I finished reading Pagan Christianity today and I mourn for what this book could have been.
The basic argument of the book is that most of what the church does today was borrowed from paganism. Things like buildings, the order of worship, the sermon, the pastor, tithing and clergy salaries, baptism and the Lord’s Supper all have their roots in pagan religious practices. Therefore, the authors strongly suggest that such things should be done away with, and we should all become house churches.
Though they don’t say it, I imagine the authors are against Christmas and Easter as well, since both of these holidays are steeped in pagan cultic worship practices.
What people who argue this way don’t seem to understand is that everything about Christianity is rooted somewhere/somehow in paganism. For example, did you know that the Genesis creation account is nearly identical in form and language to Egyptian creation myths which predate Moses? Moses almost plagiarized Egyptian creation myths, and changed the names from Egyptians gods to the Israelite God. So if Viola and Barna have their way, we better toss out Genesis. Oh, and Deuteronomy as well, since it is based on a the pagan Suzerain-Vassal treaty system of that day.
Furthermore, most of the Psalms are similar in style and language to pagan songs sung to pagan deities. Solomon “borrowed” many of his proverbs from other pagan kings. So rip Psalms and Proverbs out of your Bible too.
How about the Gospels? Have you ever wondered why there are four? One reason is that in the First Century, “Gospel accounts” was a popular genre of religious literature designed to celebrate the birth of a new Roman emperor. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are borrowing a pagan practice of writing “gospels” about the emperor, and use it to write about Jesus. So, down with the Gospels!
While we’re at it, we might as well just chuck out the whole Bible. Writing, after all, is a pagan invention, and if you’ve ever opened a Bible, you may be shocked to find that it is filled with writing! Oh, the horror.
And someone better come knock me off too. After all, I was once a pagan, and in many ways (as you can tell from this post), I still live and operate like one.
The bottom line is that Viola and Barna, though their research is excellent, have come to the absolute wrong conclusions. Yes, it is true, most of what we call “Christianity” today has it’s roots in paganism. But that doesn’t mean we jettison it! Instead, we celebrate it. Why? Because that’s what Christianity is all about: Redemption.
Christianity is about taking what is in the world (the kingdom of darkness) and redeeming it through Jesus Christ, bringing it into the kingdom of light. I mean, look at most of the things Viola and Barna talk about in their book, and most of the things I mentioned above. Almost nobody knows or remembers that these things were originally pagan. Instead, almost everybody, even people who are not Christians, equate such things with Christianity. Why? Redemption!
The truth is that rather than looking at what “pagans” are doing around us and running the other direction screaming “Run for your lives!” we should be watching, learning, and asking “How can Christ redeem that?” Personally, I believe that nothing and nobody is beyond redemption. We may need to get creative, and we will need to dump some of the sinful elements, but everything and everybody can be redeemed.
That’s what Pagan Christianity should have been about. They should have celebrated what changes have occurred over time; not criticized them. Sure, some (even most) of the things Viola and Barna criticize have become outdated, ineffective, wasteful, and maybe even sinful. But if so, then that is why we should stop using them, not because “they were once pagan.”
After reading this book, I have half a mind to go out and find the most pagan thing I can, just to see if I can redeem it and adopt it into my church. Any suggestions?
I read the book and thought it was great. The authors believe that Christmas and Easter can be redeemed. that’s why they don’t talk about it in the book. You can read a really cool discussion of their answer on christmas and easter at http://www.ptmin.org/answers.htm They say it can be redeemed, like some pagan practices can be, but others they feel can’t. they say this in the book also. the book doesn’t say that something is wrong because its pagan. it questions if a lot of what christians do for church is in line with what Jesus and the bible teach. before reading this book I thought that everything we do on sunday morning is in the bible. so I’m glad they told the story behind the tradition. it was eye opening.
Ann,
Maybe I really misjudged the book and need to reread it…but I got the distinct impression that they were saying that the way church is done today is wrong becuase it is pagan, and the only right way to do church is like a house church does it because such churches haven’t adopted any pagan practices. (Which is completely false.)
It is true that they say that such things can be redeemed (see eg. the comments on pp. 75-77), so in that sense, my review was a bit unfair. I will admit it. Also, I didn’t know that they think Christmas and Easter are fine. I am glad to hear it.
But the overall tenor of the book seemed to be critical and condemning of nearly everything the church does, not because it’s ineffective (it is), but because it has pagan roots and is therefore wrong. Take the following statement: “Nothing so hinders the fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose as does the present-day pastoral role” (p. 137). Wow.
I guess if their focus was to simply show that most of what we do has a pagan background, then they shouldn’t have followed these comments with statement that such practices are hindering God. What they are implying is that such practices, because they have pagan origins, are hindering God.
What they should have said, in my opinion, is this:
1. Lots of what we do has pagan origins. But that’s okay, IF it is effectively doing what God wants His church to do. After all, Christianity is all about redemption.
2. Here is what God wants His church to do: 1…2…3…
3. The Bible doesn’t give us a whole lot of guidelines on “how” exactly to do these things, so….
4. If our current traditions are not allowing us to do these things, we should find something else that will, either by approaching the issue with some inspired creativity, or finding a current pagan practice that we can redeem for church use.
So I agree with you that the information was good, and all Christians need to know that most of what they do in church is not from the Bible. But where I disagree with the authors is what they did with that information…
I would have liked a lot more emphasis on redemption, and a lot less (none at all) emphasis on “It has pagan influences, therefore, it’s hindering God.” If they had done this, I think this book would have been one of my top ten books of the year. That’s why I mourn for what this book could have been…
I didn’t see that in the book and I thought it was one of my top five. this is from their answers page http://www.ptmin.org/answers.htm you should read that page, its really good.
“what we do in “Pagan” is make three points:
* Much of what we do for church today has no root in the NT. It didn’t come from Jesus Christ, the apostles, or any NT author. And much of it didn’t even come from Judaism. (So let’s stop calling those practices Biblical and treating them as though they were God-breathed.) I personally find the history of our church practices to be fascinating, riveting, arresting, stunning, captivating, and even mind-blowing.
* Much of what we do for church today originated from Greco-Roman customs (the practices of pagans) and human-made inventions. (So let’s acknowledge this and not pretend that they are inspired by God.)
* Many of those practices, we believe, actually hinder the church from being what God designed her to be and how she should function. (Be open to that possibility; it just might be true.)
One thousand plus footnotes later, we leave it up to the reader to decide if our accepted church practices are a development or a departure from what we find in the NT regarding the church.
The next book will explore that question in great depth.
So “Pagan Christianity” is not the end of the story; it’s only the beginning. It’s the “clearing away the debris” phase before a new foundation can be laid and a new paradigm introduced.”
Man, you were almost there. And then this: “Instead, almost everybody, even people who are not Christians, equate such things with Christianity. Why? Redemption!”
Isn’t possible that non-Christians had good ideas and customs and should be recognized as contributors to the formation of Western society instead of hindrances that had to be overcome? Instead of the idea that the church brought civilization to savages, why not an integration of cultures?
So close.
Jeremy,
This is a great article concerning the whole redemption that is found in Jesus Christ. It’s too bad that many Christians see redemption as a one time thing that happens to Christians and that’s it. I do believe the Bible teaches that justification happens in a moment, but the full redemption of us and this world will happen at some point in the (near?) future.
It will be interesting to see what exists in the Kingdom in its redeemed state that many Christians today are uncomfortable with.
Gabe
Ann,
Yes, those are the three points I had hoped their book would say. I guess I just didn’t see that third point come out as strong as I would have liked. I will read their next book, which is coming out in June.
Bullet,
Reading back over my post, I can see your point. I never intended to imply that Christianity civilized savage pagan practices. What I was trying to say is that there has been (and still is) a lot of good things coming out of the surrounding culture, and there is nothing wrong with the church adopting these things so that we can adapt to the culture. This is what the church has been doing for 2000 years, and must continue to do.
My comment about redemption, which you quoted, was basically to show that the church has done such a good job adopting culture that nobody even remembers that these things haven’t always been “Christian.”
Incidently, I agree with Viola and Barna that most of the things they write about should be abandoned by the church today. But I disagree as to “why.” They seemed to argue that such things should be abandoned because they came from paganism. I say we should abandon them because they are ineffective and wasteful. They say, “We shouldn’t adopt cultural practices.” I say “Lets adopt more cultural customs, if it helps us love and serve others more effectively.”
I wholeheartedly agree that the best way forward is integration.
Gabe,
Thanks for the comment! That is an excellent observation about the future kingdom. I imagine you are right, that Jesus will include some things (and people) in the kingdom that many of us Christians are uncomfortable with.
I read your blog post about online churches. I would love to read that paper when you get it finished!
I’ll admit I did not read the book but was interested in the responses of the readers. It shouldnt surprise the readers that much of Christianity is based on pagan practices. From Genesis to Revelation the genre is related to what the people knew and could understand at the time, from deities, to sacrifice, to prayer, to answer of prayers. How different it would sound if written in our life time now based on our present culture.
The idea that bothers me most though is the denial of Judiastic background in the development of Christianity. Jesus does not seem Jewish anymore and the holidays he never would have celebrated based on pagan traditions have now become the high points of Christian celebration. Even including Jesus in these celebrations doesn’t negate their background.
From the changing of the lunar calendar to a solar one, to the changing of His name from Yeshua Ha Mashiach.( salvation from the Messiah) , to Jesus Christ (first and last name), to the changing of the Saturday sabbath to Sunday, Jewishness of the Messiah has been slowly replaced by Gentile culture.
Why is His birthday celebrated at the winter solstice with yule logs, trees, greenery? Because the Roman Catholics wanted it to fit in with the pagan celebrations so they would be more interested in practicing their form of Christianity. Why celebrate Easter, a pagan holiday? for the same reason as celebrating Christmas. As a result, these are fixed times of years for the celebration.
In reality, the shepherds would not have been in the hills with their sheep in the middle of December. Jesus would not have been born then. No census would have been ordered when it was the most difficult for the people to travel in cold and perhaps snow. Hence, no Christmas holiday,
In reality, the resurrection would never be celebrated as Easter before the Jewish holiday of Passover. Remember, Jesus celebrated the Passover and was then crucified.
Jesus was Jewish, is Jewish and remains Jewish. It does not matter whether the Christian culture is based on the individual customs of the people then or now. It is important only that belief in Jesus leads to redemption.
I am only saddened that there is not enough knowledge of Judaism in Christianity that would entice Jews to believe in their Messiah now as was in the beginning of Jesus” walk on earth then.
Ai,
You are absolutely correct in what you say. Thanks! One big area of study for me right now is related to Jewish backgrounds and Israelite history. I feel that one cannot understand the NT very well unless one knows the culture and times that Jesus and the apostles were living in.
Do you have any book recommendations for me?
Hey Jeremy,
That thing about the Egyptian creation myths is fascinating to me. I have been going through a “rebellion” of sorts lately where I am questioning much from my fundamentalist background and am trying to keep up with current thought and where the evidence leads. How do you approach the creation text?
Tom <
Tom,
Good to hear from you!
I am glad to hear that you are questioning much from your background. This is the best way to proceed through all of life, and keep us humble as well.
As far as the Egyptian creation myths, since the stories predate Moses, he probably adapted the Egyptian stories for the Israelites. But this does not necessarily mean that Genesis 1-2 is allegory or fiction. It is possible that the creation account as it really happened was passed down from Adam and so every culture had a similar creation story. Of course, this could also mean that Moses didn’t adapt the Egyptian stories at all, and he simply wrote what God revealed to him.
Also, understand that the theory of evolution was not presented until Darwin. Neither the Egyptians nor Moses would have ever concieved of evolution. So if we are trying to understand the original texts in the way the author and original readers would have understood them, we cannot read Gen 1-2 in an evolutionary way. That is nowhere in the text.
And be careful. When you tell people you are questioning the creation accounts of Genesis 1-2, a lot of Christians get very angry, and some religious types will actually fire you from your job… What they don’t realize is that you are simply using historical-cultural research to understand Genesis 1-2 the way Moses and the Israelites would have understood it. But since that sort of research might affect their doctrinal statement and financial support, it is seen as a threat.
If I ever get around to making some blog posts about this (I probably won’t), I will post some of the sources for those Egyptian creation texts.
Fascinating, man! Thanks so much!