<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Christmas is an anti-christian holiday</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/</link>
	<description>There'll be good content here... someday</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:08:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: GreNME</title>
		<link>http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/comment-page-1/#comment-161</link>
		<dc:creator>GreNME</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/#comment-161</guid>
		<description>I hate to be the one to break this to you, dude, but you&#039;re placing a lot of trivia (some of it untrue) together as if it were empirical fact. This is really no different than every other esoteric wannabe-historicity arguments I have been discussing with others at great length in various locations. Indeed, there is an internet movie calling itself &#039;Zeitgeist&#039; that makes similar (but not the same) errors in presenting trivia in a correlative manner to imply a factual thesis, and this posting of yours seems very similar to that.
 
Origen&#039;s writing on the subject is considered the earliest example of a Christian &#039;leader&#039; commenting on the solstice celebration by Christians, but the mistake you make is that there is absolutely nothing to imply that this was not a phenomenon that was already present being given commentary by Origen. In fact, the way in which the practice was described very much signifies that it was a regular practice in certain areas where the growing Christian movement had been gaining converts. Furthermore, your comment that Origen&#039;s writing somehow is a commentary on what people thought of celebrating birthdays is both a non-sequiter and an assumption on your part with absolutely no substantiation whatsoever. Depending on the geographical parts of Rome during that time, birthday celebrations were common and varied depending the local population. Your claim to the contrary is ridiculous. If you&#039;re interested, I will be happy to provide you with several sources on birthday celebrations in late Roman antiquity, as plenty of such sources exist.
 
You mention Persia as celebrating on December 25th the birthday of Mithra. This is a clear sign to me that you truly have done no actual research on your own, and are instead parrotting the incorrect claims of others in order to support a pre-concieved conclusion. I strongly encourage you to actually follow-up on such claims when you hear them, instead of taking the assertations of people without question. As a matter of fact, the December festival you mistakenly spoke of happens on December 21st, not December 25th, and it is called Shab-e Yalda. This festival is still celebrated to this day among many people in Iran (formerly known as Persia). Yes, the celebration is to commemorate the birth of Mithra (&#039;yalda&#039; means &#039;birth&#039;), but unlike the later Roman and Hellenized solstice celebrations this Persian holiday was celebrated at the beginning of the solstice and not the end. Unfortunately, this misconception and historical / cultural ignorance has been repeated so often and with such religious fervor by individuals that it seems very few people understand the significant differences, most specifically the difference in date, and as such are causing an equal amount of ignorance as is often considered regarding the Christmas holiday. Please be aware that making claims so deliberately and claiming them as fact displays a cultural arrogance that is insulting and damaging.
 
While we are on the subject of incorrect dates, let&#039;s focus on another one you get completely wrong: Saturnalia. Your claim is not supported by historical data, which shows the Saturnalia celebration being observed in the middle of the month of December and eventually being extended to a days-long celebration that ended around the first days of the solstice (days before the 25th). The mistake you make is that you seem unaware that the later Sol Invictus celebration (for the Roman Mithras, who was based on the Persian Mithra) borrowed some of its ritual from the Saturnalia celebration, though even to claim this as a source for the Christian version of the holiday would be based on baseless conjecture, since the earliest references to Deus Sol Invictus-- whether talking about Mithras, Aurelian, Septimius Severus, or others-- do not appear in Roman history until AT LEAST the mid-third-century. In case you aren&#039;t keeping score, this also happens to be about the same time you have Origen&#039;s (and Tertullian&#039;s) commentary on the practice of the celebrations during the time of winter solstice.
 
Essentially, what I am telling you is that most of your historical claims are grossly incorrect, as well as assuming far too much in the way of motive without supporting evidence.
 
To sum up:
 
1. The last time I checked, there is no commandment against celebrating the holiday.
2. Knowing the actual date is irrelevant to choosing a time for people who wish to hold a religious observance, since it is the event which is being observed and not the date. In case you weren&#039;t aware, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches celebrate on a different date.
3. Making claims regarding the motivations behind the holiday are the mark of someone spreading dogma and not of a scholarly evaluation of historical events. You can attempt to postulate the motives if you want, but with the multitude of factual errors you provide in your text I can guarantee you that the conclusion you form is not going to be backed by the historical information you are attempting to invoke.
 
Also, just so you are aware: I&#039;m not a Christian. As a matter of fact, I tend to be critical of the heavy politicization by some groups who identify as Christian. Perhaps you might not, but a common habit for those to whom I point out these errors is to label me a Christian, a Catholic, or some other variation of the same. I don&#039;t personally have any religious stake in any of this. I just happen to be frustrated with the overabundance of these lists of factually incorrect and flawed claims regarding ubiquitous traditions that aren&#039;t even necessarily completely a Christian observance any more. I wouldn&#039;t have a problem with it if any of you who make these ridiculous sermons were historically accurate, but make no mistake that you are simply sermonizing and the conclusion you are drawing is mutually exclusive from the actual historical facts.
 
Happy holidays.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate to be the one to break this to you, dude, but you&#8217;re placing a lot of trivia (some of it untrue) together as if it were empirical fact. This is really no different than every other esoteric wannabe-historicity arguments I have been discussing with others at great length in various locations. Indeed, there is an internet movie calling itself &#8216;Zeitgeist&#8217; that makes similar (but not the same) errors in presenting trivia in a correlative manner to imply a factual thesis, and this posting of yours seems very similar to that.</p>
<p>Origen&#8217;s writing on the subject is considered the earliest example of a Christian &#8216;leader&#8217; commenting on the solstice celebration by Christians, but the mistake you make is that there is absolutely nothing to imply that this was not a phenomenon that was already present being given commentary by Origen. In fact, the way in which the practice was described very much signifies that it was a regular practice in certain areas where the growing Christian movement had been gaining converts. Furthermore, your comment that Origen&#8217;s writing somehow is a commentary on what people thought of celebrating birthdays is both a non-sequiter and an assumption on your part with absolutely no substantiation whatsoever. Depending on the geographical parts of Rome during that time, birthday celebrations were common and varied depending the local population. Your claim to the contrary is ridiculous. If you&#8217;re interested, I will be happy to provide you with several sources on birthday celebrations in late Roman antiquity, as plenty of such sources exist.</p>
<p>You mention Persia as celebrating on December 25th the birthday of Mithra. This is a clear sign to me that you truly have done no actual research on your own, and are instead parrotting the incorrect claims of others in order to support a pre-concieved conclusion. I strongly encourage you to actually follow-up on such claims when you hear them, instead of taking the assertations of people without question. As a matter of fact, the December festival you mistakenly spoke of happens on December 21st, not December 25th, and it is called Shab-e Yalda. This festival is still celebrated to this day among many people in Iran (formerly known as Persia). Yes, the celebration is to commemorate the birth of Mithra (&#8216;yalda&#8217; means &#8216;birth&#8217;), but unlike the later Roman and Hellenized solstice celebrations this Persian holiday was celebrated at the beginning of the solstice and not the end. Unfortunately, this misconception and historical / cultural ignorance has been repeated so often and with such religious fervor by individuals that it seems very few people understand the significant differences, most specifically the difference in date, and as such are causing an equal amount of ignorance as is often considered regarding the Christmas holiday. Please be aware that making claims so deliberately and claiming them as fact displays a cultural arrogance that is insulting and damaging.</p>
<p>While we are on the subject of incorrect dates, let&#8217;s focus on another one you get completely wrong: Saturnalia. Your claim is not supported by historical data, which shows the Saturnalia celebration being observed in the middle of the month of December and eventually being extended to a days-long celebration that ended around the first days of the solstice (days before the 25th). The mistake you make is that you seem unaware that the later Sol Invictus celebration (for the Roman Mithras, who was based on the Persian Mithra) borrowed some of its ritual from the Saturnalia celebration, though even to claim this as a source for the Christian version of the holiday would be based on baseless conjecture, since the earliest references to Deus Sol Invictus&#8211; whether talking about Mithras, Aurelian, Septimius Severus, or others&#8211; do not appear in Roman history until AT LEAST the mid-third-century. In case you aren&#8217;t keeping score, this also happens to be about the same time you have Origen&#8217;s (and Tertullian&#8217;s) commentary on the practice of the celebrations during the time of winter solstice.</p>
<p>Essentially, what I am telling you is that most of your historical claims are grossly incorrect, as well as assuming far too much in the way of motive without supporting evidence.</p>
<p>To sum up:</p>
<p>1. The last time I checked, there is no commandment against celebrating the holiday.<br />
2. Knowing the actual date is irrelevant to choosing a time for people who wish to hold a religious observance, since it is the event which is being observed and not the date. In case you weren&#8217;t aware, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches celebrate on a different date.<br />
3. Making claims regarding the motivations behind the holiday are the mark of someone spreading dogma and not of a scholarly evaluation of historical events. You can attempt to postulate the motives if you want, but with the multitude of factual errors you provide in your text I can guarantee you that the conclusion you form is not going to be backed by the historical information you are attempting to invoke.</p>
<p>Also, just so you are aware: I&#8217;m not a Christian. As a matter of fact, I tend to be critical of the heavy politicization by some groups who identify as Christian. Perhaps you might not, but a common habit for those to whom I point out these errors is to label me a Christian, a Catholic, or some other variation of the same. I don&#8217;t personally have any religious stake in any of this. I just happen to be frustrated with the overabundance of these lists of factually incorrect and flawed claims regarding ubiquitous traditions that aren&#8217;t even necessarily completely a Christian observance any more. I wouldn&#8217;t have a problem with it if any of you who make these ridiculous sermons were historically accurate, but make no mistake that you are simply sermonizing and the conclusion you are drawing is mutually exclusive from the actual historical facts.</p>
<p>Happy holidays.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tracy from Hatrack</title>
		<link>http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/comment-page-1/#comment-156</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy from Hatrack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2007 14:11:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.demonclownbaby.com/2007/12/24/christmas-is-an-anti-christian-holiday/#comment-156</guid>
		<description>Well, this essay mirrors very much one I wrote back in high school.  I was raised in a faith that considered it a great offense to acknowledge the celebration of Christmas at all (for the same three reason your summary outlined).  I was the &quot;bah-humbug&quot; of my little small town school, and refused to have anything to do with any celebration, and made my opinions very vocal.

As I&#039;ve gotten older, I realize there is nothing inherently wrong with  using any day of the year just to acknowledge the incarnation of Christ, sing very pretty songs, and wish others well.  I have realized that now, for most people, Christmas is more about family and tradition than anything else, and I shouldn&#039;t try to snatch away from them what is an important part of their family identity.  It would be like them telling me to stop observing Thanksgiving (an important family holiday in my family, just because of our own traditions).

I still don&#039;t put up a tree, or lights, and rarely give gifts on Christmas. But that is just because my family never had such a tradition (as per the first paragraph of my comment).  I now attend a mainstream church that observes Christmas, and I enjoy their service, and participate, but it has no personal traditional meaning to me.

I&#039;ve learned to respect others desire to find more meaning in it than I do, and I&#039;ve tried to keep myself focused away from self, and toward more compassion for others.  I think that has struck a good balance in every way.  I&#039;m not out hitting people over the head with the &quot;facts&quot; anymore, crushing what it means to them; but I&#039;m not trying to adopt their own traditions as mine, either.  It&#039;s all about, again, focusing on others; which I think is appropriate all year long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, this essay mirrors very much one I wrote back in high school.  I was raised in a faith that considered it a great offense to acknowledge the celebration of Christmas at all (for the same three reason your summary outlined).  I was the &#8220;bah-humbug&#8221; of my little small town school, and refused to have anything to do with any celebration, and made my opinions very vocal.</p>
<p>As I&#8217;ve gotten older, I realize there is nothing inherently wrong with  using any day of the year just to acknowledge the incarnation of Christ, sing very pretty songs, and wish others well.  I have realized that now, for most people, Christmas is more about family and tradition than anything else, and I shouldn&#8217;t try to snatch away from them what is an important part of their family identity.  It would be like them telling me to stop observing Thanksgiving (an important family holiday in my family, just because of our own traditions).</p>
<p>I still don&#8217;t put up a tree, or lights, and rarely give gifts on Christmas. But that is just because my family never had such a tradition (as per the first paragraph of my comment).  I now attend a mainstream church that observes Christmas, and I enjoy their service, and participate, but it has no personal traditional meaning to me.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve learned to respect others desire to find more meaning in it than I do, and I&#8217;ve tried to keep myself focused away from self, and toward more compassion for others.  I think that has struck a good balance in every way.  I&#8217;m not out hitting people over the head with the &#8220;facts&#8221; anymore, crushing what it means to them; but I&#8217;m not trying to adopt their own traditions as mine, either.  It&#8217;s all about, again, focusing on others; which I think is appropriate all year long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

