Does Christianity derive from Paganism?

[mattityahu]

Discuss the hypothesis that Christianity adopted ideas from Pagan gods and goddesses, and that the New Testament documents reflect these ideas. Please refer to one god/goddess at a time (should be a god/goddess that was known to be worshipped in the first three centuries AD), referencing your historical sources.

Yours,
M

[YusufNoor]

:sl:

when "Christianity" became the "official religion" of the HRE, was the Emperor, at that time, a Christian?

and discuss, if you would, the connections between the Feast of Greater Saturnalius and Xmas, and maybe the connection between Easter and Pagan spring fertility festivals.

:w:

[mattityahu]

:sl:

when "Christianity" became the "official religion" of the HRE, was the Emperor, at that time, a Christian?

and discuss, if you would, the connections between the Feast of Greater Saturnalius and Xmas, and maybe the connection between Easter and Pagan spring fertility festivals.

:w:

I believe Christianity became the official religion when/just after Constantine converted. Around this time the powers that were decided to replace Saturnalia with a holiday to celebrate Jesus' birth. I don't really know much about spring fertility festivals - perhaps someone else can elaborate on this, while I research...

Yours,
M

Edit: memories corrected this post below.

[Zafran]

salaam

check out Mithras - theres a whole theory on it and Dionysis the Greek God of party.

peace

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[mattityahu]

salaam

check out Mithras - theres a whole theory on it and Dionysis the Greek God of party.

peace

What about them in particular? How is this verified historically?

Yours,
M

[memories]

I believe Christianity became the official religion when/just after Constantine converted. Around this time the powers that were decided to replace Saturnalia with a holiday to celebrate Jesus' birth. I don't really know much about spring fertility festivals - perhaps someone else can elaborate on this, while I research...

Yours,
M

No,Emperor Théodose made it the official religion in the Roman empire.

[mattityahu]

No,Emperor Théodose made it the official religion in the Roman empire.

Oops, sorry, you're right.
M

[Keltoi]

There were many Roman mystery cults that were popular in Rome at the same time that Christianity was spreading throughout the empire. The Mithra cult is but one. Most evidence points to a sort of propoganda campaign waged between Christianity and those who worshipped Mithra. The Mithra cult actually borrowed some elements of Christian theology to make their god more in line with what was making Christianity grow in popularity. The Christian faith was already well established at the time the two faiths made contact in Rome. The Mithra cult of Rome was quite different from the traditional Mithra worship that began in Iran. Roman soldiers were responsible for bringing many of these religious cults into the empire.

[Pygoscelis]

I can't think of much within the bible that didn't come before it in other religions in one form or another.

The similarities are actually quite striking.

I once saw a documentary on the zodiac and how some people think christianity is entirely based off of it. They made a fairly decent case for that argument, though I did not research their material much.

I'd actually like to hear more about that theory, both pro and con. Haven't encountered it since though as either a claim made or a debunk of it.

[YusufNoor]

:sl:

i posted this in another section:

i found this lecture series by Bart Erhman online:

From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity (The Great Courses no. 6577) (Audio CD)

Course Lecture Titles 1. The Birth of Christianity 2. The Religious World of Early Christianity 3. The Historical Jesus 4. Oral and Written Traditions about Jesus 5. The Apostle Paul 6. The Beginning of Jewish-Christian Relations 7. The Anti-Jewish Use of the Old Testament 8. The Rise of Christian Anti-Judaism 9. The Early Christian Mission 10. The Christianization of the Roman Empire 11. The Early Persecutions of the State 12. The Causes of Christian Persecution 13. Christian Reactions to Persecution 14. The Early Christian Apologists 15. The Diversity of Early Christian Communities 16. Christianities of the Second Century 17. The Role of Pseudepigrapha 18. The Victory of the Proto-Orthodox 19. The New Testament Canon 20. The Development of Church Offices 21. The Rise of Christian Liturgy 22. The Beginnings of Normative Theology 23. The Doctrine of the Trinity 24. Christianity and the Conquest of Empire

you can download all 24 lectures here:

http://beemp3.com/download.php?file=...estament+Canon

#12 was a little tricky, it never showed up on the list, click the link:

More "From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity" songs

you'll find it there, In Sha'a Allh.


interesting, as there were few REAL atheists, the VAST MAJORITY of the people were Pagan. they were pagan in that they believed in and worshiped MANY gods and sometimes people were given divinity. the Hebrews/Jews were the oddballs, they only had One, or only worshiped One. some say some Hebrews/Jews were Henotheistic, while others were Monotheistic.

along comes Jesus/Isa ibn Marriam [Peace Be Upon Them Both], and a new from of "Judaism" comes along. it is SUPPOSED to be Monotheistic, but once you make Jesus/Isa ibn Marriam [Peace Be Upon Them Both] "Divine", you really become Henotheistic.

at some point, Jews and Christians become enemies, or at least there is a split and Christianity is no longer just a "sect" of Judaism. [some say it was the Simon bar Kokba revolt. the Jews now claim that their Messiah is here and, well the Christians ALREADY have theirs.

so, even though expansion began before this, who is there to "recruit" [and sorry, i couldn't think of a proper word]?

THE PAGANS!

now, things will have to be explained it terms that they can understand.

the EASY way to say it is that by adopting Pagan customs, it will be easier to "recruit." HOWEVER, some could call it a chicken/egg problem.

IF you look at Islam today, you will see things in some places that AREN'T Islam. tribal customs have crept in and overtake Islamic values, assibiyah some call it and some have just reverted to Jahillya. same thing happened with Christianity.

was it deliberate, or just Shaytans way of dividing and conquering? well, i guess that is the purpose of the thread. and besides, i'm only on lecture 4!

:w:

[mattityahu]

Thanks that was very interesting! Looking forward to Bart's lectures.

Perhaps just a small comment that the Christians seem to reinterpret (rather than just simply adopt) the Pagan ideas when spreading and contextualizing their message, so the Pagan's can understand the message in relation to their own beliefs. Also I'm not convinced the early Christians would have understood their system as henotheistic, but that's up for debate as with all the other points raised in this topic.

Yours,
M

[Grace Seeker]

It is interesting that one can find some similarities between certain aspects of Christianity and other religions. I suspect that over time there has even been some sythesis of a few aspects of those other religions. But I hardly think that what has been put forth qualifies as parent/child religions. After all, there are also similarities with some Native American religions and that of Australian Aborigines. But only a fool would make the claim that there is some sort of connect on the basis of a few bits of parallelism. Besides, with religions such as the Mithraism, Gnosticism, or Emperor worship there is even more that stands in contrast than there is that is similar.

So, where does one turn to get a glimpse at the earliest form of Christianity? Simple answer, the book of Acts. The most primitive interpretation of the meaning of Jesus is found in the book of Acts with its account of the preaching of the early church -- preaching that is pre-Gospel writing; preaching that is largely pre-Pauline; preaching that records some of the earliest oral tradition of the infant church.

In that record we have a small group of Jewish disciples, convinced that their crucified master has indeed risen from the dead, who begin to declare his messiahship. This is not a pagan idea, this is an idea that has Jewish roots. There initial call is not to the Greek world at all, but to other Jews. They ask their fellow Jewish breathern to repent and turn in faith to Jesus, the one they had just crucified and recognize him to be Israel's long-promised messiah. In time it will break with Judaism as it sees the salvation promise as being available equally to Jews and non-Jews alike. When this happens, it quickly grows among the God-fearing Greeks who frequented Jewish synagogues.

Jewish-Christians at first press for the connection to Judaism to be kept, but under the leadership of Peter, Paul, and James and their testimony that God's grace is available to all without the need for non-Jews to convert to Judaism in order to receive it, Christianity takes off and enters the pagan world. There it will have to deal with new assaults to its self-idenity. Most of which I believe it passes, some it no doubt failed. But these are tangential issues compared to the questions of what was core and without a doubt the primitive kerygma of the Church has its focal point in the death and exaltation of Jesus the Messiah appointed to bring mankind salvation by God's gracious actions in allowing him to become the universal atoning offering of God's self for fallen and unreconciled humankind. But in the Christ that reconciliation takes place. This happens not just by the work of the cross, but also that as the Messiah Jesus will return to bring God's Kingdom to its eschatological consumation. (For example of that see Acts 3:19-21, long before Paul is preaching the cross.)

This Kingdom theme is Jesus central theme in his preaching and is among the themes of the earliest preaching of the church, prior to it leaving Jewish soil. Indeed, even after it has left Jewish soil for Hellenistic lands, carried their first by Barnabas and then joined by Paul, I find it of great interest that the summary which the book of Acts provides of Paul's preaching to the Gentiles is the utterly non-Hellenistic phrase, "the Kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22).

The other theme that we see in the most primitive kerygma of the Church is the proclamation that "Jesus is Lord." One might be tempted to see in this usage similar to the Roman usage of Lord as an expression of simple courtesy. But closer examination of how it is actually used reveals something completely different. The term "Lord" is not used indiscriminately in the speech of all sorts of persons, but is usually restricted to those appealing for supernatural help. (Source: The Self-Disclosure of Jesus, Geerhardus Vos, c. 1954, p. 129ff.) One of the best clues to the history of the word is in the Gospel of John, where the word "Lord" is used of Jesus only 3 times in the narrative portions of the first 19 chapters, but is used 9 times in the last two chapters which speak of Jesus as the risen Lord. Apparently, this evangelist feels it is appropriate to speak of Jesus as Lord after his resurrection, but does not feel the designation is so appropriate in Jesus' earlier ministry. This suggests that the title "Lord" is not just a courtesy extended to a teacher, but "belongs primarily to Jesus as the Risen and Ascended One" (The Names Of Jesus, V. Taylor, Macmillan, c.1953, p.43). But the even more impressive fact is that the term "Lord" is used both for God and the exalted Jesus. For instance, in Acts 3:19 it is clearly used for God and this usage can be traced back to the Septuagint where kyrios, (the Greek word which we translate as "Lord" in English) is the Greek translation not only of the Hebrew word Adonai but also of the Hebrew's covenant name for God, Yahweh. Because "Lord" is used this way to refer to the one God of Israel, it is all the more amazing to find the term used of both Jesus and God as the same time. For in doing so, even the earliest church, composed entirely of Jewish disciples of Christ, long before Paul is ever on the scene, are Jesus one with God. So much is this the case, but the term is used by the early church "of both God and the exalted Jesus in practically interchangeable contexts" (A Theology of the New Testament, George Eldon Ladd, Eerdmanns Publishing, c. 1974, p. 339). Most certainly, Paul will expand on this idea, and Greek and Roman culture will have parallels for it with their pagan cults, but it began with and is therefore derived from this small group of Jewish disciples led by Peter.

[Follower]

In the pagan religions that supposedly influenced Christianity, the "savior-gods" didn't died for the sins of humanity; to save humans from eternal death; or just one time; their deaths were not recorded in history; die voluntarily; were not victorious over satan.

There is proof that many pagan religions came after Chrisitianity, actually borrowing from Christianity. I wonder how much is a distortion of the original traditions and rituals held over from the earliest days of Abraham.

Just as some say Christianity adopted pagan rituals/traditions one could say that Islam did in the circumabulaton of the Kaaba. Throwing the stones at the satan rocks- not sure what this is called. Did you know that Mithra ascends through seven heavens?

Each worshipper of each respective religion hopefully understands the history of the tradition and why it was "borrowed".

[Zafran]

What about them in particular? How is this verified historically?

Yours,
M

Google it you will see the similiarites between Jesus dying being man God and raised up alive again - also his birthdayand his followers - its similar to Mithras and Dionysis.

[Zafran]

In the pagan religions that supposedly influenced Christianity, the "savior-gods" didn't died for the sins of humanity; to save humans from eternal death; or just one time; their deaths were not recorded in history; die voluntarily; were not victorious over satan.

There is proof that many pagan religions came after Chrisitianity, actually borrowing from Christianity. I wonder how much is a distortion of the original traditions and rituals held over from the earliest days of Abraham.

Just as some say Christianity adopted pagan rituals/traditions one could say that Islam did in the circumabulaton of the Kaaba. Throwing the stones at the satan rocks- not sure what this is called. Did you know that Mithra ascends through seven heavens?

Each worshipper of each respective religion hopefully understands the history of the tradition and why it was "borrowed".

Muslims believe that prophets were sent to all the world - the similirities isnt a bad thing as God communicated to all tribes according to Islam and sent messengers to all tribes and nations - the pagan ideas must have been a distortion of the real messege Tawhid.

Furthermore Muslims see the Kabba being a house bulit by Abhrham pbuh - so it was a monothestic first - later the arabs corrupted there beliefs to paganism - Muhammad pbuh came to restablish the Abhrahamic faith.

Monotheism is the nature of the human according to Islam- paganism is the corruption.

Furthermore the similirites of Jesus in christainty and other pagan cults is preety scary - whilst Islam went the opposite - it went so far that no image is central to the religion - a very odd thing in the history of religion - only Bani Isreali had such a thing - that we know of.

[Grace Seeker]

Google it you will see the similiarites between Jesus dying being man God and raised up alive again - also his birthdayand his followers - its similar to Mithras and Dionysis.

Yes, there are similarities, but that doesn't prove that one was derived from the other. The facts are that Mithraism entered the Roman sphere via Roman soldiers who encountered it in the eastern reaches of their empire in the late first century. It then grew among the soldier class (women were denied membership) reaching its zenith between the 2nd and 4th centuries. This parallels a time of growth for Christianity as well and it is very likely that there were points where the two groups influenced each other, but one must also note that Christianity was alreay established before Mithraism reached the region of the empire in which Christianity had developed. Hence to say that Christianity is derived from a religion that it had not even encountered prior to its origin is to make a nonsense claim.

[AntiKarateKid]

Yes, there are similarities, but that doesn't prove that one was derived from the other. The facts are that Mithraism entered the Roman sphere via Roman soldiers who encountered it in the eastern reaches of their empire in the late first century. It then grew among the soldier class (women were denied membership) reaching its zenith between the 2nd and 4th centuries. This parallels a time of growth for Christianity as well and it is very likely that there were points where the two groups influenced each other, but one must also note that Christianity was alreay established before Mithraism reached the region of the empire in which Christianity had developed. Hence to say that Christianity is derived from a religion that it had not even encountered prior to its origin is to make a nonsense claim.

Mithraism is derived from Zoroastrianism which predated both and was well established in places like Armenia and Antatolia, to name a few, before Christianity. To say that somehow they had not encountered it is absurd.

Rome was not in a vacuum with only Christianity, it already had mithraism too. Not to mention whatever other pagan influences it populace held.

I imagine that even according to your particular account of history, as the early Christian leaders were trying to decipher their trinity mystery they looked around to see what others thought about it, taking and leaving what they liked.

[Grace Seeker]

Mithraism is derived from Zoroastrianism which predated both and was well established in places like Armenia and Antatolia, to name a few, before Christianity. To say that somehow they had not encountered it is absurd.

Rome was not in a vacuum with only Christianity, it already had mithraism too. Not to mention whatever other pagan influences it populace held.

I imagine that even according to your particular account of history, as the early Christian leaders were trying to decipher their trinity mystery they looked around to see what others thought about it, taking and leaving what they liked.

Since Christianity originated in Palestine and not Armenia and Antatolia, I stand by what I've said. I will admit that the followers of Jesus were first called Christians in Antioch -- Syrian Antioch. Again not a hotbed of Mithraism. And contact with is not the same thing as being derived from. I've yet to see that case be made in anything but a conincidental way. It's like saying, birds have wings, bees have wings, therefore they are related to each other.

[Follower]

Isn't it possible that all the early pagan religions were off shoots/distortions of Judaism thinking they had found the Messiah written in the Old Testament?

[Zafran]

Isn't it possible that all the early pagan religions were off shoots/distortions of Judaism thinking they had found the Messiah written in the Old Testament?

No they were distortions of the true messege given to Adam pbuh. I believe Judiaism isnt the first Monothestic faith - Zoroastriainism is. Lets not forget about the ancient Egyptians and Aten. I'm sure there were many other places that were monotheistic we just dont know them..........yet.

[Grace Seeker]

Isn't it possible that all the early pagan religions were off shoots/distortions of Judaism thinking they had found the Messiah written in the Old Testament?

No. Judaism had to deal with plenty of pagan religions as well. Abraham was called out of paganism and Judaism isn't as old as Abraham (notice the name is taken from one of Abraham's descendants, not one of his ancestors). But Zoroastrianism isn't one of those that was around at the time of Judaism's beginnings for it only dates back to about 600 BCE, the time of the Hebrew prophet Isaiah, whereas Moses probably dates from about 600+ years before that.


Rough (in some cases very rough) estimations for the beginnings of the major world religions.

2000 BCE Hinduism
1500-1250 BCE Judaism
628-527 BCE Zoroastrianism
599-527 BCE Jainism
563-483 BCE Buddhism
580-500 BCE Taoism
551-479 BCE Confucianism
6 BCE -30 CE Christianity
100 CE Shintoism
570-632 CE Islam
1469-1538 CE Sikhism
1817-1892 CE Baha'i

[Joe98]

and maybe the connection between Easter and Pagan spring fertility festivals.

At the last supper, Christ was celebrating the Jewish Passover festival with his disciples.

And that is why Easter is held at the same time as Passover. It has nothing to do with Pagans !

-

[malayloveislam]

What does Hindus know about the One G-d?

The Highest G-d in Vedic Hinduism is called as Brahman. Brahman is infinite, never changing, imminent, transcendent reality. The Divine base of all matter, time, energy, time, being, space, and everything beyond the Universe. The nature of this Highest G-d had been described as transpersonal, personal, and personal by different Hindu philosophical schools.

In Rig Veda, Brahman gives rise to the primordial being "Golden Womb" that is equated with the Creator G-d, Brahma. Trinity is considered a personification of "Golden Womb" as the active principle behind the phenomena of the Universe. Brahman contextually means from Him grows everything.

Brahman is the Absolute Reality or universal substrate (not to be confused with the Creator god Brahma). It is said to be eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and ultimately indescribable in human language. The sage-seers of the Upanishads had fully realized Brahman as the reality behind their own being and of everything else in this universe. They were thus Brahmins in the true sense of the word. These rishis described Brahman as infinite Being, infinite Consciousness, and infinite Bliss (saccidananda). Brahman is regarded as the source and essence of the material universe. The Rig Veda says that by the desire of the Supreme Being (RV 10.129.4), the initial manifestation of the material universe came into being from "Golden Womb", out of which all worlds, organisms and divine beings (devas/celestial beings/angels) arise:

"Great indeed are the devas who have sprung out of Brahman." — Atharva Veda

Para Brahman corresponds to the concept of god-head and Saguna Brahman to G-d as the Primordial Being.

It is said that Brahman cannot be known by material means, that we cannot be made conscious of it, because Brahman is our very consciousness. Brahman is also not restricted to the usual dimensional perspectives of being, and thus enlightenment, moksha, yoga, samadhi, nirvana, etc. do not merely mean to know Brahman, but to realise one's "brahman-hood", to actually realise that one is and always was Brahman. Indeed, closely related to the Self concept of Brahman is the idea that it is synonymous with jiva-atma, or individual souls, our atman (or soul) being readily identifiable with the greater soul (paramatma) of Brahman.

Generally, Vedanta rejects the notion of an evolving Brahman since Brahman contains within it the potentiality and archetypes behind all possible manifest phenomenal forms. The Vedas, though they are in some respects historically conditioned are considered by Hindus to convey a knowledge eternal, timeless and always contemporaneous with Brahman. This knowledge is considered to have been handed down by realised yogins to students many generations before the vedas were committed to writing. Written texts of the Vedas are a relatively recent phenomenon.

The teaching of Monotheism had been early known to Adam (pbuh). Noah Ben Lamech too had taught about Monotheism before the Big Flood. Human imagination that made many imaginary gods sprung and being idolized.

[malayloveislam]

You can see for yourselves how Monotheism evolves to Pantheism when Hindu Rishis interprete the concept of G-d, and later evolves to be Ploytheism when tribal gods being integrated into Hinduism and G-d been personified into everything.