The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Why do atheists celebrate Christmas? Options
maillady
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:41:53 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/29/2012
Posts: 258
Neurons: 3,375
I know some do not,but most do. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
uuaschbaer
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:59:53 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/18/2009
Posts: 1,928
Neurons: 6,180
Even if Christmas wasn't characterized by Pagan traditions and symbols, even if it hadn't its origin in pagan culture, it is and has ever been a feast of drinking, eating, family and friends, a celebration of life much more than of either Christ or the winter solstice. It's exceedingly human, and a worldwide tradition, far older than Christianity. Why would doing what humans do be anything other than the expected behaviour of an atheist?
thar
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:09:41 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 22,405
Neurons: 90,781
I don't think its hypocritical, I think it is just human nature. Everyone needs festivals, year markers, 'time out' from the daily grind. A time when you are reminded to do all the things you should do anyway, like spend time with family - show people you love and appreciate them. Christmas does that. It livens up a pretty cold and grey time of year with a good time.

I don't believe in God ( I variously believe in some other things, but I certainly don't buy into any religious dogma) but as I kid I went to church and and happily sang carols, and went around raising money for charity by carol singing. I find nothing hypocritical in that, personally. I sat through the occasional sermon for the social aspect of a community gathering at church and a good sing. Even if I am not praising 'God' I think a bit of thanks and praise, even to my own internal 'godness' is never a bad thing. The whole Christian story I can live with or without. (this is New Testament, in its loosest form very innocuous and nobody can argue with it. IT is the old testament that has some ethical howlers I could not condone!)

I also celebrate Jól - the old Norse Midwinter - I do not 'believe' in the Æsir-Vanir gods either, but it has the same cultural significance - the tradition, the language and the world view is incorporated into my belief system and worldview.

THere is a reason why every human culture has festivals. Currently, atheists live in a world where in many countries, those Christian festivals still predominate, so we join in. I do not think Christians own Christmas - they may do different things, give it a different significance, use it in a different way, but I think the celebration of the festival is common. After all, Christianity in particular has piggy-backed onto underlying pagan festivals - Christmas is in Roman midwinter Saturnalia in the south, and pagan Jól in the north - Easter is on Spring pagan festival of the northern goddess Eostre; All Saints Day is on harvest time, Samhain, the pagan new Year....

The Christmas tree is an ancient pagan tradition at winter solstice...

Christians are really the Johnny-come-latelies - they should be grateful they get to celebrate their festival along with everyone else Applause
Blooper
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:22:01 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 839
Neurons: 2,292
Location: South Borneo
I think it more becomes a traditional/cultural event than a celebration of birthday of God's son.

I also am sure atheists still say "oh my God" or "Jesus christ!"
pedro
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:32:59 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 13,057
Neurons: 63,022


[image not available]
RuthP
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 9:51:18 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/2/2009
Posts: 5,408
Neurons: 87,618
Location: Drain, Oregon, United States
TFD discussed this once before (at least I found one, maybe there are more) and it is a thread worth reading. TFD Sept. 2012: Christmas for atheists?
pedro
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:00:13 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 13,057
Neurons: 63,022
and it touched a few nerves too!
Hope2
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 11:01:35 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/6/2012
Posts: 4,907
Neurons: 16,769
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Why do atheists celebrate Christmas? Why not? A party is a party.

We have a Grey Cup Party every year. The men watch football. That's the game where they run around with an oval ball and try to bash each other. Then they jump up and down and pat each other's bums. Then the men watch the half-time show with the half-naked girls very closely. The women socialize. Are the women hypocritical to be at the party?

And a lot of us in Canada start out as Christians with Sunday School backgrounds. As we get older and hone our beliefs through education or observation, we may change. But the rest of the family may not change. So why not continue to celebrate with your precious family?

I read somewhere something like this - Not to believe what one believes one should believe is hell on earth. I found myself in conflict with doubts for many years until I decided to just postpone the question as the answer will not be forthcoming here - and I will get the answer way too soon. So does that make me an agnostic or atheist? What's in a label? We all just practise our 'best guess' religion anyhow.

It is how you act that counts, not what you believe.

Edit : meant to say that I read the other thread too.
almostfreebird
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 11:20:14 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,812
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan





Because athletes also like Christmas too!



excaelis
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:36:25 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 10,965
Neurons: 32,652
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
The feasting etc at this time of year is a much older tradition in Northern culture than Christmas. I think Blooper has the right idea. My co-worker Syed, a devout Muslim, has finished his Christmas shopping. A party's a party, no matter what your faith.

' Singing words of wisdom, let it be...'.
twinsonic
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 1:23:21 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/18/2009
Posts: 356
Neurons: 1,322
Blooper wrote:
I think it more becomes a traditional/cultural event than a celebration of birthday of God's son.

I also am sure atheists still say "oh my God" or "Jesus christ!"


Exactly!
I am not exactly an "atheist" but am not a Christian. My 17 year old is an atheist. We do not celebrate the birth of Christ. We know enough about the traditions to know they do not have the origins in Christianity anyway. That the person Jesus, as a historical figure, would not have been born in late Dec, but more likely late Oct.
We have a decorated tree, send cards, listen to carols, bake cookies, exchange gifts, etc. It is a culture event. A time to reconnect with loved ones, friends, and acquaintances. Often the only contact all year!
Daveski
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 5:03:47 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/17/2012
Posts: 1,711
Neurons: 5,066
Location: Caer Sidi
Much of the symbolism of Christmas is pagan in origin anyway. It's just a veneer on top of a celebration so old it is lost in the mists of time.
Geeman
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:47:43 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2009
Posts: 1,787
Neurons: 125,022
Location: Whittier, California, United States
Can't a logger celebrate Arbor Day? Or a pacifist Veteran's Day? Or some ridiculously rich, self-enfranchised, old-money Socio-Capitalist celebrate Labor Day?

Most aspect of the Christmas holiday are, these days, pretty secular. Christmas trees CAN be religious, but in fact the root of bringing a plant into the house during the Winter solstice predates the Christian tradition by quite a lot, and there's no mention of such a thing in the Bible. There's often more forgotten Roman roots to the holiday than Christian ones.

So, overall, if one wants to celebrate Christmas then I say go for it. Personally, I find the whole holiday season to be a waste, and largely pointless, but I'm happy to have a few days off....
dusty
Posted: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:17:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/13/2012
Posts: 1,770
Neurons: 5,765
I think when Holidays are given a theme that can be accepted by all People, especially if it means that we find an Atheist celebrating Christmas, especially if a genuine smile can be seen on all faces and even more so if we are witness to bursts of laughter that cannot be avoided. These acts of involuntarily expressions when one literally cannot prevent themselves from laughing out loud no matter how much they attempt to refrain, no matter how inappropriate the timing my be, are some of the greatest gifts of Joy that can be experienced.

Tears of Joy are of the same nature

So while I understand exactly what you mean when you ask this question, because in some cases the answer may be yes there can be a situation that fits the definition of hypocritical, I still believe it is better to have an outwardly projected theme such as Santa and decorated trees, or rabbits and chocolate eggs so that anyone may find it easier to participate in Celebrations with others so that they experience receiving of Gifts together as one familiar People, and then they can branch off to their separate homes, churches, or communities where it would be disrespectful or hypocritical take part in Celebrations not appropriate to be shared with those who are of opposing beliefs.

Yes, the very detailed and specialized or personal aspects of any Celebration should be isolated to those who share compatible beliefs whether they be religious or not. They should remain separated so that we can all celebrate in ways that are not hypocritical not only for the sake of peace, but in the name of respect so that all People can have what they value as Sacred, remain in that name.

But I do believe it is important, necessary that there also be general understandings, and general places that allow for all individuals to have an area for Celebration that is suitable for all People who are responsible enough to recognize and show respect for lives of other Human Beings. Our Order and Family that Humans are a part of, are given the Freedom of choice for many aspects of their life. I believe there are ways to respectfully Celebrate Christmas no matter what ones beliefs are in regards to Christ and Religion.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:01:39 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 13,019
Neurons: 603,945
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
I have never yet met an atheist who celebrates Christmas. Sure, they take the holiday, eat the turkey, kiss the girls under the mistltoe etc., etc., but they don't celebrate the birth of Christ. Nor should they - they don't believe in him. I must say that I have never yet met an atheist who rubbishes Christmas or who despises Christians. Matbe I have just been lucky. So far the only atheists I have met have been well-informed, gracious people, mindful of other folks beliefs and sensitivities. I think these qualities partly define an atheist as one who is of settled opinion - people who keep their thoughts to themselves unless challenged. Then they can give a good account of themselves without being rude and bombastic. No offence meant.
excaelis
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:24:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 10,965
Neurons: 32,652
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”

― Stuart Chase
Jyrkkä Jätkä
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:45:23 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 43,127
Neurons: 586,764
Location: Helsinki, Southern Finland Province, Finland
As an atheist I like to watch the midnight mass in Vatican at the Christmas night.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 3:44:48 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 13,019
Neurons: 603,945
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
excaelis wrote:
“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.” ― Stuart Chase


A very precise and meaningful saying, but one must believe by faith and the source of the faith is the proof.

Daveski
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:11:33 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/17/2012
Posts: 1,711
Neurons: 5,066
Location: Caer Sidi
What proof?
excaelis
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:36:14 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 10,965
Neurons: 32,652
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Quod erat demonstrandum.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 5:20:59 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 13,019
Neurons: 603,945
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Daveski wrote:
What proof?


Christ's resurrection from the dead is admissable, I believe.
pedro
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:27:10 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/21/2009
Posts: 13,057
Neurons: 63,022
jacobusmaximus wrote:

Christ's resurrection from the dead is admissable, I believe.


Here is a summary of the stages of death (ten on this list; others may differ). Christ would only have managed the first four or five within 3 days. Cases where comatose patients on life support systems have recovered after a very long period also point to the fuzziness of trying to pinpoint a 'moment' of death.

http://listverse.com/2012/10/26/10-fascinating-stages-of-death/

There was an excellent book on this taboo subject by Sherwin Nuland called 'How We Die' Well worth a read.

here he is giving a talk ; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H89MC3xHZO0
Daveski
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 7:11:56 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/17/2012
Posts: 1,711
Neurons: 5,066
Location: Caer Sidi
jacobusmaximus wrote:
Daveski wrote:
What proof?


Christ's resurrection from the dead is admissable, I believe.


Yeah, best get CSI on it right away. So, where is the actual proof then? Didn't a lot of gods claim to come back from the dead, Baldur, Osiris etc?

Funny that there is no actual proof that any of them did.
Epiphileon
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:10:58 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/22/2009
Posts: 4,281
Neurons: 166,361
Most likely because Christmas has become engrained in the culture as the hijacked celebration of the winter solstice, as has probably already been pointed out. The, perhaps more interesting question is why the Christians thought it necessary to hijack a pagan celebration.
Daveski
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:18:49 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/17/2012
Posts: 1,711
Neurons: 5,066
Location: Caer Sidi
Epiphileon wrote:
Most likely because Christmas has become engrained in the culture as the hijacked celebration of the winter solstice, as has probably already been pointed out. The, perhaps more interesting question is why the Christians thought it necessary to hijack a pagan celebration.


Most likely it was easier to get people to convert if they felt happy with an ancient celebration. Virtually all 'Christian' festivals/holidays are based on earlier religious ones. Especially Easter:

O.E. Easterdæg, from Eastre (Northumbrian Eostre), from P.Gmc. *Austron, a goddess of fertility and spring, probably originally of sunrise whose feast was celebrated at the spring equinox, from *austra-, from PIE *aus- "to shine" (especially of the dawn). Bede says Anglo-Saxon Christians adopted her name and many of the celebratory practices for their Mass of Christ's resurrection. Ultimately related to east. Almost all neighboring languages use a variant of Latin Pasche to name this holiday. Easter egg attested by 1825, earlier pace egg (1610s). Easter bunny attested by 1904 in children's lessons; Easter rabbit is by 1888; the paganish customs of Easter seem to have grown popular c. 1900; before that they were limited to German immigrants. ~ Online Etymology Dictionary
excaelis
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 3:13:26 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2010
Posts: 10,965
Neurons: 32,652
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
This is not, frankly, a winnable argument for anyone here. To quote ( from memory ) the supercomputer in the movie ' War Games ': " Strange game, professor. The only way to win is not to play."
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 6:41:56 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 13,019
Neurons: 603,945
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
pedro wrote:
jacobusmaximus wrote:

Christ's resurrection from the dead is admissable, I believe.


Here is a summary of the stages of death (ten on this list; others may differ). Christ would only have managed the first four or five within 3 days. Cases where comatose patients on life support systems have recovered after a very long period also point to the fuzziness of trying to pinpoint a 'moment' of death.

http://listverse.com/2012/10/26/10-fascinating-stages-of-death/

There was an excellent book on this taboo subject by Sherwin Nuland called 'How We Die' Well worth a read.

here he is giving a talk ; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H89MC3xHZO0


You will understand if I say that Jesus was a special case and the normal steps into death did not apply to him. Read John 19:30 'Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit'.
Jesus chose his moment to die. He gave up - or released - his Spirit.
Blooper
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:23:01 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 839
Neurons: 2,292
Location: South Borneo
What is atheists perception about Jesus character (the human character)? Is he just positioned as a great man like Buddha, Confusius, Moses?

almostfreebird
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:32:19 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,812
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan
Romany
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 8:47:39 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 17,399
Neurons: 55,955
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Blooper - I really think a question such as "What is the atheist perception about Jesus?" is a little open-ended. Different people think different things. There is no credo for atheists. Some believe Yeshua was just an itinerant Jewish rabbi; some that he was a decent sort but not godly; others that, as no historical proof of his existence has come to light, his 'character' is an amalgamation of the characters of several nomadic preachers who roamed the country in those days.

One thing that puzzles me, however, is why so many believers don't respond when confronted with history? Even on this thread people have referred to Mithras: born of a virgin, 3 wise men, stable birth, died and rose again 3 days later; or Horus: announcement of birth by angels, born of a virgin, son of a god, came of age at 12, step/foster father of the Royal Line;baptised by a character know as The Baptist who was subsequently beheaded; little known until the age of 30 etc. and how many of the things (Sermon on the Mount) have appeared on many texts which pre-date the concept of Christianity.

I really am interested in how people view all these other things, what they think about them, why so many of them don't even acknowledge the historical record?

I once saw a very plaintive post where someone, brought up Christian, had come across the historical record and texts and was BEGGING someone to tell her why she had no need to lose her faith in order to retain her knowledge of alternative discourses which pre-dated Christianity...and I don't think she was alone. I've met many people who say that discovering all these things was the death-knell of their Christian belief.

So why don't more Christians, rather than just ignoring all this, garner together answers that would satisfy waverers who have been, for the first time, confronted with this knowledge?

I rather think, for anyone who genuinely WANTS to know and isn't just trying to stir things up, the OP's original question has been fully answered, hasn't it? Thus, while we may be straying from the OP (who has not returned) these last few posts remain pertinent.
Listening . . .
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:38:46 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/30/2011
Posts: 964
Neurons: 3,950
Romany wrote:
Blooper - I really think a question such as "What is the atheist perception about Jesus?" is a little open-ended. Different people think different things. There is no credo for atheists. Some believe Yeshua was just an itinerant Jewish rabbi; some that he was a decent sort but not godly; others that, as no historical proof of his existence has come to light, his 'character' is an amalgamation of the characters of several nomadic preachers who roamed the country in those days.

One thing that puzzles me, however, is why so many believers don't respond when confronted with history? Even on this thread people have referred to Mithras: born of a virgin, 3 wise men, stable birth, died and rose again 3 days later; or Horus: announcement of birth by angels, born of a virgin, son of a god, came of age at 12, step/foster father of the Royal Line;baptised by a character know as The Baptist who was subsequently beheaded; little known until the age of 30 etc. and how many of the things (Sermon on the Mount) have appeared on many texts which pre-date the concept of Christianity.

I really am interested in how people view all these other things, what they think about them, why so many of them don't even acknowledge the historical record?

I once saw a very plaintive post where someone, brought up Christian, had come across the historical record and texts and was BEGGING someone to tell her why she had no need to lose her faith in order to retain her knowledge of alternative discourses which pre-dated Christianity...and I don't think she was alone. I've met many people who say that discovering all these things was the death-knell of their Christian belief.

So why don't more Christians, rather than just ignoring all this, garner together answers that would satisfy waverers who have been, for the first time, confronted with this knowledge?

I rather think, for anyone who genuinely WANTS to know and isn't just trying to stir things up, the OP's original question has been fully answered, hasn't it? Thus, while we may be straying from the OP (who has not returned) these last few posts remain pertinent.


Romany,

I have asked myself these same questions since I was in college and "the lights came on" for me regarding my belief system. How could I continue to believe what I had been believing my entire life in light of the historical information I learned in school? There is such a fear of most of the people around me today . . . they are afraid to even utter the questions like "What if . . . ?" What if I've been believing my whole life something that isn't true? What if Jesus isn't God's son? What if religion is there to control the masses? What if . . . it's a powerful question. I am raising my children to know that it is a good question.

Thank you for your post.
jacobusmaximus
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:11:15 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/17/2009
Posts: 13,019
Neurons: 603,945
Location: Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
I believe, but...
A man out walking in a remote place came to great chasm spanned by a flimsy-looking rope bridge. He wondered if he could trust it to carry his weight safely to the other side. Just then a local man came by and, seeing the walker's fear, told him the rope bridge was safe to use, that he used it every day. The hiker thanked the local man for his advice, assured him that he believed him but that he would find another way to cross the chasm, which he did. The truth was that the hiker merely gave intellectual assent to his counsellor, and that is not believing. Believing is doing. Believing is making a choice and living by the priniples taught. There is no shame in being honest with yourself and admitting you have doubts about the matter of God in your life, but it is vital to know where you are coming from before you can know where you are going.
Jyrkkä Jätkä
Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:23:03 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 43,127
Neurons: 586,764
Location: Helsinki, Southern Finland Province, Finland
I'm an atheist, but also a descendant of Christian culture. I don't believe in Bible, Qur'an, Bhagavad Gita, or the other Holy Books, but I can read the sacred scripts as documents of our history and culture,
and I can respect the faith of others, whatever their religion is.

I celebrate Christmas, as do most of the Finns, partly as a religious feast, partly as Winter Solstice. There's no problem for me to go in church on Christmas Eve.
dusty
Posted: Friday, December 21, 2012 6:24:35 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/13/2012
Posts: 1,770
Neurons: 5,765
Romany wrote:
Blooper - I really think a question such as "What is the atheist perception about Jesus?" is a little open-ended. Different people think different things. There is no credo for atheists. Some believe Yeshua was just an itinerant Jewish rabbi; some that he was a decent sort but not godly; others that, as no historical proof of his existence has come to light, his 'character' is an amalgamation of the characters of several nomadic preachers who roamed the country in those days.

One thing that puzzles me, however, is why so many believers don't respond when confronted with history? Even on this thread people have referred to Mithras: born of a virgin, 3 wise men, stable birth, died and rose again 3 days later; or Horus: announcement of birth by angels, born of a virgin, son of a god, came of age at 12, step/foster father of the Royal Line;baptised by a character know as The Baptist who was subsequently beheaded; little known until the age of 30 etc. and how many of the things (Sermon on the Mount) have appeared on many texts which pre-date the concept of Christianity.

I really am interested in how people view all these other things, what they think about them, why so many of them don't even acknowledge the historical record?

I once saw a very plaintive post where someone, brought up Christian, had come across the historical record and texts and was BEGGING someone to tell her why she had no need to lose her faith in order to retain her knowledge of alternative discourses which pre-dated Christianity...and I don't think she was alone. I've met many people who say that discovering all these things was the death-knell of their Christian belief.

So why don't more Christians, rather than just ignoring all this, garner together answers that would satisfy waverers who have been, for the first time, confronted with this knowledge?

I rather think, for anyone who genuinely WANTS to know and isn't just trying to stir things up, the OP's original question has been fully answered, hasn't it? Thus, while we may be straying from the OP (who has not returned) these last few posts remain pertinent.


The problems faced by everyone, not just Christians believing in Jesus, or Atheists who really shouldn't be confronted over belief in Jesus because if an Atheists does not believe in God, then the only thing that can be in contention with Atheists is whether or not a person named Jesus existed. An Atheist would NOT dispute a record of a person (either man or woman) named Jesus if there was a legitimate record. Such a record would be acknowledged, the dispute would then be whether or not he was something special (the Son of God or the Messiah)

And that is sort of the same dispute of belief that exists between Christians and Judaism.

If the two belief systems are going to exist in peace, I don't think a preacher who tell a rabbi he wasn't welcome to attend their Holiday dinner celebration which is more of a social event then partaking of the Sacrament. The rabbi wouldn't tell the preacher he is not welcome to a Jewish Holiday social event either. Not as long as each of them was not doing the whole you are going hell for not believing the story I believe.

Now if they said they were going to hell robbing a bank and killing innocent people trying to make their escape, sure , but only if someone at the celebration was claiming to that as their plans afterward or something like that.

Excluding each other from a social celebration is not friendly practice. But any rituals that they deem sacred, and not social are the things that should not be mixed.

People tend to be less upset if you insult their color choice of their new car, but insult the choice of what the choose to believe as sacred, there is trouble. Such trouble that killing and all other unrecognized atrocities or war not only happen, but suddenly those atrocities are now are childens' duties to make sure they happen.

And that is disgusting, vile, inhumane, and just sad, maybe one of the saddest things in world.

It's sad because I cannot help myself from thinking as I watch these things happen, that probably 99% of these people desire to live righteously. They belief in God is strong and they would literally die if it were the undisputed and verifiable will of God.

The problem is that no God's will would be one of malice.

No God would intentionally fool his people, God doesn't teach lessons by creating traps for people to fall in.

A Higher Power would never let bitterness or jealousy creep into his lesson plans for those he loves.

He wouldn't even let bitter jealousy creep into teaching his enemies a lesson.

Because it is not god-like to do so.

I believe 99% of all Christian, Muslim, Jews have an honest desire to serve God

So for them to be involved in wars with each other is a BIG HUGE RED FLAG

the problem we have is with confusion, the problems we have are with people justifying lying because they already have it in their mind that they are doing God's work and the other is evil.

So now we have this current situation where thanks to all those well intended, but fraudulent evidence, fabricated proof that one story is true and the other is false, it didn't save the world, but metaphorically speaking added another paving stone to hell.

and unfortunately, when whatever wrongful lie was justified when back when, so that "God could prevail" the placement of the paving stone probably trapped an innocent traveler who was only trying to make it home, in Heaven where he was to meet up with his family.

So my problems are not with the people who genuinely desire to do Good, but instead with getting to the bottom of the Truth, so that the world can finally get on with it's life. Because once all the crap is debunked what would the world be like when all the hardcores zealots who are willing to die and kill, have no more of these silly details to be divided over.

All that energy and devotion is such that one volunteer can do the work of tens or maybe even hundreds of people who preform the job for money.

in fact, one truly devoted volunteer, in some cases is the only one who can preform specific tasks, and you could have the entire world attempting the get the task done and pay them as much as they wished for working, and it would never work


I fully understand that people had the best intentions, but we really need to let go of the stupid details, or else we are going to have to go through everything and debunk these "facts" one at a time. And there will be many high ranking religious, political, you name it, it all goes back to a very pivital moment, where the small justification is viewed for the damage that it has done much further down the road.

For every conspiracy that those who carried it out believed there is "no way to know" well, there is.

and that is mainly because they were so ill informed about the the Truth. Back then it seemed infallible,

however with very basic facts almost every conspiracy can be picked apart. Counting and numbers were established before language. We counted to one two and three before we could even think about communicating any thought other than (hunger/thirst) (sleepy/tired) (lustful/sex) please remember that these thoughts and their practice of them were around way before counting to three was necessary. We counted long before we ever spoke (or any form of communicating or language) and by the time anything was ever written, it was spoken for quite some time previously.

So it would be as easy as distinguishing between night and day to go back and show how the ingenious and very clever hoaxes (again many that were well intended or believed to halt bloodshed) are not as slick and clever now as they were a couple hundred years ago.

And even if the hoaxes were used to stop a war back then, if they can clear up the mess we now have ourselves in, where most people are good but we are fighting because you don't remember what happened, we are going to have to go back and clear up one lie at a time, which unfortunately is when individuals suddenly remember those memories they claimed they lost.

Supposedly now the restricted access to memories is now removed. Practice honesty, and you will remember.

if things don't start clearing up quick, I am going to have to teach more than my children how to identify the truth from not truth in real time, and none of this years later stuff.

and you are right Romany, if someone attacks you for merely wanting some clarification, which sometimes calls for "what if" questions, is the beginning of a sign, that shews what is going on in the area they are hiding from you.

almostfreebird
Posted: Saturday, December 22, 2012 1:25:55 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/22/2011
Posts: 2,812
Neurons: 7,024
Location: Japan





November 15(Thu) - December 25(Tue)

The Christmas theme at Tokyo Midtown is “Everyone is somebody’s Santa Claus”.
We think that everyone has someone they care about,
and we can all be a Santa to someone.
Our events are based on this concept.


quoted from http://Midtown Christmas 2012






Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.