Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Jesus is not the Reason for the Season

Expand Messages
  • Heinz Schmitz
    What is most mistaken, and even offensive, about the slogan Jesus is the Reason for the Season is that Christians are attempting to claim ownership of and
    Message 1 of 13 , Dec 24, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      "What is most mistaken, and even offensive, about the slogan "Jesus is
      the Reason for the Season" is that Christians are attempting to claim
      ownership of and priority over the entire holiday season, not just
      Christmas. There is, however, no reason to imagine that there would be
      no mid-winter holidays in the absence of Christ or Christianity.
      Modern Christmas celebrations have little or nothing to do with Jesus,
      the Feast of the Nativity, or the Incarnation. Consider some popular
      Christmas traditions: erecting and decorating a tree, hanging wreaths,
      sending cards, drinking eggnog, giving presents, hanging
      mistletoe...where is Christ in all of this?

      Thus we also have slogans about "putting Christ back into Christmas,"
      but it's difficult to see how Christ was ever central to Christmas.
      When Christians celebrated it at all, it was about the nativity of
      Jesus, not the salvation from Christ. Today, even Jesus has receded
      into the background.

      Our modern Christmas is a large number of ancient pagan practices, a
      few pieces of Christian traditions, and a large number of modern
      creations which are almost entirely secular in nature, no matter where
      they got their inspiration from. I see little room and little need for
      any "Christ" in all of this - but more importantly, I see little place
      where a "Christ" could be put back into the mix.

      This is why Jesus is not the reason for the season for non-Christians.
      Whether non-Christians celebrate some form of Christmas or something
      else entirely, the reason for the season is whatever meaning they
      invest in their holiday — and that is up to them, not to Christians.

      To put it simply, Christians who insist that Jesus is the reason for
      the season and that Christ needs to be "put back" into Christmas are
      seeking to assert their cultural superiority over everyone else. It's
      yet one more example of attempts to reassert Christian privilege in an
      America that has moved on to religious pluralism."
      -Austin Cline
    • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
      Heinz, The premise of the piece you posted is false. Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on non-Christians or to suppress winter festivities that
      Message 2 of 13 , Dec 27, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Heinz,

        The premise of the piece you posted is false. Christians are not
        attempting to impose Christmas on non-Christians or to suppress
        winter festivities that are not Christian. What they find
        objectionable is the attempt to suppress Christian elements from
        CHRISTMAS. The examples are legion: stores instructing employees
        that they may not say "Merry Christmas"; government agencies being
        pressured to remove Nativity scenes and even Christmas trees from
        public property (although somehow calling them "holiday trees"
        sometimes overcomes the objection); a school district banning
        Nativity displays but allowing Hanukkah and Ramadan displays; etc.

        In Christ's service,
        Rob Bowman



        --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Heinz Schmitz"
        <christian_skeptic@...> wrote:
        >
        > "What is most mistaken, and even offensive, about the
        slogan "Jesus is
        > the Reason for the Season" is that Christians are attempting to
        claim
        > ownership of and priority over the entire holiday season, not just
        > Christmas. There is, however, no reason to imagine that there
        would be
        > no mid-winter holidays in the absence of Christ or Christianity.
        > Modern Christmas celebrations have little or nothing to do with
        Jesus,
        > the Feast of the Nativity, or the Incarnation. Consider some
        popular
        > Christmas traditions: erecting and decorating a tree, hanging
        wreaths,
        > sending cards, drinking eggnog, giving presents, hanging
        > mistletoe...where is Christ in all of this?
        >
        > Thus we also have slogans about "putting Christ back into
        Christmas,"
        > but it's difficult to see how Christ was ever central to Christmas.
        > When Christians celebrated it at all, it was about the nativity of
        > Jesus, not the salvation from Christ. Today, even Jesus has receded
        > into the background.
        >
        > Our modern Christmas is a large number of ancient pagan practices,
        a
        > few pieces of Christian traditions, and a large number of modern
        > creations which are almost entirely secular in nature, no matter
        where
        > they got their inspiration from. I see little room and little need
        for
        > any "Christ" in all of this - but more importantly, I see little
        place
        > where a "Christ" could be put back into the mix.
        >
        > This is why Jesus is not the reason for the season for non-
        Christians.
        > Whether non-Christians celebrate some form of Christmas or
        something
        > else entirely, the reason for the season is whatever meaning they
        > invest in their holiday — and that is up to them, not to
        Christians.
        >
        > To put it simply, Christians who insist that Jesus is the reason
        for
        > the season and that Christ needs to be "put back" into Christmas
        are
        > seeking to assert their cultural superiority over everyone else.
        It's
        > yet one more example of attempts to reassert Christian privilege
        in an
        > America that has moved on to religious pluralism."
        > -Austin Cline
        >
      • Heinz Schmitz
        ... Reply: Rob that s not entirely true. I live in the South and I know personally that Christmas becomes an opportunity to Evangelize. See also
        Message 3 of 13 , Dec 28, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
          <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:
          >
          > Heinz,
          >
          > The premise of the piece you posted is false. Christians are not
          > attempting to impose Christmas on non-Christians...

          Reply: Rob that's not entirely true. I live in the South and I know
          personally that Christmas becomes an opportunity to Evangelize.

          See also http://easytoevangelize.com/christmas-ideas/

          http://www.livingwaters.com/christmas/

          http://catholicexchange.com/2006/11/10/97348/

          etc

          What they find
          > objectionable is the attempt to suppress Christian elements from
          > CHRISTMAS.

          Reply: Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it from
          earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it.


          The examples are legion: stores instructing employees
          > that they may not say "Merry Christmas"; government agencies being
          > pressured to remove Nativity scenes and even Christmas trees from
          > public property (although somehow calling them "holiday trees"
          > sometimes overcomes the objection); a school district banning
          > Nativity displays but allowing Hanukkah and Ramadan displays; etc.
          >

          Nativity scenes shouldn't be on public property, they should be on
          church property. You have to wonder if a government endorsement of
          Christianity is not the underlying agenda of those who are so vehement
          about promoting such displays on government rather than on church
          property.

          Frankly, I don't see many Hanukkah and Ramadan displays, but I do see
          churches on every corner, I see Christian displays everywhere, I see
          christian billboards, signs and crosses aplenty, and I am constantly
          reminded of the Christian intrusion into government - I guess it is
          all a matter of perception.
          Heinz
        • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
          Heinz, I had written: Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on non-Christians.... You replied:
          Message 4 of 13 , Dec 29, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Heinz,

            I had written: "Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on
            non-Christians...." You replied:

            << Rob that's not entirely true. I live in the South and I know
            personally that Christmas becomes an opportunity to Evangelize. >>

            Now, that's just silly, Heinz. Evangelizing is not the same thing as
            imposing. I assume you understood this when you were a Jehovah's
            Witness. How can you have forgotten this now?

            You wrote:

            << Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it from
            earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it. >>

            Another bizarre comment. "Christmas" is by definition Christian.
            Granted, there were winter festivals and pagan rituals associated
            with the same approximate time of the year preceding Christianity,
            but these are not the same thing as Christmas.

            You wrote:

            << Frankly, I don't see many Hanukkah and Ramadan displays,... >>

            Irrelevant. They do exist, they have been placed on public property,
            and in some cases to the exclusion of Christian displays.

            In Christ's service,
            Rob Bowman
          • Heinz Schmitz
            ... Reply: This is semantics Rob and you know it. ... I am not talking about the etymology, though it is of Catholic origin, a group many Evangelicals would
            Message 5 of 13 , Dec 29, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
              <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:
              >
              > Heinz,
              >
              > I had written: "Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on
              > non-Christians...." You replied:
              >
              > << Rob that's not entirely true. I live in the South and I know
              > personally that Christmas becomes an opportunity to Evangelize. >>
              >
              > Now, that's just silly, Heinz. Evangelizing is not the same thing as
              > imposing.

              Reply: This is semantics Rob and you know it.

              >
              > You wrote:
              >
              > << Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it from
              > earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it. >>
              >
              > Another bizarre comment. "Christmas" is by definition Christian.
              > Granted, there were winter festivals and pagan rituals associated
              > with the same approximate time of the year preceding Christianity,
              > but these are not the same thing as Christmas.
              >

              I am not talking about the etymology, though it is of Catholic origin,
              a group many Evangelicals would deny as being Christian. According to
              Christians this is Christ's birth date, which is of course a lie. You
              make it sound as if this whole association with pagan solstice
              celebrations is a coincidence, which it isn't.

              > You wrote:
              >
              > << Frankly, I don't see many Hanukkah and Ramadan displays,... >>
              >
              > Irrelevant. They do exist, they have been placed on public property,
              > and in some cases to the exclusion of Christian displays.
              >

              ...and this is rare. You actually have a higher percentage of the
              population going to Christian churches in the USA now than in the time
              of the Founding Fathers, and as a result more Christian Christmas
              displays, yet you all feel threatened when other faiths are
              represented at the exclusion of your faith, a faith that is in our
              face all the time.
              -Heinz
            • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
              Heinz, I had written: Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on non-Christians.... You replied:
              Message 6 of 13 , Dec 29, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Heinz,

                I had written: "Christians are not attempting to impose Christmas on
                non-Christians...." You replied:

                << Rob that's not entirely true. I live in the South and I know
                personally that Christmas becomes an opportunity to Evangelize. >>

                I replied: Now, that's just silly, Heinz. Evangelizing is not the
                same thing as imposing. You answered:

                << This is semantics Rob and you know it. >>

                Semantics is a good thing. If you call something X and it's actually
                Y, pointing this out may be "semantics," but it's still helpful.

                You wrote:

                << Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it from
                earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it. >>

                I replied: Another bizarre comment. "Christmas" is by definition
                Christian. Granted, there were winter festivals and pagan rituals
                associated with the same approximate time of the year preceding
                Christianity, but these are not the same thing as Christmas.

                You answered:

                << I am not talking about the etymology, though it is of Catholic
                origin, a group many Evangelicals would deny as being Christian.
                According to Christians this is Christ's birth date, which is of
                course a lie. You make it sound as if this whole association with
                pagan solstice celebrations is a coincidence, which it isn't. >>

                I'm not talking about the etymology, either. I'm talking about the
                celebration of Christ's birth, which is known as "Christmas."

                No one with any knowledge of the subject claims that December 25 is
                definitely the date of Christ's birth. We have no way of knowing the
                exact day. It may have been in the spring, as most scholars think,
                or in December or January, as a minority claim, but even if the
                latter are correct it might have been December 23 or January 8 or
                who knows when. This isn't important to us.

                Nor am I claiming that the association with the winter festivals is
                a mere coincidence. Christians chose to celebrate the birth of
                Christ at that time, knowing full well they were doing so at the
                same time as the pagans held their winter festivals. Christians were
                choosing to celebrate the birth of Christ instead of worshipping the
                sun or Mithra or some pagan deity.

                Now, there are folks today who advocate a return to paganism. That's
                their business. There are others who advocate an abandonment of all
                religion. That's their business. But Christians, who constitute over
                80% of the people in America, have every right to express their
                Christian traditions in both private and public places as long as it
                doesn't infringe on the religious liberties of non-Christians.
                Likewise Mormons in Utah have every right to have LDS-specific
                displays in public places in their state. Christian employees at
                supermarkets and outlet stores should feel free to say "Merry
                Christmas" if they wish (and not to say it if they do not wish). We
                have a right to object when Christmas trees are relabeled "holiday
                trees" out of fear of the ACLU.

                You wrote:

                << You actually have a higher percentage of the population going to
                Christian churches in the USA now than in the time of the Founding
                Fathers, and as a result more Christian Christmas displays, yet you
                all feel threatened when other faiths are represented at the
                exclusion of your faith, a faith that is in our face all the time. >>

                This is not about me feeling "threatened." I agree that some
                Christians in America overplay the persecution card. But you have
                things turned around. The problem are those people who claim that
                the presence of a Nativity scene in a public library or the singing
                of a Christmas carol in an elementary school assembly "threatens"
                their freedom to be nonreligious. It doesn't.

                In Christ's service,
                Rob Bowman
              • Heinz Schmitz
                ... Of all the ancient gods, Christ is one of the few that we know was NOT born on or around Decdmber 25. To say that Jesus is the reason for the season is a
                Message 7 of 13 , Dec 30, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                  <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Heinz,
                  >
                  > You wrote:
                  >
                  > << Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it from
                  > earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it. >>
                  >
                  > I replied: Another bizarre comment. "Christmas" is by definition
                  > Christian. Granted, there were winter festivals and pagan rituals
                  > associated with the same approximate time of the year preceding
                  > Christianity, but these are not the same thing as Christmas.
                  >
                  > You answered:
                  >
                  > << I am not talking about the etymology, though it is of Catholic
                  > origin, a group many Evangelicals would deny as being Christian.
                  > According to Christians this is Christ's birth date, which is of
                  > course a lie. You make it sound as if this whole association with
                  > pagan solstice celebrations is a coincidence, which it isn't. >>
                  >
                  > I'm not talking about the etymology, either. I'm talking about the
                  > celebration of Christ's birth, which is known as "Christmas."
                  >

                  Of all the ancient gods, Christ is one of the few that we know was NOT
                  born on or around Decdmber 25. To say that Jesus is the reason for the
                  season is a lie, to say that Tammuz is the reason for the season is not.

                  > No one with any knowledge of the subject claims that December 25 is
                  > definitely the date of Christ's birth. We have no way of knowing the
                  > exact day. It may have been in the spring, as most scholars think,
                  > or in December or January, as a minority claim, but even if the
                  > latter are correct it might have been December 23 or January 8 or
                  > who knows when. This isn't important to us.
                  >

                  Truth should be important to you.

                  ...Christians, who constitute over
                  > 80% of the people in America, have every right to express their
                  > Christian traditions in both private and public places as long as it
                  > doesn't infringe on the religious liberties of non-Christians.

                  It does however violate the principle of separation of church and
                  state. We already have displays of your "Christian traditions"
                  everywhere, why do you need here as well.
                  If you truly have faith, you don't need government imprimatur.

                  > Likewise Mormons in Utah have every right to have LDS-specific
                  > displays in public places in their state.

                  Why would any want religious intrusion in government - haven't we
                  learned enough from the Middle East and the Middle Ages?

                  Christian employees at
                  > supermarkets and outlet stores should feel free to say "Merry
                  > Christmas" if they wish (and not to say it if they do not wish). We
                  > have a right to object when Christmas trees are relabeled "holiday
                  > trees" out of fear of the ACLU.
                  >

                  I have no problem with private companies displaying Christmas Trees
                  and even I say Merry Christmas. I am not in total agreement with the
                  militant atheists like Michael Newdow.

                  > You wrote:
                  >
                  > << You actually have a higher percentage of the population going to
                  > Christian churches in the USA now than in the time of the Founding
                  > Fathers, and as a result more Christian Christmas displays, yet you
                  > all feel threatened when other faiths are represented at the
                  > exclusion of your faith, a faith that is in our face all the time. >>
                  >
                  > This is not about me feeling "threatened." I agree that some
                  > Christians in America overplay the persecution card. But you have
                  > things turned around. The problem are those people who claim that
                  > the presence of a Nativity scene in a public library or the singing
                  > of a Christmas carol in an elementary school assembly "threatens"
                  > their freedom to be nonreligious. It doesn't.

                  Reply: That's right, you're just "evangelizing", not "imposing" :)
                • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
                  Heinz, I think I ve got it. You re apparently hung up on the word season in the saying Jesus is the reason for the season. Your point is that winter
                  Message 8 of 13 , Dec 30, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Heinz,

                    I think I've got it. You're apparently hung up on the word "season"
                    in the saying "Jesus is the reason for the season." Your point is
                    that winter predates the coming of Jesus. Okay. Point made. The
                    saying is a short, pithy, rhyming slogan, not a thoroughly developed
                    argument.

                    Truth is important to me as a Christian, but the precise date of
                    Christ's birth is not. Since we don't know the exact date, it makes
                    no difference whether we celebrate it on December 25 or May 14. To
                    suggest that this point reflects a lack of concern for truth is silly.

                    You agreed that some militant atheists take their campaign too far.
                    Thanks for that acknowledgment.

                    In Christ's service,
                    Rob Bowman


                    --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Heinz Schmitz"
                    <christian_skeptic@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                    > <faithhasitsreasons@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Heinz,
                    > >
                    > > You wrote:
                    > >
                    > > << Christians don't own Christmas Rob. You may have stolen it
                    from
                    > > earlier cultures but in doing so it does not mean you own it. >>
                    > >
                    > > I replied: Another bizarre comment. "Christmas" is by definition
                    > > Christian. Granted, there were winter festivals and pagan rituals
                    > > associated with the same approximate time of the year preceding
                    > > Christianity, but these are not the same thing as Christmas.
                    > >
                    > > You answered:
                    > >
                    > > << I am not talking about the etymology, though it is of Catholic
                    > > origin, a group many Evangelicals would deny as being Christian.
                    > > According to Christians this is Christ's birth date, which is of
                    > > course a lie. You make it sound as if this whole association with
                    > > pagan solstice celebrations is a coincidence, which it isn't. >>
                    > >
                    > > I'm not talking about the etymology, either. I'm talking about
                    the
                    > > celebration of Christ's birth, which is known as "Christmas."
                    > >
                    >
                    > Of all the ancient gods, Christ is one of the few that we know was
                    NOT
                    > born on or around Decdmber 25. To say that Jesus is the reason for
                    the
                    > season is a lie, to say that Tammuz is the reason for the season is
                    not.
                    >
                    > > No one with any knowledge of the subject claims that December 25
                    is
                    > > definitely the date of Christ's birth. We have no way of knowing
                    the
                    > > exact day. It may have been in the spring, as most scholars
                    think,
                    > > or in December or January, as a minority claim, but even if the
                    > > latter are correct it might have been December 23 or January 8 or
                    > > who knows when. This isn't important to us.
                    > >
                    >
                    > Truth should be important to you.
                    >
                    > ...Christians, who constitute over
                    > > 80% of the people in America, have every right to express their
                    > > Christian traditions in both private and public places as long as
                    it
                    > > doesn't infringe on the religious liberties of non-Christians.
                    >
                    > It does however violate the principle of separation of church and
                    > state. We already have displays of your "Christian traditions"
                    > everywhere, why do you need here as well.
                    > If you truly have faith, you don't need government imprimatur.
                    >
                    > > Likewise Mormons in Utah have every right to have LDS-specific
                    > > displays in public places in their state.
                    >
                    > Why would any want religious intrusion in government - haven't we
                    > learned enough from the Middle East and the Middle Ages?
                    >
                    > Christian employees at
                    > > supermarkets and outlet stores should feel free to say "Merry
                    > > Christmas" if they wish (and not to say it if they do not wish).
                    We
                    > > have a right to object when Christmas trees are
                    relabeled "holiday
                    > > trees" out of fear of the ACLU.
                    > >
                    >
                    > I have no problem with private companies displaying Christmas Trees
                    > and even I say Merry Christmas. I am not in total agreement with the
                    > militant atheists like Michael Newdow.
                    >
                    > > You wrote:
                    > >
                    > > << You actually have a higher percentage of the population going
                    to
                    > > Christian churches in the USA now than in the time of the
                    Founding
                    > > Fathers, and as a result more Christian Christmas displays, yet
                    you
                    > > all feel threatened when other faiths are represented at the
                    > > exclusion of your faith, a faith that is in our face all the
                    time. >>
                    > >
                    > > This is not about me feeling "threatened." I agree that some
                    > > Christians in America overplay the persecution card. But you have
                    > > things turned around. The problem are those people who claim that
                    > > the presence of a Nativity scene in a public library or the
                    singing
                    > > of a Christmas carol in an elementary school assembly "threatens"
                    > > their freedom to be nonreligious. It doesn't.
                    >
                    > Reply: That's right, you're just "evangelizing", not "imposing" :)
                    >
                  • Heinz Schmitz
                    ... This sounds like another rationalization to me Rob. Christians hold themselves up as paragons of virtue and truth, but in the past four years I have been
                    Message 9 of 13 , Dec 31, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                      <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:

                      > Truth is important to me as a Christian, but the precise date of
                      > Christ's birth is not. Since we don't know the exact date, it makes
                      > no difference whether we celebrate it on December 25 or May 14. To
                      > suggest that this point reflects a lack of concern for truth is silly.

                      This sounds like another rationalization to me Rob. Christians hold
                      themselves up as paragons of virtue and truth, but in the past four
                      years I have been noticing other things. When I bring up certain facts
                      that go against their beliefs I am met with rejoinders like "Oh, I
                      don't care about that" or "That's not important to me," and I will
                      actually have Christians tell me to my face that December 25 is the
                      exact date of Christ's birth, despite any evidence to the contrary. We
                      laugh at the KJV-Only people when they say we should follow the KJV
                      Bible even when the Greek texts speak otherwise, but I see many
                      mainstream Christians who really follow the same type of logic
                      elsewhere. It is like Richard Dawkins says "Faith means blind trust,
                      in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence."

                      I was thinking of this and a quote from the movie Secondhand Lions:

                      "Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a man
                      needs to believe in the most. That people are basically good; that
                      honor, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money,
                      money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; and
                      I want you to remember this, that love... true love never dies. You
                      remember that, boy. You remember that. Doesn't matter if it's true or
                      not. You see, a man should believe in those things, because those are
                      the things worth believing in."

                      Can we add Christianity to the list above? Should we believe something
                      even if it is not true because it is better than not believing? Is
                      this the reason for the triumph of belief in the supernatural?
                      Heinz
                    • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
                      Heinz, It seems you have not left all of your Jehovah s Witness hangups behind. Congratulations on finding people who claim that December 25 is the definite
                      Message 10 of 13 , Dec 31, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Heinz,

                        It seems you have not left all of your Jehovah's Witness hangups
                        behind. Congratulations on finding people who claim that December 25
                        is the definite exact date of Jesus' birth, but there are ignorant
                        people in all religions and of no religion. I can tell when someone
                        is losing the debate when they stop debating me and start debating
                        unnamed ignorant people who are not part of the discussion.

                        Americans celebrate the birthdays of Presidents Washington and
                        Lincoln on the third Monday in February. Only someone completely
                        clueless about American history and customs thinks this means that
                        Americans are affirming that Washington and Lincoln were both born on
                        the same day. The third Monday in February isn't even the same date
                        each year. It doesn't matter. This doesn't mean we don't care about
                        truth; it just means that we choose to celebrate their births on this
                        floating day on the calendar.

                        Christians celebrate Easter on another floating day on the calendar,
                        always on a Sunday, but varying between March 22 and April 25. We
                        don't need to know the exact day of the year on which Jesus actually
                        rose from the dead, nor do we need to hold our celebration on that
                        same day, in order to hold an annual celebration of the resurrection
                        of Jesus. This has nothing to do with a lack of concern for the truth.

                        Jews celebrate Hanukkah, Passover, and Yom Kippur according to a
                        calendric system that is not identical to ours. As a result, these
                        holidays also float around on our standard calendar. Is this a
                        problem? Not to anyone who isn't intent on finding problems whether
                        they are really there or not.

                        You know full well I am not advocating believing something that isn't
                        true. To ask the question is to betray sheer prejudice. I'm sorry for
                        whatever happened to you to foster such prejudice, but it's plainly
                        there.

                        In Christ's service,
                        Rob Bowman



                        --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Heinz Schmitz"
                        <christian_skeptic@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                        > <faithhasitsreasons@> wrote:
                        >
                        > > Truth is important to me as a Christian, but the precise date of
                        > > Christ's birth is not. Since we don't know the exact date, it
                        makes
                        > > no difference whether we celebrate it on December 25 or May 14.
                        To
                        > > suggest that this point reflects a lack of concern for truth is
                        silly.
                        >
                        > This sounds like another rationalization to me Rob. Christians hold
                        > themselves up as paragons of virtue and truth, but in the past four
                        > years I have been noticing other things. When I bring up certain
                        facts
                        > that go against their beliefs I am met with rejoinders like "Oh, I
                        > don't care about that" or "That's not important to me," and I will
                        > actually have Christians tell me to my face that December 25 is the
                        > exact date of Christ's birth, despite any evidence to the contrary.
                        We
                        > laugh at the KJV-Only people when they say we should follow the KJV
                        > Bible even when the Greek texts speak otherwise, but I see many
                        > mainstream Christians who really follow the same type of logic
                        > elsewhere. It is like Richard Dawkins says "Faith means blind trust,
                        > in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence."
                        >
                        > I was thinking of this and a quote from the movie Secondhand Lions:
                        >
                        > "Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a
                        man
                        > needs to believe in the most. That people are basically good; that
                        > honor, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money,
                        > money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil;
                        and
                        > I want you to remember this, that love... true love never dies. You
                        > remember that, boy. You remember that. Doesn't matter if it's true
                        or
                        > not. You see, a man should believe in those things, because those
                        are
                        > the things worth believing in."
                        >
                        > Can we add Christianity to the list above? Should we believe
                        something
                        > even if it is not true because it is better than not believing? Is
                        > this the reason for the triumph of belief in the supernatural?
                        > Heinz
                        >
                      • Heinz Schmitz
                        ... Calm down Rob and please don t insult me by insinuating that these ignorant Christians are only a select few. ... Your examples are not exactly the same as
                        Message 11 of 13 , Dec 31, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                          <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Heinz,
                          >
                          > It seems you have not left all of your Jehovah's Witness hangups
                          > behind. Congratulations on finding people who claim that December 25
                          > is the definite exact date of Jesus' birth, but there are ignorant
                          > people in all religions and of no religion. I can tell when someone
                          > is losing the debate when they stop debating me and start debating
                          > unnamed ignorant people who are not part of the discussion.
                          >

                          Calm down Rob and please don't insult me by insinuating that these
                          ignorant Christians are only a select few.

                          > Americans celebrate the birthdays of Presidents Washington and
                          > Lincoln on the third Monday in February. Only someone completely
                          > clueless about American history and customs thinks this means that
                          > Americans are affirming that Washington and Lincoln were both born on
                          > the same day. The third Monday in February isn't even the same date
                          > each year. It doesn't matter. This doesn't mean we don't care about
                          > truth; it just means that we choose to celebrate their births on this
                          > floating day on the calendar.
                          >

                          Your examples are not exactly the same as no one declares loudly from
                          Church signs, on radio etc that these men were definitely born on this
                          day. I hear it everyday at this time of the year that Jesus was born
                          on December 25, I have never had anyone tell me that Lincoln was
                          definitely born on the 3rd Monday every year in February.
                          I belong to several very popular Christian yahoo groups, groups with
                          thousands of members, and day after day I have to weed thru some of
                          the most ignorant and anti-intellectual garbage. Rob, you're a smart
                          guy but you don't represent the average Christian. Just off the top of
                          my head many posts are about the Bildebergers, the Illuminati, the
                          Templars, they are generally anti-education, anti-science,
                          anti-medicine, anti-immunization, and everything is a big leftist plot.
                          This shouldn't be Rob, not in this day and age. When I read William
                          Coles on this group talking about the Devil as if he were real then
                          you must accept a certain responsibility for the massive ignorance and
                          gullibility that others see amongst Christians today. How is society
                          to move ahead if a large segment of the population is bogged down in
                          Medieval superstitions?
                        • Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
                          Heinz, As far as I m concerned, your argument has run aground. You are reduced to complaining about uninformed young people who roam the Internet and making
                          Message 12 of 13 , Dec 31, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Heinz,

                            As far as I'm concerned, your argument has run aground. You are
                            reduced to complaining about uninformed young people who roam the
                            Internet and making the facile claim that anyone who believes in
                            supernatural beings is ignorant and gullible. I'm ready to spend my
                            time responding to more serious efforts to engage the biblical
                            worldview.

                            In Christ's service,
                            Rob Bowman



                            --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Heinz Schmitz"
                            <christian_skeptic@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                            > <faithhasitsreasons@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Heinz,
                            > >
                            > > It seems you have not left all of your Jehovah's Witness hangups
                            > > behind. Congratulations on finding people who claim that December
                            25
                            > > is the definite exact date of Jesus' birth, but there are
                            ignorant
                            > > people in all religions and of no religion. I can tell when
                            someone
                            > > is losing the debate when they stop debating me and start
                            debating
                            > > unnamed ignorant people who are not part of the discussion.
                            > >
                            >
                            > Calm down Rob and please don't insult me by insinuating that these
                            > ignorant Christians are only a select few.
                            >
                            > > Americans celebrate the birthdays of Presidents Washington and
                            > > Lincoln on the third Monday in February. Only someone completely
                            > > clueless about American history and customs thinks this means
                            that
                            > > Americans are affirming that Washington and Lincoln were both
                            born on
                            > > the same day. The third Monday in February isn't even the same
                            date
                            > > each year. It doesn't matter. This doesn't mean we don't care
                            about
                            > > truth; it just means that we choose to celebrate their births on
                            this
                            > > floating day on the calendar.
                            > >
                            >
                            > Your examples are not exactly the same as no one declares loudly
                            from
                            > Church signs, on radio etc that these men were definitely born on
                            this
                            > day. I hear it everyday at this time of the year that Jesus was born
                            > on December 25, I have never had anyone tell me that Lincoln was
                            > definitely born on the 3rd Monday every year in February.
                            > I belong to several very popular Christian yahoo groups, groups with
                            > thousands of members, and day after day I have to weed thru some of
                            > the most ignorant and anti-intellectual garbage. Rob, you're a smart
                            > guy but you don't represent the average Christian. Just off the top
                            of
                            > my head many posts are about the Bildebergers, the Illuminati, the
                            > Templars, they are generally anti-education, anti-science,
                            > anti-medicine, anti-immunization, and everything is a big leftist
                            plot.
                            > This shouldn't be Rob, not in this day and age. When I read William
                            > Coles on this group talking about the Devil as if he were real then
                            > you must accept a certain responsibility for the massive ignorance
                            and
                            > gullibility that others see amongst Christians today. How is society
                            > to move ahead if a large segment of the population is bogged down in
                            > Medieval superstitions?
                            >
                          • Heinz Schmitz
                            ... Many, if not most of the Christians I mentioned are not young people but parents and other adults, but let s move on. You mentioned the the biblical
                            Message 13 of 13 , Dec 31, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Robert M. Bowman, Jr."
                              <faithhasitsreasons@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Heinz,
                              >
                              > As far as I'm concerned, your argument has run aground. You are
                              > reduced to complaining about uninformed young people who roam the
                              > Internet and making the facile claim that anyone who believes in
                              > supernatural beings is ignorant and gullible. I'm ready to spend my
                              > time responding to more serious efforts to engage the biblical
                              > worldview.
                              >
                              > In Christ's service,
                              > Rob Bowman
                              >

                              Many, if not most of the Christians I mentioned are not "young people"
                              but parents and other adults, but let's move on. You mentioned the
                              "the biblical worldview." I googled "Biblical Worldview" and on the
                              first page I got this from
                              http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/wow/what-is-biblical-worldview

                              "This chapter will outline the major events of the past (and even the
                              future)—the "7 C's of History"—that are foundational to the Bible's
                              important message and demonstrate how the Bible connects to the real
                              world....God created the heavens, the earth and all that is in them in
                              six normal-length days around 6,000 years ago. His completed creation
                              was "very good" (Genesis 1:31), and all the original animals
                              (including dinosaurs) and the first two humans (Adam and Eve) ate only
                              plants (Genesis 1:29–30)."

                              This, according to AIG is the Biblical Worldview. But, chances are,
                              you and many other Christians on this board right at the outset
                              disagree with this worldview, and this is the problem with talking
                              about the biblical worldview, as there is no one biblical worldview,
                              but many biblical worldviewS, yet another problem with your religion.
                              Heinz
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.