quote: I'm surprised you think Tolkien and Lewis are "pagan-friendly," since both view pagan myths as prefiguring and being fulfilled by the Gospel. I don't see how Alvin is any less Pagan-friendly than Lewis or Tolkien, since all three basically coopt paganism into Christianity, using different devices to convey the same message.
You must have misunderstood me, I did find the Alvin maker tales very Pagan-Friendly, and I think I implied elsewhere in my post that OSC's writing is pagan friendly. I meant that I did not at first realize that they were not ONLY pagan friendly alt reality tales.
And I understand how C..S.Lewis, rationalized the paganistic, polytheism in his books, but they are still pagan friendly enough that some fundies consider them anti-CHRISTIAN. (My Mom had a real problem with them.) And speaking of uptight Christians,
quote: And it doesn't bother me a whole lot, but "xtian" does seem to violate one of the niceties of letting groups pick their own names.
Well I used the term Xtian, when I was a CHRISTIAN, just as I used xmas, and people have used xmas for years. The only people I have known to get their panties in a twist about xmas were the same people who wanted to burn santa claus, not put up xmas trees or mistletoe, put up signs that say "Jesus is the reason for the season" and ignore the whole Catholic church blending of paganism and Christianity that resulted in Christmas. If I really were trying to be obnoxious, I would say Jeebus and Dog, but I am not, so I don't.
In truth, I am a horrible typist, and have enough trouble with typos, so its just easier to type xtian. Semantic objections aside, everyone obviously knew what I meant.
Oh and on the issue of Passion, is it any surprise that an industry with a high number of Jewish people would object to antying called "The Passion of the Christ" All it takes is for one person to point out that Passions were Catholic promoted plays designed to incite hatred against Jews, and that pretty much kills it in Hollywood.
Now I am not saying that Mel's movie is anti-semetic, but Passions historically were, and all I see around me in the aftermath of this movie (At least from my co-workers,) is a bunch of ignorant asses who couldn't be bothered to get their hung-over bodies to church on a regular basis teling me that they hate Jews, "Cause the Jews killed Jesus! I saw it in that movie!" So, the anti-semetic charge is not a far stretch, with that one. But it STILL got made and distrubuted, which was my whole point in the first place, (before we got sidetracked with half the posters trying to convince me that, "yes, hollywood is still evil.")
So back to the topic at hand, I hope these Narnia movies get made, and I doubt that any effort will be put into diluting the CHRISTIAN overtones, as it would effectivley destroy the storyline, to remove the allegory.
posted
Right.....right after they tried him in a kangaroo court of their own, and turned him over to the Romans....and insisted that another be released instead of him...
Not that I agree with the anti-Semitic charges made by some Jews...but have you ever heard Gibson speak of his religious views? It is kinda scary....he is that intense about them. So they were right to be concerned, maybe, upon hearing his plan to make that movie.
Also, a lot of people can green-light a movie...and not all of them are Jewish.
Although i am not a hard core "Xian" (sorry, couldn't resist... ), I did see the movie, and it was very....
Well, for lack of a better word, let me say it was moving, at least to me and my family.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for linking to the chi-rho...I had heard of it many times, but had never seen what it looked like.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The only people I have known to get their panties in a twist about xmas were the same people who wanted to burn santa claus, not put up xmas trees or mistletoe, put up signs that say "Jesus is the reason for the season" and ignore the whole Catholic church blending of paganism and Christianity that resulted in Christmas.
Xtian bothers me, and I do none of the above. Your scorn shines through both in the word and in the quote above. You have a right to say whatever you want, but please know that you are neither respectful nor polite when you do so.
posted
Out of interest, why would "xmas" bother someone? After all, "mas" is a word that's been shortened for convenience, too, and the "x" is a traditional substitution for "Christ" among many Christians.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: The only people I have known to get their panties in a twist about xmas were the same people who wanted to burn santa claus, not put up xmas trees or mistletoe, put up signs that say "Jesus is the reason for the season" and ignore the whole Catholic church blending of paganism and Christianity that resulted in Christmas. If I really were trying to be obnoxious, I would say Jeebus and Dog, but I am not, so I don't.
The term xmas bothers me.
I don't put up Santa Clause in our house, but it doesn't bother me that others do.
I have never put up a sign, nor said the phrase "Jesus is the reason for the season". While I agree with the sentiment, I don't like the idea of turning a serious idea into a trite rhyme.
I am very aware of the pegan origins of Christmas and Easter. I guess you could say that I ignore them, because they don't bother me.
quote: Out of interest, why would "xmas" bother someone? After all, "mas" is a word that's been shortened for convenience, too, and the "x" is a traditional substitution for "Christ" among many Christians.
I've never seen "x" used as a substitue for "Christ" in any form except for the word xmas or x-mas. As far as I have known, it's not used as a substitue anywhere else.
The reason why it bothers me is that its use appears to be attempt to keep the parts of Christmas that I could do without (Santa, reindeer, snomen, trips to the mall, Christmas episodes of every single sitcom with Christmas miracles in them, the Grinch, etc.), while removing anything that has any Christian significance.
Does that make sense, Tom?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I was in seminary, the professors whose disciplines/training were in early church history tended to use the chi as an abbreviation for “Christ” when they were writing on the board, writing notes on students’ papers, etc. In handwriting it looks subtly different from a capital X, though, which doesn’t show up in typing. I never saw any of them use it in typing, but typing usually indicated a more formal situation where no “shorthand” abbreviations were used.
It shouldn’t be offensive, because it (the chi) is an ancient symbol for Christ. However, I think the X has more modern connotations in most people’s minds, signifying x-ed out, or even “removed for obscenity.” Because those connotations are likely to be stronger for most people, I’m unlikely to ever use it as an abbreviation in anything but private notes. Communication is about what the receiver perceives, after all, as much as what the sender intends.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Ooh-- it's got the ancient symbol of Christ, the trendy, edgy connotation of the triple-X, and the mysterious inttellectual power of X. We can work the trinity into it, and the three crosses on Calvary . . .
posted
I think the reason it bothers people is because it's a slang adaptation of their name. When people use slang terms for the name of a group, it's usually done so patronizingly (at best) or derogatorily (at worst). There are probably innocent slang origins behind the word kike, but we wouldn't use it in polite conversation, would we? If I had a conversation about gay marriage and referred repeatedly to homos, though I might just be shortening a word, it would coume across offensively.
I like to refer to a group of people with the name they've chosen for themselves. When I talk to my Native American friends, I call them Indians because that's what they call themselves. I use the term they prefer out of respect for them.
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I stated before, when I was a Christian I used the term Xtian with pride, both for the "Fish-Symbol" tie-in and the tie-in with the "straight-edge" life-style.
And I never said "xian", where is that coming from?
posted
Hmm, I'm actually surprised this bothers you so much Kat. I'd be more worried about the "baby devouring" LDs folk-image than I would about people choosing to abreviate X for Christ.
In fact, I suspect that the "X" thing being so that people could "take Christ out of Christmas" is an urban legend in itself. I was told that as a child, but I've yet to see one iota of proof that that was the reason for it and not just simple abbreviation.
quote: In fact, I suspect that the "X" thing being so that people could "take Christ out of Christmas" is an urban legend in itself. I was told that as a child, but I've yet to see one iota of proof that that was the reason for it and not just simple abbreviation.
I fail to see the distinction between doing it to remove Christ form Christamas and doing it to abbreviate Christ out of Christmas. Or is it just the intention that you are talking about?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Probably nothing. Maybe I will get kicked off the boards for not playing nice. Or maybe I will just avoid any topic where it might come up. I can't give in though, I would feel like I bent to the dominant paradigm.
What I won't start doing is carrying on in some sort of silly troll rage about how much I hate all these over-sensitive bible thumping fundies. Cause I used to be one, and while I disagree with that lifestyle, now, seeing someone rant about how much they hate it is just sad.
So if I aquiesce and mkae a real effort to type out c-h-r-i-s-t instead of x am I a mature poster, or just a tool. If I continue to type xtian, am I just a skript kiddie? I hate l33t-speak, and internet abbreviation. (NEway u r not uber, n3wB. w00t!) Is xtian the same sort of thing? I feel like you are belittleing someting I used to use with pride.
posted
I guess I do mean the intent. As dkw said, it's abreviated a lot like that in theological lectures so that's quite easily where it derived from desipite the modern connotations that may or may not exist everywhere to begin with.
posted
Porter, If it’s being used as an abbreviation, it isn’t taking Christ out at all, since there’s nothing intrinsic about the English letters “C,” “H,” “R,” “I,” “S,” and “T” that make them any more representative of Christ than the Greek letter “Χ.”
Mazer, changing something about your writing that isn’t received in the way you intended it isn’t being “a tool,” it’s being an effective writer.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I admit that the "X-mas" abbreviation never bothered me, and I've never heard of any of these other abbreviations. Must not be a Colorado thing or something. What does bug me is whenever Christmas is brought up as a religious holiday (it seems, IRL anyways) someone points out in a really prideful manner, like they just discovered this themselves after years of research in dank and dusty libraries and scouring books strewen across the Holy Land that in fact, really Christmas is celebrated at the same time as the Pagan celebration, and what do I think about that, huh?
quote: What does bug me is whenever Christmas is brought up as a religious holiday (it seems, IRL anyways) someone points out in a really prideful manner, like they just discovered this themselves after years of research in dank and dusty libraries and scouring books strewen across the Holy Land that in fact, really Christmas is celebrated at the same time as the Pagan celebration, and what do I think about that, huh?
I wonder how much of this is a result of Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons" and "The DaVinci Code". I read them both so quickly and back-to-back that some of the subject matter has run together in my mind, but I do recall some discussion of how Christianity supplanted the old religion and more or less commandeered pagan holidays. Apparently (and I don't recall where I read this one) Jesus was not born in December as is celebrated but rather in what now would be August or September, and the decision to have "Christmas" take place when it did was a manipulation of the Winter Solstice rites. (note: that may NOT have been from Dan Brown, I was also reading a lot of Marion Zimmer Bradley around that time also and may be mixing her Avalon stories into my memory a bit as well)
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Goody, I've heard about this all my life. In fact, celebration of Christmas was outlawed in the 18th-19th century under some Puritanical governments because it was associated with paganism.
posted
The Pegans had a little-known but integral part in the formation of Christmas. Specifically, the Pegans introduced the Yule Log, wassail, and those end-the-year bragging letters.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I hate l33t-speak, and internet abbreviation. (NEway u r not uber, n3wB. w00t!) Is xtian the same sort of thing? I feel like you are belittleing someting I used to use with pride.
I would have never guessed. I don't have any problem with the x for Christ, but seeing you type it over and over and over again in one post does in fact make me think of l33t-speak, which I find annoying in almost all cases.
So N-E wayz, Y don't U just tYpe like normal? C U L8tR. luv, fqwgads
The extra four letters doesn't take up *that* much thought, does it? Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Christmas is a perfectly good secular holiday; why should atheists allow the Christians to steal it?
Christmas is not a perfectly good secular holiday - it's a Christian one by definition. It coincides with a non-Christian holiday, and has some traditions in common, but there's a lot of traditions that specifically derive from the Christmas celebration, not the Solstice celebration.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
), I did see the movie, and it was very....![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
Must not be a Colorado thing or something. What does bug me is whenever Christmas is brought up as a religious holiday (it seems, IRL anyways) someone points out in a really prideful manner, like they just discovered this themselves after years of research in dank and dusty libraries and scouring books strewen across the Holy Land that in fact, really Christmas is celebrated at the same time as the Pagan celebration, and what do I think about that, huh?![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
