Darthcrank wrote:Alright, I appologize for the "hate speech" comment.
What has become apparent to me in my time in the church and out is that discussions of this nature often are completely dependant on which view you are coming from.
Well, I'm not an athiest or anything like that...
Darthcrank wrote:In this case, folks who already have a gripe with Church politics assume that idiots in the church think that they came up with Christmas Trees and holly berries and really believe that Jesus was born on Dec. 25th.
Well let's just say that many church goers can't always be classified as the most informed, knowledgable folks on the planet. I get the idea that "lack of exposure" is sort of an ideal for a lot of church officials, otherwise the word 'secularism' might as well not be in the dictionary. Those dogmatists are the worst of the bunch, I'd say. Still, I've found that those who are able to keep their faith active and yet prevent it from becoming an unhealthy obsession often make good company, being that there's a lot of common ground there. And I'd say, if you don't make good company, how can you make a good Christian? It's not like you're going to make a lot of friends if all you like to do is bark out dogmatism and launch missles at Saddam Hussain, lol. (Sorry, hadda say it...
Darthcrank wrote:Christians recognize that the early church for some reason or another decided to celebrate at the same time other folks around them celebrated, in many ways combining customs as they celebrated separate ideals. Maybe it was a sneaky way to convert other pagans, but maybe it was only a matter of convenience.
Do you really think that this assertion is accurate? I have to wonder... Kind of seems like the perpetrators of the evolving church have been nutorious for trying to rub out any trace of the faiths of virtually every other culture that they've come into contact with, with many notable examples. Heck, even in this country, I hear they didn't take to well to the belief system of a bunch of famous witches in Salem... Look at how few venerable traces of ancient, Native American culture remain in today's America, and I think we can start to see a trend, right? It was all nothing more than 'the devil's work' to them, as I've read in the letters and newspaper articles from places like the 'Jamestown Colony'... And in the end, they always seem to be the ones who get to write all the history books, so who's to know? And if that
, at least, is a changing trend, then I'm God Damned happy to hear it.
Darthcrank wrote:At one time, the church was small and persecuted, and it would make sense for them to appear to be celebrating the same way others did, to adapt already popular holidays to suit their own purposes.
Well, that was certainly a while ago, wasn't it? In the history of Christianity, that stage is merely the blink of an eye. But it was an emperor of Rome who eventually declared Christianity to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, was it not? Christianity has been used as a tool of conquest ever since, even now, by some standards and to some people. All I can say is that I've found it best to keep that particular faith at arms reach for the most part. Heck, I even like
Christianity; I like the stories, I like the characters, I like the lessons, I like the morals. But in a historical context, it's hard to say it's been anything more than 'bad medicine' for all of humanity in general. It's actually hard to ever look back and see the good in all that's been wrought in the name of that faith; even in peoples' own, personal lives, I'm forced to make the same distinction. Christ himself was a rabble rousing fellow, though, and I do consider his to be an inspiring story. Now, if all these Christians felt the same way I do about that story, I guess there wouldn't be anything left to complain about. In any case, I'm sure that he did not intend to for all that has taken place in his name.
Darthcrank wrote:Oh, and textual criticism is so full of holes and biases it isn't even worth discussing, in my opinion. The Bible (even if you chose not to believe it) has withstood centuries of analysis and criticism because it is a unique and special book.
Darthcrank wrote:Your poll needs more options as well, as i can't answer either of those two options.
Like what? What would you like to see? You name it and it's done.