Jesus is Not a Mithras Redux
Mithraism, as it is germane to Christian historical discussion, was a mystery religion adopted by the Romans in the 1st century A.D. (I am careful with my words here, as Mithraism has a previous historical incantation in ancient Persia, though its relationship to the Roman tradition, in practice and philosophy, is unclear at this point.) Some critics claim that Christianity borrowed from the traditions of Mithraism as a means of attracting followers, though these allegedly adopted Mithraic traditions were not actually authentic to Jesus. I believe it is safe to say that, on the basis of historical scholarship done by secular, Christian and Mithraic-oriented scholars, this claim is thoroughly without serious basis.
History
According to Mithraic scholar Franz Cumont, the first mention of Mithra was made in a treaty from 1400 B.C. (Other, more recent, scholars place this date at around 700 B.C.) At this time and after, Mithraic tradition indicated Mithra as a deity who gave orders and guidance to the military, as well as dispensed justice to those who broke political treaties. As the religion developed, the Mithraic story grew richer. Mithra became known as the provider of rain, bringing vegetation and health to the people. However, to the Persians who held to this tradition, Mithra was not the supreme deity, but subservient to another god, Varuna, who was specifically associated with the culture’s rice harvest. Some descriptions of Mithra have been translated, “Lord of the Contract,” “Upholder of Truth,” “Peaceful, benevolent protector,” and “Not easily provoked.” Even later mentions of Mithra characterize him again as a warrior, though at some point they seem to have reverted again to depicting him as a pacifist deity. When Zoroastrian religion developed in Persia (estimated at around 440 B.C., according to Herodotus’ The Histories), Mithra’s previous association with treaties developed into his role as a “mediator” between the gods of good and evil, Ohrmazd and Ahriman, respectively. He was considered part of a larger pantheon of seven deities that served the gods of the upper spiritual echelon. In this Mithraic-Zoroastrian incantation, Mithra’s role in the cosmos also included delivering the condemned to hell and the saved to heaven. By the first century B.C., Mithra was still associated with these themes, in addition to having some sort of relationship with the gods Apollos and Hermes.
The Roman Mithraic tradition seems to only be linked to the Persian Mithra by name, though in the Hellenistic and Roman traditions, he is referred to as Mithras (the Greek masculine form of Mithra). The Roman Mithraic story involves the heroic slaying of a sacred bull by Mithras, perhaps an astrological allegory, though the Persian details, treaty enforcement, agriculture, and escorting of souls, seem to no longer apply. According to Roman tradition, Mithras’ heroic slaying of the bull gained him the favor of the sun god. Other than tracking the evolution of the name of Mithras across the two traditions, scholars in the 20th century have failed to establish a substantial link between the two Mithraic traditions in terms of their actual beliefs. Rather, the latest scholarship in regard to Mithras suggests that the Romans founded their version of Mithraism in response to the astrological discovery of the movement of the heavens (now referred to as the precession of the equinoxes). Scholars who advocate the astrological thesis suggest that the Persian name of Mithras was given to the god who they believed orchestrated this movement (Perseus in the Roman tradition) due to an alliance at the time with a leader from Asia Minor named Mithridates and the influence of Mithraic Cilician pirates.
Despite what seems to be an obvious lack of related details between the Mithraic tradition and the origins of Christianity, critics nonetheless allege that certain details of the Christian tradition were adapted, if not outright “stolen” from Mithraism. I will examine some of the more inflammatory claims below:
Like Jesus, Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave. His birth was also attended by shepherds.
Many Christians are well aware that there is no Biblical basis for setting the date of the birth of Jesus on December 25th. History shows that this date was introduced as significant to Christ later by the post-apostolic church, no doubt influenced by the multiplicity of sacred festivals occurring at this time. According to Mithraic tradition, Mithras was not born of a virgin in a cave. In fact, Mithras was said to have been born, fully grown, from solid rock; the event leaving a cavity behind. There was no mention of a virgin. Interestingly, the story continues to describe Mithras being helped out of the rock by shepherds, who offer him a pick from their flock. Yet according to Mithraic tradition, Mithras was created prior to the creation of mankind. Consequently, the Mithraic “shepherds” cannot be legitimately compared to those of the Christian tradition. Lastly, the earliest existing record of this narrative is from around 100 years after the manuscripts of the New Testament, leaving no room for claims that the Christian tradition copied the story and attributed it to Jesus. (Note also that the later Persian Mithraic traditions recount his conception through the incestual copulation of the god Ahura-Mazda and his mother. The Christian virgin birth story is principally concerned with the humanity of Mary and God’s role in the creation of Jesus through her. There is no parallel between this and the Mithraic story.)
Mithras was also considered a great traveling teacher and master.
This particular attribute is probably one of the most common identifiers of just about every spiritual leader in history. However, there is no mention in Mithraic tradition of Mithras being an itinerant teacher like Jesus. If this claim is to be taken seriously as evidence that Christian tradition appropriated from Mithraic tradition, one must also take into account the travels and teachings of other spiritual figures like Buddha, Krishna, Muhammed, etc.
Mithras had 12 disciples.
The Persian Mithra was often associated with the god Varuna, such that one might infer that they were considered a pair. However, in this tradition Mithra is short 10 companions. In the Roman tradition, Mithras was accompanied by two entities, created after his own image, named Cautes and Catopatres. They have been said to represent day and night or spring and fall or life and death. Mithras was also associated with the snake, the dog, the lion, and the scorpion, likely due to the astrological origin of the Roman tradition. Still, Mithras’ companions only add up to 6 at most, taking all into account. Some claim that a Mithraic stone carving, which depicts the famous bull scene with one vertical row of six images on each side, proves the “12 disciples” connection. However, most current Mithraic scholarship attributes these to zodiac representations. In addition to acknowledging that since the carving itself dates to well after the time of Jesus, any connections to the Christian tradition of 12 disciples would have to implicate Mithraism as the copycat, not Christianity. In the other direction, one would have to claim that Christianity stole the number twelve from astrology- likely a much more difficult case to make.
Mithras offered eternal life to his followers.
Like the “traveling teacher” connection, this claim no more implicates Christianity as it does just about every religious tradition that posits life after death. Incidentally, the only specific mention of a Mithraic offer of eternal life to his followers exists in a piece of writing dated to 200 A.D., which has been translated, “and us, too, you saved by spilling the eternal blood.” In Mithraic tradition, the blood is not the blood of Mithras, but that of the bull he slaughtered, and “saved” referred to being approved to ascend through other levels toward immortality. It was clearly not the same type of salvation that is taught in Christian theology.
Mithras performed miracles.
While both the Iranian Mithra and the Roman Mithras traditions recount acts of great power done by Mithra(s), this is hardly an incriminating fact. Like the teaching and offering of immortality, this is another common attribute of any religious figure. To make this claim worthwhile, one would have to show similarities in type of miracle (i.e. Mithras walked on water, healed the blind, or raised the dead).
Mithras sacrificed himself for mankind.
Some Mithraic scholars have tried to depict Mithras and the bull he had slain as one and the same, construing the story to represent that Mithras gave his own life. However, the narrative in no way suggests this. At best, Mithras could be considered heroic for his victory over the bull, though more likely is the modern interpretation that the bull slaying story corresponded to astrological themes. However, this has no comparison to the Christian claim that Jesus died as atonement for the sins of mankind.
Mithras was buried in a tomb, and after three days, He rose again.
In Prescription Against Heretics, Tertullian writes, “if my memory still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan), sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a sword wreathes a crow.” This is the only reference from which some Mithraic scholars claim a correlation between Mithraic and Christian traditions. Unfortunately, having been written after the New Testament, there is no evidence that what it describes predates Christianity. Nor is there really any compelling aspect to Tertullian’s description that would indicate that these practices were authentic to Mithraism or even appropriately compared to Christian tradition.
Mithras said, “He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”
There is no evidence for this saying being attributed to Mithras. Scholars have, however, found this saying attributed to Zarathustra, though in a medieval document (remember that Zarathustra, the founding prophet of Zoroastrianism, is thought to have lived some time around 2000 B.C.). Though followers of Mithras were known to have fellowship meals, at which was eaten bread, water, wine and meat, such circumstances were common to meals shared by many people in many different contexts.
Conclusions
It should be emphasized that none of the alleged similarities between Mithras and Jesus can be shown to apply to the Persian Mithra, but only to the Roman Mithraic tradition, which did not really flourish until after the time of the New Testament. That said, the alleged connections are quite dubious, as I explained above. In fact, no archeological evidence for this tradition can be argued to exist from any earlier than A.D. 90. This seems to suggest that the re-emergence of Mithras in the Roman context preserved the name of the Persian deity, yet adopted a new set of traditions more closely linked to the many mystery religions of the time. In any case, the overall Mithraic tradition should actually be thought of as two distinct movements, having little to do with one another beyond having a god of the same name.
The driving force of these comparisons appears to be a deliberate application of language resembling that used in Christian tradition to traditions that never actually used that language in the first place. For example, referring to the “birth” of Mithras to a “virgin” is absurd given that, according to Mithraic tradition, he was not “born” in the human sense at all, but came into being out of lifeless solid rock. Perhaps one might claim that the lifeless solid rock, having never before had an entity emerge from it, was “virgin-like,” but that would be an extreme stretch in language and meaning, and more akin to an intentional characterization of Mithraic tradition in Christian terms. Similarly, if Mithraic tradition could be shown to teach that Mithras instructed his followers to gather together in a fellowship meal, it would be misleading to refer to this as a Mithraic “last supper.” Even if Roman Mithraism did hold to traditions similar to Christianity, it would be false to assume that simply because the two traditions existed similarly and contemporaneously one must have preceded or caused the other. Like liberal Biblical scholars that give priority to Gnostic sources on Jesus, though they date long after the canonical Gospels, those that desire to establish a link between Mithras and Jesus must contend with the fact that the existing sources for Roman Mithraism are all post-Christian and cannot be said to have influenced Christian doctrine.
I do find it strange that these allegations persist despite the overwhelming fact that the historicity of the character of Mithras is incomparable to that of Jesus of Nazareth. Given that Mithras is obviously a mythical character, and that no evidence exists to show that a man name Mithras actually lived at some point in history and had followers in the same sense as the Christian disciples, the notion of Mithras actually participating in historical events and teaching actual people is significantly questionable. On the other hand, there is overwhelming evidence, attested to by multiple independent sources, that Jesus was a historical figure that actually lived in first century Palestine, assembled a group of followers, the teachings of whom were recorded by multiple sources, and was actually put to death by Roman authorities. Given the amount of historical knowledge that exists about Jesus of Nazareth, the suggestion that the Christian tradition “re-branded” Jesus with Mithraic characteristics implies an unfathomably large conspiracy without a bit of evidence to back it up.
—
Some sources on Mithraism
Mysteries of Mithra by Franz Cumont
The Mysteries of Mithras: The Pagan Belief that Shaped the Christian World by Caitlin Matthews and Payam Nabarz
The Roman Cult of Mithras: The God and His Mysteries by Manfred Clauss
The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World, by David Ulansey
Here are two somewhat relevant quotes from C.S. Lewis’ book, God In The Dock.
From the chapter, “Religion Without Dogma?”
If my religion is erroneous then occurrences of similar motifs in pagan stories are, of course, instances of the same, or a similar error. But if my religion is true, then these stories may well be a preparatio evangelica, a divine hinting in poetic and ritual form at the same central truth which was later focused and (so to speak) historicised in the Incarnation. To me, who first approached Christianity from a delighted interest in, and reverence for, the best pagan imagination, who loved Balder before Christ and Plato before St. Augustine, the anthropological argument against Christianity has never been formidable. On the contrary, I could not believe Christianity if I were forced to say that there were a thousand religions in the world of which 999 were pure nonsense and the thousandth (fortunately) true. My conversion, very largely, depended on recognizing Christianity as the completion, the actualization, the entelechy, of something that had never been wholly absent from the mind of man.
From the chapter, “Myth Became Fact”
The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact. The old myth of the Dying God, without ceasing to be myth, comes down from the heaven of legend and imagination to the earth of history. It happens—at a particular date, in a particular place, followed by definable historical consequences. We pass from a Balder or an Osiris, dying nobody knows when or where, to a historical Person crucified (it is all in order) under Pontius Pilate. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle. . . . God is more than god, not less: Christ is more than Balder, not less. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting on our theology. We must not be nervous about “parallels” and “pagan Christs”: they ought to be there—it would be a stumbling block if they weren’t. We must not, in false spirituality, withhold our imaginative welcome. If God chooses to be mythopoeic—and is not the sky itself a myth—shall we refuse to be mythopathic? For this is the marriage of heaven and earth: Perfect Myth and Perfect Fact: claiming not only our love and our obedience, but also our wonder and delight, addressed to the savage, the child, and the poet in each one of us no less than the moralist, the scholar, and the philosopher.
Scott Pruett
October 11, 2006 at 2:32 am
Scott,
Thanks for the quotes. Lewis does provide an interesting approach to dealing with the many “pagan influences” theories. Rather than claiming that they are all nonsense, he suggests that the similarities or recurring themes point to a truth so embedded in humanity as to be impossible to not find in other traditions. An interesting idea, no doubt. However, one distinction that still stands, and in which I am primarily interested, is the historical nature of the accounts of Jesus compared to the mythical nature of the accounts of what some claim are proto-Christs. This distinction is the most powerful of all, despite the fact that the larger narrative of the Judeo-Christian tradition is consistent and resolved in Christ more powerfully and transculturally than any of the pagan narratives to which it is compared.
CB
CB
October 11, 2006 at 2:49 am
Justin Martyr seems bothered by the “wicked devils” in the Mithras cults imitating Christianity’s sacred ritual (as he claimed). Sort of a ‘he said/she said’ controversy.
Apologia, LXVI.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html
CHAPTER LXVI — OF THE EUCHARIST.
And this food is called among us Eukaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. 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.
SkipChurch
October 12, 2006 at 10:14 pm
Here’s a passage, from Ovid’s Metamorphosis, recounting Ocyrrhoe’s prophecy for Asclepius. I think the Asclepius parallels to the Jesus story are more striking, because of the emphasis on healing, the rising from the dead and of course ultimate deification.
The cult of Asclepius came to Rome in the 3rd century BC, and remained popular until well into the Christian era, due to the efficacy of the healings at various sites.
http://classics.mit.edu/Ovid/metam.2.second.html
Once, as the sacred infant she survey’d,
The God was kindled in the raving maid,
And thus she utter’d her prophetick tale:
“Hail, great physician of the world, all-hail;
Hail, mighty infant, who in years to come
Shalt heal the nations, and defraud the tomb;
Swift be thy growth! thy triumphs unconfin’d!
Make kingdoms thicker, and increase mankind.
Thy daring art shall animate the dead,
And draw the thunder on thy guilty head:
Then shalt thou dye, but from the dark abode
Rise up victorious, and be twice a God.
And thou, my sire, not destin’d by thy birth
To turn to dust, and mix with common earth,
How wilt thou toss, and rave, and long to dye,
And quit thy claim to immortality;
When thou shalt feel, enrag’d with inward pains,
The Hydra’s venom rankling in thy veins?
The Gods, in pity, shall contract thy date,
And give thee over to the pow’r of Fate.”
SkipChurch
October 12, 2006 at 10:59 pm
SkipChurch,
Thanks for the quotes! There are some interesting parallels, no doubt. However, the interesting point to consider is the process of translation- specifically the word choices for certain concepts (such as ‘great physician,’ ‘heal the nations,’ ‘immortality,’ etc.) and how the original words correspond to theological concepts in other religions.
Interestingly, the translation you quote by Sir Samuel Garth and John Dryden was published in 1717, whereas a later translation by A. S. Kline in 2000 reads a bit differently (and much more consistently with a polytheistic worldview than anything resembling a Judeo-Christian monotheistic worldview):
“So when she felt the prophetic frenzy in her mind, and was on fire with the god enclosed in her breast, she looked at the infant boy and cried out ‘Grow and thrive, child, healer of all the world! Human beings will often be in your debt, and you will have the right to restore the dead. But if ever it is done regardless of the god’s displeasure you will be stopped, by the flame of your grandfather’s lightning bolt, from doing so again. From a god you will turn to a bloodless corpse, and then to a god who was a corpse, and so twice renew your fate (http://www.tkline.freeserve.co.uk/Metamorph2.htm#_Toc64106127).”
Notice that though ‘human beings will often be in [his] debt,’ if he exerts his power to raise the dead in opposition to the gods, he will be stopped. This ‘resurrection power’ is not at all comparable to that of Jesus, who, being one with the Father, could not act outside of His will (the will being of one God, rather than of the ‘gods’).
CB
CB
October 17, 2006 at 1:30 am
Check this out:
The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? Dr. Ronald H. Nash
BishopBooyah
November 30, 2006 at 2:21 am
So what you have indeed proven is that Christianity may have not borrowed from Mithraism (although you quote no sources, except silly Justin Martry, have you noted his hatred of Jews? Do you follow his advicse in regards to them as well? nor do you address numerous scholars who have compared the two, nor do you note that the beliefs of Mithraism are almost completely unknown and therefore interpretation of archeological evidence can suggest nearly anything), even if you are right, you have only proven that there is NOTHING actually new about Jesus, he traveled, he performed miracles, he had disciples, yada, yada…. silly Christians, you and your literalisms *snickers*
Matt
December 21, 2006 at 12:06 pm
“Dating from around the 15th century BC, Mithraism emerged in ancient Persia. ‘Mihr’ (the Persian form of Mithras) was the word not only for the Sun but also for a friend; and that seems to be how this pagan god was originally worshipped – as both supreme sun god and god of love.”
- Quest for the Past
“It is probable…that the western Mithras had its roots in a daevic cult of the god as practiced in Mesopotamia and Anatolia, and not in the cult of the Zoroastrianized Mithra in Iran. The western Mithras is a savior god in an era of savior gods.”
- Richard N. Frye, The Heritage of Persia
“The only dated Mithraic inscriptions from the pre-Christian period are the texts of Antiochus I of Commagene (69-34 B.C.) in eastern Asia Minor. After that there is one text possibly from the first century A.D., from Cappadocia, one from Phrygia dated to A.D. 77-78, and one from Rome dated to Trajan’s reign (A.D. 98-117). All other dated Mithraic inscriptions and monuments belong to the second century (after A.D. 140), the third, and the fourth century A.D. (M. J. Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae, 1956).”
- Edwin M. Yamauchid, “Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History?”
The Taurobolium
“A central feature of the ceremonial associated with Mithras was the taurobolium, the ritual slaughter of a bull which commemorated and repeated Mithras’ primeval act. The initiate was baptized in its blood, partaking of its life-giving properties. It may be noted that this part of the ceremonial closely resembled the ritual of the cult of Cybele, the Great Mother of Asia Minor, which had been brought to Rome three centuries before Christ..”
- Ninian Smart, The Religious Experience of Mankind
Born Again
“The liturgy of the Eucharist that John prescribes to the converted in being ‘born again’ is necessary ’so that the speaker might gaze upon the immortal beginning (Jesus) with the immortal (Holy) spirit … and be born again in thought.’ [Grese].”
“Some modern Christian believers are familar with this concept of being born again through a spirit and regard it as unique to Christianity. The just-quoted text however is from the pagan Mithras Liturgy, a guidebook of sorts that assists in the Eucharist and prepares the sojourner for his heavenly journey. It advises the seeker of the Sun-god (father of Mithras) to pray saying:”
- James Still, “The Gospel of John and the Hellenization of Jesus”
“[F]irst beginning of my beginning, …spirit of spirit, the first spirit in me, …now if it be your will, …give me over to immortal birth and, following that, to my underlying nature, so that, after the present need which is pressing me exceedingly, I may gaze upon the immortal beginning with the immortal spirit, that I may be born again in thought.”
- Mithras Liturgy
“A usual feature of the ancient mystery religions was the partaking of food and drink, and this communion celebration often reenacted a holy meal established by the gods and goddesses. In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter the Mother drinks the kykeon instead of read wine, and her devotees likewise drank the ceremonial kykeon instead of red wine, and her devotees likewise drank the ceremonial kykeon in their mystic repast. Mithraic monuments show Mithras and Sol (the Sun) sharing a meal on the body or the hide of a bull, and this sacred feast functioned as the prototype for a holy meal eaten by the Mithraic mystai….One symbolon from the mysteries of Attis claims that a mystes ate from a tambourine and drank from a cymbal in the initiatory rites.”
- Marvin W.Meyer (Editor), The Ancient Mysteries – A Sourcebook
Both Mithraism and early Christianity “included a baptism and a sacrament of bread and wine, and both guarded their central rites from nonbelievers.”
- Ancient Wisdom and Secret Sects
“He who will not eat of my body, nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”
- Mithraic Communion (M. J. Vermaseren, Mithras, The Secret God)
“And as they were eating, Jesus, having taken bread, when he had blessed, broke [it], and gave [it] to them, and said, Take [this]: this is my body. And having taken [the] cup, when he had given thanks, he gave [it] to them, and they all drank out of it. And he said to them, This is my blood, that of the [new] covenant, that shed for many.”
- Mark 14:22-26
“The Mithraic Holy Father wore a red cap and garment and a ring, and carried a shepherd’s staff. The Head Christian adopted the same title and outfitted himself in the same manner. Christian priests, like Mithraic priests, became ‘Father’, despite Jesus’ specific proscription of the acceptance of such a title (Matthew 23:9). That Jesus had been repudiating, not the Mithraists with whom he was unfamiliar, but the Sanhedrin, whose President was styled Father, is hardly relevant.
“Mithra’s bishops wore a mithra, or miter, as their badge of office. Christian bishops also adopted miters. Mithraists commemorated the sun-god’s ascension by eating a mizd, a sun-shaped bun embossed with the sword (cross) of Mithra. The hot cross bun and the mass were likewise adapted to Christianity. The Roman Catholic mizd/mass wafer continues to retain its sun-shape, although its Episcopal counterpart does not.
“All Roman Emperors from Julius Caesar to Gratian had been pontifex maximus, high priest of the Roman gods. When Theodosius refused the title as incompatible with his status as a Christian, the Christian bishop of Rome picked it up. Magi, priests of Zarathustra, wore robes that featured the sword of Mithra. Identical robes are worn by Christian priests to this day.”
- William Harwood, Mythologies Last Gods: Yahweh and Jesus
I stole this, but all are direct quotes with Authors and Books– unlike our friend the orginal poster who wrote alot, with no scholarly citations to back himself up.
Matt
December 21, 2006 at 12:13 pm
[...] But isn’t December 25 associated with the birth of Mithras? No, it is not. At least, Mithraic scholars seem not to be aware of this fact. The earliest existing record of the story of Mithras’ birth dates from the second century, perhaps a hundred years after the Gospel accounts were written. Christopher Butler has catalogued the supposed parallels between Jesus and Mithras and finds them all wanting. (In a similar vein, see here.) Nowhere in these myths is there explicit reference to December 25 as the birthday of Mithras. The assertion that December 25 was Mithras’ birthday relies on an identification of Mithras with the “unconquered sun” of Aurelian—which may or may not be a valid identification to make! [...]
Dr. Platypus » Blog Archive » When Was Jesus Born? Why December 25?
December 30, 2006 at 9:30 pm
really interesting post. i had stumbled on an atheists page where he claimed many of these things to mithra. i couldnt really find too much info online. so i am glad to be informed and see some citation.
question: the same person in question also said that horis the egyptian god had an identical story to JC as well. do you know anything about that? i tried researching it, but couldnt find anything.
may His face shine upon you
peter
PB and J
February 23, 2007 at 8:37 am
It is amazing the lengths people will go to to deny God. For to deny God to to attempt to escape admitting that their is a moral law, an ultimate arbiter, and a final judgment. If one can deny God they believe they can live a life unaccountable to a higher power.
As Paul writes:
“For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4
-J. Kaiser
totaltransformation
February 24, 2007 at 12:43 am
i have read a few things recently about mithras and i must say this particular myth has some very appealing aspects. i would speculate that early christianity benefited from some of the more attractive elements by adopting them. its called marketing. if your possible converts like some things about mithras, hey, we have that too. that doesnt take away from jesus, who from what little i know, was a decent, caring teacher.
to my way of thinking, both religions are myths. wonderful stories and imagery, but merely metaphors. jesus’s central teachings are what is important, and the world, and specifically the united states power elite, seem to have forgotten most of them.
follow the tenets of christianity, not the letter of a book that has been re-written many times by political human beings and has much wisdom, but nothing is gospel except the breath of life.
just a thought.
tycho brahe
April 9, 2007 at 8:07 am
You people DO realize that (In 90% of your cases)the sole reason for your current religion is the happenstance of your birth to parents of same, right? Had you been born in Indonesia, you’d probably be muslim. India, Hindu. A communist country, Nothing. If you truly need religion to maintain morals, then I pity your complete lack of self control and contentment.
Lars
September 12, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Actually Lars it is you who should be pitied for your pride in what you believe to be your inherent goodness and moral righteousness. For a man who cannot see his inner wickedness and blackened heart is like a man with terminal cancel who refuses to acknowledge the doctor’s sober assessment. To you, Jesus replies:
“They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
ShaunT
November 28, 2007 at 11:55 am
FACT.CHRISTIANS HAVE MURDERED MORE JEWS THAN NAZIS.POGRAMS WERE AROUND WAY BEFORE 1929 YOU SELF RIGHTIOUS PRAT.SELF RIGHTIOUSNESS HAS NO RIGHTIOUSNESS IN ITSELF.I BACK UP LARS.ORGANISED RELIGION HAS ALWAYS SERVED ITSELF 1ST AND THE WORLD SECOND @ BEST.WHEN IT COMES TO A CREATOR IT IS IDOLATROUS @ BEST!!!!!!!!!!
michael
October 6, 2009 at 8:32 am
I happen to agree with what Lars says there; I have trouble respecting a person in religious debate unless they have changed their religion from what their parents believe or at least seriously considered it (I have changed my religion at least 3 times, more if you consider changes between different types of Christianity or similar Paganisms to be actual changes). No one can truly claim to have faith or enlightenment without having seriously looked into other beliefs. Most people’s definition of ‘faith’ is just ‘believing the first thing I ever hear and then never questioning it’. The bottom line is when Christians understand why they don’t buy into Mithras or any other deity, they show they are capable of understanding why people don’t buy into their deity.
In the end I buy into the concept that I read in the Dalai Lama’s work, that it doesn’t matter if there is a God(s) or who he/she/they/it is. Your morality shouldn’t be dependent on if you think some mystical figure is looking over your shoulder, fear of hell, or some ‘carrot on a stick’ like heaven. If you would not be ‘moral’ if those conditions were not met, then you aren’t really a good person to begin with.
Secondly, I think that what is truly right and wrong would have to be something a person can know without being told. If a religion teaches that I have to call out to a deity by name, make a specific request, and follow certain rituals in order to be saved, I have to question the validity of that religion. I have reached the point of being unable to consider a religion that requires exacting rituals or for me to push their belief on other people, as those things should not be needed for what is really the truth.
Also, [Citation Needed]: “On the other hand, there is overwhelming evidence, attested to by multiple independent sources, that Jesus was a historical figure that actually lived in first century Palestine”
Blayze Kohime
March 24, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Hi Blayze,
Thanks for your comment. I do agree that when a person’s religious identification differs from the tradition in which they were raised, he/she has a unique opportunity to view it with a comparative perspective. This doesn’t really mean objectivity, though.
In regard to my comment about evidence, take a look at some of these posts:
http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/03/10/the-historical-resurrection-of-jesus-part-1-the-post-mortem-appearances/
http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/03/11/the-historical-resurrection-of-jesus-part-2-the-empty-tomb/
http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/03/13/the-historical-resurrection-of-jesus-part-3-the-origin-and-perseverance-of-the-church/
http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/03/14/the-historical-resurrection-of-jesus-part-4-addressing-alternative-explanations/
CB
CB
March 24, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Well, I don’t have any big words to say but I do have this:
Though there may be many stories and many religions, and though some elements may resemble those found in others… it’s really understandable considering the limits of reality and what all we would consider miraculous and part of what would be only managable by the divine…
Yet the most amazng characteristic I find about Jesus’ story is that it is by the standards of what an act of love would be, one in no way possible could imagine a greater story, or act of love; you truly hit the end of the road. There is no one who could give up more than God Himself since He actually rules Heaven, and He gave even what we call in our own sense, the “ultimate” sacrafice. Yet, in His sense, in the truly ultimate sense, in relativity (because of His sacrificing his rightful Heavenly rule), it’s even more so the case and one is unable to add upon it.
While one could say that it’s not the ultimate sacrifice since He didn’t remain dead, by doing so they would miss the point; Life is from God. How could He? Death couldn’t keep ahold of Him. It’s absolute nature.
So the focus should remain on, like I said; it’s impossible to imagine a bigger story of Love. No bigger player, nothing more to sacrafice, and no bigger sacrifice.
No other stories, similarities or not, even come close. None are able to mimic this state of being so absolute and complete.
I once heard a Pastor put it this way:
The carpenter, who once held the wood and nails in his hands, was now held by them… God, now being held by his own Creation.
Just magnificently absolute. Too absolute to be chalked up to man’s invention. Too much of a masterpiece, too much of a symphony hitting all the highest known notes.
Jonathan
June 11, 2008 at 1:16 pm
It does not matter how we try to cover up the fact, Mithra religion was 4000years older than Christianity, all the stories and events that relate to Jesus are copied from the Mithra religion. All Sylvester and Constantine did was to change the name of their god Mithra to Jesus and kept all the traditions that went with it.
The facts speak for them selves.
Dont let your intellegence insult you.
Dr Mohd Omar
June 14, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I was raised a catholic and practiced my faith, but recently reading about Mithra and Horus and Hercules and others, its becoming obvious this whole christianity thing is a big HOAX! Christianity is a recycling of old religions that came before it. The so called gospels were written decades after the supposed jesus was resurrected. Not one shred of archealogical, forensic, or one line ever written about this mythical man named jesus during his life. Even the gospels contradict themselves. I am mad at myself for not learning this sooner. Come on educated people its time not to FEAR what your parents drilled into you, but to learn the truth! Organized religions are just myths and copycats of ones that came before.
richard
October 16, 2008 at 4:51 am
It’s so sad how when one is not rooted in a relationship with God, they can be deceived and easily talked out of their faith. When you have a intimacy with the Father, through Jesus, no one can talk you out of that. When you’ve been rooted in religion, it’s easy to be talked out of that.
farabuvrubies
November 9, 2008 at 12:09 am
I agree that the article is wanting in terms of citations from reliable sources.Lots of denials, no source material or bibliography. I have recently left Christianity because it does not even square with its own Bible, let alone history. One need go no further than comparing the resurrection stories in Matthew and John to know that the New Testament is a fraud at worst,or an uninspired account at best.
And if one research the use of the various icons and images in Christianity, it is obvious that they are rooted in pagan religions.
As I can tell, Christianity flourished and grew by deception, syncretism and lies, while Islam grew by force and the sword. IN my mind, neither is a legitimate way to grow a religion.
In 130 CE, many Jews thought Bar Kochbah was the messiah. When he died, they said, “I guess we were wrong”. BUt Christianity was not this honest. They thought Jesus was the Messiah, but when he died, instead of admitting they were wrong, they invented an entire religion centered on false claims of “fulfilled messianic predictions” (Jesus did not fulfill a single messianic prediction, except for riding a donkey, which he set up to “fulfill the prophecy” by having his disciples steal a donkey, or two donkeys accoprding to Matthew), and new theologies regarding the nature of man, of sin and of atonement; none of which was based on the Bible of their day, the Tanakh, but instead on the adopted aspects of pagan mystery religions and Paul’s imagination.
Fred
December 10, 2008 at 1:40 am
farabuvrubies,
You are right that “rooted” Christians cannot be convinced of their error no matter the evidence. Tell me, which version of the resurrection is true, Matthew’s or John’s? They are not compatible, nor is it even possible that these are two versions of the same incident.
As a former Christian, I can safely agree with atheists (though I am not an atheist) who say that in order to be a Christian one must “check his brain in at the door”. That is really all your post is saying; no amount of truth will be allowed to change your closed mind.
Fred
December 10, 2008 at 1:44 am
like you i am a former Christian. i found it to hard to “check his brain in at the door”. and when you ask the questions that they cant answer they just start quoting the bible “have faith” and getting louder.
Nathanael
September 10, 2009 at 12:04 am
Happy Easter
joe55a
April 12, 2009 at 4:47 am
Can somebody please fix this error: “historical incantation” appears in the first sentence, within a parenthesis, and should read historical incarnation, which I am certain the author intended.
A historical INCANTATION would be an old chant of some kind. The sentence makes no sense with the word incantation and would at least make sense with INCARNATION. In fact, as I scroll quickly through I see that incantation is used throughout wherever the author needed to use the word incarnation.
And, I should mention that the error distracts from the credibility of the subject.
N.R Dupre
September 14, 2009 at 11:58 pm