# Pagan Roots of Christianity



## la reine victoria

Moderator Edit:  This thread has been split from that of displaying religious beliefs in public.  The following post by our Reine prompted an interesting debate:

We have two wonderful traditions in my village. 

On Palm Sunday there is a public procession along the High Street to the church. It is led by a child on a donkey and everyone carries a very large leaf (the nearest thing resembling a palm leaf).

On Rogation Sunday an open air service is held on one of the farms. The vicar leads everyone around the farm and fields and blesses the animals, crops, trees, river, praying that all will be fruitful. 

To me this service shows the pagan roots of Christianity. Very interesting and far more meaningful than a service in church.



Edit: I hope this adequately describes individuals doing religious things in public.






			
				emma42 said:
			
		

> "Pagan roots of Christianity"? I think Mr J Christ might have something to say about that!


 

How can you possibly comment?  You claim to be an atheist.

Of course Christianity in Britain was founded on Paganism.  Christmas Day replaced the Winter Solstice celebrations of eating, drinking and general merriment.  In Rome it replaced the festival of Saturnalia.




LRV


----------



## maxiogee

Every major Christian festival was overlain on a pagan seasonal festival, in exactly the same way, and for exactly the same reasons that Christian churches were built on pagan temples/sacred sites.
All European countries had strange "Christian" rituals which weren't part of the faith in other countries. This is because they were adapted localised pagan rituals - in Ireland there is still a remnant of the Holy Well, where people hang religious medals, scraps of cloth and other items to invoke  intercession of the old Anima Loci —> replaced of course by some extremely local 'saint'.


----------



## la reine victoria

Etcetera said:
			
		

> The first tradition described by La Reine Victoria must have its roots in the New Testament. But as for the second tradition - I don't know, really. I've never heard of anything like that... it sounds so interesting!


 

Hello Etcetera,

In the Christian calendar, Rogation Sunday is the fifth Sunday after Easter Day.  

It has references in both the Old and New Testament.  Here is an example of a Rogation Day prayer. 

_Almighty and everlasting God, Creator of all things and giver of all life, let your blessing be upon this (seed, livestock, plough, forest, __________) and grant that it may serve to your glory and the welfare of your people; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen._




_LRV_


----------



## boonognog

LRV, I think it was the word "roots" that caught emma's eye.  Not many people know that Christianity absorbed significant traditions from every culture it sold itself into.

I would have figured the whole animal blessing thing was an outgrowth of the work of St. Francis of Assisi, though...


----------



## la reine victoria

boonognog said:
			
		

> LRV, I think it was the word "roots" that caught emma's eye. Not many people know that Christianity absorbed significant traditions from every culture it sold itself into.
> 
> I would have figured the whole animal blessing thing was an outgrowth of the work of St. Francis of Assisi, though...


 

Hello Boonogong,

Emma was probably trying to say that Christianity would, obviously, never have come into being without *Christ*.  But the subject of "the pagan roots of Christianity" throughout the world is one of great interest and cannot be ignored.

I have studied the life of St. Francis of Assisi.  Indeed, he did show a great love of animals.  Whether or not he was able to interact with them, as cited, is open to question.  St. Blaise of Russia, C4th, was an earlier "St. Francis".  

I believe that the asking of God's blessing on animals, as a source of food, clothing and means of transport (horses, camels, etc.) goes back to Old Testament times but I've been unable to find a specific quotation.



LRV


----------



## diegodbs

> Is this kind of behaviour more common in more "Catholic" countries?


 
I dont't know about other countries where Catholicism is the main religion. But at least in Spain I have never seen anyone reading Bibles or praying in buses. On the contrary, we have always thought that it was more common in countries where Protestantism was the main religion.

Processions are quite a different thing, they are common in Spain at Easter, but not the things you mentioned in your first post.

The pagan roots of Christianity are many: Easter, Christmas, Black Virgins (related to the cult of Isis), churches almost always built where pagan temples once stood, etc. I'm an atheist too, but this kind of cultural relationship (christians/pagans) have always interested me.


----------



## emma42

You see, I wouldn't call them pagan "roots", I would call them pagan elements.


----------



## diegodbs

I agree, it is perhaps more accurate "elements" than "roots".


----------



## boonognog

Hmm... I would call it roots.  And I would do this specifically to make people think seriously about what exactly it is they are doing.  But maybe that's just me.   (And I am a Christian!)


----------



## emma42

But how can it be "roots"?  The sole root of Christianity (not elements of Christmas and Easter et al) is the belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that he died for our sins, was resurrected, rose to heaven, and that we should follow his teachings and reach God through him.  Or have I missed something?


----------



## diegodbs

Roots/elements?
 Death, expiation, resurrection are things that the disciples of that person (if he ever existed) said about him. We are not dealing with a religion founded by one particular person but based on something others said that he did. Are those elements (common to some religions) elements of that new religion or the roots of that new religion? ....


----------



## danielfranco

Erm, I've read before how the Ancient Egyptians had this guy Osiris and mom Isis (or is it the other way around?), and, well, the resurrection bit and all, you know? And it's been a good 6,000 years since they came up with that concept...
Over here in Texas is very common to see people engaged in very public displays of religious belief, but mostly it is the protestant contingent that do it. Part of the protestantism is that you must speak out when the Spirit moves you, and so we often see impromptu preachers exhorting the crowd that invariably gathers to listen.
In Mexico I would see many more evangelicals going around trying to give "the good news" to people in public settings, and passing out leaflets, than what I have seen here in the USA.


----------



## tvdxer

Certain Christian celebrations did indeed replace pagan celebrations on the same day.  What's wrong with "baptizing" old traditions?

The same goes with philosophy.  Aristotle and Plato have had a great influence on Catholic thought, but neither of them belonged to Abrahamic religions.


----------



## annamaria19

la reine victoria is correct.  Much of Christianity as we know it today comes from Pagan celebrations.  It was a way to get Pagans to convert without losing their feast days and celebrations (because who in their right mind would convert if it meant losing a day off?!).  They were simply renamed and reoriented.  The same thing happened in the "New World" with the indigenous people, as they took saints to replace their gods in worship and prayer.
AMS


----------



## maxiogee

tvdxer said:
			
		

> Certain Christian celebrations did indeed replace pagan celebrations on the same day.  What's wrong with "baptizing" old traditions?



Because often the Church killed practitioners of those old traditions who would not convert, particularly the votaries.
Because to 'baptise" their customs was to deny the thinking behind these celebrations - You cannot deny X and yet celebrate X's birthday.
Because often the legends generated in the process of baptising these customs were lies - how can a Church be based on lies?



			
				tvdxer said:
			
		

> The same goes with philosophy.  Aristotle and Plato have had a great influence on Catholic thought,



Suitably bowdlerised:
"But the Index didn’t stop there. It also drew up lists of books that should be purged of passages that conflicted with church teaching. Classical writers—including Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Virgil, Homer, Euclid, Hippocrates, Thucydides and others—were put on the expurgatio list because they reflected pagan beliefs. Books translated by Protestants had to be filtered for offending passages. In some cases, a book only had to be printed in a “Protestant” city to earn a place on the list of objectionable works."
(and, am I right in thinking, that at one time these authors were only to be read by certain approved scholars?)


----------



## Etcetera

LRV, thanks for your explanation!
Annamaria is absolutely right, in my opinion. In Russia, there was the same thing - many Pagan celebrations somehow became Christian... Some Pagan feast days still exist - Maslenitsa, for example. 
BTW, it seems that it was easier for a Pagan to believe in God than for our contemporaries. They were used to stories about miracles and all such things...


----------



## panjabigator

In Northeast India, there are many trible states which are relatively new converts to christianity (I think within the last 100 years).  I think they combined their trible customs and Christianity in many ways.


----------



## la reine victoria

Paganism is alive and well in Great Britain.  We have many witches, mainly "white witches" who claim to do only good.  But there are also practitioners of the "dark arts".  Wicca is the preferred name for the "religion" of the modern witch.

I happen to know two "white witches" - not as friends, but acquaintances.  They are decidedly odd and give me the creeps.

The Druids are also alive and well.  Their religion is linked to that of the ancient Celts, with their multiple gods.  Each year, at the time of the summer solstice, they are allowed to carry out their rites at Stonehenge.

An odd character, from my previous hometown, is King Arthur Uther Pendragon, the self-appointed "King of the Britons".  He is a pagan priest and Druid swordbearer and associates himself closely with the mystical/mythical King Arthur and his knights.

A very pagan festival is Halloween - celebrated on All Hallows Eve.  It is said to have originated in Ireland in the 5th century BC and was known as Samhain.  The disembodied spirits of all who had died during the previous year were thought to wander abroad looking for a living person to "possess" for the next year.  This was seen as the spirits' route to eternal life.

Amazing to think that, not so very long ago, harmless old ladies who practised herbal medecine, and maybe had a few warts and a black cat, were burnt at the stake as witches.  When crops failed, cows' milk dried up, and any sickness spread through a community, there surely had to be a witch involved.  A scapegoat would be hunted down and burned.

As a (mostly) non church-going believer in God I look on all occult practices with disfavour.  All the libraries I visit have whole sections devoted to "The Occult".  Many people are fascinated with this subject - not me.

From ghoulies and ghosties
And long-leggedy beasties
And things that go bump in the night,
Good Lord, deliver us.



LRV


----------



## Etcetera

Thanks again, Your Majesty. I didn't know that Druids still exist!
My attitude towards such things is exactly the same. Pagan rituals and traditions are sometimes very interesting from the cultural point of view. Nowadays things aren't the same as they used to be in the past, though.


----------



## emma42

LRV, I can "possibly comment" because I am a member of the Forum.  Are you suggesting that one cannot comment on a religion unless one is a member thereof?  You commented on Wicca and other matters.  As it happens, I used to be a sincere Christian, but am no more.

Whilst I, of course, agree with everything that has been said about paganism/local custom having become part of the traditions and certain celebratory elements of  Christianity, I am still not convinced that these constitute "roots".  Unless people mean the "roots" of ceremony etc, which is not the religion per se.


----------



## la reine victoria

emma42 said:
			
		

> LRV, I can "possibly comment" because I am a member of the Forum. Are you suggesting that one cannot comment on a religion unless one is a member thereof? You commented on Wicca and other matters. As it happens, I used to be a sincere Christian, but am no more.
> 
> Whilst I, of course, agree with everything that has been said about paganism/local custom having become part of the traditions and certain celebratory elements of Christianity, I am still not convinced that these constitute "roots". Unless people mean the "roots" of ceremony etc, which is not the religion per se.


 


_



"Pagan roots of Christianity"? I think Mr J Christ might have something to say about that!

Click to expand...

_ 
_Of course you have the right to comment.  But as a self-styled atheist I don't see how you can refer to Mr. J. Christ (his name is Jesus Christ, by the way) having something to say.  After all, you don't believe in God or Jesus Christ, so how can you assume that the non-existent (to your way of thinking) Jesus Christ might have something to say?  _

_Naturally I commented on Wicca and other matters since these fall under the umbrella of the topic.  I was responding to Etcetera's post on pagan festivals still extant in her own country and telling her of pagan practices which are still carried on in Britain._

_I'm sorry to hear you have lost your faith._



_LRV _


----------



## emma42

Well, really.  There is no need to use words such as "claim" and "self-styled".  I do not use such words to describe you and your beliefs.  I felt able to refer to Jesus Christ as many people do believe he existed incarnate and is the son of god.  In fact, _I_ think there is a strong possibility that he existed.  I have no problem with your commenting on Wicca or on anything else.  You appeared to have a problem with my commenting on JC.  I did not mean to cause offence when I said "Mr...".


----------



## moura

I read in a book within the "Da Vinci Code" line, that by the time of Constantin ant the unification of the Roman Church, the day when pagan adored the sun became "Sundays" to the church with all its symbolism. And the same happened in what regards the day of god Mitra birth - 25 December - it was then turned to the day of baby Jesus birth.

I'm just quoting. But it is only natural that pagan roots might have influenced the christian roots. Because this Church couldn't have started of the nothing.


----------



## emma42

Aha!  Moura, I have no problem with the idea that pagan roots influenced the practice of Christianity.


----------



## moura

Yes Emma, I see yr point: this time I read more carefully the posts before 

The issue I see regarding the "pagan roots of christianity", which, to be proved, may have mould the Church's origin ant its creed/belief (on Jesus immortality and so on), is that by knowing them may lead us to believe or extrapolate whether this Christian creed should be credible as the "pagan" creeds are now to us...well, it's all a question of faith.


----------



## Sallyb36

mankind has always had a need to know where we came from and why since our beginnings, and that's all that any religion is about.  Christianity in this country has undoubtedly taken all it's holy days from the pagan calender in an attempt to make the conversion of the population easier for the Church.
Personally I think that religion is for people who can't cope with life without a prop, but that's just my heathen view.


----------



## emma42

Yes, Moura.  Interesting points, but, indeed, it's all a question of faith in one supernatural matter or the other.


----------



## Papalote

emma42 said:
			
		

> But how can it be "roots"? The sole root of Christianity (not elements of Christmas and Easter et al) is the belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that he died for our sins, was resurrected, rose to heaven, and that we should follow his teachings and reach God through him. Or have I missed something?


 
Good morning,

I was going to agree with you, Emma, about Christianity not having pagan roots, only multiple layerings of other faiths, until I remembered.... the Immaculate Conception, or virgin birth, is not a unique and single happening conceived (no pun intended ) by Christianity. There are quite a few instances in pagan mythology of mortal women being impregnated by the gods. 

Here is a link in Wikipedia about that. One has to scrolll down to the section : Possible Borrowing from Paganism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth

I find this thread extremely interesting, as I once did a study on religious synchretism in Mexico. So, I thank all the forer@os who have given me an insight into their country´s own religious synchretism.

Thanks,

Papalote


----------



## Papalote

Sallyb36 said:
			
		

> mankind has always had a need to know where we came from and why since our beginnings, and that's all that any religion is about. Christianity in this country has undoubtedly taken all it's holy days from the pagan calender in an attempt to make the conversion of the population easier for the Church.
> Personally I think that religion is for people who can't cope with life without a prop, but that's just my heathen view.


 
Hi, Sally,

Actually, we do not need religion to cope with life, religion enriches our lives with a spiritual dimension which nothing else can provide. Rather, it is drug users, alcoholics, workaholics and ufo-worshippers who need their specific props to cope with life. Let´s not confuse the two.

Thanks,

Papalote


----------



## Sallyb36

I disagree Papalote, my life is enriched daily by the beauty around me and by the good deeds of mankind, and by the love of my friends and family, but I see no need for organised religion


----------



## cuchuflete

Papalote said:
			
		

> Actually, we do not need religion to cope with life, religion enriches our lives with a spiritual dimension which nothing else can provide.



I see your point about a spiritual dimension enriching our lives in a way that nothing else can, and agree with you on that.
However, religion is no prerequisite to a spiritual dimension.
I know some very spiritually deep people who have no religious wrappings around their spirituality.  For many, religion and it's ceremonies and theologies stifle spirituality.

In short, a spiritual life may coincide with a religious one, or stand totally apart from religion.


----------



## emma42

Yes, Papalote, that is a good point.  I will think on the matter - perhaps even change my mind (horror!)


----------



## Etcetera

Sally, I remember that you have pointed out that it's your personal opinion, but nonetheless, such statements can be dangerous and sometimes offensive. When you say that 


> religion is for people who can't cope with life without a prop


it somehow sounds as though you think that all the forer@s who have claimed themselves to be religious people are just unable to cope with life. You don't actually think so, I hope?


----------



## la reine victoria

Papalote said:
			
		

> Hi, Sally,
> 
> Actually, we do not need religion to cope with life, religion enriches our lives with a spiritual dimension which nothing else can provide. Rather, it is drug users, alcoholics, workaholics and ufo-worshippers who need their specific props to cope with life. Let´s not confuse the two.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Papalote


 

I agree with you Papalote.  God, as I perceive him, is not my prop to cope with life. But he certainly enriches my life in ways a non-believer could never understand.  We all have bad times - God has seen me through them far more than any human being could.



LRV


----------



## Sallyb36

Etcetera, I'm sorry if it offends you, but yes I do. (you asked, I will not lie).  I don't understand why it is dangerous to believe that. Also, I know that you are entitled to believe whatever you want, and would defend your right to do so, as I defend my own.


----------



## Sallyb36

Karl Marx said that religion is the opium of the people, so my views aren't new.


----------



## Etcetera

Thank you for your honesty, Sally.


----------



## Sallyb36

It's one of the few things I can guarantee Etcetera.  Thank you for not taking it too personally and raging at me (it has been known to happen!!)


----------



## Etcetera

I respect other people's opinion, that's all. I've learned long ago that it's the only way to make people respect your own views.


----------



## natasha2000

Well, I am not sure what this thread is about, since the title says Pagan roots of Christianity and the last X posts talk about if we need religion or not to cope with everyday's life....

Anyway, my post goes about the title:

Serbs are Ortodox Christians, and they have one Christian custom that nobody else in this world has, nor even other Ortodox peoples - SLAVA. 

As a matter of fact, SLAVA is the purest evidence on how pagan custom turns to be a Christian one.

Slava is a celebration of a Saint protector of each family. Catholics have Saints protectors of cities, towns, countries, Serbs have family saints protectors. Each family has their own saint. My family's Saint is St.Nicolas, and it is celebrated on 19th Deceber, and it is non-animal feast (others can be, but St.-Nicolas is not), where all food that is prepared is made without animal ingredients, which means, no meat, no fat, no milk, no eggs... Fish is allowed, though.

So, these Saints protectors are nothing else than old Slavic home spirits called "domaći". These were little men - dwarfs - who were believed to live in the home fire and protect family from any kind of evil. That is why the fire should be kept alive all the time, in order to maintain their home as a gratitude for protecting their home.

So when Christianity came among Serbs, those little dwarfs were changed for Saints. Some are more known, some are less known, some are international, some are known only at national level. St. George is for example, the Saint of many Gipsy families, so it is known as Gypsy Saint, too, although not only Gypsies celebrate it. My Grandpa celebrated it on each 6th May until he died.


----------



## Etcetera

Natasha, and how a family can get its saint protector? To make my question more exact: on what the choice of a Saint is based?


----------



## la reine victoria

Do people keep statues of their saint in their homes Natasha?  If so, do they look like dwarfs or have they been "Christianised" to look like people - like the Roman Catholic saints?

I'd be intertested to know.  I found your story fascinating.



Thank you.



LRV


----------



## moura

About pagan roots, there is an important Summer festivity in Portugal in June,generally called "Popular Saints". Within these feasts there the St. Anthony, the St. John and the St. Peter's days.
Basically people gather in the most popular quarters ornate with ballons and coloured ribbons, eating lots of roasted sardines, drinking wine, dancing etc. etc. 
Well, one of the ancient symbols related to these feasts are the "St. John's bonfires" (which people with good legs try to jump) and that are said to be remnisciences and adaptation by Church of pagan cult to the fire.


----------



## cuchuflete

I just read a few of the many web sites dedicated to discussions of the Pagan Roots of Christianity.  

Without saying that these make Christianity better or worse, or more or less important, some of those sites give lots of historical background.

This one may be of interest:

http://www.entheology.org/POCM/pagan_origins_getting_started.html


----------



## natasha2000

Etcetera said:
			
		

> Natasha, and how a family can get its saint protector? To make my question more exact: on what the choice of a Saint is based?


 
Usually it is inherited from father to son, but if a father has two or three sons, then the eldest takes over the family saint and the younger choose on their own. Usually the man takes his saint when he marries and forms a family. When the SLAVA is passed from father to son is the matter of father's choice. 

You are invited only once in your life to SLAVA. You will never get another invitation because you are expected to come or at least to call to congratulate each year without any invitation whatsoever.

A big meal is prepared, usually it is lunch. At noon, a special candle and a cake , as well as a sweet weat are taken into the church to be blessed by a priest. These things are taken by a man of the house, the father, but it is better to be taken by a firstborn son, because then the priest blesses him, too. Then at home, the candle is lighten and it is not put out until it burns completely, and it is put on the table, together with tha cake. 
When guests come, they are welcomed with a boiled weat (with sugar, it's delicious!). He is expected to make a cross sign and to take a little bit of weat. 
The presents are usually a bottle of wine, or candies or flowers for the hostess.

Here you can see how it is arranged to welcome the guests. The man in the picture is serving himself with a weat.


----------



## la reine victoria

Another interesting point, Natasha, is that the feast of your family's St. Nicolas, doesn't allow the eating of animals or their products - only fish. 

Is he the same St. Nicholas who is the patron saint of Christmas?  I imagine he isn't because we all eat lots of everything then.  





LRV


----------



## natasha2000

la reine victoria said:
			
		

> Do people keep statues of their saint in their homes Natasha? If so, do they look like dwarfs or have they been "Christianised" to look like people - like the Roman Catholic saints?
> 
> I'd be intertested to know. I found your story fascinating.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> LRV


 
no, your Majesty...

The saints are presented as icons.

They are saints, and the real ones. The saints just took over the role of "dwarfs". And they were not just dwarfs, it's just that I cannot find any other, more adequate term... Like Irish leprichauns, maybe...
But the thing is that the role of "domaći" is now passed to Saints - to protect family.


----------



## natasha2000

la reine victoria said:
			
		

> Another interesting point, Natasha, is that the feast of your family's St. Nicolas, doesn't allow the eating of animals or their products - only fish.
> 
> Is he the same St. Nicholas who is the patron saint of Christmas? I imagine he isn't because we all eat lots of everything then.
> 
> 
> 
> LRV


 
I don't know much about Saints, but this St Nicolas is Saint protector of fishermen. Maybe this is why the fish is allowed...


----------



## Etcetera

Thank you, Natasha! That's very interesting!


----------



## la reine victoria

Thank you very much Natasha.  It's good to hear of other cultures from someone who has experienced them.  







LRV


----------



## maxiogee

Sallyb36 said:
			
		

> Personally I think that religion is for people who can't cope with life without a prop, but that's just my heathen view.



If I could modify Sally's comment to read…
Personally I think that religion is for people who can't cope with death without a prop, but that's just my heathen view.​… I'd be happy to stand over it as reflecting my own opinion.


----------



## la reine victoria

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> This one may be of interest:
> http://www.entheology.org/POCM/pagan_origins_getting_started.html


 

Thank you Cuchu,

A very interesting link.  It puts a new perspective on things.

My 93 year old friend and I were discussing this very topic just last week.  He started off by saying, "There's nothing new about Christianity you know, similar practices were being carried out in pagan times."



LRV


----------



## panjabigator

Maxiogee, I think that portion of the conversation is off topic for this thread and the entire forum.  But anyway, are these pagan rituals at all looked down upon?  I know that in India, where religion sometimes is not clearly cut (people follow everything in some places), priests and upper class folk tend to criticize people who do not follow the religion to the T.  So just because I give respect to Hindu dieties (btw, Im a Sikh), I am labeled a bad Sikh.

Side note...I am a bad Sikh because I do not keep my hair! I cut it.


----------



## maxiogee

panjabigator said:
			
		

> Maxiogee, I think that portion of the conversation is off topic for this thread and the entire forum.


Quite. But off-topicness has never really bothered me. The moderators know that I have no problems with being deleted for chat or warned for off-topicness. I just wanted to make a point in response to where the thread was drifting.




			
				panjabigator said:
			
		

> But anyway, are these pagan rituals at all looked down upon?


They are no longer seen as pagan, having been around for so long now. The real pagan stuff has more or less gone now. LRV (I think) mentioned the witch connection with cows which stop milking, and hens which won't lay etc. In Ireland there was until recently a widespread belief in what were known as a _piseóg_ (pronounced pish-ogue (to rhyme with rogue)) - someone who could cast a spell on your livestock and/or crops. There were precautions which one could take to prevent this happening, which usually involved (as far as I know) talismanic objects being hung in certain places, or might involve ritualised manouvres/practices with regard to performing certain everyday chores.
These weren't really looked down on, more 'tolerated' with a slightly condescending air as a remnant of outdated folklore.
Other elements of pagan belief - if you count belief in fairies as pagan - such as the concept of the "stolen child" or "changeling" - a child which was so pretty/handsome that the fairies came and took it and left one of their own in its place. At the end of the 19th century a woman of 26 was burned to death by her husband (aided by her family of origin) because it was believed that she was either a changeling or was a witch. The stories surrounding fairies and leprechauns are legion, and it is difficult now to tell which are really folklore and which have been enhanced for touristic benefit.


----------



## lizzeymac

panjabigator said:
			
		

> .....
> But anyway, are these pagan rituals at all looked down upon?  I know that in India, where religion sometimes is not clearly cut (people follow everything in some places), priests and upper class folk tend to criticize people who do not follow the religion to the T.  So just because I give respect to Hindu dieties (btw, Im a Sikh), I am labeled a bad Sikh.
> ....



There are quite a few places in America where public (State) schools have begun to forbid the celebration of Halloween because it has pagan roots.  No costumes in school, no trick or treats, no decorations - especially the "black witch."  As far as I know, this is only an issue for Christian Fundamentalists (among "mainstream" Judeo-Christian religions). 

I read about one school that forbids it's students to watch TV shows & movies with any occult or pagan storylines - Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Stephen King movies, Lord of the Rings, that sort of thing. 
Not because the shows might be crap or because the kids should be studying or doing something that is "real' or useful, but because the shows portray & "glamorize" Satanic issues.  
I think most American watch too much TV but that reasoning is a bit of a stretch for me.  I don't think most teeagers are that weak-minded.


----------



## maxiogee

lizzeymac said:
			
		

> Not because the shows might be crap,



The only reason for censorship which I would feel somewhat comfortable with!  

If vampires are fictitious, how can stories about them be any worse than stories about smurfs, leprechauns or knights and dragons?
And of course, if the churches think that they are not fictitious then shouldn't they tell us.

The same goes for witches - either they exist and have "powers" (in which case show us the evidence) or they are fanciful inventions along the lines of the "Gods" of ancient Greece.


----------



## Lingvisten

I don not totaly agree on the statement, that the serb "slava" is a unique tradition, but rather just a different way of keeping the house god. In Scandinavia we have something quite similar. The house god is here called "nisse". This was originaly a pagan house god turned into a saint by the christians who could not get rid of the house god. The saint who took over the house gods place was skt. Nicolas. This developed into the nickname "Niels" or "Nis", wich eventually became "nisse". This god protected the farm, but should be fed well, or else he could make terrible damage (burning farms, making the cattle sick but also minor gags). Many people still put out porridge, especially at christmas time, to the "nisse". 
When Denmark was christianized in around 960 ac. Jesus Christ was introduced as a new, more powerfull, god in the norse pantheon, called "Hvide Krist" (White Christ). In the early years he was pictured as a powerfull king, and not as the suffering christ, because the viking kings of Denmark, Norway and Sweden would not find the humiliated crusified god appealing. Lots of heathen traditions is still alive, but with a christian surface. I don't see any reason why they should not be able to co-excist, as long as the message of christ dieing for our sins is preserved.


----------



## CrazyArcher

It's odd that even having recieved solid proofs that almost everything about their religion has pagan roots (or should I say 'was stolen'?), Christians still believe in that stuff. It's more than replacing one religion with another one. Look at ancient Celtic rites of Samhain, Yuletide, Beltane... They are very pure and touching fests, completely not fitting the oppression that Christianity enstated afterwards: censorship of the old writings and burning of witches, to name a few. Christians even call themselves "slaves of God" - come on, the pagan customs have nothing to do with religion of slaves. Christians decieved people through adopting their origianl customs "merely changing the surface", and this way took over their lives. It's disgusting.


----------



## Sepia

emma42 said:


> But how can it be "roots"?  The sole root of Christianity (not elements of Christmas and Easter et al) is the belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that he died for our sins, was resurrected, rose to heaven, and that we should follow his teachings and reach God through him.  Or have I missed something?



Even though my view of Jesus C. is slightly different from yours, you are absloutely right - these are the roots of Christianity.

However, what they introduced in Northern Europe as Christianity - or rather the way they did it has extremely little to do with the original ideals that Jesus was trying to make people understand. 

The introduction of "Christianity" up here was a tragic and violent matter - simply a political tool, simply designed to destroy the cultural bonds between the Germanic and Celtic tribes of Central, East and Nort Europe in order to make it easier to conquer and control them. 

When there are traces of ancient Germanic and Celtic rituals in modern day Christian practice it is a far cry from what you can call roots. It is very much like when they change the name of a ship. You can't cover the name fully with the paint, so you have to paint the new name exactly on top of the old one so that it does not show too much. 

There have been examples of e.g. druids becoming Christian priests who have mixed some of the practices of both sides. I still don't think we can talk about roots there - rather insurgency. An attempt of maintaining some part of the original culture. 

The most obvious example showing that (this) "Christianity" was nothing but a political tool is Russia. The would-be ruler of all tribes, Vladimir, knew that others had had success in enhancing their power by introducing a state religion actually acted in a modern way: Just like when a company is looking for a new advertizing agency and lets a few agencies pitch, he invited leader various religion to present their stuff - Jewish, Islam, Catholic, Greek Orthodox. After deciding for a religion he did like all the others - convert or you'll be sorry.

What may be left of our ancient religions, ancient herbal medicine (whichcraft!!) whatever else our acestors have can in no way be considered roots of the new culture that destroyed the old one.


----------



## Outsider

Lingvisten said:


> When Denmark was christianized in around 960 ac. Jesus Christ was introduced as a new, more powerfull, god in the norse pantheon, called "Hvide Krist" (White Christ). In the early years he was pictured as a powerfull king, and not as the suffering christ, because the viking kings of Denmark, Norway and Sweden would not find the humiliated crusified god appealing.


In southern Europe as well, the archetype of the suffering Christ only became predominant some centuries after that time. In early medieval iconography, Christ is often depicted as a divine triumphant ruler. (Example.)



Lingvisten said:


> Lots of heathen traditions is still alive, but with a christian surface. I don't see any reason why they should not be able to co-excist, as long as the message of christ dieing for our sins is preserved.


There's the little matter of the 2nd. commandment...


----------



## Lingvisten

The ten commandments are, in my point of view, irellevant to the teachings of the new testament (other than for background understanding), but this is probably not the thread to discuss that.


----------



## Athaulf

Among Christian South Slavs (both Catholic and Orthodox), and especially in Serbia and Bosnia, one of the most venerated saints is the prophet Elijah. In popular beliefs, his character has displaced Perun, the ancient Slavic god of thunder (which was akin to the Old Norse Thor or Zeus of ancient Greeks). Thus in popular belief, Elijah the Thunderer rides his chariot above the clouds and throws thunders, and his character is sometimes seen as so exalted and powerful that he is considered as God's supreme agent for dealing with our world, as a dispenser of justice, punisher of the evil, etc. I remember once seeing a portrait of Elijah in a home of a very devout Croatian Catholic family, in which the prophet was riding his chariot through the skies armed by the lightning bolt, and I couldn't help but chuckle, stricken by the sheer pagan symbolism of the image.


----------



## Athaulf

cuchuflete said:


> I just read a few of the many web sites dedicated to discussions of the Pagan Roots of Christianity.
> 
> Without saying that these make Christianity better or worse, or more or less important, some of those sites give lots of historical background.
> 
> This one may be of interest:
> 
> http://www.entheology.org/POCM/pagan_origins_getting_started.html



I came across this website several years ago, when I was intensively interested in the topic of this thread. As someone who has some passing familiarity with serious academic work on the subject, I would recommend everyone to take the claims of this web page with a large grain of salt. It does present some interesting and important nuggets of truth, but its overall presentation style is far too bombastic and sensationalist, and it presents much highly suspicious (and sometimes downright false) evidence for some of its claims, including misleading and out of context quotes, as well as quoting highly controversial scholarly opinions as established truth. 

Also, there are two quite distinct topics at hand here: (1) the pagan origins of the original Christian beliefs that spread through the Mediterranean during the last centuries of the Roman Empire, and (2) the relics of pagan beliefs and customs in folk traditions of various peoples that have been Christianized since then. The second one is a matter of more or less clear and uncontroversial ethnography, but the first one is a subject of heated controversies, not only because it has strong implications for the religious feelings of people, including many scholars of religion, but also because the available historical evidence is sparse and open to creative interpretations.


----------



## Lingvisten

In Russia, when there was a thunder storm, it was custom to throw the cat out of the house. The cat might be a devil in disguise, and the peasents where afraid that Elijah would hit the house with his thunderbolts, trying to hit the devil.


----------



## cuchuflete

Athaulf said:


> ... I would recommend everyone to take the claims of this web page with a large grain of salt. It does present some interesting and important nuggets of truth, but its overall presentation style is far too bombastic and sensationalist, and it presents much highly suspicious (and sometimes downright false) evidence for some of its claims, including misleading and out of context quotes, as well as quoting highly controversial scholarly opinions as established truth.



That may be a fair and objective description of the cited web page.  Curiously, it may _also_ be a fair and objective description of some modern religious sects.  Small world.


----------



## Sepia

Lingvisten said:


> The ten commandments are, in my point of view, irellevant to the teachings of the new testament (other than for background understanding), but this is probably not the thread to discuss that.




Nevertheless, the content of The Old Testament is part of the teachings they are cultivating in Christian Churches.

So according to them you cannot have a parallel religion like you obviously can when you are a Shintoist/Bhuddist or simply just make your own choice.

Especially in Denmark I have heard of cases where people have been kicked out of rooms they rented in church owned community houses, for practising Yoga, so it is definitely taken serious by State Religion Authorities - for those who do not know: The protestant church in Demark is a state authority and its priests are civil servants!

So I'd still say, even though a lot of things have been mixed there is really no way that main stream Christian churches can admit having done so - but I find it obvious that they had to because you cannot just make things disappear out of peoples minds. Even though they have been threatened with all sanctions including torture and death for practicing our traditional religions and culturing knowledge that came along with it, this of course is only can make them shut their mouthes about it and practice in secrecy. But syncronizing rites, holidays etc. has not necessarily much to do with overtly mixing anything - I may just as well have something to do with keeping people occupied at the same time where they would be practicing rituals of the traditional religions.
Besides, a lot of ideas and ways of thinking probably came from the Romans: Signore J. Cecar always claimed that the Celtic and Germanic gods were the same as the Greek/Roman ones - they just happened to have different names. From this way of thinking, the idea of neutralizing Slava or Danish nisser to the status of some saint is not far away and also a very clever thing to do, politically. 
The introduction of Christianity in the Celtic, Germanic and other parts of the world was nothing but a political instrument - a means of capturing the minds of people in order to dominate them. Even today it is used in this way.

What would interest me to know is why it seems tho have mixed better with traditional religions in Ireland - was there less domination from the outside or from internal would be rulers, and if so, why? My first guess would be socio-economic reasons or simply a matter of geography - it is not the first place a central European ruler would think of expanding into.

Any answers or theories?


----------



## palomnik

It is no doubt true that all religions to some extent inherit various portions of their ritual and belief from the religions that preceded them.  In the case of Christianity, this is even more likely because - unlike Judaism and Islam in particular - there is almost no revelation about how ritual should be performed.  Arguably, the only Christian rituals with biblical sanction are baptism and the eucharist.  When Christianity became a religion of the masses, there was a ritual "vacuum", which was filled by adapting local traditions for Christian usage.

That anybody would take this as a rationale for denying any value to religion in general or Christianity in particular leaves me a bit bewildered.


----------



## Dee Poe

Just a thought.  Is it possible that the root of the problem and the true point of divide between genuine Christianity and paganism [bad word] is the tendency we humans have to want to do what we want, when we want, how we want.  The opposite is to turn from this love of self-autonomy and submit to God's Lordship as revealed by Jesus.  The people who still have a hankering for doing it their way will find ways to combine their belief systems and practices with God's word written in the Bible; it's called syncretism.


----------



## Lingvisten

Genuine Christianity doesn't excist! Christianity will always be turned and twisted into the different world views of its subjects. You can take of every layer of different european and judaic cultures and you'll only end up with the spoken quotes of Jesus. These quotes where written down, many years after the preaching of Jesus, and so probably also have changed during the years (some people forget and put theire own words instead). For us christians, the only thing left to do, is to clinch to the hope, that Jesus lived, was the son of God, died on the cross for our sins, and defeated death. Then we are left (as already said) with a ceremonial and ritual vaakum. Should we then use the judaic or european rituals? Ore should we make new or have non at all? This is only a matter of cultural preference. The essence of christianity lies not in the rites, but in the message of our salvation. 

To think, that man are able to celebrate God the right way, is to me, arrogance. We can not save our selfes by the right practice, the right actions or the right thinking. We are only saved through Christ.


----------

