Will you please watch this, it refutes EVERY point you just mentioned and it was right in front of your post. Ridiculous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_9ZyddjaM4&eurl
I just watched this as well, it was a total waste of time, and now I'll never forgive you
It didn't address all my points, which is basicaly that by not even looking at the pagan sources - which are also doubtful, it is alleging the
bible says things it doesn't say. I thought it wasn't even going to address any of the points I made, but after six minutes into it
I found something.
The first 3 minutes, she says absolutely nothing.
At 3:30 minutes, she basically said I made up the pagan sources, and they disagree with everyone else, but really I know because I reconstructed it.
At 5:00 is a pitch to buy my books if you want sources
At 5:30 christians burned it all up, so there are no sources (and so I made it up!)
At 6:15 minutes she claims ok, Christians really started celebrating Christmas in the 4th century, so its part of the "tradition" even if its not in the bible.
First, this is completely wrong. There were no widespread Christmas celebrations until the middle ages. And what we call Christmas is part of
the Adam and Eve festival of the early middle ages.
Look it up, thats why there is a christmas tree.
This is why the Puritans could so easily ban Christmas. And also, I am a puritan type, so if its a tradition and not in the bible, it goes.
7:00 She addresses the number of wise men not being in the bible.
I missed that. I meant they weren't at his birth, the wise men appeared later when he was an infant somewhere under two.
She does not address they weren't even at his birth.
So I add to my list of ojections, there weren't
3 wise men in the bible either. There were just
wise men in the bible. Its just a late day pop-culture addition.
8:00 more attacking
etc.
The information I wanted took up less than a minute. She probably spent as much time talking about buying her books
-----------------------------------------------------
This type of information is not new to me at all, because my beliefs are puritan / reform type beliefs. There are countless books written on traditions not in the bible and that should not be in the church from a Christian perspective, and this reformers tradition goes back four hundred and more years. If you have studied it, it is pretty easy to separate what is in the bible from what is not. Zit is just blurring the lines between what is actually biblical and what non-Christians might believe about it.
Here is an example of an old popular work on traditions that aren't in the bible. "The Two Babylons, 1853". It has many flaws, but compared to zit its still better".
http://philologos.org/__eb-ttb/
Separation of pagan practices from the bible isn't an atheist undertaking, its puritan, and requires much reading of the bible. Christmas trees for instance aren't biblical, which is why I know that the celebration of it originally wasn't "christ's birth" but the adam and eve festival.