Evangelical 1 criticising CC: “CC is bad because it pictures Jesus with long hair, a style of representation used for false gods such as Zeus & Serapis”
Evangelical 2 criticising CC: “CC is bad because it pictures Jesus with long hair, a style of representation adopted from pictures of Cesare Borgia”.
So which is it ? If people are going to make comments that put a body of people in a bad light, it would be very nice if they would first of all get their story straight.
It is in any case a silly argument, and can be used against ideas dear to Evangelicals. For instance, a Sumerian myth tells us that:
The goddess Inanna-Ishtar descended to the Underworld - so did Jesus.
While there, she was impaled - rather like Jesus
She was dead for three days - so was Jesus
She was raised from the dead - so was Jesus.
Here is the entire myth -
Inana's descent to the nether world: translation
See especially lines 164-75.
Inana, it could be argued (if one were minded to argue in that way, which most of us are not), is the model for the Christian god Jesus.
Since Abram came from Ur and Haran (both of them Babylonian cities), he evidently continued to worship the
Babylonian gods, many of whom were taken over from the Sumerians. Ishtar was one of them. His descendants had many dealings with the Assyrians & Babylonians, and the Jews were exiles in Babylonia.
The Jewish calendar even has a month with the same name as the god Tammuz. Jesus never objected to that. Yet Tammuz was the husband of Inanna-Ishtar. So the Jesus-story is clearly a Jewish-Christian adaptation of a Sumerian myth. Like Jesus, Tammuz is a divine shepherd.
If Jesus was the real deal, why did He never once object to this very obvious idolatry ? Clearly because Jesus is either an invented person, invented to hide the Babylonian origins of Christianity - or, he was propagating the Babylonian religion of Abraham.
Evangelicals call Jesus “Saviour”. This is further proof that Biblical Christianity is nothing but warmed-over paganism: for the god Zeus is also called “Saviour”. Marduk the patron god of Babylon is called “merciful”, and the god Daiianu, “Judge”, is clearly the source of the idea that Jesus is Judge. If Jesus is called “King”, so was the god Hadad, the LUGAL or King of the city of Aleppo.
The attempt by some Evangelicals to use alleged or genuine similarities between Catholicism & non-Christian cultures, never notices the differences, nor why they are significant.
Using this type of reasoning, one can demonstrate that John Knox and John Calvin are the same individual:
John Calvin was called John
So was John Knox
John Calvin sponsored a Presbyterian type of Protestantism
So did John Knox
John Calvin strongly favoured a well-educated laity
So did John Knox
John Calvin was a former RC
So was John Knox
John Calvin was a prominent Protestant Reformer
So was John Knox.
John Calvin is often portrayed wearing an academic cap
So is John Knox
John Calvin took part in several religious controversies
So did John Knox
John Calvin was a man
So was John Knox
John Calvin had a long beard
So did John Knox
John Calvin died after 1560
So did John Knox
John Calvin did not reach his 60th birthday
Neither did John Knox
John Calvin wrote a good deal
So did John Knox
John Calvin has been commemorated by statues of him
So has John Knox
John Calvin was married
So was John Knox
John Calvin was predeceased by his wife
So was John Knox
John Calvin has a reputation for being gloomy
So has John Knox
John Calvin has had a lasting effect in politics
So has John Knox
John Calvin opposed Roman Catholicism with great vigour
So did John Knox
John Calvin died in his bed
So did John Knox
John Calvin was very outspoken
So was John Knox
John Calvin spent some of his life in France
So did John Knox
John Calvin corresponded with royalty
So did John Knox
John Calvin showed great zeal for what he considered true Christianity
So did John Knox
John Calvin was influential outside his homeland
So was John Knox
John Calvin wrote in the vernacular
So did John Knox
I make that 25 similarities between these two men. A couple of similarities are usually enough to prove to some Evangelicals that something RC is derived from something pagan. So by the reasoning adopted by some (most certainly not all) Evangelicals, John Knox and John Calvin must be the same person.
The reasoning such Christians use in order to show that Catholicism (or indeed some other form of Christianity) is pagan or pagan-related, needs to be tested for validity. And a simple way of testing it is, to apply it to something known for sure not to be pagan, to see whether, using that kind of reasoning, it can be demonstrated to be pagan. If it can be, then something is wrong with the reasoning adopted. In other words, this reasoning needs to be tested on something that can serve as a control on it.
For instance: if, as some Christians claim, episcopal mitres are pagan, then by association so must academic caps be pagan; because they are both developments of the same article of headgear. But both Calvin and Knox wore academic caps; therefore, by this particular variety of reasoning found among some evangelicals, Calvin and Knox are both tainted with paganism. The absurdity of the conclusion is obvious. It is absurd because the premise, that Episcopal mitres are pagan in origin, is false, & can be known to be so. It is of course conceivable that either Calvin or Knox or both was tainted with paganism in some way: but if that is to be demonstrated, it cannot be demonstrated by arguments based on what is false. And it can never be assumed from the outset that either of them was.