To wonder why people who appear to dislike religion enjoy Christian celebrations

(509 Posts)
Cupcake1985 Sun 03-Nov-13 11:08:57

I know that most people enjoy Christmas, Easter etc with no regard for the actual Christian basis and meaning of the celebration, but aibu to think that those people should then not get all offended by the religious aspects and sometimes be downright rude about it?? The nativity play, spreading the word of god through carol singing etc..... Dare I mention operation Christmas child?! If you enjoy Christmas then at least try to accept it is actually about the birth of Christ or at least respect that others will celebrate this fact and may try to share that with those around them with the best intentions.

Basically cheer up, be accepting, be kind.

As for Adam, yes of course the life/death/resurrection of Jesus still make sense even if Adam and Eve are metaphorical. The "fall" represents where human beings have chosen not to live in a way that would honour a God of love/kindness. If you don't take it literally it just means you're not a fundamentalist.

Christians have been saying "oh but it's metaphorical" for so long it must sound reasonable to their ears. This sorry excuse for an explanation would have got me burned at the stake for the first 16 centuries or so if I had put it forward. Can you imagine it? "he said Adam & Eve didn't exist! kill the unbeliever!"

And of course there are thousands or millions of christians today who will say you must be sent by the devil to even suggest it. Are you sure they are not right?
smile

I see that the Catholic Cardinal George Pell shocked people when he said Adam & Eve were a myth and that was only in 2012 so this belief in the truth of the bible can't be completely dismissed as fundamentalist. I imagine if I checked I'd only have to go back about 4 popes to find one that said Adam & Eve were real and they should know after all.

This rewritten version makes even less sense than the original. If The Fall depends on the behaviour of everyone - including those not born yet - then the fall hasn't happened yet. The whole point was that it was something that happened back then. And what will god do if even one person chooses to live in a way that would honour a God of love/kindness? They would not then have fallen so the rules wouldn't allow for them existing.

So it's not just the one little story in the OT you have to fix to make it make sense. References to the crucifixion and the reason for it are are all over the place. It would be easier to start again with a new bible, a new name and a new religion.

oh and "a God of love/kindness"? which one would that be? Apollo?

ivykaty44 Tue 12-Nov-13 18:08:00

We have a midwinter celebration around the 25-1 jan each year, this depends on how long we get off work. We have present swapping, cake making dinner on the 24th December a large lunch on 25th and a lot of games then seeing family and friends. We have a annual visit to a duck race (not real ducks but yellow plastic ducks) and a few other traditions - holly and ivy on the table and candles, lights around the house and outside to brighten up December.

friday16 Tue 12-Nov-13 17:58:58

Yes death and rebirth appear in mythical stories but Jesus was a historical figure who had no need to derive his story from anywhere.

But his later followers did need to match the existing muths. Unless you're seriously claiming that the resurrection is an historical fact, as opposed to a myth or allegory, in which case we're outside the world of factual debate.

Coupon Tue 12-Nov-13 17:48:51

Yes death and rebirth appear in mythical stories but Jesus was a historical figure who had no need to derive his story from anywhere. Having similarities doesn't make things the same.

As for Adam, yes of course the life/death/resurrection of Jesus still make sense even if Adam and Eve are metaphorical. The "fall" represents where human beings have chosen not to live in a way that would honour a God of love/kindness. If you don't take it literally it just means you're not a fundamentalist.

Beastofburden Mon 11-Nov-13 08:03:54

A true non believer, any. Can I tempt you with smoked salmon perhaps? Are you more of the savoury persuasion?

AnyBagsofOxfordFuckers Sun 10-Nov-13 22:09:54

I hate mince pies AND marrons glacés. I am a lone wolf in the wilderness, AWWOOOOOOOO!

octopusinastringbag Sun 10-Nov-13 21:37:56

Holo, yes I remember it. I also recall seeing a vicar for the purposes of confession, RC style as there is a thing for it in the C of E book of rites - I can't remember what it is called now, sorry. I used to be C of E in the dim past.

VikingLady Sun 10-Nov-13 19:51:22

I will try them. I like chestnuts. Preferably roasted on an open fire, with Jack Frost nipping at my toes.

Jack Frost? You pagan!

HolofernesesHead Sun 10-Nov-13 12:20:24

Octopus - we Anglicans confess our sins every time we celebrate communion. It's quite early on in the service. Personal confession, the sacrament of reconciliation is there in the Anglican tradition and is actually making a bit of a comeback as people recognise its value. The classic Anglican attitude towards personal confession is this: all may, none must, some should.

HolofernesesHead Sun 10-Nov-13 12:17:54

Re. Adam: of course it still makes sense if you take Adam as a representative figure. In fact that makes it clearer that Jesus redeems the sins of all people, represented in the figure of Adam. And yes, those sins include adultery; I don't know any Christian who'd disagree with that, however liberal they are. As for Charles, well, that's a whole other question to do with the relationship between the church and state, and whether the monarch us expected to be a spiritual leader of the church as well as supreme governor. The Queen, I think, is a true spiritual leader - but monarchs before her not so much.

octopusinastringbag Sun 10-Nov-13 11:08:29

friday the world is full of hypocrites...some of whom are Christian. The rest of us are free to be hypocrite without having to worry about the troublesome religious bit....grin
Charles should not, IMO, be the head of the church of England in the future but if every Christian who had committed a sin was not allowed to have a role in the church then the pews would be deserted. They have to bend the rules in order to keep going, then they can ask for forgiveness. I believe that the C of E does have a confession and penitence rite in there but it is not used very much.

HettiePetal Sun 10-Nov-13 10:36:53

So without Adam you lose the entire point of Christianity

Totally. Without Original Sin (or anything like that) the "great sacrifice" on the cross becomes completely pointless (if there even was a point to begin with).

Marrons glacés are candied sweet chestnuts Oh. blush

I will try them. I like chestnuts. Preferably roasted on an open fire, with Jack Frost nipping at my toes.

Cain and his wife, surely that's only a problem if you take the opening chapters of Genesis as literal historical record?

That is true and Christianity has retreated to the point where many Christians now say that people evolved after god created the world and that there was no Adam or Eve.

BUT... therein lies a problem because the whole point of Jesus being born and dying (according to Christians) is to make up for Adam's actions in Eden.

So without Adam you lose the entire point of Christianity.

Beastofburden Sun 10-Nov-13 10:18:26

Agree with Friday. People who are not gay but who might want to commit adultery to seem to keep their options rather open on this one.

Hettie, no, that's glacé cherries, you splitter. Marrons glacés are candied sweet chestnuts. Try one, you would love it <extends evangelising smile>

HettiePetal Sun 10-Nov-13 10:00:03

I am so uncultured, I have no idea what a Marron Glace is. Aren't they just cherries that you buy in a tub to put in a fruit cake?

I am launching the Mince Pie reformation. Back to basics. Oxford & her fellow heretics are not welcome. So there.

friday16 Sun 10-Nov-13 09:58:37

Christians who commit straightforward banned sins such as adultery.

Such as, for example, the future supreme head of the CofE. Oddly, Charles's adultery (and particularly shitty adultery, too, as his and Camilla Shand's affair persisted through the entirety of both their previous marriages) doesn't appear to trouble Christians at all: I've never heard it so much as mentioned. You'd have thought that given their willingness to shun gays for adultery, no bishop would be willing to attend the coronation when it happens. Why is Justin Welby, who thinks that gays dishonour marriage in the manner of wife-beating, not telling his current boss, the Queen, that he is not willing to work with her son because of his repeated, consistent and ongoing dishonouring of marriage? Because, like all Christians, he's very selective in his adherence to the rules their imaginary friend supposedly gave him. Condemning adultery: not my thing. Equating same-sex marriage with wife-beating: come right on in.

My betting is that come Charlies' coronation, Westminster Abbey will be full to the gunwales with "Christians", whose enthusiasm for making loud statements about sexual sin has a great big blind spot when it comes to adultery. Adultery is condemned at length in the Bible, but Christians don't care; homosexuality gets barely a look in, and they froth at the mouth about it. That's because their hatred of gays isn't about religion, it's about being bigots.

Beastofburden Sun 10-Nov-13 09:48:44

It's a funny thing about the range of views of evenagelicals and also the difference between what they believe in church and how they behave at work, say.

It's easy to say that this disconnect is hypocrisy, especially if we leave the example of homophobia and look at other forms of divergence such as Christians who commit straightforward banned sins such as adultery.

Actually I think it can be more about a ritual behaviour that is only valid in church. I am sure that their core beliefs remain with them all week. But the ultra conservative stuff is sort of a brand, a ritual face for Sundays. It places you in a certain group. You don't have to then do it all week.

Beastofburden Sun 10-Nov-13 09:43:43

Marron, even. These iPads have no class.

But they have been infiltrated by the American right. Mine keeps trying to give god a capital letter....

Beastofburden Sun 10-Nov-13 09:42:23

Welcome to the Marion glacé sect. Those from respectable mince pie sects are welcome here. Those who prefer puff pastry <boak> will be raisined. Like stoning, but softer.

HolofernesesHead Sun 10-Nov-13 08:36:54

smile Azz.

azzbiscuit Sun 10-Nov-13 08:25:26

I hope people realize that attempting to argue with religious people using fact and reason is futile, since the definition of religion is to abandon fact and reason and embrace pure wibble.

octopusinastringbag Sun 10-Nov-13 07:35:16

I am not in favour of religion at all, at least not personally. It's just not for me and I have fairly negative views of it for myself.

That said, I respect it as something special for a lot of people and I support it so am happy to mark the Christian celebrations and accept the historical accounts of Jesus.

Both my children went to a church school and decided to do their first communion and believed for a while, I was happy for them that they had that and took them to church but I was not in favour of it. We went until my youngest decided that he no longer believed and didn't want to go any more so I went to church for about 20 years.

HolofernesesHead Sun 10-Nov-13 07:31:56

Although tbf, I do know lots of people who identify as evangelicals and they're a very mixed bag - some are fine with women doing whatever men do, evolution, homosexuality etc. There is definitely a conservative to liberal spectrum within evangelicalism, and also, evangelical church leaders tend to me much more conservative than those in the pews, so someone who attends a conservative church is likely to be more liberal than their churchmanship would suggest.

And evangelical women tend to be more liberal than men, although obviously that's a generalisation. Sociologically, it's acreally interesting picture; certainly not something that can be adequately described in a few words!

HolofernesesHead Sun 10-Nov-13 07:26:07

Yes, I know that for some people, reading Genesis 1 as an alternative to evolution is an article of faith. I live in a nice little liberal Christian bubble, and from time to time I am genuinely shocked at stuff that Christians who aren't in that nice little bubble say.

friday16 Sun 10-Nov-13 07:18:50

surely that's only a problem if you take the opening chapters of Genesis as literal historical record?

Which of course many Christians do. Young Earth Creationism and Biblical Literalism may be the stuff of fringe nutcasery in terms of the population at large, but they're not fringe nutters amongst Christians. You can be pretty certain that your local Evangelicals, if they have any time spare from railing against homosexuality and women getting educations, will spend a bit of time railing against evolution.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now