nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Filthy atheists stealing our Christmas

MrPudding

Hi all,

I thought I would get this one over with nice an early this year so we can all relax and enjoy our winter holiday.

So, blah blah blah, you don't believe in jesus so why do you celebrate CHRISTmas blah blah blah, you are such a hypocrite, blah blah blah, CHRISTmas is for CHRISTians, blah blah blah, CHRISTmas much be crap in your house 'cos you are a filthy atheist and don't believe in anything, blah blah blah.

Please chip in if I missed anything.

MrP

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hotblack Desiato

Hasn't been the best of years in fairness. Time for a wee drink.

learn_more

Interesting debate on UK radio the other day. Whether one should wish people a happy Christmas or happy holidays , as you get in the USA. Reasoning being that as in the UK and US, one doesn't know in what demographic one lies in.

One contributor, a muslim, said he was offended if he was wished a happy christmas. Think he was a shia muslim, though he didn't say.

I've abandoned xmas but partake in the holiday. I have no choice, it's a public holiday.

I'm loath to wish anyone a happy xmas when I couldn't care less about xmas myself. I'd be happy to wish ppl a happy holidays though, at the risk of being labelled a Grinch.

No one likes 'Americanisms' filtering over here but I think 'happy holidays' is one of the better ones.

Peregrinus

Meh. This particular holiday is called "Christmas". It's because of Christmas that it's a holiday at all. "Happy Holidays" always strikes me as a pained attempt Not To Mention It.

I would avoid wishing "Happy Christmas" to someone that I knew wasn't a Christian, or otherwise found the greeting upsetting or offensive. But I don't think the fact that you don't attach much significance to Christmas yourself is a reason for not extending the greeting to others, especially if you know they're Christian or otherwise welcome the greeting. When you're offering greetings, commiserations, congratulations, etc to someone else the relevant consideration as to how you frame what you say is how they feel, not how you feel.

dwayneshintzy

"Happy holidays" can include Christmas, Hannukah, New Year's and (potentially) Ramadan though.

Peregrinus

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

"Happy holidays" can include Christmas, Hannukah, New Year's and (potentially) Ramadan though.

It can, of course (though I would point out that Ramadan is not supposed to be particularly happy, even if it happens to fall at the end of December).

Much as I dislike "Happy Holidays" as sounding too much like An Attempt Not To Mention The War, I would probably use it, or some variant of it ("Have a good holiday!") for someone who I knew or thought might be bothered by "Happy Christmas!".

My main point is, though, that this would be driven by my perception of their beliefs and feelings about Christmas, not by my own. At the risk of oversimplying, whether it's appropriate for me to wish someone a happy Christmas doesn't depend at all on whether I'm a Christian; it depends on whether they are.

Second Toughest in_the Freshers

Did you see Tesco has them Chocolate Eggs for sale already...

Advbrd

Second Toughest in_the Freshers wrote: »

Did you see Tesco has them Chocolate Eggs for sale already...

Spring holiday eggs?

Advbrd

I will continue to say Happy Christmas regardless what offence is taken.
In my opinion, anyone who takes offence at this is a tosser and I gladly offend them.

CruelCoin

learn_more wrote: »

I'm loath to wish anyone a happy xmas when I couldn't care less about xmas myself. I'd be happy to wish ppl a happy holidays though, at the risk of being labelled a Grinch.

Happy Holidays is where its at.

pauldla

silverharp

I don't like Happy holidays , I grew up with happy xmas so its staying that way. In fact I avoided buying Budweiser this year because of their annoying "happy holidays" adverts

lazygal

silverharp wrote: »

I don't like Happy holidays , I grew up with happy xmas so its staying that way. In fact I avoided buying Budweiser this year because of their annoying "happy holidays" adverts

I avoided it because Budweiser is crap.

silverharp

lazygal wrote: »

I avoided it because Budweiser is crap.

that's a better reason of course , I went with Grolsch in the end

oldrnwisr

Peregrinus wrote: »

Meh. This particular holiday is called "Christmas". It's because of Christmas that it's a holiday at all. "Happy Holidays" always strikes me as a pained attempt Not To Mention It.

Well, here's the thing. The idea that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday is a bit of a deepity. It is superficially true that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday in December. However, even if Christianity hadn't been invented we would still have a public holiday in December. If, for example, we stuck to pre-Christian Celtic traditions or had adopted the pre-Christian Roman religion, we would still be celebrating a public holiday in December. In fact vestiges of these traditions are still incorporated into modern Christmas traditions. Decorating houses with holly and ivy is an ancient act of sympathetic magic designed to protect the spark of life that ancient peoples felt was disappearing from the world during winter.

Happy Holidays, on the other hand, as I've explained on this thread last year was actually a Christian invention and had little to do with political correctness or recognising other people's religions. It simply had to do with
coming up with a shorter alternate greeting to "Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year." The fact that Happy Holidays has evolved to be a secular or inclusive greeting in the meantime is no bad thing IMHO.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I would avoid wishing "Happy Christmas" to someone that I knew wasn't a Christian, or otherwise found the greeting upsetting or offensive. But I don't think the fact that you don't attach much significance to Christmas yourself is a reason for not extending the greeting to others, especially if you know they're Christian or otherwise welcome the greeting. When you're offering greetings, commiserations, congratulations, etc to someone else the relevant consideration as to how you frame what you say is how they feel, not how you feel.

I think the key here is knowing. As you say, if you know that someone is or isn't a Christian you can change your greeting appropriately. However, what about when you don't know. Sure we don't have as diverse a society as the US or UK but recognising that someone you meet on the street may not share the same religion that you do and may not be celebrating the same holiday as you is a sensible and humble idea. After all isn't humility something that Christians are supposed to strive for?

infogiver

Peregrinus wrote: »

Meh. This particular holiday is called "Christmas". It's because of Christmas that it's a holiday at all. "Happy Holidays" always strikes me as a pained attempt Not To Mention It.

I would avoid wishing "Happy Christmas" to someone that I knew wasn't a Christian, or otherwise found the greeting upsetting or offensive. But I don't think the fact that you don't attach much significance to Christmas yourself is a reason for not extending the greeting to others, especially if you know they're Christian or otherwise welcome the greeting. When you're offering greetings, commiserations, congratulations, etc to someone else the relevant consideration as to how you frame what you say is how they feel, not how you feel.

As I was leaving my office to go home on the Friday afternoon 16th December I found staff from neighbouring businesses, who happen to both be from Bangladesh, enjoying a cigarette each on our window sill, on their return from Friday prayers at the local premises that serves as their mosque. I joyfully announced to them that I was not going to be back till today, the 4th, and heartily wished them both a very very merry Christmas.
They both wished me a happy break and waved cheerily at me as I drove away.
If they want to take offence I really couldn't care less as they shouldn't care if I tut tut at their rather rambunctious Eid celebrations.
Anyone who takes offence at anyone else's friendly greeting needs to take their head out of their backside for a minute and wonder what it's all about.

Peregrinus

Most Jews, Muslims and atheists of my acquaintance are not offended at being wished "Happy Christmas!" but, if asked, many will say that they prefer something non-specific.

It's not that they find the notion of Christmas offensive; still less that they object to general goodwill and wishes for happiness. What gets to them is the assumption that celebration of Christmas, as such, is normative. It's a bit like gay people being sensitive to the assumption/presumption that everyone is straight; it's not necessarily a hostile presumption but, applied again and again, it does become burdensome to those who are subjected to it.

Absolam

learn_more wrote: »

Interesting debate on UK radio the other day. Whether one should wish people a happy Christmas or happy holidays , as you get in the USA. Reasoning being that as in the UK and US, one doesn't know in what demographic one lies in.

It's Merry Christmas or nothing. Damn modern English and sensitivity to others, anyone whose demographic is different to mine can just put up with it.
If they want to wish me Happy Hanukkah, Cool Yule, Super Solstice or anything else back I'll smile and say thanks. Good wishes are good wishes, and if you don't like 'em then damn your eyes, man.

Advbrd

Absolam wrote: »

It's Merry Christmas or nothing. Damn modern English and sensitivity to others, anyone whose demographic is different to mine can just put up with it.
If they want to wish me Happy Hanukkah, Cool Yule, Super Solstice or anything else back I'll smile and say thanks. Good wishes are good wishes, and if you don't like 'em then damn your eyes, man.

Sh!t, I am agreeing with Absolam. I think I need to take a break from boards.

MrPudding

I am an atheist, and arguably an anti-theist, and I wish people a happy Christmas. Whether one believes in it or not, the period we are referring to, in the country I am living in, is Christmas. I have no problem with people wishing me a happy Christmas, I am not a christian, but I don't take any offence from it. On the contrary, as I believe I pointed out earlier in this thread I FCUKING LOVE CHRISTMAS, so i get a nice warm feeling when someone wishes me a happy one. If a person gets annoyed by being wished a happy Christmas then I'm afraid I am going to annoy them.

As far as I am concerned, wishing someone a merry or happy Christmas is pretty much the same as saying "enjoy your holiday" to a colleague that is taking two weeks off in August, we just don't have a name for it.

MrP

Hotblack Desiato

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Well, here's the thing. The idea that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday is a bit of a deepity.

Had to follow that link...

Although he is a frequent source of deepities, the name does not come from Deepak Chopra.

:pac:

Have to agree with you MrP. For most people today saying or hearing "Happy Christmas" has little or no religious significance, it's just a cultural relic.

Peregrinus

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Well, here's the thing. The idea that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday is a bit of a deepity. It is superficially true that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday in December. However, even if Christianity hadn't been invented we would still have a public holiday in December . . .

Well, no.

In the real world, the one we live in, the reason we have a holiday on 25 December is because of the cultural influence of Christianity.

You can't credibly assert that, without Christianity, we would have a holiday at this time anyway. You can hypothesise an alternative history in which the pagan festival celebrated at this time was preserved as culture evolved in the absence of Christianity, but equally you can hypothesise an alternative history in which it wasn't. And there's nothing remotely improbable about the latter alternative; lots of other pagan festivals haven't been preserved down to our own time, and I can see no argument for saying that it was inevitable that this particular one would be.

So, the reason we have a holiday at this time is Christianity.

(I do like the concept of a "deepity", though, even though I disagree that this is an example of one.)

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

lots of other pagan festivals haven't been preserved down to our own time, and I can see no argument for saying that it was inevitable that this particular one would be.

So, the reason we have a holiday at this time is Christianity.

I bought a yule log decorated with holly and a little robin this year. We also have a Christmas tree up. So it seems then that elements of pagan (yule and possibly other) festivals have been preserved. Obviously there are also elements of Christianity around, and elements of commercial Santa culture too.

Of course there are always people around who claim its supposed to be purely a Christian festival, and "the true meaning" of Christmas has been lost. But that seems to be based on a false premise.

oldrnwisr

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, no.

In the real world, the one we live in, the reason we have a holiday on 25 December is because of the cultural influence of Christianity.

You can't credibly assert that, without Christianity, we would have a holiday at this time anyway. You can hypothesise an alternative history in which the pagan festival celebrated at this time was preserved as culture evolved in the absence of Christianity, but equally you can hypothesise an alternative history in which it wasn't. And there's nothing remotely improbable about the latter alternative; lots of other pagan festivals haven't been preserved down to our own time, and I can see no argument for saying that it was inevitable that this particular one would be.

So, the reason we have a holiday at this time is Christianity.

(I do like the concept of a "deepity", though, even though I disagree that this is an example of one.)

Well it can be credibly asserted, IMHO.

And here's why.

First off, let's answer the question of whether the winter solstice was a celebration in pre-Christian Ireland. The answer is obviously and unsurprisingly yes. Newgrange is the oldest evidence for celebration of the winter solstice anywhere.

The second question is whether or not any invading culture is likely to have had any similar festival in their own culture. The answer to this question is again overwhelmingly yes. Among the many different winter solstice celebrations which we have evidence for we have:

Anglo-Saxon - Mōdraniht
Scandinavia - Juul (Yule)
Early Roman - Saturnalia
Late Roman - Dies Natalis Solis Invicti
Hopi - Soyaluna
Chinese - Dongzhi
Iran/Tajikistan/Azerbaijan - Shab-e Chelleh/Yalda
Russia/Belarus/Romania etc. - Koliada

I could go on, but I think you get my point. The celebration of the winter solstice is universal in any culture where the solstice itself is significant (i.e. other than equatorial regions). Any culture living in this region is going to have a winter solstice celebration.

The celebration of the winter solstice is primal. It is a celebration of the victory of light over dark, good over evil. Some of the modern trappings of Christmas like Yule logs and holly and ivy are a reflection of this. They are a reminder, in some ways of what we used to believe.

The specific reason why Christmas is celebrated on the 25th December is because of the winter solstice. It goes without saying that there is no birthdate mentioned for Jesus in the Bible and the circumstantial evidence presented by Matthew (and Luke) suggests that Jesus would actually have been born sometime in June. Indeed, the matter was hotly debated by early Christian leaders with some of the proposed dates being April 19/20 and May 20. In 274CE the festival of Sol Invictus was adopted by the Roman Empire as an official feast. Sixty years later in 334 we get the first mention of Christmas being on 25 December as a move to co-opt or overwrite the existing festival.

So the first key question has been answered, that of whether we would have had a celebration at the end of December in the absence of Christianity? Yes.

The second key question is whether such a tradition would have survived if another religion/culture had invaded Ireland in the way Christianity did. The answer is again, yes. Firstly, it's likely for reasons of geography and the universality of solstice celebrations that any invading culture would have had a pre-existing solstice tradition of their own. Secondly, the dominant religious method of conquest is syncretism. Religious syncretism is the process by which religions incorporate other religions traditions and beliefs into their own when they encounter new ideas and cultures. So, for example, when you read the Bible you can see the incorporation of Hellenistic, Zoroastrian, Egyptian and Sumerian myths and beliefs into the Judeo-Christian canon. As Neil deGrasse Tyson explains here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXTme8dhT1g

"persuasion isn't always: here's the facts, you're either an idiot or you're not, it's here are the facts and here is a sensitivity to your state of mind and it's the facts plus the sensitivity when convolved together creates impact"

Religious syncretism is exactly like that. Selling your new religion if one of the things you have to sell is that everything the other culture believes is complete bollocks. It's much more effective to co-opt or incorporate their pre-existing beliefs into your religious structure.
Indeed this is what we see with Christmas with a many elements of the modern Christmas traditions being retained from pagan festivals including:

Yule log (Juul)
Holly and Ivy (Celtic)
mistletoe (Norse)

So, in summary, barring the invasion of Ireland by Somalia, Gabon, Australia or aliens, I think it's fair to say that even without Christianity we would still have a public holiday in December.

Absolam

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Well it can be credibly asserted, IMHO. And here's why. First off, let's answer the question of whether the winter solstice was a celebration in pre-Christian Ireland. The answer is obviously and unsurprisingly yes. <...> The celebration of the winter solstice is universal in any culture where the solstice itself is significant (i.e. other than equatorial regions). Any culture living in this region is going to have a winter solstice celebration. So the first key question has been answered, that of whether we would have had a celebration at the end of December in the absence of Christianity? Yes.

Well... the assertion wasn't that we could have a celebration at the end of December in the absence of Christianity. That we could needs no evidence, anything is possible after all. The assertion that without Christianity, we would have a holiday at this time anyway isn't credible because as Peregrinus pointed out, there's no reason to believe any of the other solstice festivals would have survived in the absence of Christianity. Such as does remain of them remains because of the way Christianity incorporated and spread those traditions as it's own, whether it was yule logs, gift giving, or decorated trees. The very fact that we observe anything like a solstice festival so long past the need to be aware of it is attributable to Christianity; there's nothing to show that any other religious observance would have survived so universally, and the obvious fact is they didn't.

oldrnwisr wrote: »

The second key question is whether such a tradition would have survived if another religion/culture had invaded Ireland in the way Christianity did. The answer is again, yes. <...> So, in summary, barring the invasion of Ireland by Somalia, Gabon, Australia or aliens, I think it's fair to say that even without Christianity we would still have a public holiday in December.

But you're not providing anything to support your 'yes', are you? That Christianity was a successfully syncretic religion doesn't mean any other would have been. In fact, if any other had been, then arguably Christianity wouldn't be in the position it is now. So the best you can really offer is 'maybe' and even then, it's pretty doubtful, because there's no particularly good reason for the winter solstice festival to be the most significantly observed of the solstice/equinox events. Christianity actually considers the spring equinox festival to be the most significant, Celts started their new year with the autumn equinox, and the Egyptians plumped for the summer solstice. So there's no evidence at all for the probability of the tradition surviving under any other religion (or lack of one) is there?

The best that can be said is that Christmas is the reason we have a holiday at this time of year. Christmas is certainly an accumulation of considerably more than just a celebration of the birth of Jesus, but we've no reason to think any other festival could have headlined the same compilation of events, and the fact is, none of them did.

smacl

Christianity is demonstrably syncretic in Ireland as can be seen in the many sheela na gig statues that are more often then not incorporated into churches. On some occasions, where they were later found offensive by the clergy, the stones on which they were carved were actually reversed leading to them being better preserved. They are most assuredly pagan, considered important by the locals prior to and after the arrival of Christianity, and clearly incorporated thereafter.

Peregrinus

oldrnwisr wrote: »

. . . So, in summary, barring the invasion of Ireland by Somalia, Gabon, Australia or aliens, I think it's fair to say that even without Christianity we would still have a public holiday in December.

Well, of course, we have the new year holiday. What is striking is that we have two holidays that can be regarded as, in origin, celebrations of this particular astronomical milestone. There is no other calendar/astronomical milestone for which this is the case. For most of them, we have lost the holiday which marked the milestone, not gained a second holiday.

It's fairly clear that, as history has in fact unfolded, we have the second holiday because of Christianity. Chrstianity didn't just adopt the holiday, but associated it with what is for Christians one of the central events of human history. Other calendar milestones celebrated by pagans gave us minor holidays like St. John's Eve or holidays which have long disappeared like Michaelmas, whereas Christmas has become a double holiday, a bank holiday, and a major festival with considerable social and economic signficance.

You can hypothesize that if history had unfolded differently we would inevitably have had a second holiday at this time in any event. But, frankly, you'll have your work cut out to persuade me of the inevitablity of Christmas. It did not have to be this way. It wasn't this way with other pagan holidays. Even with Christianity, it didn't have to be this way; the Christians could have picked some other time to celebrate the Incarnation, given that they had no idea what time of the year it actually occurred. Symbolically, it would work just as well as an end-of-winter holiday, or indeed as a harvest holiday, where it would neatly balance Easter (the date of which isn't random, since it depends on the Jewish Passover).

In short, there was nothing inevitable about the development of the modern Christmas. That it did in fact develop into the holiday we know is attributable to the cultural impact of Christianity but, Christianity or not, did didn't have to develop at all.

silverharp

one way or another it doesn't really matter, I think it would be safe to say that there would be one annual time where people try to get home and have a celebration, if it was dec or mar makes no odds. The pre Christian Romans apparently had a week of excess in mid to late Dec so that in itself might have been enough to imprint on a lot of Europe which then would have sucked in a lot of the winter solstice traditions.

oldrnwisr

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, of course, we have the new year holiday. What is striking is that we have two holidays that can be regarded as, in origin, celebrations of this particular astronomical milestone. There is no other calendar/astronomical milestone for which this is the case. For most of them, we have lost the holiday which marked the milestone, not gained a second holiday.

It's fairly clear that, as history has in fact unfolded, we have the second holiday because of Christianity. Chrstianity didn't just adopt the holiday, but associated it with what is for Christians one of the central events of human history. Other calendar milestones celebrated by pagans gave us minor holidays like St. John's Eve or holidays which have long disappeared like Michaelmas, whereas Christmas has become a double holiday, a bank holiday, and a major festival with considerable social and economic signficance.

Well, no. We don't. In fact, the idea of having two holidays at that time of year predates Christianity entirely. In Roman times, there was Saturnalia (later Dies Natalis Solis Invicti) a week long festival of gift-giving and merrymaking coinciding with the winter solstice. This holiday is pretty universal as explained in my last post and a similar one was celebrated in Ireland long before the advent of Christianity.
The Romans also celebrated the New Year on 1st January separately to Saturnalia and long before Christianity. Although the Roman New Year originally began in March to coincide with the vernal equinox, by at least 153 BCE, it had moved to January 1st. There is evidence to suggest that the people of Ireland had a trading relationship with the Romans at least as far back as the 1st century CE (Ptolemy's map of this period depicts coastal settlements and tribes in Ireland) and as much as 300 years before the arrival of Christianity. Indeed, the Irish word Eanair comes from the Latin Ianuarius. This could possibly indicate a link to the feast of Janus celebrated by the Romans on 1st January.

There's is good evidence to suggest that the celebration of two holidays at the end of December predates Christianity entirely and it's survival has not been because of Christianity. Indeed, almost all of the key Pagan festivals have survived into the 20th century in one form or another, in some cases, despite the arrival of Christianity. The Celtic festival of Samhain and it's belief in the breaking down of barriers between worlds survives largely intact as Halloween. Although most of the traditions of Lughnasadh died out in the 20th century, one of its more prominent traditions still exists as Reek Sunday. Similarly, although Bealtaine bonfire traditions largely died out by the 1950s, in some places like Limerick they are still carried out today. Finally, Imbolc still exists as a feast to the goddess Brigid although Christian myth has recast her as a saint.

These pagan festivals only died out in the early to mid 20th Century and survived almost 2000 years of Christian influence mostly unchanged. Similarly in cultures where Christianity has had little influence over or contact with native beliefs such as China, Iran or the Hopi, winter solstice celebrations persist to this day. Even in other cultures where there has been a Christian influence, festivals such as Koliada have survived largely unchanged into modern times.

The key points in this argument are as follows:

Long before the introduction of Christianity to Ireland people here celebrated a winter solstice festival. This is pretty much a universal feast celebrated by many cultures around the globe.
Had Christianity not arrived in Ireland it's very likely that this festival would still be celebrated unchanged in Ireland. This is because the same festival has survived in cultures where Christianity has had no impact (e.g. Yalda). It has also survived unchanged in cultures which were conquered by Christianity (e.g. Koliada).
Had another culture invaded Ireland instead of Christianity we would still expect the festival to survive because a) all the other surrounding cultures also had winter solstice festivals and b) any successful expansionist religion is inevitably syncretic (exclusivist religions don't really last very long)

In order to demonstrate your point about pagan festivals dying out, you would need to cite examples of festivals which are no longer extant, explain why they died out and explain why this is comparable to the winter solstice festival. However, you haven't cited any such examples to date.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Even with Christianity, it didn't have to be this way; the Christians could have picked some other time to celebrate the Incarnation, given that they had no idea what time of the year it actually occurred.

Well, that's not really true now is it? Christmas was born out of the desire to have Christianity become the official religion of the Empire. Since Christianity was to become the dominant religion it had to paste over the existing Sol Invictus religion. Therefore, the birth of Jesus, the central figure of Christianity is born on the same day as the Sun (Dies Natalis Solis Invicti) was in the old religion. Christmas replaced the most significant and most analogous festival of the old religion. It couldn't really have been any other way.

*My reply to Absolam's post will appear in the creationism thread.

MrPudding

In your face Turtwig.

MrP

Hotblack Desiato

Jaysus. This thread gets earlier every year :rolleyes: