The Paganisation of Christianity

[blü 2]

Thats the reason I said earlier "in the Greek philosophy they used Logos to be more literal than the Christians". Christians dont use it in the literal sense or the dictionary meaning. Only John makes it a bit special, and Christians made it extra special, and that is why I said it is one of the reasons John does not get into the synoptic problem.

I basically agree.

Of course, the author of John, like Paul (and unlike the synoptic authors) sees his Christianity through gnostic glasses, and his Jesus, like Paul's (and unlike the synoptic Jesuses) lived in heaven with God before coming to earth and in his role as the demiurge created the material universe (eg 1 Corinthians 8:6, John 1:2).

 

[firedragon]

I basically agree.

Of course, the author of John, like Paul (and unlike the synoptic authors) sees his Christianity through gnostic glasses, and his Jesus, like Paul's (and unlike the synoptic Jesuses) lived in heaven with God before coming to earth and in his role as the demiurge created the material universe (eg 1 Corinthians 8:6, John 1:2).

I said "Synoptic problem". Its different to just authors and Paul.

Anyway, this is gonna get steered into something else so I withdraw from this. Thanks for your insights.

Cheers.

 

[Altfish]

So I have heard that at least 3 Christian festivals have roots in paganism:

Halloween
Christmas
Easter

Are there any others ?

Due to this are some denominations of Christianity more authentic than others?

You misunderstand the reason.
When Christianity arrived in 'pagan' countries it took over the existing festivals and made them Christian. So the Winter Festival became Christmas - yet by all accounts JC was born in April?

 

[Harel13]

"The most likely “historical Eostre” is a localized goddess worshipped by the Anglo-Saxons in present day county Kent in Southeastern England"

Was There Really a Spring Goddess Called Eostre?

Well, British people are descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes, of course.

 

[ChristineM]

So I have heard that at least 3 Christian festivals have roots in paganism:

Halloween
Christmas
Easter

Are there any others ?

Due to this are some denominations of Christianity more authentic than others?

I would say its more Christianisation of paganism, you can join our club and bring your feast days with you.

 

[Colt]

So I have heard that at least 3 Christian festivals have roots in paganism:

Halloween
Christmas
Easter

Are there any others ?

Due to this are some denominations of Christianity more authentic than others?

Yes, interpreting the cross as a "blood sacrifice" is Pagan as were animal sacrifices in Judaism. The flesh eating and blood drinking rituals were practiced in the Mystery religions. Christianity is really a marriage between Paul's version of the Gospel and existing beliefs and rituals of the religions of the Roman empire.

 

[Rival]

Its not correct Rival. They also contradict and affirm that they are not really referring to Greek philosophy because in the Greek philosophy they used Logos to be more literal than the Christians. Christians refer to Philo because he was a Jew but hellenised as a precursor in scholarship, but not in Christianity per se. So Philo probably did inherit Logos from Greek philosophy because he was hellenised. But Christians claim that Logos existed since the beginning with God, equal to God, and eternal as God, and that its a Christian concept. Not Greek.

Nevermind. Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, but they assert and acknowledge where the word 'logos' and its association comes from. No Christian will tell you the Gospels invented the basic idea or that it began with them. Or I have never heard them say this.

"The word Logos is the term by which Christian theology in the Greek language designates the Word of God, or Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Before St. John had consecrated this term by adopting it, the Greeks and the Jews had used it to express religious conceptions which, under various titles, have exercised a certain influence on Christian theology, and of which it is necessary to say something."

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Logos

 

[firedragon]

Yes, but they assert and acknowledge where the word 'logos' and its association comes from. No Christian will tell you the Gospels invented the basic idea or that it began with them. Or I have never heard them say this.

Well, in my anecdotal experience, many christians do. But I have not done any survey to understand what percentage of Christians believe this way or that way. Christians scholars know the origins, but by saying Christians I am not referring to scholars who know better.

"The word Logos is the term by which Christian theology in the Greek language designates the Word of God, or Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Before St. John had consecrated this term by adopting it, the Greeks and the Jews had used it to express religious conceptions which, under various titles, have exercised a certain influence on Christian theology, and of which it is necessary to say something."

Exactly what I said.

 

[Augustus]

And you can prove this . . . how?

Via the rational and critical evaluation of historical evidence of course.

(Although to a strong balance of probabilities rather than proof)

 

[Rival]

Via the rational and critical evaluation of historical evidence of course.

(Although to a strong balance of probabilities rather than proof)

cOnStANTine!!!

 

[Augustus]

You misunderstand the reason.
When Christianity arrived in 'pagan' countries it took over the existing festivals and made them Christian. So the Winter Festival became Christmas - yet by all accounts JC was born in April?

You misunderstand that there is no real evidence for that and plenty of evidence against.

The myth you are promoting is really just rehashed Protestant anti-Catholic polemic combined with 19th C Romanticism.

For some reason, western "rationalists" become the most credulous, anti-intellectual suckers on anything that makes Christianity seem bad or illegitimate and will refuse to even consider any actual scholarship by actual experts.

 

[Augustus]

cOnStANTine!!!

Pagan who invented Christianity and the Bible to dupe the masses into being subservient.

Scientific factz.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Via the rational and critical evaluation of historical evidence of course.

(Although to a strong balance of probabilities rather than proof)

That is how someone could supposedly prove it. Yet no one seems to be able to do that here.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

It's certainly an unclear area, because of the wide ambit of meanings, even before we get to the Christians and the theology: my small dictionary provides "saying, speaking, speech, mode of speaking, eloquence, discourse, conversation, talk, word, expression, assertion, principle, maxim, proverb, oracle, promise, order, command, proposal, condition, agreement, stipulation, decision, pretext, fable, news, story, report, legend, prose-writing, history, book, essay, oration, affair, incident, thought, reason, reckoning, computation, reflection, deliberation, account, consideration, opinion, cause, end, argument, demonstration, meaning, value, proportion' and then it adds 'New Testament the Word'.

One may take one's pick. Perhaps we should translate it as 'thingie'.

Thats the reason I said earlier "in the Greek philosophy they used Logos to be more literal than the Christians". Christians dont use it in the literal sense or the dictionary meaning. Only John makes it a bit special, and Christians made it extra special, and that is why I said it is one of the reasons John does not get into the synoptic problem.

"The word Logos is the term by which Christian theology in the Greek language designates the Word of God, or Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Before St. John had consecrated this term by adopting it, the Greeks and the Jews had used it to express religious conceptions which, under various titles, have exercised a certain influence on Christian theology, and of which it is necessary to say something."

Whatever the term means, I found the use of it by Marcus Aurelius, not a Christian, to be very moving. To him, it is like 'the force' in the movie star wars. It weaves everything into a web of harmony and fate, it is central and all-directing, it is something you trust in, something you always should seek to find a better sense of. The concept seemed like the glue that held European civilization together

In Christianity, perhaps they needed to retain the term merely due to the centrality it had, but I find John's use of it to be more a distillation. It becomes less a mystery, more of a tool, more of a messenger. It becomes word shaped, where to Aurelius it seems to be more 'energy-shaped.' It's not clear to me that even the pagan gods get to escape being sculpted by the logos

 

[amorphous_constellation]

For some reason, western "rationalists" become the most credulous, anti-intellectual suckers on anything that makes Christianity seem bad or illegitimate and will refuse to even consider any actual scholarship by actual experts.

When I want to listen to an intellectual on why Christianity is pagan, I for one listen to rabbi Tovia Singer, who has numerous videos on that, and has apparently studied church history. Why should I trust anyone on this board over him?

Other intellectuals understand the line from paganism to christianity as well. Take Jordan Peterson even, who makes an explanation of the Egyptian pantheon as being quite akin to a Christological mode, or of his making Christianity seem (to my perception) as just a node on a broader tradition of 'hero myths'

 

[firedragon]

Whatever the term means, I found the use of it by Marcus Aurelius, not a Christian, to be very moving. To him, it is like 'the force' in the movie star wars. It weaves everything into a web of harmony and fate, it is central and all-directing, it is something you trust in, something you always should seek to find a better sense of. The concept seemed like the glue that held European civilization together

In Christianity, perhaps they needed to retain the term merely due to the centrality it had, but I find John's use of it to be more a distillation. It becomes less a mystery, more of a tool, more of a messenger. It becomes word shaped, where to Aurelius it seems to be more 'energy-shaped.' It's not clear to me that even the pagan gods get to escape being sculpted by the logos

Check the synoptic gospels and how they use it.

 

[Augustus]

That is how someone could supposedly prove it. Yet no one seems to be able to do that here.

Make an argument in support and people may do just that... Shouldn't people start by offering evidence why they think they are pagan first?

 

[Augustus]

When I want to listen to an intellectual on why Christianity is pagan, I for one listen to rabbi Tovia Singer, who has numerous videos on that, and has apparently studied church history. Why should I trust anyone on this board over him?

Other intellectuals understand the line from paganism to christianity as well. Take Jordan Peterson even, who makes an explanation of the Egyptian pantheon as being quite akin to a Christological mode, or of his making Christianity seem (to my perception) as just a node on a broader tradition of 'hero myths'

Of course there are "pagan" influences on Christianity.

That doesn't make Easter, Christmas and Halloween "pagan" though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Make an argument in support and people may do just that... Shouldn't people start by offering evidence why they think they are pagan first?

What? Your question makes no sense in regards to the conversation that was being had. Do you even know what he needs to support?

 

[Rival]

Of course there are "pagan" influences on Christianity.

That doesn't make Easter, Christmas and Halloween "pagan" though.

Good times