Mithra and Jesus

[John Powell]

I have become very doubtful that any story of Mithra rising from the dead predates the Christian Gospels - or at least that we have any evidence that this is the case, and my main reason for holding this doubt is that those who perpetuate this claim about Mithra do not provide any sources.

POWELL:
Ok.

Why do you believe that "Mithra rising from the dead" post dates the Christian Gospels? Is there something about theologial borrowing in this case that offends your worldview?

Jack Bauer:
My second line of enquiry would be to look at the dying/rising story of Mithra to see if it was purported to be a case of bodily resurrection at all, but I haven't got to that stage yet. I want to give the proponents of this claim a couple of days more to offer something.

POWELL:
I've seen that terminology used: "bodily resurrection." What about arms and legs and so on do you think wouldn't be a body? Don't you mean "physical resurrection" as in the kind of body that could be felt rather than merely seen (like a spirit).

John Powell

[Johnny MacManky]

I'm especially interested in this topic because a good few years back I was n00b enough to be taken in by the Freke & Gandy The Jesus Mysteries rubbish.

Here's the earliest ref. I have found to so far:

TERTULLIAN

THE PRESCRIPTION AGAINST HERETICS.

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. PETER HOLMES, D.D., F.R.A.S., ETC., ETC.]


CHAP. XL.--NO DIFFERENCE IN THE SPIRIT OF IDOLATRY AND OF HERESY. IN THE RITES OF IDOLATRY, SATAN IMITATED AND DISTORTED THE DIVINE INSTITUTIONS OF THE OLDER SCRIPTURES. THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES CORRUPTED BY HIM IN THE PERVERSIONS OF THE VARIOUS HERETICS.

The question will arise, By whom is to be interpreted the sense of the passages which make for heresies? By the devil, of course, to whom pertain those wiles which pervert the truth, and who, by the mystic rites of his idols, vies even with the essential portions of the sacraments of God. He, too, baptizes some--that is, his own believers and faithful followers; he promises the putting away of sins by a layer (of his own); and 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 crown. http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tullian11.html

Written late 2nd, early 3rd C.

See also http://www.tertullian.org/works/de_p...tm#manuscripts

[Glenn P]

POWELL:
Ok.

Why do you believe that "Mithra rising from the dead" post dates the Christian Gospels?

I said that this is what I read somewhere.

Is there something about theologial borrowing in this case that offends your worldview?

I'm not interested in any psychological issues at all in this thread. This thread is going to remain a thread about a historical claim and the evidence for it, and not whether or not the said claim causes offense.

POWELL:
I've seen that terminology used: "bodily resurrection." What about arms and legs and so on do you think wouldn't be a body? Don't you mean "physical resurrection" as in the kind of body that could be felt rather than merely seen (like a spirit).

John Powell

In the first century, the idea of resurrection just was the idea of something bodily - tangible and physical. So if it is claimed by somebody that there was some sort of pre-Christian belief in Mithra rising from the dead, and an example is cited, the next step is to scrutinise that example to see whether it is a claim about resurrection or not. It's all part of the historical enquiry about the claim for which I am requesting evidence.

This thread is only about historical evidence for a particular claim. That is all it will ever be about. if that results in deafening silence, then that is fine, but it will not turn into a maze of side issues that distract from the fact that no evidence has been presented for the claim that the OP is inquiring about.


Please absolutely respect this.

[John Powell]

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: lilpixieofterror

Deleted at request of Thread Starter. Please stay on topic.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Ratnat]

Those claims are perhaps best pursued in a thread on that topic.
No, what I'm talking about is not the claim that Mithraism's teaching about a dying and rising god has any basis in Christianity. I'm talking about the opposite claim, namely that the Christian belief in a dying and rising God was influenced or even copied from Mithraism.
Ah, there we go. That's the subject of this thread. Presumably you got this from some source. Can you cite the second century source that claims Mithra rose from the dead? I'd appreciate it.

I doubt anyone claimed Mithra was a human who died and rose from the dead. Like other figures that played in the many popular "Mystery Cults" he was merely the anthropomorphic depiction of a cosmological event (Sun movement).

Early Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Tertullian who tried to deal with similarities of certain rituals grasped at straws to explain them away.

.

[Glenn P]

I doubt anyone claimed Mithra was a human who died and rose from the dead. Like other figures that played in the many popular "Mystery Cults" he was merely the anthropomorphic depiction of a cosmological event (Sun movement).

That's interesting. Are you saying that the idea of a bodily resurrection was not present in Mithraism to begin with, and therefore could not have been copied from it?

Early Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Tertullian who tried to deal with similarities of certain rituals grasped at straws to explain them away.

.

I'm not sure what "certain rituals" might be that have importance to this thread (and I wasn't aware of Justin Martyr referring to Mithraism, could you show me where he did that?). Ratnat, do you have any suggestions as to the earliest reference to Mithra rising from the dead - even if not in an actual resurrection, in any form at all? The only real purpose of this thread is to collect sources of information about this one very narrowly defined issue.

Thanks.

[Ratnat]

That's interesting. Are you saying that the idea of a bodily resurrection was not present in Mithraism to begin with, and therefore could not have been copied from it?

I'm not sure what "certain rituals" might be that have importance to this thread (and I wasn't aware of Justin Martyr referring to Mithraism, could you show me where he did that?). Ratnat, do you have any suggestions as to the earliest reference to Mithra rising from the dead - even if not in an actual resurrection, in any form at all? The only real purpose of this thread is to collect sources of information about this one very narrowly defined issue.

Thanks.

Here are the passages from Justin. Check out the link for many other citations.

Justin Martyr

Clauss: Justin Martyr, 1 Apology. 66 (108)

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. (ANF)

Clauss: Dialogue with Trypho. 70 (62 n.77, 144-5)

70. And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words? For they contrived that the words of righteousness be quoted also by them. But I must repeat to you the words of Isaiah referred to, in order that from them you may know that these things are so. They are these: `Hear, ye that are far off, what I have done; those that are near shall know my might. The sinners in Zion are removed; trembling shall seize the impious. Who shall announce to you the everlasting place? The man who walks in righteousness, speaks in the right way, hates sin and unrighteousness, and keeps his hands pure from bribes, stops the ears from hearing the unjust judgment of blood closes the eyes from seeing unrighteousness: he shall dwell in the lofty cave of the strong rock. Bread shall be given to him, and his water [shall be] sure. Ye shall see the King with glory, and your eyes shall look far off. Your soul shall pursue diligently the fear of the Lord. Where is the scribe? where are the counsellors? where is he that numbers those who are nourished,-the small and great people? with whom they did not take counsel, nor knew the depth of the voices, so that they heard not. The people who are become depreciated, and there is no understanding in him who hears.' Now it is evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks. And this prophecy proves that we shall behold this very King with glory; and the very terms of the prophecy declare loudly, that the people foreknown to believe in Him were foreknown to pursue diligently the fear of the Lord. Moreover, these Scriptures are equally explicit in saying, that those who are reputed to know the writings of the Scriptures, and who hear the prophecies, have no understanding. And when I hear, Trypho," said I, "that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this. (ANF)

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/

[SpinyNorman]

[Glenn P]

Well, I'm certainly not interested in following any links. The idea was that people would bring evidence of belief in Mithra rising from the dead into the thread.

Now that you've quoted the two passages from Justin - presumably the two best examples you have, it certainly reveals the bluffing of you saying "Early Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Tertullian who tried to deal with similarities of certain rituals grasped at straws to explain them away."

I see no straw grasping at all. In his apology, which was dedicated to Emperor Antoninus, who ruled from 138-161 (it's funny that you dated the Apology to a time when Justin would have been around eight years old! More likely date is around AD 156), Justin claims that the followers of Mithras have imitated the Christian institution of the Lord's Supper. Now, in what way, according to you, was he grasping at straws?

Because it would be off topic here and I'm being very strict about my thread staying exactly on topic, don't post your explanation here. You can start your own thread and if you like, you can post a link to it in this thread, which is about the belief that Mithra rose from the dead.

In the second quote, Justin suspects that the followers of Mithra have imitated a prophecy from Daniel, on the grounds that they teach that Mithra was begotten of a rock.

It's no good calling this grasping at straws, when in fact there's no problem to be explained in the first place. To even think that there's a strong similarity between Daniels vision and the belief that a person would be begotten by a rock was a mistake in the first place. Rather than make the accusation of imitation, Justin should simply have laughed at the comparison.

So colour me unconvinced, but feel free to start a thread on that other subject if you wish. Again, none of this even hints at the subject of this thread, a subject that will not be diverted, namely; When is the earliest reference to the belief that Mithra rose from the dead, a belief that Christianity allegedly (according to some), imitated?

By the way: Just in case you might want to, please don't reply by complaining about me insisting that the thread stay on one narrowly defined subject. As the thread starter, I can insist on this.

[Ratnat]

Well, I'm certainly not interested in following any links. The idea was that people would bring evidence of belief in Mithra rising from the dead into the thread.

Now that you've quoted the two passages from Justin - presumably the two best examples you have, it certainly reveals the bluffing of you saying "Early Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Tertullian who tried to deal with similarities of certain rituals grasped at straws to explain them away."

I see no straw grasping at all. In his apology, which was dedicated to Emperor Antoninus, who ruled from 138-161 (it's funny that you dated the Apology to a time when Justin would have been around eight years old! More likely date is around AD 156), Justin claims that the followers of Mithras have imitated the Christian institution of the Lord's Supper. Now, in what way, according to you, was he grasping at straws?

Because it would be off topic here and I'm being very strict about my thread staying exactly on topic, don't post your explanation here. You can start your own thread and if you like, you can post a link to it in this thread, which is about the belief that Mithra rose from the dead.

In the second quote, Justin suspects that the followers of Mithra have imitated a prophecy from Daniel, on the grounds that they teach that Mithra was begotten of a rock.

It's no good calling this grasping at straws, when in fact there's no problem to be explained in the first place. To even think that there's a strong similarity between Daniels vision and the belief that a person would be begotten by a rock was a mistake in the first place. Rather than make the accusation of imitation, Justin should simply have laughed at the comparison.

So colour me unconvinced, but feel free to start a thread on that other subject if you wish. Again, none of this even hints at the subject of this thread, a subject that will not be diverted, namely; When is the earliest reference to the belief that Mithra rose from the dead, a belief that Christianity allegedly (according to some), imitated?

By the way: Just in case you might want to, please don't reply by complaining about me insisting that the thread stay on one narrowly defined subject. As the thread starter, I can insist on this.

Sorry if I was not clear. I think the earliest extant reference(cited by another poster) is made by Tertullian (mistakingly). Any depiction of a resurrection was simply the annual death and rebirth of the sun as held by most solar myth cults.

Also, I did not date the passage on Justin..it is from the link.

[Glenn P]

Sorry if I was not clear. I think the earliest extant reference(cited by another poster) is made by Tertullian (mistakingly).

OK, so late second-early third century AD. Thanks.

Any depiction of a resurrection was simply the annual death and rebirth of the sun as held by most solar myth cults.

Except the followers of those myths, as far as I can tell, did not believe that anyone had risen from the dead. But that's definitely for another thread.

Also, I did not date the passage on Justin..it is from the link.

OH, OK well they were way off.

[Kabane52]

Mithra never died.

[John Powell]

Jack Bauer:
That's interesting. Are you saying that the idea of a bodily resurrection was not present in Mithraism to begin with, and therefore could not have been copied from it?

POWELL:
You keep using this misguided language of "bodily resurrection," Jack. Are you saying they didn't think Mithra had a body? He had no head or legs or arms? No. You're saying they didn't think he had a physical body.

If I point out errors in your reasoning or in your language then do you intend to have these deleted for being off-topic?

John Powell

[Glenn P]

POWELL:
You keep using this misguided language of "bodily resurrection," Jack. Are you saying they didn't think Mithra had a body? He had no head or legs or arms? No. You're saying they didn't think he had a physical body.

If I point out errors in your reasoning or in your language then do you intend to have these deleted for being off-topic?

John Powell

Your last post that was deleted was off topic, as it wasn't about Mithra, and it wasn't about the question of this thread.

The language of bodily resurrection is correct. It was understood by the ancients, even if not by you. There's nothing to correct, only a subject to distract from, because nobody is providing any evidence.

That's fine. Silence, if there is such silence, needs to be there so that we can all see how bankrupt this claim about Mithra is. Please don't interrupt it with the sound of totally irrelevant clatter.

[LGM]

Your last post that was deleted was off topic, as it wasn't about Mithra, and it wasn't about the question of this thread.

The language of bodily resurrection is correct. It was understood by the ancients, even if not by you.

I assume you have testimony from all the 'ancients' to that effect?

The amusing thing about Jack, is that he's so pretentious, he really thinks he's a genius and has everything figured out about what all ancient people thought and knew about everything.