The paganism in Easter.
Well, it’s Easter again. Here we’re having a big ham covered with brown sugar and honey. Confused? We aren’t celebrating Easter, we’re celebrating ham! Easter is an odd holiday actually.We are told by Christians that it is time of the crucifixion and alleged resurrection of their God-man. The odd thing about it is that his “resurrection” floats around.
Consider how you celebrate your birthday. If you were born on February 6th then every year on that day it would be the anniversary of your birth -- your birthday. It wouldn’t take place on a different date every year. Easter is supposed to celebrate the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the God-man yet it floats around. One year he resurrected on one day and another year on another day. That is really miraculous.
The reason it floats is that Easter is not based on the anniversary of the “resurrection” of this God-man. Instead the date is set by the cycles of the Moon. Did you know that? I bet you doughnuts that 90% of Christians have no idea that this is the case. But the date of Easter is the first Sunday after the 14th day of the full moon that is on, or after, the vernal equinox.
And what about the name for the holiday? Why isn’t it called “Resurrection Day” or something like that? Why this odd word: Easter? The name Easter, which virtually all Christians now hold sacred is an old pagan goddess. It comes from the goddess Eastre or Eostre. She was the goddess of fertility. If you wondered why Easter is celebrate with eggs and rabbits then think fertility.
Celebrating the Spring equinox was common in the pagan cults of the day just as pagan celebration of the Winter solstice, around the 25th of December, was common. And these pagans celebrated with painted eggs laid by rabbits. The reality is that Easter is largely an import from the pre-Christian pagan cults. The early Puritan settlers in New England were very much opposed to Easter celebrations, as they were to Christmas, considering it nothing more than the resurrection of paganism. When these fundamentalists ruled England, during the days of Oliver Cromwell, they actually banned Easter along with that other pagan holiday, Christmas.
Labels: Easter
posted by GodlessZone at Sunday, March 23, 2008
13 Comments:
Good artice NGZ. How have you been doing so far? I have been well. I am glad that you are still writing good artices.
April 02, 2008
There is lots of evidence of God's existence, the beauty of nature, the order of life, the sheer design behind it all, and some personal experiences I have had. God exists.
August 12, 2008
Ex-Labour: That is a perfect illustration of how fallacies can be short and simple while truth far more complex. Basically you offer two arguments, one is the old design argument popular with the Religious Right. If the sheer design of nature proves a deity then the deity in quesiton has to be even more awesome and thus even more in need of a designer. You are basically stuck in a loop of infinite regression. As for your personal experiences -- such experiences can be induced merely by touching the brain in a certain way. Personal experiences are not evidence, they are merely how people interpret things. If I accepted such experiences as “proof” I would have to accept that Elvis is alive, that space aliens are anally probing Americans and that crystals really do heal.
August 13, 2008
Man. You are very stubborn. Why not go to church, try it out? Choose a church where the Holy Spirit is allowed to move, heal and touch people. See lives transformed in front of your very eyes. Easter is a time to remember when Christ died to save YOU from YOUR sins. Therefore it does not need a fixed date. I assume your in the US. Did you not hear about the Revival in Lakeland? People raised from the dead and loads of people healed. There is plenty of places where God is at work. Don't go and hide your head in the sand, explore Christianity, from a variety of different churches. Do not form an opinion from what you read on the web and hear on the news.
January 30, 2009
Man, you aren't too bright. Why do you assume that I didn't attend such a church? People say Scientology changed their lives. Does that prove Scientology is right to you? People say recommitting to Allah changed their life.
You claim people were raised from the dead in some bogus revival. Who? Can you provide names? Was it after they were embalmed (which would be really impressive). Give me one verified case of someone being raised from the dead, where we have confirmation that they were actually dead and then raised. I won't hold my breath because I found that people like you tend to believe fantasies because they confirm what you think and you don't investigate such claims lest they ruing the buzz you get from fake stories.
I will keep the comments open so that you can post documentation of such a resurrection but I bet you won't do it.
January 30, 2009
I assume you don't attend such a church because if you did you would want Christ to completely consume you from the inside out. Therefore there would be no need for a NO GOD ZONE and you would not need to critique Christianity.
I didn't expect you to think what I was saying is right, hence why I suggested you seek it for yourself.
I will be honest, I found it quite a shock and was quite sceptical when I saw this kind of stuff for the first time. I now see this more and more in my church.
I do not know if this is the kind of proof you were after, if not I will find some stuff for you.
Good job I do not bet, cause you would have just lost it if I did:
http://ruahflames.org/2008/05/30/woman-raised-from-the-dead-todd-bentley-revival
January 30, 2009
Thank for proving the intentional blindness of the faith driven. Christ is dead, he is no one but some man that some people claim is god, no evidence for that either. And any heavily believed doctrine can change lives.
You did not win a bet but you proved my point that you are intentionally blind. The very article you point to, from a lunatic Christian site with no credibility, says that they heard that a woman in Kenya had been raised from the dead but have had NO SUCCESS at getting confirmation.
We can follow a link to a case where they say they have names, etc. That woman was revived by paramedics but was stop and go during medical procedures. The family decided to take away life support but she didn't die. So she was revived by paramedics, got medical care and didn't die when life support was removed. That is not uncommon and it's called medicine. She was not resurrected from the dead.
So far there is no evidence that you've offered.
What we do have is that Christians then lie about what happened and exaggerate it. So because her heart had stopped some moron farther down comments and calls her "brain dead" which is a very different thing. So far no proof. I'm still waiting. Can't you do better than that.
We need a documented case of someone who is clearly dead raised from the dead by prayer. Not someone in dire medical condition, worked on by paramedics who lives. And not some unknown person is some unnamed part of Kenya either. This is the typical hearsay stories that Christians stupidly latch onto in desperation. Can't jesus do better than that?
January 30, 2009
Well I am sorry to disappoint you.
I am only showing you my view of it. You can either leave it or take and pursue it. You want hard facts, which I understand. Its not the hardest concept to understand but I guess you want at least a little bit of evidence before you can accept this wacky stuff.
God gave Free Will, he wont force you to accept him. But I am praying for you whether you like it or not. I am praying God will open doors, soften your heart. The evidence you want your gonna have to pursue , IE. Going to church, etc. God will not force you to accept him, even though He sent His only son to die for you.
Christianity is bigger than you think. There are more than 'some' people claiming him to be God. Its growing too.
As for the evidence of the raising of the dead, the video I sent was not the best, but it was good enough for me to believe. I cannot find any evidence which is unfortunate because hey you may have just accepted that. Sorry.
If you want to fire something back at me then thats cool. But I probably wont answer it, because I do not want to give you an excuse to have a go at me for forcing it into you.
It was nice Chatting, Sorry I cannot assist you further.
January 31, 2009
No NIck. You aren't showing your view of things, which is meaningless. You made a factual claim which is quite different. And when you do that you need what you call "a little bit of evidence". Actually when you make a very big claim, such as people be resurrected from the dead, you need some pretty good evidence.
You can try to avoid the truth if you want but you have NO EVIDENCE to back up a claim that you made. You are now evading the claim you made and tyring to talk about things which can't be factually supported: the supernatural. But resurrections would take place in the natural world and are something for which there should be evidence.
You bragged you had the evidence. You went so far as to claim that if you had bet on it you would be walking away with my money. And now, where the rubber hits the road, you call your false claim "my view of it"" and then beat a hasty retreat making it clear that you have no intention of backing up your claim.
You even claimed that the resurrections are happening in your church. You said you were skeptical at first when you first "saw this kind of stuff for the first time. I now see this more and more in my church." Asked for some evidence you gave two cases: one of an unnamed women in a unnamed town somewhere in Kenya and the other of a woman who heart stopped beating and was restarted by paramedics -- not raised from the dead.
So from personally witnessing such things and seeing them "more and more" you ended up with nothing you saw: one which there is no evidence it happened and a second where it is far removed from the claim you made.
Now if you are making claims about facts (these would be facts) and you have no evidence for the facts then that is normally called lying.
January 31, 2009
Are you really using the English word "Easter" to prove the holiday is pagan? The word wasn't even used until almost 800 years after Christ. And that is just the English word. The Latin word is, Pascua.
As for when Easter is, for over 300 years Christ's resurrection was celebrated on different days all over the world. So in 325 the Council of Nicaea decided to use a formula that would place the holiday in line with Passover. We know that is when Christ was sacrificed.
The bunny and eggs argument you bring up is a moot point since Christians don't celebrate any of it. Bunnies and eggs are secular not religious.
The goddess you mention is also known as the goddess of Spring - a rebirth. This might explain why ENGLISH has the word "Easter."
As for proving Christ's resurrection? It happened about 2000 years ago so giving proof to someone who is obviously so blind as yourself probably is impossible. But I give you 3 facts to ponder:
1. All of Christ's disciples ran and hid when he was captured and crucified. They even denied knowing him. Yet just a few years later they were all willing to die for him. One was flayed, one was thrown into hot oil, etc.
What changed from the time He was crucified and they were too scared to stand-up with Him to the time when they were willing to die a horrible death?
Christ's resurrection, that's what.
2. The first few Popes all became martyrs too. As did many early Christians. What would make anyone accept being Pope when it meant certain death? What would make anyone continue to join a religion when it would mean death?
Christ's resurrection.
3. The Shroud of Turin. What is it? Scientists have no idea what made the likeness of Christ on that cloth. And historical documents show that it's been around since Christ died.
Many have tried to prove it is fake. Yet have failed. Maybe it's real,maybe it isn't. But it just might be the proof you so desire.
For 2000 years people have tried to knock down Christ and His Holy Catholic Church, yet it's never been done. Why? Because the Church and Christianity is truth.
You too shall fail in your attempts and you will eventually die. You will leave this Earth, but the Church and Christ will live forever.
You obviously feel much guilt and unhappiness. Why else would you waste your time spreading lies and half-truths to prove something you will never be able to prove?
Do not blame God or religious people for your problems. Instead, turn to God and you will then know true happiness.
God bless...
April 09, 2009
Chai: This is the second time where you take a comment and go off in some completely different direction pretending you have addressed the comment when all you have done is rant on something entirely different. In addition, chunks of that rant were on totally different topics not discussed here.
If the day changes every year then it is not a celebration of the anniversary of anything. You say the Council of Nicea placed Easter in line with Passover. Unless Wikipedia is very, very, very wrong they say just the opposite in their history of the Council of Nicea, which has a section on “Separation of Easter computation from Jewish calendar.” Your claim is the complete opposite of what happened and actually prove my point that the date is not the anniversary of the death of Jesus at all. In addition they only said the date must be uniform around the world (how arrogant) and independent of the Jewish calendar but beyond that they set no date at all, as you claim.
I mentioned the rabbit and eggs because they came from the pagan origins of Easter – the celebration of fertility. That they are still associated with the holiday indicates the original pagan origins of the holday which Christians rebaptized and pretended had something to do with Jesus.
You state three “facts” on the alleged resurrection. Do these “facts” come from an unbiased, reliable, contemporary account? NO! You are obviously a Catholic otherwise I can’ t see why you would pretend that the “first Popes” were martyred. The first Popes came late in the church history only the Catholic fake history to pretend there were earlier Popes with any indication that the church had the hierarchy that Catholics love. As for the idea that martydom proves the faith is real, I will note people were martyred trying to create a Nazi state, a communist state and virtually every false movement in the history of the world.
Martydom only indicates that a person was killed, usually due to their beliefs. People of all beliefs have been killed over the centuries. That doesn’t prove the validity of the belief only the intensity of the belief held by the dying person. Apparently the Confederacy was divine since hundreds of thousands of men went into the Civil War willing to die for it.
You completely lie about the Shroud of Turin. No documents exist which prove it exists since the time of Christ and numerous scientists have shown means to get exactly that sort of image using the technology of the day.
Keep your childish psychologizing to your self Dr Freud. No, I don’t feel guilt and unhappiness. Why do Christians have to slander everyone they disagree with by making such absurd claims?
April 09, 2009
Thank you for the insults. It proves I am right.
I could completely rip apart your "rebuttal" but I won't waste my time.
The fact that you stoop to insult me proves I am right and I have angered you.
Any unbiased person who reads what you wrote and then reads what I wrote can plainly see I refute everything you say. Sadly, all you have is more lies and insults.
You fail to back-up any of your claims. Your only reference is Wikipedia. This is too funny! Wikipedia is not an accepted source.
But it is sad that you know so little about what you write about that you have to turn to Wikipedia in order to try to keep up with me.
There are none so blind, my friend.
But take heart. I will pray for the Holy Spirit to enlighten you.
God bless...
April 09, 2009
When some twists what is said each time that is moronic. I've run into the "I can prove your wrong but won't bother" argument constantly from the religiously deluded. It is common, so feel right at home. You complain that I only mentioned Wikipedia as a source when you offered NO SOURCES AT ALL for your claims. One source, no matter if considered unreliable, trumps zero sources.
Pray all you want. At least when your talking to yourself you aren't annoying others.
April 09, 2009
Post a Comment
<< Home