On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:10:46 -0800, Karl S
wrote:



You sort of missed the point, Karl. Christmas couldn't happen in
July......the winter solstice......get it? Most of the world pays attention
to the winter solstice in one way or another, and celebrates Saturnalia,
Sacaea, Zagmuk, Christmas, Chanukah or whatever.......and has since
antiquity.....they just change the name and the idols periodically. The
Christians merely borrowed from a variety of creation myths (as did the
Jews.....and the Romans......and others.....before them) and stuck some of
their own window dressing on it. Their major problem was that they weren't
real good with calendars........or at making up their minds for that matter.
They missed the solstice.....and they still can't decide whether or not they
like the vernal equinox (about the timing of which they are equally
uncertain).....the whole death and rebirth (resurrection, blah, blah....you
know, Easter) better than the solstice. See, the old year dies.....cosmic
significance and all that.....right? But when does it begin anew?
Hm......is it when they days start to get longer?......or is it when the
grass starts to grow again? Well, what the hell......let's start it both
times! Can't lose!

Wolfgang
i mean, does ANYBODY really still believe that december 25th marks an
important birthday?


I'm sorry Wolfgang, but you are not missing - but rather, ignoring - the
point.

Christmas could indeed be any time of the year, because it seems nobody
really knows the exact date of Jesus' birth. That it was set in December
was a slightly shameful political decision taken a long time ago, that
is true. Mankind, even well-meaning scholarly types, can get political.

However, Christmas is in fact the celebration of the birth of Jesus, the
Christ. The salvation of mankind is worth celebrating.

You will of course continue to ignore this, for the sheer malicious fun
of it. By all means do so, for this time of year is the hatching season
for Christ-haters, if that is how you celebrate the winter solstice.
By the way, celebrate it today.

Not on the 25th. That's Christmas.

Karl S.


Christmas is celebrated in whatever way (and for whatever reason) the
celebrants wish to celebrate it. I have no problem with a person
celebrating it as a deeply religious holiday. I have no problem with
someone celebrating it with no mention of Jesus. I do have a problem
with people telling other people how they must organize their family
traditions. Christmas is the name of a day. Its origins are obvious,
but in the modern world it is the name of a day, just as Halloween is
the name of a former holy day that has been adopted as a secular name
for October 31st. Christmas has also become a secular name for
December 25th. Like it or not Christmas is now a time for merrymaking
with prayer and reflection being an option.

And this is not just a modern phenomenon. Christmas was until 150
years ago primarily an adult, secular celebration, which included
lots of alcohol cosumption and even role changing. The wassailers, far
from being happy, pious carollers were groups who went from door to
door singing and expecting to rewarded with drink. They became
progressively drunker and rowdier as they made their rounds. This is,
in part, why Christmas was banned by the Pilgrims (and the English
Roundheads IIRC). Like it or not Christmas is just our cultures way of
celebrating during the darkest time of the year. A phenomena that is a
universal custom in the northern hemisphere, no matter what its
called.

g.c.