Paganism versus Christianity

[Jane_the_Bane]

Judaism is tied to Christianity.

That sounds like: "Christianity is tied to Islam."
It's not technically incorrect, but it insinuates a very strange way of conceptualizing the relationship between the two.

Other religions ARE pagan. Why not?

From the very beginning, the term was used derogatorily, whether it was the Roman equivalent of "hillbilly" or "civilian". Even in contemporary usage, it insinuates primitive superstition (in contrast to the supposedly more enlightened beliefs of one's own religion).

 

[grasping the after wind]

Since the OP is referring to specific passages in the Bible by specific authors the meaning of "pagan" as they would have defined it ought to be considered. I don't believe that the Jewish community of the time viewed anyone outside the Jewish community as anything other than pagan and the Christian conception of the word would have had much the same meaning as Christianity began as a sect within Judaism. I am not sure what the OP is attempting to either discuss or point out but if one is looking to contrast Christianity and paganism using the meaning of pagan I would expect that the early Christian authors cited would have used then Christ and everything implicit to the life, death and resurrection of Christ is the big difference. Unlike any other religion Christianity is based upon God sacrificing for the sake of man not just man sacrificing to gain the favor of a god. Christianity does not include the idea of man behaving in any specific way in order to earn the favor of God or striving to become self transformed into something godlike himself. In Christianity, unlike other religions, man does not strive to reach oneness with God but God offers that oneness to man as a freely given gift. In other religions, man reaches out to God, in Christianity, God reaches out to man. In other religions, following the commands of god(s) leads to sanctification in Christianity man is sanctified not by man's actions but by the actions of God. In other religions, salvation is something one achieves, in Christianity salvation is beyond one's ability to achieve so instead one is offered it as a gift. Those are major philosophical differences between Christianity and other religions. When one gets into the details of how a believer carries out one's religious life the differences are much less apparent but the motivation behind the details that comes forth from the philosophy is meant to be quite different. This leads to some confusion not only for outsiders but for many Christians as well. the problem for some is that Christians that are not considered to be paragons of virtue are still given the same gift of salvation as those that people consider to be "good" and many Christians have not come to terms with that idea and still want salvation to be a thing that can and must be earned in some way. Those of other religions do not accept the notion of freely gifted salvation at all as it is completely contradictory to their own religious belief system and they along with atheists become confused about Christianity when Christians that are supposed to believe in freely given salvation and forgiveness of sins act as if they believe something else entirely.

 

[juvenissun]

Is it just me, or is this just a fancy way of saying: "Don't expose yourself to other points of view until you've sufficiently indoctrinated yourself"?

Yes, that is almost right.
Anything not proper about that?

 

[juvenissun]

That sounds like: "Christianity is tied to Islam."
It's not technically incorrect, but it insinuates a very strange way of conceptualizing the relationship between the two.

From the very beginning, the term was used derogatorily, whether it was the Roman equivalent of "hillbilly" or "civilian". Even in contemporary usage, it insinuates primitive superstition (in contrast to the supposedly more enlightened beliefs of one's own religion).

Christianity accept almost all doctrines of Judaism. Islam or any other religion has no comparison to that.
What does pagan mean is not important. It is simple Christian or Non-Christian.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Yes, that is almost right.
Anything not proper about that?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe that it is the opposite of keeping an open mind?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Christianity accept almost all doctrines of Judaism. Islam or any other religion has no comparison to that.

The overlap between Judaism and Islam is considerably larger than between Christianity and either of the two. But that was not the point. The point was that giving Christianity precendence over Judaism by saying "Judaism is tied to Christianity" is a weird way of phrasing their relationship for that very reason.

What does pagan mean is not important. It is simple Christian or Non-Christian.

Au contraire.
There's a tribe in Oceania who calls itself "human", and everyone else "naked butts". Yes, it's funny, and yes, "naked butts" is basically their word for "foreigner" - but it also tells us a lot about the way they relate to outsiders, and the picture's not very pretty.

The same applies to the "Christians vs. Pagans"-dichotomy. It's tribalism at its worst, and serves to denigrate and belittle the "pagans". I can live with "Non-Christian", even if it's no more descriptive than "Non-Baseball-fan".

 

[grasping the after wind]

The overlap between Judaism and Islam is considerably larger than between Christianity and either of the two. But that was not the point. The point was that giving Christianity precendence over Judaism by saying "Judaism is tied to Christianity" is a weird way of phrasing their relationship for that very reason.


Au contraire.
There's a tribe in Oceania who calls itself "human", and everyone else "naked butts". Yes, it's funny, and yes, "naked butts" is basically their word for "foreigner" - but it also tells us a lot about the way they relate to outsiders, and the picture's not very pretty.

The same applies to the "Christians vs. Pagans"-dichotomy. It's tribalism at its worst, and serves to denigrate and belittle the "pagans". I can live with "Non-Christian", even if it's no more descriptive than "Non-Baseball-fan".

Kind of like calling people deniers because they aren't all in on one's political agenda. When there is an us vs them attitude there is little room for an open mind.

 

[juvenissun]

Oh, I don't know. Maybe that it is the opposite of keeping an open mind?

Before one could open his mind, he has to be prepared so he can protect himself.
I think that is very easy to understand.

 

[juvenissun]

The overlap between Judaism and Islam is considerably larger than between Christianity and either of the two. But that was not the point. The point was that giving Christianity precendence over Judaism by saying "Judaism is tied to Christianity" is a weird way of phrasing their relationship for that very reason.


Au contraire.
There's a tribe in Oceania who calls itself "human", and everyone else "naked butts". Yes, it's funny, and yes, "naked butts" is basically their word for "foreigner" - but it also tells us a lot about the way they relate to outsiders, and the picture's not very pretty.

The same applies to the "Christians vs. Pagans"-dichotomy. It's tribalism at its worst, and serves to denigrate and belittle the "pagans". I can live with "Non-Christian", even if it's no more descriptive than "Non-Baseball-fan".

I don't have your problem. To me, pagan is non-Christian.

 

[LoAmmi]

I don't have your problem. To me, pagan is non-Christian.

Well, I'll just object and say that I'm not pagan.

 

[Job8]

What is the difference between other faiths and Christianity? What is the difference between Paganism and Christianity?

The essential difference between "other faiths" and Christianity is Christ -- the Saviour of the world. The essential difference between paganism and Christianity is false gods versus the one true and living God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Paganism is worship of the creature rather than the Creator (Rom 1:25).

 

[awitch]

The essential difference between "other faiths" and Christianity is Christ -- the Saviour of the world.

We don't have saviors because we don't need one.

 

[Job8]

We don't have saviors because we don't need one.

Actually every human being needs the Savior. The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

 

[awitch]

The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

The need is in no way apparent.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Actually every human being needs the Savior. The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

Every human being needs shoelaces. The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

See how that works?

 

[JackRT]

I agree that pagan is a rather derogatory term. The early Christian church used the term 'pagan' and 'gentile' interchangeably but 'pagan' eventually took over. The Christian antipathy towards pagan beliefs is rather puzzling in view of the strong influence upon both Judaism and Christianity by Egyptian religion, Zoroastrianism, Mithraic beliefs and Greek philosophy.

 

[gord44]

Actually every human being needs the Savior. The need may not be apparent, but the reality does not change.

I figured that out over the last year. Thankful for the Amida Buddha and his compassionate vow to save all beings from their karma and unenlightenment. I hope you make that decision soon!

 

[Chesterton]

Paganism may be compared to that diffused light that glows in a landscape when the sun is behind a cloud. So when the true centre of worship is for some reason invisible or vague, there has always remained for healthy humanity a sort of glow of gratitude or wonder or mystical fear, if it were only reflected from ordinary objects or natural forces or fundamental human traditions.

It was the glory of the great Pagans, in the great days of Paganism, that natural things had a sort of projected halo of the supernatural. And he who poured wine upon the altar, or scattered dust upon the grave, never doubted that he dealt in some way with something divine; however vague or fanciful or even sceptical he might be about the names and natures of the divinities.

Wine was more than wine; it was a god. Corn was more than corn; it was a goddess. There is much doubt and dispute about how literally they understood these statements; but they certainly understood the first half of the sentence as meaning exactly what it said. They were not satisfied with realism, because they never quite lost the sense of something more real than realism.

- G.K.C.

 

[Job8]

I figured that out over the last year. Thankful for the Amida Buddha and his compassionate vow to save all beings from their karma and unenlightenment. I hope you make that decision soon!

Unfortunately, Buddha himself needed the Savior.

 

[awitch]

Unfortunately, Buddha himself needed the Savior.

Too bad your savior didn't show up until 500 years after Siddhārtha Gautama was born.