On Dec 26, 6:28*pm, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote:
"husk" wrote in message

...
On Dec 26, 2:53 pm, " *Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote:



"husk" wrote in message

....
On Dec 26, 10:04 am, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq."
wrote:

Negative, I am saying that, as a Christian, I am tasked with not
allowing
my
religion to be secularized, liberalized and *******ized by accepting the
language the anti-religious or non-religious use to usurp and
marginalize
my
religion.

--
Gregory Hall

Maybe I live in a different culture than you do Greg, but where I live
Christian are fighting to maintain the Merry Christmas greeting. Go
to a grocery or departent store, run by a big chain, and one does not
hear a Merry Christmas greeting from the staff. Even when you give
them a Merry Christmas and they attend the same church as you, they
are reluctant to respond back the same due to pressure from their
bosses to be PC. I have talked to Jews and Muslims on this matter
and they are not offended by the Merry Christmas greeting as in their
opinion it is polite to wish someone of another religion merriment in
their religious celebrations, just as I will wish Happy Hanakah , or
Happy Eid to Jews and Muslims. What is wrong is the exclusion of any
mention of the beliefs of others in secular society. It is only
polite to offer another good wishes on the eve of their religious
occasion. We shouldn't take offence when offered such greeting and we
shouldn't feel uncomfortable in giving the greeting.

The words of the greeting matter not unless the words are an attempt
at nutralizing the religion in the event. Since the word "Christmas"
is in "Merry Christmas" and Holy is in "Happy Holidays", one should
not get all wrapped up in the meaning each individual takes. If you
say Happy Holidays, or Merry Christmas to me I interpret that as a
religious greeting. It matters not that the sender or the greeting
may not, it is how it is interpretted that matters.

What upsets me is when corporations deny their employees the right to
say , "Merry Christmas." One should not take offence to being wished
Merry Christmas any more than if I were mistaken for a Jew and be
wished Happy Hanakah.

=================[REPLY]=====================

But the word they are trying to suppress is not the word, merry. It is the
word Christmas because Christmas is a religious-based word. I can
guarantee
if people went around saying, "Satanic Salutations" these anti-religious
liberals would be ALL FOR that. There would be NO mention of trying to
suppress that expression in public. There would be no mention of
separation
of church and state.

See the difference? The agenda is to mock and belittle Christianity. The
word 'merry' accomplishes that purpose in the eyes of the anti-religious.
Therefore, Christians should not fall into their trap which marginalizes
Christianity. As Christians, we should reply to any "merry Christmas
salutation with something like, "Holy Christmas" or "Blessed Christmas."
This would demonstrate that a 'merry Christmas' is a less than
satisfactory
expression as to the real meaning of Christmas.

--
Gregory Hall

My argument is the mocking of Christ only makes him stronger.

He needs us not to fight his battles. *He needs us to be generous with
our money, our time, our labour and our heart. *That alone will aid
him in more ways than fighting the secularists.

* * *==================[REPLY]==================

Historically speaking, there is no justification for your statement that
Jesus doesn't need us to fight His battles. His recruiting the apostles and
his instructing them to go forth and teach the world about His message of
salvation refutes your assertion. His statement, "Upon this rock (the
steadfast faith as shown by Peter) shall my church be built" is another
example of how He needs and requires Christians to spread the Gospel.

--
Gregory Hall

He said to go forth and teach. He did not say to go forth and fight.

When we are generous with our time, our labour, our money and our
heart, in the name of Jesus, we are Apostles. For when we do these
things we are asked why. At that point we can teach them about
Jesus. You give first and wait for them to be inquisitive. In your
face missionary work is rarely successful. If it was all Haitians
would be Scientologists by now.

A true story was retold at our church last year. A parishoner heard
of a woman, on her street,who had her hours drastically reduced at
work and had barely enough for rent let alone food and other bills.
He and his wife determined that they had surplus money and the woman
could make better use of it than they. He went over to her house and
gave an envelope of money to her with no explanation. The woman
opened the envelope and was not happy, she went back to the givers'
house and demanded to know what they expected in return for this
money. When told nothing, she was suspicious, but under her financial
circumstances grudgingly took the money and left. Very little of a
thank you was given. During the next weeks the couple and the woman
would pass on the street and exchange hellos, but no mention of the
money was made. One day the woman appeared at the door and told the
couple she needed to know why they gave her the money, why they
expected nothing back as her expeience had been nothing came to you
for free.

At this point the woman was ready to hear the story of Jesus.

We give of ourselves, we expect nothing in return and we wait for them
to come to us.

Fighting the secularists is a waste of our time. It's what the
Scientologists do and they are failing miserably.