Pagan origins of Christianity?

Question

http://home.earthlink.net/~pgwhacker/ChristianOrigins/

Answer 1

Precisely. :)

Answer 2

Religions borrowed heavily from one another during those times. It was not at all an uncommon way to gain faith and hold it. That, in fact, leaves out a HUGE amount of the complex changes and consolidations that went into forming Christianity of the ancient world. It's changed even since those times quite a bit, if not as much as oral-based culture's religions tend to change over time due to the ossification of the written word.

Just remember that its origins are not a means for discrediting its followers. Understanding the culture that a religion was formed in is an important part of understanding the religion.

Answer 3

What a contradiction. Christianity is from the word "Christian' which referred to the early pious followers of Christ. If you wanted to ask about pagan influence in Christianity, then the preview in the structure of Solomon's Temple gives us all the prophetic clues. Check at what juncture the Gentiles were allowed to work on the structure. Match that juncture with the century and there you go: prophecies fulfilled.

Boaz.

Answer 4

1. "Christian theology borrowed more than the archaic myth of the dying-resurrected Godman." All I have to say is: Ancient fufilled prophesy.

2. "Initiation by baptism" This is actually a modified Jewish ritual called Mikvah

3. "communion with the God through a holy meal that represented the flesh of the dead God, the Holy Spirit" I've got nothing on that one at the moment.

4. "monotheism, and immortality of the soul were all core beliefs of many ancient faiths." Yeah, like...ummm...Judaism. Jesus WAS a Jew.

5. "miracles" Again, fufilled prophecy.

6. "And they had them centuries before Christianity was a twinkle in Saint Paul's eye." Umm...Paul didn't even write the gospels. What does he have to do with what Jesus said about bread and wine, and other accounts of what Jesus did during his life?

Basically, the article is refuting the existance of Jesus and the validity of the New Testament accounts of His existance (the gospels.) It implies that the gospels are just made up stories based on Pagan things, correct? Well, let me give you just two things to chew on for a moment...

The New Testament writers weren't writing just stories or fables, they wrote what they saw, felt, witnessed, what they experienced. "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. We write this to make our joy complete." (1 John 1:1-4)

If you think people just invented this story, that Jesus didn't really rise from the dead or perform miracles that people just made it up, this is what I have to say. The reason I know that's not true is this: All of those people who keep saying Jesus rose from the dead, most of them died for saying it. People don't die for things they KNOW are lies.

Answer 5

All religions come after pagan era to bring enlightenment but it is over taken by pagan rituals after sometime.So ,it is a natural cycle.

Answer 6

Yes! Thanks for educating them. But then, can those right wing pesky christians really be educated...they have so few brain cells well lets see.

Answer 7

That sums it up, alright. Blessed be.