The Christmas celebrations have their origins beyond the days of Christianity itself. The early Romans used to celebrate the "day of the unquenchable sun". This was considered the day when it could be seen that the days were no longer getting shorter, but were actually lengthening. So winter was seen as losing its grip, victory will ultimately go to the sun. As you can imagine the day was filled with merry making.
In northern Europe the season was referred to as Yuletide. This feast was marked with decorating with evergreens, yule logs, etc. But most of all Yuletide was marked with feasts, drinking and debauchery.
As Christianity conquered these lands the pagan feasts were Christianized. The debauchery was removed. The pagan gods were removed. In their place were Christian images, stories, and ceremonies. It was common practice in those days that the conqueror would replace the holy sites with their own sites, this is what happened to the old pagan feasts.
2006-12-09 03:00:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dr. D 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
i don't care. Bible mentions that Christ was born in 25th December, and Christmas warms my heart and makes me come closer to my family. Christmas has lots of aims, different to everyone. The main aim and purpose and theme of this christianic celebration is to feel love and peace in our hearts and become better people.
2006-12-09 02:43:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
you answered your own question ...
it isnt about Christs birthday since it was most likely in the spring
it is a holiday , plain and simple ... taken from pagan celibrations...
so whats wrong with having a day where we can give gifts and show others how much we love them ..
i agree we shouldnt need a day to do this ..
but it is lovely that we do
added note ....
there is nothing wrong though with having this as a day to celibrate in your faith also , for the above reason
2006-12-09 02:42:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Peace 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Oh certainly I undergo in concepts a instructor telling me as quickly as that the church had mentioned this on call understand and ettiquite: we are in a position to be called "Mormons" and that's ok. and we are in a position to declare you're a "Mormon" and that i'm a "Mormon". "Mormonism" is likewise ok, while you evaluate it incredibly is our "ism." we could no longer say we prepare Latter-Day-Saintism, see? what they do no longer choose us to call that's "the Mormon church" or "i'm a factor of the LDS Church." As for "LDS," because of the fact the full acronym could be so long it may defeat the point, "LDS" on my own is nice. by employing pointing out that we are LDS, we propose that we are latter day saints of the Church of Jesus Christ. It nonetheless is ideal and shows understand. even however many different names suited, of direction the main understand could certainly be to state that we are individuals of the "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day saints." or in simple terms "we belong to the Church of Jesus Christ" to simplify haha. desire that modify into comprehensible and that it helped! have a sturdy night!
2016-12-18 10:20:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by yakel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
We give in return, for Christ was given to us. Call it Capitilism if you want, we dont need your participation anyway!
2006-12-09 02:57:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by element_op 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
What the hell is with this war on Christmas? Sheesh!
2006-12-09 02:44:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋