A Religious Christmas

Buzzerbee · Before February 2015

Twipply:

Do you have any proof that he didn't exist?

Twipply wrote:

Claim without source, thus worthless.

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

Sanguine: that's my poiny, you were not raised religously. You also seem to have a blatent disregard for 85.6 percent of the world, saying that they are stupid and that their beliefs are fairy tales. You honestly disgust me. In America there are no religon pledges or whatever you mean either, except in Catholic schools.

As for the discrimination of Jews, I know it was the fault of one maniac, and I am confused as to who you are calling ignorant. Of course it was condemned, I have no clue where you got that it wasn't from. I was simply pointing out that Jews have been persecuted more than Athiests. Anti-Semitism is a very real thing.

Bee: Nice chart, in that case, I stay with my earlier statement about it being nonreligous and not agnostic. And the same religion would not be lost, because the same God would stay. Again, that is a part of your personal belief.
Shift: well, this topic was not created to discuss whether Christmas was religous or not, but the real purpose was lost with all this Athiesm talk. I may request a lock with all this off-topicness, but not yet.

Takoman: Again I say, by "real" I meant "original", not what it is now.

Last edited by xputnameherex (Dec 28 2011 11:07:57 pm)

Sanguine · Before February 2015

There is a difference between being raised in a non-religious way and being raised to shun religion. Not being aware of it means retaining one's purity of self. I was never warned about religion, nor have I ever talked to my parents about it up until it fell. This leads me to the question of whether religious belief or not being religious at all is the unnatural state of being.

It bemuses me how I "disgust" you. Religious people who are presented with facts remind me of animals forced into a corner, really. Attack as a last ditch effort. Sadly, this won't work in an intellectual debate.

Tako · Before February 2015

xputnameherex wrote:

Takoman: Again I say, by "real" I meant "original", not what it is now.

Big difference.

You want to discuss celebrating the original Christmas? Well let's see if I can go wayy back in time to Zoey's post...

I'm sure it was "originally" pagan or Roman holiday

Try again.

topic != real Christmas
topic != original Christmas

What I think you want to discuss is the Christian Christmas.

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

That wasn't called Christmas, it was just gift giving on December 25, not Christmas.

BEE · Before February 2015

And the same religion would not be lost, because the same God would stay

So things would play out exactly the way they have this time? If yes, explain different religions.

Twipply · Before February 2015

Shift wrote:

Religion: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects

I was a tiny little bit interested until I read the definition you chose for religion, then I ceased being interested.

BuzzerBee wrote:

Do you have any proof that he didn't exist?

Proof in the sense that current day science and logic essentially forbids it, yeah. Proof in the sense that he 100% didn't exist and it's an absolute, unquestionable certainty? No, of course not. I think I implied when I said that the biblical jesus certainly didn't exist, I meant so from a scientific viewpoint.

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

Bee: Other religions would not exist. Only the true one. Which I believe is Christianity, others believe differently.

Tako · Before February 2015

xputnameherex wrote:

That wasn't called Christmas, it was just gift giving on December 25, not Christmas.

So if we change "Valentines day" to "Love day" it's a completely different holiday?

I still consider the Roman holiday to be equal to 634 BCE's Christmas. Of all days of the year, why would they choose December 25th? Especially when he was born some time in the Spring?

Once again, you want to talk about the Christian Christmas (the "original" Christian Christmas by specification), which I have provided a response to in my very first reply to the topic.

BEE · Before February 2015

xputnameherex wrote:

Bee: Other religions would not exist. Only the true one. Which I believe is Christianity, others believe differently.

So you're saying, that if everything started off exactly the same as you believe it did (a second time), that only chiristianity would exist.

If that is the case, why do other religions exist now? If it starts off exactly the same, how would the next time now produce different beliefs.

Shift · Before February 2015

TakoMan02 wrote:

Shift wrote:
Practices and Beliefs ~ Custom definition of custom
Where did you see beliefs in the definition of custom?

... You're kidding, right? I hyperlinked you to the page on dictionary.com. I took the definition from the site verbatim. Check. Good? Good.

Custom: a habitual practice; the usual way of acting in given circumstances.
It's a custom to celebrate Christmas. When you celebrate Christmas, you are not believing in anything.

Isn't that the point we're arguing, here? If so, then you can't assume that it's false in order to prove that it's false.

Religion: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects
Christmas != religion or a religious holiday, as explained in my previous post. Why do you go out of your way to define such an illogical point (and I'm pretty sure you know it, given you have a few pennies worth of common sense).

Shift just wrote:

Isn't that the point we're arguing, here? If so, then you can't assume that it's false in order to prove that it's false.

You provided no argument against Christmas being religious, you only stated that it's not. If now you're seriously trying to argue that I hadn't used logic, then you obviously don't know what logic actually is.

Nice pun.

Oh, and I wasn't tailoring my argument to fit yours; it was meant for Twipply.

EDIT: I didn't see Twipply... reply.

Twipply wrote:

Shift wrote:
Religion: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects
I was a tiny little bit interested until I read the definition you chose for religion, then I ceased being interested.

I'll admit that the definition I chose is a bit reaching, but I chose it because it used the exact words that I needed. If I had chose a different definition, then I would have had to have another line of logic and another definition in order to have the same clarity. If you really need to clarify the definition of religion, then you're welcome to use the hyperlink I gave you. Otherwise, I would suggest you make an argument.

Last edited by Shift (Dec 29 2011 12:01:44 am)

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

Takoman: fine. I was falling about the celebration of the birth of Jesus. It makes no difference.

Bee. That would happen if humanity turned the same route every single time

Tako · Before February 2015

@Shift: Well, you answered everything except the one question I asked. Where do you see "beliefs" in the definition of "custom"?

Practices and Beliefs ~ Custom          definition of custom
Religion ~ Custom                                     transitive property of congruence
Custom ~ Christmas                               definition of Christmas
Religion ~ Christmas                               transitive property of congruence
Religion ~ Religious                                  given (I would hope)
Religious ~ Christmas                               substitution property of congruence

Dictionary.reference.com wrote:

cus·tom [kuhs-tuhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
a habitual practice; the usual way of acting in given circumstances.
2.
habits or usages collectively; convention.
3.
a practice so long established that it has the force of law.
4.
such practices collectively.
5.
Sociology . a group pattern of habitual activity usually transmitted from one generation to another.

In my post that you claim is not an argument, I clearly stated a fact that Christmas does not have to be a religious holiday to all people. Please disprove it with something other than sarcastic remarks and false linking of definitions.

Last edited by Tako (Dec 29 2011 10:28:23 am)

Zoey2070 · Before February 2015

xputnameherex wrote:

In America there are no religon pledges or whatever you mean either, except in Catholic schools.

While there are no 'religion pledges' there IS religion in the United States Pledge (I know it's not what you were saying, but pretty much every school in UHMERICA says it). Want me to rehearse it? I've said it over a thousand times. [Over 1440 times, actually.]

I pledge allegiance
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic
for which it stands
one nation,
under god,
indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.

Isn't that funny? Especially considering freedom of religion is the first amendment, and yet we've been taught to say 'under god' in the mornings at school? I didn't even know the United States had a pledge before I got into first grade.

xputnameherex wrote:

Bee: Other religions would not exist. Only the true one. Which I believe is Christianity, others believe differently.

lolno. I'm not going to explain this.

xputnameherex wrote:

Bee. That would happen if humanity turned the same route every single time

Did you know that world war I would not have happened how it did (not exactly, anyway) if this one guy didn't decide he wanted to stop for a bite to eat instead of assassinating someone? Or if he had missed when the person he was assassinating just happened to pass by the place he got food? That was so improbable, it's almost but not quite chance.

Also, you're contradicting yourself...

If humanity happened exactly the same as it did, then absolutely nothing would change, because that's what 'exactly the same' means. Which means that religion would exist exactly as it does today. Basically, both timelines would be the same and there wouldn't be a single particle of difference. Maybe. Who knows.

Yet if humanity changed by a little, tiny bit, like someone accidentally tripping over a rock or something, nothing would be the same. THIS INCLUDES ALL RELIGION. Taoism, Christianity, Pastafarianism, Buddhism, etc, etc.

Perhaps we wouldn't be using the Latin Alphabet and we wouldn't be speaking in 'English'.

So Christianity wouldn't exist as it does now, even if it was just a tiny bit different, it wouldn't be the exact same religion. 'True religion' my ****.

You want to know something I find amusing? How ancient polytheistic religions are considered Myths. It's still religion, so maybe when we become a Type II civilization, all religion will be considered myths.

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

Oh, that pledge. 1xd1 That is mostly for the reason that almost everyone believed in a god then. There was another big reason, I just can't remember it now. The argument about that has been around for a while.

Please do explain if it is not what you say below.

You're thing about the world war is exactly what I meant. I said yes, if everything happened the same, the same religions would exist.

First of all, tripping over a rock would barely change anything, unless that rock was some kind of artifact. And the true religion would happen the same, its not like all the values are suddenly lost, the religion would be told from whatever god the same, so it would be made the same.

Ancient religions are considered myths because no one believes in them anymore. No other reason. You also still seem to disrespect all other beliefs as child lore, saying that in a more advanced society religion would be a myth.

Buzzerbee · Before February 2015

Why are we all arguing about this?

Obviously, none of us are getting converted.

You ask us to back things up with facts, but the whole basis of religion and faith is believing without seeing.

So everybody just run off to your little PlaySkool toys and don't argue about this anymore, because from what I'm seeing, it's getting out of hand, and it isn't affecting anything or anybody positively.

xputnameherex · Before February 2015

BuzzerBee wrote:

Why are we all arguing about this?
Obviously, none of us are getting converted.
You ask us to back things up with facts, but the whole basis of religion and faith is believing without seeing.
So everybody just run off to your little PlaySkool toys and don't argue about this anymore, because from what I'm seeing, it's getting out of hand, and it isn't affecting anything or anybody positively.

Agreed. Lock requested. I'm not backing out of anything, this is just forming bad relationships.

BillyP · Before February 2015

BuzzerBee wrote:

Why are we all arguing about this?

Why do you think? Could it be because of the controversial OP? Of course not!

Last edited by BillyP (Dec 29 2011 4:41:41 pm)

Bash · Before February 2015

xputnameherex wrote:

Agreed. Lock requested. I'm not backing out of anything, this is just forming bad relationships.

Locked.

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#51 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#52 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#53 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#54 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#55 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#56 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#57 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#58 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#59 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#60 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#61 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#62 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#63 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#64 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#65 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#66 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#67 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#68 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

#69 Before February 2015

Re: A Religious Christmas

Board footer