Mithra and Jesus

[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.

POWELL:
It was in response to a request you made. Are the requests you make off topic or just the criticisms of your requests?

Jack Bauer:
The language of bodily resurrection is correct.

POWELL:
No it's not.

Jack Bauer:
It was understood by the ancients, even if not by you.

POWELL:
Apparently, I understand it better than they do. That's why I'm saying it's wrong.

However, did the Gospel writers characterize the resurrection of Jesus as one in which he had a body, something a spirit doesn't, or as one in which he had a body that can be felt, something a spirit doesn't? Where is this language "bodily resurrection" used in the Bible?

Jack Bauer:
There's nothing to correct, only a subject to distract from, because nobody is providing any evidence.

POWELL:
The language is in need of correction.

Jack Bauer:
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.

POWELL:
What I'm concerned about is someone presenting evidence for a bodily resurrection for Mithra but then you reject it because you SAY it's not a bodily resurrection because of your misguided terminology.

John Powell

[historic salve]

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.

Category error. If you can define "resurrection" in the mystery religions any way you want to (assuming the relevant cognates, egeiro or anastasis, are even applied to the god in question), then where's the parallel?

[Pereynol of Sheer Dread]

In any event, one could well resort to the Logos Christology....

[Johnny MacManky]

Interesting link LGM. I'll read it in more detail later, but for now I've only had time for a very quick skim read.

Supplementary Article No. 13B is in Part Two, found here, has the following comments which, coupled with previous posts above, probably confirm that any claims of Christian borrowing re: resurrection specifically from Mithraism is unfounded.

Probably no pagan savior cult envisioned in its myth the resuscitation of the mourned-over corpse of the god to the status of a former living person, even temporarily. When the 'dying and rising' concept was initially attached directly to the agricultural cycle, the earliest myths, such as that of Eleusis or in the even earlier myths of Inanna or Tammuz, had to do with the descent of the deity to the underworld, not always presented as an actual death, and his or her reemergence to the surface. When such myths began to be applied to humans and their fate, they had to undergo a mystical deepening which embodied much more than the plant and food cycle; they had to encompass human death and what lay beyond—in a different world, since the dead, in universal experience, did not come back to this one.

eta: Later in the same article (but I've used up my 8 lines) the author appears to attribute the concept of a "bodily resurrection" to Jewish ideas concerning a future (i.e. afterlife) Kingdom of God.

[Tladatsi]

I think that is a mis-characterization of what is being suggested. It is not so much that Jesus is similar to Mithra but that Christianity is similar to Mithradism. It must pointed out that this is a very old observation. Both Justin and Tertullian note the similarities in ritual and theology.

For example, Justin notes that Apol. 1, ch. lxvi

Justin

And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστ [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

It would seem that, according to Justin, that the followers of Mithras likewise drank wine which they conceived as the blood of their lord and ate bread that they thought of as the body of their lord. I would note here that in the Didache, while a wine and bread sacrament is mentioned, it is NOT conceived in this way but an entirely different theory.

In Chapter LXX he likewise tries to distinguish Mithrasism from Christianity by asserting that Mithras was born of a rock and that this not, as it would seem some claimed, identical to a quotation from Daniel or Isaiah. In particular to the sharing of bread and wine during the Eucharist is, it would seem, very similar to early (and current) Christian practices.

In Chapter LXXVIII Justin disputes the similarity of Mithras and Jesus both being born in a cave (mangers were often in caves). Justin does not deny the similarity but insists that the followers of Mithras were imitating Jesus (as he does above in regards to he Eucharist. (Interestingly he has the Magi as being Arabs from Damascus.)

Likewise Tertullian responds in Chapter XXII to the attacks upon Christianity as being a copy Mithraism by Celsus. Tertuliian does not actually deny any similarity but rather questions by Celsus mentions a rather obscure cult as compared to more famous ones such the "rites of Hecate" or Eleusis, Comanian Diana, or even than those in Ægina. However, it is clear that Celsus thought there was a similarity and Tertullian was concerned enough to not deny it but change the subject.

In Chapter XL, Tertullian again insists that the followers of Mitras are imatating Christian believes and practices.

Tertullian

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 He, too, baptizes some—that is, his own believers and faithful followers; he promises the putting away of sins by a laver (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. What also must we say to (Satan’s) limiting his chief priest to a single marriage? He, too, has his virgins; he, too, has his proficients in continence. Suppose now we revolve in our minds the superstitions of Numa Pompilius, and consider his priestly offices and badges and privileges, his sacrificial services, too, and the instruments and vessels of the sacrifices themselves, and the curious rites of his expiations and vows: is it not clear to us that the devil imitated the well-known moroseness of the Jewish law? Since, therefore he has shown such emulation in his great aim of expressing, in the concerns of his idolatry, those very things of which consists the administration of Christ’s sacraments, it follows, of course, that the same being, possessing still the same genius, both set his heart upon, and succeeded in, adapting to his profane and rival creed the very documents of divine things and of the Christian saints his interpretation from their interpretations, his words from their words, his parables from their parables. For this reason, then, no one ought to doubt, either that “spiritual wickednesses,” from which also heresies come, have been introduced by the devil, or that there is any real difference between heresies and idolatry, seeing that they appertain both to the same author and the same work that idolatry does. They either pretend that there is another god in opposition to the Creator, or, even if they acknowledge that the Creator is the one only God, they treat of Him as a different being from what He is in truth. The consequence is, that every lie which they speak of God is in a certain sense a sort of idolatry.

[Mithras was very popular among the Roman military, hence the reference to soldiers]

Tertullian notes the many similarities between the practices and theories of Mithras and does not deny them but simply asserts that Satan has stolen them to be used by Mithras. It would seem that he felt the need to explain these similarities so they must have been well known and annoying.

So, it would seem, that the followers of Mitras baptized their initates, offered forgiveness of sin, put a mark on the forehead of followers (think of Ash Wednesday), shared bread during services, spoke of resurrection of the dead, &c.

If there had not been some similarity, both Justin and Tertullian would not have gone to dismiss this similarity as theft and imitation.

Not mentioned by either Justin or Tertullian is that Mithras was born on December 25th, the shortest day of the year. They don't mention it because at that time Christians did not recognize December 25 as Jesus' day of birth but rather January 6 (still celebrated in Ireland as "little Christmas"). It was not until much latter that Jesus birthday was celebrated on the shortest day of the year, the birthday of the Sun.

Likewise they do not mention that the followers of Mithras held Sunday to be holy. This because early Christians, like the Jews, celebrated the "Lord's Day" on Saturday so there was no similarity to explain.

The image of the sword is important to Tertullian, it was key symbol of Mithras. He used the sword to kill the bull. It was a symbol Sol Invictus, the invincible sun, the Latin name for Mithras. The image is that of a sword with the handle up and the point down, resembling the lower case letter "t". It of course resembles the Latin Cross, the nearly universal symbol of Christianity today. However in the time of Tertullian and Justin, it was not so they saw no need to explain that similarity because there was none. (BTW, Romans crucifixes were not "t" shaped but "T" shaped).

Other similarities include Mithras being born to "Anahita, the Immaculate Virgin Mother of the Lord Mithras". Anahita was said to have conceived the Mithras from the seed of Zarathustra preserved in the waters of Lake Hamun in the Persian province of Sistan. In other, contradictory traditions, he is also born without any sex but from the rock wall of a cave.

So I agree, Jesus resembles Mithras not at all. However, there amble comparisons between Christianity and Mitrasism. So much so that the Church Fathers felt the need to explain them away as plagerism.

(Sorry for the length).

Occasionally you might see a TWeb atheist make passing reference to the cult of Mithra as a religion that Christianity got its ideas from by depicting a dying and rising God.

This thread is for any TWeb non-Christian who entertains this claim, or who has made it at TWeb. It's time to step up to the plate. Can you please cite the earliest known reference to Mithra dying and rising again.

Until this is done, any and all references to this belief and its influence on Christianity can and will be dismissed.

Thanks.

[Glenn P]

IMO, Jack is asking for evidence of something that most of us on here do not assert. At first I thought it was merely a strawman but I see it is a specific claim made by what seems a small minority.

Right, it isn't a strawman, it's claim made by some people. If you don't make the claim, then that's good. I wanted to single out one small specific claim and make sure everyone could see that the evidence for it was lacking.

I'm a small man with small projects.

[Glenn P]

I think that is a mis-characterization of what is being suggested. It is not so much that Jesus is similar to Mithra but that Christianity is similar to Mithradism. It must pointed out that this is a very old observation. Both Justin and Tertullian note the similarities in ritual and theology.

Similarity in theology? Well, that is by no means established by those two quotes from Tertullian and Justin, both mentioned earlier in the thread. Did you see those posts?

But actually, I'm not mischaracterizing the claim that I'm asking about. I really am intending to find out about the earliest reference to Mithras rising from the dead, because the claim really has been made that the resurrection of Jesus was borrowed from the teaching about the resurrection of Mithras. Here's an example, in case you think I'm simply makingup a straw man:

Mithraism, like Christianity, offers salvation to its adherents. Mithras was born into the world to save humanity from evil. Both figures ascended in human form, Mithras to wield the sun chariot, Christ to Heaven. The following summarizes the aspects of Mithraism that are also found in Christianity.
"Mithras, the sun-god, was born of a virgin in a cave on December 25, and worshipped on Sunday, the day of the conquering sun. He was a savior-god who rivaled Jesus in popularity. He died and was resurrected in order to become a messenger god, an intermediary between man and the good god of light, and the leader of the forces of righteousness against the dark forces of the god evil."

SOURCE

Our very own Amnouy draws on such claims, quoting them here:

Wikapedia: “Mithras was born from a virgin on the December 25, a date later co-opted by Christians as Christ's birthday in 320 AD. A traveling teacher and master, “Mithras also performed miracles. He had twelve companions as Jesus had twelve disciples. Mithras died for man’s sins and was resurrected on the following Sunday. The crucifix, water baptism and the breaking of bread and wine are also shared by both religions”

There is much more.

SOURCE

There is much more, we are told! So the claims are made, that is a matter of fact. Now, it's not true that Mithraism teaches that Mithras was born of a virgin, as a matter of fact, but my point is just that the parallel is made, and people do suggest that Jesus, or at least parts of his life - most importantly for this thread, his resurrection - were copied fom Mithraism.

If we can get a consensus here that there's really no pre-Christian evicence that Mithraism taught that Mithras was resurrected from the dead, then that's great, but I'm willing to wait a little longer to see if any such evidence comes to light.

[Mountain Man]

Moderated By: Mountain Man

Moved a bunch of posts to here at the request of the thread starter.

To the rest of you, please respect Jack Bauer's wishes as the thread starter and keep your posts on-topic. Read the opening post again if you are unclear as to exactly what the topic is. Any further off-topic posts will be moved or deleted, and we may have to start issuing infraction points if Jack's wishes are blatantly disregarded.

***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.

[Tladatsi]

I see your point.

Yes, the web is full of such claims but there is no evidence to back it up for the most part. There IS evidence that in some versions Mithras myths he was born to a virgin (Anahita, read Joseph Campbell), but then everyone who is anyone was, Buddha, Augustus, Romulus and Remus, Anakin Skywalker to name a few (Isaac was born to a 90 year old woman, which is even more miraculous than being born to virgin). There are several different stories of how Mithras was born or created (created ex nihil by Ahura Masda, and earthly incarnation of Ahura Masda, from the Virgin Anahita, from a rock, etc). Most the other claims, (12 followers, died on the cross, died and born again, etc) I have found no substantiation as yet. A lot of it is just a big echo chamber effect, where everyone repeats the same claims then find substantiation from all of the people who say the same thing.

BTW, no claims that the Christians "stole" Christmas from Mithras / Sol Invictus but rather it was forced up Christians by Constantine who was a follower of Sol Invictus. The same is true of worshiping on Sunday or the using the Latin Cross as the symbol of Christianity. Before, Christians celebrated Jesus' birth on January 6, worshiped God on Saturday, and used the fish as the symbol of their religion.

In regard to Tertullian and Justan, the point is that many people in the Greco-Roman world found these two religions very similar. There would have been no reason for them make the comments they did unless it were so. More to the point, they do not deny the similarities, they simply say that the followers of Mithras "stole" their ideas and practices from the Christians.

Similarity in theology? Well, that is by no means established by those two quotes from Tertullian and Justin, both mentioned earlier in the thread. Did you see those posts?

[Tassman]

[snipped]

There is much more, we are told! So the claims are made, that is a matter of fact. Now, it's not true that Mithraism teaches that Mithras was born of a virgin, as a matter of fact, but my point is just that the parallel is made, and people do suggest that Jesus, or at least parts of his life - most importantly for this thread, his resurrection - were copied fom Mithraism.

If we can get a consensus here that there's really no pre-Christian evicence that Mithraism taught that Mithras was resurrected from the dead, then that's great, but I'm willing to wait a little longer to see if any such evidence comes to light.

The point was correctly made previously that the similarities are between Mithraism and Christianity rather than Mithras and Jesus. It was the intellectual climate of the all-pervasive mystery cults that influenced the early Christian writings not the lives of the particular gods of the Mystery Religions.

Your OP asks that we cite the earliest known reference to Mithra dying and rising again. Until this is done, any and all references to this belief and its influence on Christianity can and will be dismissed”.

But what you are asking for is irrelevant.

Mithraism, the Mystery Cult, most certainly had an influence on early Christianity in the writings of Paul and the early epistles, as did the other Mystery religions.

The fact is that the origins of the Olympian gods who dominated Classical Greece are unknown as are the origins of the Mystery Religions that dominated the Roman Empire and the origins of the Christian religion are also shrouded in doubt.

But there is no doubt that these religions all existed.

What we DO know is that prior to the actual written gospels the most popular forms of religious faith in the very early Christian period were the salvation cults or "Mystery Religions". And we DO know that each of these had its savior god or goddess, such as Mithras, Dionysos, Attis, Isis and Osiris. And we DO know that these cults possessed myths in which the savior deity had overcome death or performed acts which guaranteed a happy existence in the next world plus they possessed rituals such as communal sacred meals and so on.

It would be inconceivable that very early Christianity and the Mystery Religions did not cross-fertilize and influence each another considering the volatile religious atmosphere of the period and considering the obvious similarities between them…especially during the period of the writings of Paul and the other early epistle writers.

But by the period of the gospels CE 70 + and increasingly thereafter we have an historicized, “fleshed out” version of the Pauline Mystery Religion Jesus and such a physical, literal dying/rising god is to my knowledge unique to Christianity.

[Johnny MacManky]

. . . But what you are asking for is irrelevant.

Hi Amnouy,

I don't think we've discussed before. I'm not in this thread simply to bash 'Christ Mythers' and I don't think Jack is either. I'm certainly attempting to carry out an impassionate examination of the historical evidence upon which comments, such as those you've just made, are based. Some evidence may be in ancient documents, other may be archaeological, like the Mithraic temple near Hadrian's Wall just some 100 miles from where I live. (I really should visit it.)

I disagree wholeheartedly that the question put by the OP is "irrelevant". How can a straightforward request for an historical reference be "irrelevant"? Such ancient evidence surely must exist. The question merely asks: "Which is the most ancient?"

. . . What we DO know is that prior to the actual written gospels the most popular forms of religious faith in the very early Christian period were the salvation cults or "Mystery Religions". And we DO know that each of these had its savior god or goddess, such as Mithras, Dionysos, Attis, Isis and Osiris. And we DO know that these cults possessed myths in which the savior deity had overcome death or performed acts which guaranteed a happy existence in the next world plus they possessed rituals such as communal sacred meals and so on.

How do we know these things? Upon what information to we base this knowledge? Is it upon a twentieth century book by Freke & Gandy, or upon various online sources? Maybe it's based upon the research of some scholar over 100 years ago, or maybe it's based upon some extant ancient evidence dated prior to the Current Era.

I put it to you that the earliest reference specifically to resurrection as a feature of the Mithraic Mystery cult is made by Tertullian (which I posted earlier in the thread) dated to around 300AD.

:johnny:

[Glenn P]

The point was correctly made previously that the similarities are between Mithraism and Christianity rather than Mithras and Jesus. It was the intellectual climate of the all-pervasive mystery cults that influenced the early Christian writings not the lives of the particular gods of the Mystery Religions.

Amnouy, everyone in this thread has seen a direct quote from none other than you, drawing parallels between the life of Mithras and the life of Jesus.

Your OP asks that we cite the earliest known reference to Mithra dying and rising again. Until this is done, any and all references to this belief and its influence on Christianity can and will be dismissed”.

But what you are asking for is irrelevant.

Nobody is asking you to get excited about the topic of the OP. If you find it irrelevant, then feel free not to attempt an answer. But out of respect for the topic, please don't try to divert it. Just answer, or don't.

<snipped out debunked claims about the evolution of the teachings about Jesus' life>... and such a physical, literal dying/rising god is to my knowledge unique to Christianity.

Thank you. That last part was on topic.

[Tassman]

Amnouy, everyone in this thread has seen a direct quote from none other than you, drawing parallels between the life of Mithras and the life of Jesus.

Parallels yes, but not here on earth but rather they both rose from the dead in the heavenly spheres.

You keep attempting to bring the dying/rising Mithra into the material world where you believe Jesus performed his saving acts and, quite rightly, rejecting the resurrection comparison between Jesus and Mithra.

But my point is the reverse.

Paul lived in a world where Platonism was the dominant religious/philosophical influence and Platonism, the basis of many of the mystery religions, divided the universe into a timeless, perfect higher realm (containing the "genuine" reality, intellectually accessible to man), and an imperfect, transient world of matter as its pale copy on earth. The mystical activity of the cultic gods was thought to take place in the upper dimensions of reality, having effects on humanity below.

And, for Paul, it is in THIS purely spiritual plane that the saving acts of Jesus Christ occurred.

The man Jesus (if he existed at all which I personally think he did…as a man) was not relevant to the divine Christ of Paul, which he preached as revealed directly to him by god, NOT by the life and work of the recent historical man Jesus.

Nobody is asking you to get excited about the topic of the OP. If you find it irrelevant, then feel free not to attempt an answer. But out of respect for the topic, please don't try to divert it. Just answer, or don't.

I am not trying to divert the OP but I am simply trying to point out that, as far as I know, NO ONE thinks that Mithra lived in the material plane of existence and that he physically rose from the dead here on earth so you have set up a straw man.

Thank you. That last part was on topic.

My pleasure!

[Glenn P]

Parallels yes, but not here on earth but rather they both rose from the dead in the heavenly spheres.

Don't be evasive. You just said that the comparison was not between Jesus and Mithras, but between Mithraism and Christianity. I pointed out that in fact you yourself are on record making direct comparisons between Mithras and Jesus. Now instead iof admitting that you were flatly wrong, you are arguing about the content of that comparison.

You keep attempting to bring the dying/rising Mithra into the material world where you believe Jesus performed his saving acts and, quite rightly, rejecting the resurrection comparison between Jesus and Mithra.

But my point is the reverse.

Paul lived in a world where Platonism was the dominant religious/philosophical influence and Platonism, the basis of many of the mystery religions, divided the universe into a timeless, perfect higher realm (containing the "genuine" reality, intellectually accessible to man), and an imperfect, transient world of matter as its pale copy on earth. The mystical activity of the cultic gods was thought to take place in the upper dimensions of reality, having effects on humanity below.

And, for Paul, it is in THIS purely spiritual plane that the saving acts of Jesus Christ occurred.

You've never ever succeeded in demonstrating this gobbledegook about Paul. On the contrary, every attempt was defeated, so you can't appeal to it now. I will not allow you to turn this thread into yet another soapbox for your failed arguments on that subject, so take it elsewhere. Do not perpetuate it here, in your next post, or at any time in the future. It is off topic.

I am not trying to divert the OP but I am simply trying to point out that, as far as I know, NO ONE thinks that Mithra lived in the material plane of existence and that he physically rose from the dead here on earth so you have set up a straw man.

I have never done any such thing in this thread. If you're saying that there is no pre-Christian story of a resurrection of Mithras - understood as that word was understood in the first century, then fine. That's close to an answer to the OP.

[GakuseiDon]

I see your point.

Yes, the web is full of such claims but there is no evidence to back it up for the most part. There IS evidence that in some versions Mithras myths he was born to a virgin (Anahita, read Joseph Campbell)

Tladatsi, I'm interested in the evidence for the source of this claim. There are many sites referring to how a temple dated 200 BCE has a "The Immaculate Virgin Mother of Lord Mithra" dedication, but I've never seen the source for this. (I've seen how Anahita is the consort of Mithra, but not the mother).

Can you confirm that Campbell really did claim this, and if possible, do you know what the source of his claim is?

(ETA) FYI: Roger Pearse is trying to track down all references to the "Roman" Mithras in Roman Empire literature here:
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/

He doesn't include the Persian Mithra or Indian Mitra.