Is Christianity based upon Pagan ideas?

[Oberon]

20-30 is still a long time, if that is true. Add to that the fact that Paul was not a even a contemporary of Jesus.

Actually, he was. Paul was very much alive and an active pharisee while Jesus was preaching. He just hadn't joined Jesus' disciples.

Where are their written accounts, or written testimony of their oral accounts?

All the gospels other than Mark attest to witnesses of Jesus' resurrection.

As for Paul's testimony, it cannot be deemed reliable. Remember, he was formerly the persecutor of Christians; guilt and fear are most likely his motives for some of his writings.

Hardly. You should try reading his letters.

Who knows what they experienced. As far as anyone knows, however, no one seems to have actually seen him ascend into Paradise. That idea is apparently based only on the fact (?) that the tomb was empty. It is a far cry to assume that he rose from the dead based on such scanty 'evidence'. Besides, humans don't come back to life once dead, let alone rise into the clouds.

The point is that Paul is not the only one who attests to followers seeing Jesus after he died. Whether they really saw him, or thought they did (and were deluded or delusional) or whether they were lying, the point is that Paul's testimony is not the only testimony we have of Jesus' followers seeing the risen Jesus.

It is as big a concoction as the parting of the Red Sea, the Deluge, turning water into wine, raising the dead, turning staffs into snakes, the virgin birth, etc.

We aren't discussing the validity of any religious beliefs. The point of your thread here was whether or not (and to what degree) christianity used pagan ideas. My point is not that Jesus actually resurrected, but that it is THIS (not his death) which formed the core of Christianity.

These false beliefs come out of the Sensation Center, coupled with the Power Center, and the Security Center.

Right. Have you studied neuroscience?

Don't you see? The fact that the theme of the Crucifixion is even associated with the activity of the drinking of his blood (directly from the wounds, even!)

One artistic depiction of drinking the blood of Jesus from his wounds does not equal a christian concept, and it isn't.

simply means that people believed his blood to have certain powers.

No, the didn't. The point of drinking the body and blood of Jesus is that it represents HIS sacrifice, not to gain power from it.

One gains the benefit of those powers by either washing in the blood or drinking it. Actually, it is a very common Christian theme:

I see nothing in your quote, or elsewhere, about gaining power through drinking.

Christians not only symbolically drink the blood of the divine, but eat his flesh as well, every day, in the Catholic Mass, for one thing.

Yes. The point is this has nothing to do with the taurobolium.

"The bull is seen as a symbol of Spring, of rebirth...

Two points:

1. Once more, the hellenistic mithras dates AFTER the composition of Paul and at least the synoptics gospels, as well as likely the gospel of John.
2. Washing in the blood of a bull as a symbol of rebirth is not akin to drinking and eating the blood of christ to celebrate his suffering and sacrifice for the benefit of all mankind ("do this in memory of me...")

The Problem of Paul

Again, you really need to find some better sources. And again, the mithraic rituals you are describing postdate almost all of the NT.

 

[Oberon]

Of course. The story had to be re-told in such a way as to make it appear that Jesus was not only God in the flesh, but that his mission was a success, even though it was a failure:

Pretty much, yes. But I don't think it was simply "retold" as such. Plenty of similar figures had attempted to do what Jesus did and failed. Something happened to make the earliest followers believe Jesus resurrected. Delusional despair, hallucination, a powerful dream, or who knows what.

Jesus and his immediate followers were Pharisees.

Completely and utterly wrong.

If bathing in the bull's blood were all there was to it, I would agree with you, but see my post above: the initiate also ate the bull's flesh and drank his blood to gain the benefits of the blood's power, for the same reason Christians do. The bull was a symbol of Spring and renewal; so was Jesus.

Jesus was not a symbol of spring or renewal. That is one of the central differences. Jesus' one-time sacrifice and resurrection meant the one-time opening of the doors to the kingdom of heaven, not cyclical rebirth/spring.

....so the "Resurrection" had to be concocted in order to turn Jesus into a One of a Kind Special Case. That, too, is where they made their fatal mistake.

It may have been "concocted" but I doubt it. If it had been, why were none of the other Jews who made messianic claims and then were killed thought to have resurrected? Something other than a lie or concocted story happened to make his disciples believe in the resurrection. I think it was probably some type of dream/vision/delusional despair, but of course we will never know.

What "spiritual realm" would have been restored? Was Heaven ever in need of such restoration?

Heaven didn't need restoration, we did. Jesus' triumph as the risen messiah restored humans to paradise, which had been closed to them.

No it is not. People hear voices they claim are from the world of the spirit all the time.

They see things too.

Virtually no one, however, claims to see people rising from the dead simply because it is not reality.

Many, many, many people have claimed to see dead people in the form of spirits and ghosts.

In the Zen temples there is a phenomenon known as makyo. In sesshin, intensive meditation sessions, students claim they have seen Jesus, Buddha, the Blessed Mary, etc.. face to face. The Zen Master listens to them, then quietly instructs them to return to their meditation mats and re-focus on their breath. These are hallucinations and not real visions.

Same idea. The point is it is no more far fetched to imagine a risen Jesus than that Allah actually spoke to Muhammed, and no more far fetched to imagine that Jesus' followers had visions or hallucinations they interpreted as the risen Jesus than to imagine Muhammed had auditory hallucinations he interpreted as the voice of Allah.

It is just a matter of degree. Both are intended to pacify a potentially punishing deity. One is just more imminent, that's all.

No, honoring and pacification are quite different from absolution. Honoring and pacification are required regardless of any wrongdoing. You honor YHWH or Jupiter or Zeus because they are powerful and pacificy them because that power can be turned against you. Absolution is done only out of a desire to spiritually cleanse oneself due to sin/wrongdoing.

 

[logician]

My userstanding is that "heaven, hell, prophecy, daemon possession, sacrifice, initiation by baptism, communion with God through a holy meal, the Holy Spirit, monotheism, immortality of the soul, miracle working son of God, and born of a mortal woman" all come from various pre-Christian myths. One can take three (at least) tacks here...

1) These pre-Christian myths aren't real in an historic sense, or aren't similar enough to the Jesus story to lend cred to the "borrowed myths" idea.
2) God-men have a lot in common and thus the Jesus stories are bound to sound a lot like pre-Christian ideas of God.
3) The writers of the Bible were steeped in these pre-Christian myths and embellished their versions to lend God-like cred to Jesus.

I'll take the last one (mostly).

Even the existence of Jesus was most likely a myth, certainly the birth and death stories were, and most of the events in the life of the supposed Jesus were simply written to fulfill OT prophesies.

 

[Oberon]

Even the existence of Jesus was most likely a myth, certainly the birth and death stories were, and most of the events in the life of the supposed Jesus were simply written to fulfill OT prophesies.

Yes, we know you read The Jesus Mysteries. However, for those interested in the opinion of people who actually know what they are talking about, there are virtually NO experts in ancient history, NT studies, ancient jewish studies, or classics who beleive that Jesus was a myth.

 

[Breathe]

and most of the events in the life of the supposed Jesus were simply written to fulfill OT prophesies.

Most probably were I agree with you here (but of course, not all of them) and others were probably the incorporation of Pagan elements as time goes by. (Though I believe Jesus existed and was most likely a sage with non-Jewish influences like Buddhism, myself.)

This begs the question, why do the fulfilled prophecies of Jesus' existence, not fulfil them better? Why are many of the verses ones that Christians take as prophecies ones that (most) Jews do not take as prophecies of the moshiakh, and ones that are misunderstood (the translation of 'almah as virgin, for example)?

And then one has to ask, why are there so many areas and prophecies that were ignored, and many prophecies not fulfilled? Why the concept of Jesus having to come back to many more things, something alien to Jewish thought?

 

[Oberon]

Though I believe Jesus existed and was most likely a sage with non-Jewish influences like Buddhism, myself.

You think Jesus was influenced by Buddhism!!??

 

[Breathe]

You think Jesus was influenced by Buddhism!!??

Yep.
Why?
(This may go off-topic though. )

 

[Oberon]

Yep.
Why?
(This may go off-topic though. )

Well, I suppose it isn't quite "off topic" as Buddhism could be considered paganism. The reason I ask is because asserting that Jesus was in any way, shape, or form influenced by Buddhism is about the most ridiculous thing I have heard. I though Logician and dogsgod's "mythic Jesus" theories would be the most outlandish theories with the least amount of evidence I would encounter concerning the historic Jesus. I was wrong.

 

[Breathe]

The reason I ask is because asserting that Jesus was in any way, shape, or form influenced by Buddhism is about the most ridiculous thing I have heard.

Well, it's not really that ridiculous.
Alexander the Great had contact with India around 300BC. There became an Indo-Greek kingdom. There were the Indo-Scythian, Indo-Parthian kingdoms and possibly even the Kushan empire at the time of Jesus' life. These both had huge populations of Buddhism, as well as Hellenic Paganism and Zoroastrianism. These are part of the Silk Road path. At least one Greek ruler converted to Buddhism before Jesus was even born.

To say that no Buddhists (even lay Buddhists) would have ever attempted to convert people during a short stop in and around where Jesus lived is to be dismissive of far too much. That would be equivalent to thinking that after one gets to Iran, it was like "HERE BE DRAGONS!", but we know that was not the case and that there was a lot more interaction between China, India and Afghanistan-Pakistan than many would give credit for.

That is also excluding many of the similarities in the message. Turn the other cheek, Father Son and Holy Spirit, Buddha Dharma Sangha, etc.

 

[Oberon]

Well, it's not really that ridiculous.
Alexander the Great had contact with India around 300BC.

About the time buddhism was just coming into its own.

To say that no Buddhists (even lay Buddhists) would have ever stayed and/or attempted to convert people during a short stop in and around where Jesus lived is to be dismissive of far too much.

No, it isn't. Have you studied the culture of 1st century galilee much? Jesus didn't even have a great deal of contact with greek culture, which dominated the eastern Roman empire, let alone buddhism. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere of buddhist influence in 1st century palestine in or around Jesus' time.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Well, it's not really that ridiculous.
Alexander the Great had contact with India around 300BC. There became an Indo-Greek kingdom. There were the Indo-Scythian, Indo-Parthian kingdoms and possibly even the Kushan empire at the time of Jesus' life. These both had huge populations of Buddhism, as well as Hellenic Paganism and Zoroastrianism. These are part of the Silk Road path. At least one Greek ruler converted to Buddhism before Jesus was even born.

To say that no Buddhists (even lay Buddhists) would have ever attempted to convert people during a short stop in and around where Jesus lived is to be dismissive of far too much. That would be equivalent to thinking that after one gets to Iran, it was like "HERE BE DRAGONS!", but we know that was not the case and that there was a lot more interaction between China, India and Afghanistan-Pakistan than many would give credit for.

That is also excluding many of the similarities in the message. Turn the other cheek, Father Son and Holy Spirit, Buddha Dharma Sangha, etc.

If you take the story of Buddha, it also the story of Christ, their lives that is....

Thisis one reason why I think it is foolish to take the life of Jesus OR Buddha as historical fact...

Because both are largely paths for others to walk upon...

much like the tale of the prince and the pauper...

For Gnostics it is found in the Acts of thomas, which is used by Christians in India...

............

The Hymn of the Pearl is of the Thomas tradition and is one of the most poetic and mystical of all Gnostic works. It is the story of the Divine Pilgrim's sojourn on the earthly plane.


The central figure is a young Prince who is asked by his royal mother and father to journey to the land of Egypt. There, they say, he will find a precious jewel, a pearl of uncommon lustre. It is guarded, though, by a fearsome dragon. The prince must somehow charm the dragon to release the sacred jewel.


In leaving the palace of his homeland, the little Prince must leave behind the exquisite garments of his office, a princely robe, luminous and covered with jewels. He dons a simple dress and starts on his way. Arriving in Egypt he takes care to dress in the clothes of the land, but is recognized as a foreigner and given tainted food to eat. He falls into a deep and forgetful sleep.


The Prince's parents, on hearing of his trials, send a messenger with a letter reminding him of his stately birth and promised task. He awakens and reads the letter. Heartened by its message, he remembers the dragon, and in a great act of courage snatches away the precious pearl. Triumphant in his mission, he leaves for home. His former life seems far and distant, for when he left he was just a boy. But when his parents greet him in joy and celebration, returning to him his jeweled robe, he remembers all that he has forgotten.


"As I now beheld the robe, it seemed to me suddenly to become a mirror-image of myself: myself entire I saw in it, and it entire I saw in myself, that we were two in separateness, and yet again one in the sameness of our forms.... And the image of the King of kings was depicted all over it.


"Once I had put it on, I arose into the realm of peace belonging to reverential awe. And I bowed my head and prostrated myself before the splendor of the father who had sent it to me. For, it was I who had done his commands, and likewise it was he who had kept the promise. And I mingled at the doors of his archaic royal building. He took delight in me, and received me with him in the palace." (The Gnostic Scriptures, 374-5/77, 78, 86, 98-102)

Gnostic Christianity and the Myth of Sophia

 

[Breathe]

About the time buddhism was just coming into its own.

Exactly, it was a young, new thing. This shows they had interactions with India, and more than likely, Buddhists, far before Jesus even existed.

No, it isn't.

I disagree. This paints a view of the Middle East being some kind of backwater recluse living under a rock, when they were a main route for trade.

Have you studied the culture of 1st century galilee much? Jesus didn't even have a great deal of contact with greek culture,

Jesus is going to have travelled around, and we are not aware of what he did in his youth. He most likely learned his trade, but what else? I really doubt Jesus was sitting only in his home town.

There is absolutely no evidence anywhere of buddhist influence in 1st century palestine in or around Jesus' time.

But there is in Jesus' teachings p), and there is evidence of Buddhism in Greece. So, why would there not have been some travellers in some big, market cities of Israel like Jerusalem which are on the way to Greece and Rome?

 

[Mr Cheese]

Interestingly enough....

Jesus the "lost years"

Is the exact same period of time that an pupil in the essene groups spent in learning....

 

[Oberon]

Exactly, it was a young, new thing. This shows they had interactions with India, and more than likely, Buddhists, far before Jesus even existed.

No, it doesn't. "They" meaning Alexanders greeks is not the same as the roman empire, and the roman empire isn't the same as the people of Judaea.

I disagree. This paints a view of the Middle East being some kind of backwater recluse living under a rock, when they were a main route for trade.

Judaea had numerous different towns. Jesus seems to have avoided the most hellenestic, restricting himself to towns and villages which were overwhelmingly Jewish (as most of Galilee was).

Jesus is going to have travelled around

How could you possibly know that? Many people in Jesus' day (and not just jews) could live their whole lives without venturing far out of their hometown.

I really doubt Jesus was sitting only in his home town.

No, but venturing out to surrounding Jewish villages doesn't make it likely that he encountered buddhism. There is not evidence whatsoever of buddhist influence anywhere in all of Judaea.

But there is in Jesus' teachings p),

Hardly. If there are parallels, they certainly don't indicate buddhist influence.

and there is evidence of Buddhism in Greece.

No, there is evidence that the greek empire made contact with places where buddhism was flourishing. Not the same thing. Moreover, Jesus lived under the roman empire, among an overwhelmingly Jewish population.

So, why would there not have been some travellers in some big, market cities of Israel like Jerusalem which are on the way to Greece and Rome?

1. Jerusalem wasn't a major road to rome from the east.
2. Jesus spent only his final days in Jerusalem.
3. There is no evidence anywhere of buddhist influnece in Judaea.

 

[logician]

Most probably were I agree with you here (but of course, not all of them) and others were probably the incorporation of Pagan elements as time goes by. (Though I believe Jesus existed and was most likely a sage with non-Jewish influences like Buddhism, myself.)

This begs the question, why do the fulfilled prophecies of Jesus' existence, not fulfil them better? Why are many of the verses ones that Christians take as prophecies ones that (most) Jews do not take as prophecies of the moshiakh, and ones that are misunderstood (the translation of 'almah as virgin, for example)?

And then one has to ask, why are there so many areas and prophecies that were ignored, and many prophecies not fulfilled? Why the concept of Jesus having to come back to many more things, something alien to Jewish thought?

Actually, the supposed Matthew was the main culprit in this. Just because they were WRITTEN to fulfill OT prophecies doesn't mean they did. Indeed OT prophecies were in general meant for their day an time, not many years in the unknown future. The supposed life of Jesus really had nothing to do with them.

 

[logician]

This insistence that the supposed Jesus "invented" Xianity from scratch is both arrogant and absurd. It's like saying Einstein came up with the theory of relativity with no help from Newton and other scientific giants. It plain just doesn't make sense.

 

[Breathe]

No, it doesn't. "They" meaning Alexanders greeks is not the same as the roman empire, and the roman empire isn't the same as the people of Judaea.

And neither did I say that.

Judaea had numerous different towns. Jesus seems to have avoided the most hellenestic, restricting himself to towns and villages which were overwhelmingly Jewish (as most of Galilee was).

Yet he still went to Jerusalem..

How could you possibly know that? Many people in Jesus' day (and not just jews) could live their whole lives without venturing far out of their hometown.

Because he was a carpenter of sorts, and there is a "slight" chance he may have had to work on a project outside of his city.

Hardly. If there are parallels, they certainly don't indicate buddhist influence.

If you say so..

No, there is evidence that the greek empire made contact with places where buddhism was flourishing. Not the same thing. Moreover, Jesus lived under the roman empire, among an overwhelmingly Jewish population.

And there is also evidence that the Greeks had contact with Buddhists in the first century.

1. Jerusalem wasn't a major road to rome from the east.

But other places in Israel were.

2. Jesus spent only his final days in Jerusalem.

Luke 2 suggests otherwise. "Every year his parents went to Jerusalem". Do we assume this festival stopped after this? I doubt it.

3. There is no evidence anywhere of buddhist influnece in Judaea.

I never said Judaea, though. That's what you have said, not me. I've said Jesus encountered Buddhists and shares similarities with their faith. I did not say Buddhists ruled, conquered, invaded, subjected, influenced, or anything else of Israel, merely that they almost certainly would have passed through, spent a few days preaching, and continued on.

 

[Oberon]

Interestingly enough....

Jesus the "lost years"

Is the exact same period of time that an pupil in the essene groups spent in learning....

And from which source do you derive the number of years that an essene spent learning?

 

[Breathe]

Actually, the supposed Matthew was the main culprit in this. Just because they were WRITTEN to fulfill OT prophecies doesn't mean they did. Indeed OT prophecies were in general meant for their day an time, not many years in the unknown future. The supposed life of Jesus really had nothing to do with them.

Ahh, I see what you mean now Yeah, sounds good to me.

The author of Matthew most certainly points at a Gentile with a medicore level of understanding of the Jewish faith.

 

[LittleNipper]

Yes because there are all kinds of examples in the Bible of Lucifer attempting to become closer to his inner and outer nature.

BTW, what planet was the Bible you're reading published on?

Satan in the lord of this world until the day GOD judges him. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with GOD and the Word was GOD. And the the same became flesh and dwelt amongst men.