Question:
I think so. I’m not happy with the way that the statement of Plutarch is handled by scholars, as I said. But on the other hand, if the cult originates in Tarsus, why does the archaology show it originates in Rome?
From what Plutarch said, it appears that the Asia Minor cult was a small band of people who worshipped several gods, including Mithras. Some devotees must have got to Rome, where they reformed the cult to focus solely on Mithras, and gained enough followers to construct the first Mithraeum. From there it exploded. Speculation, of course, but I don’t see anything implausible here. What would be implausible would be a Roman inventing Mithras from nothing.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It seems to be overlooked that Judaism is full of Mithraic themes. Blood as a so called sacrament and animal sacrifice, covers the OT from start to finish. Even today, Ultra Orthodox Jews continue to sacrifice animals, and blood is often sprinkled over it’s alters during various ceremonies. While it’s the flavour of the month for Christian apologists to suggest an essential difference between Mithra and Christianity is the bull sacrifice, one needs only to look at the other half of Christian scripture, the OT, to find the bull and bull sacrifices so prevalent that it pretty much slaps you in the face. Bull’s and bull sacrifice was a common Judaic ritual. Try putting the word "bull" as well as "bull sacrifice" into one of these Christian Bible search-engines and be prepared to be shocked because therein you will find the stain of Mithras. While Mithra might have been the king of bull sacrifice, Christianity as supported by the Old testament, did historically practice the very same ritual. Ancient Judaic culture is the Christian connection to Mithra.
Ancient Judaism developed in the Mediterranean world. In common with many cultures, the Israelites sacrificed animals, including bulls. There were no slaughterhouses, and for a pastoral people killing an animal was a relatively rare a big event. So it was natural only to do so on festivals, and to make a ritual of the act of slaughter. Of course ideas such as that certain animals were sacred to certain gods, or that portions of the sacrifice should be reserved or not eaten, or that an altar should be used for the slaughter, were passed around different religions and it is impossible to say who influenced who. By New Testament times the Jewish tradition had developed so that sacrifices in the proper sense were only offered at the temple. After the destruction of the temple in AD70 they ceased altogether, but traces of the original traditions survive to this day in shehita, or kosher slaughter. Where the Mithraic bull ritual came from is anyone’s guess, but it was probably first century Roman, and modelled on the practises of other cults. So ultimately the traditions do come from some common source, the Mediterranean religious mileu of 1500 BC or thereabouts. But that is the only connection between them.
Response:
I’m afraid this post hasn’t appeared in google, so I can’t well respond to it directly. I have no dog in this fight, because I think any similarities are likely due to common religious responses to mortality: death and rebirth with solar or seasonal imagery.
I agree. In fact Manfred Clauss in his classic book on Mithraism makes this point, and suggests a common cultural background has a lot to do with trivial similarities. Hurray. So at least one "common argument" thread makes a valid point. Agreed? But I’d be interested in knowing what sort of evidence you would expect to find that demonstrated the NT borrowed from mithraism. You could find a document that mixes clearly Christian with clearly Mithraic themes.
Well, to start with we’d have to actually know something about Mithraic beliefs and practises. While quite a lot of inscriptions exist, these don’t tell us much; the literary references are very scanty. So everyone is inferring things. However, Mithras was a pagan cult. It was polytheistic. In general in these, observance was more important than belief. It was syncretistic. It centred on temples with a relief of Mithras killing the bull. If we wanted to assert that Christianity was tied to it, we would expect Christianity to be a cult of a similar kind. But in fact we have too little evidence about Mithras to be sure of links even to clearly related cults such as Sol Invictus. What we have — above — does not sound at all like the early Christians. Christians related to Jews, not pagans. They were monotheists. Belief was more important than observance; syncretism was abhorrent; Christians didn’t even have fixed places of worship. What non-trivial links are there? Trivial arguments that both Christians and Mithraists ate bread at ritual meals? Since the Chancellor of the Exchequer makes budget announcements at the banquet at the Mansion House, does that mean the City of London financial centre is a cult of Mithras? Or all Christians?? If someone is making up a religion and incorporating useful aspects of a popular religion, it seems pretty unlikely they would acknowledge that they were borrowing. In fact, I would expect them to try to cover up any precedents. Why? Mithras worshippers didn’t cover up their Persian antecedents. St Paul doesn’t try his debt to the Jewish scriptures. You imagine that early Christians would be motivated to make life easy for twentieth century apologists.
I agree. So, what kinds of things would you expect to find if they were borrowing? Where would this evidence be found? Look at the evidence that Christianity borrowed many religious ideas from Judiasm. Pretty overwhelming.
True. Now look at the evidence for some genuine syncretism. For instance the date of Christmas. We cannot prove that there was no very early tradition that Jesus was born on this date (possibly accurate). But very few scholars would totally dismiss the idea that the date was chosen to correspond with the winter solstice, the idea borrowed from pagan Sun religions.
I agree. We know from the later letter of Pope Gregory to Augustine of Canterbury that the church had a practise of situating feasts at times when pagans converting to Christianity were accustomed to celebrate, in order to harness custom in the service of the new faith. So although no-one knows how Christmas came to be 25/12, reading back from that to something on the last day of Saturnalia, the Dies Solis Invictus, is a reasonable suggestion. God in His wisdom could have chosen December 25th for His birth, but accepting the traditional date at face value assumes a minor miracle, which we don’t have to do.
Agreed. All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have no dog in this fight, because I think any similarities are likely due to common religious responses to mortality: death and rebirth with solar or seasonal imagery. Hurray. So at least one "common argument" thread makes a valid point. Agreed? But I’d be interested in knowing what sort of evidence you would expect to find that demonstrated the NT borrowed from mithraism. You could find a document that mixes clearly Christian with clearly Mithraic themes. Or there could be more Mithriac themes in the Christian scriptures. I’ve mentioned the visit of the Magi as a tiny shred of evidence. Now if this incident was much longer, and given a much more central place in Christian theology, then the idea that Christianity owed a lot to an Eastern astrological religion would be much more plausible. If someone is making up a religion and incorporating useful aspects of a popular religion, it seems pretty unlikely they would acknowledge that they were borrowing. In fact, I would expect them to try to cover up any precedents. Why? Mithras worshippers didn’t cover up their Persian antecedents. St Paul doesn’t try his debt to the Jewish scriptures. You imagine that early Christians would be motivated to make life easy for twentieth century apologists. So, what kinds of things would you expect to find if they were borrowing? Where would this evidence be found? Look at the evidence that Christianity borrowed many religious ideas from Judiasm. Pretty overwhelming.
Not at all… underwhelming a parallel drawn with wide distortion of facts < evidence. Parallelism < evidence. Now look at the evidence for some genuine syncretism. For instance the date of Christmas. We cannot prove that there was no very early tradition that Jesus was born on this date (possibly accurate). But very few scholars would totally dismiss the idea that the date was chosen to correspond with the winter solstice, the idea borrowed from pagan Sun religions. God in His wisdom could have chosen December 25th for His birth, but accepting the traditional date at face value assumes a minor miracle, which we don’t have to do.
I don’t know of any christian religion that asserts that jesus was born on the 25, and it is fairly common knowledge that feasts were often placed at pagan holidays to in essens drown out the competition.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have no dog in this fight, because I think any similarities are likely due to common religious responses to mortality: death and rebirth with solar or seasonal imagery. Hurray. So at least one "common argument" thread makes a valid point. Agreed? But I’d be interested in knowing what sort of evidence you would expect to find that demonstrated the NT borrowed from mithraism. You could find a document that mixes clearly Christian with clearly Mithraic themes. Or there could be more Mithriac themes in the Christian scriptures. I’ve mentioned the visit of the Magi as a tiny shred of evidence. Now if this incident was much longer, and given a much more central place in Christian theology, then the idea that Christianity owed a lot to an Eastern astrological religion would be much more plausible. If someone is making up a religion and incorporating useful aspects of a popular religion, it seems pretty unlikely they would acknowledge that they were borrowing. In fact, I would expect them to try to cover up any precedents. Why? Mithras worshippers didn’t cover up their Persian antecedents. St Paul doesn’t try his debt to the Jewish scriptures. You imagine that early Christians would be motivated to make life easy for twentieth century apologists. So, what kinds of things would you expect to find if they were borrowing? Where would this evidence be found? Look at the evidence that Christianity borrowed many religious ideas from Judiasm. Pretty overwhelming. Now look at the evidence for some genuine syncretism. For instance the date of Christmas. We cannot prove that there was no very early tradition that Jesus was born on this date (possibly accurate). But very few scholars would totally dismiss the idea that the date was chosen to correspond with the winter solstice, the idea borrowed from pagan Sun religions. God in His wisdom could have chosen December 25th for His birth, but accepting the traditional date at face value assumes a minor miracle, which we don’t have to do.
It seems to be overlooked that Judaism is full of Mithraic themes. Blood as a so called sacrament and animal sacrifice, covers the OT from start to finish. Even today, Ultra Orthodox Jews continue to sacrifice animals, and blood is often sprinkled over it’s alters during various ceremonies. While it’s the flavour of the month for Christian apologists to suggest an essential difference between Mithra and Christianity is the bull sacrifice, one needs only to look at the other half of Christian scripture, the OT, to find the bull and bull sacrifices so prevalent that it pretty much slaps you in the face. Bull’s and bull sacrifice was a common Judaic ritual. Try putting the word "bull" as well as "bull sacrifice" into one of these Christian Bible search-engines and be prepared to be shocked because therein you will find the stain of Mithras. While Mithra might have been the king of bull sacrifice, Christianity as supported by the Old testament, did historically practice the very same ritual. ** Exodus 24:5 Then he sent young Israelite men, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls as fellowship offerings [ 24:5 Traditionally [ peace offerings ] ] to the LORD . **Exodus 29:36 Sacrifice a bull each day as a sin offering to make atonement. Purify the altar by making atonement for it, and anoint it to consecrate it. ** Numbers 15:8 " ‘When you prepare a young bull as a burnt offering or sacrifice, for a special vow or a fellowship offering [ 15:8 Traditionally [ peace offering ] ] to the LORD , ** Deuteronomy 18:3 This is the share due the priests from the people who sacrifice a bull or a sheep: the shoulder, the jowls and the inner parts. ** Judges 6:28 In the morning when the men of the town got up, there was Baal’s altar, demolished, with the Asherah pole beside it cut down and the second bull sacrificed on the newly built altar! ** 2 Samuel 6:13 When those who were carrying the ark of the LORD had taken six steps, he sacrificed a bull and a fattened calf. ** 1 Chronicles 15:26 Because God had helped the Levites who were carrying the ark of the covenant of the LORD , seven bulls and seven rams were sacrificed. ** 1 Chronicles 29:21 The next day they made sacrifices to the LORD and presented burnt offerings to him: a thousand bulls, a thousand rams and a thousand male lambs, together with their drink offerings, and other sacrifices in abundance for all Israel. ** 2 Chronicles 29:33 The animals consecrated as sacrifices amounted to six hundred bulls and three thousand sheep and goats. ** Ezra 7:17 With this money be sure to buy bulls, rams and male lambs, together with their grain offerings and drink offerings, and sacrifice them on the altar of the temple of your God in Jerusalem. ** Ezra 8:35 Then the exiles who had returned from captivity sacrificed burnt offerings to the God of Israel: twelve bulls for all Israel, ninety-six rams, seventy-seven male lambs and, as a sin offering, twelve male goats. All this was a burnt offering to the LORD . **Job 42:8 So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has." ** Psalm 51:19 Then there will be righteous sacrifices, whole burnt offerings to delight you; then bulls will be offered on your altar. ** Psalm 66:15 I will sacrifice fat animals to you and an offering of rams; I will offer bulls and goats. Selah ** Isaiah 1:11 "The multitude of your sacrifices- what are they to me?" says the LORD . "I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. ** Isaiah 66:3 But whoever sacrifices a bull is like one who kills a man, and whoever offers a lamb, like one who breaks a dog’s neck; whoever makes a grain offering is like one who presents pig’s blood, and whoever burns memorial incense, like one who worships an idol. They have chosen their own ways, and their souls delight in their abominations; ** Hosea 12:11 Is Gilead wicked? Its people are worthless! Do they sacrifice bulls in Gilgal? Their altars will be like piles of stones on a plowed field. ** Hosea 14:2 Take words with you and return to the LORD . Say to him: "Forgive all our sins and receive us graciously, that we may offer the fruit of our lips. [ 14:2 Or [ offer our lips as sacrifices of bulls ] ] Ancient Judaic culture is the Christian connection to Mithra. PeterT
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses. It is disturbing the number of people in the modern era who are quite prepared to repeat nonsensical hearsay of this kind, without filtering it through their brains or checking it in any way, purely in order to abuse Christians. What sensible non-Christian thinks this is a good way to proceed? A while back I got fed up of hearing this ‘Mithras’ nonsense and looked up all the facts about Mithras, not in modern opinions but in the ancient sources. Immediately I found that statements like the above "The New Testament was … influenced by Mithraism" to be based on nothing more than wishful thinking (at best — Bernard Connor certainly doesn’t know this to be a fact, but he’s making a very definite statement anyway). I haven’t done the same for Dionysius and Osiris, but I don’t believe for a moment that others have either. I have no dog in this fight, because I think any similarities are likely due to common religious responses to mortality: death and rebirth with solar or seasonal imagery. But I’d be interested in knowing what sort of evidence you would expect to find that demonstrated the NT borrowed from mithraism. If someone is making up a religion and incorporating useful aspects of a popular religion, it seems pretty unlikely they would acknowledge that they were borrowing. In fact, I would expect them to try to cover up any precedents. So, what kinds of things would you expect to find if they were borrowing? Where would this evidence be found?
This theory supported by the fact that the Roman Church and it’s political lackeys has from it’s earliest days systematically assassinated it’s dissenters (the killing of the heretics- freethinkers) and remained violently sectarian. PeterT
Response:
Tony Miller has had his say, and what was that: LOL!!!! Mose, ol’ boy, you’re a hoot! Great comeback Tony. You sure gave us a lot to discuss. Do you think no one sees the classic purpose of your post? It’s a standard by the ignorant. When they can’t argue, they poke fun. Until you actually post something, we’ll just consider you amusing.
I leave this jeer in only because of what you go on to say later. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And then of course Roger. What does he say? I don’t claim to be an expert either. This passage is certainly suggestive to me that the cult originated in that area. But when I was reading Clauss and Ulansey, I gathered that they did not in fact regard this as evidence, given that it was (a) second century and (b) rather against the flow of all the other data for an origin in Rome itself in the mid first century. I think (not recall exactly) that they suggested that in fact the pirates were worshippers of Perseus (also keen on phrygian caps, I gather) and that by the time of Plutarch this has become a vague rumour which Plutarch has identified as Mithras. Is it true? I’m not comfortable with this type of argument myself. What do other people think? So, lets see. Plutarch, a respected historian,
Hang on; where did you get this description of Plutarch? From the Columbia Encyclopedia: "Although Plutarch displays evident pride in the culture and greatness of the men of Greece, he is nevertheless fair and honest in his treatment of the Romans. As a biographer Plutarch is almost peerless, although his facts are not always accurate. Since his purpose was to portray character and reveal its moral implications, his technique included the use of much anecdotal material." I’m not rubbishing him; just considering how much weight we have to consider a throwaway comment of his to have. makes a comment ca 100AD, and says that these pirates amoung other reliogious rites, practiced mithraic rites, and these rites of Mithras have come down to his own time. And Roger says the passage is suggestive.Then he quotes that two writers, did not regard it as evidence, why?? Because it was 2nd century. It was 100AD.
Just so. And the second reason?? It did not fit their theory that the cult started in Rome ca. 50AD.
No, it’s not a matter of ‘their theory’ — it’s that the archaeology all starts with Rome and people spreading out from Rome. Then he suggests that maybe Plutarch, mixed up the worship of Perseus and Mithras. But again, what does Plutarch say?? They practiced rites of religious mysteries, amoung which those of Mithras have been perserved to our own time. So, yes Roger, maybe they did worship Perseus also. But the historian, says that the mithras rites were the ones perserved to his own day, which is 100AD.
Since the other evidence is different, however, I refer you to what I suggested above to reconcile the two accounts. A few questions. Were there Roman soldiers posted to Asia Minor in 67BC.?
Posted? Roman troops were active in the area at the time of Pompey’s Eastern settlement. Was the cult of Mitras very popular with Roman Troops?
Surely, in the second and third centuries AD. Did these Roman troops get credit for taking the cult to Rome?
Are you asking me or telling me? But what has all of this to do with the issue? And lets not forget Billu and his comments. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses.
He’s certainly right that you haven’t offered any facts yet for ‘Paul the apostle of Mithras’. Cute Billu: Now you tell us where Easter came from? December 25th birthday for Jesus? Black Friday crucifixation and rising on the Pagan day of the Sun? Pope being called Father, and having a miter, rod and ring?
When did dec.25 become Christmas? You’re quoting — what is it you’re quoting? Trivial parallels to everyday things do not make any point at all. Then I can’t pass this up from Roger. Isn’t it interesting that those who hate the Christians can’t even bring themselves to be polite in public. Roger, do your think your reply was in anyway polite?
And, from discourtesy you pass to personal abuse? Lets get another opinion. You are rude and obnoxious, Pearse PeterT Not to get involved in personal jibes,
Then why do you? Who cares what Peter Terry thinks or says? Look him up online. He’s dishonest, abusive scum, and one of the limited collection of people I won’t bother with. Or am I being dumb here. I wonder… is ‘Moses’ just another name for this odious troll PT? Hmmm. All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just to add a bit to the previous. If you have any doubt, about this. Roger says, This passage is certainly suggestive to me that the cult originated in that area. But when I was reading Clauss and Ulansey, I gathered that they did not in fact regard this as evidence. Here is what David Ulansey says on his own site: Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult’s membership included significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism.
I wish I had Ulansey’s book here, so I could get him at full length. It’s full of stuff about the worship of Perseus in that locale. I understood him (from memory) not to take on board the creation of the cult in the time of Pompey, but of course I could be wrong. I’m certain that Clauss dismissed it. Roger, does he start that paragraph with the statement, our earliest evidence??
Sorry, but I can’t quite work out what the question here is. Interesting. Very Interesting.
I think so. I’m not happy with the way that the statement of Plutarch is handled by scholars, as I said. But on the other hand, if the cult originates in Tarsus, why does the archaology show it originates in Rome? All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
I have no dog in this fight, because I think any similarities are likely due to common religious responses to mortality: death and rebirth with solar or seasonal imagery.
Hurray. So at least one "common argument" thread makes a valid point. Agreed? But I’d be interested in knowing what sort of evidence you would expect to find that demonstrated the NT borrowed from mithraism.
You could find a document that mixes clearly Christian with clearly Mithraic themes. Or there could be more Mithriac themes in the Christian scriptures. I’ve mentioned the visit of the Magi as a tiny shred of evidence. Now if this incident was much longer, and given a much more central place in Christian theology, then the idea that Christianity owed a lot to an Eastern astrological religion would be much more plausible. If someone is making up a religion and incorporating useful aspects of a popular religion, it seems pretty unlikely they would acknowledge that they were borrowing. In fact, I would expect them to try to cover up any precedents.
Why? Mithras worshippers didn’t cover up their Persian antecedents. St Paul doesn’t try his debt to the Jewish scriptures. You imagine that early Christians would be motivated to make life easy for twentieth century apologists. So, what kinds of things would you expect to find if they were borrowing? Where would this evidence be found?
Look at the evidence that Christianity borrowed many religious ideas from Judiasm. Pretty overwhelming. Now look at the evidence for some genuine syncretism. For instance the date of Christmas. We cannot prove that there was no very early tradition that Jesus was born on this date (possibly accurate). But very few scholars would totally dismiss the idea that the date was chosen to correspond with the winter solstice, the idea borrowed from pagan Sun religions. God in His wisdom could have chosen December 25th for His birth, but accepting the traditional date at face value assumes a minor miracle, which we don’t have to do.
Response:
Just to add a bit to the previous. If you have any doubt, about this. Roger says, This passage is certainly suggestive to me that the cult originated in that area. But when I was reading Clauss and Ulansey, I gathered that they did not in fact regard this as evidence. Here is what David Ulansey says on his own site: Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult’s membership included significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism. Roger, does he start that paragraph with the statement, our earliest evidence?? Interesting. Very Interesting.
Response:
The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses.
It is disturbing the number of people in the modern era who are quite prepared to repeat nonsensical hearsay of this kind, without filtering it through their brains or checking it in any way, purely in order to abuse Christians. What sensible non-Christian thinks this is a good way to proceed? A while back I got fed up of hearing this ‘Mithras’ nonsense and looked up all the facts about Mithras, not in modern opinions but in the ancient sources. Immediately I found that statements like the above "The New Testament was … influenced by Mithraism" to be based on nothing more than wishful thinking (at best — Bernard Connor certainly doesn’t know this to be a fact, but he’s making a very definite statement anyway). I haven’t done the same for Dionysius and Osiris, but I don’t believe for a moment that others have either. Why tell lies? All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? "They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult. Now we have pure speculation. It isn’t impossible that St Paul was aware of them. Equally they could have been a group like the Ordo Templum Solaris (or whatever it is) who many people haven’t even heard of. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD. Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it?? Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found. The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses. Then prove the miracles, the resurrection, the assumption, that 12 apostles existed, that Christianity was not influenced by Mithras and on and on and on. PeterT
From Cumont to Ulansey: The Mithraic Studies Revolution In 1975, Mithraic studies scholar John Hinnells lamented "the practical difficulty of any one scholar mastering all the necessary fields" — linguistics, anthropology, history (Indian, Iranian, and Roman!), archaeology, iconography, sociology — in order to get a grip on Mithraic studies. Hinnells of course is on target with his lament; we have made the same observation here regarding Biblical studies. But Mithraism being a relatively dead religion, there are no equivalents of seminaries keeping the Mithraic studies flame alive, and no past history of "Mithraic Fathers" who produced voluminous works and meditations upon Mithra. Thus it is not surprising that for the longest time, from the end of the 19th century until the middle of the 20th, there was only one person in the world who could be regarded as any sort of authority on Mithraism — and that was Franz Cumont. Cumont worked with the thesis that Mithraic belief was of a continuous, fairly invariable tapestry from it’s earliest history up into the Roman period. The first remaining record of a god named Mithra appears as a deity invoked in a treaty dated 1400 BC [Hinn.MS, ix]; thereafter he is one of several Indo-Iranian gods, and he is known for giving orders, assembling people, and marshalling them — perhaps with some militaristic overtones. He also appears as one who represents the concept of fidelity — one of many such abstractions and personifications of virtues in the ancient East, such as Bhaga the god of sharing and Aryaman the god of hospitality (think of them as divine-level Care Bears, if you will). As such, Mithra was the guy who went around dishing out punishment to those who broke treaties. He was the "guardian of the truth," "most dear to men," one "whose long arms seize the liar," who "injures no one and is everyone’s friend," one who was all-seeing and all-knowing — the sun was his "eye" on the world. Mithra was responsible also for bringing rain, vegetation and health — for in the ancient eastern mind, it is the moral behavior of persons (especially the king) that determines the national welfare and brings a fertile climate. If the king in your land broke a treaty, you would be advised to pack up if you were a farmer, because Mithra would soon be gliding in on his chariot with a boar shape on the front (accompanied by a divine sidekick representing Victory) to kick some tail and put things right [MS.27-51]. At other times Mithra was paired with a deity named Varuna, who was his superior. Varuna was the god in charge of helping men cultivate rice (although rice "ripening in the untilled soil" was still Mithra’s business), so the two of them together oversaw the agricultural aspects of men’s lives. The ancient Mithra was a great guy. Lord of the Contract, Upholder of Truth. Peaceful, benevolent, protector, provider of a nice place to live and cattle, not easily provoked. A little later in Aryan history, he did become more of a warrior (previously, he had left a lot of the tail-kicking duties to Varuna), but then switched back to pacifism. But then Zoroastrianism came along, and Mithra had some new things to do. He served as mediator between Ohrmazd and Ahriman, the good and bad gods of Zoroastrian dualism; but at the same time, he underwent something of a demotion as he became one of a group of seven lesser yazatas who served the upper-level deities [Cum.MM, 5] and was assigned some special escort duties: bringing demons to hell, and bringing souls to Paradise. For a while after, things seem to have been quiet for Mithra. As late as the first century BC, Mithra is still associated with the sun along with Apollos and Hermes. [MS.129] So, why all this background? The problem was that Cumont was entirely wrong about very ancient (we shall say for convenience, Iranian) Mithraism being in continuity with Roman Mithraism. For you see, the Roman Mithra was best known for his act of slaying a bull; yet there is no indication that the Iranian Mithra ever made his way into a bullpen for any reason. [MS, xiii] The Roman Mithra didn’t appear at all interested in contract enforcement or escorting demons into hell. (Most likely, because demons are terrible tippers.) And to make matters more complex, his followers in Iran, unlike the Roman Mithraists, did not worship in cave-like rooms (although Porphyry did think, incorrectly, that Zoroaster, the "putative founder of the cult," originated the idea of a cave as the image of the cosmos — Beck.PO, 8), design levels of initiation, or pursue secrecy. [Ulan.OMM, 8] There was simply no solid connection between the two faiths except for the name of the central god, some terminology, and astrological lore of the sort that was widely imported into the Roman Empire from Babylon anyway [Beck.PO, 87]. Nevertheless, because Cumont was locked into the notion of continuity, he assumed (for example) that the Iranian Mithra must have done some bull-slaying somewhere along the line, and he molded the evidence to fit his thesis, straining to find an Iranian myth somewhere that involved a bull-killing (it was done not by Mithra, but by Ahriman) and supposing that there was some connection or unknown story where the Iranian Mithra killed a bull. Cumont’s student Vermaseren [Ver.MSG, 17-18] also tried to find a connection, but the closest he could get was a story in which Soma, the god of life (who, as rain, was described as the semen of the sacred bull fertilizing the earth), was murdered by a consortium of gods which included Mithra — as a very reluctant participant who had to be convinced to go along with the plan. But simply put, the Roman Mithra wasn’t anything like the Iranian one. He dressed really sporty, with a Phrygian cap (typical headgear for Orientals of the day) and a flowing cape that would have made Superman green with envy. He slayed a cosmic bull and earned the worship and respect of the sun god. He had new friends, animals that gave him a helping hand (or paw, or claw) with the bull-slaying, as well as two torch-bearing twins who could have passed for his sons. If this was the … read more »
Response:
You don’t compare like evidence because doing that doesn’t give you the answer you want. "It is not morally acceptable to say … our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally acceptable to … manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that apply only to one’s own story. " [John Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29]
Some assertions are historically true (there was such a man as Mohammed), some are dubious (there may well have been a Trojan war, but we can’t really be sure), some are obviously false (the planet Venus is a rock orbiting the Sun, not a goddess). I don’t see a problem with this. Physical evidence for the Mithras cult in Rome predated physical evidence for Christianity in Rome. Does this prove Mithras-ism predated Christianity? If not, why not.
In the case of Mithraism, most of the evidence we have is physical evidence – the remains of temples. In the case of early Chritianity, most of the evidence we have is textual evidence. The reason is that first century Christians wrote a great deal but built little, whilst first century Mithras worshippers wrote very little down but did build things. We can date Christianity very closely to Pontius Pilate, and it arrived in Rome obviously within thirty or so years of its foundation. The first evidence for Mithraism, with the exception of the single reference in Plutrach, is about AD50. So Christianity and Mithraism arrived in Rome at about the same time, but probably Christianity had the slight edge. The first definite evidence for Mithraism is about twenty years after Pilate’s tenure in Palestine, so it is likely that Mithraism is slightly later, but of course you can’t prove that absolutely.
Response:
Tony Miller has had his say, and what was that: LOL!!!! Mose, ol’ boy, you’re a hoot! Great comeback Tony. You sure gave us a lot to discuss. Do you think no one sees the classic purpose of your post? It’s a standard by the ignorant. When they can’t argue, they poke fun. Until you actually post something, we’ll just consider you amusing. Then Malcolm has his say. And what is that? Plutarch could be wrong. It was only a small cult. But what did Plutarch actually say? I read where he says that they practiced the rites of religious mysteries, OF WHICH THOSE OF MITHRAS HAVE BEEN PRESERVED TO OUR OWN TIME. And his Lives was written what ca. 100AD. And thank you Malcolm for admitting there might have been a small mithraic community in 67BC. I’m so glad that you could read what he said. That they were practicing rites of mithras, and they have been preserved to our own time.. And then of course Roger. What does he say? I don’t claim to be an expert either. This passage is certainly suggestive to me that the cult originated in that area. But when I was reading Clauss and Ulansey, I gathered that they did not in fact regard this as evidence, given that it was (a) second century and (b) rather against the flow of all the other data for an origin in Rome itself in the mid first century. I think (not recall exactly) that they suggested that in fact the pirates were worshippers of Perseus (also keen on phrygian caps, I gather) and that by the time of Plutarch this has become a vague rumour which Plutarch has identified as Mithras. Is it true? I’m not comfortable with this type of argument myself. What do other people think? So, lets see. Plutarch, a respected historian, makes a comment ca 100AD, and says that these pirates amoung other reliogious rites, practiced mithraic rites, and these rites of Mithras have come down to his own time. And Roger says the passage is suggestive.Then he quotes that two writers, did not regard it as evidence, why?? Because it was 2nd century. It was 100AD. And the second reason?? It did not fit their theory that the cult started in Rome ca. 50AD. Then he suggests that maybe Plutarch, mixed up the worship of Perseus and Mithras. But again, what does Plutarch say?? They practiced rites of religious mysteries, amoung which those of Mithras have been perserved to our own time. So, yes Roger, maybe they did worship Perseus also. But the historian, says that the mithras rites were the ones perserved to his own day, which is 100AD. A few questions. Were there Roman soldiers posted to Asia Minor in 67BC.? Was the cult of Mitras very popular with Roman Troops? Did these Roman troops get credit for taking the cult to Rome? And lets not forget Billu and his comments. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses. Cute Billu: Now you tell us where Easter came from? December 25th birthday for Jesus? Black Friday crucifixation and rising on the Pagan day of the Sun? Pope being called Father, and having a miter, rod and ring? Then I can’t pass this up from Roger. Isn’t it interesting that those who hate the Christians can’t even bring themselves to be polite in public. Roger, do your think your reply was in anyway polite? Lets get another opinion. You are rude and obnoxious, Pearse PeterT Not to get involved in personal jibes, but he does have a point Roger. Have an excellent day.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? "They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult. Now we have pure speculation. It isn’t impossible that St Paul was aware of them. Equally they could have been a group like the Ordo Templum Solaris (or whatever it is) who many people haven’t even heard of. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD. Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it?? Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found. The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris. Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses.
Then prove the miracles, the resurrection, the assumption, that 12 apostles existed, that Christianity was not influenced by Mithras and on and on and on. PeterT
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? "They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult. Now we have pure speculation. It isn’t impossible that St Paul was aware of them. Equally they could have been a group like the Ordo Templum Solaris (or whatever it is) who many people haven’t even heard of. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD. Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it?? Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found. The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris.
Nice assertion too bad it can’t be backed up by facts, only guesses.
Response:
Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found. Typical apologist contortion.
Ad hominem noted. Isn’t it interesting that those who hate the Christians can’t even bring themselves to be polite in public, never mind keep to the facts or the subject. You don’t compare like evidence because doing that doesn’t give you the answer you want.
Misrepresentation noted. That is your technique, boy. "It is not morally acceptable to say … our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally acceptable to … manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that apply only to one’s own story. " [John Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29]
Hypocrisy noted. So why do you keep doing it? Physical evidence for the Mithras cult in Rome predated physical evidence for Christianity in Rome. Does this prove Mithras-ism predated Christianity? If not, why not.
Answer your own jibes, troll. Dirk Hartog I don’t care what you believe.
Lie #1. You never post anything but religious abuse. I care what the evidence is.
Lie #2. You never offer any. I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs.
Lie #3. You’ll say anything, so long as it serves your purpose. Boy am I glad I don’t share this creep’s religion! Roger Pearse
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found. Typical apologist contortion. Ad hominem noted. Isn’t it interesting that those who hate the Christians can’t even bring themselves to be polite in public, never mind keep to the facts or the subject. You don’t compare like evidence because doing that doesn’t give you the answer you want. Misrepresentation noted. That is your technique, boy. "It is not morally acceptable to say … our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally acceptable to … manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that apply only to one’s own story. " [John Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29] Hypocrisy noted. So why do you keep doing it? Physical evidence for the Mithras cult in Rome predated physical evidence for Christianity in Rome. Does this prove Mithras-ism predated Christianity? If not, why not. Answer your own jibes, troll. Dirk Hartog I don’t care what you believe. Lie #1. You never post anything but religious abuse. I care what the evidence is. Lie #2. You never offer any. I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs. Lie #3. You’ll say anything, so long as it serves your purpose. Boy am I glad I don’t share this creep’s religion!
It is crystal clear that any judgement this poster makes concerning any historic issue surrounding Christianity, is clouded by his personal religious dogma hence I would take what ever he says with a grain of salt. You are rude and obnoxious, Pearse PeterT – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Roger Pearse
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Lately there has been a fair amount on the groups about Mithras. Origins, whether it is Persian, and so on. My concern about Mithras, is simply an historic one. Was it in practice before christianity? Lets examine some facts. First a quote from a book. If one needs to they can look up the Plutarch bit. I’ll accept that as it is. David Ulansey – The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult’s membership included significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism.
The problem I have with the mithratic connection is that there is no evidence of ‘borrowing’ only guesswork. There is also very very very little evidence of what the mithratic cults were about. It was a MYSTERY religion meaning inductees wer taught orally once brought into the fold. People take an inscription here, a carving there and spin a story and then insist it’s true. We don’t even know what mithraism was about much less making it a ’source’ for christianity. You are taking someones GUESSES and presuming that they are the facts and again presuming that they influenced Christianity.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? "They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC.
I don’t claim to be an expert either. This passage is certainly suggestive to me that the cult originated in that area. But when I was reading Clauss and Ulansey, I gathered that they did not in fact regard this as evidence, given that it was (a) second century and (b) rather against the flow of all the other data for an origin in Rome itself in the mid first century. I think (not recall exactly) that they suggested that in fact the pirates were worshippers of Perseus (also keen on phrygian caps, I gather) and that by the time of Plutarch this has become a vague rumour which Plutarch has identified as Mithras. Is it true? I’m not comfortable with this type of argument myself. What do other people think? So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD.
‘Admits’? Is it a crime 
Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous.
Lots of inscriptions, all starting ca. 80-ish AD I think. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings.
Malicious speculation. Von Danikenists used to do this. The idea that one should not say what one does not know to be true never bothered them. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it??
Did you mean ‘Obscurantists’? You’d better let Dr. Ulansey and Dr. Clauss know that, in your view, they’re all obscurantists. Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found.
Presumably so. But if someone took the view that it did arise in the Republican age, I suppose we could go with it. What opinions that cult involved, and whether it had much to do with the cult as known in the second century we would find difficult to know. All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found.
Typical apologist contortion. You don’t compare like evidence because doing that doesn’t give you the answer you want. "It is not morally acceptable to say … our story is truth but yours is myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally acceptable to … manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that apply only to one’s own story. " [John Crossan, The Birth of Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29] Physical evidence for the Mithras cult in Rome predated physical evidence for Christianity in Rome. Does this prove Mithras-ism predated Christianity? If not, why not. Dirk Hartog I don’t care what you believe. I care what the evidence is. I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? "They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult. Now we have pure speculation. It isn’t impossible that St Paul was aware of them. Equally they could have been a group like the Ordo Templum Solaris (or whatever it is) who many people haven’t even heard of. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD. Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it?? Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found.
The New Testament was not only influenced by Mithraism, but also by the cults of Dionsyius-Baccus and Osiris. Bernard
Response:
Lately there has been a fair amount on the groups about Mithras. Origins, whether it is Persian, and so on. My concern about Mithras, is simply an historic one. Was it in practice before christianity? Lets examine some facts.
LOL!!!! Mose, ol’ boy, you’re a hoot! -Tony — For fairly troll free Catholic discussion, join on the web at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romancatholic/ "Or could it confirm that he’s [Joseph Geloso's] a locution short of a dogma?" – Daniel Hoehr
Response:
Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry??
"They themselves [the Cilician pirates] offered strange sacrifices upon Mount Olympus, and performed certain secret rites or religious mysteries, among which those of Mithras have been preserved to our own time having received their previous institution from them." (Plutarch, Lives13) So it isn’t clear that the pirates were Mithras worshippers, though their rite were incorporated into those of Mithras. Also of course Putarch may not be right. And this is all we have for Mithraism pre-AD. However (I am no expert) I don’t see anything too unreasonable in arguing for a small Mithraic community in 67BC. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult.
Now we have pure speculation. It isn’t impossible that St Paul was aware of them. Equally they could have been a group like the Ordo Templum Solaris (or whatever it is) who many people haven’t even heard of. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD.
Roger knows a lot about Mithraism. There’s solid evidence for Mithraism from about then, and only this one scrap of Plutarch for anything previous. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it??
That’s pure speculation. The dates fit, but there’s nothing about Mithras in St Pauls extant writings. The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it??
Christinaity predates any physical evidence for the Mithras cult in the Roman Empire. Since we don’t have a very complete historical record, we can’t rule out a few minor groups existing previous to then, but obviously there weren’t many, or the temples would have been found.
Response:
Lately there has been a fair amount on the groups about Mithras. Origins, whether it is Persian, and so on. My concern about Mithras, is simply an historic one. Was it in practice before christianity? Lets examine some facts. First a quote from a book. If one needs to they can look up the Plutarch bit. I’ll accept that as it is. David Ulansey – The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries – Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult’s membership included significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism. Now lets look at some actual History shall we?? Tarsus a city in Cilicia. It became one of the richest and greatest cities of the east under the Romans after 104BC. So lets round that off to 100BC. So it is safe to assume that there were Roman soldiers there in 100BC. Was the cult of Mithras, a cult that was popular with Roman soldiers? Well yes it was. And we know that the cult was in the Roman Province of Cilicia in 67 BC. And Jesus was crucified when?? Approximately 33AD?? So, it is then safe to say that the cult of Mithras was in the Roman provinces 100 years before Christ and his ministry?? But lets take this all one step further. The so called Apostle Paul. Where was he from?? Hey, Acts say he was from Tarsus, a city in Cilicia. He is supposed to have studied under the great Gamaliel. Would there be a chance that maybe, just maybe, Paul was familiar with the cult of Mithras. I mean during Paul’s varied career, he persecuted Jews, and when he was finally going to be killed by the Jews, he quickly ran to the Roman Governor. With the Roman Governor, Paul claims to be a Roman. And the cult of Mithras was popular with Roman Soldiers. I think maybe Paul was aware of this cult. So, now our resident expert, Roger admits that Modern scholars consider that this religion was founded in Rome ca. 50AD. Now ca. means about. If it was in the Roman province of Cilicia 137 years before that, maybe in Rome a little earlier. Lets see. Jesus died approximately 33AD. When did Paul arrive in Rome? Eusebius seems to think it was during the reign of Nero, who just happened to rule from 54-68AD. So, lets see. Mithras arrived in Rome ca. 50AD. Could have been earlier, as it was popular with Roman soldiers, and they were serving in Cilicia in 67BC when it was supposedly introduced there. Interesting, The cult seems to have been in Rome, just a little before the christians. Or maybe, out hero, Paul brought it?? Another tactic that the anti-mithras crowd like to spout now. It does not go back to the ancient Persian diety. Any expert on the religion, will tell you they are not sure. In some respects it very much looks like the Persian religion, and in many respects it does not. That is not surprising. Imagine you compared Christianity of today with the religion of Jesus time. There is no doubt, that Jesus celebrated the Jewish Sabbath. No doubt that he celebrated the Jewish High days, like the Passover, Unleaven Bread, etc. In the Gospels, In Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus never refers to himself as the Son of God. He always uses the term Son of Man. This is so pronounced that Jesus uses the term Son of Man 55 times in the first three gospels. Even in John, he uses the term Son of Man 10 times to 4 for the Son of God. I just mention this as a similiarity, but in Ezekiel, the prophet Ezekiel is referred to as the Son of Man 88 times. Interesting. The point being that Christianity of today is a far cry from what Jesus celebrated in his day. So, the Mithras cult of Rome, may very well have some differences from the Old Persian religion. Do they both have the ritual killing of the Bull? A number of other similiarities?? The bottom line to all this is simple. Roger and a bunch of the Obscurants would like you to believe that Christianity predates Mithras. Does it?? Check the facts.
Response:
mac