This "You KNOW it's a Myth" billboard is shown on the goddiscussion.com website. Vehicles entering New York City via the Lincoln Tunnel have the billboard facing them.
The thing is, it's trying to be tricky; but it's very transparent for those who know the ploy. Let me say that the wise men or kings were not numbered in the Gospel. The manger is not known in terms of exactly what it was. Jesus wasn't born on December 25th. The list goes on. However, that's not where the atheists of atheists.org want to stop. They (the hardcore of them anyway) really want you to believe that Jesus never existed in the flesh as a full human being — every bit as much alive in the flesh as you are.
Perhaps you'll also notice that the star is the Mogen David, which most Christians would not include in any representation of the nativity because of it's Talmudic-Jewish (Pharisaic), anti-Christ connection.
If you dig a little on the goddiscussion.com site (it took about two seconds — literally — for me), you'll find the likes of one who has renamed herself "Acharya S." This woman is a heroine of the founder of the Zeitgeist Movement, who reportedly goes by his first and middle name (to keep his family out of it — if so, not very impressive) Peter Joseph.
I won't reinvent the wheel here, because Chris White (nowheretorun1984's Channel on YouTube) completely shredded all of Acharya S and Peter Joseph's Zeitgeist Movement dung on the story of Jesus. To put it in simple terms, Acharya S and Peter Joseph are New Agers (anti-Christs).
Watch Chris's video series on them. Then leave me a comment to let me know what you think.
Not all atheists subscribe to this particular brand of nonsense, but many do.
Anyway, the main thing to keep in mind concerning Christmas is that it was the Roman Catholic Pope Julius I in 350 A.D. who declared that Jesus's birthday would be celebrated on December 25th. December 25th was an important date — being near the beginning of winter. He wanted to bring in pagans, to convert them, and most people figure the Pope thought co-opting the date would help in that. It was a very bad idea because it led to things such as that shifty billboard.
However, Jesus was personally known by John, his close disciple, who was in turn known by Polycarp who was, in turn, known by Irenaeus and so on down to the present. Among many other things, Irenaeus wrote of Polycarp.
Irenaeus is best known for his dismantling of the Gnostics, who claimed secret oral knowledge from Jesus. It reminds me of the Pharisees who claim secret oral teachings from Moses and more. Jesus had a running verbal and spiritual battle with those Pharisees (who are today's Talmudic rabbis) who had Jesus premeditatedly murdered by proxy (the Romans in Jerusalem).
Irenaeus simply pointed out that none of the first bishops anywhere and going right back to the Apostles were Gnostics — end of discussion for those who love the truth.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)