{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/28/2015 6:48:05 PM
2
You have it backwards. The roots would be celebrating the birth of Christ, hence Christ Mass. Pagan traditions were adopted by church to make it less secular and more palatable.
English
-
Christ was born in september
-
They believe Him to be born in April, as the anecdotal evidence suggests, such as the shepherd tending the sheep. Yes I'm aware Dec is most likely not the birth month
-
You are close. And I don't think (most of the) people here dispute there is the religion part here and the... Uh... *Other* religion part here. Only the the mouth-breathers don't get that there are two different things going on here. But the fact is, the "birth" was moved. And it was moved to co-opt a previous celebration by a different religion. It's not "to make pagan traditions less secular and more palatable" (whatever that last part means). True, it does diffuse some of the pagan ritual, but it also adds credence to the religion co-opting it. "That thing all of you are celebrating? Surprise! You are actually celebrating our belief system! See, we even changed the name to prove it!"
