ZRod
Well-known member
Don't forget about bans on same sex marriage, which is almost entirely influenced by people trying to force their religious beliefs on everyone.
Last edited by a moderator:
If Stephen Fry Met God . . .
- Thread starter Husker_x
- Start date
TGHusker
Well-known member
Might I suggest:
The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? (The Student Library) Paperback – February, 2003
by Ronald H. Nash (Author)
Formerly titled Christianity and the Hellenistic World. A critical examination of the claim that Christianity borrowed some of its essential beliefs and practices from Hellenistic philosophy, Greco-Roman mystery religions, and Gnosticism. "Professor Nash has written a lucid and superb book." (Professor Edwin Yamauchi, Miami University - Ohio)
http://www.amazon.com/The-Gospel-Greeks-Testament-Thought/dp/0875525598
Josh McDowell in his book "A Ready Defense" does a good summary of the these issues and quotes Nash and others extensively.
From Amazon, a reviewer of the Nash book had this to say:
17 of 20 people found the following review helpful
5Jason Santiago
ByJason Santiago "J_santiago"on September 19, 2006
Format: Paperback
On the surface, many folks might think that the topic is very obscure or not all that important. And while it's true that the subject matter is somewhat complicated and can initially appear pretty irrelevant to present day Christianity, it is nonetheless a topic with enormous present day relevance and deserves to be explored. In a nutshell, this book attempts to analyze whether early Christianity was influenced by pagan philosophical systems or by ideas that existed in the pagan mystery religions. There are a number of reasons why such an examination is so important. First, as this book mentions, a link of influence of paganism on early Christianity has been a common tactic among various folks in academia who are looking to discredit the Christian faith in front of an impressionable audience, and while not mentioning it, the Jesus Seminar has also been diligent in advancing such arguments in an effort to dedeify Jesus. And the reason is clear. One can make major inroads in discrediting the authenticity of Christianity if they can demonstrate, for example, that the resurrection of Jesus as described in the Gospels was really a mythical story copied from allegedly similar recountings in the pagan mystery religions. If this could be demonstrated, any number of additional negative ideas could be argued with greater force, such as that Jesus wasn't really God because the resurrection recountings of the Gospels are not historical but mythical and parallel other myths of the time, or that Jesus is no more special or unique than other supposed gods or deities in other religions. It is clear that the ramifications of these kind of theories, if proven, would be devastating to Christianity. Thus, the importance of this book.
Nash carefully divides the book into 3 sections; analyzing the possibility that early Christianity was influenced by pagan philosophy such as Platonism or Stoicism, analyzing the possibility that early Christianity borrowed some of its stories from the pagan mystery religions such as Isis/Osiris or Mithra, and analyzing whether Christianity was influenced by Gnosticism. In each case, Nash does a good job of beginning his analysis by clearly defining the terms of the debate, and fairly representing the claims made by those who positively assert pagan influence on Christianity. These introductions give the reader a very good starting point for seeing how these arguments, when left unscrutinized, can on the surface appear to be compelling. By presenting the arguments fairly and completely, Nash does a good job of peaking the interest of the reader to read on in order to find out whether these arguments really hold water once we get below the surface. And particularly in the analyses of pagan philosophy and the mystery religions, Nash's analyses are very detailed and meticulous. Nash's analyses are very effective in meticulously discrediting these arguments and in most cases, showing very clearly the lazy scholarship that often fuels such arguments. By doing this, Nash not only puts these arguments in their place, he affirms the historical reliability, uniqueness, and truth of the Christian faith as described in the New Testament and clearly demonstrates that there is absolutely no evidence of a pagan influence on Christianity, and in fact, there is sufficient evidence to suggest a Christian influence on paganism.
In summary, after one reads this book, it is likely that they may scratch their heads in wonder when one thinks about why this book had to be written, given the lazy and even contrived scholarship that is the basis for so many of the arguments affirming a pagan influence on early Christianity. One might reasonably wonder how such ideas ever had any credibility to start with when Nash so completely destroys the arguments with very simple facts and analysis. I applaud Nash for being so thorough in the topics covered and in the analysis. There are over 30 pages of footnotes at the end of the book for the reader who is interested in conducting additional research and examining other pertinent resources. I completely concur with what Nash says in this book when commenting on the alleged influence of the mystery religions on early Christianity, "These..arguments against Christian syncretism help us understand why biblical scholars today seldom claim any early Christian dependence on the mysteries. They constitute an impressive collection of reasons why scholars in such other fields as history and philosophy should rethink their methods and conclusions and finally put such views to rest." This is an excellent book, and one that can greatly help any Christian easily and effectively counter the claims of pagan influence on the early faith. A 'must have' for any apologetics collection.
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
Well-known member
Christianity has borrowed heavily from other religions. This is not an unknown fact, and has been tackled before. Not knowing this is head-in-the-sandedness.
Some reading on this:
Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices
Editorial Reviews From the Publisher"Most contemporary Christians are massively ignorant as to how the church got to where it is today and of how much current church practice is due simply to accumulated tradition, with little or no roots in Scripture. This book provides a useful service in peeling back the layers of tradition, showing the origins of much that we today call "church." Christians who want to be biblically faithful, regardless of their particular tradition or church form, can learn and benefit from the book."
Howard Snyder, Professor of History and Theology of Mission, Asbury Theological Seminary, author of "The Problem of Wineskins" and "The Community of the King."
"PAGAN CHRISTIANITY is a landmark, a true milestone in the overall task of bringing in a new style of responsible, interactive Christianity to replace the old, severely paganized ecclesiastical forms. Frank has done us a great favor, drawing together revealing tidbits from hundreds of sources to create a continuous picture of the formation of today's institutional church. There's nothing like it in print. It is now THE book on church history from the point of view of the underground, open church."
James Rutz, author of "Megashift" and "The Open Church."
"PAGAN CHRISTIANITY contains a wide variety of interesting and helpful historical information of which most Christians - or non-Christians - will be completely unaware. The book identifies - in part or in whole - the pagan roots of many of our current church practices, as well as indicates some borrowed from earlier Jewish or, occasionally, more recent Customs."
Robert Banks, New Testament scholar, author of "Paul's Idea of Community" and "The Church Comes Home."
"This feisty book attacks the incipient paganism that has been absorbed into historic Christianity over the years. It exposes the syncretistic weak spots in what we assume to be basic in our way of doing church. Thoroughly iconoclastic, it is also at the same time a good apologetic for the house church movement which has strong restorationist impulses. My guess is that it will anger some readers and thrill others. I am one of the latter. Whatever, it won't be too easy to dismiss as it is really well researched and substantiated. I think it is definitely worth the read even if I do think it is a tad purist in tone. Just don't drop it-it is likely to explode."
Alan Hirsch, author of "The Forgotten Ways" and "The Shaping of Things to Come."
Some reading on this:
Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices
Editorial Reviews From the Publisher"Most contemporary Christians are massively ignorant as to how the church got to where it is today and of how much current church practice is due simply to accumulated tradition, with little or no roots in Scripture. This book provides a useful service in peeling back the layers of tradition, showing the origins of much that we today call "church." Christians who want to be biblically faithful, regardless of their particular tradition or church form, can learn and benefit from the book."
Howard Snyder, Professor of History and Theology of Mission, Asbury Theological Seminary, author of "The Problem of Wineskins" and "The Community of the King."
"PAGAN CHRISTIANITY is a landmark, a true milestone in the overall task of bringing in a new style of responsible, interactive Christianity to replace the old, severely paganized ecclesiastical forms. Frank has done us a great favor, drawing together revealing tidbits from hundreds of sources to create a continuous picture of the formation of today's institutional church. There's nothing like it in print. It is now THE book on church history from the point of view of the underground, open church."
James Rutz, author of "Megashift" and "The Open Church."
"PAGAN CHRISTIANITY contains a wide variety of interesting and helpful historical information of which most Christians - or non-Christians - will be completely unaware. The book identifies - in part or in whole - the pagan roots of many of our current church practices, as well as indicates some borrowed from earlier Jewish or, occasionally, more recent Customs."
Robert Banks, New Testament scholar, author of "Paul's Idea of Community" and "The Church Comes Home."
"This feisty book attacks the incipient paganism that has been absorbed into historic Christianity over the years. It exposes the syncretistic weak spots in what we assume to be basic in our way of doing church. Thoroughly iconoclastic, it is also at the same time a good apologetic for the house church movement which has strong restorationist impulses. My guess is that it will anger some readers and thrill others. I am one of the latter. Whatever, it won't be too easy to dismiss as it is really well researched and substantiated. I think it is definitely worth the read even if I do think it is a tad purist in tone. Just don't drop it-it is likely to explode."
Alan Hirsch, author of "The Forgotten Ways" and "The Shaping of Things to Come."
Landlord
Banned
All valid points.
Never wanted to imply that it doesn't exist, but generally speaking, whenever people cry foul of "stop shoving your religion down my throat", it's 99% of the time in response to a specific individual talking about their faith and wanting them to shut up, rather than speaking out in opposition towards the systemic influences of Christianity/religion on our government that are being more and more weeded out over time.
TGHusker
Well-known member
Knapp, I don't have an issue with your post. I would agree that many 'church practices' have been borrowed from pagan sources and visa versa. We all know Christmas isn't the actual birth date of Jesus for example and we could site other practices. My post and the book by Nash pertains to central doctrine - Christ's resurrection for example. Perhaps the current home church movement may be the closest thing to the 1st century church. I recognized some of the authors you note in that regards. I have found that different people have different "Pathways to God" (see Gary Thomas book with that title). Some find great solace & meaning in the high church liturgy and others in the very informal home church setting. I think you will find more of those pagan issues associated with the more deeply organized institutional church. I think any organization (religious, civic, etc) looses its 'purity' over time as it rubs elbow with the culture at large. The challenge, which I think many of the authors you site are addressing, is to restore the foundation of why the organization exists and bring life back into it.
knapplc
Well-known member
There's a limit to that restoration of foundation, though. Going back all the way to the roots means discovery of pre-Christian myths including virgin births, walking on water, gods dying and rising again, etc, etc, etc. None of the stories of Jesus were new when the Gospels were written, whether that be his sinlessness, his healing of the sick, turning water into wine, being arrested and tried, even a god being nailed to a cross was not new when the Christ story was written down.
It becomes not necessarily a matter of bringing Christianity back to some level of "purity," and rather a matter of discovering the bits and pieces of the truth, and where it all comes from.
It's far easier to simply reject this information and repeat the song we learned as children, "Jesus loves me, this I know. For the Bible tells me so." The Bible tells us everything, including the fact that the Bible is inerrant. But... a little digging raises some pretty serious questions about that.
Working too hard to return to the roots of Christianity, therefore, is not something the Church ever seems to invest much time into.
It becomes not necessarily a matter of bringing Christianity back to some level of "purity," and rather a matter of discovering the bits and pieces of the truth, and where it all comes from.
It's far easier to simply reject this information and repeat the song we learned as children, "Jesus loves me, this I know. For the Bible tells me so." The Bible tells us everything, including the fact that the Bible is inerrant. But... a little digging raises some pretty serious questions about that.
Working too hard to return to the roots of Christianity, therefore, is not something the Church ever seems to invest much time into.
walksalone
New member
I'm fine, but the Jesus and those who oppose him have your undies in a twist, I just get a kick out of you guys and the wasted f*cks given over your imaginary friend...
walksalone
New member
JJ Husker
Donor
I'm glad you find it entertaining and that it causes you to give wasted f*cks also. If it didn't, I guess you wouldn't comment so often about it.
walksalone
New member
I'm replying to you out of amusement, the other reply is something completely different...
NUance
New member
This is something I wonder about. I mean, the Bible was written so long ago. By different people. In different languages. And has been translated umpteen times. I have to wonder if perhaps some things have been lost in the translation. Or perhaps the subtle changing of word and phrase definitions has put things in a different light. I'm not necessarily saying the Bible contains mistakes. But if it did I wouldn't be surprised. And if it does, it's not like it would demean my faith. I worship God. Not a book. The Bible is merely a tool to use in worship. I realize some Christians[SIZE=11pt]—[/SIZE]maybe even most Christians[SIZE=11pt]—[/SIZE]would consider this blasphemous. (Don't stone me, man!)
One thing about the Bible that I find pretty amazing is that it was written centuries before we knew most of the basic scientific concepts we know today. It amazes me that the Bible doesn't run afoul of some the basic scientific concepts that we take for granted today, but were beyond comprehension 2,000 to 3,000 years back.
/btw, I'm now into the New Testament in my quest to re-read the Bible. About 2/3s done with Matthew.
StPaulHusker
Banned
This is a strange argument to make.maskershake said:
StPaulHusker
Banned
You know. I don't agree with Walksalone with regards to religion but I have to say his response to LOMS deserves as many +1's as it can get.
StPaulHusker
Banned
I assume the imaginary friend is God? Because Jesus is/was real. Just wanted to be sure who was being referenced