Book Discussion: Pagan Christianity

[Amanah]

Viola, Frank
Pagan Christianity? : exploring the roots of our church practices/Frank Viola and George Barna. Tyndale, 2002, 2008


I'm going to be commenting on the above book. I'll be making posts on the book as I read it. This first post covers a few thoughts from Chapter 2 of the book.

Chapter 2 of Pagan Christianity points out on pages 10-11 that :

"Ancient Judaism was centered on three elements: the Temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifice. When Jesus came, He ended all three, fulfilling them in Himself. He is the temple who embodies a new and living house . . . He is the priest . . . and He is the perfect and finished sacrifice."

"In Greco-Roman paganism, these three elements were also present: Pagans had their temples, their priests, and their sacrifices. It was only the Christians who did away with all of these elements."

The point being made in Chapter two is that when Constantine became Emperor of Rome, He reintroduced pagan aspects into Christianity: temples, priests, relics, worship of the dead, and sacred spaces.

In Christianity there were to be no sacred spaces. People are to be the temple of the Lord. Constantine introduced the idea of the holy site. Most of the churches he built were built on the tombs of dead saints as he incorporated worship of the dead into the Christian faith. He created temples that copied pagan religious systems and reintroduced the concept of temples, priests, and sacred spaces.

"Almost to the dying day, Constantine 'still functioned as the high priest of pagansim.' In fact, he retained the pagan title Pontifex Maximum, which means chief of the pagan priests." The same title used for the Pope today. (Viola 19)

When Constantine structured the church around pagan practices that make the building a sacred space, and the priests the focal point of the service, Christians were robbed of their true identity in Christ and turned into spectators of a religious ritual.

I'll comment more as I read more.

[Amanah]

Still in Chapter 2

I kind of knew this information, but didn't realize the full extent of the pagan influence on the Catholic Church.
I've spent time in Germany, Italy, and France and have seen the beauty and grandeur of many of these churches first hand. They truly are the glory of Europe. In many villages the church is the show piece and center of life till this day. I've spend many hours wandering around in Cathedrals and marveling at Romanesque and Gothic structures, their art, spires and stained glass windows. I know that in the Middle Ages, for the unlettered masses, the Church (steeped in pagan ritual as it was) was the only way people had to know the history and stories of their God. For depicted on the churches in art are the stories of the fall and redemption of mankind.

back to the book

Constantine Churches were fashioned after pagan temples.

Holy water, a purification ritual before entering the temple
Churches were decorated with pagan art
Basilicas were designed for sun worship, so faced the east
the bread and wine represented the sacred sacrifice
the Bishop's chair was called the Cathedra (the throne)
the pomp and ritual also derived from pagans
Roman Emperors appeared in public with lights, candles, incense and processional music

side note: I have a new favorite breakfast. I scoop some oatmeal in a bowl, add a chopped apple, cover with just enough water to cover the oatmeal but not the apple, microwave for 5 minutes at 50% power. After cooked add cinnamon, almond milk, and Stevia and eat. It's really good.

[Amanah]

I think it is sad when people cannot appreciate the Cathedrals of Europe as art. We have lost many beautiful works of art to religious zealots. Pardon the detour; it's a product of an UC religious background, combined with a Liberal Arts Education.

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

Buddhas of Bamiyan

The Buddhas of Bamiyan (Persian: بت های باميان – but hay-e bamiyan) were two 6th century[1] monumental statues of standing buddhas carved into the side of a cliff in the Bamyan valley in the Hazarajat region of central Afghanistan, situated 230 km (140 mi) northwest of Kabul at an altitude of 2,500 meters (8,202 ft). Built in 507 CE, the larger in 554 CE,[1] the statues represented the classic blended style of Gandhara art.[2]

The main bodies were hewn directly from the sandstone cliffs, but details were modeled in mud mixed with straw, coated with stucco. This coating, practically all of which was worn away long ago, was painted to enhance the expressions of the faces, hands and folds of the robes; the larger one was painted carmine red and the smaller one was painted multiple colors.[3]

The lower parts of the statues' arms were constructed from the same mud-straw mix while supported on wooden armatures. It is believed that the upper parts of their faces were made from great wooden masks or casts. The rows of holes that can be seen in photographs were spaces that held wooden pegs which served to stabilize the outer stucco.

They were dynamited and destroyed in March 2001 by the Taliban, on orders from leader Mullah Mohammed Omar,[4] after the Taliban government declared that they were "idols".[5] International opinion strongly condemned the destruction of the Buddhas, which was viewed as an example of the intolerance of the Taliban. Japan and Switzerland, among others, have pledged support for the rebuilding of the statues.[6]

[Amanah]

So, I'm finished with Chapter 2 which can be summarized fairly well by the following quote from page 42:

"We have become victims of our past. We have been fathered by Constantine who gave us the prestigious status of owning a building. We have been blinded by the Romans and Greeks who forced upon us their hierarchically structured basilicas. We have been taken by the Goths who imposed upon us their Platonic architecture. We have been hijacked by the Egyptians and Babylonians who gave us our sacred steeples. . . The building is an architectural denial of the priesthood of all believers."

On Page 30 thru 46 Viola continues his critique with Protestant churches. He thinks that we have taken the Pagan Catholic model and changed a few things like replacing the altar table with the pulpit. We have kept the steeple, which he equates to the obelisks of Eqypt. The Pulpit and preaching is central in our contemporary churches, and he sees this as a problem because he feels that the platform, pulpit and choir server the purpose of educating, entertaining, reaching lost souls, ect, But he sees the people in the pews as non participants.

I'm having problems with the book at this point for a few reasons. Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. If we are having revival in church, the Word is being preached, and souls are being saved, that can't be all bad right? The point of going to church is not to be non-participatory, but to bring people to church with you so they can hear the gospel and be saved.

I'm also thinking about the books that I have read about Azusa street now and wondering about the services described in those books. I've read that people met to pray and God took over the services. That people took turns bringing the message as God led them. There were testimonies, preaching, gifts in operation as the Spirit led.

Of course the central message of this book is that the early church first met in homes and that people were able to participate as God led them. And according to Viola, this is impossible due to the structure of our pagan buildings.

[Amanah]

At this point I have to admit I'm wondering what really goes on in a home church.
Are there any OP home churches?
Are they places where people eat and drink alcohol?
Are there a bunch of kids running through the house being a pain in the neck?
Is it way more work then its worth?

I'll keep reading and commenting, but now it's time for lunch.

[Aquila]

I'd like to add the thoughts from a previous post:

Originally Posted by Aquila

Yes the church is a people, not a building with a steeple. It's also not a house.

And when the "church" (the disciples of Jesus) meet Paul tells us several things are to take place....

- Everyone being able to bring a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.
- Gift of tongues coupled with interpretation, two or at most three.
- Two or three anointed teachers speak and guide the meeting.
- If a saint attending has a revelation or something to share, whoever is speaking must stop and give them the floor so that all might be able to prophesy, learn, and be encouraged. Meetings are to be discussion based.
- Those who address the group must realize that their spirits are subject to the anointed teachers guiding the group.
- Women (or anyone for that matter) are not to use the time for socializing.
- Those who think they are spiritual Christians should acknowledge that this order of service is a command from the Lord.

All of this is found in (I Corinthians 14:26-38).

Now... if the disciples of Jesus strictly meet in a setting that is too large to facilitate this kind of body ministry... biblical fellowship and discipleship as Paul would describe it isn't taking place. Therefore, rather the church meets occasionally in large building or not (mine does) the small group gatherings are more beneficial for a deeper and more biblical Christian walk and experience.

The house church I attend has activities and Bible movies for smaller kids. Kids are encouraged to participate with the grown ups when older. Kids are not to be regarded as a pain in the neck. They are very important. Many resources cover the importance of children in the house church movement. A great book that covers kids is, Houses That Change The World, by Wolfgang Simson. You can download a free .pdf copy if you Google it.

Please note, the idea that children are an interruption and not a blessing to the meeting is a notion the traditional church has built. "Shovel the kids off so we can play church." The truth is, kids contribute more than most know. And they learn and ask questions. Suffer not the little children. They were present when Jesus taught. Also when the Apostles would teach.

I've attended house church for almost two years now. We don't drink alcohol in the house church. In private, people live according to their convictions on the matter. We are networked and have a larger gatherings at the campus for worship and celebration.

God bless.

[Amanah]

good morning Aquila

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Amanah

good morning Aquila

Good morning!

This is the day that the LORD has made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it!

[Amanah]

On page 81 I just read something that really struck a cord with me. If you are a shy introverted person, you can easily fall through the cracks, can easily hide in a traditional church service. You could spend 10+ years in a church and have very few close relationships.

Viola has this to say about relationship:

"No evangelist or apostle in the New Testament brought souls to Christ simply to save them from hell. Such a thought was unknown to the early Christians. The early Christians won people to the Lord to bring them into God's community, the church . . . In the words of Gilbert Bilezikian: 'Christ did not die just to save us from sins, but to bring us together into community. After coming to Christ, our next step is to be involved in community. A church that does not experience community is a parody, a sham.' "

[Dedicated Mind]

good stuff amanah. almost like a blog. but keep it here. i think tim keller has some sermons on community. i've heard that holy water came from german pagans that worshipped streams and rivers. when charlemagne became emperor, he introduced german practices empire wide.