Don't you love Jesus?

[Jon P. Inghram]

There's a catch thought - if both:
a) God doesn't exist
b) we cease to exist after death
than you won't be able to find out

Yep, and since I consider that a distinct possibility it's fine by me too.

BTW, what's with all the long movies lately?!? I'm gonna be stuck here at work until Goblet of Fire gets out at 1:30... blah.

[KvHagedorn]

Probably the only person that took offense to the idea that Jesus wan't European was UtwigMU.

Does it matter that he was or was not? I think Jesus thought himself part of a larger community than that of Judea. He felt he was for all mankind, and his allegiance was to God his Father, not to any mortal prince or people.

[KvHagedorn]

Oh, back on topic... I think the goofy Jesus playing baseball and other things are rather creepy if they're intended to be "serious." If they're just joke / gag items, then they're just good old tasteless.

I think they are serious, but not really so creepy. Maybe amusing.

The idea is that Christ is with us in all we do, I think. It's meant to be comforting.

[Wombat]

Giftgiving has been part of Chrisitanity ever since Roman times, so it's nothing new. Santa Claus (aka St. Nicholas etc.) has been part of Christmas since ~1100 AD. Traditions connecting him with giftgiving go back as far.

Not that Christmas has anything to do with Jesus's actual birth, which even the Bible shows would have been no later in the year than October, and likely much earlier.

[KvHagedorn]

Thus the reinterpretation/reprioritization of the rule set.

Christmas is supposed to be one of the most significant events of the Chrisitan calendar, right? It's the coming of your L&S.

And the message has been hijacked by the ability to manipulate the graven Santa Claus image. No doubt Saint Nick was a good man, but he was nothing like the man portrayed as Santa Claus. Furthermore, call it what you will, kids, who are obviously too young to know better, are praying to Santa for the toys they want.

Ok, so let's compare and contrast to Chanukah. Although the event is a secular holiday and was conceived as a reaction to Christmas, the solemnity has not been lost. It's not about the presents; they're usually lame. It's about family, and believing in miracles, etc.

Had we a graven Chanukah Harry image it would be subject to the same distortion that has occurred with Santa Claus, who until Coke got their hands on him looked very different.

I guess I was very lucky, because as a child my parents never let me miss the message that it is a good thing to be generous, as Santa Claus is depicted as being. I agree that corporations that worship only money have tried to turn everything into rot, but I don't think most people really see Santa as some sort of graven image nor have they been twisted into worshipping him as some sort of godhead symbol of consumerism.

[schmosef]

Giftgiving has been part of Chrisitanity ever since Roman times, so it's nothing new. Santa Claus (aka St. Nicholas etc.) has been part of Christmas since ~1100 AD. Traditions connecting him with giftgiving go back as far.

The term "XMAS" so many think of as a recent, commercialized name for the holiday actually goes way back to the early church as well. Eastern Christians (and not a few Jews) in those days freely interchanged their speech and writings between Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek. "X" in Greek is the first letter of Christ's name and was used as a holy symbol, hence XMAS(S) = Christs Mass.

Christmas trees, cards and carols came into the mix during the 1800's AD.

Dr. Mordrid

I'm not sure what you're driving at. I'm sure that people gave gifts before Roman times too. What does the etymology of "XMAS" have to do with anything?

I'm talking about how the message of Christmas, the spirit of Christmas has been significantly obscured in modern times. And my theory is that existence of the graven image of Santa Claus is at least partially and probably significantly at fault.

I'm not trying to say that Judaism is better than Christianity. I'm just confused by the ready acceptance of graven images in Christian culture, even though the Christian religion forbids it. And I'm explaining why graven images are so staunchly verboten in Judaism. I'm using Santa Claus as an example of something that children definitely are allowed to pray to. He's a graven image in word and deed.

And I'm saying that the true meaning of Christmas is being slowly eroded. Maybe I'm wrong. Are you arguing otherwise?

[schmosef]

Does it matter that he was or was not? I think Jesus thought himself part of a larger community than that of Judea. He felt he was for all mankind, and his allegiance was to God his Father, not to any mortal prince or people.

No it doesn't matter. You can have your German look Christ. I don't care. Maybe Gurm does.

My point is that regardless of what he looks like, I'm confused that any depiction of Jesus isn't considered a graven image.

[Jessterw]

Christmas is still a time for the celebration of family. Don't let the popular view confuse what it means to most. True, for kids, the gift giving is great importance, but that fades with age. I've never heard of a child praying to Santa, writing a letter or sitting on his lap asking for something, sure, but not the kind of prayer or worship that would make Santa into a graven image.

Christmas is what it is today because more than just Christians celebrate it. Christians still celebrate it for what it is. Adding to the celebration doesn't take away from the core meaning, it simply adds another layer to it. It's up to parents and family, as well as the church, to keep the Christian meaning from being lost. Nevermind that I don't see how Christianity is to blame for the secular additions to Christmas.

I still think you are trying to imply that the rules established by Judaism are what all others should be judged against. Which is fine if it is your belief, but, whether implied or not, there is a tone that says, "my religion is better than yours". Again, it may or may not be intended, but it's there.

I also don't understand the obsessing over the image of things, when it is the message that matters.

[schmosef]

I guess I was very lucky, because as a child my parents never let me miss the message that it is a good thing to be generous, as Santa Claus is depicted as being. I agree that corporations that worship only money have tried to turn everything into rot, but I don't think most people really see Santa as some sort of graven image nor have they been twisted into worshipping him as some sort of godhead symbol of consumerism.

Maybe I'm confused but "generosity", while a valid virtue, isn't the true message of Christmas, is it?

[Jessterw]

My point is that regardless of what he looks like, I'm confused that any depiction of Jesus isn't considered a graven image.

Because it is a depiction of Christ, not just any other being. The depiction isn't being worshiped, what it represents is. The article I linked to quite clearly explains this.

[Jessterw]

Maybe I'm confused but "generosity", while a valid virtue, isn't the true message of Christmas, is it?

It's definitely part of it. Jesus' generosity during his lifetime are very much a part of who he was. This generosity was not of the monetary or physical possession sort, but rather that of selfless giving of self.

[KvHagedorn]

I don't think a picture or a crucifix or even a statue is necessarily a graven image. Now, if someone were to carve some statue that was supposed to embody the spirit of God in any way, and we were expected to bow down before this statue as such, that would be the sort of thing God would frown upon. If some confused persons wish to pray to artifacts as though they were the embodiment of God Himself, that's very sad, and I can see how some who have been converted recently from idolatry would attach themselves to crucifixes and such in this way, but I never have, and I don't think most mainstream Christians are so mistaken.

As to Santa being a graven image that children worship, I think you are way off base there.

[schmosef]

I still think you are trying to imply that the rules established by Judaism are what all others should be judged against. Which is fine if it is your belief, but, whether implied or not, there is a tone that says, "my religion is better than yours". Again, it may or may not be intended, but it's there.

Don't be so paranoid JW, we don't want you.
Furthermore, I'm only asking because I'm trying to understand. If you don't have an answer, that's fine, but don't start accusing me of things.

I also don't understand the obsessing over the image of things, when it is the message that matters.

I'm sorry, isn't it one of your ten commandments too? It's not me who was obsessing. According to both our books, it was God.

And I've explained the Jewish rational for being so vigilant about it.

I say it's a graven image as soon as it's made. You say it has to be worshipped before it becomes a graven image.

So let me ask another question. Do all Christian sects have saints?

[Marshmallowman]

There is a reason why they call these things religous icons, eg that printer icon is not a real printer is it, but we all know what it means

[schmosef]

Because it is a depiction of Christ, not just any other being. The depiction isn't being worshiped, what it represents is. The article I linked to quite clearly explains this.

I didn't see your link before. I'll read it now.