Was jesus born on december 25th?

Evangelion said:
Correct. Saturnalia, to be precise.
Click to expand...

Festival of the Invincible Sun (Sol Invictus), to be really precise. The finale of Saturnalia was 2 days earlier, though the whole of Saturnalia lasted 7 days (despite attempts to shorten it, which were ignored) and much of the basis for Christmas stems from Saturnalia (giving of gifts, joyous celebration, that sort of thing).

I'd like to go back to Rome at its peak and experience Saturnalia. The solemnity of the religious ceremony in which the feet of Saturn were unwrapped, the anticipation and then the official declaration of the revels. Io Saturnalia!
 
djmc0 said:
Hardcore Christians call atheists ignorant
Click to expand...

ha-Ha Many of us call atheists ignorant on this forum and I don't know any which are Christian. Atheism is a BELIEF that there can not possibly be a deity at all. They try and use science as evidence. But they are using science totally outside it's remit and what it was designed to do.

I don't know stance is the correct stance for a scientist and is agnostic not atheist.

Angilion said:
Doesn't follow from your premise. Besides, one of the cornerstones of science is that it doesn't require belief.
Click to expand...
only if it is used properly. Which many people don't if it is not used properly. Then it requires BELIEF, Evolution does not rule out a deity. Remember we are also talking ANY form of deity not just man made religions, but any.
 
Last edited:
Burnsy2023 said:
Going off topic a little, I think atheists annoy me more than die hard Christians, or at least as much.
Click to expand...

To be fair I only tend to have issue with atheists when engaging them in coversation regarding religion. I have not once had an evangelical atheist approach me in the street and try and leaflet or convert me.
 
Evangelion said:
[..] Here Tacitus refers to Christ as a literal person who died under Pontius Pilate. He does not merely say that the Christians believed Jesus existed; he treats Jesus as a historical figure and refers to him in the context of verifiable historical events.
Click to expand...

You are right. That passage is so anti-Christian that it's hardly likely to have been added later by Christians to fake evidence. Although it's possible that Tacitus was repeating a belief rather than stating a fact, since it was just one reference in a piece about Nero rather than about Christianity. It doesn't look that way, though - if he thought so badly of Christians, why would he take their word for anything and risk his reputation if it wasn't true?
 
I don't think it really matters when he was born, but it's a good celebration whether you are Christian or not. Jesus sounded like a pretty decent chap to me.
 
lol at people saying Jesus didn't exist. There's all sorts of historical evidence that Jesus existed.

Whether he performed miracles or was the son of god is what I have serious trouble believing.
 
^ It is pretty obvious that it is more likely Jesus existed, than didn't - that is hardly difficult to swallow. That his mum was a virgin and he could walk on water, significantly more debatable.
 
So you are saying that we should doubt every historical figure for which we have only written and historical evidence? :rolleyes:
 
Snakedoctor said:
^^ There is no evidence he did exist. Only anecdotal.
Click to expand...

That's still a lot more than for other people at the time. They did not have records like we did. I think it is highly likely he existed. To say it is all fiction is denying a very historical book it's proper place. It is a very useful book for historians on major events and timeliness. A lot of it has been proven historically correct all though distorted. Like the city of Soddom being destroyed in a hails storm of fire. No I don't think he had all these powers.
, but just because you don't believe in the religious aspect of the bible. Doesn't mean you should dismiss it entirely.
 
Snakedoctor said:
No Jesus was invented a man or men. They used several parallels with pagan ceremonies so the "Heathen" would easily convert and be controlled.
Click to expand...

It really isn't as simple as that. Yes the established church did use comparitive transplantation as a means to spread the influence of Christianity but during the period of the biggest expansion of Christianity throughout Northern Europe (4th-9th Century) many population groups adopted Christianity but continued to hedge their bets by keeping older underlying traditions alive just in case. Many Norse warriors would wear a Thors Hammer that also doubled as a Christian Cross, Christian Burials (east-west allignment) during the so called Dark Age period are found with grave goods and offerings, Even as late as the 11th Century their appear to be contempory sources claiming that some Norman miles would follow the shout of 'Dex Aie' (God aid us) with 'Thor aid us', when you investigate late Dark Age and early Medieval monumental architecture you often find pagan, christian and hibrid reference within the structure. The spread and influence of Christianity and the level of socio-political commitment from the diverse peoples it affected is a very complicated issue.
 
wait wasnt there a song with the lyrics:
"Jesus christ our saviour, was born on CHRISTMAS DAY?"
 
If you took Christmas or Easter for that matter away, what would England/British culture have to celebrate compared to other countries or faiths?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom