Tuesday, 22 April 2014

Pagan influences in churches - speak the truth clearly

This Christian missionary (David Wood)seems to have taken his claims about Islam right off a dodgy missionary website before airing them on an internet evangelical Christian TV show (ABN Sat). Looking beyond this man's amateurism let's look at his claims; his claims are refuted in the video and questions are raised about Christian practices and beliefs which are linked to pagans.

're Pagan Practices in Islam' (A Powerful Response to ABN)

This Christian falls into error as he is unaware that the Islamic practices and revered places/objects that he mentions are in fact linked back to Abraham (p) thus are in fact monotheistic. Abraham built the Kaba and worshipped God there. Thus, worshipping God at the Kaba is Abrahamic and monotheistic NOT pagan.

The Christian in the video (David Wood) is confused as AFTER the passing on of Abraham and Ishmael (p) later generations in the vicinity of the Kaba took up idol worship and thus became pagans but also maintained some Abrahamic practices. These Abrahamic practices were restored back to a complete monotheistic way with the coming of Islam.

Hajj (the pilgrimage) was revealed by God and was proclaimed by Abraham. Circumambulation was mentioned by God to Abraham (see Quran 22:26-27)

Kissing the black stone (which Abraham used as a cornerstone for the Kaba) is something Muslims do as it's the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (p). It's not a pagan practice.

The Christian practices and beliefs we highlighted to have pagan roots

Easter: As Christianity spread into Europe different Pagan customs blended into the holidays. It's actually thought the word 'Easter' may have come from Eostre (a Pagan goddess of Spring and fertility. Jesus never celebrated Easter nor ever taught anybody to do such.

Easter Eggs: Eggs have been mythological symbols of birth for thousands of years. Christians adopted the egg as an Easter custom around the 13th century. Jesus never taught this practice of the Easter egg - he never practiced such.

Easter Bunny: The rabbit had long been a symbol of fertility and new life in European pagan customs. Christians adopted the rabbit around the 16th century.

Bunnies are a leftover from the pagan festival of Eostre, a great northern goddess whose symbol was a rabbit or hare http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/03/easter-pagan-symbolism

The cross: The cross is something that is believed to have originated from the ankh:

The Ankh is commonly known to mean life in the language of Ancient Kemet (land of the Blacks) renamed Egypt by the Greeks. It is also a symbol for the power to give and sustain life, the Ankh is typically associated with material things such as water(which was believed by Egyptians to regenerate life), air, sun, as well as with the[ir] gods, who are frequently pictured carrying an Ankh.
The Egyptian king is often associated with the Ankh also, either in possession of an Ankh (providing life to his people) or being given an Ankh (or stream of Ankhs) by the[ir] gods. http://theafrocentricexperience.com/index.phpoption=com_content&view=article&id=86&Itemid=125

Jesus never wore a cross nor taught people to wear such crosses.

Christmas: Christians celebrate this in the winter (December) despite knowing Jesus was not born in the winter. This celebration is linked to the winter solstice which the nature worshippers observed.

The Trinity: This is a belief that Jesus didn't teach nor did any other Prophet. It's thought this belief in the trinity was due to Graeco-Roman (pagan) influence. Islam is bringing people back to the original message of the Prophets.

Please, if you love the Prophets and want to follow their teachings look into Islam:

Umar Lee Leaves Christianity and Comes to Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk


Anonymous said...

At state level, Britain has become liberal fundamentalist – not a ‘Christian’ or ‘plural’ society

an excellent analysis by Taji Mustafa of Hizb ut-Tahrir, Britain Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron wrote an article for the Church Times – perhaps hoping to win support from middle England – that Britain is a ‘Christian country’. He has been publicly rebuked by… Read More ›


Anonymous said...

Inanna Wasn’t Crucified, She Was Just Nailed Up Dead
Casey only addresses one thing I have ever written relating to mythicism, ever. Seriously. In this entire book, he never mentions a single argument, claim, or passage in Proving History, or in any other book, article, or blog post I’ve ever written, pertaining to the topic of this book. Except one single small passage in Not the Impossible Faith: my discussion of the Innana death-and-resurrection narrative (NIF, pp. 18-19; Casey, 7-5983ff.). This is most strange, because in NIF there are a lot of refutations of assumptions he relies on in his book (such as that Luke is “an outstanding historian by ancient standards,” so true he had to say it twice, verbatim: 3-2619; 3-2683; see NIF, ch. 7, for a gut-check on that; OHJ, ch. 9, for a groin-check). Yet he never responds to those refutations or even seems to be aware of them. Likewise all my preemptive refutations of his arguments in PH, which I’ve noted already.
And then the one single thing of mine he does address, he gets wrong in almost every way.
First, I never argued in NIF that “Jesus cannot have been crucified” because Inanna was; in fact I there explicitly say I am not saying the crucifixion of Jesus was inspired by that. Yet Casey imputes to me the other argument. That’s worse than a straw man, because it actually misleads his readers, who will now think I made a ridiculous argument, which in fact I didn’t. Indeed, nowhere in NIF do I even argue that Jesus didn’t exist (to the contrary, NIF consistently assumes he did). He even tries to admit this, but characterizes it as “going back” on myself (7-5994), when in fact it was simply my position, not a retreat from some “other” position (which again basically makes him a liar).
In the passage in question I am explicitly responding to the argument that “no one would worship a crucified deity, therefore Jesus must have actually risen from the dead.” Casey surely rejects such fundamentalist balderdash as I do, yet he does not tell his readers that this is the only context in which I brought up the Inanna narrative. Inanna is an example of a humiliated, killed and crucified deity, who was nevertheless widely worshipped. I seriously doubt Casey can honestly have a problem with that. Because it being true has no bearing on whether Jesus existed–unless you argue that “no one would worship a crucified deity, therefore Jesus must have actually been crucified.” Fortunately Casey doesn’t appear to make that argument. (Because my argument in that case would be correct.) So why my treatment of Inanna concerns him in this book is hard to discern. And he never explains any of this to his readers, who are thus mislead into thinking I argue that Inanna’s tale is an argument against the historicity of Jesus. It’s not. I think it can bear on the subject, but not like that. And I didn’t even discuss that possibility in NIF.
Second, Casey suffers from concrete thinking (see next section), so badly that he thinks Inanna can’t be a crucified deity because she was a vegetation goddess (7-5994). That is a non sequitur. That’s like saying she can’t be a crucified deity because she’s a woman. Or not Jewish. The differences are irrelevant. We unmistakably have a god descending from heaven, into another supernatural realm below (the underworld), being tried, executed, humiliated, and crucified (her naked corpse nailed up), and then rising from the dead three days later and ascending back to heaven (it also has this whole thing being her plan from the start). Scholars therefore cannot claim such narratives did not predate Christianity. They most certainly did. Whether they had any influence on Christianity is a separate question. But it should certainly be relevant that this narrative was part of a major cult in the Middle East still practiced in Christian times and known to the Jews of Judea (as I show in NIF, a fact Casey does not mention).