What to do if your child wants to celebrate "the holidays"?

iguana

iguana wrote: »

Are all you people vegetarians? Easter is about the ROAST LAMB! It's the best meal of the year. And then later you get roast lamb sandwiches.:)

Easter is about chocolate eggs :D


I'll eat lamb I think but I wouldn't get excited about the poor little baa lambs...

iguana

bluewolf wrote: »

Easter is about chocolate eggs :D

Meh! I have chocolate every day. My husband only cooks his 4 mushroom soup, mint and rosemary rubbed lamb, with gravy from scratch, goose-fat roast potatoes, balsamic roast vegetables and minty peas once a year.

seamus

iguana wrote: »

Are all you people vegetarians? Easter is about the ROAST LAMB! It's the best meal of the year. And then later you get roast lamb sandwiches.:)

I'm vegetarian, and so's my wife!

(Never thought I'd find an appropriate use for that reference).

Easter is about chocolate eggs. And drink.

Dades

Not to mention Good Friday party at home niiite!

Slugs

Quick question for parents here that celebrate christmas (the event, not the the birth of christ)...

How many of you do the Santa Claus thing with your kids?

If you do and you're a proclaimed athiest/agnostic, and have made an attempt to raise your child the same, do you not think it's incredibly sick and hypocritical to tell them there is no sky wizard, but there is a man in the north pole who'll give you presents if you're good all year... o.O

Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees the sick and hypocritical side of this.

As I always love to say,

Santa is God for kids
God is Santa for adults

Dades

Slugs wrote: »

do you not think it's incredibly sick and hypocritical to tell them there is no sky wizard, but there is a man in the north pole who'll give you presents if you're good all year... o.O

Santa is an invention for kids, like Barney or Iggle Piggle, or the Tooth Fairy. Kids love Christmas because of Santa - and parents of kids love Christmas because they see the joy of their kids.

While on the most basic level Santa and God share a lot of similarities - Santa doesn't have much to say about worshiping him, hell, confession, original sin, homosexuality, (in)equality, contraception etc.

So no, the only mistake is to deny kids all imagination because the imagined adult entities leave a lot to be desired.

Slugs

While it doesn't have some of the other characteristics such as sin, confession, etc. The premise is still the same. A figure of authority who can reward you for abiding to his moral code, or punish you for doing otherwise.

I don't see what imagination is involved in the Santa Claus idea. The child doesn't create Santa. The parents do. They introduce the child to the idea of a man who lives in a magical world and once a year, this man comes to give them gifts dependant on the child's behaviour. Now I know the child's imagination is powerful, but I doubt they went that far to create this. The parents created this idea and essentially lie to their child just like they do with the tooth fairy, and not only do the parents lie to them, but the entire society lies to them. And not just once, on multiple occasions. How many times did you question your parents about Santa? How many times did they point blank lie to your face about it? And remember the person who tried to tell you otherwise, that santa didn't exist, remember how they were told to be quiet, and stop ruining the lie. Reminiscent of something...

And remember when you found out the truth. I know I personally didn't get that upset about it, but I know plenty of people who did. For many people that was the same feeling they got when their view of a deity was contested.

robindch

iguana wrote: »

Easter is about the ROAST LAMB! It's the best meal of the year. And then later you get roast lamb sandwiches.:)

At least in christianity, the paschal lamb only rises once, three days after death.

Chez robindch's extended family, I've seen the bloody stuff show up at every meal for a week.

nozzferrahhtoo

iguana wrote: »

Are all you people vegetarians? Easter is about the ROAST LAMB! It's the best meal of the year. And then later you get roast lamb sandwiches.:)

Actually I make something of a point of eating Rabbit at easter

pH

Slugs wrote: »

If you do and you're a proclaimed athiest/agnostic, and have made an attempt to raise your child the same, do you not think it's incredibly sick and hypocritical to tell them there is no sky wizard, but there is a man in the north pole who'll give you presents if you're good all year... o.O

No, make believe and pretend are a natural, integral and wonderful part of a child's life and fun. Much of modern Santa seem to be all carrot and no stick, I'd hazard a guess that most kids today haven't even heard of getting coal from Santa if they're bold.

You're whole premise is bizarre, just because you as a parent don't believe in God, and on the basis of that you don't indoctrinate your child into a religion, you're now "incredibly sick and hypocritical" to play make believe games with them?

Slugs

Make believe games? o.O A little perspective here...

Covering your sitting room with pillows, cushions and blankets and pretending you're in a castle adventuring for a day is a make believe game to me. But a lie that's kept up for on average 10 - 12 years with society helping to perpetuate it... That's a make believe game?

Much of modern Santa seem to be all carrot and no stick, I'd hazard a guess that most kids today haven't even heard of getting coal from Santa if they're bold.

Of course they do. I know parents who do it and I can't count how many times last year I was in a shopping centre watching as a stressed out parent calmed their child down by telling them "if you don't stop being bold, santa won't bring you presents."

Slugs

Slugs wrote: »

And remember when you found out the truth. I know I personally didn't get that upset about it, but I know plenty of people who did. For many people that was the same feeling they got when their view of a deity was contested.

I know I was young enough, but I don't remember when I found out tbh. I don't remember anyone actually telling me or being disappointed I do remember a believing state and a not-believing state but not the transition

I used to think it was a bit hypocritical as well, but considering there's all the tv shows and all the little imaginary lands and things I used to dream of, I think it's just one more of those. As long as it doesn't carry on to too old.

Dades

Slugs wrote: »

I don't see what imagination is involved in the Santa Claus idea. The child doesn't create Santa. The parents do.

On that basis perhaps we should avoid hand puppets, or talking teddy bears, or the Man in the Moon or any other sick lies we invent and fill our children's heads with?

Slugs wrote: »

And remember when you found out the truth. I know I personally didn't get that upset about it, but I know plenty of people who did. For many people that was the same feeling they got when their view of a deity was contested.

Well I suspect most kids discover it themselves, and most keep quiet about it too to remain on the gravy train. If some kids get upset it's not for long - and they'll at least have learned a life-lesson in critical thinking.

I've yet to hear of a child who developed long-term trust issues on discovering the truth about Santa, or indeed come across a forum for such disenfranchised children.

nozzferrahhtoo

Dades wrote: »

On that basis perhaps we should avoid hand puppets, or talking teddy bears, or the Man in the Moon or any other sick lies we invent and fill our children's heads with?

Wholly agreed. The only real difference however which I think Slugs should concentrate more on, is that we normally do not tell them puppets, talking teddys, men on the moon etc actually are real, let alone have the power to affect their lives in very real ways dependent on their own actions... With Santa we do.

Dades wrote: »

and they'll at least have learned a life-lesson in critical thinking.

I was just thinking of something before you posted this which was along these lines and I was not going to post it until you created the opening. Thought Experiment:

Often, as was mentioned in a few posts above, we tell the children to be good or the Santa Entity will not bring them gifts. In this way the outcome of their being good gets attached in their minds to the actions of an unseen power with the ability to affect their happiness.

Now look at out A&A forum. We periodically get topics on the subject, or derailed to the subject, of being good without god and how atheists can not be moral etc etc.

Is it possible that the theist fixation on this fallacy is partly, or even significantly, affected by our willingness to instill that way of thinking in kids from a young age. Maybe instead of a lesson in critical thinking as you put it, we are actually instilling in them the idea that morality is connected with pleasing an unseen judgmental entity and upon losing the concept of Santa Claus a void is created which the churches are only too happy to step in and utilize.

Gambler

liamw wrote: »

I think you're overreacting. I'm atheist but I would definitely do the whole Santa Claus thing with my kids. Some of my fondest childhood memories and excitement came from the notion of Santa bringing presents.

See I never had that growing up so for me I don't see it as a big deal at all. I also had some jewish friends growing up who didn't have Santa either and they never missed it either.. So for me I find it harder to see reasons why we should do it..

Dades

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Wholly agreed. The only real difference however which I think Slugs should concentrate more on, is that we normally do not tell them puppets, talking teddys, men on the moon etc actually are real, let alone have the power to affect their lives in very real ways dependent on their own actions... With Santa we do.

Anyone with kids will tell you that inanimate objects regularly "talk" and form very real parts of childrens lives. Let little kids be kids, I say, they'll have enough problems in real life when they're older - as we've all seen this week. I don't understand why anyone would want to remove such harmless joys.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Is it possible that the theist fixation on this fallacy is partly, or even significantly, affected by our willingness to instill that way of thinking in kids from a young age. Maybe instead of a lesson in critical thinking as you put it, we are actually instilling in them the idea that morality is connected with pleasing an unseen judgmental entity and upon losing the concept of Santa Claus a void is created which the churches are only too happy to step in and utilize.

It's a theory - though not one I'd jump at, tbh.

I don't believe that removing Santa from the equation is going to alter the reality that adults can't face their own mortality, or that life sucks and having someone in the sky helps people.

Rev Hellfire

I wonder how many of of those opposed to Santa and Christmas actually have kids.

mikhail

I found this interesting.

Santa Claus, my secular friends, is the greatest gift a rational worldview ever had. Our culture has constructed a silly and temporary myth parallel to its silly and permanent one. They share a striking number of characteristics, yet the one is cast aside halfway through childhood. And a good thing, too: A middle-aged father looking mournfully up the chimbly along with his sobbing children on yet another giftless Christmas morning would be a sure candidate for a very soft room. This culturally pervasive myth is meant to be figured out, designed with an expiration date, after which consumption is universally frowned upon.

By allowing our children to participate in the Santa myth and find their own way out of it through skeptical inquiry, we give them a priceless opportunity to see a mass cultural illusion first from the inside, then from the outside. A very casual line of post-Santa questioning can lead kids to recognize how completely we all can snow ourselves if the enticements are attractive enough. Such a lesson, viewed from the top of the hill after exiting a belief system under their own power, can gird kids against the best efforts of the evangelists – and far better than secondhand knowledge could ever hope to do.

nozzferrahhtoo

Dades wrote: »

Anyone with kids will tell you that inanimate objects regularly "talk" and form very real parts of childrens lives.

Yeah that is agreed too. The difference I describe is different to this so maybe I am just not getting my point across right the first time. The difference between it and what you say here is that it is the kids minds doing what you describe. The talking inanimate objects is not us telling the kids the imaginary object/person exists or that how that entity acts towards them is dependent on their actions "good" or "bad" performed now. Santa is.

The difference is subtle, but important. At no point do we tell them the puppets/toys are sentient, watching their every move and will enact retribution for naughtiness in the form of withholding gifts, money or other happiness.

In a funny way, tangential to my point above, it is like a weird form of scapegoating. Rather than piling our sins on the goat however we are piling punishment for sins on the goat. Punishing our children for misdeeds and pretending like it is someone else who is the "bad guy" for doing it.

Dades wrote: »

I don't understand why anyone would want to remove such harmless joys.

I am not convinced I do either. I have only become a father in the last 3 months so it is some time yet before I have to really consider this. I am not one of the one on the thread here arguing against Santa or engaging in the fantasy with the children. I merely think it is worth being aware of the differences between it and other forms of fantasy play such as puppets and the like. It is a subtly but massively different thing we are engaged in and staying aware of that is worth doing I think.

Gregor Samsa

Slugs wrote: »

Of course they do. I know parents who do it and I can't count how many times last year I was in a shopping centre watching as a stressed out parent calmed their child down by telling them "if you don't stop being bold, santa won't bring you presents."

Personally, I was never brought up to believe that Santa wouldn't bring me anything based on my behaviour, and I won't be doing that with my child(ren).

I think if we start down this road that having Santa for young kids is hyprocritical, then we're taking ourselves too seriously. If Santa isn't part of your culture, history, heratage or happy memories, then that's perfectly fine - no need to introduce it now just to fit in.

But I think one should have a better argument against it than pure ontology.

Dades

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The difference is subtle, but important. At no point do we tell them the puppets/toys are sentient, watching their every move and will enact retribution for naughtiness in the form of withholding gifts, money or other happiness.

Just because we as adults can see the correlation because Santa and the insidiousness every-watching god concept, doesn't mean we have to deny kids a few years of one of the highlights of any 'western' childhood. Besides, the level of "better be good or else" type of behavior is I think overstated - that certainly not what I remember of those years.

Unless someone can come up with a valid study to show belief in Santa is detrimental to kids, rather than adult philosophical comparisons with unpalatable deities, then I'm going to allow my kids the joy I had a kid.

In fact we're booked in to visit the DSPCA winter wonderland next weekend.

Oh, and congrats, btw!

bigbadbear

Where's the OP gone?

5uspect

bigbadbear wrote: »

Where's the OP gone?

Christmas shopping?

nozzferrahhtoo

Dades wrote: »

Just because we as adults can see the correlation because Santa and the insidiousness every-watching god concept, doesn't mean we have to deny kids a few years of one of the highlights of any 'western' childhood.

Nor am I arguing that.

I am merely saying that being aware of the difference between engaging in this fantasy and other forms of play are worth being aware of given that if the types of fantasy are different the possible effects of each are likely different too.

I have no firm opinions on the matter, I just think the different effects of each are an area worth further study, especially given the similarities between aspects of it (just as being moral to appease a supernatural watchful eye) and that of aspects of later in life beliefs such as Theism.

alyuciao

Considering that Christmas was banned by the English for nearly 30 years under Cromwell and then for another 20 odd years in the new world under the puritans. The fact that the Catholic church is not a fan of Santa Claus and that he has nothing to do with God in the first place...... as a non higher being believer or as a higher being disbeliever (I could never be bothered to think too much about it) I LOVE CHRISTMAS.

Family, presents, good food and drink. My kids enjoy the celebrations too.

You would only spend time thinking / worrying / being bothered about it if you were religiously inclined.

Church of Santa, anyone?

seamus

alyuciao wrote: »

Family, presents, good food and drink. My kids enjoy the celebrations too.

Let's just be honest here:
As an atheist, we don't have any "afterworld" nonsense to live for, the highlights of existence are our families, having fun and enjoying food and drink.

Since Christmas is a celebration about or involving all of these things, atheists should embrace the holiday as a celebration of everything that is great about being alive. Because there's nothing else once you're dead.

iguana

seamus wrote: »

I'm vegetarian, and so's my wife!

(Never thought I'd find an appropriate use for that reference).

I sense a new thread coming on. "Why would an atheist be a vegetarian?" Without the belief that God sees every little bird that dies why would any non-believer not eat it?

Carlos_Ray

girlyhappyface wrote: »

I am agnostic, and don't celebrate Christmas, Halloween or Easter.

Halloween ?? lol. Why didn't you include St Valentines day while your at it.

girlyhappyface wrote: »

I don't have children yet, but am wondering how you atheists or agnostics respond if your child wants to have a Christmas tree, dress up at Halloween etc.
I'm imagining that most kids don'y give a hoot about attending Church so it's just the stuff that other kids are doing that I'm imagining that they may want to do.
I absolutely could not have Christmas decorations in my house, as I never have had, but I am wondering about how I would feel if I had my child ask me.

So what do you do if your child wants to celebrate something you don't believe in?

Many people have commented here about how unfair it is that parents force their religious beliefs on children. The idea that a child should be allowed to explore and discover its own beliefs (or lack of) is commonly advocated. With this is mind, what gives you the right to deny your child the right to form its own belief?

Just because ones parents are religious, doesn't mean they won't be atheist. Likewise, just becuase you are atheist doesn't mean your child will share your views. Are you going to deny your child the right to explore different beliefs to you? If so , you are just as bad as the overpowering religious parents that some are so critical of.

Your child is not merely an extension of you. It is a seperate human with the right ( and capacity) to make its own mind up.

The job of the parent is to accomadate the child and help it gather as much imformation about the world as it can. If my Children wanted to celebrate "Thanks Giving", I'd provide the Turkey.

Aseth

In my family Christmas is celebrated as a certain tradition without linking it to any religion. It's time to meet other family members, eat, drink and do nothing Also an opportunity to spoil each other with gifts.

Choochtown

Used not to be fussed about christmas part me being anti-religion at the time part hating my favorite pubs filled with amateur drinkers (the type that try to force themselves to be the life and soul for the 3 days a year they're in the pub xmas eve, new yrs eve and paddys day).

THEN ... I had kids. Christmas is now fanfeckintastic! I tell them we're celebrating the birth of a great prophet, a man who could explain exactly why the things in the night sky move as they do ... Isaac Newton.

philologos

5uspect wrote: »

What does celebrating Christmas have to do with Christianity?

Well, the whole Christ thing for a start? * :pac:

* Has the annual A&A "War on Christmas" begun

pH

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, the whole Christ thing for a start? * :pac:

So you admit what you xians do at "Easter" obviously has a everything to do with Eostre then?

Or maybe you'd be willing to admit that many people for many reasons refer to various times of the year (and week) by the names of various Gods (or celebrations for those Gods), but that doesn't mean per se that the God has anything to do with it anymore?

Or perhaps (and I'm guessing this is more likely) that Christmas has everything to do with Christ, Easter also has everything to do with Christ, yet Thursday has nothing to do with Thor nor August anything to do with the divinity of Augustus Caesar, mainly because that's what you want to be true?

Oh and ... Why do protestants celebrate Christmas?

Gregor Samsa

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, the whole Christ thing for a start? * :pac:

We've already established that the name and its origins, like Thursday or January, is irrelevant to non-Christians (sub: Norse/Roman pagans).

And that pretty much all the traditions and celebrations, except the crib and going to mass/service/church which most of us don't do anyway, have a non-Christian origin.

And even if they did, we'd bee too drunk and stuffed to care.

Ghost Buster

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, the whole Christ thing for a start? * :pac:

* Has the annual A&A "War on Christmas" begun

Hmmm. Correct me if Im wrong but I think most of the posts here are pro Christmas as a holiday.

Ickle Magoo

Jakkass wrote: »

* Has the annual A&A "War on Christmas" begun

You mean the almost seasonless, never gets boring - much; "christmas is just for christians"...despite it being a tradition stolen from the pagans, moulded in together with various nordic & germanic folklore, survived a couple of calender changes which would make the date of anyone's original birthday BC an impossibility and eventually handed on to clement clarke moore and coca cola. Frankly, the first six letters of the name are where religion begins and ends for the vast majority of those who enjoy the festive season.

Buceph

Choochtown wrote: »

THEN ... I had kids. Christmas is now fanfeckintastic! I tell them we're celebrating the birth of a great prophet, a man who could explain exactly why the things in the night sky move as they do ... Isaac Newton.

We celebrate the fairy at the top of the tree. Daniel O'Donnell.

I'm not religious at all, and that extends beyond Christianity. So when I see people saying "ah sure that's pagan, you're allowed celebrate that" it seems a bit off, seeing as paganism was just as much a belief as anything else.

That being said, I see nothing wrong with taking some of the messages of Christmas and Winter festivals in general, and amalgamating them into your own ideaology. Christianity has some underlying principles that are quit solid, the idea of love and charity, and I don't have any hesitation to take those elements and leave the religious aspect behind. Santa Claus is more core to Christmas for most kids than Jesus. And I've always been quite enamoured with the origins of Saint Nicholas, "Saint Nicholas of Myra" in Asia Minor. The idea that he threw three bags of gold through a family window as dowries for the three daughters. While Nicholas is reported to have been a religious man, I think there's a nice message in the story that goes beyond religion.


Basically, what it boils down to for me is partly a societal thing where we everyone can have the same setting for something. And partly the distillation of a lot of varying messages from many religions and beliefs that have survived (in some form) for the past N Thousand Years.

I think if you can put things into their symbolism and almost fable like qualities, while seperating it from the faith and obedience aspect of religion, then there's nothing wrong with creating your own meaning for your children and your self. It's just a handy time where you can borrow from the rest of the world and make it your own. Especially, as I say, there's a lot of folk wisdom in the underlying truths of any Christmas or Winter celebration.

philologos

pH wrote: »

So you admit what you xians do at "Easter" obviously has a everything to do with Eostre then?

Actually, Easter is probably better timed than Christmas, being very close to the Jewish festival of Pesach or the Passover Feast during which Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected. In fact Christian observance of Easter focuses on the foundation of the Gospel the good news that the Lord Jesus conquered death and saved mankind. Perhaps we need a better name for it though in Christian celebrations. Evidently, Easter was the nearest European festival to that of Passover and then history. At least that seems logical.

pH wrote: »

Or maybe you'd be willing to admit that many people for many reasons refer to various times of the year (and week) by the names of various Gods (or celebrations for those Gods), but that doesn't mean per se that the God has anything to do with it anymore?

I'm aware of this too. Thankfully I don't worship Thor on Thursday, or Wodan or Wednesday

God still has a lot to do with Christmas in Ireland and in the Western world despite increased secularisation in parts. Observance of Christmas is considerably higher than weekly attendance throughout the year.

I know on a personal level and on the level of the Christian communities I often interact with, at least we will be celebrating the coming of the Lord Jesus as Saviour into the world

pH wrote: »

Or perhaps (and I'm guessing this is more likely) that Christmas has everything to do with Christ, Easter also has everything to do with Christ, yet Thursday has nothing to do with Thor nor August anything to do with the divinity of Augustus Caesar, mainly because that's what you want to be true?

Well, its not about truth really if we are talking about the impact of Christ on the world in comparison to that of Thor, August or the divinity of Augustus Caesar. Jesus impacted the world, and changed it forever.

pH wrote: »

Oh and ... Why do protestants celebrate Christmas?

Celebrating the arrival of the Lord Jesus into the world at any stage is better than not celebrating it at all. Of course the Puritans would have disagreed with this, as well as a lot of other Reformed denominations.

5uspect

Jakkass wrote: »

* Has the annual A&A "War on Christmas" begun

Lock and load!

pH

I'm probably going to hate myself for this later ...

Jakkass wrote: »

Actually, Easter is probably better timed than Christmas, being very close to the Jewish festival of Pesach or the Passover Feast during which Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected. In fact Christian observance of Easter focuses on the foundation of the Gospel the good news that the Lord Jesus conquered death and saved mankind. Perhaps we need a better name for it though in Christian celebrations. Evidently, Easter was the nearest European festival to that of Passover and then history. At least that seems logical.

Let me remind you of your original post that I responded to, which highlighted the word Christ in Jesus Christ and Christmas as if that had importance or relevance, you are happy to call your springtime celebrations "Easter" (even though you don't believe in her), as many non Christians are quite happy to call a late December celebration Christmas for purely cultural reasons, and in the same way Eostre doesn't come in to your Easter celebrations, Christ doesn't come into ours.

I'm aware of this too. Thankfully I don't worship Thor on Thursday, or Wodan or Wednesday

Nor I your Christ at Christmas, I think you may be getting this!

God still has a lot to do with Christmas in Ireland and in the Western world despite increased secularisation in parts. Observance of Christmas is considerably higher than weekly attendance throughout the year.

Or maybe not

For you it might have, and for other Christians, for many many others it does not.

I like your phrase "increased secularisation" everything about Christmas (except for the Catholic mass on that date) is pretty much secular or pagan in origin, and despite many attempts to at increased religousisation Christmas retains its original purpose of a party at this time of year.

I know on a personal level and on the level of the Christian communities I often interact with, at least we will be celebrating the coming of the Lord Jesus as Saviour into the world

Well, its not about truth really if we are talking about the impact of Christ on the world in comparison to that of Thor, August or the divinity of Augustus Caesar. Jesus impacted the world, and changed it forever.

As so "Your God is soooooooooooooo big and important, much much bigger and better than those other ones", that argument, really?

Celebrating the arrival of the Lord Jesus into the world at any stage is better than not celebrating it at all. Of course the Puritans would have disagreed with this, as well as a lot of other Reformed denominations.

I can understand the service on Christmas day, the hymns etc, but how exactly does eating turkey, decorating a fir tree, sending cards, eating mince pies, getting presents from Santa and falling asleep after too much Baileys mean protestants are celebrating the arrival of their Lord Jesus?

Nevyn

Many of the 'christmas' traditions were around well before christianity.
They were things done to survive the worst weeks of the winter.
The lights and bringing in greenery into the house help with the fact your going to be stuck in doors and bored.
Gifts were made and exchanged, the keeping busy was good occupational theraphy and would provide usually clothes which people woould need or toys for distraction for the long nights.
Feasting made sense as well, to use up and store food in the best place in people.
The drinking and merry making keeps people in good mood and wile away the hours.

All these traditions happened well before the followers of JVH took them over.
They help us mentally, emotionally and physically get through the darkest part of the year until it starts getting bright again. So wether you attach any spiritual or religious meaning to the or not I don't see why anyone would not take part in them.

And that ok, I will think of the lot of ye when I am calling the Sun back soltaice before the Dawn :P

Nevyn

Jakkass wrote: »

Actually, Easter is probably better timed than Christmas, being very close to the Jewish festival of Pesach or the Passover Feast during which Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected. In fact Christian observance of Easter focuses on the foundation of the Gospel the good news that the Lord Jesus conquered death and saved mankind. Perhaps we need a better name for it though in Christian celebrations. Evidently, Easter was the nearest European festival to that of Passover and then history. At least that seems logical.

Easter is the Sunday after the First Full Moon after the spring equinox,
yes that is very christian.

Actually easter had a fixed date for the roman christian church but moving to to the above reckoning as done as part of the deal for bringing the Celtic churches back into the fold.

philologos

^ Point about nearest European festival to the Jewish passover is still a valid point

philologos

pH wrote: »

Let me remind you of your original post that I responded to, which highlighted the word Christ in Jesus Christ and Christmas as if that had importance or relevance, you are happy to call your springtime celebrations "Easter" (even though you don't believe in her), as many non Christians are quite happy to call a late December celebration Christmas for purely cultural reasons, and in the same way Eostre doesn't come in to your Easter celebrations, Christ doesn't come into ours.

Agreed, but in sum total, on a societal level, Christmas is still primarily a Christian festival even if you wish to disregard this in your particular celebrations.

The same cannot be said of Easter in its pagan context.

pH wrote: »

Nor I your Christ at Christmas, I think you may be getting this!

See above

pH wrote: »

For you it might have, and for other Christians, for many many others it does not.

Also see above.

pH wrote: »

I like your phrase "increased secularisation" everything about Christmas (except for the Catholic mass on that date) is pretty much secular or pagan in origin, and despite many attempts to at increased religousisation Christmas retains its original purpose of a party at this time of year.

Nobody claims that Christmas isn't a celebration. The question is what is being celebrated.

pH wrote: »

As so "Your God is soooooooooooooo big and important, much much bigger and better than those other ones", that argument, really?

This would explain why Christmas has retained its Christian influence to the current date, yes.

pH wrote: »

I can understand the service on Christmas day, the hymns etc, but how exactly does eating turkey, decorating a fir tree, sending cards, eating mince pies, getting presents from Santa and falling asleep after too much Baileys mean protestants are celebrating the arrival of their Lord Jesus?

Much of these are parts of the celebration of the former. I don't get why you are listing Protestants out in particular. We celebrate it for pretty much the same reason as Catholics. Presents are a sharing in the gift of Christ's coming into the world, this is at least what I have understood in a Christian context. Indeed, mince pies and all the other trapping merely have to do with how we celebrate rather than why.