Toto

All of the scholars I read, whether they tend toward mythicism or not, state that Christianity drew on Jewish and pagan roots. (The Christians claim that the pagan elements were mere cultural borrowings.) The basis of the more scholarly mythicist case is that early Christians constructed the narrative of Jesus by reading the scriptures (i.e., the Septuagint) and constructing a story that would show prophecy being fulfilled.

Evangelion

The "pagan roots" claim is perfectly legitimate when we're talking about stuff like the transmutation of Saturnalia into "Christmas" and the transmutation of a pagan fertility festival into "Easter." This is documented history, and I do not dispute it.

It does not concern me, however, because (a) it has no bearing on original, 1st Century Christianity, and (b) I do not actually keep these "Christianised" celebrations, for the very reason that they are little more than paganism in another guise.

By the same token, there is more than enough evidence to prove that the Catholic Church permitted pagan converts to carry on some of their own traditional practices and superstitions under a "Christian" veneer.

As late as the 18th Century (for example) the Jesuits were still trying to convince the Holy See that Chinese ancestor-worship (and other such rituals) could be safely accommodated under a Catholic theological umbrella. (The Franciscans had tried a similar tactic in 17th Century Mexico, where they met with greater success.) Unfortunately for the Jesuits, however, Pope Clement XI did not agree with their methods... and the Jesuit practice of "theological accommodation" was prohibited by a papal decree.

Again, this is documented history and I do not dispute it. And again, it is utterly irrelevant to me, since (a) it has no bearing on original, 1st Century Christianity, and (b) I am not a Catholic.

But when it comes to the claim that Christianity at its very heart is pagan to the core... Well. I have yet to see a credible argument for this assertion.

Fallacies of equivocation just don't cut it, and superficial similarities combined with unsubstantiated extrapolation do not constitute objective proof.

Ted Hoffman

Ever heard of tone deaf?

Even if were the case that Christianity has not borrowed from pagan religions, Christianity, by its very construction, is an insult.

You dont need mythers to insult xstianity by ascribing its origins to pagan sources.

Now please stop wasting everyones time. We were having a discussion here before you came here undecided about whether to be a comedian or a serious participant. Why dont you go to church and pray for enlightenement?

Evangelion

Ever heard of "anachronistic"?

I've contributed a valid analysis of the logos passage by 4 respectable academics. That is not a waste of time.

I wasn't undecided at all. You're just miffed because (a) you didn't understand my logos quotes, and (b) you don't really have anything of value to contribute yourself.

Gotta love those sour grapes, baby.

I never have before. Why would I start now?

If this is the best you can do, you shouldn't even be here.

Ted Hoffman

Because you seem incapable of contributing meaningfully in a discussion of this nature without appearing comical and ridiculous. All you can do is resort to strawman responses and intellectually void parodies in the name of irony.

If you never have before, the time has come.

Celsus

This thread has become too heated. I am giving it a 24-hour cooling down period in the meantime. Remember, good debators can always have a cool emotional detachment to the topics at hand.

Joel
BC&H Moderator

Celsus

This thread is reopened. Please remember to maintain the standards expected of a higher forum.

Joel
BC&H Moderator

contracycle

Tariq Ali's book "Clash of Fundamentalisms" (London, Verso, 185984457x) begins with an overview of Islam. Ali asserts that Mohammed, as a historical figure, is carrying out a distinct purpose which is the final eradication of the female divinity from theology. From this stance, the accomodation of the Virgin Mary in Christianity is a pagan anachronism held over in the new partiarchal ideology and worshipped, in many ways, as Inanna or the earth goddess had been before her. All this gets tied in the infamous 'satanic verses'; perhaps River could comment on the the idea.

Certain strands of thought see this deliberate implementation of a partiarchal theology, and the conscious eradication of a female theology, as very significant. Indead, the frequency with which a transfer of power, or legitimacy, or authority, from an autochthonous female figure to a contemporary male one occurs with striking frequency and of apparently independant provenance in many cultures.

I won't go too far doen the implications of that line of thought. But I would like to point out that "who was Mary" may be a pointless question if she was in essentially a fossilised Inanna, and that her 'origin' substantially predates all the Peoples of the Book.

Geoff Hudson

Tariq Ali is talking through his derriere, as usual. When is the "penny going to drop" that Mary was the pure because she was the daughter of a high priest?

Geoff

contracycle

How bizarre.