[MR] new vs. old

[Towey, Brian]

> First, I wasn't trying to be antagonistic.  Sorry if it came off that way.


No offense taken, I assure you!  I only replied privately because we were
drifting off topic.

> What seems to be more important, and is of the utmost importance in 
> Christian scholarship, is the sacrificial blood of the Lamb being shed for

> the redemption of sins.

No argument there!  That is not a pagan holdover.  It's a straight-line
descendent of Mosaic law.

> As a matter of fact, Christian apologists may have taken up the "washing" 
> symbolism specifically to appeal to practicioners of the Mythra religion
who 
> would have been familiar with the idea.  

That's all I was trying to say.  Thank you for spelling it out clearly. 

You know, in this thread we have not made much distinction between several
variants of Barre's original question. 

a) What elements of Christian theology may have been influenced by pagan
philosophy?
b) By what cultural translations was an essentially Jewish messianic cult
made meaningful to foreigners?  Ingvild's post about the Heliand was
fascinating, and I will definitely have to get a copy!
c) What cultural practices in majority-Christian areas pre-date
Christianity?  How did Christianity change them, if at all?  And, was that
change deliberate?
d) Did medieval Christians build their shrines and churches on the ruins of
their foes' temples as a kind of dominance display?
e) How did medieval Christians convert or adapt pagan sites when an area
converted?
f) When Christian teachers look for metaphors by which they can explain
concepts like "rebirth," how can they avoid using symbols that other
religions had used before?  And, if they can't, how can they avoid
confusion?

Any one of those would make a fascinating discussion.  But, (a) is the one
that has to be handled most delicately, for fear of treading on the
theological toes of the faithful.  If I bruised yours, Eogan, I apologize.

-Charles Fleming