Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Of course. I'd guesstimate that 95% of Christians in the US are aware that December 25th is not Jesus' true birthdate. He probably wasn't born in 0 AD, either, but more like 3AD or 4AD.
Nobody is "blind" to this. Nobody is pretending that we actually know Jesus' true birthdate.
Reasonable people understand that lots of facts are lost to time, and Jesus' birthday is one of them. To celebrate his birth, somebody had to pick a day, and they picked December 25, probably because it coincided with other festivals. As good a day as any other.
The big reveal about 12/25 isn't going to shatter anybody's faith, because we all know it already. If you were Christian, you'd understand that this is a big ho-hum, because the magical part isn't the arbitrary 12/25 date, it's the birth itself.
and faithful christians also don't find it odd that several other ancient gods were born on the that day, and/or had virgin mothers and died and rose again. It doesn't occur to them (and they are certainly not taught) that Jesus as son of god is simply an updated myth. People with faith understand these things.
You need to read up on the history of early Christianity. The Christians sought converts by appropriating other traditions, and this is well known to modern Christians. The fact that they did so does not disprove who Jesus is nor does it disprove the existence of God. What it proves is that the early Christians were very shrewd strategists when it came to recruiting converts. Again, this has nothing to do with theology.
It proves that they had deceitful intents and were willing to fudge details in order to get what they wanted.
Anonymous wrote:
You need to read up on the history of early Christianity. The Christians sought converts by appropriating other traditions, and this is well known to modern Christians. The fact that they did so does not disprove who Jesus is nor does it disprove the existence of God. What it proves is that the early Christians were very shrewd strategists when it came to recruiting converts. Again, this has nothing to do with theology.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Of course. I'd guesstimate that 95% of Christians in the US are aware that December 25th is not Jesus' true birthdate. He probably wasn't born in 0 AD, either, but more like 3AD or 4AD.
Nobody is "blind" to this. Nobody is pretending that we actually know Jesus' true birthdate.
Reasonable people understand that lots of facts are lost to time, and Jesus' birthday is one of them. To celebrate his birth, somebody had to pick a day, and they picked December 25, probably because it coincided with other festivals. As good a day as any other.
The big reveal about 12/25 isn't going to shatter anybody's faith, because we all know it already. If you were Christian, you'd understand that this is a big ho-hum, because the magical part isn't the arbitrary 12/25 date, it's the birth itself.
and faithful christians also don't find it odd that several other ancient gods were born on the that day, and/or had virgin mothers and died and rose again. It doesn't occur to them (and they are certainly not taught) that Jesus as son of god is simply an updated myth. People with faith understand these things.
You need to read up on the history of early Christianity. The Christians sought converts by appropriating other traditions, and this is well known to modern Christians. The fact that they did so does not disprove who Jesus is nor does it disprove the existence of God. What it proves is that the early Christians were very shrewd strategists when it came to recruiting converts. Again, this has nothing to do with theology.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Of course. I'd guesstimate that 95% of Christians in the US are aware that December 25th is not Jesus' true birthdate. He probably wasn't born in 0 AD, either, but more like 3AD or 4AD.
Nobody is "blind" to this. Nobody is pretending that we actually know Jesus' true birthdate.
Reasonable people understand that lots of facts are lost to time, and Jesus' birthday is one of them. To celebrate his birth, somebody had to pick a day, and they picked December 25, probably because it coincided with other festivals. As good a day as any other.
The big reveal about 12/25 isn't going to shatter anybody's faith, because we all know it already. If you were Christian, you'd understand that this is a big ho-hum, because the magical part isn't the arbitrary 12/25 date, it's the birth itself.
and faithful christians also don't find it odd that several other ancient gods were born on the that day, and/or had virgin mothers and died and rose again. It doesn't occur to them (and they are certainly not taught) that Jesus as son of god is simply an updated myth. People with faith understand these things.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Of course. I'd guesstimate that 95% of Christians in the US are aware that December 25th is not Jesus' true birthdate. He probably wasn't born in 0 AD, either, but more like 3AD or 4AD.
Nobody is "blind" to this. Nobody is pretending that we actually know Jesus' true birthdate.
Reasonable people understand that lots of facts are lost to time, and Jesus' birthday is one of them. To celebrate his birth, somebody had to pick a day, and they picked December 25, probably because it coincided with other festivals. As good a day as any other.
The big reveal about 12/25 isn't going to shatter anybody's faith, because we all know it already. If you were Christian, you'd understand that this is a big ho-hum, because the magical part isn't the arbitrary 12/25 date, it's the birth itself.
and faithful christians also don't find it odd that several other ancient gods were born on the that day, and/or had virgin mothers and died and rose again. It doesn't occur to them (and they are certainly not taught) that Jesus as son of god is simply an updated myth. People with faith understand these things.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Of course. I'd guesstimate that 95% of Christians in the US are aware that December 25th is not Jesus' true birthdate. He probably wasn't born in 0 AD, either, but more like 3AD or 4AD.
Nobody is "blind" to this. Nobody is pretending that we actually know Jesus' true birthdate.
Reasonable people understand that lots of facts are lost to time, and Jesus' birthday is one of them. To celebrate his birth, somebody had to pick a day, and they picked December 25, probably because it coincided with other festivals. As good a day as any other.
The big reveal about 12/25 isn't going to shatter anybody's faith, because we all know it already. If you were Christian, you'd understand that this is a big ho-hum, because the magical part isn't the arbitrary 12/25 date, it's the birth itself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Carolling is crazy sh!t? (Note the spelling of sh!t, so it doesn't get caught by the IT people at somebody's workplace.) If you say so.
Fact is, carolling, along with Christmas trees and reindeer, have nothing to do with the scriptural basis of Christianity. These things, although lovely, were secular practices appended onto the faith, but they are in no way a fundamental part of it. If somebody ripped carolling, bell ringing, reindeer, snow, presents, ivy and egg nog out of Christmas starting tomorrow, the New Testament would be completely untouched. That's right, there's no carolling, snow, reindeer or ivy in the canonical New Testament.
The history of caroling is simply a random example of of how traditions get passed along. The history behind Carolling is quite bizarre!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Carolling is crazy sh!t? (Note the spelling of sh!t, so it doesn't get caught by the IT people at somebody's workplace.) If you say so.
Fact is, carolling, along with Christmas trees and reindeer, have nothing to do with the scriptural basis of Christianity. These things, although lovely, were secular practices appended onto the faith, but they are in no way a fundamental part of it. If somebody ripped carolling, bell ringing, reindeer, snow, presents, ivy and egg nog out of Christmas starting tomorrow, the New Testament would be completely untouched. That's right, there's no carolling, snow, reindeer or ivy in the canonical New Testament.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Carolling is crazy sh!t? (Note the spelling of sh!t, so it doesn't get caught by the IT people at somebody's workplace.) If you say so.
Fact is, carolling, along with Christmas trees and reindeer, have nothing to do with the scriptural basis of Christianity. These things, although lovely, were secular practices appended onto the faith, but they are in no way a fundamental part of it. If somebody ripped carolling, bell ringing, reindeer, snow, presents, ivy and egg nog out of Christmas starting tomorrow, the New Testament would be completely untouched. That's right, there's no carolling, snow, reindeer or ivy in the canonical New Testament.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
This particular example is of Horus. There are many examples of religion taking on aspects of older belief structures, the stories make the transition easier. Look up the history behind caroling, that's some crazy shit!
Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?
What story are you referring to?
Anonymous wrote:OP here. Jesus is not the first story of the son of a god, born on Dec 25th, of a virgin, and resurrected in the spring. Understanding these aspects of religious history, how is it possible to truly believe one story and not another? Do those of you who believe have any knowledge of religious history or do you prefer to blind yourself to these realities?