• PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Im a gnostic atheist, but I’m agnostic (in the literal sense of the word - I do not think knowledge is possible at this time) with regards to a historical Jesus.

    I can’t fault your reasoning, though I’d like to throw a counter-argument out there as an alternative. The first thing I would point out is that Dec 25th was held to be the nativity of Sol Invictus, which is considered by some to be the reason for assigning the date there. I believe that’s where we also get “Sunday” as Jesus day, and the halo as a symbol of holiness.

    In addition the spring rebirth does align with the semiotics of the resurrection - the dead earth coming back to life is the origin of most of the spring-associated festivals in Europe. Dead Jesus coming back to life, and in Christian teachings ending “death” as a phenomenon for his followers, maps well to that.

    Also, I don’t think the southern cross was a big thing in Europe. I think those stars were considered to belong to another constellation (when and where they were visible) until all of the rest of this was settled.

    • Lemmeenym@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Sunday’s name doesn’t have anything to do with Jesus. Rome took the seven day week from Egypt and renamed the days after the Roman model of the solar system. Sunday is named for the Sun.