Well, there are no references to Christianity or to Jesus in the film or the book. And Christians only even started celebrating Christmas around the fourth century A.D… Before that, the holiday was a winter harvest festival in many pagan cultures, not to mention the Roman holiday of Saturnalia. But, still, it wasn’t much of a celebrated holiday associated with Christianity until the 18th or 19th centuries.
That’s for Santa? Well that legend has been going on for about as long as Christmas has been, but didn’t really get associated with it much until the early 19th century.
So, there was no who Jesus. But, it’s worth noting, they probably had a Christmas Krampus.
You can’t celebrate Christmas without Christianity. It’s in the name.
If the holiday they celebrate is canonically called Christmas, then Christianity has to exist in the universe. It doesn’t matter if Christmas is an amalgamation of pagan holidays.
You can’t celebrate Christmas without Christianity. It’s in the name.
I’m an atheist, and I celebrate Christmas. no Jesus involved. same for most everyone I’ve ever met.
If the holiday they celebrate is canonically called Christmas, then Christianity has to exist in the universe.
that’s like saying “I invented the light bulb! therefore, if it exists anywhere else in the universe, they stole it from me!”
lots of people invent or discover things simultaneously all over the world, and it’s not until later that we find out. Here’s a whole wiki article about it.
And maybe the story is translated from another language, and the term 'Christmas" was substituted so modern western children would understand the context.
examples:
Frozen: Reimagines Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Snow Queen,” focusing on sisterly love rather than a quest for a lost love, fitting modern narratives.
Maleficent: Retells “Sleeping Beauty” from the villain’s perspective, adding complexity and exploring her backstory.
Hard Candy: A dark modern take on “Little Red Riding Hood,” with a young girl confronting a predator.
American Gods: Neil Gaiman brings ancient gods into modern America, reflecting cultural shifts and beliefs.
so, the term ‘Christmas’ being used could mean many things-- most of all that you shouldn’t just jump to safe conclusions.
Dude wtf? Why are you taking this as a “personal attack”. I wasn’t attacking, just pointing out that to use the word “Christmas” you have to have a Christ. So the Who’s would have to have a “Christ” not THE SAME Christ. Sure Sues could have called it something else like “Wintermas” but he didn’t so the Who lore requires a Christ like figure.
What personal attack? Their point is pretty clear to me. They’re not talking about the holiday, they’re talking about the etymology of the actual word “christmas” which has its root in the word “christ”. For the whos to have the word “christmas” implys that they also have the word “christ”. Why would the whos have a word for “christ” unless they had their own version of a christ? If the whos didn’t have a christ (mythical or otherwise) then they wouldn’t have any reason to invent the word “christ”. Without the word “christ” the root for the word “christmas” isn’t there so the word " christmas" wouldn’t have been invented.
You’re focusing on the holiday but the actual celebration is irrelevant. It’s the use of the word “christmas” that implys who jesus. It’s the same as if the whos called the holiday “saturnalia” it would imply that they had a saturn.
I’m an atheist, and I celebrate Christmas. no Jesus involved. same for most everyone I’ve ever met.
I’m talking about the name of the holiday having religious origins. Can’t call the holiday Christmas without there being a Christianity.
that’s like saying “I invented the light bulb! therefore, if it exists anywhere else in the universe, they stole it from me!”
That’s a false equivalency. We’re talking about word origins not inventions.
And maybe the story is translated from another language, and the term 'Christmas" was substituted so modern western children would understand the context.
Well, there are no references to Christianity or to Jesus in the film or the book. And Christians only even started celebrating Christmas around the fourth century A.D… Before that, the holiday was a winter harvest festival in many pagan cultures, not to mention the Roman holiday of Saturnalia. But, still, it wasn’t much of a celebrated holiday associated with Christianity until the 18th or 19th centuries.
That’s for Santa? Well that legend has been going on for about as long as Christmas has been, but didn’t really get associated with it much until the early 19th century.
So, there was no who Jesus. But, it’s worth noting, they probably had a Christmas Krampus.
You can’t celebrate Christmas without Christianity. It’s in the name.
If the holiday they celebrate is canonically called Christmas, then Christianity has to exist in the universe. It doesn’t matter if Christmas is an amalgamation of pagan holidays.
This is an etymological fallacy. There is no reason to believe that the Whos’ etymological history and usage of the word must mirror our own.
I’m an atheist, and I celebrate Christmas. no Jesus involved. same for most everyone I’ve ever met.
that’s like saying “I invented the light bulb! therefore, if it exists anywhere else in the universe, they stole it from me!”
lots of people invent or discover things simultaneously all over the world, and it’s not until later that we find out. Here’s a whole wiki article about it.
And maybe the story is translated from another language, and the term 'Christmas" was substituted so modern western children would understand the context.
examples:
so, the term ‘Christmas’ being used could mean many things-- most of all that you shouldn’t just jump to safe conclusions.
Their point is given the name Christmas there needs to be a Christ but the Who’s Christ doesn’t necessarily have to have the same Christ.
just explained - with many examples - of how that’s not necessarily true.
also, it’s a fictional story about fictional beings in a fictional land. Nothing has to be true here.
You are getting too hung up on the “event” of Christmas. You are ignoring the “name” Those examples don’t call it the same name.
Removed by mod
Dude wtf? Why are you taking this as a “personal attack”. I wasn’t attacking, just pointing out that to use the word “Christmas” you have to have a Christ. So the Who’s would have to have a “Christ” not THE SAME Christ. Sure Sues could have called it something else like “Wintermas” but he didn’t so the Who lore requires a Christ like figure.
What personal attack? Their point is pretty clear to me. They’re not talking about the holiday, they’re talking about the etymology of the actual word “christmas” which has its root in the word “christ”. For the whos to have the word “christmas” implys that they also have the word “christ”. Why would the whos have a word for “christ” unless they had their own version of a christ? If the whos didn’t have a christ (mythical or otherwise) then they wouldn’t have any reason to invent the word “christ”. Without the word “christ” the root for the word “christmas” isn’t there so the word " christmas" wouldn’t have been invented.
You’re focusing on the holiday but the actual celebration is irrelevant. It’s the use of the word “christmas” that implys who jesus. It’s the same as if the whos called the holiday “saturnalia” it would imply that they had a saturn.
It’s the Whoville version of Life Day, but Suess translated it to the closest equivalency.
just glad he didn’t translate Wookie grandpa watching VR porn in the living room!
You know, grandpa straight jorkin’ it to the Meta Quest is a thing that could realistically happen now.
Luckily the Grinch stole his player before he could.
I’m talking about the name of the holiday having religious origins. Can’t call the holiday Christmas without there being a Christianity.
That’s a false equivalency. We’re talking about word origins not inventions.
Bro, this is Dr Seuss. What are you on about?
a fictional, Seussian world where anything is possible. such as one where Christmas exists but “christ” does not.
for christ’s sake, let it go, lol