Good Friday could be better.
-
bugDanny wrote:
Easter does come from pagan religions. The bunny was a symbol of fertility (don't remember from what religion right now). The eggs are also not Christian, etc. Is it really right to celebrate something that is tainted by pagan beliefs? I'll leave the answer to that to the reader.
Actually, as I stated, the Easter bunny is a recent invention: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_bunny[^] "Recently, a neopagan legend has sprung up concerning the Easter Bunny. Though it is usually circulated as a Pagan tradition, it does not appear before 1990; it is presented by a fictitious character, Mrs. Sharp, created by an author of inspirational aphorisms. (Sarah Ban Breathnach, 'Nostalgic Suggestions for Re-Creating the Family Celebrations and Seasonal Pastimes of the Victorian Home'). It reached a far wider audience when in 2002 a version of the story, The Coming of Eostre, was published in Cricket magazine. According to the story, Eostre found a wounded bird in the snow. To help the little bird survive the winter, she transformed it into a rabbit, but the transformation was incomplete and the rabbit retained the ability to lay eggs. In thanks for its life being saved, the rabbit took the eggs and decorated them and left them as gifts for Eostre.[2] This story is deemed fakelore by critics, who point out that it has never appeared in any historical account of pagan celebrations, nor in any attempt to reconstruct the same by folklorists such as Grimm. There is also no historical evidence linking Ostara to the hare or rabbit." Christianity is not tainted by pagan beliefs. That's just another angle of attack taken up by militant atheists bent on destroying the concept of any religion but their own.
espeir wrote:
Actually, as I stated, the Easter bunny is a recent invention:
Well, first I'd like to state that even if the Easter bunny was a recent invention or whatever, it's included as 'part of Easter' and yet has no basis in the Bible. My post you responded to was mainly about the choice of dates, which you had said were not known, or something, so dates of pagan celebrations were chosen. That in itself is tainting the celebration with pagan beliefs. But the dates are known, unless I'm misunderstanding what dates you are refering to. Again, see my earlier post.
espeir wrote:
Christianity is not tainted by pagan beliefs. That's just another angle of attack taken up by militant atheists bent on destroying the concept of any religion but their own.
First of all, I'm not a militant atheist. I am Christian. Second of all, I did not write that Christianity was tainted by pagan beliefs (though many of the different sects are), I wrote that the celebration of Easter is tainted by pagan beliefs. As far as Easter goes, The Encyclopædia Britannica says: “There is no indication of the observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament.” Jesus instituted the commemoration of the Memorial of his Death, or the Lord's Evening Meal, which first-century Christians observed every year on Nissan 14. If you need it to be pointed out what some 'Christian' religions believe that is tainted by paganism, observe the following list. Note: I'm not trying to get into a doctrinal debate with you; any search of these subjects should show, however, the pagan basis for the beliefs. The Trinity - The Bible does not advocate a trinity of three gods as one. A man name Michel Servetus wrote "In the Bible there is no mention of the Trinity." The Jews understood God to be one God. (Deuteronomy 6:4) And Jesus taught the same thing. (John 5:19, for example.) The belief of the Trinity didn't enter Christianity until the Council of Nicea (sp?) I believe. It came from pagan religions. hellfire - In ancient Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs the “nether world . . . is pictured as a place full of horrors, and is presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” (The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, Boston, 1898, Morris Jastrow, Jr., p. 581) Early evidence of the fiery aspect of Christendom’s hell is found in the religion of ancient Egypt. (The Book of the Dead, New Hyde Park, N.Y., 1960, wit
-
espeir wrote:
Christians (with the expection of the crazies) are the most well-adjusted people in society.
I don't believe that; do you have any solid evidence? I do think that Christians can be well-adjusted and also that Atheists can have problems, but from my own experience, vocal Christians tend to have issues. Maybe there are quiet sane ones, but they don't tell me their religion?
espeir wrote:
So you're claiming that atheism could not exist without Christianity?
Exactly. :) Look at the etymology of the word Atheist. From Greek atheos from a- "without" + theos "a god". You must first have people who believe in god to have people who disbelieve in that god. If there were no people who believed in god, then we'd all be something like agnostics.
espeir wrote:
However, you do militantly make unfair and unjustified attacks against those who possess a different ideology than you.
I don't believe this either, can you provied examples?
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
I do think that Christians can be well-adjusted and also that Atheists can have problems, but from my own experience, vocal Christians tend to have issues. Maybe there are quiet sane ones, but they don't tell me their religion?
I agree with that. I don't like the "megachurch" (often referring to themselves as born-agains) crowd. They tend to be maladjusted people who go back and forth between being drug addicts and "Christians". Those are also the vocal crazy ones. I also agree that most atheists are reasonable people, but those that I refer to as "militant" are much worse than the Christian crazies in my view. At least the Crazy Christians mean well. Militant atheists seem bent on destruction of religion more than conversion (which is innocuous).
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
Exactly. Look at the etymology of the word Atheist. From Greek atheos from a- "without" + theos "a god". You must first have people who believe in god to have people who disbelieve in that god. If there were no people who believed in god, then we'd all be something like agnostics.
That's not true. While the term atheism may require that theism exists, the concept of Godlessness does not require that a concept of God exists. If religion never formed, then everyone would be an atheist (but called something else).
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
I don't believe this either, can you provied examples?
Read this thread.
-
Michael Martin wrote:
Close cockhead, lucky you live a long way away, I track down and beat f*** out of smarmy fucks like you over here.
I doubt you would be capable. So it turns out that the enlightened atheist is actually just a crazy.
You are the biggest wanker to ever grace these forums. Happy Easter you fucking twat! :)
The Rob Blog
Google Talk: robert.caldecott -
You are the biggest wanker to ever grace these forums. Happy Easter you fucking twat! :)
The Rob Blog
Google Talk: robert.caldecottI would agree that I have the biggest wanker. :)
-
Correct. The same is true with Christmas. Nothing in the Gospels states when Jesus was born, so the celebration of his birth was set to coincide with the Roman festival of Saturnalia. In this case also the Christian celebration has replaced the pagan observances. Deus caritas est
Andy Moore wrote:
In this case also the Christian celebration has replaced the pagan observances.
You think Christmas has replaced the pagan observance? In fact, December 25th was chosen, yes, because of the Roman festival of the Sun. The religious leaders adopted this festival and tried to make it "Christian". The pagan roots of Christmas have long been recognized and was even banned in England and some American colonies because of this. Not convinced that it's pagan? The first-century Christians did not, and would not have, celebrated Jesus birthday. His disciples likely knew that birthday celebrations were connected with superstition. For instance, many Greeks and Romans of ancient times believed that a spirit attended the birth of each human and protected that one throughout life. “This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born,” says the book The Lore of Birthdays. So the very celebration of his birth would link that celebration with pagan superstitions. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
Andy Moore wrote:
In this case also the Christian celebration has replaced the pagan observances.
You think Christmas has replaced the pagan observance? In fact, December 25th was chosen, yes, because of the Roman festival of the Sun. The religious leaders adopted this festival and tried to make it "Christian". The pagan roots of Christmas have long been recognized and was even banned in England and some American colonies because of this. Not convinced that it's pagan? The first-century Christians did not, and would not have, celebrated Jesus birthday. His disciples likely knew that birthday celebrations were connected with superstition. For instance, many Greeks and Romans of ancient times believed that a spirit attended the birth of each human and protected that one throughout life. “This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born,” says the book The Lore of Birthdays. So the very celebration of his birth would link that celebration with pagan superstitions. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
Are you that guy that sponsors those billboards that say going to church on Sunday is satanic?
-
I didn't say that, you illiterate retard. I said the claim that it was pagan in origin came up 20 years after you were born. The easter bunny has been around for 500 years. If it were pagan, it would have been around for 2000 years.
espeir wrote:
I didn't say that, you illiterate retard. I said the claim that it was pagan in origin came up 20 years after you were born. The easter bunny has been around for 500 years. If it were pagan, it would have been around for 2000 years.
“Ancient pagans used the rabbit as a symbol of the abundant new life of the spring season. . . . The first record of the bunny as an Easter symbol is found in Germany about 1572,” says The Catholic Encyclopedia for School and Home. The Easter bunny has been around for 500 years, the fertility symbol of the rabbit has been around for much, much longer. So, yes, it is pagan. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
espeir wrote:
I didn't say that, you illiterate retard. I said the claim that it was pagan in origin came up 20 years after you were born. The easter bunny has been around for 500 years. If it were pagan, it would have been around for 2000 years.
“Ancient pagans used the rabbit as a symbol of the abundant new life of the spring season. . . . The first record of the bunny as an Easter symbol is found in Germany about 1572,” says The Catholic Encyclopedia for School and Home. The Easter bunny has been around for 500 years, the fertility symbol of the rabbit has been around for much, much longer. So, yes, it is pagan. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
No... It's not pagan. We named the planet Saturn after a pagan God, but that does not mean that's it's pagan to call it Saturn. Our society has certain traditions that date back may date back to pagan times, but unless we practice those traditions with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods, then it is not pagan. The rabbit may or may not have derived its fertile sumbolism from pagan traditions, but the fact that it was not used as a symbol for Easter until the 1500's (when paganism was no more) indicates that it does not have pagan roots. They were cultural roots.
-
Are you that guy that sponsors those billboards that say going to church on Sunday is satanic?
espeir wrote:
Are you that guy that sponsors those billboards that say going to church on Sunday is satanic?
No, sir. As I noted in my other posts, I am Christian. I just don't observe pagan practices and beliefs. I attend Sunday, and Tuesday and Thursday as well. I read the Bible daily and strive to apply it in my life. We are all imperfect, though, so I'm not trying to claim I'm better than anyone else. Just pointing out a bit of history. Anyone that is serious about observing a religious holiday, I believe, should be ready and willing to research that celebration to see if it really is in accord with their beliefs. Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
No... It's not pagan. We named the planet Saturn after a pagan God, but that does not mean that's it's pagan to call it Saturn. Our society has certain traditions that date back may date back to pagan times, but unless we practice those traditions with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods, then it is not pagan. The rabbit may or may not have derived its fertile sumbolism from pagan traditions, but the fact that it was not used as a symbol for Easter until the 1500's (when paganism was no more) indicates that it does not have pagan roots. They were cultural roots.
Interesting. A few points:
espeir wrote:
but unless we practice those traditions with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods, then it is not pagan.
So, you're promoting a mixing of Christian and pagan traditions, though of course no longer with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods? 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 says "what fellowship does light have with darkness? Further what harmony is there between Christ and Belial... 'and quit touching the unclean thing'." Does it seem appropriate then to mix pagan traditions with true worship when the Bible clearly tells us not to? Would it make sense to buy a gift for your father that is decorated with things that you know he clearly hates? Also,
espeir wrote:
The rabbit may or may not have derived its fertile sumbolism from pagan traditions, but the fact that it was not used as a symbol for Easter until the 1500's (when paganism was no more) indicates that it does not have pagan roots.
Have you heard of wicken, taoism, buddhism, African tribal religions, etc., etc? There still is pagan religions out there, pagan meaning not Christian (or Muslim or Jew). In addition, the ancient Egyptian religions are dead (I think), but would you consider it right for me to take images of Osiris, Horus, or Ra and to name them for Christian Saints or Jesus and use them in my worship? Would that even make sense? These pagan 'gods' were held in opposition to the true God. Do you think He cares, then, whether the religions are still around? So what if the pagan religion that spawned the Easter bunny isn't alive anymore? Wouldn't God still find that pagan god just as offensive today? Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
-
Interesting. A few points:
espeir wrote:
but unless we practice those traditions with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods, then it is not pagan.
So, you're promoting a mixing of Christian and pagan traditions, though of course no longer with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods? 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 says "what fellowship does light have with darkness? Further what harmony is there between Christ and Belial... 'and quit touching the unclean thing'." Does it seem appropriate then to mix pagan traditions with true worship when the Bible clearly tells us not to? Would it make sense to buy a gift for your father that is decorated with things that you know he clearly hates? Also,
espeir wrote:
The rabbit may or may not have derived its fertile sumbolism from pagan traditions, but the fact that it was not used as a symbol for Easter until the 1500's (when paganism was no more) indicates that it does not have pagan roots.
Have you heard of wicken, taoism, buddhism, African tribal religions, etc., etc? There still is pagan religions out there, pagan meaning not Christian (or Muslim or Jew). In addition, the ancient Egyptian religions are dead (I think), but would you consider it right for me to take images of Osiris, Horus, or Ra and to name them for Christian Saints or Jesus and use them in my worship? Would that even make sense? These pagan 'gods' were held in opposition to the true God. Do you think He cares, then, whether the religions are still around? So what if the pagan religion that spawned the Easter bunny isn't alive anymore? Wouldn't God still find that pagan god just as offensive today? Danny The stupidity of others amazes me!
bugDanny wrote:
So, you're promoting a mixing of Christian and pagan traditions, though of course no longer with the intent of worshipping pagan Gods? 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 says "what fellowship does light have with darkness? Further what harmony is there between Christ and Belial... 'and quit touching the unclean thing'." Does it seem appropriate then to mix pagan traditions with true worship when the Bible clearly tells us not to? Would it make sense to buy a gift for your father that is decorated with things that you know he clearly hates?
That is not clear. Corinthians is clearer: "So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do." So then it is clearly stated that as long as we know the heart of what we in regard to idols, paganism, etc..., that it does not matter if we eat meat sacrificed for a pagan God as long as we are not pagans. I should think the same would apply for Easter. If we are not celebrating pagan Gods but are celbrating the resurrection, then we are doing no wrong. We are not wrapping Easter in paganism, it merely has historical roots with the great conversion.
bugDanny wrote:
Have you heard of wicken, taoism, buddhism, African tribal religions, etc., etc? There still is pagan religions out there, pagan meaning not Christian (or Muslim or Jew). In addition, the ancient Egyptian religions are dead (I think), but would you consider it right for me to take images of Osiris, Horus, or Ra and to name them for Christian Saints or Jesus and use them in my worship? Would that even make sense? These pagan 'gods' were held in opposition to the true God. Do you think He cares, then, whether the religions are still around? So what if the pagan religion that spawned the Easter bunny isn't alive anymo
-
No, I'm pretty sure I know my stuff! :cool:
-
espeir wrote:
Wow! Do I know my stuff or what! :suss:
Not really cock muncher, I forgot the inability of the average american to get irony or sarcasm. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
Michael Martin wrote:
I forgot the inability of the average american to get irony or sarcasm.
Whoa, don't compare espeir to the average American, he's no where near average. :laugh: At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
Michael Martin wrote:
I forgot the inability of the average american to get irony or sarcasm.
Whoa, don't compare espeir to the average American, he's no where near average. :laugh: At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
Michael Martin wrote:
I forgot the inability of the average american to get irony or sarcasm.
Whoa, don't compare espeir to the average American, he's no where near average. :laugh: At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
Tim Craig wrote:
he's no where near average
I agree with that. I leave behind mediocrity for the masses. :cool:
-
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
I do think that Christians can be well-adjusted and also that Atheists can have problems, but from my own experience, vocal Christians tend to have issues. Maybe there are quiet sane ones, but they don't tell me their religion?
I agree with that. I don't like the "megachurch" (often referring to themselves as born-agains) crowd. They tend to be maladjusted people who go back and forth between being drug addicts and "Christians". Those are also the vocal crazy ones. I also agree that most atheists are reasonable people, but those that I refer to as "militant" are much worse than the Christian crazies in my view. At least the Crazy Christians mean well. Militant atheists seem bent on destruction of religion more than conversion (which is innocuous).
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
Exactly. Look at the etymology of the word Atheist. From Greek atheos from a- "without" + theos "a god". You must first have people who believe in god to have people who disbelieve in that god. If there were no people who believed in god, then we'd all be something like agnostics.
That's not true. While the term atheism may require that theism exists, the concept of Godlessness does not require that a concept of God exists. If religion never formed, then everyone would be an atheist (but called something else).
Daniel R Ferguson wrote:
I don't believe this either, can you provied examples?
Read this thread.
espeir wrote:
They tend to be maladjusted people who go back and forth between being drug addicts and "Christians".
Like those you were so proud of a minute ago for holding the highest positions in government? :wtf: At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
Tim Craig wrote:
he's no where near average
I agree with that. I leave behind mediocrity for the masses. :cool:
-
Maybe he's been busy, what with the global population growing like crazy. He can't rightly be expected to make things right for everyone here on Earth. That's what the promise of Heaven is all about. It's like, "Sorry, things get out of hand down here, but stick with me and I'll make it alright after your times up". BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wrightbrianwelsch wrote:
Maybe he's been busy, what with the global population growing like crazy. He can't rightly be expected to make things right for everyone here on Earth.
Omnipotence out the window again. Gee, I'm omnipotent but I don't care. I'm omnipotent but I'm just too busy. How convenient. At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
-
espeir wrote:
I leave behind mediocrity for the masses.
That's true. Your trail of mediocrity is wide and deep. The masses can't avoid stepping in it. At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
Yes. I consume wisdom and purge my ignorance...leaving it for others to wallow in. Swim in my intellectual excrement....swim....
-
espeir wrote:
They tend to be maladjusted people who go back and forth between being drug addicts and "Christians".
Like those you were so proud of a minute ago for holding the highest positions in government? :wtf: At any given instant there are considerably more assholes than mouths in the universe.
I said certain Christians. As per my statement, those would obviously not be the well-adjusted members of our society...That's what the word "maladjusted" means.