Progress

[Bob Kohm]

I'm in it for the self-amusement.

You'll go blind and grow hair on your palms.

[SeaDogStat]

I'm in it for the self-amusement.

You'll go blind and grow hair on your palms.

And it's a sin...

[Gregg]

Weaker and weaker, nots. You started out here so strong, too

I am betting more people laughed than didn't.

[Fresno Bob]

my question still sits out there.....

[GwynnInTheHall]

my question still sits out there.....

of course it does.

but have faith, someone will answer.............

[Gregg]

of course it does.

but have faith, someone will answer.............

Yep. With three auctions this weekend and a 6 hour drive each way. Probably not going to get an indepth reply until next week.

[Kevin Seitzer]

my question still sits out there.....

About why we (in the west) celebrate Christmas on December 25? I didn't realize that was actually a serious question, but since you keep bringing it back up, I'll assume it was.

We don't know what day Jesus was actually born. Even by around 200 years after his birth, that information had been lost, and that's the earliest written record (from Clement of Alexandria) that we have of any discussion of his birth date. Clement mentioned a number of possible dates in March, April, or May. Some time between 200 and 300 the Roman church started celebrating Jesus' birth on December 25. Other groups celebrated on January 6, and the Armenians do to this day. The reason for the choice of those dates is unknown.

Some people have proposed that the church wanted to usurp the Roman feast for Sol Invictus, which was set on December 25 in the year 274. There is little evidence for this theory. The December 25 date seems to have been used while the Romans were still attempting to wipe out the church (prior to Constantine's conversion), and there is no evidence that the church was adapting other Roman festivals during this time.

Basically, the reasons for the choice of that date for the celebration have been lost, and we're left with speculation. Since we don't have any evidence to support another specific date, it's tough to argue for moving it elsewhere on the calendar, I suppose.

[ironfist]

FB can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the gist of his question was something like, "How can we trust anything that's written in the Bible if we can't even get the protagonist's birthday straight?"

For one thing, I don't think the date is written or mentioned in the Bible, so that's why everyone is guessing.

[senorsheep]

FB can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the gist of his question was something like, "How can we trust anything that's written in the Bible if we can't even get the protagonist's birthday straight?"

Oh, you wacky birthers...

[Fresno Bob]

FB can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the gist of his question was something like, "How can we trust anything that's written in the Bible if we can't even get the protagonist's birthday straight?"

It's more than that, how can anyone look at the Bible as the untouchable sacrosanct word of God, when we have crystal clear evidence that the Catholic Church will shift major major facts to suit their own purposes. Again, I find it much, much easier to believe that the cohorts of a politically killed insurrectionist would steal his body from a tomb, then to think that said dead insurrectionist was divine. If I'm developing the major mythos of a church, I know which version I tell, the same way I decide to shift one of the two holiest days of my canon to something that allows me to co-opt pagan winter festivals.

[Fresno Bob]

About why we (in the west) celebrate Christmas on December 25? I didn't realize that was actually a serious question, but since you keep bringing it back up, I'll assume it was.

We don't know what day Jesus was actually born. Even by around 200 years after his birth, that information had been lost, and that's the earliest written record (from Clement of Alexandria) that we have of any discussion of his birth date. Clement mentioned a number of possible dates in March, April, or May. Some time between 200 and 300 the Roman church started celebrating Jesus' birth on December 25. Other groups celebrated on January 6, and the Armenians do to this day. The reason for the choice of those dates is unknown.

Some people have proposed that the church wanted to usurp the Roman feast for Sol Invictus, which was set on December 25 in the year 274. There is little evidence for this theory. The December 25 date seems to have been used while the Romans were still attempting to wipe out the church (prior to Constantine's conversion), and there is no evidence that the church was adapting other Roman festivals during this time.

Basically, the reasons for the choice of that date for the celebration have been lost, and we're left with speculation. Since we don't have any evidence to support another specific date, it's tough to argue for moving it elsewhere on the calendar, I suppose.

Christmas and Easter are the two holiest days in the Christian church, the only actual historical evidence for Jesus tags his birth to the roman census in the spring, yet the church decides to ignore it and pick another birthday. Is it that much of a jump to think they might also "embellish" or "alter" the truth around things like resurrection, miracles, etc?

[heyelander]

honest question... was tracking dates of birth for commoners that big a deal at the time?

[Gregg]

Hmm, this doesn't exactly match my understanding of the birth date selection.

The Roman god Attis, a son that came from the virgin birth of Nana (sound familiar?), had his birthday celebrated on December 25th.
The Greek god Dionysus' birth was celebrated on December 25th.
The Egyptian god Osiris' birth was celebrated on December 25th.
Bablyonians celebrated a "victory of the Sun God" festival on December 25th.
The Roman Empire celebrated the Festival of Saturn from Dec. 17th-23rd.



I'd argue that since Romans were used to celebrating the birth of one god or another on December 25th, it made it that much easier for the Roman Emperor Aurelian to make it official during his reign (270-275 BCE). Regardless, it seems pretty clear that this date was selected to usurp or utilize, depending on your predisposition, that date for Christian purposes.

Please do not confuse the Catholic Church with The Bible.

The actual date of the birth of Jesus in not important. What is important is that He actually had a birthdate and is a real historical figure. As early as 1971 historians were still debating as to whether or not Jesus actually existed. Today there is no debate about that

Birthday celebrations are fun. They make us feel good. Nothing wrong with celebrating the Birth of our Lord and Savior. If at some point in history the Roman Church wanted to use it to evangelize over the other false gods I have no problem with that. It certainly is no reason to throw out the Bible. I see no evidence in the Bible that Jesus wanted a birthday party.

Now He did request to be remembered by the breaking of bread representing his body, and the drinking of wine representing his blood.

Does anyone doubt that Jesus Christ was crucified? Does anyone not believe that at the very least Jesus thought He was dying to save those He loved?

Even the Muslims call him a great profit.

Well back to the motives or sanity of the one called Jesus. No one seems to question his sanity. If he was a politcal martyr what was his agenda? To bring down his enemies by loving them? Those were some pretty smart fisherman to make up a religion that flies in the face of everything that would hold true to the beliefs of the day. Pretty shrewd to write about their cowardace and failures, pretty shrewed to elevate woman to positions of honor in a time where they weren't so highly thought of.

You guys are pretty smart. I wonder how well you could argue for the Lord Jesus Christ if you were believers.

He gave us the gift for free, there is nothing we can add to it. He did this so we cannot brag about our own works. That alone should tell you there is no politcal agenda.

[senorsheep]

Even the Muslims call him a great profit.

He gave us the gift for free...

[Fresno Bob]

Please do not confuse the Catholic Church with The Bible.

why not, they were the ones that assembled the New Testament, they were the editors (at worst, I'd actually argue that they were the authors), they decided which gospels got used at a minimum. Where's the Gospel of Thomas, you know, the one that says that you don't need a physical church or hierarchy, opps, what a surprise, that one doesn't get to make the final draft....