Where's Mithras ??? (page 2)

skiz

There doesn't seem to be a dispute as to whether or not the Persian version of Mithras predated Jesus by hundreds of years

There doesn't seem to be a dispute as to whether or not the Persian version of Mithras contained scriptures or written doctrines, it didn't

There doesn't seem to be a dispute that the point in time when the fully developed Roman version of Mithras was circulating can not be determined. It can not be determined if it was fully developed before Jesus life or after

There doesn't seem to be a dispute as to whether or not the Roman version of Mithras contained many similarities to the Gospel accounts of Jesus life such as:

Virgin birth
Twelve followers
Killing and resurrection
Miracles
Birthdate on December 25
Morality
Mankind's savior
Known as the Light of the world

So isn't the central question .....

..... what proof exists that the Persian Mithras mirrored the Jesus type concepts of the Roman Mithras ?

David

peacefulpete

Skiz...The main question is whether the religious environment of the early centuries CE could, without any need for miraculous intervention, fullly explain and account for the emergence of a new cult with a dying/raising godman. Students of religious history and developement see obvious kinship between the Jesus cults (there were many) and other mystery (meaning professing to have secret knowledge) cults that developed both before and contemporaneously. It is a modern Apologist tactic to confuse the matter by suggesting that if this one cult can not be shown to have fully developed prior to the emergence of the Jesus cult, then the Gospels are true. It is like the O.J. lawyers suggesting that "if the glove doesn't fit you must aquit"! The question you asked is easy to answer from the information already provided. No, we know very little about the Persian cult other than his virgin birth and some stories wherein the Mithra charater plays a minor role. Early authors and historians did assume too much in concluding the Persian Mithra god had a cult similar to the Roman form. In fact it would have been VERY surprizing if it were so. Cults and traditions never remain unchanged for hundreds much less thousands of years. The Roman Mithra cult was a product of it's time and religious environment. Cults of Artemis, Attis and Dionysus had wide followings. Osirus was making a comeback. These and other political developements forged a brand new version of the Persian myth in the first centuy BC. Similarly cults like those of Jesus and Apollonius of Tyana were products of the times. This is why they share stories and imagery. Cults and legends grow collaterally from common soil. Bull slaying and blood sacrifice,virgin/immaculate births, half man half gods, miraculous cures, control over natural forces, expelling demons, births and deaths coinciding with the Solstices or Spring/fall agricultural cycles, sage counsel and calls for religious reforms are standard material from this period. Precedents of these motifs in some cults date back thousands of years BC. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

gumby

One doesn't need to only look at mithra to see how Jesus was a copied motif. Most all of the mystery religions were webbed together in how their deities functioned. A godman such as Jesus and his characteristics, go back much further than Mithrasism. Take a look at 'mystery religions' and you will see many religious society's that borrowed from one another. You might want to buy a book on the subject also......such as "The Jesus Mysteries"...or "The Christ Conspiracy". These books provide documentation on matters under discussion whearas a website might not. Good luck.....it's a fun ride.

Gumby

peacefulpete

The Christ Conspiracy while insightful at points is not the best choice. The author has taken heat for less than scholarly style and wild conspiracy weaving. Earl Doherty's Book, the Jesus Puzzle is better as companion to the Jesus Mysteries to introduce a person to the interrelatednessof theses cults. Both books present the argument that the Jesus character was originally a Mythical one that became refashioned as a Jewish reformer by Roman Christians 50-100 years after the stories were first circulated. This is controvertial. The debates rage about whether Jesus was a real Jew (or composite of a number of real people) that was overlain with mythology or the other way around as these authors propose. The conclusion in this controversy is really irrelevent to most of us, as what matters is the kinship that i mentioned earlier. These authors do a fine job introducing lay people like us to the facts.

Enishi

Some of the research I've done seems to suggest that Jesus was originally a Nazorean Essence, a teacher who lived before the time suggested in the Gospels. Those who formulated the early Christian religion took elements from Mithraism and the other Mystery Schools because they all shared similar ideas, and applied these allegorically to Jesus. The fact that the Gospels are not literally true doesn't mean that they are some sort of evil conspiracy as people have suggested. Although people may scoof at them today, many of the ancient myths (even the seemingly ridicolous ones) were the outer form of complex spiritual teachings. For instance, the Bible is literally a gold mine of occult teachings, even though most don't realize it.

peacefulpete

That is one possible scenario that seems to pull all the pieces together. And i agree that the atmosphere of "conspiracy and lies" spawned by some authors is not helpful to serious students who understand the function of myth and tradition in human history.

hooberus

skiz said:
There doesn't seem to be a dispute as to whether or not the Roman version of Mithras contained many similarities to the Gospel accounts of Jesus life such as:
Virgin birth

skiz, how can the birth of Mithras be classified as a "Virgin birth" (fully grown coming from solid rock)? It can be called a miraculous birth, but it is no where really close to the virgin birth of Jesus (a baby born from a woman who had knew no man).

http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_04_02_04_MMM.html

Next, the cave part. First of all, Mithra was not born of a virgin in a cave; he was born out of solid rock, which presumably left a cave behind -- and I suppose technically the rock he was born out of could have been classified as a virgin! Here is how one Mithraic scholar describes the scene on Mithraic depictions: Mithra "wearing his Phrygian cap, issues forth from the rocky mass. As yet only his bare torso is visible. In each hand he raises aloft a lighted torch and, as an unusual detail, red flames shoot out all around him from the petra genetrix." [MS.173] Mithra was born a grown-up, but you won't hear the copycatters mention this! (The rock-birth scene itself was a likely carryover from Perseus, who experienced a similar birth in an underground cavern; Ulan.OMM, 36.)

peacefulpete

reread the posts hooberus.

hooberus

pete, can you please show me where Mithras was "born of a virgin"?

peacefulpete

The largest near-eastern Mithraeum was built in western Persia at Kangavar, dedicated to 'Anahita, the Immaculate Virgin Mother of the Lord Mithras'. ........ According to Persian traditions, the god Mithras was actually incarnated into the human form of the Saviour expected by Zarathustra. Mithras was born of Anahita, an immaculate virgin mother once worshipped as a fertility goddess before the hierarchical reformation. Anahita was said to have conceived the Saviour from the seed of Zarathustra preserved in the waters of Lake Hamun in the Persian province of Sistan. ......According to Persian mythology, Mithras was born of a virgin given the title 'Mother of God'.

Where's Mithras ???

Share this