Some may say that it is never a good time to put poop in the punch bowl, and Christmas Eve would be a punch bowl sort of time for your statement. But you really didn't put it in the bowl. You posted this in the Atheists and Agnostics forum. That should be perfectly fine. Believers need not tread here and be offended. If I visit the Religion forum I respect that it is a forum not specifically for atheists, like me, in which to constantly deride religion.
I have some pretty strong opinions on religion. Namely, that it is one of the worst evils mankind ever dreamed up. There are tons of people who hold the same view. Perhaps you are one of them. Others see the good things religions bring about and praise them.
I tend to agree with Sam Harris. Harris contends that the only moral framework worth talking about is one where "morally good" things pertain to increases in the "well-being of conscious creatures" (That last sentence is a quote from Wikipedia. I couldn't really improve on it so I used it). Every religion has brought about some pretty opposite consequences from improving the well-being of sentient beings. In fact, religions have brought about some of the most horrific scourges on sentient beings. Our current, popular ones are no exception.
The idea that one needs religion or Gods and Goddesses to be moral is quite the fallacy.
But I digress. The subject is the Nativity. It is quite the hyped and contrived story. First of all, many ancient dwellings had spaces where humans and animals were pretty close together and even shared. The shared body heat of the large animals helped heat the dwellings. So the mix of humans and animals at the scene is really only remarkable to modern people. Though, when I travel in the Northeastern US I see a lot of what look like houses and barns back to back or otherwise connected. Surely this served more than the purpose of making it easy to get to the livestock during cold, snowy winters.
Now days, historians are beginning to come right out and say the story is just a fable. That shepherds would not be tending a flock in December. That perhaps the story would be more properly set in June than in December. Most of us know that the Romans picked the date to co-opt the winter festival they already observed. Just like building physical structures of the new Christian church over the old temples of earlier religions served to wipe them out, selecting that date was purposely selected to help wipe out the old pagan festival.
Then there is the whole matter of having to return to one's birthplace for a census or paying taxes. Roman documents show this just was not the way it was done. People were taxed in the province in which they resided. Just like today. There is also no record of a census at this time. So that part is also pretty silly
As for the Magi? I'm not really sure.
Frankly, the whole thing just seems to be the ancient equivalent of a Lifetime TV movie. Nice to watch with the family but completely devoid of reality.
= new reply since forum marked as read
