The progressive war on Christmas/Christianity

[American_Jihad]

I know for a fact that Jesus didn't like fruitcake. He rewraped it, and gave it to the Romans as a gift.

Holy Smokes how old are you...

 

[HUGGY]

How fucked up are Christians about Christmas?

"Question: "What year was Jesus Christ born?"

Answer: The Bible does not provide the exact day or even the exact year in which Jesus was born in Bethlehem. But a close examination of the chronological details of history narrows the possibilities to a reasonable window of time.

The biblical details of Jesus’ birth are found in the Gospels. Matthew 2:1 states that Jesus was born during the days of Herod the king. Since Herod died in 4 B.C., we have a parameter to work with. Further, after Joseph and Mary fled Bethlehem with Jesus, Herod ordered all the boys 2 years old and younger in that vicinity killed. This indicates that Jesus could have been as old as 2 before Herod’s death. This places the date of His birth between 6 and 4 B.C.

Luke 2:1-2 notes several other facts to ponder: “In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria.” We know that Caesar Augustus reigned from 27 B.C. to A.D. 14.

Quirinius governed Syria during this same time period, with records of a census that included Judea in approximately 6 B.C. Some scholars debate whether this is the census mentioned by Luke, but it does appear to be the same event. Based on these historical details, the most likely time of Christ’s birth in Bethlehem is 6-5 B.C.

Luke mentions another detail concerning our timeline: “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age” (Luke 3:23). Jesus began His ministry during the time John the Baptist ministered in the wilderness, and John’s ministry started “in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas” (Luke 3:1-2).

The only time period that fits all of these facts is A.D. 27-29. If Jesus was “about thirty years of age” by A.D. 27, a birth sometime between 6 and 4 B.C. would fit the chronology. More specifically, Jesus would have been approximately 32 years old at the time He began His ministry (still “about thirty years of age”).

What about the day of Christ’s birth? The tradition of December 25 was developed long after the New Testament period. It’s the day Christians have agreed to celebrate the birth of Jesus, but the exact day of His birth is unknown."

What year was Jesus Christ born?

The Christians not only pulled Jesus's birthday out of thier asses... they were off by 4-6 years on the beginning of the calender.

Good grief you people are ignorant! Christmas is a joke.

 

[HUGGY]

Riddle me this Batman... If the BeJeebus was so damned important at the time he supposedly walked the earth and everything he supposedly said is "gospel"...why is there no accurate record of his birth?

If they don't have even the most basic and fundimental facts straight...how can ANYTHING in the bible be believed?

 

[HUGGY]

Why didn't those stooges back in the day think to ask Mary and Joseph's family when Jeebus was born?

The Romans kept pretty good records.. Why is there no mention of Jeebus's birth with the Romans if he ws such a thorn in thier asses. They had no investigators?

You Christians are so full of shit. Seriously!

 

[HUGGY]

Oh..That's right...The babble is the "word of god"...blah...blah...blah...

And this all knowing god couldn't slip anyone a hint when his only begotton son was gonna was gonna pop out of his "virgin"(that's rich) mamma's snatch?

You don't think that the only virgin woman giving birth in the history of mankind MIGHT have been news even 2000 plus years ago?

 

[ABikerSailor]

It was news 2,000 years ago. As a matter of fact, many people thought it was miraculous............


However.........................the miracle was denigrated and made less by the way the Catholic (and subsequently the Christian church) had idolized and made into myth the legend of Jesus.

 

[koshergrl]

Gads, you guys are such losers. Aside from the whole Christian thing.

 

[koshergrl]

I have got to find a group with a higher level of discussion.

 

[HUGGY]

Gads, you guys are such losers. Aside from the whole Christian thing.

I dunno.... If I was gonna have a "savior" and build my whole life around him I might want to have a few basic facts straight....

just sayin....

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

What would a new liberal Christianity look like?

In practice it should be defined by two things: an attachment to political liberalism and prioritising the 'cultic'

Theo Hobson
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 9 June 2013

In the first half of this two-part article I argued that we need a new sort of liberal Christianity. It must affirm political liberalism, but must resist the rational-humanist temptation that has debased this tradition in the past. Authentic Christianity needs the dual grounding of faith and cult.


What might this new liberal Christianity mean in practice? Well, it is defined by two things: its attachment to political liberalism – the liberal state – and its prioritisation of the ritual, the sacramental, the cultic.


The first of these is straightforward enough. In political terms, this new liberal Christianity will revive the old affinity between Protestantism and the liberal state. This does not mean an affirmation of "liberalism" in all its meanings (rational individualism, the free market, individual rights, and so on). It means affirmation of the sort of state that seeks to make "liberty" a unifying principle. Like it or not, the US is the model liberal state: it succeeded (gradually) in fusing liberty and national identity, and in separating church and state. The new liberal Christianity will argue for Britain's belated imitation of this (bring home the revolution!). It will demand the disestablishment of the Church of England, for in a really robust liberal state there must be clarity that citizens are united by secular ideals, rather than a nostalgic idea of religious unity. Will religion be marginalised by a heightened secularism? No, religion will become capable of new clarity and honesty.

...

What would a new liberal Christianity look like? | Theo Hobson | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

I find it interesting that liberals don't want any form of religion involved in government, they then use their own "separation of church and state" interpretation to enforce it. Yet when an organization influenced by Christian values from it's founding [the Boy Scouts of America] doesn't immediately follow suit with the Girl Scouts to accept homosexuality, they receive pressure from liberal groups to adapt to THEIR values and with the "evolving" society. Chic-fil-a, another private organization with Christian roots, utilizes their First Amendment rights to speak on their opinions based on their beliefs and they are perceived as having no right to do so. The Salvation Army, founded in 1865 and reminiscent to the sound of bell ringers during the Christmas season, has been a charitable organization which provides needs for the poor. Unfortunately within the last 15 years, they have come under scrutiny and banned from collecting outside of various businesses. Their crime being found in its foundational ties with Christianity, resulting in a conflict to the "preferred" liberal views of society.

Mind you, I don't agree with any religion forcing their views in government, to a world of non believers that don't share in their beliefs or point of view. However, the liberal society hasn't shied away from THEIR push to force private organizations to condone their "worldly" vision for the country, or face some form of retribution in an attempt to hurt their status within the nation. Why the need to coerce private business that supports a different set of values, to conform to the left's ideology of what an organization OUGHT to accept? Why not leave them to their own ideals, to which no government is allowed to provoke and dictate it's views upon a religious based organization? There is absolutely nothing standing in the way of the left establishing their own private organizational equivalent, over the need to silence and assimilate the views of another. A true wall of separation according to liberal interpretations, or a mere play on words to promote one ideological viewpoint of the role of government over the other? With the manipulation of religious compassion to promote greater Federal control through progressive ideals, issues such as healthcare regulations forced unto the lives of others, the later is clearly evident.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

OK... Let's talk about the war on Christmas.

I'm gonna start with the macro economics..

When I was a kid there was no Walmart..Big box stores... JC Pennys and Sears Roebuck was about as big as it got. Now probably upwards of 75% of the junk that will mostly be destroyed by the end of January originates in Asia. It used to be a big boon for the American economy to manufacture and distribute the goods bought and sold on Christmas...no more. Now it is just a handfull of minimum wage jobs.

What pray tell is the religious component of Christmas?

Someone please tell me how Jesus would view an American Christmas.

Far more is displayed about Santa and the reindeer than the nativity scene. And is the nativity scene even rellevant to December 25th?

How can any serious Christian scholar look at a typical American household's Christmas without having blood come out of his eyes ...ears and nose?

If I may offer a tip for the Christians you should try to seperate your holiday from the disgusting trinket smorgasboard fest which really only helps economies in the third world and seek an actually factual birthdate for Christ and celebrate actual events.

Abraham Lincoln declared a day of thanksgiving in 1863. This holiday is to commemorate the "First Thanksgiving" of the Pilgrims after their first harvest in the New World in 1621. Is there any factual evidence to suggest this event occurred on the fourth Thursday in November? How disrespectful and embarrassing it would be if they couldn't establish an accurate day of the event. Yet, our nation still looks forward to having such an event represented. Oh the horror that our nation can't establish a more accurate date with certainty. I'm sure the pilgrims would be disgusted that a spiritual filled day attributed to "giving thanks" was being trumped by parades, and the promise of strong retail discounts and sales. Interesting how one holiday's accuracy and rightful representation can be viewed differently from another.

 

[koshergrl]

Serious biblical scholars usually aren't moved by the sort of hatred Huggster describes...because they're intimately acquainted with God.

 

[HUGGY]

OK... Let's talk about the war on Christmas.

I'm gonna start with the macro economics..

When I was a kid there was no Walmart..Big box stores... JC Pennys and Sears Roebuck was about as big as it got. Now probably upwards of 75% of the junk that will mostly be destroyed by the end of January originates in Asia. It used to be a big boon for the American economy to manufacture and distribute the goods bought and sold on Christmas...no more. Now it is just a handfull of minimum wage jobs.

What pray tell is the religious component of Christmas?

Someone please tell me how Jesus would view an American Christmas.

Far more is displayed about Santa and the reindeer than the nativity scene. And is the nativity scene even rellevant to December 25th?

How can any serious Christian scholar look at a typical American household's Christmas without having blood come out of his eyes ...ears and nose?

If I may offer a tip for the Christians you should try to seperate your holiday from the disgusting trinket smorgasboard fest which really only helps economies in the third world and seek an actually factual birthdate for Christ and celebrate actual events.

Abraham Lincoln declared a day of thanksgiving in 1863. This holiday is to commemorate the "First Thanksgiving" of the Pilgrims after their first harvest in the New World in 1621. Is there any factual evidence to suggest this event occurred on the fourth Thursday in November? How disrespectful and embarrassing it would be if they couldn't establish an accurate day of the event. Yet, our nation still looks forward to having such an event represented. Oh the horror that our nation can't establish a more accurate date with certainty. I'm sure the pilgrims would be disgusted that a spiritual filled day attributed to "giving thanks" was being trumped by parades, and the promise of strong retail discounts and sales. Interesting how one holiday's accuracy and rightful representation can be viewed differently from another.

Another bad analogy. Thanksgiving is just a rememberance of the co-operation and assistance the Native Americans bestowed upon the English settlers at a time when it was doubtfull they would survive.

Jeebus is one man. Everyone has a birthday. It shouldn't be too much to ask what is his especially since his virgin mom should have been somewhat of a celebrity. One would think that Joseph would have had some important questions at the time also. If my virgin wife became knocked up I would have become a little more than curious. What kindof a moron was Joseph anyway?

 

[Meister]

Serious biblical scholars usually aren't moved by the sort of hatred Huggster describes...because they're intimately acquainted with God.

Most people aren't moved by the sort of hatred Huggy describes. The few atheists I know think of their belief as a personal thing and really have no issue with how others feel about their religion.
The internet messageboards seem to attract the most vile and outspoken.

 

[ABikerSailor]

This ^^^^^ is a comment about my walk with God, yamoron biker.

Never said anything about your walk with God, nor did I even mention anything about religion.

I just told you something about a story from your own book.

Based on your posts, I'm guessing that your path is quite different from that what Jesus (whose true name is Yeshua) taught.

If you only knew how many loons obsess over the name "Yeshua".

You are a piss poor biblical scholar. You profess a lot of knowledge you don't have, and you get your stories mixed up. Like when you thought Noah slept with his daughters in a cave.

And you are talking about my walk with God. You still are. I'm sorry you're too dim, or drunk, to comprehend what you are saying...but that's not my problem. I'll pray for you. I pray for scumbags all the time, that's part of my path.

Nice...............judging others to prove your own point of view.

"Judge not lest ye be judged".

Good luck with that Kaiser Twit.

 

[American_Jihad]

Muslim Persecution of Christians: The Spring Offensive

June 14, 2013 By Raymond Ibrahim

The Islamic jihad against Christians in Nigeria is proving to be the most barbaric. A new report states that 70% of Christians killed around the world in 2012 were killed in the African nation. Among some of the atrocities committed in March alone, at least 41 people were killed in a suicide bomb attack at a bus station in a predominantly Christian neighborhood. According to the Christian Association of Nigeria, these attacks “were a signpost of the intended extermination of Christians and Christianity from northern Nigeria.”

According to the Rev. Jerome Ituah, “Out of the 52 Catholic churches in Maiduguri diocese, 50 of them have been destroyed by Boko Haram. When two Christian brothers were returning home after Sunday church service, jihadis opened fire on them with machine guns, killing the brothers, as well as three others, and injuring several more Christians.

...

Accordingly, whatever the anecdote of persecution, it typically fits under a specific theme, including hatred for churches and other Christian symbols; apostasy and blasphemy laws; sexual abuse of Christian women; forced conversions to Islam; theft and plunder in lieu of jizya (tribute); overall expectations for Christians to behave like cowed “dhimmis” (barely tolerated citizens); and simple violence and murder. Oftentimes it is a combination thereof.

Because these accounts of persecution span different ethnicities, languages, and locales—from Morocco in the west, to India in the east, and throughout the West, wherever there are Muslims—it should be clear that one thing alone binds them: Islam—whether the strict application of Islamic Sharia law, or the supremacist culture born of it.

Muslim Persecution of Christians: The Spring Offensive | FrontPage Magazine

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What would a new liberal Christianity look like?

In practice it should be defined by two things: an attachment to political liberalism and prioritising the 'cultic'

Theo Hobson
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 9 June 2013

In the first half of this two-part article I argued that we need a new sort of liberal Christianity. It must affirm political liberalism, but must resist the rational-humanist temptation that has debased this tradition in the past. Authentic Christianity needs the dual grounding of faith and cult.


What might this new liberal Christianity mean in practice? Well, it is defined by two things: its attachment to political liberalism – the liberal state – and its prioritisation of the ritual, the sacramental, the cultic.


The first of these is straightforward enough. In political terms, this new liberal Christianity will revive the old affinity between Protestantism and the liberal state. This does not mean an affirmation of "liberalism" in all its meanings (rational individualism, the free market, individual rights, and so on). It means affirmation of the sort of state that seeks to make "liberty" a unifying principle. Like it or not, the US is the model liberal state: it succeeded (gradually) in fusing liberty and national identity, and in separating church and state. The new liberal Christianity will argue for Britain's belated imitation of this (bring home the revolution!). It will demand the disestablishment of the Church of England, for in a really robust liberal state there must be clarity that citizens are united by secular ideals, rather than a nostalgic idea of religious unity. Will religion be marginalised by a heightened secularism? No, religion will become capable of new clarity and honesty.

...

What would a new liberal Christianity look like? | Theo Hobson | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

I find it interesting that liberals don't want any form of religion involved in government...

Just as we find your ignorance unsurprising.

‘Liberals’ advocate for no such thing.

There are circumstances when religious expression in government is appropriate and when it is not. The conflict lies only in the latter.

 

[Obamanation]

As long as there is a Quran there will be people who kill in the name of it!

Horrible!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This ^^^^^ is a comment about my walk with God, yamoron biker.

Never said anything about your walk with God, nor did I even mention anything about religion.

I just told you something about a story from your own book.

Based on your posts, I'm guessing that your path is quite different from that what Jesus (whose true name is Yeshua) taught.

If you only knew how many loons obsess over the name "Yeshua".

You are a piss poor biblical scholar. You profess a lot of knowledge you don't have, and you get your stories mixed up. Like when you thought Noah slept with his daughters in a cave.

And you are talking about my walk with God. You still are. I'm sorry you're too dim, or drunk, to comprehend what you are saying...but that's not my problem. I'll pray for you. I pray for scumbags all the time, that's part of my path.

Clearly arrogance, hate, and pride are no longer considered ‘sins’ per Christian dogma.

 

[ABikerSailor]

As long as there is a Quran there will be people who kill in the name of it!

Horrible!

Interestingly enough............as long as there is a Bible, people will kill in the name of it as well.

Wanna talk about the abortion doctors who have been shot?

How about the women's health clinics that were bombed?

Does your God say that it's okay to murder if you prevent someone else from killing? If so, show me the Bible verse that says it's okay, and show me the Bible verse that says it's not allowed to abort a fetus in the womb?