This is an appeal to ignorance. December 25 was originally a Pagan holiday; the date has nothing to do with the birth of Christ.
Yes this maybe an appeal to ignorance. The fact still remains there has been no proof that Christ never existed. Just plenty of proof to dispell if Christs performed miracles or the events up, around and after his death. As far as the definition of Chistmas. This is what Miram-Webster Dictionary says about Christmas. Function: noun Usage: often attributive Etymology: Middle English Christemasse, from Old English Cristes mæsse, literally, Christ's mass 1 : a Christian feast on December 25 or among some Eastern Orthodox Christians on January 7 that commemorates the birth of Christ and is usually observed as a legal holiday 2 : CHRISTMASTIDE - Christ·mas·sy or Christ·masy /-m&-sE/ adjective
That says nothing about the origin of Christmas. Show me where in the Bible it says that Jesus was born on December 25. The Christmas tradition is based on Paganism, not Christianity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth Anyone can make up a book and "answer" how the earth was "started"
First I never said that was Christ was born on Christmas 25. But it still goes back to the point of what was stated in the dictionary. A feast celebrating the birth of Christ dependin on who and where you lived. If you would like to read on how Cathoics incorporated the pagan holiday you may do so in Origins of Chrismas. But it still comes down to the translation of definition of Christmas as "Christs Mass". What it really matters is why do those who are hard core scientific believers are so bothered by religion or anything related to the subject. Espcecially with the fact that the Catholic religion incorporated Pagan practices. Why does religion bother those in the Scientific community? We as a society are not in the dark ages of killing off scientists or burning them at the stake. So it comes down to this day in time. Why does relegion bother science so much? and remember Darwins, the big bang theory etc. are all theories and therefore not proven. In fact the science community can not agree on one sole theory either. If science is exact than agree on something. And how many times did science have to revamp carbon dating? In fact science says it is possible for the red sea to be parted by Moses. Or christ to walk on water. And they have used science to prove these factors. The tides, time of year and whereabouts on the water these events have taken place.
You know they get plenty of stem cells from when woman bear birth of a child. I do know that when I had both of my children(one being 18 and one being 14) I signed a consent form for a portion of the cord to be donated to science. I know many hospitals still do this. To me to push it futher is unnecessary and feeds confusion. And considering the birth rate just here in the US alone. Lets do some math. And to me I would think we would have enough for research.
The bible was only invented so that the major retailers can make millions in the run up to Christmas.
This is true. But how come Jehovah's Witnesses give Bibles away for free to those who want one? Interesting question huh?
Jeez get over that claim. The Bible doesn't say Jesus was born on December 25, that day was just chosen because it was believed he was born around that time of the year.
IN the world of debate, a premise is considered 'an argument.' I didn't realize you were unaware of this. This terminology is quite common. Even, say, in building an Excel spreadsheet. Your premise, whether you realize it as one or not, is that religion is nonsense and that it should not be taught to our children. 'Religion' being a natural outgrowth of belief in God, you are asking us not to teach our children of God's existence. Again, this IS THE WEAKNESS IN YOUR ARGUMENT History proves that knowledge of God is UNIVERSAL and COMPLETE in Man. It is intuitive knowledge and not empirical. What you want is your cake and to eat it too. For, since ALL of mankind's known history shows that belief in God is the one common thread throughout, then, boyo, NOT to teach of God would be contrary to our experience and would invoke the very indoctrination you posture to decry. In fact, you wish us of faith NOT to teach of God's existence erroneously believing that this would somehow dry up the well-spring of belief in Him. The experience of mankind proves otherwise. You are not actually therefore asking us to stop teaching of God. You are asking us to START TEACHING he does not exist. Rather heavy handed of you, don't you think? This, is the "weakness in your argument." Show me one people in the vast history of Man that did not believe in God. Just so I can get that "chip off my shoulder."
Through the door mate, threshold means entrance or doorway. It was (I thought) a superb joke but I think it sailed over your head. Here in the UK we get them all the time knocking on doors but most of the time people are not interested, hence the superb joke. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Jehovah's+Witnesses&page=3 See #19, #22 and #23
2Cr 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And that includes December 25th
Mine reads: Consequently if anyone is in union with Christ, he is a new creation; the old things passed away, look! new things have come into existence This has nothing to do with December 25. This verse relates completely to people turning over a new leaf in life. "Putting on the new personality" as the apostle Paul said. I can't see your connection at all here. Col
The bible was only invented so that the major retailers can make millions in the run up to Christmas. Ahahahahahahahha!!! No, that's why rap was created. And porno. And crack. Among many other things. IN fact that you ignore the Bible has been around far longer than major retailers period - is about the most amusing aspect of your statement.