How much of Christianity is based on Paganism?

That's good info. I'm not studying now, and don't expect to again. But I'll be careful about using Wikipedia to improve my knowledge.

Not sure about most if these coincidences. No lesson is derived from them in the quote given by FBM. The source is not quoted hence it's not verifiable*... They mean very little I think. Real, doctrinal pagan imports into judaism and christianity abound: polytheism, temple in which the god resides, human and animal sacrifice, sacred cows, scape goats, the Nehushtan, the son of God etc. No need to look for far-fetched coincidences in festival dates with obscure cults. The Bible itself is largely pagan.

I never understood what was so baaaaad about paganism.

* a wiki article is always easily verifiable thanks to the numerous sources it cites. Also they are peer reviewed, while personal websites aren't.

I was going to mention earlier that Wiki pages generally cite sources, but forgot to do so.

I saw you say you'll avoid wikipedia... Very sad that the best tool for knowledge ever to come out of the internet be disparaged unfairly like that. Really sad. This place should be called Able2Obscure.

People like you make it so.

You didn't notice, for sure, that countless people came here asking for answers and got them, precise and accurate.

People like you, Frank and your kin are the ones that are responsible for the fact that sound and helpful posters have been leaving the site.

Such is the internet...

Let me clarify that I'm not eschewing Wiki altogether. I just going to be more cautious when using it to gather information about hot topics such as religion and politics. Just the hot topics. Otherwise, I get bookoodles of good ideas from it. But if I want to reference something for a paper I'm writing, I go to peer-reviewed journals. Wiki may attain that level someday, but it hasn't yet. It's far better than the Encyclopedia Brittanica that I grew up with, no doubt.

Okay. Note that the fastest route to the relevant academic literature is often the wiki entries on a topic.

The same name YHWH comes from the sound heard from high winds originated by cosmical events affecting earth.

This name was also adopted by a Chinese emperor when the event of Exodus was in progress.

The meaning of "warrior" makes more sense than "the one who causes something", because it carries aggressive behavior. A description of the god that is mentioned in the bible portrait him in a verse as "a man of war".(Exodus 15:3)

The sound of drums is also copied by several cultures because that same sound reflects earthquake noise, volcanic eruptions,which mean disaster., destruction. It was adopted by humans of all cultures to express the same against others.

The majority of religions look at heavens to portrait the location of their gods, and the original meaning of the word "god" in every ancient language simply means "powerful one". Even the Hebrew "elohim" means powerful one, almighty,master, owner, an authority title, spirit, and similar.

From here, it is a question to find out how a certain culture opted for a single god rather than a few group of gods as the rest of cultures opted to worship.

It is understood that ancient Egypt also showed worshiping an invisible god, it was a period of monotheism in the Egyptian culture. Who copied it from whom is not the point but how it comes that more gods were added later one.

Christianity just followed the traffic when adopting rituals and beliefs from other cultures. This is a human thing: for example,very recently have been found old synagogs with the Zodiac symbols in the ceiling of their buildings... paganism affects to every culture without exceptions.

The NYPD Is Editing the Wikipedia Pages of Eric Garner, Sean Bell
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/03/nypd-editing-wikipedia-pages-eric-garner-sean-bell

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biblianazar/esp_biblianazar_33.htm



very good site

Another good bit of info is simply googling other Messiahs. Not like Jesus was the only one, were many before as well as after him. In that broader context things are better udnerstood.

This is a very good subject. Actually, when comparing what the Bible really teaches to what many so called Christian religions promote, you will find that there is a big difference. For example, the teaching that we have an immortal soul. No where in the Bible can this idea or thought be found. But interestingly the Bible paints quite the opposite picture. For example, at Ezekiel chapter 18 and verses 4 and 20, the Bible clearly states that the soul can die. The Bible also deals with what happens to a person's consciousness upon death. Note Psalm 146 and verses 3 and 4. After showing how pointless it is to put our trust in mere humans to solve the major problems of this world, it then points out toward the end of verse 4 that after the persons spirit goes out (life leaves the body), the person's thoughts perish or come to and end. Thus making it clear that upon death even the process of conscious thought stops.

This is very different from what is taught in many main stream relgions claiming to be Christian, wouldn't you agree? Yes, in every case you will find that when what a religion claiming to be Christian teaches closely mirrors pagan customs and beliefs, it is because they are not really adhering to what the Bible Really Teaches.

You are referring to the OT . In Psalms 16:11, Psalms 21:4-6, we will be blessed and have pleasure FOREVER .

In the NT, John 17:3, Matthew 25:46, we will have ETERNAL LIFE .

There are many more, especially in John, but this is enough to prove you wrong .

You are correct for Jesus did, by his sacrifice, make it possible for us to have everlasting life. Even those now dead will soon arise as Acts 24:15 says "There is going to be a resurrection of the just and the unjust." So what the Bible reveals in the Old Testament regarding what can happen to the soul is correct. Otherwise there would be no need for a resurrection, a bringing back to life from the dead, the opposite of life.

Note how our master Jesus cleared things up regarding what happens at death. He does this at John 11:11-14 where it is recorded:

(John 11:11-14) "After he said these things, he added: “Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.” 12 The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.” 13 Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus said to them plainly: “Lazʹa·rus has died"

Being a master teacher, Jesus knew that in verse 11 when he said that Lazarus has fallen asleep, his disciples would logically think he was referring to normal sleep as verse 12 shows. But then Jesus opens their eyes to what death is in verse 14. Teaching in this way helped the disciples to see that death is likened to sleep, a sleep that only Jesus can awaken us from. This helped his disciples make the connection between what had just taught and what is stated in the OT at Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 and Psalm 146:3,4. The dead truly are conscious of nothing at all but sleeping in death. See how the OT and the NT agree helps understand what the Bible states at 2 Timothy 3:16, 17: "16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."

Yes, both the OT and the NT agree regarding what happens to a person (soul) at death. Yes, everlasting life is promised and will be realized once Jesus starts to fulfill Acts 24:15 "resurrecting the just and the unjust". But for now those now dead are sleeping as did Lazarus was before his resurrection.