i feel we try to squeeze too much..within too small a timeline

sinter class/saint nik's day is 5 dec
recalling how he 'revived' 3 boys butcherd by a butcher

then there is god[the all knowing seeing all knowing all]
and most definitivly isnt jesus...[jexus upons whomes birth a new year begins]...so clearly jesus 'birthday...should be on the first day[of the new year]

he dies yet didnt die
ie he came back to prove..spirit survives death..[we all get born again;..regardless of creed]..we also dont thus have a combined [unified]..reserction 'day'...[and also dont thus have any 'day of judgment']..or he as having been born of woman..would still be there awaiting his]

to say it began 2000 plus years ago...excludes the rite of the light [haunnyka]hanika]...mixes together dead trees..with the winter solstice...[so workers dont get extra days off work?]

in short its obscene..to join these diveergent sepperate events
together under a satan clause
of crass commercial excess

buh humbugg burger
ya want fries..[lies]..with that

i know one cant cover everything in a single article
but what 'birth' was more amasing...johns mother[a priestes..falling pregnany in her eighties]...;a few moths before the virgens conception

fertilised by here husband...a high priest
serving in his high office...who jesus clearly regards as the messiah[plus that jesus..didnt do anything..till the baptiser lost his head]

i will admit im much influenced by the dead sea scrolls
and books...that discuss...the good teacher..and the bad one etc

but l;ets look at the fruit of the tree
with honesty and no blame shame nor adgenda

jesus didnt write the bible
he came to unite...yet claimed to do this by division
[as written and told of by others....with the main 'words..written by one who hated the living christ..persicuted..him while alive..'paul who became saul]

the truth is hiden...too much has been confounded and subverted
santa isnt jesus and certainly aint god...[the christs house is divided]...but putting no god before god..seems clear

and its most sure..jesus never turned
the phrase..'a just war'.. into the neo[new]...law

we can find that of god..by finding
that good of life love mercy grace charity

and in the end..if its not about god...
why should it be re the messanger

to name the god...jesus
is to miss that

we shall call him..em-manuel...
[to find the good..with/in everyone]
and give the goods of god..back to the good of man kind*

not of the war or curses kind
but the loving gracefull knind...of the everpresent living good
sustaining even the most vile...too..their living..one living good god

many messangers
what christ gave
is but a fracten..of what john taught

but its not about the mess-anger
its about their...mess-age

The great thing about Christmas is that Jesus was born of a virgin so we could get Christmas presents. Yet why? Well obviously he didn't need to be born of a virgin. He could have come into the world in the usual - diploid - manner. He *chose* to be born of a virgin so that he could impress future adherents of his religion with how easily he could suspend the laws of nature at whim. However even the Bible seems to have entertained some doubt on this particular point by tracing his descent through Joseph. Obviously he coudn't be descended from Joseph if Mary was a virgin, could he? The idea that Mary might not have been a virgin of course has generated many a snigger from the impious. Even Jesus didn't seem to be too sure, as he never referred to himself as "God" or even "the son of God", but only as "the son of man". But surely that's the one thing that would *not* be true if he was born of a virgin?

But the factual circumstances of Jesus' birth are only relevant in so far as we believe the whole narrative, going back to the book of Genesis, that Jesus "saved" us. What did he save us from? Why eternal torture in Hell, of course, what else? And why were we at risk of that? Because God had decided so. And why did God decide so? Because he decided to punish all the descendants of Adam and Eve for their sin. Wasn't that a bit, you know, *abusive* of God to punish countless people for a wrong they didn't commit? Well... yes, it was, wasn't it? And what was this terrible sin? Well he told them not to eat the fruit of a particular tree, without letting them know that, if they did, he would punish them severely and torture all their innocent descendants for eternity...

Stop right there. This is nutty. Isn't it? Come on Christians, repeat after me
"Yes this is a nutty belief system and it is dishonest of me to pretend otherwise. There is no reason to think that Jesus' birth is relevant to anything but Christmas presents; it has no wider significance. And a garbled load of fabulous codswallop is not a necessary basis of a system of ethics."

Peter you write: "Stop right there. This is nutty. Isn't it?" Taken in the context of the whole bible and the fairy tales contained there in. Birth by a virgin is very mild indeed. Christians will tell you 'god works in mysterious ways', this is just a bit more of the mysterious stuff.
Peter you write: "without letting them know that, if they did, he would punish them severely and torture all their innocent descendants for eternity..."
Christians accept that their all loving, all merciful god allows innocent children to die the most agonising deaths through no fault of their own, they call it 'gods will' so a bit of eternal torture for the rest of us should not be too hard to cop.

"... this is just a bit more of the mysterious stuff."

Certainly it is.

Also mysterious is how anyone could believe it.