Hypocrites can't change this

  • Follow Letters

Let’s end it once and for all. Anti-Christians who do not want anything Christian said, displayed, etc., are hypocrites. Every day they use a Christian item, and they cannot live without it. It is the calendar – the Gregorian, Christian calendar. Period. If they want to change anything, let them try to change the calendar! Ha!

Carlo Bracci

Evans

Comments (26) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
omnomnom
3964
Points
omnomnom 01/07/12 - 02:23 am
0
0
give pagans back December

give pagans back December 25th and they may capitulate Mr. Bracci. I've no use for calendars myself. They just remind me my days are numbered :)

copperhead
1035
Points
copperhead 01/07/12 - 10:19 am
0
0
Look out- we may be forced to

Look out- we may be forced to go to the muslim calendar!

Riverman1
84926
Points
Riverman1 01/07/12 - 10:25 am
0
0
I want us to start using the

I want us to start using the Mayan Calendar. I want some action this year.

Riverman1
84926
Points
Riverman1 01/07/12 - 10:44 am
0
0
If we get enough women

If we get enough women believing in the Mayan calendar this could turn into a fun year. You know an Airplane like thing where we keep reminding the women the end is near, sooooooo.......

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/07/12 - 10:45 am
0
0
Kinda odd that a "Christian"

Kinda odd that a "Christian" calendar would have months named after Roman gods and emperors. Maybe the Mayan would have been more appropriate.

TParty
6003
Points
TParty 01/07/12 - 11:02 am
0
0
January is named after Janus,

January is named after Janus, the name has its beginnings in Roman mythology. Janus is the god of beginnings and transition. I wonder why the Christian calendar would have Roman gods representing the months...

It's probably the same reason why Christians adopted Satunalia, a roman holiday that gave us the gift-giving aspect of Christmas.... It was just an easier transition from one mythology to another.

drivenslow
0
Points
drivenslow 01/07/12 - 11:38 am
0
0
hahahahahaha sound like this
Unpublished

hahahahahaha sound like this christian like many has no idea of history beyond that bible....the calendar just like christmas has nothing to do with christainity or religion......maybe pagan religion and you christians wonder why you are such easy targets
hahahahahahahahaha

drivenslow
0
Points
drivenslow 01/07/12 - 11:40 am
0
0
its not the religion its the
Unpublished

its not the religion its the ignorance you spew in defense of your religion

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/07/12 - 01:07 pm
0
0
Mythology? Hardly. Show me

Mythology? Hardly. Show me where Juno, Saturn, Janus, et al. were born on earth. Where did they live and die? There's no historical evidence for these myths.

In stark contrast, there is more abundant historical and archeological proof that Jesus Christ existed than for practically any other figure from antiquity.

Now, you may not believe that Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, as he taught and as his earliest followers believed as a truth worth dying for. That is your right. But, to lump Christ in with the ancient myths of Rome or any other civilization is preposterous and reveals more prejudice than objective thinking.

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 01/07/12 - 01:43 pm
0
0
And all the good you've

And all the good you've done
Will soon get swept away.
You've begun to matter more
Than the things you say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDzxn66W3uM&feature=related

madgerman
236
Points
madgerman 01/07/12 - 02:32 pm
0
0
I gather that because the
Unpublished

I gather that because the Gregorian calendar use was decreed by GregoryXIII that he is a good Catholic. I mean afterall the first christian religion was catholic so shouldn't all christians be catholic? But then again Jesus was Jewish so.......

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/07/12 - 03:08 pm
0
0
The first "Christians" were

The first "Christians" were not specifically the "Catholic" Church. Jesus' earliest followers were called "The Way". Then they became known as Christians, first at Antioch a bit later on. With the influence of Christianity finally overtaking the Roman empire, Constantine made Christianity the official state religion much, much later. That's when Roman Catholicism really took hold, and held power (both political and religious) through the Middle Ages until the Reformation.

Catholics will probably say that when Peter and the Apostles established The Church on the Day of Pentecost, that was the beginning of the "Catholic" Church -- with Peter as the first Pope. I guess it just depends on how you want to look at it. Perspectives can differ.

TParty
6003
Points
TParty 01/07/12 - 03:43 pm
0
0
There is also proof of Joseph

There is also proof of Joseph Smith, the founder of Latter-Day Saints, but the stories are still myth. The golden plates are on par with any other supernatural miracle one reads about Jesus, Moses, and Mohammed.

Jon Lester
2323
Points
Jon Lester 01/07/12 - 04:28 pm
0
0
And the Eastern Orthodox

And the Eastern Orthodox church uses the Julian calendar. Today happens to be Christmas.

Conservative Man
5577
Points
Conservative Man 01/07/12 - 04:50 pm
0
0
Pithy letter...Love it!!

Pithy letter...Love it!!

pearlthesquirrel
786
Points
pearlthesquirrel 01/07/12 - 05:09 pm
0
0
Holy tintinnabulation
Unpublished

Holy tintinnabulation Batman...it's only seven days into the year 2012 and already The Augusta Chronicle has printed two letters (more on that later) that are "pro-religious" in orientation. In Mondays paper we had Gil Ward and Christmas gone: Jesus isn't - and today we get Carlo Bracci and Hypocrites can't change this. Carlos' letter - all seven sentences of it - seems to be not so much a letter as it is what my old college bro' would call "random thoughts." As I read Carlos' letter(?), I kept envisioning a little kid with an ice cream cone sticking out THEIR tongue at another kid because THAT kid doesn't have an ice cream cone. That's hilarious because, ...well, I'll tell you why. I'm the guy that would paintbrush-backhand that ice cream cone out of that other kids hand and stomp a mudhole in it after it hit the ground! I mean, did Carlos use the word "hypocrite" towards agnostics, atheists, non-believers, infidels, secularists, scientists, and the like? Really? When Carlos says "hypocrites", does he mean like all the religious prelates accused of "sexual assault", "child molestation", "stealing/embezzling church funds", and "indecent assault and gross indecency" ad nauseum until the cows come home within the religious community - is that what he means by hypocites or hypocrisy? Maybe Carlos needs to open up that Bible and hit up Romans 2:1 and Matthew 7:1-2....you know, that's the part about "judging other people." Hypocrites - tell me about it. And one more thing - I'm a baaaaaaaaaaaad man! Peace out!

shrimp for breakfast
5457
Points
shrimp for breakfast 01/07/12 - 07:34 pm
0
0
I agree with Riverman 100%

I agree with Riverman 100%

bailmeout4
0
Points
bailmeout4 01/07/12 - 08:23 pm
0
0
Howcanweknow..."practically

Howcanweknow..."practically than another figure from antiquity"...yeah, thats true due to your eurocentric teaching. Ever heard of Buddha?

Pu239
284
Points
Pu239 01/07/12 - 08:58 pm
0
0
When I read this LTE....my
Unpublished

When I read this LTE....my mind played MC Hammer as the sound track...

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/07/12 - 11:57 pm
0
0
TParty, you comments are

TParty, you comments are standard for someone who just rejects Christianity without really thinking seriously about it. Pretty common, actually. People been saying the same thing for several centuries, but no one has yet proven Christianity a hoax (like Joseph Smith and the golden plates).

What no one can answer is why the eyewitnesses to Jesus' life gave their own lives rather than deny his miracles -- particularly his resurrection. They suffered terrible tortures rather than say it was all a hoax. And, they were there. We, 2000 years later, were not.

Can you be more specific about which "hoaxes" you are referring to regarding Christianity?

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/08/12 - 12:00 am
0
0
bailmeout4, huh? I didn't say

bailmeout4, huh? I didn't say anything against Buddha. Why are you bringing him up? By the way, Christ was not in Europe. He was in Asia.

All I was saying is that there is substantial evidence for Christ's life and death -- even from contemporary Roman, Greek, and Jewish historians. My comment was in response to TParty, who did not bring up Buddha either. Buddha was not part of this thread (until you arrived).

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/08/12 - 12:05 am
0
0
PearlySquirrel, like so many

PearlySquirrel, like so many you misunderstand the "don't judge" passage, and quote it out of context. Please go back and read it carefully. Jesus does not say "don't judge". What the passage addresses is not being a hypocrite. Judge your own acts before you judge the acts of another. That is NOT a prohibition against judging at all. Quite the contrary.

Interestingly, there are several NT passage that instruct Christians to judge. People conveniently forget to quote those verses, don't they.

If a person is blatantly violating God's commands as listed in the Bible, then that fact can be pointed out. Again, that's not judging at all. That's simply stating facts.

This "don't judge" thing is blown way out of proportion. In context, it does not prohibit judging in the least.

bailmeout4
0
Points
bailmeout4 01/08/12 - 12:57 am
0
0
Howcanweknow...you are so

Howcanweknow...you are so lost. Eurocentric teaching refers to your education. Also, you did say "In stark contrast, there is more abundant historical and archeological proof that Jesus Christ existed than for practically any other figure from antiquity," hence the Buddha reference.

InChristLove
22480
Points
InChristLove 01/08/12 - 09:17 am
0
0
Eurocentric means centered or

Eurocentric means centered or focused on Europe or European peoples, especially in relation to historical or cultural influence.......so I am assuming this is why Howcanweknow stated "By the way, Christ was not in Europe. He was in Asia."

bailmeout4, possibly a better phrase or word could have been used to make your snide remark?

The difference in Buddha and Christ is, Buddha never claimed to be a god or prophet and set out searching for truth. There is no doubt that he was a mere man who claims to be Enlightened. Oh the other hand, Christ did claim himself to be Jehovah, God, and He is the Truth.

There are several accounts of who Buddha was, when he was born, and if he really existed as a man on earth. There are historical documents mentioning a man named Jesus that corresponds with teaching in the Bible and referencing his death on the cross. I believe Howcanweknow was referencing true actual figures of antiquity. If you can not prove Buddha actually existed as a man then it is a myth and can not be included in the equation.

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/08/12 - 01:49 pm
0
0
Bailout, I said "practically"

Bailout, I said "practically" any other character from history, as you note. I didn't say there was no evidence for Buddha. What gives?

Why bring up Buddha at all? He is irrelvant to this discussion at hand.

If I am "eurocentric", then you are "buddhacentric".

ICL has hit the real issue on the head. Buddhim is basically atheistic, and preaches individual enlightment. Christ claimed to be God Incarnate, and the way for man to reach God.

Buddha was all about the self reaching up to "god" (whatever that is), whereas Christ is all about God coming down to man. Sounds like Christ sure has a far better teaching to me!

OJP
6788
Points
OJP 01/08/12 - 02:32 pm
0
0
Classic strawman, Mr.

Classic strawman, Mr. Bracci.

I don't know any non-Christian "who do[es] not want anything Christian said, displayed, etc..." And simply because something has Christian origins or was created by a Christian does not mean that it is Christian (many horrible people are Christians, after all).

But if you insist, then Christians must change the names of the months and days of the week. Those are not Christian.

OJP

InChristLove
22480
Points
InChristLove 01/08/12 - 03:07 pm
0
0
OJP, I guess it is wonderful

OJP, I guess it is wonderful that you don't know any non-believers who do not want anything relating to Christianity said or displayed. Sadly, I do. You are correct though, in saying just because something may have a Christian origin does not mean that is Christian, but maybe it would have been better stated there are many horrible people who "claim" to be Christian. None of us are perfect individuals and we all deter from the path of righteousnessfrom time to time, but for someone to be classified as" horrible", I would question whether their status of Christian was valid.

Although I understand the point Mr. Bracci is trying to make, I do think his stance could have been better said using something other than the calendar. The calendar was last reformed by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 based on calculations referencing Easter which Christians celebrate as the death and resurrection of Christ, some of the months named for Roman gods where never changed.

So to say the names of the month have to be changed in order to call it a Christian calendar, is no more valid than to say we need to change the calculation of our months because it's not a Christian calendar. Why can we not accept it as a combination of two worlds....you decide which is the better of the two.

howcanweknow
2306
Points
howcanweknow 01/08/12 - 03:37 pm
0
0
Many horrible people are

Many horrible people are Christians. Well, that's partly true. Christians never claim to be perfect people, just sinners who are forgiven.

I would ask what gives OJP the right to say who is horrible and who is not? Obviously, OJP has set the moral standard for society, and we are to obey that standard or we are branded as "horrible". As someone criticized above, "judge not" huh? Nice to see that "horrible" Christians are not the only judgmental folks alive.

OJP
6788
Points
OJP 01/08/12 - 04:57 pm
0
0
InChristLove: I'd wager there

InChristLove:

I'd wager there are almost no non-Christians in this entire country who do not want anything relating to Christianity said or displayed. Most agnostics/atheists cherish separation of church and state, and therefore fully support Christians' rights to say and display anything relating to their religion (particularly in private) - as long as the government isn't tangled up with it.

It's an absurd statement, really.

And I was being facetious about the calendar. Non-Christians are no more endorsing Christians by using the Gregorian calendar than Christians are endorsing paganism by using the common names of the week (e.g., Sun-day, Moon-day, Thors-day, Saturn-day).

The "No True Scotsman" argument won't work with me, either. Some Christians are horrible people. However, that doesn't mean that the religion must own what they do.

OJP

OJP
6788
Points
OJP 01/08/12 - 04:56 pm
0
0
howcanweknow: As a

howcanweknow:

As a non-Christian, Christ's dictate to "Judge not, lest ye be judged" doesn't really apply to me (in a religious sense) - and certainly isn't an effective "gotcha" against me.

And I'm no more going to get into a pedantic argument over the definition of "horrible" as I am over whether 1+1=2 can be definitely proven true.

OJP

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs