Is Christianity based on pagan beliefs and rituals? Did the authors of the Bible, especially the New Testament, draw from pagan myths and ancient fables?
At some point in the sixth decade of the first century, the Apostle Peter wrote: "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty" (II Peter 1:16, NKJV).
Sorry, Peter. In addition to challenging your authorship of the second epistle which bears your name, many critics of Christianity charge that you and your peers did, in fact, found the Christian religion based on ancient fables and pagan traditions. These critics allege that Christianity is indeed rooted in paganism and that the origins of Christianity have more to due with legend and myth than history.
Pagan Roots of Christianity?
According to the website Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth (POCM), Mediterranean cultures in the ancient world "shared standard ideas about Gods and their powers and place in the universe [and] Christianity simply adopted those ideas and applied them to Jesus."
POCM explains:
Heaven, hell, prophecy, daemon possession, sacrifice, initiation by baptism, communion with God through a holy meal, the Holy Spirit, monotheism, immortality of the soul, and many other "Christian" ideas all belonged to earlier, older Pagan faiths. They were simply part of ancient Mediterranean culture. Along with miracle working sons of God, born of a mortal woman, they were common elements of pre-Christian Pagan religion. Mithras had 'em. So did Dionysus, Attis, Osiris, and Orpheus. And more. (Emphasis theirs)
One former Anglican priest bluntly states: "Christianity began as a cult with almost wholly Pagan origins and motivations for the first century." In fact, says Tom Harpur, the former priest turned critic, "Not one single doctrine, rite, tenet, or usage in Christianity was in reality a fresh contribution to the world."
What the Scholars Say about Paganism and Christianity
The pagan roots of Christianity is a popular argument on the Internet and a premise favored in several recent books, including The Jesus Mysteries by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy and Those Incredible Christians by Hugh J. Schonfield. However, its popularity within scholarly circles has significantly declined since the early 20th century.
T.N.D. Mettinger, a Swedish scholar who has devoted years to the analysis of pagan religions, declines to endorse the view that Christianity parallels paganism. Addressing the resurrection of Jesus specifically, Mettinger writes: "There is, as far as I know, no prima facie evidence that the death and resurrection of Jesus is a mythological construct, drawing on the myths and rites of the dying and rising gods of the surrounding world."
Interestingly, many elements of the pagan myths often associated with Christianity actually post-date the writing of the New Testament. One example is the myth of Attis. While the myth itself predates Christianity, Christian apologist Michael Licona points out that "the first report we have of a resurrection of Attis comes long after the first century."
Many aspects of various ancient religions were lifted out of context, pasted together with others, and shaped into a sort of "universal Mystery-religion" that was then paralleled with Christianity. While this approach continues to earn mileage on the Internet, the academic community no longer embraces it.
Edwin Yamauchi, a student of 22 languages and a professor of Mediterranean studies, explains that "by the mid-twentieth century, scholars had established that the sources used [for the ancient pagan religions] were far from satisfactory and the parallels [with Christianity] were much too superficial." Consequently, says Yamauchi, it's been "pretty much of a closed issue in the scholarly community."
POCM acknowledges that "modern academic orthodoxy" is against them, but they counter that this is due to the Christian bias of most religion scholars. The scope of this article does not permit an examination of this claim, but it should be noted that bias in and of itself does not fatally undermine the quest for truth or the discovery of facts. As such, it is inappropriate to dismiss "modern academic orthodoxy" out of hand, simply because a majority of modern academics disagree with POCM.
Evaluating Christianity on its Own Terms
Regardless of the apparent parallels with other faiths and religions, Christianity deserves to be assessed on its own terms. The claims of the Bible warrant examination in their own right, and the historical evidence for Jesus should be weighed irrespective of whatever has been written concerning Mithras, Osiris, or any other ancient god.
It is unlikely, however, that those advancing the claims of similarity between Christianity and paganism will respect such ground rules. According to Yamauchi, they don't even respect the ground rules of basic academic scholarship. Yamauchi writes: "They don't have the languages, they don't study the original sources, they don't pay attention to the dates, and they frequently quote ideas that were popular in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries but have already been refuted."
****
Sources for this article include:
The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel (Zondervan, 2007)
The copyright of the article Is Christianity Based on Paganism? in Protestantism is owned by Brian Tubbs. Permission to republish Is Christianity Based on Paganism? must be granted by the author in writing.
Comments
Apr 2, 2008 5:42 AM
Pink
:
. Just because Christianity has some similarities to some of what comes out of Paganism, does that mean Christianity is based on it? . What is Paganism if it isn't the idea of many gods? . Christianity claims one God. . So, if a large segment of Pagans come out of their polytheistic world into the monotheistic world of Christianity, does that mean their belief is based on something that they had in Paganism? . For them? Maybe?
Apr 2, 2008 7:29 AM
Migisi
:
. We've discussed this before, more than once. . If paganism is being defined here as 'pre-Christian' or 'primitive' religion, then Judaism fits and is pagan. Since Christianity is an offshoot from Judaism (we often say "Judeo-Christian"), then Christianity is based on paganism. . If paganism is being defined here as 'polytheism', Christianity fits more than Judaism, and is pagan i.e. Father/Son/Spirit = polytheism. Adherents worship and pray to God the Father ~and~ Jesus the Son. All one has to do is check a Christian prayer book. The church attempted to resolve their polytheistic theology by making each god a 'personage' of one god. I've listed before the stark similarities which Christianity shares with the 'pagan' religions i.e. virgin births, man-gods performing miracles, crucifixions, resurrections, ascensions, etc. .
Apr 2, 2008 7:30 AM
Brian Tubbs
:
Obviously, I'm NOT taking the position that Christianity is based on paganism. I'm simply calling attention to the debate, and showing that most scholars dismiss the connection. But there are many (including, I believe, our friend Migisi) who believe that Christianity borrows many of its doctrines (including the resurrection of Jesus) from pagan sources.
Apr 2, 2008 7:41 AM
Brian Tubbs
:
<i>If paganism is being defined here as 'pre-Christian' or 'primitive' religion, then Judaism fits and is pagan. Since Christianity is an offshoot from Judaism (we often say "Judeo-Christian"), then Christianity is based on paganism.</i>
That's not a good definition of paganism. A better comes from Dictionary.com - "One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially an adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity."
<i>If paganism is being defined here as 'polytheism', Christianity fits more than Judaism, and is pagan i.e. Father/Son/Spirit = polytheism. Adherents worship and pray to God the Father ~and~ Jesus the Son. All one has to do is check a Christian prayer book. The church attempted to resolve their polytheistic theology by making each god a 'personage' of one god.</i>
Your description is based on the supposition that Christianity was invented by humans as opposed to being revealed by God.
I would also say that whatever adjective or descriptor you apply to the Trinity doctrine (be it "Paganism" or "Polytheism"), the doctrine deserves to be analyzed and studied in its own right.
<i> I've listed before the stark similarities which Christianity shares with the 'pagan' religions i.e. virgin births, man-gods, , crucifixions, resurrections, ascensions, etc. </i>
A majority of scholars in recent years have debunked virtually all of these similarities. For one thing, many of the developed mythical traditions POST-date Christianity, including Mithraism, which (though it originated in the East centuries before Jesus) didn't become popular and established in the West until AFTER the time of Christ. For another, many of the so-called tenets of these pagan religions were NOT written down by their adherents, but have been conjectured and hypothesized by western scholars many centuries AFTER these religions had died off.
Apr 2, 2008 7:42 AM
Migisi
:
. <i>...Christianity borrows many of its doctrines (including the resurrection of Jesus) from pagan sources.</i> . Comparative evidence supports borrowing. I've already presented it - more than once.
Apr 2, 2008 8:00 AM
Migisi
:
. <i>That's not a good definition of paganism. A better comes from Dictionary.com - "One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially an adherent of a polytheistic religion in antiquity."</i> . Another definition of pagan according to most Christians -- everyone who is not Christian. Therefore, Muslims and Jews ~are~ pagans. Many Protestants claim that Catholism is pagan, given the worship of Mary. . I guess, as you've often insisted elsewhere, we need to be on the same page regarding terms and definitions. . <i>Your description is based on the supposition that Christianity was invented by humans as opposed to being revealed by God.</i> . Correct. Don't all spiritual thoughts originate from the mind of Man? . <i>... the [Trinity] doctrine deserves to be analyzed and studied in its own right.</i> . Been there, done that in many threads before. You admitted before that you couldn't explain it, and being a scholar and pastor yourself, you've studied it. . <i>A majority of scholars in recent years have debunked virtually all of these similarities.</i> . A majority of CHRISTIAN scholars, you mean. They debunk everything which doesn't support traditional doctrine. . <i>For another, many of the so-called tenets of these pagan religions were NOT written down by their adherents,... </i> . True for Judaism and Christianity as well. Both relied heavily on oral traditions. . <i>but have been conjectured and hypothesized by western scholars many centuries AFTER these religions had died off.</i> . A belief system need not die off before it's "conjectured and hypothesized by western scholars". How many Christian denominations are there? How many sects of Judaism? .
Apr 2, 2008 10:31 AM
Pink
:
. I think the major definition of Paganism includes polytheism as the main stream. . The resurgence of a polytheistic religion is predictable in these times where a single set of values is so difficult to find even among sectarians. . . .
Apr 2, 2008 6:05 PM
Brian Tubbs
:
I don't mean a majority of Christian scholars. I mean a majority of scholars....period. Most academics who have studied ancient religions recognize that the timelines and source material doesn't support the notion that Christianity borrowed from paganism.
What's more, you seem to have a cynical notion that bias precludes any search for knowledge and invalidates the outcome of any such quest. If that is true, then NO knowledge is possible, since EVERYONE has a bias to some degree. And if THAT is your position, then communication itself is pointless as is any attempt to form any kind of a democratic consensus. I would offer that it's VERY possible for a person who is biased to compensate for that bias via proper checks and balances - and arrive at a fair-minded, even an objective conclusion. It IS possible.
Apr 2, 2008 6:11 PM
Brian Tubbs
:
<i>Been there, done that in many threads before. You admitted before that you couldn't explain it, and being a scholar and pastor yourself, you've studied it.</i>
I admitted that I can't explain it to your satisfaction, and I've acknowledged that there's an element of mystery to the doctrine.
But I have offered some thoughts on the doctrine. See the link below...
I don't expect you to agree with my position, but there it is.
Apr 2, 2008 6:25 PM
Brian Tubbs
:
Migisi, what I will acknowledge is that Catholicism has incorporated into itself some pagan elements. But the Catholic Church has strayed considerably from apostolic Christian origins. It no longer represents the core Christian church that existed in the first century. And, sadly, part of its drift is that it has picked up some pagan influences along the way.
I would also agree that some of our Christian holidays have taken on pagan influences. This is obvious and can't even be contested. Christmas is the best example. In fact, it was originally a pagan ritual - the winter solstice - which was then coopted by the imperial (later Roman Catholic) church.
So, Migisi, I am in agreement with you insofar as the above is concerned. Yes, over the years, Christianity (especially Catholic Christianity) has been influenced by paganism.
Where we differ is when it comes to the core doctrines of the Christian faith - the core message of Christianity - which originated in the FIRST century! That core message was NOT based on paganism. It was based on the actual life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and then his actual crucifixion and resurrection - and the subsequent preaching and teaching of Jesus' apostles. THAT is where Christianity (at its core) came from. Not paganism.
