, but how many people really celebrate Christmas as a pagan holiday? lmao.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Ok, but how many people really celebrate Christmas as a pagan holiday? lmao.

That wasn't the point...

 

[System001]

That wasn't the point...

Kind of is the point. Christmas is pretty much universally recognised as a day that Christians use to celebrate the birth of Christ, so regardless of whether the holiday was hijacked or fails to sync with Jesus' actual birth date, the OP's point still stands.

 

[Punk Hazard]

Kind of is the point. Christmas is pretty much universally recognised as a day that Christians use to celebrate the birth of Christ, so regardless of whether the holiday was hijacked or fails to sync with Jesus' actual birth date, the OP's point still stands.

Lmfao no it doesn't. OP talking about how the gift-giving festive culture hijacked Christ's birthday, robbing from the true meaning of Christmas. It's ironic because Christ's birthday hijacked it from Pagan culture, making it not the true history/celebration as he claims. If you wanna ask why people aren't recognizing the "real" celebration of Christmas, then it better be about Paganism or it isn't the "real" celebration.

OP is going on about how Santa stole Christmas from Jesus but ignoring that Jesus stole it from Pagans.

 

[Marin]

Because christmas is the celebration of the solstace, a pagan holiday which is done on the 24'th. It's the celebration of the days becomming brigher, more sunlight and all that jazz.

christians just co-oped the holiday because it was the easiest way to spread christianity to places where there wore no christians if the original people could keep their holidays even after accepting a new god.



actually, he is not, there are no proof of his existence at all, there are plenty of proof of people with the name jesus, sins it was the 6'th most common name at the time in that region, and there are also roman records on 1 jesus being crusified in the year 36.

that's all the proof there is of jesus, at best it indicates that it's plasuble that there would been a carpenter named jesus, possible even a person calling himself a profet, but there is a long, long way from that to the actual jesus of the bible being comfirmed.

Ok, sorry for the late reply. Went to the movies last night so I kept you hanging.

Now, first of let's clear some terminology up, shall we? Winter solstace isn't a pagan holiday, but rather an astronomical event more commonly known as the longest night in a year. What you are talking about is probably one of the festivals that happen on that day, the one that shares the most attributes with Christmas, to be precise. It goes by the name Yule.

To be clear, what you called co-oping the holiday was a standard reformation wich was a result of people leaving the pagan beliefs behind and embracing Christianity. In short, there was no huge hijacking of the festival by smacking a Christian label on it.
I'll clarify. The reason you, or most people who claim that Christmas is a rip-off of a pagan festival, are claiming that Christians stole Yule, is due to various elements that were originally present in Yule being present in Christmas.

Indeed, a lot of traditions that are practiced on Christmas are direct descendands of the ones practiced on Yule, however these traditions are just cultural customs wich were adopted along the way. Saying Christmas is a stolen version of Yule, would require more than just additional customs, but a theft of idea. What I mean by theft of idea is stealing the core of that something.

This is not the case here. Not only do Christmas and Yule have completely different themes, but the actual way of celebrating is wastly different. Unlike Christmas, wich is a one-day holiday, Yule is celebrated for several days, has different practices such as drinking toasts to Odin and other gods, offering sacrifices etc.

Actually, the individual elements wich are shared between the 2 aren't even exclusive to Yule. Winter festivals all over the world (including cultures with wich Christians didn't even have much contact) share similar elements, wich are mostly decorational in nature. Just look at the list of winter festivals on wikipedia and you'll see a ton of festivals bearing similar attributes. At the end of the day, those attributes aren't a valid reason to call something a rip off of something else. Had the core idea been stolen, your argument would hold its ground, but that's not the case here.

Now, about Jesus...

First of all, what you're proposing is known as a

You must be registered for see links

, a hypothetis widely criticized by nearly all scholars regardless of their ideological position.

There is a good amount of evidence for Jesus' existence. Most of the documents regarding Jesus and his disciples come from Jewish and Roman authors (fits perfectly with the setting of the NT) so don't be confused by the harsh words they use to describe them. I'm gonna go over some now.

Flavius Josephus, a well known Jewish historian, wich is considered to write one of the oldest mentions of Jesus.

Spoiler

"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."

Pliny the Younger, mentioned Jesus in one of his letters

Spoiler

"[The Christians] were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

Gaius Suetonius - talked about Christians doint 'mischief' in the name of Christ (Chrestus)

Spoiler

"Because the Jews of Rome caused continous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from the city."

"After the great fire at Rome [during Nero's reign] ... Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief."

Cornelius Tacitus - one of greatest Roman historians, here he talks about Nero blaming the Christians for the fire he set in Rome and mentions Christians doint terrible superstitions in the name of Christus ()

Spoiler

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."

These are just a few, there are many more mentions of the biblibical Jesus, his disciples and early Christians. There are many lost works that are mentioned in other sources, such as writing of Pontius Pilate or various gnostic sources, as well as many other such as the Jewish Talmud, wich is a satire of Jesus' life.

And this is all extra-biblibical evidence. Not to mention various studies of the historicity of the New Testament, most notable the synoptic gospels. Even if we were to push all these things aside, there are centuries of human testimony, and hundreds of witnesses who endured the most gruesome suffering and deaths just because they wouldn't throw Christianity away. Surely they wouldn't go to such lengths had they not experienced something life-changing in Jesus.

There are also many criteriums wich go for the fact that Jesus did exist and his disciples were indeed telling the truth, such as the criterion of disimillarity, criterium of embarassment, and so much more. There is a reason why nearly all scholars agree that Jesus of the NT existed. Here are the main points wich are accepted by nearly all scholars:

- Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist
- He called disciples
- He had a controversy at the Temple
- Jesus was crucified by the Romans near Jerusalem
- Jesus was a Galilean
- His activities were confined to Galilee and Judea
- After his death his disciples continued
- Some of his disciples were persecuted

Here it is clear that there is much more pointing to Jesus of the NT having existed, than him being a fabrication. This turned out a lengthy post, but I've barely scratched the surface even with all this. If you want to learn more on this matter feel free to contact me.

 

[Made in Heaven]

Christmas is a pagan holiday, not Christian. Besides, everyone knows Prophet Jesus wasn't even born in the winter.

 

[Marin]

Christmas is a pagan holiday, not Christian. Besides, everyone knows Prophet Jesus wasn't even born in the winter.

Reffer to my post above. Also, "everyone knows" is obviously false, otherwise we wouldn't be commemorating it. You're free to back it up.

 

[Made in Heaven]

-Snip-

Why do you feel the need to prove Prophet Jesus was real ? Pretty sure the mere existence of Christianity is proof that he existed in some shape or form, regardless of whether or not the Christian view of him is correct or not.

 

[Marin]

Why do you feel the need to prove Prophet Jesus was real ? Pretty sure the mere existence of Christianity is proof that he existed in some shape or form, regardless of whether or not the Christian view of him is correct or not.

'Feel the need' is a statement I don't quite get. A person stated that Jesus never existed, so I gave him evidence he did. Isn't it called discussion?

Regardless, how is that a reply to wether Christmas is a pagan hoiday or not? (A case I believe I have proven in the post above, thus telling you to read it.)

 

[Made in Heaven]

Reffer to my post above. Also, "everyone knows" is obviously false, otherwise we wouldn't be commemorating it. You're free to back it up.

Not to sound rude, but that post doesn't change much. It's pretty well known fact that Christmas was a Pagan holiday that Christians adopted into their own faith in an attempt to further spread their religion, and soon it became what we see today.

With Santa, Snowmen, Red-nosed Reindeers, and Elves.

Literally none of those have anything to do with Prophet Jesus.

No matter how you look at it, the celebration, regardless of how or why Christians themselves celebrate it today, is not an authentic/genuine Christian holiday, as there is no mention of it in the Bible or other Christian sources. And speaking of authentic sources, Prophet Jesus' birth date is never mentioned in the Bible as far as I'm aware , and the Dec 25 date was simply slapped on.