THE PAGANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY

[Jayson]

Yes.
I don’t contest that, and that is factored into everything that I’ve been discussing.

The only two things I’ve stated in contest to your point about democracy were:

1. I don’t think there’s really a case for Jesus going to an education center, nor really a requirement for that to be the case for him to be educated; nor does this make him a hick…by no means at all.
2. There’s no real direct line to “democracy” in the Hellenistic sense in Jesus, but, there is some relative behavioral similarities in Galilean custom to a democratic republic, and of which Jesus would have grown up in.

I never contested that he was saturated in Hellenistic cultures, but instead have regularly highlighted that such would have been the case.

[felix_dakat]

Paganism is more widely applicable. Aborigines and the Chinese are pagan but not Hellene. But, in the context of the Christianity of Roman Empire, which is what we’re talking about, Hellene and Pagan are virtually synonymous:

Hellene comes to mean “pagan”

See also: Hellenistic religion
The name Hellene was given the meaning “pagan” by the early Christian church, and retained that meaning until the end of the millennium. It is believed that contact with Christian Jews led some Christians to use Hellene as a means of religious differentiation. Jews, like Greeks, distinguished themselves from foreigners, but unlike Greeks, did so according to religious rather than cultural standards.

Roman domination of the Greek world enhanced the prestige of the religious institutions that remained intact. Early Christians differentiated people according to religion, so the sense of the word Hellene as a cultural attribute became marginalized and then supplanted by its religious element. Eventually, Christians came to refer to all pagans as Hellenes.

St. Paul in his Epistles uses Hellene almost always juxtaposed to Hebrew, and in disregard of all other ethnicities (Romans, Syrians, Egyptians, etc.) living in the area at the time. The aim was probably to represent the aggregate of the polytheistic and the monotheistic religious communities, who respectively believed in many gods or one god.[51] Hellene is used in a religious sense for the first time in the New Testament. In the Gospel of Mark 7:26, a woman arrives before Jesus kneeling before Him: “The woman was a Hellene, a Syrophœnician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter.”[52] Since the nationality or ethnicity of the woman is stated to be Syrophœnician, “Greek” (translated as such into the English of the King James Version, but as haiþno “heathen” in Ulfilas’s Gothic; Wycliffe and Coverdale likewise have heathen) must therefore signify her polytheistic religion. A broadly similar terminology is found in John 12:20-23: “And there were certain Hellenes among them that came up to worship at the feast … Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified”. This could have one of two interpretations: either that Jesus meant that the time had come for his religion to spread to the pagans (in which case the term “Hellenes” is religious), or that it would spread by using the Greek language (in which case the term “Hellenes” is meant to be linguistic). The development towards a purely religious meaning was slow, and complete by approximately the 2nd or 3rd century AD: Athenian statesman Aristeides, in his written Apology to the Emperor Hadrian, picked out the Hellenes as one of the representative pagan peoples of the world along with the Egyptians and the Chaldæans.[53] Later, Clement of Alexandria reports an unknown Christian writer who named all of the above Hellenes and spoke of two old nations and one new: the Christian nation.[54]

Several books written at this time demonstrate quite clearly the semantic shift. Perhaps the first was Tatian’s Address to the Greeks, completed in AD 170, where Tatian criticizes pagan beliefs in order to defend Christian ones.[citation needed] Most important of the later works was Athanasius’ Against Hellenes, originally titled Against the Gentiles (Greek ethnikoi) according to older manuscripts. It was changed by a later writer at a time when Hellene had lost its ancient meaning entirely.[citation needed] From then on, Hellene no longer meant an ethnic Greek or an adherent to Greek culture, but pagans in general, regardless of race. Emperor Julian’s attempt to restore paganism failed, and according to Pope Gregory I, “matters moved in favor of Christianity and the position of the Hellenes was severely aggravated”.[55] Half a century later Christians protested against the Eparch of Alexandria, whom they accused of being a Hellene.[56] Theodosius I initiated the first legal steps against paganism, but it was Justinian’s legal reforms that triggered pagan persecutions on a massive scale. The Corpus Juris Civilis contained two statutes which decreed the total destruction of Hellenism, even in civic life, and were zealously enforced even against men in high position. The official suppression of paganism made non-Christians a public threat, which further derogated the meaning of Hellene. Paradoxically, Tribonian, Justinian’s own legal commissioner, according to the Suda dictionary, was a Hellene (pagan).[57]

The name Hellene meaning “pagan” has persisted into modern times. Many groups advocating a revival or reconstruction of the worship of the Olympian Gods call themselves Hellenic Polytheists or Hellenists, and the religion Hellenismos. Such groups outside of Greece are careful not to imply that, by calling themselves Hellenes, they consider themselves Greek nationals.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

@felix dakat

@Thomas Bowers

Nowhere in my knowledge is Greek democracy regarded as a pagan concept. Just because most Greeks were pagan (Socrates being a notable exception) does not imply all their concepts were pagan or because Jesus worked with a Hellenistic idea that he paganized his belief system. The study of Marx, for example, does not make one a Marxist. It is really quite simple.

Democracy came from a pagan society. How is it not pagan? How was Socrates not a pagan? Hellenism was the spread of the Greek Pagan culture thoughout Alexander’s empire. How is that not paganism? How could Jesus be influenced by Helleism and not be influenced by paganism? You were asserting that Jesus was studying Democracy right? You were contending that he was following a notable greek philosopher in his practice of it. If he wasn’t preaching and practicing democracy, how do you know he studied it? It is not recorded in any of the Gospels that he studied Democracy. I don’t recall that any of the Gospels ever quote Jesus using the word democracy. If it’s as simple as you say, it won’t be hard for you to answer my questions.

Well maybe Jesus was Teflon, and nothing stuck to him. Is that a reasonable supposition?

[felix_dakat]

@V-OutOfTheWilderness

@felix dakat

@Thomas Bowers

Nowhere in my knowledge is Greek democracy regarded as a pagan concept. Just because most Greeks were pagan (Socrates being a notable exception) does not imply all their concepts were pagan or because Jesus worked with a Hellenistic idea that he paganized his belief system. The study of Marx, for example, does not make one a Marxist. It is really quite simple.

Democracy came from a pagan society. How is it not pagan? How was Socrates not a pagan? Hellenism was the spread of the Greek Pagan culture thoughout Alexander’s empire. How is that not paganism? How could Jesus be influenced by Helleism and not be influenced by paganism? You were asserting that Jesus was studying Democracy right? You were contending that he was following a notable greek philosopher in his practice of it. If he wasn’t preaching and practicing democracy, how do you know he studied it? It is not recorded in any of the Gospels that he studied Democracy. I don’t recall that any of the Gospels ever quote Jesus using the word democracy. If it’s as simple as you say, it won’t be hard for you to answer my questions.

Well maybe Jesus was Teflon, and nothing stuck to him. Is that a reasonable supposition?

Sure, if he was an unfathomable mystery as per the christology of Paul.

[Jayson]

@felix dakat

Paganism is more widely applicable. Aborigines and the Chinese are pagan but not Hellene. But, in the context of the Christianity of Roman Empire, which is what we’re talking about, Hellene and Pagan are virtually synonymous:

I have literally never seen anyone use the label “Pagan” when they want to say the “Hellenistic period”.
It’s not in any textbook as the “Paganistic period” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenization).

So, while it may be possible to interchange the two in some fashion, I would strongly advise anyone against it as it radically clouds the intention of one’s meaning when talking to a general audience or any standard anthropological audience around since the 19th century.

[Thomas_Bowers]

Felix and V =

Socrates was born an Athenian, where most citizens believed in pagan gods. He was sentenced to death for not believing in the pagan gods of the Athenian state, so he certainly was not a pagan simply because he was an Athenian. And his ideas were certainly not pagan, including his “Republic” governed by a philosopher/king, the smartest of men. The “Republic” was attributed to him by Plato. Likewise, the Greek idea of democracy was not a pagan idea because some Greek conceived of it. Paganism refers to a belief in one or more of a pantheon of anthropomorphic gods, like Zeus, Hera, Apollo, a cave bear or whatever, who are called upon to intervene in one’s life for special reasons. So, play what semantic games you like, the ideas of democracy, tyranny or oligarchy are not pagan ideas.

[Jayson]

I’m with Thomas on this one.

Extrapolating Pagan in this fashion just so that we can say that Jesus was Pagan influenced is a stretch in any historical or anthropological circle.
I’ve never seen this kind of sliding of terms done regarding the Hellenistic culture, and the immediate assumption of Pagan religion adherence by contact with Hellenistic cultures is equally a bit off.

That said, I think we’ve rather drifted into a tangent of semantics and should be able to clearly understand that there’s no imperative that indicates that Jesus was Pagan in religion by anything that we have discussed or showed.

[Thomas_Bowers]

@Jayson

I’m with Thomas on this one.

Extrapolating Pagan in this fashion just so that we can say that Jesus was Pagan influenced is a stretch in any historical or anthropological circle.
I’ve never seen this kind of sliding of terms done regarding the Hellenistic culture, and the immediate assumption of Pagan religion adherence by contact with Hellenistic cultures is equally a bit off.

That said, I think we’ve rather drifted into a tangent of semantics and should be able to clearly understand that there’s no imperative that indicates that Jesus was Pagan in religion by anything that we have discussed or showed.

Agreed.

[Jayson]

I do, however, think that I prefer to give credit to the Galileans for their unique social structure among the Hebrew peoples rather than supply Jesus with democratic concepts from Hellenization.

Though, one could argue that Galilee somewhat siphoned this idea from being Hellenized, but I’m more prone to lean toward the idea that they were following a rather old Hebrew tradition of herdsman society whereby the eldest elder’s council was the primary means of governance.
I think Galilee was simply the place where it was given a chance to evolve into larger more settled variations because of the circumstances regarding their plight as the “stuck in the middle” people.

Early Hebrew tribes did govern this way, we know that.
It just wasn’t continued once they evolved into the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah.
We only really see this concept come back once the Kingdom of Israel fell completely apart before Judah did, and the Galileans were left to self-govern without external recognition of any of their own governance.

It doesn’t seem too much of a stretch to me for these peoples to fall back on a known way of governance that already existed within their culture, and to adapt it to suit their needs in a different time once again.

Could Jesus have gotten the concepts from the surrounding Hellenistic cultures? I can’t rule that out entirely.
Yet, I see a more strong possibility that what we call a democratic republic was something that Jesus inherently assumed without much thought behind because Galilee itself was mostly managed this way for a few hundred years prior to Jesus showing up.

[Thomas_Bowers]

Jayson -

As I recall my initial presentation of my conclusion that Jesus synthesized the concepts of his religion with concepts of radical democracy, I did not precisely identify the source of the concept of radical democracy and some concluded I meant some Greek notion of democracy (which then led the discussion on a wild tangent about whether such would have paganized Christianity). Here is what I wrote:

“Early Christianity had enormous power because it was the synthesis of religion and radical democracy, in which every individual had moral, social and political worth regardless of class or status, all persons were entitled to make judgments moral, social and political, all were sons or daughters of the same powerful God and could relate personally to and have equal access to that being, and the people generally were the power in the world. This force was revolutionary and subversive to the Roman Imperial order and its elitist successors. The particulars of the teachings of Jesus assume revolutionary significance: for peace, for love, for charity,and for sharing and against wealth, against inequality, against cruelty and against war. This is the architecture of the message of Jesus for all mankind.”

It seems a stretch to me to believe that Jesus, with his enormous intellectual capacity, would not have been aware of Greek philosophical notions such as democracy but, supposing he was not aware, my point is not lost. Your arguments and research point out an alternative venue by positing traditional people-based organizations for governance in Galilee and earlier before kingships were formed for governance of the Hebraic people. If what you describe is the actual source of part of the architecture I outline, I am happy. It is a radical form of democratic governance at the most basic levels that you have elucidated and may well have formed an important part of the perspective of Jesus in dealing with and solving human problems.

[Jayson]

Sounds great to me.
I will admit that I do have a bias in anthropology whereby I will attempt to make sense of everything in an event by the merits of the primary supplying culture first before I attempt to out-source the production of the event to a secondary culture; I tend to think people radically underestimate the power of a human being and a human being’s capacity for insight, intellect and creativity and too often short-cut astounding work with just attributing it to direct borrowing or outright out-sourcing (the extreme worst of this, in my opinion, is the “Ancient Aliens”…“theory”).

I was, indeed, at first in opposition to your concept of “democracy”, but as we kept discussing, what you had meant by that became more clear, and that removed my hesitation to the concept.

Overall, I have to thank you for this thread, Thomas.
It’s been a while since I’ve been engaged in a good anthropological chasing of Jesus discussion, and this one was one of the better conducted conversations on the matter that I have seen around here.

That’s a compliment to everyone that took part, btw; this topic rarely fares so cleanly to double-digit pages while remaining both on-tangent for the most part, and within respectable bounds of respectable discourse between the various arguments involved.

Thanks!

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

@Thomas Bowers

Felix and V =

Socrates was born an Athenian, where most citizens believed in pagan gods. He was sentenced to death for not believing in the pagan gods of the Athenian state, so he certainly was not a pagan

I’m not sure about this. To say Socrates wasn’t pagan is like saying I’m not Christian because I speak out against Christianity. Socrates was as soused with paganism as I with Christianity. And he was sentenced to death by trumped up charges.

[felix_dakat]

@Jayson

@felix dakat

Paganism is more widely applicable. Aborigines and the Chinese are pagan but not Hellene. But, in the context of the Christianity of Roman Empire, which is what we’re talking about, Hellene and Pagan are virtually synonymous:

I have literally never seen anyone use the label “Pagan” when they want to say the “Hellenistic period”.
It’s not in any textbook as the “Paganistic period” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenization).

So, while it may be possible to interchange the two in some fashion, I would strongly advise anyone against it as it radically clouds the intention of one’s meaning when talking to a general audience or any standard anthropological audience around since the 19th century.

Pagan was a pejorative term used by Christian for non-Christians. So, an anthropological text book wouldn’t use it in place of Hellene, no.

[felix_dakat]

@Thomas Bowers

Felix and V =

Socrates was born an Athenian, where most citizens believed in pagan gods. He was sentenced to death for not believing in the pagan gods of the Athenian state, so he certainly was not a pagan simply because he was an Athenian. And his ideas were certainly not pagan, including his “Republic” governed by a philosopher/king, the smartest of men. The “Republic” was attributed to him by Plato. Likewise, the Greek idea of democracy was not a pagan idea because some Greek conceived of it. Paganism refers to a belief in one or more of a pantheon of anthropomorphic gods, like Zeus, Hera, Apollo, a cave bear or whatever, who are called upon to intervene in one’s life for special reasons. So, play what semantic games you like, the ideas of democracy, tyranny or oligarchy are not pagan ideas.

And yet to the Christians, Socrates was a pagan as were all Greek philosphers. During the first four centuries of interest to your OP thesis, Christianity was in competition with and influenced significantly by Neoplatonism and Stoicism. Shall we not consider those as an important part of the paganization of Christianity?

Meanwhile the Christian Church from these [Greek philsophical] speculations has kept itself severely apart—as of course representing a unique and divine revelation little concerned or interested in such heathenisms; and moreover… has managed to persuade the general public of its own divine uniqueness to such a degree that few people, even nowadays, realize that it has sprung from just the same root as Paganism, and that it shares by far the most part of its doctrines and rites with the latter.
Edward Carpenter Pagan and Christian creeds: their origin and meaning.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

@felix dakat

@Thomas Bowers

Felix and V =

Socrates was born an Athenian, where most citizens believed in pagan gods. He was sentenced to death for not believing in the pagan gods of the Athenian state, so he certainly was not a pagan simply because he was an Athenian. And his ideas were certainly not pagan, including his “Republic” governed by a philosopher/king, the smartest of men. The “Republic” was attributed to him by Plato. Likewise, the Greek idea of democracy was not a pagan idea because some Greek conceived of it. Paganism refers to a belief in one or more of a pantheon of anthropomorphic gods, like Zeus, Hera, Apollo, a cave bear or whatever, who are called upon to intervene in one’s life for special reasons. So, play what semantic games you like, the ideas of democracy, tyranny or oligarchy are not pagan ideas.

And yet to the Christians, Socrates was a pagan as were all Greek philosphers. During the first four centuries of interest to your OP thesis, Christianity was in competition with and influenced significantly by Neoplatonism and Stoicism. Shall we not consider those as an important part of the paganization of Christianity?

Meanwhile the Christian Church from these [Greek philsophical] speculations has kept itself severely apart—as of course representing a unique and divine revelation little concerned or interested in such heathenisms; and moreover… has managed to persuade the general public of its own divine uniqueness to such a degree that few people, even nowadays, realize that it has sprung from just the same root as Paganism, and that it shares by far the most part of its doctrines and rites with the latter.
Edward Carpenter Pagan and Christian creeds: their origin and meaning.

Well, like as has been claimed on this thread, if Jesus grew up around Roman culture he couldn’t help but absorb pagan culture. Paul too.

Realistically, how could Christianity help but be pagan influenced from its beginning? The soil it grew up in was pagan. So, making any other claim, Is like saying you don’t get wet while swimming in the ocean?

Unless, as is believed, Christianity came up by revelation, or by the direct hand of a non pagan God.

As outlandish as it sounds, that God wouldn’t be pagan free either. As it’s recorded that He believes in other gods.

He could be arguing with Zeus as we speak. Like Socrates. Like on ILP.

[felix_dakat]

Overall, I have to thank you for this thread, Thomas.
It’s been a while since I’ve been engaged in a good anthropological chasing of Jesus discussion, and this one was one of the better conducted conversations on the matter that I have seen around here.

That’s a compliment to everyone that took part, btw; this topic rarely fares so cleanly to double-digit pages while remaining both on-tangent for the most part, and within respectable bounds of respectable discourse between the various arguments involved.

Thanks!

I agree with Jayson, Thomas. I’m merely asking questions about your thesis that flow logically from my data base.

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

@felix dakat

Overall, I have to thank you for this thread, Thomas.
It’s been a while since I’ve been engaged in a good anthropological chasing of Jesus discussion, and this one was one of the better conducted conversations on the matter that I have seen around here.

That’s a compliment to everyone that took part, btw; this topic rarely fares so cleanly to double-digit pages while remaining both on-tangent for the most part, and within respectable bounds of respectable discourse between the various arguments involved.

Thanks!

I agree with Jayson, Thomas.

Ditto. Thanks everyone. But surely this doesn’t mean this thread is done. Does it? Have we really gotten down to the bottom of THE PAGANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY?

[felix_dakat]

V—I’m not done.

“Church Father” Tertullian included the Greek philosophers among the pagans whose ideas would corrupt Christianity:

Ancient History Sourcebook:
Tertullian:
On Pagan Learning, c. 220 CE

For philosophy it is which is the material of the world’s wisdom, the rash interpreter of the nature and the dispensation of God. Indeed heresies are themselves instigated by philosophy. From this source came the Aeons, and I known not what infinite forms, and the Trinity of Man in the system of Valentinus, who was of Plato’s school. From the same source came Marcion’s better god, with all his tranquillity; he came of the Stoics. Then, again, the opinion that the soul dies is held by the Epicureans; while the denial of the restoration of the body is taken from the aggregate school of all the philosophers; also, when matter is made equal to God, then you have the teaching of Zeno; and when any doctrine is alleged touching a god of fire, then Heraclitus comes in. The same matter is discussed over and over again by the heretics and the philosophers; the same arguments are involved. Whence comes evil? Why is it permitted? What is the origin of Man? And in what way does he come? Besides the question which Valentinus has very lately proposed–Whence comes God? Which he settles with the answer: From enthymesis and ectroma. Unhappy Aristotle! who invented for these men dialectics, the art of building up and pulling down; an art so evasive in its propositions, so far-fetched in its conjectures, so harsh, in its arguments, so productive of contentions, embarrassing even to itself, retracting everything, and really treating of nothing! Whence spring those “fables and endless genealogies,” and “unprofitable questions,” and “words which spread like a cancer?” From all these, when the apostle would restrain us, he expressly names philosophy as that which he would have us be on our guard against. Writing to The Colossians, he says, “See that no one beguile you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, and contrary to the wisdom of the Holy Ghost.” He had been at Athens, and had in his interviews (with its philosophers) become acquainted with that human wisdom which pretends to know the truth, while it only corrupts it, and is itself divided into its own manifold heresies, by the variety of its mutually repugnant sects.

What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church? What between heretics and Christians? Our instruction comes from “the porch of Solomon,” who had himself taught that “the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart.” Away with all attempts to produce a mottled Christianity of Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic composition! We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquisition after enjoying the gospel! With our faith, we desire no further belief. For this is our primary faith, that there is nothing which we ought to believe besides!

Source:

From: Tertullian, On the Proscription of Heretics, trans. T. Herbert Bindley, (London: SPCK, 1914).

[V-OutOfTheWilderness]

@felix dakat

V—I’m not done.

Great … let’s proceed …

“Church Father” Tertullian included the Greek philosophers among the pagans whose ideas would corrupt Christianity:

Ancient History Sourcebook:
Tertullian:
On Pagan Learning, c. 220 CE

Oh but bro Felix we can go back earlier than that, to Justin Martyr (c. 100-165) & to his “Apologies,” one to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, and another to “the sacred Senate” of Rome.

Here we find what is said to be used in even earlier times in Christianity, and that is, the only explanation they could come up with, as to why Christianity and paganism were so similar. It was called : Diabolical Mimicry ; that is, Satan pre-mimicked the true religion, Christianity, in the earlier myths. I suppose here we find that paganism was considered to be of the devil, mocking Christianity by, creating a counterfeit Christianity (in the Greek myths) hundreds of years earlier. So Christianity only looks pagan.

“The Demons Imitate Christian Doctrine.” - Justin Martyr - First Apology

“Be well assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the knowledge of and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is called the Devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; just as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false prophets in Elijah’s days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son of Jupiter, was begotten by [Jupiter’s) intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? … And when he [the devil] brings forward AEsculapius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? … And when I hear that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited this also.” (Dial. with Trypho, ch. lxix; ANF. i, 233.)

“The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic words [in the Old Testament], said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and …having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven.”
– Justin Martyr - “First Apology”

Chapter LXVI - Of the Eucharist.
“For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.”
– Justin Martyr, First Apology

Justin Martyr : http://www.danacarvey.net/media/satan2.wav

[felix_dakat]

@V-OutOfTheWilderness

@felix dakat

V—I’m not done.

Great … let’s proceed …

“Church Father” Tertullian included the Greek philosophers among the pagans whose ideas would corrupt Christianity:

Ancient History Sourcebook:
Tertullian:
On Pagan Learning, c. 220 CE

Oh but bro Felix we can go back earlier than that, to Justin Martyr (c. 100-165) & to his “Apologies,” one to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, and another to “the sacred Senate” of Rome.

Here we find what is said to be used in even earlier times in Christianity, and that is, the only explanation they could come up with, as to why Christianity and paganism were so similar. It was called : Diabolical Mimicry ; that is, Satan pre-mimicked the true religion, Christianity, in the earlier myths. I suppose here we find that paganism was considered to be of the devil, mocking Christianity by, creating a counterfeit Christianity (in the Greek myths) hundreds of years earlier. So Christianity only looks pagan.

“The Demons Imitate Christian Doctrine.” - Justin Martyr - First Apology

“Be well assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the knowledge of and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is called the Devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; just as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false prophets in Elijah’s days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son of Jupiter, was begotten by [Jupiter’s) intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? … And when he [the devil] brings forward AEsculapius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? … And when I hear that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited this also.” (Dial. with Trypho, ch. lxix; ANF. i, 233.)

“The devils, accordingly, when they heard these prophetic words [in the Old Testament], said that Bacchus was the son of Jupiter, and …having been torn in pieces, he ascended into heaven.”
– Justin Martyr - “First Apology”

Chapter LXVI - Of the Eucharist.
“For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.”
– Justin Martyr, First Apology

Justin Martyr : http://www.danacarvey.net/media/satan2.wav

By noting the remarkable similarity between Christian and pagan myths on the way to denying a common source, Justin inadvertantly makes a strong argument for their common origin.