Didn't Caesar tell Mary Magdalene that there was as much chance of Jesus rising from the dead as of the egg in her hand turning red? And then the egg in question duly changed colour? Or something?
The egg symbolises the pretext upon which a father explains to his wife why he's going to Asda on Maundy Thursday, when he'll also find 1L bottles of spirits for £15 and a third off pork pies.
Amen.
Though I'm surprised the Daily Mail didn't do a story about halal Easter eggs today.
Easter and Christmas are just arbitrary dates used by the Christian church to manipulate the masses. Like much of the Christian faith it doesn't make any sense to intelligent people
I mean if they are able to pinpoint the birth of Jesus to the 25th December, why are they happy to celebrate the more important milestone of his death, resurrection and ascension to random dates in March or April
If one is linked to phases of the moon then why not the other? Like much of religious teaching it's all just made up as they go along. A bit like our Queen's official birthday.
The Christian Church have hijacked things like painted eggs and decorated trees to maintain the popularity of their religious festivals. Like most of the Bible, they've embellished things and twisted ancient writings for their own ends.
Intelligent people have challenged this
manipulative propaganda for centuries.
Happy Easter everyone. Enjoy your chocolate bunnies
I don't know where the aster bunny has come from in the UK. It was originally German, and exported from there to the US. From whence ... guess. Those who feel they look cool by slavishly following everything american are responsible.
The idea of an egg-giving hare came to the U.S. in the 18th century. Protestant German immigrants in the Pennsylvania Dutch area told their children about the "Osterhase" (sometimes spelled "Oschter Haws"[15]).[16] Hase means "hare", not rabbit, and in Northwest European folklore the "Easter Bunny" indeed is a hare.
By the way OP I will say something. You pedal a bike. If you sell stuff, you peddle it.
Don't do that again (most people on here get that wrong, now you won't).
I think you missed my other crucial point in my opening post. I wasn't suddenly startled by the realisation that a vicar was reeling off their own edited version of the truth. You don't need to pat my head.
What was said yesterday morning gets rolled out on TV every year where a vicar says this is what Easter is really about and the presenters pretty much always let it go unchallenged. Why is this almost always the case? The message being sent out is that Easter is specifically a Christian festival which, in principle, excludes those not of the faith. But that's not was Easter is actually about. Easter marks the coming of Spring, new life, the moving away from the previous Winter and the days getting longer. Many people are turned off by the concept of marking Easter in any way as they see it as being solely about the resurrection, because that's the one version of the holiday that gets rammed down our throats every year. Is it really just too difficult to merely mention that Easter actually predates Jesus and allow the audience to draw their own conclusions rather than simply rehash the same mixed messages?
Easter should be an open festival for everybody to enjoy and promoted as such without the wagging finger of the church claiming possession of its origins.
When asked how a parent should explain about the origins of the egg and the connection to chocolate with Easter to their kids she said, "The children, yes. I mean, eggs are about new life, chickens come out of them, bunnies, new life, Spring, and so eggs, um, are a sign of new life because at easter we're celebrating Jesus coming back to life and the best eggs are the ones that are hollow in the middle because that reminds us that Jesus on Easter day the tomb was empty where Jesus came back to life."
Everyone knows the best eggs have treats inside. They may be hollow, but they aren't empty. How does that fit her twisted philosophy?
Everyone knows the best eggs have treats inside. They may be hollow, but they aren't empty. How does that fit her twisted philosophy?
I have always had Christian Easter Eggs, which as we all know consists of a hollow shell. On Good Friday we are allowed to rattle the egg and can hear a sweet insude. When we open up the egg on the Monday we find a single empty sweet wrapper inside. That is my Easter; it is a beautiful thing
You do know there was more than one 'Caesar' don't you, smartarse?
There was only one Caesar at a time, and he almost certainly wasn't in Jerusalem that weekend to chat to Mary M about eggs. How and why would she have access to the leader of the Roman Empire for goodness sake?
Maybe it was something you read in a Dan Brown novel.
I mean if they are able to pinpoint the birth of Jesus to the 25th December, why are they happy to celebrate the more important milestone of his death, resurrection and ascension to random dates in March or April
25th of December is another old Pagan festival which had a Christian story imposed on it. Jesus date of birth is almost certainly a different date.
The egg is only a symbol but it has been commercialised as has Christmas. It is also used to explain the Trinity (don't ask)
As for Easter being a pagan festival is nonsense. Easter, as it does this year, often falls on the Jewish Passover which predates Christ by a 1400years. For some Jews Christ was the promised Messiah (most Jews are still waiting) and the last blood sacrifice made at Passover. Jews maintained blood sacrifice which goes back to Genesis until the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70ad. If the Temple is ever rebuilt presumably they will resume animal sacrifice.
The Romans despite a few moments in time tolerated Christianity (three emperors are mentioned in the historical parts of the new testament, Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius) or it would never have spread even to Britain by 200ad. As for Druids the Romans completely wiped them out in Britain and France by 60ad so we only guess what they did.
Of course if you do not believe any of the historical parts of the Bible you can take a tour at the British Museum where artifacts mainly from the Old Testament are on show and they produce a guide book explaining where they were discovered and their meaning.
The key word here being 'symbolised'.
Old stuff gets given new meanings, people happily crowbar their own justifications into anything they want to keep!
And I always remember easter being the first sunday after the first full moon after the vernal equinox, can't remember if same-day means we do it a week later or not though...
There's also the question about how much factual information we expect to get from anyone on any morning-telly sofa, whatever the subject!
Possibly. Eggs clearly do represent birth and therefore by extension can possibly represent rebirth. But going on about hollow eggs representing the empty tomb is taking reverse engineering of symbols too far. I wonder what she says the tree symbolises at Christmas?
You're right about the timing of Easter. It relates to the first full moon after vernal equinox. That may also be the fourth full moon after the winter solstice but it isn't how it is defined.
It's really no surprise that a religious representative is peddling inaccuracies about belief in this way. How can you be accurate about something with no factual basis.
It's really no surprise that a religious representative is peddling inaccuracies about belief in this way. How can you be accurate about something with no factual basis.
How do we know about any historical character but by reading old documents. Christ was in other documents outside the bible including the quran which also included Abraham and Mary.
Something happened 2000 years ago that even the Romans (If they had wanted to) could not stamp out.
Possibly. Eggs clearly do represent birth and therefore by extension can possibly represent rebirth. But going on about hollow eggs representing the empty tomb is taking reverse engineering of symbols too far. I wonder what she says the tree symbolises at Christmas?
I agree about the hollow egg bit, and am somewhat dubious about the empty tomb and tomb entrance stone stories too - there's no need to further embellish something that could have been left as such a simple representation. Regardless of what one might think of religion, there's that many spring festivals around we really shouldn't panic about this one except from a commercialisation point of view.
And how chocolate eggs seem to be so much thinner nowadays.
As for Christmas trees, I would certainly hope these don't get dragged into it - though possibly less likely given that they are less frequently used as part of any nativity scene. Unless we are into school play territory and I don't think we should read too much significance into religious theatrical productions that include a role of 'third lobster'
The egg is only a symbol but it has been commercialised as has Christmas. It is also used to explain the Trinity (don't ask)
As for Easter being a pagan festival is nonsense. Easter, as it does this year, often falls on the Jewish Passover which predates Christ by a 1400years. For some Jews Christ was the promised Messiah (most Jews are still waiting) and the last blood sacrifice made at Passover. Jews maintained blood sacrifice which goes back to Genesis until the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70ad. If the Temple is ever rebuilt presumably they will resume animal sacrifice.
The Romans despite a few moments in time tolerated Christianity (three emperors are mentioned in the historical parts of the new testament, Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius) or it would never have spread even to Britain by 200ad. As for Druids the Romans completely wiped them out in Britain and France by 60ad so we only guess what they did.
Of course if you do not believe any of the historical parts of the Bible you can take a tour at the British Museum where artifacts mainly from the Old Testament are on show and they produce a guide book explaining where they were discovered and their meaning.
It's not really a surprise that the people who wrote the Bible used current and historical events as a background. So there are bound to be references to provable factual occurrences. That doesn't tell you anything about whether the religious aspects are true or not. To point out there are facts in it and imply the rest might therefore be true is a fallacy.
Christmas certainly was grafted onto an old pagan festival. Is it really likely December 25 is when Jesus was born? Easter may well also have adopted pagan rituals for celebrating Spring, but the timing of it is correct in biblical terms.
Possibly. Eggs clearly do represent birth and therefore by extension can possibly represent rebirth. But going on about hollow eggs representing the empty tomb is taking reverse engineering of symbols too far. I wonder what she says the tree symbolises at Christmas?
You're right about the timing of Easter. It relates to the first full moon after vernal equinox. That may also be the fourth full moon after the winter solstice but it isn't how it is defined.
It's really no surprise that a religious representative is peddling inaccuracies about belief in this way. How can you be accurate about something with no factual basis.
BIB - For the sake of clarity - and correcting my own hamfisted way of putting it in my first post - I was saying how Easter wasn't based on marking a fixed anniversary of a single event. It's timing is worked out on a celestial basis, which is generally around the time of the fourth full moon, or specifically the vernal equinox. It's not what defines Easter, but it's necessary to point it out for context.
How do we know about any historical character but by reading old documents. Christ was in other documents outside the bible including the quran which also included Abraham and Mary.
Something happened 2000 years ago that even the Romans (If they had wanted to) could not stamp out.
I'm not saying people referred to in the Bible didn't exist. They probably did. But that doesn't mean they had any miraculous significance.
It's not surprising Christ, Abraham, Mary, et al are in the Quran as that was written when the OT and NT were widely taught and accepted. So it was the starting point. Just as the Christian New Testament takes the Jewish Old Testament as a basis. So the Quran is not objective evidence of Christ's existence, it's merely repeating what was widely accepted at the time.
BIB - For the sake of clarity - and correcting my own hamfisted way of putting it in my first post - I was saying how Easter wasn't based on marking a fixed anniversary of a single event. It's timing is worked out on a celestial basis, which is generally around the time of the fourth full moon, or specifically the vernal equinox. It's not what defines Easter, but it's necessary to point it out for context.
Fair enough. It's not surprising that ancient festivals were timed according to celestial events as these are easily observable and calendars as we know them had little significance. Everything was related to natural cycles.
How do we know about any historical character but by reading old documents. Christ was in other documents outside the bible including the quran which also included Abraham and Mary.
Something happened 2000 years ago that even the Romans (If they had wanted to) could not stamp out.
See, I do happen to think there was likely a guy called Jesus who lived around that time, made a few speeches, did some of the things attributed to him and that he met a unpleasant end. Do I think he was the messiah? No (that was Brian...obvs**). Do I think he came back to life? No. Do I think he died for all our sins? No. Not least because his death has done nothing but cause centuries of division and brought misery to many cultures around the world. But that's the fault of others rather Jesus himself. Much of what's been done or said in his name since he died would most probably horrify him.
** figured I might has well do it before someone else did.
Most Christian know Jesus was not born on Christmas Day but at a time when shepherds were tending lambs, ie spring. Oddly the star sign Aries (the Ram/Lamb) is March/April but Christians don't go there.
The New Testament was a bringing together of the various manuscripts that became the Gospels, the letters of Paul and others and finally the Revelations of John. These were added to the books of the Old Testament that had been around for a hundreds of years to make the bible. It was done after 100ad as the verbal tradition was being lost as people died and it was felt the need was to have a written record. Many of the manuscripts were left out which leads to controversy among modern scholar.
Comments
I don't know where you got that from.
By the way OP I will say something. You pedal a bike. If you sell stuff, you peddle it.
Don't do that again (most people on here get that wrong, now you won't).
Anyone would think we should pay attention to this cult.
She may be misguided, but she's probably not that bad-and watch your spelling, at the end.
Amen.
Though I'm surprised the Daily Mail didn't do a story about halal Easter eggs today.
I mean if they are able to pinpoint the birth of Jesus to the 25th December, why are they happy to celebrate the more important milestone of his death, resurrection and ascension to random dates in March or April
If one is linked to phases of the moon then why not the other? Like much of religious teaching it's all just made up as they go along. A bit like our Queen's official birthday.
The Christian Church have hijacked things like painted eggs and decorated trees to maintain the popularity of their religious festivals. Like most of the Bible, they've embellished things and twisted ancient writings for their own ends.
Intelligent people have challenged this
manipulative propaganda for centuries.
Happy Easter everyone. Enjoy your chocolate bunnies
And it was a hare, not even a rabbit.
the egg represents the rock that closed off the cave where jesus's body was laid .....
ALLEGEDLY
I think you missed my other crucial point in my opening post. I wasn't suddenly startled by the realisation that a vicar was reeling off their own edited version of the truth. You don't need to pat my head.
What was said yesterday morning gets rolled out on TV every year where a vicar says this is what Easter is really about and the presenters pretty much always let it go unchallenged. Why is this almost always the case? The message being sent out is that Easter is specifically a Christian festival which, in principle, excludes those not of the faith. But that's not was Easter is actually about. Easter marks the coming of Spring, new life, the moving away from the previous Winter and the days getting longer. Many people are turned off by the concept of marking Easter in any way as they see it as being solely about the resurrection, because that's the one version of the holiday that gets rammed down our throats every year. Is it really just too difficult to merely mention that Easter actually predates Jesus and allow the audience to draw their own conclusions rather than simply rehash the same mixed messages?
Easter should be an open festival for everybody to enjoy and promoted as such without the wagging finger of the church claiming possession of its origins.
Yeah to be fair she just fell for the propaganda.
Everyone knows the best eggs have treats inside. They may be hollow, but they aren't empty. How does that fit her twisted philosophy?
I have always had Christian Easter Eggs, which as we all know consists of a hollow shell. On Good Friday we are allowed to rattle the egg and can hear a sweet insude. When we open up the egg on the Monday we find a single empty sweet wrapper inside. That is my Easter; it is a beautiful thing
Maybe it was something you read in a Dan Brown novel.
25th of December is another old Pagan festival which had a Christian story imposed on it. Jesus date of birth is almost certainly a different date.
As for Easter being a pagan festival is nonsense. Easter, as it does this year, often falls on the Jewish Passover which predates Christ by a 1400years. For some Jews Christ was the promised Messiah (most Jews are still waiting) and the last blood sacrifice made at Passover. Jews maintained blood sacrifice which goes back to Genesis until the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70ad. If the Temple is ever rebuilt presumably they will resume animal sacrifice.
The Romans despite a few moments in time tolerated Christianity (three emperors are mentioned in the historical parts of the new testament, Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius) or it would never have spread even to Britain by 200ad. As for Druids the Romans completely wiped them out in Britain and France by 60ad so we only guess what they did.
Of course if you do not believe any of the historical parts of the Bible you can take a tour at the British Museum where artifacts mainly from the Old Testament are on show and they produce a guide book explaining where they were discovered and their meaning.
Possibly. Eggs clearly do represent birth and therefore by extension can possibly represent rebirth. But going on about hollow eggs representing the empty tomb is taking reverse engineering of symbols too far. I wonder what she says the tree symbolises at Christmas?
You're right about the timing of Easter. It relates to the first full moon after vernal equinox. That may also be the fourth full moon after the winter solstice but it isn't how it is defined.
It's really no surprise that a religious representative is peddling inaccuracies about belief in this way. How can you be accurate about something with no factual basis.
How do we know about any historical character but by reading old documents. Christ was in other documents outside the bible including the quran which also included Abraham and Mary.
Something happened 2000 years ago that even the Romans (If they had wanted to) could not stamp out.
And how chocolate eggs seem to be so much thinner nowadays.
As for Christmas trees, I would certainly hope these don't get dragged into it - though possibly less likely given that they are less frequently used as part of any nativity scene. Unless we are into school play territory and I don't think we should read too much significance into religious theatrical productions that include a role of 'third lobster'
Christmas certainly was grafted onto an old pagan festival. Is it really likely December 25 is when Jesus was born? Easter may well also have adopted pagan rituals for celebrating Spring, but the timing of it is correct in biblical terms.
BIB - For the sake of clarity - and correcting my own hamfisted way of putting it in my first post - I was saying how Easter wasn't based on marking a fixed anniversary of a single event. It's timing is worked out on a celestial basis, which is generally around the time of the fourth full moon, or specifically the vernal equinox. It's not what defines Easter, but it's necessary to point it out for context.
It's not surprising Christ, Abraham, Mary, et al are in the Quran as that was written when the OT and NT were widely taught and accepted. So it was the starting point. Just as the Christian New Testament takes the Jewish Old Testament as a basis. So the Quran is not objective evidence of Christ's existence, it's merely repeating what was widely accepted at the time.
See, I do happen to think there was likely a guy called Jesus who lived around that time, made a few speeches, did some of the things attributed to him and that he met a unpleasant end. Do I think he was the messiah? No (that was Brian...obvs**). Do I think he came back to life? No. Do I think he died for all our sins? No. Not least because his death has done nothing but cause centuries of division and brought misery to many cultures around the world. But that's the fault of others rather Jesus himself. Much of what's been done or said in his name since he died would most probably horrify him.
** figured I might has well do it before someone else did.
The New Testament was a bringing together of the various manuscripts that became the Gospels, the letters of Paul and others and finally the Revelations of John. These were added to the books of the Old Testament that had been around for a hundreds of years to make the bible. It was done after 100ad as the verbal tradition was being lost as people died and it was felt the need was to have a written record. Many of the manuscripts were left out which leads to controversy among modern scholar.