Posted 08 June 2004 - 08:32 AM
Cloudedmoon,
Welcome to the discussion.
| QUOTE |
| Mithra was born on December 25th. He was considered a great traveling teacher and master. He had 12 companions or disciples. He performed miracles. He was buried in a tomb. After three days he rose again. His resurrection was celebrated every year. Mithra was called "the Good Shepherd." He was considered "the Way, the Truth and the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah." He was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb. His sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ. Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected. His religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper." |
I've encoutered the Mithraic material before from a variety of sources. Concerning the Mithraic story, scholars have precious little to work with because there is only little bit of material. From the material, though, we have no indication that Mithras was referred to as "The Good Shepherd" or "the Way, the Truth, and the Light. I also know of nothing that signifies that Mithras was worshipped on Sunday or that he was identified with the Lion or the Lamb. As far as Easter goes, you'd have a much better argument if you went back to the goddess Ishtar.
All that said, the only similarities that Mithras and Jesus share are the following: The celebration of Jesus and Mithras on Dec. 25 and the usage of a sacred meal to celebrate Jesus and Mithras.
As far as the Dec. 25 date goes, I've noted elsewhere that it appears nowhere in the New Testament in reference to Jesus's birth. In fact, it's not even clear from the Mithraic material that it was celebrated in reference to the Mithras's birth. There are 3rd and 4th century references from early church patriarchs that Jesus's birth was celebrated on that day, but the reason for designating Dec. 25 had to do with Christians trying to compete with religions that worshipped the sun on Dec. 25. Emperor Aurelian set aside this day for reverence to the sun in AD 274. The earliest mention of Dec. 25 in reference to the celebration of Jesus's birth is about AD 337. These Christians were trying to compete with the non-Christians sun-worshippers, so they decided to worship Jesus on that day. The motive wasn't to pinpoint the exact day of Jesus's birth. The closest thing we've got connecting Mithras with Dec. 25 is a scant possibility that adherents celebrated Mithras's emergence from a rock on this day. But this is as close as scholars have gotten.
As far as the sacred meal goes, many religions had (and still do have) sacred meals. However, this is a far cry from saying that Mithras adherents participated in a Eucharist or Lord's Supper in the Christian sense of either of those terms. To prove your point, you can't merely rely on pointing out that both religions had meals; you have to show that the significance of the meals were similar. Not only that, but in the Lord's Supper, Jesus relies so much on the Jewish passover ritual that if you want to accuse Jesus and Christians of borrowing, you have no further to look than Jewish culture and scriptures (which is no big secret). And the Jewish rites and culture are older than the Mithraic myth.
This is the same problem with some of the other similarities you have listed: "The Anointed"[Messiah] and "The Savior". Gods in some way being anointed or in some way being saviors is very widespread, even among cultures that have had no contact with one another. These qualities are so universal in their general meaning that we can't say that just the use of these words in reference to one god or another automatically points to one religion borrowing from another. You have to show that references to Mithras being "anointed" and "a savior" mean the same thing as when those terms are applied to Jesus. And they simply do not. Mystery cults did not mean the same thing metaphysically/theologically by these terms. And the terms are too universal to be able to make a connection. Also, Jesus got the terms "Anointed One" and "Savior" from the Jewish scriptures, which were already around before Mithrasism.
| QUOTE |
| Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected. His religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper." |
There is little proof that Mithras was a dying and rising deity to begin with. In fact, in the mystery religions that do feature a dying and rising deity, the "deaths" and "risings" of said deities only occurs because they are one with nature, and therefore subject to seasonal cycles like winter (death) and spring (birth, or re-birth). Concerning resurrection, no mystery religion has a concept of resurrection that looks like what happened to Jesus.
Lastly, while some mystery cults are older than Christianity, some of the superficial things they have in common with Christianity are not. What has been found, actually, is that in some of the language and rituals of mystery cults was adopted after Christianity was established as religion! So if the allegation of borrowing is going to be rooted in a "who's older?" question, then the mystery cults may be guilty in instances where the Christian-sounding language or rituals they adopted came after Christianity was established. Unfortunately, scholars try to read the post-Christian era mystery cult material back into the pre-Christian era life of mystery cult. This is poor scholarship, though, on their parts.
If truth is not a matter of majority vote, neither is it a matter of minority dissent.
--Douglas Groothius