How did Christianity kill longstanding paganism in Europe?

[Shiranui117]

Some still continue but under the guise of Christian ritual (or earth religions). I am thinking specifically of christmas, christmas trees and yule logs, easter celebrations, harvest celebrations

Easter and Christmas are thoroughly Christian celebrations. Some of the imagery that has come to be associated with them in Western countries in the previous few centuries (Easter eggs, Christmas trees) is not.

 

[lukethethird]

How did Christianity kill longstanding paganism in Europe?
Mostly with the sword, and then firearms.

 

[sooda]

No, but sometimes your responses are....what on earth are you talking about?

The prophesies about Egypt, Damascus, Babylon and Syria all failed miserably.

Either a prophesy is specific or its a parlor game.

 

[Shiranui117]

Unfortunately your comment shows that you know as much about baptism as Constantine did.
If anyone delayed getting baptized because they thought they could sin with impunity until they "washed their sins away" later in life, then they were fooling themselves.

That's not actually the reason it was usually done. Baptism has always been held to be for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38 is but one of many, many scripture verses I could quote here). Many laypeople held the belief during the early centuries of Christianity that, once one was baptized, they had to keep that metaphorical garment unstained. If one fell into serious sin after having been baptized, there was no way for that sin to be forgiven. (Eventually the Church Fathers put this idea to rest, but it still had a profound effect on the psychology of the early Christian laity.) Ironically, you espouse shades of that very same idea in the rest of your post.

Baptism is NOT a washing away of sin.....Jesus' blood did that, (1 John 1:7)

Baptism is how we participate in the washing away of our sins by Christ's death for us. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The very Scripture verses which you post elsewhere in your post also highlight this. I notice that Protestants who deny God's ability to confer grace to us by using His physical creation and the actions of His servants generally tend to hold to this either-or position; either we intellectually assent to the faith and come into the Church by a mere declaration of faith and God forgives us without any sort of physical sign or gesture, or we undergo baptism for the remission of our sins. I think this is a false dichotomy that does not bear out in the rest of Scripture, and it's a brainchild of the Protestants who deny the good of the material universe and God's ability to use physical creation to bring about the salvation of the whole human person, body and soul.

Constantine's baptism was meaningless.....just like infant baptism is today.

Judging somebody's eternal salvation? Rather bold of you.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

This is the opinion of those who haven't taken the time to read primary source documents from the true Christians who were living during these times, yes. Sadly for many American Christians following movements which originated in the 1800's and 1900's, the real story is very different.

Maybe you could be so kind as to give us some of the facts.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Easter and Christmas are thoroughly Christian celebrations. Some of the imagery that has come to be associated with them in Western countries in the previous few centuries (Easter eggs, Christmas trees) is not.

God gives us a list of holy days to celebrate but Christmans ans Easter are not included. Wonder how they got to be "Christian"?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

How did Christianity kill longstanding paganism in Europe?
Mostly with the sword, and then firearms.

They also killed people who believed the Bible and not some made up religion that absorbed many pagan ideas and tried to call itself"Christian".

 

[shmogie]

It sounds like Constantine had a lot of clout in his day. It sounds like religion was forced onto people according to the faith of the rulers over them. It seems like religion was once established by governments, a far cry from the American First Amendment. Why is America mainly Christian? The Pilgrims brought Christian traditions from England and the Colonists acquired the faith from Europe. King Henry VIII, a Catholic converted to Protestant, made buggery a capital offense in England. Why homophobia and Christianity go so hand in hand seems odd since Jesus never mentions homosexuality in the bible and there is no commandment against it.

Uh, Jesus never mentions baseball or sex with a dead body either. There is much said in the Bible about homosexuality.

 

[Deeje]

The prophesies about Egypt, Damascus, Babylon and Syria all failed miserably.

Either a prophesy is specific or its a parlor game.

Please be more specific....I am not understanding your references.

 

[Cooky]

That's not actually the reason it was usually done. Baptism has always been held to be for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38 is but one of many, many scripture verses I could quote here). Many laypeople held the belief during the early centuries of Christianity that, once one was baptized, they had to keep that metaphorical garment unstained. If one fell into serious sin after having been baptized, there was no way for that sin to be forgiven. (Eventually the Church Fathers put this idea to rest, but it still had a profound effect on the psychology of the early Christian laity.) Ironically, you espouse shades of that very same idea in the rest of your post.

Baptism is how we participate in the washing away of our sins by Christ's death for us. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The very Scripture verses which you post elsewhere in your post also highlight this. I notice that Protestants who deny God's ability to confer grace to us by using His physical creation and the actions of His servants generally tend to hold to this either-or position; either we intellectually assent to the faith and come into the Church by a mere declaration of faith and God forgives us without any sort of physical sign or gesture, or we undergo baptism for the remission of our sins. I think this is a false dichotomy that does not bear out in the rest of Scripture, and it's a brainchild of the Protestants who deny the good of the material universe and God's ability to use physical creation to bring about the salvation of the whole human person, body and soul.

Judging somebody's eternal salvation? Rather bold of you.

Such good points. It helps when learning why Christianity unfolded the way it did, to look at what exactly went on rather than just point blame against this or that group.

So much knowledge is lost when we refuse to hear the first hand accounts.

As for the notion of: *sins not being able to be forgiven* after baptism -that would have been a definite stumbling block that needed to be corrected.

The rest of your post is right on spot as well.

 

[Cooky]

They also killed people who believed the Bible and not some made up religion that absorbed many pagan ideas and tried to call itself"Christian".

You make it sound so simple, when in actuality, it is much more complex than that.

...things happened. Terrible heresies occured, some even including self-starvation as a means to martyrdom. Others included re-scripting of bibles.

Many of those heretic sects believed they were "bible believing" Christians too. Luckily for us all, the Catholic Church squashed those beliefs many generations ago. Thousands of years worth of generations, all put to the test of time. I can only imagine the number of sects and denominations that existed only to fade away -they must be in the tens of thousands. Some of which we know were very self destructive.

...So we probably shouldn't be so quick to place the non-Catholic Christians of yesterday on a pedestal, until we've come to realize who they actually were, and what they did.

 

[sooda]

Please be more specific....I am not understanding your references.

Deut. 7:1, God Will Give Israel 7 Nations. Joshua 15:63, He Is Unable To Drive Some Out.

Isaiah 17:1 Damascus Will Be Destroyed

Isaiah 19:5 The Nile Will Dry Up.

Jeremiah 50:39 Babylon will be uninhabited.

Ezekiel 29:10-13 Egypt Will Be Uninhabited For Forty Years (after being destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, Ezekiel 29:19)

 

[Cooky]

....And with all those lost sects, we can see how the Church formed into what it is. We can see why everything happened.

And most importantly, we may struggle with this, but we should be able to see how similar we actually are. Because as Christianity was refined, we all really do share a lot of common beliefs in the end.

 

[Deeje]

That's not actually the reason it was usually done. Baptism has always been held to be for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38 is but one of many, many scripture verses I could quote here).

Yes I agree that the act of baptism was centered on the saving value of Christ's blood.
But the "remission" or "forgiveness" of sin (Gr. "aphesis") had to do with.....

1. release from bondage or imprisonment
   
   
2. forgiveness or pardon, of sins (letting them go as if they had never been committed), remission of the penalty (Strongs)

So the blood of Christ made forgiveness possible and the act of baptism was an acknowledgment that Christ's sacrifice was accepted and applied to the baptismal candidate. It also meant that a baptized Christian was to do their best to live a sinless life from that day forward. Yet, God was not expecting more of imperfect humans than they were capable of giving. If they fell down, but were truly sorry, they could expect forgiveness on the basis of Christ's shed blood.

Many laypeople held the belief during the early centuries of Christianity that, once one was baptized, they had to keep that metaphorical garment unstained. If one fell into serious sin after having been baptized, there was no way for that sin to be forgiven.

And that was only half correct. If they had knowledge of scripture they would have known that Christ's sacrifice covers all repentant sinners...but the people did not have the scriptures, did they? The church made sure that no one but themselves had access to God's word.

Wasn't God's dealings with King David enough for them to understand that even gross sin can be forgiven if one repents from the heart. Even after David had committed adultery and murder, his heartfelt expressions of regret were enough for God to pardon his error, although he did not prevent the consequences of his actions. David's sins could have merited the death penalty, but God himself judged David and forgave him.

(Eventually the Church Fathers put this idea to rest, but it still had a profound effect on the psychology of the early Christian laity.) Ironically, you espouse shades of that very same idea in the rest of your post.

The early church fathers should have prevented the misunderstanding in the first place. Baptism was the beginning of one's Christian course as Jesus himself demonstrated. As soon as one accepted Christ they were baptized without delay. Its not the act of baptism that imparts some 'magical' kind of spiritual 'insurance'. People who view it that way are completely misled. Its the heartfelt commitment that is expressed in baptism that is the important thing. An infant is incapable of accepting that responsibility.

Baptism is how we participate in the washing away of our sins by Christ's death for us. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The very Scripture verses which you post elsewhere in your post also highlight this.

Did I say that they were mutually exclusive? They are expressions of the same act. Accepting Christ and getting baptized are consecutive steps in the same process of becoming a Christian. It has to happen at the beginning, not the end of a person's Christian journey.

I notice that Protestants who deny God's ability to confer grace to us by using His physical creation and the actions of His servants generally tend to hold to this either-or position; either we intellectually assent to the faith and come into the Church by a mere declaration of faith and God forgives us without any sort of physical sign or gesture, or we undergo baptism for the remission of our sins. I think this is a false dichotomy that does not bear out in the rest of Scripture, and it's a brainchild of the Protestants who deny the good of the material universe and God's ability to use physical creation to bring about the salvation of the whole human person, body and soul.

I am not sure what you mean by all that. God's grace is not a license to sin so that you can hold back from baptism until your life is almost over....and then "wash your sins away" at virtually the last minute...what an incredibly shallow faith that would betray. And what a complete misunderstanding of the act of baptism it would demonstrate.

Judging somebody's eternal salvation? Rather bold of you.

It is not my place to judge anyone....I can judge their actions however, and say definitely that the Bible condemns those actions....but the judge of all of us is the Christ. He knows who is a genuine disciple and those who blindly follow ritual as if it is all that God requires of us. I do not believe that it will end well for those who "think" that "close enough is good enough" when it comes to obeying the Christ and "doing the will of the Father". (Matthew 7:21-23)

 

[Cooky]

How did Christianity kill longstanding paganism in Europe?
Mostly with the sword, and then firearms.

I argue that the test of time is the ultimate test.

 

[Cooky]

And that was only half correct. If they had knowledge of scripture they would have known that Christ's sacrifice covers all repentant sinners...but the people did not have the scriptures, did they? The church made sure that no one but themselves had access to God's word.

That's not actually true. Most lay people couldn't read back then, so the need for bibles was less than it is today.

Also, there was a period where the Catholic Church collected and burned all bibles... This took place centered in France when sects existed who began re-scripting and mass distributing their own versions of the bible mixed with Moorish rooted philosophies.
...The integrity of YOUR holy scriptures were protected by the Catholic Church (and OC.).

You're welcome... On behalf of the CC.

 

[Deeje]

That's not actually true. Most lay people couldn't read back then, so the need for bibles was less than it is today.

Oh, but the priests and the scribes could read and the people still got the wrong message....didn't they?
If they understood scripture and they were the ones responsible for teaching their flock the truth about baptism, why did the people get such a twisted interpretation of it? Teachers have double accountability.

Also, there was a period where the Catholic Church collected and burned all bibles... This took place centered in France when sects existed who began re-scripting and mass distributing their own versions of the bible mixed with Moorish rooted philosophies.

That is not the way I heard it. The Catholic Church wanted complete custody of the bible so that there was no one who could question their interpretation of things or their doctrines adopted from pagan sources. It would have disempowered them to have dissension in their ranks and it was so easy to put "heretics" to the fire, especially after torturing a confession out of them.

...The integrity of YOUR holy scriptures were protected by the Catholic Church (and OC.).

So why do most Bible translations not contain the apocryphal books if the Holy Scriptures were "protected" by the RC church?
If the church had stuck to the scriptures then Mary would never have been elevated above the status that the Bible gave her as simply the mother of Jesus. She could never have become "the Mother of God" if there was no trinity. Teachings about hellfire could never have been presented to scare the people into submission or face the consequences. Baptism would never have been seen as a meaningless ritual carried out as some kind of 'spiritual insurance policy'. I don't think most people have any idea how much the church deviated from the teachings of the Christ whilst adopting all manner of false religious concepts from their neighbors. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) No one seemed to care.....or was it that there was no who cared left to utter a protest?

You're welcome... On behalf of the CC.

The last people on earth I would trust with my eternal future would be the Roman Catholic church. It seems to me that whatever Christ taught, the RC church taught the opposite.

Sorry....but you are welcome to them.

 

[sooda]

Oh, but the priests and the scribes could read and the people still got the wrong message....didn't they?
If they understood scripture and they were the ones responsible for teaching their flock the truth about baptism, why did the people get such a twisted interpretation of it? Teachers have double accountability.



That is not the way I heard it. The Catholic Church wanted complete custody of the bible so that there was no one who could question their interpretation of things or their doctrines adopted from pagan sources. It would have disempowered them to have dissension in their ranks and it was so easy to put "heretics" to the fire, especially after torturing a confession out of them.



So why do most Bible translations not contain the apocryphal books if the Holy Scriptures were "protected" by the RC church?
If the church had stuck to the scriptures then Mary would never have been elevated above the status that the Bible gave her as simply the mother of Jesus. She could never have become "the Mother of God" if there was no trinity. Teachings about hellfire could never have been presented to scare the people into submission or face the consequences. Baptism would never have been seen as a meaningless ritual carried out as some kind of 'spiritual insurance policy'. I don't think most people have any idea how much the church deviated from the teachings of the Christ whilst adopting all manner of false religious concepts from their neighbors. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) No one seemed to care.....or was it that there was no who cared left to utter a protest?



The last people on earth I would trust with my eternal future would be the Roman Catholic church. It seems to me that whatever Christ taught, the RC church taught the opposite.

Sorry....but you are welcome to them.

Nobody really had Bibles before the Guttenberg Press circa 1452.

 

[sooda]

Gutenberg Bible
www.gutenberg-bible.com

What is the Gutenberg Bible? Johann Gutenberg holds the distinction of being the inventor of the movable-type printing press.

In 1455, Gutenberg produced what is considered to be the first book ever printed: a Latin language Bible, printed in Mainz, Germany.

 

[Deeje]

Nobody really had Bibles before the Guttenberg Press circa 1452.

Were the Dead Sea scrolls scripture? Were they printed on a printing press? What form did the Scriptures have when Jesus walked the earth? The apostles used the scriptures freely when they were preaching.....

The Catholic church took the Bible away from the people and burned at the stake anyone who dared to posses one. But when it was time, God took it from the church and put the Bible back into the hands of the people.
Whom he used to do that is irrelevant. It is his word, not their.