Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether God or Eostra (if this was an actual faith, and frankly there’s no evidence for that, see previous para) are “real” is obviously a separate question that is best answered with faith.

Well thanks for admitting there is no evidence of a god.

And for telling me that it is OK to believe in Eostra on the exact same principle of faith.

What cannot be believed based on faith?

Anonymous wrote:Whether God or Eostra (if this was an actual faith, and frankly there’s no evidence for that, see previous para) are “real” is obviously a separate question that is best answered with faith.

Anonymous wrote:Is this the thread where we demand evidence?

OK, great! Been waiting for this one.

Where is the evidence for god then? Since evidence is suddenly so important.

I'll wait.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Christian, but I'm not concerned about this as a Christian. I have no problem with "baptizing" useful pagan customs. I have a problem with these stories, because they fail as history. There simply isn't evidence for them, and people believe them because they show up on the History Channel between showings of Ancient Aliens.

Translation: I refuse to believe the scholars, including contemporaneous writings by Bede, because it disagrees with my presuppositions, and I will say they fail as history but provide no evidence of that claim, and hope no one calls me on my bullshit.

I waited a bit to respond to this, because I needed to get to where I could lay my hands on my copy of Winters in the World Eleanor Parker's excellent recent book on the Anglo Saxon year. Parker is a specialist on medieval English and Scandinavian literature at Oxford and a scholar by anyone's definition. Here's what she says about the connection between Eostre and Easter celebration:

t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the [i]name- not the origins of the festival. The Christian festival of Easter long pre-dated the Anglo-Saxon conversion, and its essential features, including the principal behind its dating, had been established for centuries. What's more, we have no evidence of any symbols, customs, or rituals that may have been associated with Eostre in Anglo-Saxon England or anything to suggest how her festival might have been celebrated. Bede mentions "feasts," in the vaguest terms, but he probably has no idea what those might have involved. Today it's popular myth that symbols linked in modern Britain with Easter, especially eggs, hares or rabbits derive from worship of Eostre, but there's no Anglo-Saxon evidence to support that. None of these symbols were linked to Easter in the Anglo-Saxon period; eggs weren't associated with Easter in Britain until the later Middles ages, hares and rabbits not until much later still. There's nothing to suggest any continuity between the pre-conversion festival and the Anglo-Saxon Christian Easter, and the modern observance of Easter owes nothing to Anglo-Saxon paganism, with the sole exception of its English name.

(Page 126)

She also relevant to your odd description of Bede as "contemporary":

Most likely Bede wasn't relying on personal knowledge but was using a written source for month-names and adding his own speculation about the meaning- and in some cases he may have just been guessing.

(Page 15)

She also notes with regard to the name that:

Some have gone so far as to suggest that Bede invented Esotre as a scholarly hypothesis to explain a name he didn't understand

(Page 125) (There's a citation here to "Anglo-Saxon Paganism: The Evidence of Bede" by an R.I. Page a Cambridge scholar who was an expert on Anglo-Saxon runes)

So basically, what I'm saying is that I'm satisfied that my opinions are based on scholarship, including giving Bede his proper due.

So we agree then, that it is the origin of the name. Great! Kind of a stretch to suggest that is the only connection, don't ya think?

While her scholarship is impressive, the rest of her statements are unsupported by citation. They are just statements of her opinion. "He may have been guessing" or "He may have invented" . Which are ironic accusations!

As for the symbology, we know the rabbit wasn't biblical. Leviticus 11:6 states that the hare is an unclean animal: “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/virginity-fertility-or-just-chocolate-the-opaque-history-of-the-easter-bunny/

DP. It’s very surprising you claim to be in agreement with pp about the origin of the word “Easter.” She basically debunked the pagan claim that it was derived from a pagan goddess, and she used credible sources.

In particular, there’s no positive evidence that pagans ever had a goddess named Eostre, also the venerable Bede of the 8th century wasn’t contemporary or entirely reliable on many points besides this one. You’ve taken a LACK of evidence for this alleged pagan goddess and turned this into “unsupported opinion” about her nonexistence, then somehow you’ve turned this into an assertion that a. she existed, and b. pp agrees with you. Also, you keep ignoring the stronger evidence that “Easter” entered Middle English from the middle German word for dawn, “Eostarum.” Not to mention, the idea that 5-6th century Brits were created the festival, instead of the more obvious 1st and 2nd century peoples of the Middle East and Rome, is a bit insulting.

That’s quite a stretch, dontcha think?

Dude, YOUR POST QUOTES PARKER SAYING THIS: {I}t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the name- not the origins of the festival.

So yes, we agree that is the origin of the name.

My position is that if the name is the source it is likely the rest is sourced there also, at least until other evidence proves it isn't. You provide no evidence it wasn't, no evidence of where else those symbols came, and simply "Bede prolly made it up" with no evidence that is true.

It's fricking laughable.

Howzabout this: stop gish galloping with many words that prove nothing, and show one bit of evidence that the holiday and symbology came from somewhere else. Otherwise I claim victory and I am done with you!

Dude, you’re talking to somebody different from the person who posted what you’re quoting.

So, you repost her sentence with the words “even if” Eostre existed—I bolded it for you—and try to turn this subjective expression of uncertainty into an assertion that you and pp agree that Eostre definitely existed. That’s your first unsubstantiated leap of logic. Amazingly, second leap: you take this even further to assert that the (still very unproven) name means there must have been traditions behind it. And an implied third leap: for your claim about a link to the Christian Easter you’d that these traditions must have involved spring or the equinox or something.

“Even if” is not proof of existence. Several of us are curious if you have proof that goes beyond “even if.” Or, frankly, whether you’re just trolling with all these bizarre leaps of logic.

Trying not to laugh here….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Christian, but I'm not concerned about this as a Christian. I have no problem with "baptizing" useful pagan customs. I have a problem with these stories, because they fail as history. There simply isn't evidence for them, and people believe them because they show up on the History Channel between showings of Ancient Aliens.

Translation: I refuse to believe the scholars, including contemporaneous writings by Bede, because it disagrees with my presuppositions, and I will say they fail as history but provide no evidence of that claim, and hope no one calls me on my bullshit.

I waited a bit to respond to this, because I needed to get to where I could lay my hands on my copy of Winters in the World Eleanor Parker's excellent recent book on the Anglo Saxon year. Parker is a specialist on medieval English and Scandinavian literature at Oxford and a scholar by anyone's definition. Here's what she says about the connection between Eostre and Easter celebration:

t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the [i]name- not the origins of the festival. The Christian festival of Easter long pre-dated the Anglo-Saxon conversion, and its essential features, including the principal behind its dating, had been established for centuries. What's more, we have no evidence of any symbols, customs, or rituals that may have been associated with Eostre in Anglo-Saxon England or anything to suggest how her festival might have been celebrated. Bede mentions "feasts," in the vaguest terms, but he probably has no idea what those might have involved. Today it's popular myth that symbols linked in modern Britain with Easter, especially eggs, hares or rabbits derive from worship of Eostre, but there's no Anglo-Saxon evidence to support that. None of these symbols were linked to Easter in the Anglo-Saxon period; eggs weren't associated with Easter in Britain until the later Middles ages, hares and rabbits not until much later still. There's nothing to suggest any continuity between the pre-conversion festival and the Anglo-Saxon Christian Easter, and the modern observance of Easter owes nothing to Anglo-Saxon paganism, with the sole exception of its English name.

(Page 126)

She also relevant to your odd description of Bede as "contemporary":

Most likely Bede wasn't relying on personal knowledge but was using a written source for month-names and adding his own speculation about the meaning- and in some cases he may have just been guessing.

(Page 15)

She also notes with regard to the name that:

Some have gone so far as to suggest that Bede invented Esotre as a scholarly hypothesis to explain a name he didn't understand

(Page 125) (There's a citation here to "Anglo-Saxon Paganism: The Evidence of Bede" by an R.I. Page a Cambridge scholar who was an expert on Anglo-Saxon runes)

So basically, what I'm saying is that I'm satisfied that my opinions are based on scholarship, including giving Bede his proper due.

So we agree then, that it is the origin of the name. Great! Kind of a stretch to suggest that is the only connection, don't ya think?

While her scholarship is impressive, the rest of her statements are unsupported by citation. They are just statements of her opinion. "He may have been guessing" or "He may have invented" . Which are ironic accusations!

As for the symbology, we know the rabbit wasn't biblical. Leviticus 11:6 states that the hare is an unclean animal: “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/virginity-fertility-or-just-chocolate-the-opaque-history-of-the-easter-bunny/

DP. It’s very surprising you claim to be in agreement with pp about the origin of the word “Easter.” She basically debunked the pagan claim that it was derived from a pagan goddess, and she used credible sources.

In particular, there’s no positive evidence that pagans ever had a goddess named Eostre, also the venerable Bede of the 8th century wasn’t contemporary or entirely reliable on many points besides this one. You’ve taken a LACK of evidence for this alleged pagan goddess and turned this into “unsupported opinion” about her nonexistence, then somehow you’ve turned this into an assertion that a. she existed, and b. pp agrees with you. Also, you keep ignoring the stronger evidence that “Easter” entered Middle English from the middle German word for dawn, “Eostarum.” Not to mention, the idea that 5-6th century Brits were created the festival, instead of the more obvious 1st and 2nd century peoples of the Middle East and Rome, is a bit insulting.

That’s quite a stretch, dontcha think?

Dude, YOUR POST QUOTES PARKER SAYING THIS: {I}t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the name- not the origins of the festival.

So yes, we agree that is the origin of the name.

My position is that if the name is the source it is likely the rest is sourced there also, at least until other evidence proves it isn't. You provide no evidence it wasn't, no evidence of where else those symbols came, and simply "Bede prolly made it up" with no evidence that is true.

It's fricking laughable.

Howzabout this: stop gish galloping with many words that prove nothing, and show one bit of evidence that the holiday and symbology came from somewhere else. Otherwise I claim victory and I am done with you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Christian, but I'm not concerned about this as a Christian. I have no problem with "baptizing" useful pagan customs. I have a problem with these stories, because they fail as history. There simply isn't evidence for them, and people believe them because they show up on the History Channel between showings of Ancient Aliens.

Translation: I refuse to believe the scholars, including contemporaneous writings by Bede, because it disagrees with my presuppositions, and I will say they fail as history but provide no evidence of that claim, and hope no one calls me on my bullshit.

I waited a bit to respond to this, because I needed to get to where I could lay my hands on my copy of Winters in the World Eleanor Parker's excellent recent book on the Anglo Saxon year. Parker is a specialist on medieval English and Scandinavian literature at Oxford and a scholar by anyone's definition. Here's what she says about the connection between Eostre and Easter celebration:

t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the [i]name- not the origins of the festival. The Christian festival of Easter long pre-dated the Anglo-Saxon conversion, and its essential features, including the principal behind its dating, had been established for centuries. What's more, we have no evidence of any symbols, customs, or rituals that may have been associated with Eostre in Anglo-Saxon England or anything to suggest how her festival might have been celebrated. Bede mentions "feasts," in the vaguest terms, but he probably has no idea what those might have involved. Today it's popular myth that symbols linked in modern Britain with Easter, especially eggs, hares or rabbits derive from worship of Eostre, but there's no Anglo-Saxon evidence to support that. None of these symbols were linked to Easter in the Anglo-Saxon period; eggs weren't associated with Easter in Britain until the later Middles ages, hares and rabbits not until much later still. There's nothing to suggest any continuity between the pre-conversion festival and the Anglo-Saxon Christian Easter, and the modern observance of Easter owes nothing to Anglo-Saxon paganism, with the sole exception of its English name.

(Page 126)

She also relevant to your odd description of Bede as "contemporary":

Most likely Bede wasn't relying on personal knowledge but was using a written source for month-names and adding his own speculation about the meaning- and in some cases he may have just been guessing.

(Page 15)

She also notes with regard to the name that:

Some have gone so far as to suggest that Bede invented Esotre as a scholarly hypothesis to explain a name he didn't understand

(Page 125) (There's a citation here to "Anglo-Saxon Paganism: The Evidence of Bede" by an R.I. Page a Cambridge scholar who was an expert on Anglo-Saxon runes)

So basically, what I'm saying is that I'm satisfied that my opinions are based on scholarship, including giving Bede his proper due.

So we agree then, that it is the origin of the name. Great! Kind of a stretch to suggest that is the only connection, don't ya think?

While her scholarship is impressive, the rest of her statements are unsupported by citation. They are just statements of her opinion. "He may have been guessing" or "He may have invented" . Which are ironic accusations!

As for the symbology, we know the rabbit wasn't biblical. Leviticus 11:6 states that the hare is an unclean animal: “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/virginity-fertility-or-just-chocolate-the-opaque-history-of-the-easter-bunny/

DP. It’s very surprising you claim to be in agreement with pp about the origin of the word “Easter.” She basically debunked the pagan claim that it was derived from a pagan goddess, and she used credible sources.

In particular, there’s no positive evidence that pagans ever had a goddess named Eostre, also the venerable Bede of the 8th century wasn’t contemporary or entirely reliable on many points besides this one. You’ve taken a LACK of evidence for this alleged pagan goddess and turned this into “unsupported opinion” about her nonexistence, then somehow you’ve turned this into an assertion that a. she existed, and b. pp agrees with you. Also, you keep ignoring the stronger evidence that “Easter” entered Middle English from the middle German word for dawn, “Eostarum.” Not to mention, the idea that 5-6th century Brits were created the festival, instead of the more obvious 1st and 2nd century peoples of the Middle East and Rome, is a bit insulting.

That’s quite a stretch, dontcha think?

Dude, YOUR POST QUOTES PARKER SAYING THIS: {I}t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the name- not the origins of the festival.

So yes, we agree that is the origin of the name.

My position is that if the name is the source it is likely the rest is sourced there also, at least until other evidence proves it isn't. You provide no evidence it wasn't, no evidence of where else those symbols came, and simply "Bede prolly made it up" with no evidence that is true.

It's fricking laughable.

Howzabout this: stop gish galloping with many words that prove nothing, and show one bit of evidence that the holiday and symbology came from somewhere else. Otherwise I claim victory and I am done with you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Christian, but I'm not concerned about this as a Christian. I have no problem with "baptizing" useful pagan customs. I have a problem with these stories, because they fail as history. There simply isn't evidence for them, and people believe them because they show up on the History Channel between showings of Ancient Aliens.

Translation: I refuse to believe the scholars, including contemporaneous writings by Bede, because it disagrees with my presuppositions, and I will say they fail as history but provide no evidence of that claim, and hope no one calls me on my bullshit.

I waited a bit to respond to this, because I needed to get to where I could lay my hands on my copy of Winters in the World Eleanor Parker's excellent recent book on the Anglo Saxon year. Parker is a specialist on medieval English and Scandinavian literature at Oxford and a scholar by anyone's definition. Here's what she says about the connection between Eostre and Easter celebration:

t's important to recognize that even if Easter does take its name from a goddess, that only tells us about the origins of the [i]name- not the origins of the festival. The Christian festival of Easter long pre-dated the Anglo-Saxon conversion, and its essential features, including the principal behind its dating, had been established for centuries. What's more, we have no evidence of any symbols, customs, or rituals that may have been associated with Eostre in Anglo-Saxon England or anything to suggest how her festival might have been celebrated. Bede mentions "feasts," in the vaguest terms, but he probably has no idea what those might have involved. Today it's popular myth that symbols linked in modern Britain with Easter, especially eggs, hares or rabbits derive from worship of Eostre, but there's no Anglo-Saxon evidence to support that. None of these symbols were linked to Easter in the Anglo-Saxon period; eggs weren't associated with Easter in Britain until the later Middles ages, hares and rabbits not until much later still. There's nothing to suggest any continuity between the pre-conversion festival and the Anglo-Saxon Christian Easter, and the modern observance of Easter owes nothing to Anglo-Saxon paganism, with the sole exception of its English name.

(Page 126)

She also relevant to your odd description of Bede as "contemporary":

Most likely Bede wasn't relying on personal knowledge but was using a written source for month-names and adding his own speculation about the meaning- and in some cases he may have just been guessing.

(Page 15)

She also notes with regard to the name that:

Some have gone so far as to suggest that Bede invented Esotre as a scholarly hypothesis to explain a name he didn't understand

(Page 125) (There's a citation here to "Anglo-Saxon Paganism: The Evidence of Bede" by an R.I. Page a Cambridge scholar who was an expert on Anglo-Saxon runes)

So basically, what I'm saying is that I'm satisfied that my opinions are based on scholarship, including giving Bede his proper due.

So we agree then, that it is the origin of the name. Great! Kind of a stretch to suggest that is the only connection, don't ya think?

While her scholarship is impressive, the rest of her statements are unsupported by citation. They are just statements of her opinion. "He may have been guessing" or "He may have invented" . Which are ironic accusations!

As for the symbology, we know the rabbit wasn't biblical. Leviticus 11:6 states that the hare is an unclean animal: “The hare, for even though it chews the cud, it does not have divided hoofs; it is unclean for you”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/virginity-fertility-or-just-chocolate-the-opaque-history-of-the-easter-bunny/

DP. It’s very surprising you claim to be in agreement with pp about the origin of the word “Easter.” She basically debunked the pagan claim that it was derived from a pagan goddess, and she used credible sources.

In particular, there’s no positive evidence that pagans ever had a goddess named Eostre, also the venerable Bede of the 8th century wasn’t contemporary or entirely reliable on many points besides this one. You’ve taken a LACK of evidence for this alleged pagan goddess and turned this into “unsupported opinion” about her nonexistence, then somehow you’ve turned this into an assertion that a. she existed, and b. pp agrees with you. Also, you keep ignoring the stronger evidence that “Easter” entered Middle English from the middle German word for dawn, “Eostarum.” Not to mention, the idea that 5-6th century Brits were created the festival, instead of the more obvious 1st and 2nd century peoples of the Middle East and Rome, is a bit insulting.

That’s quite a stretch, dontcha think?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another appropriated holiday. Samhain is a very sacred holiday in my faith. It’s the day the veil is at its thinnest. We communicate with and honor our deceased ancestors. Costumes were meant to help the living blend in with the dead. We carve Jack-o-lanterns to scare away any unwanted guests. It is our most important festival. I love that we celebrate Halloween in the US. But I hate how evangelical Christians pretend it isn’t a pagan/Wiccan holiday. Same with Yule (Christmas). Same with Ostara (Easter). All the so-called “Christian” holidays were appropriated.

If you attend a church that celebrates Samhain (Halloween), your church is 10O% hypocritical. It is a pagan holiday.

Easter was originally a Roman fertility rite that included sacrifices too.

Nope. Easter started during Passover. The Last Supper was a Passover meal and the supper and Jesus’ death occurred when Jerusalem was clogged with people celebrating Passover. This is Christianity 101.

Oh, really? What is the origin of the word "Easter"? And the rabbits and eggs as symbols?

It's more complicated than your curt "nope" implies. Like many religious holidays (such as Christmas), it's origins are tied to seasonal changes, solstices and equinoxes.

Yes really, the Last Supper was a Passover meal. This is scriptural (it’s in the New Testament) and it’s really fundamental. Why would you claim that it’s not part of Passover?

The eggs may have come from Passover. Regardless, eggs and bunnies are not part of liturgy or scripture.

What role do eggs and bunnies play in Wicca? Are you saying that Wicca has a monopoly on using eggs and bunnies, and Jews shouldn’t be using eggs at Passover either?

Of course it was a passover meal. That was not in question and I am not sure why you imply it was.

The point is that passover and easter are both appropriated equinox holidays, and easter still uses the equinox and lunar cycle to calculate it's date, just as the pagans did when they invented it. The pagan celebrations were already happening, so the religious leaders appropriated them for celebrating the biblical stories of Jesus' resurrection and the time God killed a whole bunch of children but not certain ones.

It was a originally festival celebrating spring planting and reproduction, hence eggs and bunnies, neither of which have anything to do with Christianity or Judaism. And the name comes from the goddess Eostre. This all pre-dates Christianity.

Jeez I really thought most adults knew this.

Do you have any documented, first-hand accounts of these celebrations?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another appropriated holiday. Samhain is a very sacred holiday in my faith. It’s the day the veil is at its thinnest. We communicate with and honor our deceased ancestors. Costumes were meant to help the living blend in with the dead. We carve Jack-o-lanterns to scare away any unwanted guests. It is our most important festival. I love that we celebrate Halloween in the US. But I hate how evangelical Christians pretend it isn’t a pagan/Wiccan holiday. Same with Yule (Christmas). Same with Ostara (Easter). All the so-called “Christian” holidays were appropriated.

If you attend a church that celebrates Samhain (Halloween), your church is 10O% hypocritical. It is a pagan holiday.

Easter was originally a Roman fertility rite that included sacrifices too.

Nope. Easter started during Passover. The Last Supper was a Passover meal and the supper and Jesus’ death occurred when Jerusalem was clogged with people celebrating Passover. This is Christianity 101.

Oh, really? What is the origin of the word "Easter"? And the rabbits and eggs as symbols?

It's more complicated than your curt "nope" implies. Like many religious holidays (such as Christmas), it's origins are tied to seasonal changes, solstices and equinoxes.

Yes really, the Last Supper was a Passover meal. This is scriptural (it’s in the New Testament) and it’s really fundamental. Why would you claim that it’s not part of Passover?

The eggs may have come from Passover. Regardless, eggs and bunnies are not part of liturgy or scripture.

What role do eggs and bunnies play in Wicca? Are you saying that Wicca has a monopoly on using eggs and bunnies, and Jews shouldn’t be using eggs at Passover either?

Of course it was a passover meal. That was not in question and I am not sure why you imply it was.

The point is that passover and easter are both appropriated equinox holidays, and easter still uses the equinox and lunar cycle to calculate it's date, just as the pagans did when they invented it. The pagan celebrations were already happening, so the religious leaders appropriated them for celebrating the biblical stories of Jesus' resurrection and the time God killed a whole bunch of children but not certain ones.

It was a originally festival celebrating spring planting and reproduction, hence eggs and bunnies, neither of which have anything to do with Christianity or Judaism. And the name comes from the goddess Eostre. This all pre-dates Christianity.

Jeez I really thought most adults knew this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another appropriated holiday. Samhain is a very sacred holiday in my faith. It’s the day the veil is at its thinnest. We communicate with and honor our deceased ancestors. Costumes were meant to help the living blend in with the dead. We carve Jack-o-lanterns to scare away any unwanted guests. It is our most important festival. I love that we celebrate Halloween in the US. But I hate how evangelical Christians pretend it isn’t a pagan/Wiccan holiday. Same with Yule (Christmas). Same with Ostara (Easter). All the so-called “Christian” holidays were appropriated.

If you attend a church that celebrates Samhain (Halloween), your church is 10O% hypocritical. It is a pagan holiday.

Do you think only evangelical Christians “pretend” Halloween isn’t your sacred holiday? All other religions, the non-religious, and everyone in between vocally acknowledge your sacred holiday?

This forum is a joke…now evangelicals aren’t acknowledging Samhain!

What I hate is the hypocrisy. It is a pagan holiday. Pretending it isn’t is ridiculous. I actually respect the churches that don’t celebrate it at all. At least they acknowledge that the holiday is not one evangelicals should participate in.

Pagans sacrificed humans and animals, and practiced cannibalism. Do you do such things to authentically worship your most sacred holiday?

Do you smear yourself with the blood of sacrificed animals and humans on Yule?

Well at my church we drink blood and eat Jesus’ body.

Well, you aren’t putting live, screaming infants on altars and murdering them to appease angry gods…which is why Jesus wants us to eat crackers and drink tiny cups of grape juice, instead.

pp isn’t a pagan. pagans needed blood to worship.

Um. God told Abraham to put his baby on an Alter as a sacrifice. 😂

You guys are bad at religion- Abraham told his son that he dreamt he was going to sacrifice him, the son (varies by faith tradition) agreed to do the will of God and then an angel told them to sacrifice a lamb. the whole point of the story is to stop the practice of human sacrifice which was practiced all over- Asia, Middle East, south American .. human beings have always practiced it and the story is to stop it. I bought Halloween was a catholic holiday? catholic university always has trick or treat booths and kind of goes all out. .