Oh, the ironing!! (Gotta love that "Christian" ignorance)

[Roland99]

Flipping channels a moment ago, I came across a "Christian" Sunday morning show. In this prepared ad they were showing, a woman was saying how important it was for "Christians" to display nativity scenes in their churches and ESPECIALLY on their PRIVATE property. They must get the word out about the true meaning of Christmas.

Nevermind the FACT that nativity scenes are 100% false representations and that Christmas was created to combat the pagan celebration of the winter solstice.


I love the smell of irony in the morning. It smells like....hypocrisy.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

1. If the poor fools

"knew" a tenth of what they "believe," they'd spontaneously combust.

[knitter4democracy]

18. Thanks.

Being one of those fools (too much pain today for church), I really appreciate your sentiment. :eyes:

[TallahasseeGrannie]

20. I'm sorry you are hurting today

knitter. BTW, I'm a crocheter, myself. Just started a baby sweater for my six week old grand daughter. It has a popcorn stitch. Hard!

[knitter4democracy]

23. Ooh, that sounds lovely!

I love that stitch--I just wish I could crochet. My crocheted stuff always turns out badly. I have no idea why. I think it's that only one hook thing. ;)

Thanks. I live with daily pain, but it's been worse this weekend. I really wish I were well enough to drag myself and my family to church this morning. :( Oh well, maybe I can get us to do prayers later.

[FreedomAngel82]

59. Sorry you're in a lot of pain

:( :hug: I'm a church going person myself and haven't been since last Sunday. I sadly fell and hurt my left foot too bad. :( I was wearing a new pair of shoes and the bottoms were super slick and I fell. :cry: But it's a lot better now. Hopefully I'll be going back Sunday. :)

[yella_dawg]

65. Lightweights.

I'm currently working on an embroidered Peacock 18" x 22" all satin stitched by hand. Over twenty colors so far, with more to come. I'll be finished about 2020, with any luck.

[knitter4democracy]

76. Wow!!!

Satin stitch drives me nuts, so I stick to knitting. What count linen is it on? That piece sounds like it will be drop-dead gorgeous!

For my WIP list, check my blog: http://riverwalkyarns.blogspot.com (I never have fewer than ten at any given time).

[yella_dawg]

93. Blush.

Not linen at all. Hundred percent cotton trigger. It's a cloak, basically designed to be a medium for embroidery. The peacock is the biggest design, but not by that much. A couple of 10" x 10" designs already, and numerous 6" - 8" designs. Four feet of border 2 1/2" wide. The handmade frog closure took nearly a month to finish working an hour or two most days.

Needless to say, I've been on this project for years.

[knitter4democracy]

105. That sounds amazing.

I can't imagine stitching anything that big. It will be a work of art when it's done. Will you wear it or put a huge frame around it? ;) That's what Kaffe Fasset does for his museum shows, anyway.

I can just imagine how beautiful it will be. Wow!

[GrpCaptMandrake]

56. I'm sorry for your pain

I'm even sorrier that you think when someone starts a thread about televangelists, you think it's about you.

I draw a very bright line distinction between the people who actually try to follow yeshua and the charlatans of the Religion Industry.

Hope you get to feeling better, unless you really ARE a televangelist. :dilemma:

[knitter4democracy]

78. *giggle*

Yeah, they'd never let me near the cameras. :D

I remember the time they asked me to be part of a discussion panel for chapel (required at my college) about the election in 1996. I pissed off about, oh, three-quarters of the student body by stating that we shouldn't be one-issue voters, that abortion rights were actually important to fight for, and that the Republicans were just using us anyway. That was the last time they ever let me speak in public. *sigh*

The OP wasn't super clear that the rant was entirely directed at televangelists only, and many here at DU don't draw such a clear line as you do. Many here are quite clear that they hate all Christians and think we're all horrible stupid people, so if I was a bit defensive, please consider the environment first before judgement.

[madeline_con]

128. I know a preacher's wife who'd never heard of the Crusades

:eyes: (these eyes should be rolling)

[Toots]

2. It's their American right to practice their religion on their own property

But when they want to bring their religious propaganda onto my (community) property then they are no longer acting in the interest of America but of their church...

[FreedomAngel82]

60. Exactly

And ignore other people's freewill and religious freedoms. As a Christian since I believe in God He gave all of us freewill and with that comes choices and consequences which includes believing in Him or not. Not even Jesus came to judge people.

[ComerPerro]

107. Well, that's why they phrased it in such a way

so they could say "on our private property".

That way, they can make people feel like evil liberals are going to make it so you can't post a Nativity scene on your private property.

Of course, its not true. But this is how they cloud the issue, and rally support from the "persecuted" (at term I use very loosely to describe these jerks).

[TallahasseeGrannie]

3. 100 % false representations?

You're sure about that?

I know that the early church chose the winter dates for Christmas because it was a good match for a pre-existing celebration...

but the figures in the nativity scene really don't represent a time, per se. The characters are straight from the Bible version of the birth of Christ. You know, Mary, Joe, the kings, the animals...

She was talking about putting religious symbols on her private property. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the hypocracy in that.

Unles while she said it she was swigigng a bottle of Jack Daniels and beating her kids while she ironed her husband's KKK robe. Then I'd agree with you.

Until then, I saw we cut her a break.

[Roland99]

4. Uh, yes. The nativity scene is a complete and utter fabrication

Never happened.


Come on! Jesus was ROYALTY! You think he was born in a food trough?

[wtmusic]

7. Well put.

Tolerance. I really don't give a damn what people put on their private property, or what they believe. :thumbsup:

[Ladyhawk]

57. Hell, let 'em stuff their property full of whatever.

Why should I care?

It's when they try to expand this onto public property or my private space...that's the problem.

Let 'em believe whatever they want.

[Dorian Gray]

27. Right on, TallahasseGrannie! N/P

[GrpCaptMandrake]

62. Check those Kings

How many are represented in the traditional creche? Three, right? Nowhere in accepted scripture will you find that there were "three" kings from the East. Or "wise men," as it's often depicted. No number is given. The number of wise men is derived from the three types of gifts.

You may think it hairsplitting, but the tiniest of children are taught from the cradle onward that there were "three" wise men. Not so.

While I admire your tolerance, the point (I think) of the original post was that these people are getting all exorcised about something of which they really lack knowledge and understanding. Especially after last year's right-wing meme about how "the liberals won't let us say "Merry Christmas" anymore.

And you're right: the date was chosen to coincide with the Roman Saturnalia.

The bunny and the eggs at Easter (Ishtar/Astarte/Eostre) are even *more* bizarre.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

67. So you are saying

that those wise men got together and only bought three gifts when there could have been a whole cadre of them? Geez! Tightwads.

Well, that's the way rich folks stay rich, I guess!

LOL

[alphadog]

123. Not entirely true

I was educated in a Catholic school...actually, right through college, and we were always taught that although tradition states that there were 3 kings we don't know how many they were and they actually were not "kings" in the way we think of them today.

[Critters2]

88. It isn't historical fact,

but that doesn't mean it's not meaningful. I get SOOO tired of having to defend my faith here. I'm a progressive Christian, which means that I know that Jesus was probably born in Nazereth, not Bethlehem, in a house not a stable, etc. But I also see the importance of feeling connected to the tradition. I love nativity scenes.

Too many people insist "the bible is either all true, or none of it's true." For fundies, this means it's infallible, inerrent, etc. For people at the other end of the spectrum, it's all useless lies,etc.

I'm happy in my little, gray world, where the Bible is important, but not inerrant...spiritually relevant but not a science or history textbook. Not empirical truth, but not exactly lies. It's not the easy black and white world of the fully convinced, but I like it

B-)

[LittleClarkie]

101. Well, aside from the three wise men showing up much later

so the nativity is sorta the Reader's Digest condensed version.

But aside from that, if I had to pick between the nativity an rampant commercialism, I guess I'd pick the nativity.

[BOSSHOG]

5. I would gladly accept their religious displays on public property

after they give up their tax exempt status retroactive to the first day reagan was in office.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

6. But this issue

isn't about public property, right? Or did I miss something in the OP?

Nativity scenes have no place on public property. And if churches paid taxes, then they'd be private property!

[BOSSHOG]

8. You are correct

about the OP and my slight diversion from it. However, I believe churches are past the point of no return relative to tax exempt status. They are involving their religious beliefs in every aspect of politics, ergo they should pay taxes like you and me.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

10. You probalby have noticed

I'm a Christian because I chime in now and then..

but you know, BOSS, you have a good point about churches

I'm not sure the whole tax exampt thing is "kosher" anymore.

Do you know if "ministries" like the 700 Club pay taxes? Because they sure preach politics from the pulpit. On TV no less.




edited for pre-coffee spelling

[BOSSHOG]

13. I'm a Christian

also. I was an Altar Boy and contemplated the Priesthood 40 years ago. I stopped going to the local Catholic Church because not a sermon would go by that the Priest was bad mouthing this group or that group which had nothing whatsoever to do with why I went to Church. If a Priest/Minister wants to beat me up and show me the error of my ways, fine. But don't bad mouth others who are not present in Church to me. What I find incredibly ironic is that such forceful actions of organized religion has nothing to do with their constitutional liberties. Their sole goal is to alter the liberties of others who may or may not believe as they do; and if they want to involve themselves that way, then they should pay the piper.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

21. OT for BOSS

Boss, how are you all ever going to replace the trees you lost in Katrina? Did you live oaks all go down, or just the tall pines? How is it going? Get your winter garden in yet? I'm putting out cabbages today and sweet peas.

[BOSSHOG]

68. Thanks for asking

We have mostly Pines and lost about half of what we had. We lost one beautiful oak which was on the border between me and our neighbor. Its gone and we have a lot less shade now. We have an oblong one acre lot with the house towards the front (north) and a large wooded backyard. I may plant more pine trees on our south border. They grow fast and will provide more privacy and won't be danger to the house. We have crepe myrtle lining the driveway and only lost one of them. The remaining ones look beautiful now after the shock treatment they got. I've also let Mimosas grow wild in the back (far away from the house) and didn't lose any of them. My winter plantings so far consist of pansies, violas, dianthus and snapdragons. Nothing edible this winter. Its still pretty darn hot here and we've only gotten one good rain in more than two months. Have you ever grown the ornamental cabbages?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

70. Sure have grown

oranmental cabbage and you know what? I eat them! Not bad, actually.

Have you considered Bradford pear trees? I know a lot of folks think they are trash trees because of the shallow root system, but they are so nice in all the different seasons. Grow fast, too.

My husband and I have 8 acres we grow Virginia pines on and have sold at Xmas time. They are over grown now.

[BOSSHOG]

74. I planted a Bradford Pear

on the east side of the house under some Pine two years ago. It was a knee high sprig when I planted it and now its more than ten feet tall. Its doing very well considering it most likely gets too much shade. I've yet to figure out that shade stuff in a climate which scorchs plants in the summertime. My neighbor has two Bradford Pears in his front yard planted the same time as ours and they get a lot more sun than ours but his trees and ours are doing fine. I insist we plant nothing in the front yard; a bone of contention with my wife. We also have a gorgeous japanese magnolia in the back which is doing great. One of the pine limbs fell on it and I thought it was gone but once we removed the debris its just being a little showoff. It took quite a beating but is doing fine.

[Roland99]

80. Aristocrat Pears are more recommended here as they are hardier

and stand up to the strong spring winds better than Bradford Pears.

[jmowreader]

66. The 700 Club is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization

Check out their financials! http://www.cbn.com/about/annualReports/

[Critters2]

90. Yeah, that pisses me off

I would SOOO love to take a swipe at the Bushies from the pulpit--Christian my ass! But my congregation would be less than happy if I cost it its tax-exempt status. But Pat Robertson openly campaigns for the Repugs, and it never hits the fan.

Yep, just pisses me off! :grr:

[jmowreader]

100. You don't understand, Reverend

It's okay to campaign for Republicans from the pulpit. Most of your brand-name televangelists do.

It's not okay to campaign against them.

Elect me President and among my first acts will to direct my Commissioner of Internal Revenue to investigate Falwell, Robertson, Swaggart and Wildmon with the intent of lifting their 501(c)(3) status.

[SmokingJacket]

63. Yeah, but I don't WANT them to be involved --

if they paid taxes they'd be demanding even more influence.

Cease and desist, I say.

[Roland99]

9. My take on the ad (and I wish I could post a video or something)

is that it was an "in your face" move to put the nativity scene in public view to show that "Christians" won't back down in their faith.

The point I was making about the irony is that that "faith" they are selling is a false one. Why is the nativity scene (which is an utter fabrication) some stalwart of their faith's foundation? Shouldn't the foundation of the Christian religion be the teachings of Jesus? It *should* be. But, if they *did* follow the teachings of Jesus, they'd realize they've been the modern-day Sadducees and Pharisees all along and that's a tough pill to swallow.

I have no problem with people who profess to be Christian and follow his teachings instead of the trappings surrounding the modern-day version of Christianity.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

12. If I saw the video!

I would probably have the same unpleasant feeling about her as you did.

But I would like to explain to you what the Nativity scene means to me. First, it is a cultural icon for me, irregardless of religious belief. We have always had a creche scene in our home at Christmas. Putting it up is a big, big deal. And as a person of faith, it represents birth to me..the beginning of all life, and also of course the metaphor for the birth of Christ who came to live among us as a human. (my belief and I understand and respect that it is not your belief, but I'm trying to give you my perspective as a progressive Christian).

You repeated "utter fabrication" about the nativity scene, and your point about the date is well taken, but the characters in the scene are straight out of all the Gospels. Now, whether you believe there is historical basis for the life of Christ..I'm not a historian so I can't argue that, although I do believe many historians agree there was a historical Jesus. And I would assume he had to be born somewhere! Interestingly, the gospels are pretty much the same about the circumstances, the manger, animals, etc. Except the little shed often seen in Nativity scenes was probably one of many caves in that area. But it is hard to create a cave for a sculpural group.

You could make the same argument, I guess, about crucifixes.

Now, all that said I completely agree that many who profess to follow Christ are going down the wrong path..and not just "modern" day Christianity. There have been many skewed versions of Christianity through the ages. This is just the latest.

[Roland99]

16. Question then: Does your nativity scene show an alabaster-white

Mary and Joseph or someone representing someone born in that region?

Also, could you quote the Bible passage that states Three Wise Men (or Kings) visited Jesus in a stable? It doesn't. That's another fraudulent representation.


I'm not trying to demean your faith or personal beliefs but just want you to realize that nativity scene is a complete and utter fabrication, much like this admin's take on the intelligence leading us to war in Iraq. Exaggerations and mistruths.

[knitter4democracy]

22. You say the same of any faith's oldest symbols.

Pick any religion at least a thousand years old, and you will find many things that seem fabricated or at least a bit off. The problem lies in how the stories were passed down--by mouth and only written down much later. There were many versions, I'm sure, and everyone's version was different. The Gospel writers went with the best they had and went from there.

You're right that the Three Wise Men came later, as that's pretty clear. That's why their day is celebrated in January. They are included, however, because they are part of the story.

I guess what I'm having trouble with is how upset you are about someone's private faith. If it's on private property, what concern is it of yours? If you really think that the entire Christian faith is a lie, and you seem to, that's your private faith, and that's fine.

I can understand feeling like that woman was trying to force her faith down your throat (too freakin' many "Christians" do that for bad reasons) and being angry about it, but I can't understand attacking Christians here about it. You have been demeaning our personal beliefs in your statements and tone, and that doesn't jive with your message of needing tolerance.

[Roland99]

31. I have no problem with someone putting up a nativity scene out of...

the goodness of their heart and their faith.


BUT, to do it as instigation when prodded by some teleevangelist I'll call it for what it is.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

36. Teleevangelists SUCK

and are a subspecies. Snake oil salesmen. We agree there.

[knitter4democracy]

40. Oh, I get that. That's just stupid.

Those schmucks are evil. I wouldn't do anything those guys say. I knew too many religion majors in college.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

24. The stable issue

is a language thing. We think of stables as out buildings. In that area they were caves. But it is hard to sculpt a cave.

My personal scenes have no facial colors..the ones I make are terra cotta colored because I don't glaze them at all.

My Hummel scene, the characters are caucasian but not alabaster by any means. Just medium flesh tones.

Now, I'm not doing a search for whether or not the Bible refers to the kings in a stable. I know they were traveling. I hope they got there! Well, I guess they did because they gave gifts. But again, it was a cave.

I know you aren't demeaning my faith. This is a good dialogue.

But I gotta tell youo, Roland, the link between "the utter fabrication" of the nativity scene and this admin's take on the intelligence leading to the war...well that's just a bit over the top for me! But it made me smile. Thanks for sharing your feelings. I respect them as you respect mind.

[Roland99]

29. A cave? You refute the Gospels' account of the wise men entering

"into the house"? And, they visited a young lad, not a newborn.

You see, Jesus was actually conceived before the proper time given the rules guiding conception for those in the line of David. The "wise men" were likely members of the high priests sent to determine the legitimacy of his birth and his right, as the first male born, to continue the Davidic line.

Abiathar, the designated Gabriel at the time) granted the approval, under the consent of Zacharias (the designated Michael or High Zadok - hence, Melchizedek) for Mary to enter into confinement to save them the embarrassment of having conceived at the improper time. Remember, the original texts describe Mary as an almah, "young woman", not a virgin. Jesus was conceived prior to the First Marriage ceremony and gave birth before the Second Marriage ceremony. The wise men were the high priests of the time determing what to do about the "illegitimate" birth.

So, yes, the comparison of the nativity scene as an utter fabrication is appropros with the * admin's run-up to invade Iraq. False representation and exaggeration of facts.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

38. I guess you don't go to movies, huh?

[Roland99]

39. Quite a bit but I realize that movies are fiction; works of arts.

There are WAY too many people that don't treat the Bible as such. Sure, there's a lot of historical accuracy in the Bible but most "believers" fail to recognize the symbolism in the Bible (and it's rampant in both the Old and the New Testaments).


But, you didn't answer my question. ;)

Matthew 2:11 states:

And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him

[TallahasseeGrannie]

43. Well, I guess

we've flogged this dang horse dead, Roland! And we're at a point where we'll have to agree to disagree.

I have no problem with anything respresentational or not that people put on their front yards. I love symbols..I dream in symbols.

Oh wait..your last statement..do I disagree with the Gospels? No, I just don't care about that aspect of it. At some point he was circumcized and we don't have artwork about that! (although we do have a holy day, oddly enough) If showing the three kings there in a little house is a nice symbol, that's fine. If you want complete representational realism we're flat out of luck because we weren't there. I also have a little sculpture of Noah's ark, and I think that is myth. I don't demand my art be representational.

I personally think you are more put off by some aspect of this lady that just grossed you out and you attacked her words because it was so subtle you couldn't figure out just what the heck got to you. And I've been there, for sure.

We have more in common than you might think.

[berni_mccoy]

48. How do you know this is not something lost in translation?

Are you a bible scholar? Do you know Aramaic?

The gospels have been translated many times from Aramaic and they often times were translated in order to avoid confusing the uneducated.

And as far as what anyone requests of others, they have a right to do so. It's called free speech and freedom of religion. If people want to do 'missionary' work, they have every right to do so. You don't have to like it, listen to it or accept it. You just have to tolerate that they do it.

[Roland99]

79. What does Aramaic have to do with anything?

The original New Testament manuscripts were in Greek, not Aramaic.

But, as others have, it seems you have misinterpreted the OP. I have no problem with people displaying nativity scenes OF THEIR OWN ACCORD and because they feel it's a key part of their faith.

HOWEVER, I *DO* have a problem with people displaying it because some broadcast segment told them to do it as an "in your face" display of Christianity.

Matthew, Chapter 6, Verses 1 & 2:

Take heed that ye do not your righteousness before men, to be seen of them: else ye have no reward with your Father who is in heaven. 6:2When therefore thou doest alms, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have received their reward.

[berni_mccoy]

94. Aramaic was the original language of the Gospels

They were translated into Greek. Jesus and the disciples spoke Aramaic as their native language.

You can actually order the original Aramaic text if you want: http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0511035977

[stevietheman]

117. No, I don't have to tolerate it.

Toleration is tantamount to tacit approval. I (and I'm sure many others) think in terms of acceptance or non-acceptance. I don't accept what these people are doing, and I don't tolerate it.

But I also have no right to stop them. I will say that instead of tolerating the content of their speech, I accept they have the right to say anything they want, even if intolerable to me.

In short: What I tolerate is their free speech rights, not what they are doing or saying.

[PsychoDad]

55. Most Christians interpret that to mean....

That the Wise men, (Zoroastrian priests from Persia ?) did not arrive until after Jesus' birth in the manger, perhaps as much as 1 or 2 years later.

[knitter4democracy]

42. So . . .

You've read a book that refutes another book, believe that book instead, and then base all your opinions on that? How is that any different than what we do, just with different books?

The Gospels are pretty clear that the Three Wise Men are not Jewish or from around there. The High Priest was not involved, from the narratives that were passed down from the time or the one in St. Luke's Gospel, which seems to get much of its info straight from Mary, the Theotokos, herself.

[Roland99]

45. The Gospels mention NOTHING about THREE wise men

nor their heritage nor from where they come (other than to say "the east").

The point of my OP was that the woman in the ad is saying spread the true meaning of Christmas via a display that itself is a false representation.

[knitter4democracy]

51. The Gospel of St. Matthew does.

Chapter 2 is all about the visit of the Magi, at least through verse twelve. St. Matthew states that they were still in Bethlehem, but he doesn't say how old Jesus was by that point. Our church celebrates their coming after Christmas on January 6th, or Epiphany (also the feast day of Jesus' baptism).

You're right that we don't know much, but if they were the ones you speak of, Mary would've known them well, as tradition has it that she grew up in the Temple, and King Herod would've known them well, as they would've been high-up political leaders as well, and the account doesn't even hint at that. All we have written down is that they were from another country (v. 12) to the east (v. 1). Tradition has it that they were from very far away and of a completely different faith, but I'll have to look more into that.

I do agree that the true meaning of Christmas doesn't lie in the creche or icon of the Nativity. The true meaning of Christmas is far more complex than that. The symbol is still powerful, though, as it hints at the rest of the story. That's why Christians have always depicted the Nativity in various art forms from the beginning.

[Roland99]

82. The Gospel of Matthew says NOTHING about THREE wise men

It simply says "wise men". It does not mention their numbers.

And, the Epiphany is another erroneous date that does not fit in with the historical record of the birth of Jesus.

[knitter4democracy]

83. Not all saints days are done for accuracy.

You're right about the number, but that comes from oral tradition, as do many other parts of the faith. Frankly, the Magi aren't central to the story or anything, so having things a bit off really doesn't bother me.

Many saint days and feasts are decided by something else, not total scientific accuracy, like their birth or death dates or things like that. Often, they are decided for theological reasons. That doesn't bother me, either.

I'm Eastern Orthodox Christian, and the mystical parts of the faith are the ones most important to me. I like a church that emphasizes the mystery behind what we believe, what Jesus actually preached, and what we have learned from the saints. I know it's not a perfect faith or a perfect church, but I'm not perfect, either, so it's all good.

[Roland99]

86. My sister is Greek Orthodox

She takes very seriously the various rites and rituals and I fault her none for that as she realizes what Jesus really taught has nothing to do with the self-obsessed (self-professed) Christians "believe".

[knitter4democracy]

87. We used to be but switched to a Russian church.

The Greek Orthodox Church is beautiful, and most in the US are fairly liberal.

We are the other side of the faith, and it is actually difficult to explain our version to most evangelicals. My husband and I converted from an evangelical church, and even we have a hard time explaining. Usually, they just lump us in with Catholics and leave it with that, which is actually a bit funny.

That's cool. :)

[Roland99]

89. I understand your predicament well.

I was born and raised Catholic (including 12 years' of Catholic schooling) but am an ardent atheist now.

There's a huge, $100 million+ megachurch just a mile (as the crow flies) from my sister's house. I pass it everytime I head over to visit. Quite the juxtaposition. We've joked that even though I'm an athiest, I'm more Christian than most of those attending Six Flags Over Jesus (Southeast Christian Church).

And it's because of my sister and others that I know that understand the difference between following Jesus's teachings and claiming to be a Christian that I try to make my posts not a blanket condemnation of all Christians.

[knitter4democracy]

108. Six Flags over Jesus!

*snort* That's really funny! And yet, it's so true . . .

Those mega-churches scare me, in all honesty. They have odd worship styles (and I went to an evangelical college with require chapel, so that's saying something), and they're quite adept at using peer pressure and guilt. I believe that there are real Christians who attend those, but I think that they're snowed and following some pastor who has basically brainwashed them.

Btw, my aunt used to go to the Crystal Cathedral. I kid you not. We went with her a couple of times, and it was quite disturbing. I'd never been in a church where the pastor preached from his own feel-good book and never cracked open a Bible (never even saw one around). She's moved since, but she still watches on Sunday mornings and calls it attending church. :eyes: Very, very odd.

[CardInAustin]

115. Six Flags....

Roland,

I know all about Six Flags Over Jesus (Southeast Christian). It is absolutely ginormous. The power they wield in parts of the Louisville community is truly frightening. They distribute a their own newspaper all over town....in two languages!! Mass is measured in the thousands.

I am a native Louisvillian and just moved back from Austin less than a year ago.

[Roland99]

119. Have you seen the new building they're constructing?

I wonder what they're going to do when they need to expand again?

I can imagine them taking over the motels, restaurants, and the Garden Ridge across I-64 and building a massive walkway over the interstate.

[CardInAustin]

120. Yep

I can see them demanding that their flock ONLY do business with people and organizations that support Southeast Christian Church. Only buy groceries from the "correct" grocery....only hire people with the "correct" faith....etc Very very scary stuff.

[FreedomAngel82]

61. And also add to that

allow other scenes there as well. They want just their's which is just selfish.

[bluedawg12]

11. Why not post the beatitudes instead of idolatry and the worship

of plastic figurines?

We are a stupid, stupid, species.

The true meaning of Christmas on the front lawn?

Yup, that's about right. The depth of theology and spiritualism is defined by the placement of nativity scenes depicting a blue eyed tuetonic Mary and infant.

[Roland99]

14. Exactly.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

26. The Beatitudes ROCK

but they don't make good figural art.

On the other hand, I have personally written them out in calligraphy and put them on my walls.

[Roland99]

33. That they do. ALL would do well to live by, essentially, the Golden Rule.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

15. ROFLMAO! nt

[knitter4democracy]

17. That's a good idea.

I might do that this year.

Btw, do you know how hard it is to find creches with accurate skin tones? I've given up. Of course, we use icons in our church, so the creche is more for my kids to learn the story behind each person and all, but still! I once looked at at least a hundred of them at Bronner's in Frankenmuth, and I still didn't find anything I liked.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

19. Oh but I don't use stupid plastic figurines

our home scene, which was passed down, is by Hummel. It is lovely. And through the years I have myself made dozens of clay figures and fired them..mine are rather Mexican looking..not a lot of detail. I give them to family for Christmas.

But then again, plastic figures to those who can only afford plastic figures, are nevertheless precious to them. Heck, in Latin American they make nativity figures out of tin cans that are awesome.

And sure, why not the true meaning of Christmas on the front lawn? Any less credible than stained glass windows, icons, statues of the saints, Notre Dame... We are talking private property now, right?

Now, the "depth of theology and spiritualism" I don't know of any art representation that accomplishes that. And all races depict their god as in their image. The black churches around her depict black Jesuses and black nativity scenes, as they should.

[bluedawg12]

25. Granny- people can and always have placed ornaments

on their private property- except perhaps hate symbols like a burning cross.

I am not adressing anyone with their traditional family ornaments-

I was thinking of the idea in the the thread that people must put out nativity scenes because: "They must get the word out about the true meaning of Christmas."

True, we depict Jesus as who we tend to be. But many get that confused with who he was, a semitic man, 2,000 years ago. I do bristle at some of the really flowery depictions of Jesus with long flowing, straight brown hair, and rosy cheeks and red lipsticky- I wonder if people tend to romanticize the image and forget his words?

peace

[Dorian Gray]

34. Bluedawg....

Of course they do. They are human beings. If there's one thing that I've learned about our species, it's that none of us like to hear what we don't want to hear. So, we'll keep our ears and minds closed to any message unless it jives with the message WE want it to be. :)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

35. "The true meaning of Christmas"

I have a feeling this woman was probably very objectionable and maybe a bit dim, in order to have ticked off Roland so much.

That said, I'm okay with the words because I can use my front lawn to get out any message I want, whether it is "teach your children to worship Satan" or "Vote for Bush" or putting up Christian symbols.

This Halloween on my street there are ghosts galore! What's the big deal with a nativity scene?

Now, the depiction of Jesus throughout the ages, well there is a doctoral dissertation all in itself. We have a painting of Jesus in my church that IS rather Semetic looking but disturbing nevertheless because he looks...well, hot! Good looking! Maybe the dude with the long hair and lipstick is a bit less sexual? But remember, folk art (and to a certain extent plastic figures are folk art) is not created by the intellectuals, but by everyday people.

We're a visual species. Most of us learn by seeing first, and hearing second. So sure we forget the words and romanticize the image. If we didn't, I'd be out of a job!

[Clark2008]

54. Hee hee...

My fiance is Semetic and...well, HOT!

:hi: Granny.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

50. I like the idea of long haired Jesus.....

....mainly because the right-wing hypocrites would call him a long haired hippy and want nothing to do with him.

[Dorian Gray]

32. My Nativity Scene

given to me as a wedding gift, is crystal. So, no facial features or skin tones. I actually find the crystal scene to be quite lovely.

[jane_pippin]

28. You know, I really don't care if people want to put a nativity scene on

their property. I don't care if they put up a 6 foot plastic nativity with a light up Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Further, I don't care if the historical accuracy of the nativity isn't 100% spot on. I don't care if it's only 1% spot on. Hell, have a giant Santa figure kneeling next to it bringing Jesus a gift. I could give a shit.

I know it's a co-opted day with multiple pagan symbols but after a few hundred years I think it's safe to say we're stuck with it. I hear what you're saying but it's their right to do it.

As you've mentioned in the thread, it seemed like the video was about defending Christmas or some such nonsense. I personally find that notion of theirs ridiculous--Christmas isn't going anywhere, like it or not. Glance at any retail store right about now and surely they will see that it's alive and kicking.

Anyway. I just woke up so perhaps I'm rambling a bit, but I think when it comes to all of this religion business all sides could stand to be a little more tolerant of one another than they are.

[NoPasaran]

30. As long as they don't have loudspeakers blasting that ghastly

"Little Drummer Boy" song. I don't care what they have in their yards.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

37. LOL

Now THAT is a misrepresentation! I have a hard time believing there were British drummers there!

Did you read last year about some poor folks on a street who had to live next door to an enormous Xmas display with loudspeakers, real animals and a zillion lights? Now that would be annoying.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

44. Hey, I like the Bing Crosby/David Bowie version.....

....although the video from the Christmas special still gives me nasty thoughts about old Bing tuning up on David with his belt over his haircut.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

41. Oh come on now.......

....when you keep bashing people for advocating using their own property to put up whatever representation of their religion they choose, it gives creedance to idiots like O'Reilly and Hannity who claim "liberals hate Christmas". It's none of your business, any more than some Repug neighbor bitching if you put an "Impeach Bush" sign in the front yard.

[Roland99]

46. So, now the "reason for the season" is an "in your face" attitude?

:eyes:

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

47. It's the Santa Claus thing.....

....when they talk "reason for the season" it's code for "enough with the Santa and the elves and the Frosty the Snowman".

[sleipnir]

49. More on the Winter Solstice part. It's actually a substitute for

the birthday of Mithras, closely related to Zoroastrianism. His birthday is celebrated on the 25th of December. Mithras was the Persian Sun God who had quite a huge following back in the day. His birthday coincides with the sun coming back from the lowest point of the year. A rebirth of the sun, if you will.

The biggest force Christianity had to conquer in the ancient world was Zoroastrianism and it's associated religions. Oddly enough, the early Christians just co-oped the Zoroastrian beliefs into their own. Basically, Zoroastrianism was the Beta version of Christianity. Christianity was quite a different animal before they altered their beliefs and holidays to try to appeal to converting Zoroastrians.

[thinkingwoman]

53. "Zoroastrianism was the Beta version"

LOL...that's a great statement with a lot of truth in it!

[msongs]

52. those nativity scenes made in CHINA by...gasp... heathens and slave

labor.

what percentage of the junk peddled this year is gonna be made by chinese slave labor?

Msongs
www.msongs.com/chinamart.htm

[Cleita]

72. How do you know that? A good majority of Chinese are either

Christians or Buddhists.

Most of our Christmas traditions are pagan anyway, the Christmas tree, Yule log, bows of holly, mistletoe, exchanging gifts, etc. all predate the birth of Christ.

I just got an interesting article in my Archaeology magazine that suggests that Jesus, if he was a real person, could have been born in Bethlehem of Galilee, not Bethlehem of Judea. The Bethelehem in Galilee would have been much closer to Nazareth, so it seem the Gospel writers didn't get that detail of his birth right. It could be just a made up story (my opinion). This is something for the fundies to ponder.

http://www.archaeology.org/0511/abstracts/jesus.html

[FreedomAngel82]

58. Education is the key

This is why they don't want people to have all this education and the rightwing puts out all this propoganda. I'm a Christian but even I know that. I remember seeing some special on the History Channel about the Bible we know today and it was all Biblical Scholars and one person said how Jesus was more than likely born in April or a month around that because of all the clues that is known of activities going on at that point in time (cenuses and the sheep grazing). And of course they're all hypocrites because they a while back were trying to get Halloween out of schools. :eyes:

[GrpCaptMandrake]

64. While we're at it

might one point out that "private property" was a foreign concept to the early Church, that, in fact, they held all property in common? That they were much closer to the Native American view of property than anything the Church would later adopt? That they may have been the 1st century equivalent of "communists?"

May we?

Probably not.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

69. Did some searching..here's an interesting link

http://www.archaeology.org/online/reviews/threekings/

[GrpCaptMandrake]

71. Fascinating!

Thanks for that. And you see that, in fact, the Gospels don't give the number of the Kings or Magicians.

Ever wonder what became of the gold they brought? Would've come in handy for that flight into Egypt. Or for setting up one's own carpentry business. Might that have played a part somehow in Yeshua's response to the poor? Recall that the Buddha grew up as a rich prince, but renounced it all.

[Roland99]

81. There are problems from the get-go with that site.

It wants to perpetuate the story of *three* wise men when nothing is said in the Bible about the number of men that came to vist nor does the Bible mention their names.

They could have been Zadok priests, could have been priests coming from Qumran (which is in the east from Bethlehem), or they could have come from other countries. If they came from other lands, perhaps they'd heard of the birth of a new son of David and wanted to pay, essentially, a religious/diplomatic visit.

Here's an interesting site:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09527a.htm

[TallahasseeGrannie]

84. Well, Roland

I think it does say somewhere in the that nobody knows how many, from where or even their gender. Kind of in the middle of the text. I'm not familiar with the source so I can't vouch one way or the other.

G

[OnionPatch]

73. Well, historically accurate or not

I plan to put a nativity scene (it's silver...no skin tone) in my own yard this year....right next to my "Peace on Earth" sign. My neighbors all know we're the lone Dems of the neighborhood and my point is to show them I have no problem with something like a nativity scene on PRIVATE property. At the very least it will confuse them, heh heh.

Geez, how dense can you be to not understand this issue? Public property, funded by ALL taxpayers should not have religious symbols on them. This is the same as giving preferential treatment to one certain religion. Duh!

[GrpCaptMandrake]

77. Way too complicated for the average Bush voter, Onion n/t

[OnionPatch]

98. LOL, you're probably right

What I'm hoping is that one of them will say something stupid like, "I thought you liberals were against nativity scenes."

At the very least, they'll be confused, so it will be fun.

[upi402]

75. Yeah, they put the Arabs they love to hate on display for

their religion that is hated like never before.

If they were like the poster above there would be no problems. But the zealots take over and the pissing match is on...
"Hey, they're not like us. Kill them"

Dear god, save me from your followers!

[TallahasseeGrannie]

85. Could you explain

"they put the arabs they love to hate on display for their religion that is hated like never before"?

I'm confused.

[bobbieinok]

91. from NT...shepherds at Bethlehem(Luke), kings at Nazareth (Matthew)

nowhere in Bible does it have the 'report' that the 2 groups were present at the same time

this was a big shock to me when I started thinking for myself about this ca junior high school age

[hunter]

92. I think Jesus was born on Halloween.

Is it okay if I set up my Nativity scene then?

[LittleClarkie]

102. Knock yourself out -- but I thought I'd read the spring

myself.

Dec 25th was Mithras' holiday, and the Church was competing. Celebrate when you want to.

[triguy46]

95. Back in the good old days of the 70s, no Baptist would consider such tripe

they would have considered it Papist and idol worship. I guess that is now all behind us, and only those with the really big, like .5 scale internally lit nativity scenes you see in Wal Mart are true believers. Its the SIZE that counts, once again!!!

[Arugula Latte]

109. He who has the guadiest, biggest Thomas Kinkade display of crap wins!

n/t

[Terran]

96. Wow, you know nothing about faith or spirituality, do you?

If you did, you certainly wouldn't be calling Chritians "hypocrites" merely for displaying Nativity scenes at Christimas. Get real.

[Roland99]

99. Yet another person MISSING THE POINT

READ the OP and READ my other posts.

I am NOT bashing Christianity. It's very plain to see if one only opens their eyes.

[Terran]

104. Okay Sparky, WTF WAS your point?

You implied that any Christian who displays a Nativity scene is a hypocrite because the Nativity scene is 'false'. Hmm, let's see, hypocrites...a central image from their religion is false...and you weren't bashing Christians or Christianity? Right. So what was your "point" again? Enlighten me.

[Roland99]

111. Read my OP, post #9 and post #31...."sparky".

[Terran]

116. Question

Do you ever find yourself complaining about how materialistic Christmas is? Because if you do, then you're the hypocrite here. As your OP states,

...a woman was saying how important it was for "Christians" to display nativity scenes in their churches and ESPECIALLY on their PRIVATE property. They must get the word out about the true meaning of Christmas.

Emphasis mine. So what do you find so appalling about someone urging Christians to emphasize the true meaning of Christmas? What could possibly be wrong with that, as long as they're talking about doing it on their own private property? To me it sounds like a rejection of all the very non-Christian bullshit that goes on at Christmas (i.e., the materialism) and an embracing of the what the holiday was originally about. And yet you have your panties in a twist over this. Amazing.

You also said,

Nevermind the FACT that nativity scenes are 100% false representations and that Christmas was created to combat the pagan celebration of the winter solstice.

This is where your ignorance of spirituality is most obvious. It doesn't matter, to Christians, that the Nativity doesn't represent something that actually happened. 90% of the stories associated with Christ probably are "false" in that same way. But for Christians this is part of their mythos, it's what makes it work them , it's part of what makes their faith a real thing. So if *you* are a Christian and don't get that, then I pity you; and if you're not a Christian, then you should shut the f*ck up and stop criticizing people over incredibly niggling details of somebody else's religion. It's none of your business.

Finally,

I love the smell of irony in the morning. It smells like....hypocrisy.

Ah very clever, very witty, not. How is a Christian who wants to emphasize the 'true meaning' of Christmas a hypocrite? Regardless of whether they decided to do it on their own or whether it took someone else to remind them they maybe should do it? Does that slight failure of Christian spirit make that person a hypocrite? You must have some extremely high standards, but I suspect you yourself do not measure up to them. There's a very wise saying attributed to Jesus that you would do well to internalize: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

And by the way, I'm *not* a Christian. I just can't stand people who take such obvious relish in knocking someone else's religious practices, and especially over something as essentially benign as this.

[Roland99]

118. You just...don't....get it.

This isn't about people displaying a nativity scene out of respect for their faith and truly wanting to display the true meaning of Christmas.


Go back and read my posts and you'll understand that.

[Terran]

121. If I don't get "it"

why don't you explain to me what I'm not getting. I read your posts; I responded in detail to your OP. What don't YOU get about what I wrote? Blowing me off like that shows you have no argument.

[Roland99]

122. Seems several others have understood what I mean.

I don't feel the need to repeat myself.

[DeepModem Mom]

97. Roland99, I appreciate your quotation marks around the word "Christian"...

but then you use the word "false," and remind Christians here, who I'm sure know already, that Christmas is a celebration rooted in ancient celebrations at the same time of year. I avoid almost all religious threads that have nothing to do with politics here at DU, but this thread has been flaming all day, and I'm chiming in.

At least two active and sincere DUers have been upset by the religious threads in GD today, to the point of considering leaving DU. Call them too sensitive if you like, but is this an upside-downside situation? Is it worth it to call out the "religious" Right (who are villified, I am sure, by every Christian on this board) for non-political words, beliefs, or actions, if even a few DU Christians are offended?

I'm a very skeptical Christian, in open revolt against my relatively liberal Protestant denomination, and I am offended by the constant stream of "religious war" posts in GD. (There is, as you know, a Religion and Theology forum these posts could be posted in.) Would you post a thread here with the subject line "Gotta love that 'Jewish' ignorance"? Or, "Gotta love that 'Muslim' ignorance"? Would such a post be allowed, even with the quotation marks?

DU rules allow you to post this here, but please know that you are, I'm sure unintentionally, contributing to division here at DU.

[Roland99]

112. How many members of the Jewish or Muslim faith act like these idiots?

I'm describing the type of person that gives Christianity a bad name, a very bad name.

How many Jews try to push bans on same-sex marriage as Constitutional Amendments? How many Muslims partake in mega-church-sponsored events with Senate Majority Leaders to push for uber-conservative judges at the Federal level? How many Buddhists protest and firebomb abortion clinics?

This isn't about religion or theology. It's about egos and abuse of power.

[DeepModem Mom]

113. I think all religions have fanatics who give them a bad name --

well, maybe not Buddhism. Some might think it valuable to post "Gotta love those Jewish settlers," or "Gotta love those Muslim terrorists." But if they did, I doubt they would post it in GD, because DUers of those faiths, not hostile to Palestinians, and certainly not terrorists, might think they are being painted with a broad brush, even if that was not the posters intention.

Anyway, I don't want to be in a "religious war" with you, or anybody. I wish you, and all DUers, the best as we fight this broader war I think we're all fighting together.

Peace.

[patcox2]

124. Ya just can't escape your bigotry, stop blaming those who see it.

You are so wriggling and twisting in your efforts not to sound like a bigot. Give it up, revel in your condescending bigotry.

Blaming everyone who sees what is plain and evident, all your protestations to the contrary, is not working.

[Roland99]

125. Says yet another ignorant poster that has no clue what they're saying.

:eyes:

[really annoyed]

103. Ah, let em!

They won't wreck my holiday fun!

:party:

[Az]

106. As long as they keep it to their property

No biggie.

Me? I am putting up a statuary of Socrates addressing the Senate. Like Jesus we don't known when Socrates was born. So I celebrate his birth on Dec 25.

Happy Socraday!

[noonwitch]

110. They should display their nativity scenes on private and church property

No reasonable person objects to that, it's their right to do so.

The objections are to the displays on public property. The city I live in has two nativity displays. One is in Warren's "Old Village" and sits in the median of Mound Rd at Chicago. The other is in front of City Hall and also includes a menorah made of lights and a lighted "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" sign. It's probably not right of them to have nativity displays or the menorah, but it really doesn't bother me personally. There are much bigger issues to worry about than nativity scenes on public property.

I've always liked nativity scenes, even before I started going back to church. They are usually pretty. They're better imagery than crucifixes, that's for sure.

[RedCloud]

114. Hercules to the rescue!

Let me see. Father was Zeus. (Zeus-Deus-Dios (God in Spanish!), OMG!)
Mother Alcmene, an earth virgin, was impressed by Zeus's light show and she got impregnated immaculately! (See any connection, yet?)
Herc was from a cavern (womb of Earth symbol) and in his lifetime became The Good Shepherd (Not a carpenter posing as one!), The Prince of Peace, The Son of Man and when Zeus took his body to Mt. Olympus three days after Herc voluntarily gave up his life, a spiritual bridge to Mt. Olympus was formed, Herc was also called the Saviour. (See any coinkydinks yet?) But on another note, could put John Holmes to shame!

[Az]

126. Welcome to the R&T subforum!

:hi:

[Goldensilence]

127. yep understood Roland

my thoughts are this, this would be like me having an native american ceremony with an african american as the chief. It just doesn't quite sound right does it?

It would be like celebrating any relgious ceremony without a little more knowledge of the history and innerworkings of it.

What you do is ask questions that question a person's faith in whatever. So you're not questioning their beliefs you are questioning them and their faith that is the sense of persecution that i think many people find. Most non-christians when they ask questions aren't bashing christians i think. For the most part i think they are asking as much for themselves as the person they are asking the question. If a christain has faith in their religion they shouldn't be bothered more as they should feel the need to politely inform not preach. I also think that if they themselves even some part ofthem see something in the statement they owe it to themselves to look into it more and get an understanding of their faith and more importantly how that relates to who they are and their experience of this reality. While my thoughts and experience are typically buddhist in nature when a question comes up about what i think i try to be thoughtful and informing not preaching and seeing it as an oppurtunity to convert we all travel different paths and i respect that.

At best i think conveying a little understanding is at interest to all.