Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
You can read this if you want. It's one of the sources for the video. Religion for Breakfast is a scholar with a PHD in religous studies; hardly nuts.
Well...
I know why you hide the link:
https://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2018/12/concerning-yule.html?m=1
It's a blog that has screenshots from twitter...
None of that changes anything I've already said.
The reason I link that is because the other sources are books. I've provided evidence for my claims while you haven't. Since you refuse to read the evidence you are not interested in learning, only preserving your own worldview. You are not worth my time.
Well, yeah...
If one guy told me the sun was coming up tomorrow morning, no one would ask for sources.
If one guy said tomorrow James Madison would rise from the dead and lead an army of vampires against the unicorn oppressors ....
Well. People might not just take their word.
Now, here's where I might lose you:
You don't know how fucking ridiculous and obviously wrong what you keep saying is.
Obviously I am, or you wouldn't have hit send after typing that shit.
You're right that I care, otherwise I would not have made my initial comment. I apologise for being rude, I just didn't have the time to write a proper response.
The reason I commented is because I think that it's important that the discussion about what is pagan and what is not is taken with all the facts in mind. It just so happens that I watched a video where an expert explains that, although many people think so, there is in fact no evidence that Christmas trees are a pagan tradition appropriated by Christianity.
The reason I made my rude comment is that you dismiss the evidence I provide for my claim. I am very aware that people might not believe me at face value, which is why I provide evidence for my claim. I am making the, to your eyes "fucking ridiculous and wrong", claim, so to you the burden of proof is on me. I then provide proof. The reason i got frustrated is that you refuse to even engage at the evidence. At first you decice that you won't watch the video. I assume this is because you prefer to read instead, which is fair.
You take a cursory look at the channel and deem it "nuts", instead of looking into who the author is, what his credentials are and most importantly, you don't look at the sources for the video which are books and other material written by other scholars. I link the blogpost because I assume you don't care enough about this issue to read several books on the topic, and you dismiss this as well because it "has screenshots from twitter". The whole point of the blogpost is the same as my initial comment; to correct a longstanding myth, which is why it "responds" to twitter-posts. The blogpost is written scolar, although, I will admit, not an expert in early christianity like Dr. Mark Henry of Religion For Breakfast.
I am not trying to defend Christianity; I'm not even religious. All the video points out is that Christmas trees were likely a recent invention, and that we have no evidence to suggest that they were appropriated from a pagan religion.
Again, sorry for being rude in the previous comment. I hope you now understand why your behavior made me upset now, and I hope you will engage with the provided sources now. If you won't, then I stand by my original comment.