{"id":46,"date":"2023-03-03T17:09:39","date_gmt":"2023-03-03T17:09:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/chapter\/pagans-heathens-infidels-and-heretics\/"},"modified":"2023-04-05T03:23:28","modified_gmt":"2023-04-05T03:23:28","slug":"pagans-heathens-infidels-and-heretics","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/chapter\/pagans-heathens-infidels-and-heretics\/","title":{"raw":"5. Pagans, Heathens, Infidels, And Heretics","rendered":"5. Pagans, Heathens, Infidels, And Heretics"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n

The terms \u201cpagan\u201d, \u201cheathen\u201d, and \u201cinfidel\u201d get bandied about a lot in modern English vernacular. Quite often, each gets used to hint at (or as a direct synonym for) \u201cgodless\u201d (which none of them actually means).<\/p>\r\n

For the proper study of mythology, however, we need to have a better, fuller understanding of the history and historicity of these terms.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Pagan<\/h2>\r\n

\"Pagan\" comes (ultimately) from the Latin word p\u0101g\u0101num<\/em>, meaning \u201cpeasant\u201d or \u201crural\u201d, and which was derived from p\u0101gus<\/em>, meaning \u201cvillage\u201d or \u201crural district\u201d (cf. Greek \u03c0<\/em>\u03cc\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2<\/em> (polis), \u201ccity\u201d). The Latin word thus had a primary meaning of \"one who dwells in the country\", in contrast to urb\u0101num<\/em>, \u201cof or belonging to a city\u201d.<\/p>\r\n

With the rise of large cities and social stratification, \u201ctown-dwellers\u201d often had little-or-no contact with country-dwellers or the particulars of their lives and livelihood. (There are inner-city residents in our own society who may go their entire lives without encountering farm animals in any situation other than a petting zoo.)<\/p>\r\n

So, there were people living and working in the city (\u201ccivilians\u201d or \u201ccitizens\u201d, from the Latin civis<\/em>), and there were people living and working in the countryside. The country-dwellers were of two main types: agriculturalists (farmers) and pastoralists (herders). They tended to remain \u201ccloser to nature\u201d than the city-dwellers. As often remains the case today, these country-dwellers were viewed by the city-dwellers as \u201cquaint\u201d, \u201cbackward\u201d, \u201cna\u00efve\u201d \u2014 as \u201cbumpkins\u201d or \u201chicks\u201d.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"159\"]\"Drawing Fig. 5.1<\/strong> Drawing of the Greek God Pan (a Satyr). Public Domain. Wikipedia<\/a>. CC0 1.0<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n

These p\u0101g\u0101na<\/em>, because they still tended to crops and animals, also still tended to worship (or at least show reverence to\/for) the older nature-based deities (e. g. Faunus<\/em> [Pan<\/em> in Greece, shown at right figure 5.1<\/strong>], Ceres<\/em> (Greek: Demeter<\/em>), etc.). This reverence was sometimes even in preference to or instead of<\/em> the official state gods (who, in Rome, were, of course, largely borrowed from the Greeks).<\/p>\r\n

So, \u201cpagan\u201d originally meant simply \u201ca country-dwelling worshiper of the older nature spirits and deities\u201d. As such, it didn\u2019t carry much more of a negative connotation than being \u201cfrom the country\u201d does among enlightened urbanites today.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Heretics and Heresy<\/h2>\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_80\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"280\"]\"Map Fig. 5.2<\/strong> Map of ancient Asia Minor, with location of Nicaea indicated. Wikipedia.com<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nIn 325 CE, the Roman Emperor Constantine I (\u201cthe Great\u201d), called an ecumenical council (it was the seventh such council to be called; the earliest had been in 50 CE, in Jerusalem). The council was held in the small Anatolian town of Nicaea see figure 5.2<\/strong>, and charged with producing a document which defined Christianity once-and-for-all: its beliefs, practices, doctrines. It was the first attempt in the history of the movement to achieve a consensus through debate and compromise. Which it did, mostly.\r\n

The result was the Nicene Creed of 327 CE, which, among other things, established the divine nature of Jesus as The Christ<\/em> (see below) and set the official date of Easter. Constantine threw the political and military might of the Roman (later Byzantine) Empire behind the Nicene Creed, and, as a result, for the first time it became possible to \u201cbe Christian in the wrong way\u201d. In other words, if you continued to hold beliefs or practice doctrines that weren\u2019t approved of in the Nicene Creed, then you were \u201cdoing Christianity wrong\u201d.<\/p>\r\n

Among these \u201cwrong-headed\u201d beliefs and practices were: denying the divinity of Jesus; rejecting the belief in Jesus\u2019 resurrection three days after his crucifixion; and questioning the verity and efficacy of the Holy Ghost as God\u2019s primary conduit of interaction with the physical world. (Later, other attitudes and\/or practices that were seen as threatening to the power of the Church (eastern or western) would be denounced as heretical, as would practicing any religion other than some accepted, recognized version of Christianity).<\/p>\r\n

The word \u201cheretic\u201d comes from the Greek word hairetik\u00f3s<\/em>, which meant \u201cable to choose\u201d. It came to be applied first to those who resisted the Nicene Creed. Because they were seen as \u201cchoosing<\/em> to do Christianity wrongly\u201d, they were heretics<\/em> (see the discussion on the word \u201cinfidel\u201d, below). The Church used Roman military might (later developing armies of its own) to do its best to stamp out these \u201cwillfully chosen, wrong beliefs and practices\u201d and to eradicate the writings upon which they were based.<\/p>\r\n

This, of course, established a precedent that would see some of its worst excesses during the Crusades (between 1095 and 1271) and the Inquisition (starting 1231 CE) \u2014 in fact, more than half of the Crusades ordered by the Roman Church were conducted in Europe against people who also called themselves Christians<\/em>!<\/p>\r\n

Today, the word \u201cheretic\u201d has taken on a more generic sense of \u201canyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle,\u201d and is used in secular as well as religious circumstances. For instance, fan-fiction is sometimes called \u201cheresy\u201d when it contradicts the accepted norms and\/or history of a given fictional universe (its canon<\/em>).<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Julian the Apostate: Looking Back<\/h3>\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"250\"]\"Grey Fig 5.3<\/strong> Grey coin depicting bearded man with diadem, facing right. The text around the edges reads D N FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG. Wikipedia<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n

The Roman Emperor Julian (Flavius Claudius Julianus; Constantine\u2019s grandson), was born in 331, and ruled the Roman Empire as Augustus from the eastern capital of Constantinople for about 2\u2153 years between 361 \u2013 363. Julian was born a Christian and professed the Christian faith (at least publicly) until shortly before becoming Emperor. After his ascension to the throne, he openly embraced Neoplatonic Hellenism and sought to restore widespread pagan worship. Thus, he was called \u201cthe Apostate\u201d: apostasy<\/em> is the condition of having rejected one\u2019s former religion.<\/p>\r\n

He was stridently opposed to the Christianity of his time (he had not had a very positive experience of it). He almost exclusively referred to Christians as \u201cGalileans\u201d, and even wrote a treatise titled Contra Galilaeos <\/em>(Against the Galileans<\/em>). The original has been lost, but from references made to it by other writers, we know it focused on the inconsistencies and disagreements between the various Christian sects as the primary reason for restoring polytheistic religion to prominence in the Roman Empire. (The fact that his family was renowned for familial homicide, yet claimed to embrace the peace-loving ideologies of Christianity also contributed significantly to his rejection of the newer religion in favor of the older spirituality.)<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_81\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"300\"]\"Map Fig 5.4<\/strong> Map of ancient Galilee. Wikipedia<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nJulian\u2019s choice of the name \u201cGalileans\u201d was a reference to Jesus\u2019 purported origins in the Levantine region of Galilee see figure 5.4<\/strong>, where he is written to have spent his childhood in the village of Nazareth (hence the epithet \u201cJesus of Nazareth\u201d). Some sources claim that the family of Jesus\u2019 Earthly father, Joseph, was centered in Nazareth. Jesus\u2019 birthplace is reputed, of course, to have been the town of Bethlehem, which was the seat of the line of King David (reigned c1010-970 BCE); thus claiming that Jesus was born there meant that that he could also be claimed to be descended from the Hebrew King of a thousand years before. This would mean that not only would he have a political claim to the throne, but centuries of prophecy had also declared that the Jewish <\/span>messiah<\/em> (see below) would be born in the \u201ccity of David\u201d \u2014 thus, it could also be claimed that Jesus was that prophesied \u201canointed one\u201d.<\/span>\r\n

Julian\u2019s reference to Christians as \u201cGalileans\u201d was derogatory. This insult is in the same vein as the question posed by Nathanael in the biblical Book of John, chapter 1, verse 46, when he was told of Jesus\u2019 origins: \u201cCan anything good come out of Nazareth?\u201d9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\r\n\r\n

From Bumpkin To Sinner<\/h3>\r\n

Six emperors later (they tended to go through them quickly in those days) the Emperor Theodosius I (the Great) declared in 382 CE that Christianity was the official and only religion of the Roman Empire<\/em>; he banned all other forms of worship, and decreed that any-and-all deities other than the Christian God were fictions, \u201cfalse\u201d gods, and that to worship them was heretical.<\/p>\r\n

As a result, anyone<\/em> \u2014 not just those still living in the countryside \u2014 who continued worshiping other gods (and particularly<\/em> the old Roman gods), was no longer to be tolerated as \u201cquaint\u201d, \u201cbackward\u201d, and \u201cna\u00efve\u201d, but to be vilified as \u201crebellious\u201d, \u201cbarbaric\u201d, and \u201cignorant\u201d.<\/p>\r\n

By definition, to be a pagan was now to be a heretic, as well. A word that had previously simply identified \"a worshiper of the older nature deities\" came to be applied to anyone<\/em> who worshiped any<\/em> deities other than the God recognized by the Roman Church \u2014 and you could easily lose your life over it.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Enter The Heathens<\/h2>\r\n

Interestingly, the word \"heathen\" comes from an old Gothic (western\/southwestern Germanic) word related to the word \u201cheath\u201d. So, \u201cheathen\u201d seems to have had a similar sense as \u201cpagan\u201d, but referring not just to someone who didn\u2019t live in a town or city, but to someone who came from \u201ca place outside\u201d, in other words, an \u201coutlander\u201d. Thus, by extension, a \u201cheathen\u201d is \u201ca non-believer\u201d (because obviously<\/em> anyone who wasn\u2019t part of your culture automatically had to have a different religion, right?) The term probably was used by the pre-Christian Germans and Scandinavians simply to refer to those who worshiped other gods, and as such was retained (and slightly redefined) when Christianity took root in Northern Europe in the 700s CE.<\/p>\r\n

Thus, \u201cpagan\u201d and \u201cheathen\u201d both came to be used (largely interchangeably, at least north of the Alps) to refer to non-Christians, and particularly those who worshiped older, more nature-oriented deities, and who were therefore \u201cwrong\u201d in their worship according to Roman Catholicism. They \u201cneeded to be corrected\u201d, and would make themselves into heretics if they refused to convert.<\/p>\r\n

Nowadays, of course \"heathen\" tends to be used disparagingly and\/or pejoratively (in religious contexts) to mean \"an individual of a people that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible; a person who is neither a Jew, Christian, nor Muslim\", and that leads us to\u2026.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Western Infidels<\/h2>\r\n

The word \u201cinfidel\u201d comes from the Latin infid\u0113lis<\/em>, meaning \u201cunfaithful, treacherous\u201d. While it has been (and still is) used by Christians to refer both to non-Christians and to those who have renounced their previous adherence to the Christian faith, most Westerners are probably more familiar with its use by some sects of Islam in reference to Christians. In this sense, it is an English translation of the Arabic word kafir<\/em>, which means \"rejector\", \"denier\", \"disbeliever\u201d, or \u201cunbeliever\u201d.<\/p>\r\n

In Islamic belief, God (Allah) revealed his plan for humankind in three parts, or stages: the Law of Moses (the Ten Commandments, canonically said to have been revealed in the 13th<\/sup> Century BCE); the teachings of Jesus (1st<\/sup> Century CE); and the revelations to Muhammed (7th<\/sup> Century CE).<\/p>\r\n

In this view, Christians, by clinging to Jesus\u2019 message but ignoring the teachings of Muhammed, are being \u201cunfaithful\u201d to God (Allah). They are ignoring the last revelations of Allah\u2019s will, and thereby rejecting his plan for humanity. Islam actually recognizes and reveres Jesus as a prophet, but takes exception to the (post 5th<\/sup> Century CE) Christian doctrine of dyophysitism<\/em>, which is the belief that Jesus (as the Christ<\/em>, see below) was (at least partly) divine, and therefore, was \u201cthe Word made flesh\u201d, a physical manifestation of God on Earth.<\/p>\r\n

The vehemence of the Islamic official rejection of this idea is evidenced in the inscription around the outside of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem see figure 5.5<\/strong>, which reads, in part: \u201cIt is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"373\"]\"The Fig. 5.5<\/strong> The Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem, Israel CC-BY-SA 4.0 Andrew Shiva.\u00a0Wikimedia<\/a>.[\/caption]\r\n

Jesus (the) Christ<\/h2>\r\n

The earliest followers of Jesus did not call themselves \u201cChristians\u201d; indeed, for the first 70 years or so of the movement, they still considered themselves to be Jews (albeit of a new variety), and conducted their worship in the synagogues alongside their more traditional neighbors. Judaism, after all, had prophesied a Messiah (see below) since ancient times \u2014 and Jesus\u2019 followers declared that he had fulfilled that prophecy. The name \u201cJesus\u201d, is, in fact the Latinization (I\u0113sus<\/em>) of the Greek I\u0113so\u016bs<\/em>, which is itself a translation of the Hebrew Y\u0113sh\u016ba<\/em> (\u201cGod is help\u201d, or \u201cGod Saves\u201d). The historical person\u2019s actual name would probably have been Yeshua Bar Yosef (Aramaic) or Yeshua Ben Yosef (Hebrew), both meaning \u201cYeshua, Son of Yosef (Joseph)\u201d.<\/p>\r\n

Another direct translation of \u201cYeshua\u201d into English is the name \u201cJoshua\u201d. In fact, in the King James Version of the Old Testament, there exists a mistranslation in which the name of the Hebrew leader, Joshua, is rendered as \u201cJesus\u201d: \u201cFor if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.\u201d20<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cThe Christ\u201d<\/h3>\r\n

The word christ<\/em> is from the Latin Chr\u012bstus<\/em>, borrowed from the Greek \u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2<\/em> (chr\u012bstos<\/em>, \u201canointed\u201d), which is a conceptual translation of the Hebrew m\u0101sh\u012ba\u1e25<\/em> (\u201canointed\u201d), and which is directly transliterated into English as \u201cmessiah\u201d. It appears in 2 Maccabees<\/em>, chapter 1, verse 10, in a reference to those who had been anointed<\/em> (chosen) as priests.<\/p>\r\n

The first (written) use of christ<\/em> to refer to Jesus appears in the Book of Matthew<\/em>, chapter 16, verse 16, when Simon (Peter) answers a question from Jesus by saying: \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d It then subsequently appears in the first line of the Book of Mark<\/em> (1:1), which reads: \u201cThe beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Christian<\/h3>\r\n

The first use of the word \u201cChristian\u201d to refer to followers of Jesus appears in the Acts of the Apostles<\/em>, which was probably written between about 90\u2014110 CE, most likely by the same author as the Gospel of Luke<\/em>, where the passage reads, \u201c\u2026 the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch,\u201d which tells us that the term was in common use by at least the end of the first century of the movement.<\/p>\r\n

\u201cChristian\u201d as the name of the followers of Jesus appears only two other times in the New Testament, in Acts<\/em> 26, and finally in 1 Peter <\/em>4. It is worth noting that in the first two instances, the word is used in the sense of others speaking about <\/em>the followers of Jesus and not the followers referring to themselves using the term.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Modern Borrowings: Pagans, Wiccans, and Druids, Oh My!<\/h2>\r\n

(Neo)Pagan<\/h3>\r\n

Various groups today refer to themselves as pagans<\/em> or neo-pagans<\/em>. In both cases, the speaker is often referring both to a set of beliefs and to a set of practices. Interestingly, though, for many who choose these self-descriptions, they seem to use them more as indicators of what they have rejected than as affirmations of what they\u2019ve adopted. \u201cI am a pagan,\u201d seems more to be the rebellious declaration, \u201cI am not<\/em> a Christian!\u201d Fundamentally, these terms are used validly only<\/em> if what is meant by them is the reverence or worship of pre-Christian, nature-based deities \u2014 whether perceived as personified or simply as universal forces.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Wicca<\/h3>\r\n

Wicca is (not to put too fine a point on it) a completely modern invention, having been developed in the 20th<\/sup> Century and publicized in Gerald Gardner\u2019s 1954 book Witchcraft Today.<\/em>22<\/a><\/em><\/sup>\u00a0It seeks to position itself as a legitimate successor to older pagan belief systems, but with aspects that tailor it to the specific spiritual, emotional, and psychological needs arising out of the special challenges of modernity.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

Druidism\/Druidry<\/h3>\r\n

In a similar vein, Druidism (Druidry) is largely a modern belief system, though its origins are older than that of Wicca, dating to the 17th<\/sup> Century in Britain. The Ancient Druids, apparently a shamanic\/priestly class in Gaulish and Celtic culture, left behind no writings of their own to record or explain their beliefs and practices. While ancient sources do<\/em> make mention of the Druids, these accounts are almost universally disparaging, and therefore suspect.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n

\r\n
9<\/a> John 1:46 KJV.<\/div>\r\n
20<\/a> Book of <\/i>Hebrews<\/i>, chapter 4, verse 8, KJV.<\/div>\r\n
22<\/a> Gerald Brosseau Gardner, Witchcraft Today<\/i> (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1954).<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"
\n

The terms \u201cpagan\u201d, \u201cheathen\u201d, and \u201cinfidel\u201d get bandied about a lot in modern English vernacular. Quite often, each gets used to hint at (or as a direct synonym for) \u201cgodless\u201d (which none of them actually means).<\/p>\n

For the proper study of mythology, however, we need to have a better, fuller understanding of the history and historicity of these terms.<\/p>\n

Pagan<\/h2>\n

“Pagan” comes (ultimately) from the Latin word p\u0101g\u0101num<\/em>, meaning \u201cpeasant\u201d or \u201crural\u201d, and which was derived from p\u0101gus<\/em>, meaning \u201cvillage\u201d or \u201crural district\u201d (cf. Greek \u03c0<\/em>\u03cc\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2<\/em> (polis), \u201ccity\u201d). The Latin word thus had a primary meaning of “one who dwells in the country”, in contrast to urb\u0101num<\/em>, \u201cof or belonging to a city\u201d.<\/p>\n

With the rise of large cities and social stratification, \u201ctown-dwellers\u201d often had little-or-no contact with country-dwellers or the particulars of their lives and livelihood. (There are inner-city residents in our own society who may go their entire lives without encountering farm animals in any situation other than a petting zoo.)<\/p>\n

So, there were people living and working in the city (\u201ccivilians\u201d or \u201ccitizens\u201d, from the Latin civis<\/em>), and there were people living and working in the countryside. The country-dwellers were of two main types: agriculturalists (farmers) and pastoralists (herders). They tended to remain \u201ccloser to nature\u201d than the city-dwellers. As often remains the case today, these country-dwellers were viewed by the city-dwellers as \u201cquaint\u201d, \u201cbackward\u201d, \u201cna\u00efve\u201d \u2014 as \u201cbumpkins\u201d or \u201chicks\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"Drawing
Fig. 5.1<\/strong> Drawing of the Greek God Pan (a Satyr). Public Domain. Wikipedia<\/a>. CC0 1.0<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

These p\u0101g\u0101na<\/em>, because they still tended to crops and animals, also still tended to worship (or at least show reverence to\/for) the older nature-based deities (e. g. Faunus<\/em> [Pan<\/em> in Greece, shown at right figure 5.1<\/strong>], Ceres<\/em> (Greek: Demeter<\/em>), etc.). This reverence was sometimes even in preference to or instead of<\/em> the official state gods (who, in Rome, were, of course, largely borrowed from the Greeks).<\/p>\n

So, \u201cpagan\u201d originally meant simply \u201ca country-dwelling worshiper of the older nature spirits and deities\u201d. As such, it didn\u2019t carry much more of a negative connotation than being \u201cfrom the country\u201d does among enlightened urbanites today.<\/p>\n

Heretics and Heresy<\/h2>\n
\"Map
Fig. 5.2<\/strong> Map of ancient Asia Minor, with location of Nicaea indicated. Wikipedia.com<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In 325 CE, the Roman Emperor Constantine I (\u201cthe Great\u201d), called an ecumenical council (it was the seventh such council to be called; the earliest had been in 50 CE, in Jerusalem). The council was held in the small Anatolian town of Nicaea see figure 5.2<\/strong>, and charged with producing a document which defined Christianity once-and-for-all: its beliefs, practices, doctrines. It was the first attempt in the history of the movement to achieve a consensus through debate and compromise. Which it did, mostly.<\/p>\n

The result was the Nicene Creed of 327 CE, which, among other things, established the divine nature of Jesus as The Christ<\/em> (see below) and set the official date of Easter. Constantine threw the political and military might of the Roman (later Byzantine) Empire behind the Nicene Creed, and, as a result, for the first time it became possible to \u201cbe Christian in the wrong way\u201d. In other words, if you continued to hold beliefs or practice doctrines that weren\u2019t approved of in the Nicene Creed, then you were \u201cdoing Christianity wrong\u201d.<\/p>\n

Among these \u201cwrong-headed\u201d beliefs and practices were: denying the divinity of Jesus; rejecting the belief in Jesus\u2019 resurrection three days after his crucifixion; and questioning the verity and efficacy of the Holy Ghost as God\u2019s primary conduit of interaction with the physical world. (Later, other attitudes and\/or practices that were seen as threatening to the power of the Church (eastern or western) would be denounced as heretical, as would practicing any religion other than some accepted, recognized version of Christianity).<\/p>\n

The word \u201cheretic\u201d comes from the Greek word hairetik\u00f3s<\/em>, which meant \u201cable to choose\u201d. It came to be applied first to those who resisted the Nicene Creed. Because they were seen as \u201cchoosing<\/em> to do Christianity wrongly\u201d, they were heretics<\/em> (see the discussion on the word \u201cinfidel\u201d, below). The Church used Roman military might (later developing armies of its own) to do its best to stamp out these \u201cwillfully chosen, wrong beliefs and practices\u201d and to eradicate the writings upon which they were based.<\/p>\n

This, of course, established a precedent that would see some of its worst excesses during the Crusades (between 1095 and 1271) and the Inquisition (starting 1231 CE) \u2014 in fact, more than half of the Crusades ordered by the Roman Church were conducted in Europe against people who also called themselves Christians<\/em>!<\/p>\n

Today, the word \u201cheretic\u201d has taken on a more generic sense of \u201canyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle,\u201d and is used in secular as well as religious circumstances. For instance, fan-fiction is sometimes called \u201cheresy\u201d when it contradicts the accepted norms and\/or history of a given fictional universe (its canon<\/em>).<\/p>\n

Julian the Apostate: Looking Back<\/h3>\n
\"Grey
Fig 5.3<\/strong> Grey coin depicting bearded man with diadem, facing right. The text around the edges reads D N FL CL IVLIANVS P F AVG. Wikipedia<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The Roman Emperor Julian (Flavius Claudius Julianus; Constantine\u2019s grandson), was born in 331, and ruled the Roman Empire as Augustus from the eastern capital of Constantinople for about 2\u2153 years between 361 \u2013 363. Julian was born a Christian and professed the Christian faith (at least publicly) until shortly before becoming Emperor. After his ascension to the throne, he openly embraced Neoplatonic Hellenism and sought to restore widespread pagan worship. Thus, he was called \u201cthe Apostate\u201d: apostasy<\/em> is the condition of having rejected one\u2019s former religion.<\/p>\n

He was stridently opposed to the Christianity of his time (he had not had a very positive experience of it). He almost exclusively referred to Christians as \u201cGalileans\u201d, and even wrote a treatise titled Contra Galilaeos <\/em>(Against the Galileans<\/em>). The original has been lost, but from references made to it by other writers, we know it focused on the inconsistencies and disagreements between the various Christian sects as the primary reason for restoring polytheistic religion to prominence in the Roman Empire. (The fact that his family was renowned for familial homicide, yet claimed to embrace the peace-loving ideologies of Christianity also contributed significantly to his rejection of the newer religion in favor of the older spirituality.)<\/p>\n

\"Map
Fig 5.4<\/strong> Map of ancient Galilee. Wikipedia<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Julian\u2019s choice of the name \u201cGalileans\u201d was a reference to Jesus\u2019 purported origins in the Levantine region of Galilee see figure 5.4<\/strong>, where he is written to have spent his childhood in the village of Nazareth (hence the epithet \u201cJesus of Nazareth\u201d). Some sources claim that the family of Jesus\u2019 Earthly father, Joseph, was centered in Nazareth. Jesus\u2019 birthplace is reputed, of course, to have been the town of Bethlehem, which was the seat of the line of King David (reigned c1010-970 BCE); thus claiming that Jesus was born there meant that that he could also be claimed to be descended from the Hebrew King of a thousand years before. This would mean that not only would he have a political claim to the throne, but centuries of prophecy had also declared that the Jewish <\/span>messiah<\/em> (see below) would be born in the \u201ccity of David\u201d \u2014 thus, it could also be claimed that Jesus was that prophesied \u201canointed one\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

Julian\u2019s reference to Christians as \u201cGalileans\u201d was derogatory. This insult is in the same vein as the question posed by Nathanael in the biblical Book of John, chapter 1, verse 46, when he was told of Jesus\u2019 origins: \u201cCan anything good come out of Nazareth?\u201d9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

From Bumpkin To Sinner<\/h3>\n

Six emperors later (they tended to go through them quickly in those days) the Emperor Theodosius I (the Great) declared in 382 CE that Christianity was the official and only religion of the Roman Empire<\/em>; he banned all other forms of worship, and decreed that any-and-all deities other than the Christian God were fictions, \u201cfalse\u201d gods, and that to worship them was heretical.<\/p>\n

As a result, anyone<\/em> \u2014 not just those still living in the countryside \u2014 who continued worshiping other gods (and particularly<\/em> the old Roman gods), was no longer to be tolerated as \u201cquaint\u201d, \u201cbackward\u201d, and \u201cna\u00efve\u201d, but to be vilified as \u201crebellious\u201d, \u201cbarbaric\u201d, and \u201cignorant\u201d.<\/p>\n

By definition, to be a pagan was now to be a heretic, as well. A word that had previously simply identified “a worshiper of the older nature deities” came to be applied to anyone<\/em> who worshiped any<\/em> deities other than the God recognized by the Roman Church \u2014 and you could easily lose your life over it.<\/p>\n

Enter The Heathens<\/h2>\n

Interestingly, the word “heathen” comes from an old Gothic (western\/southwestern Germanic) word related to the word \u201cheath\u201d. So, \u201cheathen\u201d seems to have had a similar sense as \u201cpagan\u201d, but referring not just to someone who didn\u2019t live in a town or city, but to someone who came from \u201ca place outside\u201d, in other words, an \u201coutlander\u201d. Thus, by extension, a \u201cheathen\u201d is \u201ca non-believer\u201d (because obviously<\/em> anyone who wasn\u2019t part of your culture automatically had to have a different religion, right?) The term probably was used by the pre-Christian Germans and Scandinavians simply to refer to those who worshiped other gods, and as such was retained (and slightly redefined) when Christianity took root in Northern Europe in the 700s CE.<\/p>\n

Thus, \u201cpagan\u201d and \u201cheathen\u201d both came to be used (largely interchangeably, at least north of the Alps) to refer to non-Christians, and particularly those who worshiped older, more nature-oriented deities, and who were therefore \u201cwrong\u201d in their worship according to Roman Catholicism. They \u201cneeded to be corrected\u201d, and would make themselves into heretics if they refused to convert.<\/p>\n

Nowadays, of course “heathen” tends to be used disparagingly and\/or pejoratively (in religious contexts) to mean “an individual of a people that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible; a person who is neither a Jew, Christian, nor Muslim”, and that leads us to\u2026.<\/p>\n

Western Infidels<\/h2>\n

The word \u201cinfidel\u201d comes from the Latin infid\u0113lis<\/em>, meaning \u201cunfaithful, treacherous\u201d. While it has been (and still is) used by Christians to refer both to non-Christians and to those who have renounced their previous adherence to the Christian faith, most Westerners are probably more familiar with its use by some sects of Islam in reference to Christians. In this sense, it is an English translation of the Arabic word kafir<\/em>, which means “rejector”, “denier”, “disbeliever\u201d, or \u201cunbeliever\u201d.<\/p>\n

In Islamic belief, God (Allah) revealed his plan for humankind in three parts, or stages: the Law of Moses (the Ten Commandments, canonically said to have been revealed in the 13th<\/sup> Century BCE); the teachings of Jesus (1st<\/sup> Century CE); and the revelations to Muhammed (7th<\/sup> Century CE).<\/p>\n

In this view, Christians, by clinging to Jesus\u2019 message but ignoring the teachings of Muhammed, are being \u201cunfaithful\u201d to God (Allah). They are ignoring the last revelations of Allah\u2019s will, and thereby rejecting his plan for humanity. Islam actually recognizes and reveres Jesus as a prophet, but takes exception to the (post 5th<\/sup> Century CE) Christian doctrine of dyophysitism<\/em>, which is the belief that Jesus (as the Christ<\/em>, see below) was (at least partly) divine, and therefore, was \u201cthe Word made flesh\u201d, a physical manifestation of God on Earth.<\/p>\n

The vehemence of the Islamic official rejection of this idea is evidenced in the inscription around the outside of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem see figure 5.5<\/strong>, which reads, in part: \u201cIt is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"The
Fig. 5.5<\/strong> The Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem, Israel CC-BY-SA 4.0 Andrew Shiva.\u00a0Wikimedia<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Jesus (the) Christ<\/h2>\n

The earliest followers of Jesus did not call themselves \u201cChristians\u201d; indeed, for the first 70 years or so of the movement, they still considered themselves to be Jews (albeit of a new variety), and conducted their worship in the synagogues alongside their more traditional neighbors. Judaism, after all, had prophesied a Messiah (see below) since ancient times \u2014 and Jesus\u2019 followers declared that he had fulfilled that prophecy. The name \u201cJesus\u201d, is, in fact the Latinization (I\u0113sus<\/em>) of the Greek I\u0113so\u016bs<\/em>, which is itself a translation of the Hebrew Y\u0113sh\u016ba<\/em> (\u201cGod is help\u201d, or \u201cGod Saves\u201d). The historical person\u2019s actual name would probably have been Yeshua Bar Yosef (Aramaic) or Yeshua Ben Yosef (Hebrew), both meaning \u201cYeshua, Son of Yosef (Joseph)\u201d.<\/p>\n

Another direct translation of \u201cYeshua\u201d into English is the name \u201cJoshua\u201d. In fact, in the King James Version of the Old Testament, there exists a mistranslation in which the name of the Hebrew leader, Joshua, is rendered as \u201cJesus\u201d: \u201cFor if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.\u201d20<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

\u201cThe Christ\u201d<\/h3>\n

The word christ<\/em> is from the Latin Chr\u012bstus<\/em>, borrowed from the Greek \u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2<\/em> (chr\u012bstos<\/em>, \u201canointed\u201d), which is a conceptual translation of the Hebrew m\u0101sh\u012ba\u1e25<\/em> (\u201canointed\u201d), and which is directly transliterated into English as \u201cmessiah\u201d. It appears in 2 Maccabees<\/em>, chapter 1, verse 10, in a reference to those who had been anointed<\/em> (chosen) as priests.<\/p>\n

The first (written) use of christ<\/em> to refer to Jesus appears in the Book of Matthew<\/em>, chapter 16, verse 16, when Simon (Peter) answers a question from Jesus by saying: \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d It then subsequently appears in the first line of the Book of Mark<\/em> (1:1), which reads: \u201cThe beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.\u201d<\/p>\n

Christian<\/h3>\n

The first use of the word \u201cChristian\u201d to refer to followers of Jesus appears in the Acts of the Apostles<\/em>, which was probably written between about 90\u2014110 CE, most likely by the same author as the Gospel of Luke<\/em>, where the passage reads, \u201c\u2026 the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch,\u201d which tells us that the term was in common use by at least the end of the first century of the movement.<\/p>\n

\u201cChristian\u201d as the name of the followers of Jesus appears only two other times in the New Testament, in Acts<\/em> 26, and finally in 1 Peter <\/em>4. It is worth noting that in the first two instances, the word is used in the sense of others speaking about <\/em>the followers of Jesus and not the followers referring to themselves using the term.<\/p>\n

Modern Borrowings: Pagans, Wiccans, and Druids, Oh My!<\/h2>\n

(Neo)Pagan<\/h3>\n

Various groups today refer to themselves as pagans<\/em> or neo-pagans<\/em>. In both cases, the speaker is often referring both to a set of beliefs and to a set of practices. Interestingly, though, for many who choose these self-descriptions, they seem to use them more as indicators of what they have rejected than as affirmations of what they\u2019ve adopted. \u201cI am a pagan,\u201d seems more to be the rebellious declaration, \u201cI am not<\/em> a Christian!\u201d Fundamentally, these terms are used validly only<\/em> if what is meant by them is the reverence or worship of pre-Christian, nature-based deities \u2014 whether perceived as personified or simply as universal forces.<\/p>\n

Wicca<\/h3>\n

Wicca is (not to put too fine a point on it) a completely modern invention, having been developed in the 20th<\/sup> Century and publicized in Gerald Gardner\u2019s 1954 book Witchcraft Today.<\/em>22<\/a><\/em><\/sup>\u00a0It seeks to position itself as a legitimate successor to older pagan belief systems, but with aspects that tailor it to the specific spiritual, emotional, and psychological needs arising out of the special challenges of modernity.<\/p>\n

Druidism\/Druidry<\/h3>\n

In a similar vein, Druidism (Druidry) is largely a modern belief system, though its origins are older than that of Wicca, dating to the 17th<\/sup> Century in Britain. The Ancient Druids, apparently a shamanic\/priestly class in Gaulish and Celtic culture, left behind no writings of their own to record or explain their beliefs and practices. While ancient sources do<\/em> make mention of the Druids, these accounts are almost universally disparaging, and therefore suspect.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
9<\/a> John 1:46 KJV.<\/div>\n
20<\/a> Book of <\/i>Hebrews<\/i>, chapter 4, verse 8, KJV.<\/div>\n
22<\/a> Gerald Brosseau Gardner, Witchcraft Today<\/i> (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1954).<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"menu_order":6,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-46","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/46","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/46\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":247,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/46\/revisions\/247"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/3"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/46\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=46"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=46"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppschum1015\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=46"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}