babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » culture   » Three Myths of Christmas

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Three Myths of Christmas
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 22 December 2006 12:31 AM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hey All. WIth all the chatter about Lord's Prayers, religious fundamentalism of various kinds and the political ramifications, I thought I would hurl this out for folks to consider.

First, though, just to say best wishes and happy holidays (Christmas, Chanukah, Winter Solstice, etc.) to all Rabblers and families.

1. JC's Birthday

December 25, according to Gail Penhall, Catholic Theology professor and religious historian at Franciscan University, was not the birth date of the legendary JC. That day was picked by the wife of Roman Emperor Constantine III, who, after making a career of slaughtering Christians, declared himself to be one.

That day was originally the supposed birth of the Pagan God of Saturn, her favourite holiday known as the Saturnalia, when people were supposed to show they all loved and cared for one another by exchanging gifts. She felt that since in Christian folklore the Three Wise Men brought gifts to Jesus on his birthday, there was no problem continuing that tradition. Besides, it made it easier for the huge Pagan populations to convert to Christianity if the traditions were the same.

Also, what we know today Dec. 25 at that time would have been early November in the old Julian calendar, which the Romans developed (named after Caesar Julius). December's root word is "deca," which means "ten" for the tenth month. The date we have today, in the twelfth month a week before the New Year, didn't exist before the Gregorian calendar (named after Pope Gregory XIII) was developed in 1582.

Actually for Catholics and Coptics (the oldest Christian church), the biggest religious holiday is supposed to be Easter, since that was the supposed time of JC's resurrection and resulting salvation of humanity, not Christmas.

The actual assumed birth of JC took place likely in April and has nothing to do with gift-giving, winter blues, yuletide cheer or the month of December.

Amazing what totalitarian rule can accomplish.

2. The Virgin Mary in the stable

According to Penhall and other religious scholars, there is no actual historic claim in the Bible that JC was born of a virgin woman. Rather the reference is symbolic to indicate purity and integrity, not that a virgin woman actually got pregnant. That, as we all know, would be a biological perversion and a physical impossibility.

The idea that she was virgin came from an Old Testament prophecy in the Book of Matthew, which predicted the Messiah, which is an old Hebrew term for "salvage" or "save," would be born in the Palestinian city of Bethlehem of a young un-married woman. The assumption by many Jewish advocates then was that she would be a virgin, since the prophecy said she was to be "pure"--as in innocent and un-corrupted.

But in fact, the Book of Luke, written an estimated 80 to 100 years later, re-affirmed the Mathew prediction, but acknowledged that the Messiah would be a descendant of the family of David, who were the ancestors of Joseph, Mary's husband and obviously JC's father. The family of David apparently had always been based mainly in Bethlehem. While Joseph may have lived in the city of Nazareth, his family, which supposedly traces its roots back to David, lived mostly in Bethlehem.

Also, the book the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, written by two religious historians, claims that the whole idea of Mary being a virgin is an error in translation, since ancient Hebrew terminology for purity of spirit or innocence, especially when applied to a young woman, could easily be confused with sexual virginity. Add to this, the repeated translations of these ancient texts into ancient Greek, three stages of Latin, modern Greek, then into early Italian, various Gaulic, Gaelic, Saxon and Slavic languages and then through repeated stages of English and other languages certainly helps confuse things further.

Furthermore, according to Penhall, there are NO Biblical references to JC being born in a stable manger surrounded by animals because Mary and Joseph were denied access to an inn. None. Not any.

Penhall says that infant mortality was very high in that era. It is much more likely that Mary would have been surrounded by the women of Joseph's family in one of their homes, since they were in Bethlehem, assisting in the child birth.

The stable and inn stories were likely added later to re-enforce the values of purity and humility and modesty, and rejecting materialism, accumulated wealth and status.

Religious historians, including those of the Vatican, argue that the Bible is in fact written in symbolisms and metaphors resulting from writing of people experiencing visions that they believe were divinely inspired. These stories are meant to promote a real code of ethics, conduct and morals that, they say, are divinely inspired (Ten Commandments, golden rule, etc.), and are not in themselves meant to be taken literally in a material sense.

Sadly, over the centuries, these myths and symbols have been twisted around and modified by religious power cliques, corporate capitalist institutions and oppressive state regimes to terrorize and guilt-trip people into being obedient and subservient to them. The idea of power deities that can arbitrarily violate the laws of nature and physics without any recourse is a good way to do that.

3. Big Fat Jolly Santa Claus

Christmas really goes commercial with this myth. Actually, according to both the Vatican and Wikipedia, there was a Santa Claus of sorts--and many versions of him over the centuries. The earliest historic references are from 16th Century German Catholic literature, which actually describe a character from 1400 years earlier, Saint Nicholas (Sankt Nikolaus),in A.D. 245 in the port city of Patara in Byzantium (now Turkey). He became the Bishop of Myra and the patron saint of children, sailors, students and teachers and was known for his charity and poverty relief work. His feast day is apparently Dec. 6, when he supposedly dedicated his time to getting gifts to children of poor and oppressed families, which is the main reason he is connected with Christmas.

There are also stories of him and his family (this was before the Catholic celibacy rule of the 15th Century) were forced to leave due to his repeated challenges to the authority of both the church and state hierarchies and the merchant classes and seek refuge in central Europe to the north. As time went on, repeated stories kept him moving further and further north.

With the rise of Protestant reformism of Martin Luther, Nikolaus got de-sanctified, since most Protestant religions don't have saints, and he became known as das Christkindl--Kris Kringle in English--(an angel-like "Christ Child") and eventually evolved into der Weihnachtsmann (Father Christmas).

In Austria, Holland, parts of Germany, and Switzerland, Nikolaus (or Pelznickel) brings his gifts for children on Nikolaustag, Dec. 6, not Dec. 25. Nowadays, St. Nicholas Day on Dec. 6 is a preliminary round for Christmas. The tradition later spread to parts of England, where Nikolaus got his sainthood back, since Anglicans do recognize saints.

Dutch settlers brought the "Sinter Klaas" myth with them to New Amsterdam in the mid 1600s (now New York). British settlers did the same later.

However, in none of these versions was the mythical Santa Klaus ("Claus" in English) ever fat, wear a red-and-white suit, necessarily jolly or fly around with reindeer and air-drop himself in houses via the chimney.

That came with Clement C. Moore's 1823 book A Visit from St. Nicholas, which showed Santa Claus driving a sleight drawn by "eight tiny reindeer" and in doing so he created an image we all have today. Artist Thomas Nast drew Santa Claus based on Moore's description cementing in this image.

Apparently, the image was spruced up by graphic artists working for Coca Cola, which, of course, has adopted the red and white colours.

It's too bad that a guy associated with such great acts of compassion and charity has become the twisted icon of corporate commercialism and excess.


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Krago
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3064

posted 22 December 2006 03:26 AM      Profile for Krago     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steppenwolf Allende:
[QB]Furthermore, according to Penhall, there are NO Biblical references to JC being born in a stable manger surrounded by animals because Mary and Joseph were denied access to an inn. None. Not any.[QB]


CHARLIE BROWN : Isn't there anyone out there who can tell me what Christmas is all about?

LINUS VAN PELT : Sure, Charlie Brown, I can tell you. Lights, please. (A spotlight shines on Linus.) "And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flocks by night. And lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the lord shone round about them, and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not, for behold, I bring unto you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you this day is born in the City of Bethlehem, a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; you shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel, a multitude of the heavenly host, praising God, and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on Earth peace, good will toward men'". That's what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown.


From: The Royal City | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Caissa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12752

posted 22 December 2006 05:20 AM      Profile for Caissa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
For a good examination of the Gospel Birth Traditions you should read John Shelby Spong's, Born of a Woman.
From: Saint John | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 22 December 2006 05:26 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Actually, if you go by the account in Luke, which claims that Jesus was born in the 6th month (going by the Hebrew calendar), he'd have been born in August or September, not April.

Also, it IS in the Bible that Jesus was placed in a manger because there was no room at the inn. Luke 2:6-7. Although I have no problem with the idea that these verses could have been added later. In fact, if I remember my theology correctly, none of the gospels were written at the time it was happening, and the purpose of the gospels was to speak to different audiences quite a while after Jesus was gone and groups of Christians were establishing the movement, and it's believed that these accounts were written more as propaganda tools than as strict scholarly history.

And, of course, there are also many more gospels with all sorts of interesting things (that many Christians nowadays would consider heretic) said about Jesus and his life, and they are interesting legends about him.

What always amazes me is that people can believe that every word of the current Bible is true and that the gospels that didn't make the cut are heretic or not true. The whole process for choosing which texts for inclusion in the bible was completely political, and obviously patriarchal although most fundies don't care about that. Even if you believe that the people who wrote the gospels about Jesus were divinely inspired, surely the fact that a bunch of guys picking and choosing which ones to include in the Bible based on what they WANTED TO BELIEVE should make you say, hmm, maybe the Bible isn't the last word when it comes to the life and teachings of Jesus. And maybe, just maybe, the admonitions in the Bible about not taking away or adding texts to the canon without suffering divine retribution might be just a wee bit tautological and self-serving on the part of the people who chose which texts would be included.

It's amazing to me that any Christian can get through their first year of philosophy or religious studies, get all this information about how man-made the process of building the Christian religion was (and how much of Christian theology is actually just recycled from much older, supposedly "heathen" or "pagan" religions), and not give up the pap they've been spoonfed in Sunday school. I don't know how they do it. I almost envy them.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Caissa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12752

posted 22 December 2006 06:01 AM      Profile for Caissa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Most of Paul's letters pre-date the first Gospel which was Mark. Mathew was written next, followed by LUke and finally John. They reflect different theologies.
From: Saint John | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Brett Mann
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6441

posted 22 December 2006 06:59 AM      Profile for Brett Mann        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The "first takes" on editing the Bible stories were made by the earliest Christian communities, as those who had actually seen and heard Jesus in the flesh began to die off and misleading and/or innaccurate accounts of His teachings began to appear. Michael Grant, one of the foremost historians of the Bible takes a stab at figuring out what was added later and what was ommited. His argument is largely based on the inclusion of stories which presumably early church fathers would not really want to include, perhaps like the driving of the money changers from the Temple (showing Jesus capable of real anger) but which could not be excluded because too many people had witnessed the actual event. Grant also points out that the earliest scripture writers were not reporters, and not interested in "factual" reports of the kind we expect today. For these early writers, the point was Jesus' continuation of and consistency with the prophetic traditions of the Old Testament. This they took as the deepest reality, and so did the audience they were writing for. There are those in Christendom who believe that the record and the Church began to be skewed away from the real teaching of Christ by Paul, who never met Jesus. He set Christianity on the road to wide acceptance and cultural dominance, but at what damage to Jesus real original teachings? To do an "end run" around Paul and get closer to "primitive Christianity", take a look at the Gospels of Thomas, Valentine, et al,, wrongly labelled "gnostic" gospels.
From: Prince Edward County ON | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 22 December 2006 08:08 AM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well written Steppenwolf

quote:
That day was originally the supposed birth of the Pagan God of Saturn, her favourite holiday known as the Saturnalia, when people were supposed to show they all loved and cared for one another by exchanging gifts.

Might also want to note that decorating a tree also orginates from the same Pagan line... For the most case, Christianity copied and eventually took over pretty much every Pagan tradition and holiday (which really aided in it's general spread and acceptance).


From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 22 December 2006 11:17 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
For the most case, Christianity copied and eventually took over pretty much every Pagan tradition

In Latin America, it is very common to come upon towns named "San Juan de Tlalcapa" or "San Francisco de Chichimotl".

The natives will tell you that when the priests came, they just slapped a Saint John or Saint Francis on the front of the original village name, hoping the natives would eventually start using it.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 22 December 2006 11:49 PM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Also, it IS in the Bible that Jesus was placed in a manger because there was no room at the inn. Luke 2:6-7. Although I have no problem with the idea that these verses could have been added later.

This is exactly what many religious scholars are saying. I haven't read that passage myself, but it doesn't seems likely to me that if it's true that much of Joseph's family was living in Bethlehem, which is supposedly one reason why they went there, that they would leave him and his wife to deliver a baby in a manger.

So it seems more likely that was added later (just like the misinterpretation over Mary being an actual virgin instead of just being pure or innocent).

Another couple Christmas traditions that are actually pre-Christian are Christmas Lights (only thing I actually like about the season) and the Christmas tree

I wonder how many of those lovable right-wing "Christian" fundamentalists out there know they are committing heresy by decking up a tree or setting up a few lights.


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Winnie the Pooh
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13670

posted 23 December 2006 05:11 AM      Profile for Winnie the Pooh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Brilliant display of animosity towards a faith.

If the thread had been against Islam or such it would have been banned in the womb.

Merry Christmas.


From: Alaska | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 23 December 2006 07:08 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
SA, apparently the people were supposed to go back to the city THEY were born in. So that doesn't necessarily mean that he has family there, if they settled somewhere else.

Also, I suppose it's possible that his family, not having been visited by an angel and told that Mary's pregnancy before Joseph had "known her" as Joseph was, might not be quite as understanding, nor overly accepting of the couple at their place.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 23 December 2006 05:02 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steppenwolf Allende:
That came with Clement C. Moore's 1823 book A Visit from St. Nicholas, which showed Santa Claus driving a sleight drawn by "eight tiny reindeer" and in doing so he created an image we all have today. Artist Thomas Nast drew Santa Claus based on Moore's description cementing in this image.
myth #4: That Clement Clark Moore wrote A Visit From St. Nicholas.

It was actually written some 15 years earlier by Henry Livingston, Jr.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 23 December 2006 05:27 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Brilliant display of animosity towards a faith.

Santa Claus is a religious symbol?

Steppenwolfe actually does the christofascists a favour, by pointing out that many of those er..hallmarks of the commercialization of Christmas are really not Christian in the first place.

In any case, anyone who displays animosity towards religion is okay by me, as long as that animosity is universal.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 23 December 2006 05:43 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Winnie the Pooh:
Merry Christmas.
I love the way the Christian faithful are wont to snarl their "Merry Christmas" through clenched teeth as an aggressive parting shot against anyone who displays heathen tendencies!

You can almost hear them add under their breath, "and fuck you!"


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Winnie the Pooh
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13670

posted 24 December 2006 12:25 AM      Profile for Winnie the Pooh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No snarling Christians here. But what ever gives you a woody go for it.
From: Alaska | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 24 December 2006 01:47 AM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Brilliant display of animosity towards a faith.

Well wha-d-ya-know! A heresy cop is in town ready to behead anyone who deals in fact.

Ok, Mr. Inquisition. Tell me just how dispelling some of the myths of various religions and showing how some of their philosophies have been perverted for capitalistic exploitation constitutes animosity?

quote:
If the thread had been against Islam or such it would have been banned in the womb.

Heh! With all the talk-down around here about Islamic regimes and their US-backers, including those who started and continue to fund the Taliban, etc., we might start worrying that we might get targeted by Al Qaeda.

The fact is, for those who care about facts, the three great Biblical Old Testament religions--Christianity, Judaism and Islam--are by far the three that have most readily lent themselves to be corrupted and misused by colonial/capitalistic/corporatist forces and their various totalitarian regimes to commit more horrors, atrocities, injustices, genocide and ecological and economic damage than the two world wars combined.

Now why in the world should I feel any animosity toward that?


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Winnie the Pooh
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13670

posted 24 December 2006 06:55 AM      Profile for Winnie the Pooh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thank you for the detailed response, Step. Not being a smart ass, debate is good, thank you.

You do attempt to cloud misdeeds in a present religion with historical events. Not a faith on this planet I could not do the same for\.

The foundation of most faiths is really simple. Be nice to each other.

So I celebrate my religion's holiday. I wish no ill to others.

and to all a very Merry Christmas


From: Alaska | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 24 December 2006 10:33 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Winnie the Pooh:
I wish no ill to others.
..though you do support targeted assassinations of "scumbags" in Afghanistan by Canadian troops.

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Winnie the Pooh
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13670

posted 24 December 2006 10:41 AM      Profile for Winnie the Pooh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Spector, I'm not sure why you hate christians.

I don't hate. I forgive you, spector.


From: Alaska | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 24 December 2006 10:53 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Winnie the Pooh:
The foundation of most faiths is really simple. Be nice to each other.

So I celebrate my religion's holiday. I wish no ill to others.


That is a hoplessly Christo-centric view of world religion. I certainly don't think that Judaism is based on it, and an "eye for an eye" more in keeping with the spirit of the Torah, obedience to Allah is much more focal in Isalm, while Hindu religion certainly justifies violence. Buddhism ignores the whole issue of "niceness" more or less altogether.

But then imposing Christian ontology on the rest of the world is as thematic in Christianity as the niceness factor, and such ambitions often seem to to supercede any tendency toward being "nice to other people" -- even to the extent where being nice to them includes running them off their land, imprisoning them, forcing conversion, torturing and burning them as as part of expunging their wickedness so that the purified soul can be clean before god.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 24 December 2006 11:19 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Winnie the Pooh:
Spector, I'm not sure why you hate christians.
I don't hate Christians. Some of my best friends and relatives are Christians.

I detest their religious beliefs.

And I refuse to accept your forgiveness because I have done nothing to you that needs to be forgiven.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Winnie the Pooh
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13670

posted 24 December 2006 12:41 PM      Profile for Winnie the Pooh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"I detest their religious beliefs.

And I refuse to accept your forgiveness because I have done nothing to you that needs to be forgiven."

Phase One: Denial


From: Alaska | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 24 December 2006 12:48 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And one of the best forms of denial is simply ignoring things, such as the post where I undressed your ethnocentric interpretations of modern relgion and Christianity.

But thats ok, I forgive you.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sans Tache
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13117

posted 24 December 2006 07:24 PM      Profile for Sans Tache        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Is there any religion on this world that is 100% historically correct? I would like to know which one is but if I find one thing that incorrect would you denounce that (whole) religion?

I believe historians have a definition for religion; the explanation of the inexplicable. If anyone has a better one, please list it.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 24 December 2006 07:40 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Happy holidays all.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 24 December 2006 10:57 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sans Tache:
I believe historians have a definition for religion; the explanation of the inexplicable. If anyone has a better one, please list it.
OK, since you asked:

#1
Tentatively, I propose to define religions as social systems whose participants avow a belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought. This is, of course, a circuitous way of articulating the idea that a religion without God or gods is like a vertebrate without a backbone. - Daniel Dennett, Breaking The Spell (p. 9)

#2
By religion I mean a set of beliefs held as dogmas, dominating the conduct of life, going beyond or contrary to evidence, and inculcated by methods which are emotional or authoritarian, not intellectual - Bertrand Russell, The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism

#3
Faith is believing what you know ain't so. - Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Brian White
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8013

posted 02 January 2007 01:22 PM      Profile for Brian White   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Time to get the bibopedia project going I think.
I want to edit it for rivers of blood for starters.
And the books that didnt make it. Lets have them!

From: Victoria Bc | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca