Today I'm neither Angry nor Happy about....

[Lost Leopard Spot]

As I cannot help it, can I throw into the mix, we haven't even got the faintest idea as to whether he was born at all...

if you've got as far as accepting there was a "he" - then I think it stands to reason he was born at some time...

Straws... Clutching at. I'm assuming the traditional narrative that Cheist was male. Whatever he/she/it was supposed to be, there is no evidence, from a scientific point of view, that he/it/she existed at all. Only faith... and faith is just that, an idea in your own head with no evidence whatsoever that what you believe is TRUE.

When you're banging on his door; you start to believe. Believe me, you start to believe..............

I think, if we are are going to compare banging on door moments, then I think, on the balance of probabilities, that we had equally 'horrendous' experiences. In my case, it made me less likely to believe in unicorns...

[thebish]

I think you misunderstand my 'argument'. There is no proof (as an example) that Zeus was born on April 1st... not because it is as equally likely that he was born on November 7th, but because he wasn't born at all...

I don't think I do... maybe it'd help if you specified what kind of "proof" you'd expect that someone existed about 2000 years ago...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I think you misunderstand my 'argument'. There is no proof (as an example) that Zeus was born on April 1st... not because it is as equally likely that he was born on November 7th, but because he wasn't born at all...

I don't think I do... maybe it'd help if you specified what kind of "proof" you'd expect that someone existed about 2000 years ago...

How can I put this...? I rather feel, that if somebody is going to argue as to whether or not we know what date Christ's birthday is, and that somebody is labelled as a Christian, then, when I come along and argue the fact that we don't know whether Christ actually existed or not, then I feel the ball is in your court as regarding what kind of proof you'd present regarding 'his' existence, as opposed to me having to specify what kind of proof I'd expect. No doubt, there is no proof, but that doesn't invalidate my conjecture, but it does however ask questions as to why you'd take his existence as a fact seeing as you yourself acknowledge that proof of his existence cannot reasonably exist.

[Worthy4England]

So if you don't believe in God AG, then you won't be celebrating his birthday? No presents, tree or festive food?!

I take Bank Holidays off.

I don't work in a bank.

But you believe banks exist, I think. And you get the holiday because of the Act of Parliament they're taken from, rather than because they only apply to banks.

As Christmas Day isn't a Bank Holiday and you don't believe in Christ, you should be made to work it.

[Lord Kangana]

I do.

Though my belief in banks existence is neither here nor there, as they exist.

And re: what you've read - its because they come from the Bank of England originally. You need to read more than Wiki. So ner.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So if you don't believe in God AG, then you won't be celebrating his birthday? No presents, tree or festive food?!

I take Bank Holidays off.

I don't work in a bank.

But you believe banks exist, I think. And you get the holiday because of the Act of Parliament they're taken from, rather than because they only apply to banks.

As Christmas Day isn't a Bank Holiday and you don't believe in Christ, you should be made to work it.

But it is...

[Worthy4England]

I do.

Though my belief in banks existence is neither here nor there, as they exist.

And re: what you've read - its because they come from the Bank of England originally. You need to read more than Wiki. So ner.

I don't think I said Bank Holidays didn't come from the BoE. I just pointed to the legislation from which people who don't work in banks get the day off. Hence, whether you work in a Bank or not, is irrelevant. So ner with knobs on.

[Worthy4England]

So if you don't believe in God AG, then you won't be celebrating his birthday? No presents, tree or festive food?!

I take Bank Holidays off.

I don't work in a bank.

But you believe banks exist, I think. And you get the holiday because of the Act of Parliament they're taken from, rather than because they only apply to banks.

As Christmas Day isn't a Bank Holiday and you don't believe in Christ, you should be made to work it.

But it is...

No it ain't it's a public holiday.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So if you don't believe in God AG, then you won't be celebrating his birthday? No presents, tree or festive food?!

I take Bank Holidays off.

I don't work in a bank.

But you believe banks exist, I think. And you get the holiday because of the Act of Parliament they're taken from, rather than because they only apply to banks.

As Christmas Day isn't a Bank Holiday and you don't believe in Christ, you should be made to work it.

But it is...

No it ain't it's a public holiday.

According to the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 Christmas Day is a movable Public Holiday in so much as when Christmas Day falls on a weekday it is a Bank Holiday, and when it falls on a weekend day it is a substitute day and a Public Holiday is declared on the Monday after, in lieu. So yes, it is a Public Holiday, but it is also a Bank holiday when 25th December falls on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday... so triple nerr...

[Worthy4England]

According to the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 Christmas Day is a movable Public Holiday in so much as when Christmas Day falls on a weekday it is a Bank Holiday, and when it falls on a weekend day it is a substitute day and a Public Holiday is declared on the Monday after, in lieu. So yes, it is a Public Holiday, but it is also a Bank holiday when 25th December falls on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday... so triple nerr...

You could point me to where the said Act declares Christmas day a Bank Holiday?

[Lord Kangana]

I think we're kind of proving LLS's point in a very practical way here.

[Worthy4England]

I think we're kind of proving LLS's point in a very practical way here.

Not at all Christmas Day as a holiday exists because of custom and practice. So pretty much because folk believe it's a day off.

[Lord Kangana]

But, and here's the clincher, you're asking for proof beyond reasonable doubt to support a postulation.

Ithankyou.

[thebish]

I think you misunderstand my 'argument'. There is no proof (as an example) that Zeus was born on April 1st... not because it is as equally likely that he was born on November 7th, but because he wasn't born at all...

I don't think I do... maybe it'd help if you specified what kind of "proof" you'd expect that someone existed about 2000 years ago...

How can I put this...? I rather feel, that if somebody is going to argue as to whether or not we know what date Christ's birthday is, and that somebody is labelled as a Christian, then, when I come along and argue the fact that we don't know whether Christ actually existed or not, then I feel the ball is in your court as regarding what kind of proof you'd present regarding 'his' existence, as opposed to me having to specify what kind of proof I'd expect. No doubt, there is no proof, but that doesn't invalidate my conjecture, but it does however ask questions as to why you'd take his existence as a fact seeing as you yourself acknowledge that proof of his existence cannot reasonably exist.

i'm struggling to grasp your point/reasoning... for me - the reference to his encounter with Pilate and his death in Josephus's history and in Tacitus's writings (among others) - and the fact that several other people chose to write about his life is compelling enough for me to believe he existed. the idea of having proof of the existence of a person who lived 2000 yrs ago beyond some kind of written record about his life/sayings/deeds/death is what is escaping me - there's as much (probably much MORE) "proof" that Jesus existed as there is anyone else who lived 2000yrs ago...

on what basis do you believe ANY particular individual existed 2000yrs ago - that's my question... (I'm not sure why you are dodging it...)

a further reason is that - unless I have missed it - there is no record of any contemporaneous or near-contemporaneous source that denied the existence of jesus... If his entire existence was made up - then I'd have expected there to be some record of someone denying it... but - not a squeak...

furthermore - I am struggling to grasp a motive for such a fabrication... the early church leaders were persecuted, used as human torches and fed to the lions (if you believe Nero existed - though I'm not sure how you could be sure...)

there's certainly more than enough to satisfy my questions as to whether he actually existed.

as for how his life/existence has been interpreted and used/abused - well, that's a whole different ballgame...

[Worthy4England]

But, and here's the clincher, you're asking for proof beyond reasonable doubt to support a postulation.

Ithankyou.

No I'm not. It was rhetorical.I believe the answer is that Spotty can't point me to any words in the said Act that make Christmas Day a Bank Holiday (because they don't exist).

So Christmas Day is a holiday because enough folk believe we shouldn't work that day, so it only actually exists because we believe it exists. QED.

[Lord Kangana]

I thought you were arguing the exactitude of Xmas, crimbo, whatever you wish to be calling it, being a holiday, not a bank holiday?

[Worthy4England]

I thought you were arguing the exactitude of Xmas, crimbo, whatever you wish to be calling it, being a holiday, not a bank holiday?

I said it was a public holiday not a Bank Holiday.

[Lord Kangana]

Exactly.

[Worthy4England]

Exactly.

[Lord Kangana]

You just repeated what I said above. Just there.