1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYou mentioned my name here twice. If you do not want to provoke some reaction, please do not mention my name in the context of your annoying accusations. Now bugger off.
I would appreciate it if you stop trolling every thread I post in and parroting the same crap over and over again. Everybody has heard it about a million times. If you have anything to actually add to the discussion of the similarities between the "life" of Jesus and prior pagan "mythical" figures, go ahead. Otherwise, shut up.
All right people...let's get some life in this thread...what we want here is a bit of comparative mythology putting the Jesus story against the Mithras story under the assumption that both have mythological aspects...Then maybe we can look at how Constantine may have had Sol Invictus transformed into Christ...If you're not prepared to treat Christ as a myth, steer clear...
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI do think it is important that we do not focus on one specific pagan/pre-christ deity. We have to take a look at the entire spectrum that NT authors would have had to draw from. I hope to be able to spend more time on this thread at a later time.
All right people...let's get some life in this thread...what we want here is a bit of comparative mythology putting the Jesus story against the Mithras story under the assumption that both have mythological aspects...Then maybe we can look at how Constantine may have had Sol Invictus transformed into Christ...If you're not prepared to treat Christ as a myth, steer clear...
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIf you're not prepared to treat Christ as a myth, steer clear...
All right people...let's get some life in this thread...what we want here is a bit of comparative mythology putting the Jesus story against the Mithras story under the assumption that both have mythological aspects...Then maybe we can look at how Constantine may have had Sol Invictus transformed into Christ...If you're not prepared to treat Christ as a myth, steer clear...
No problems. It'll be fun to watch an atheist Mutual Admiration Society at work.
Originally posted by David CI agree, but unless your doctorate is ready for publishing some time soon, we could take Mithras / Christ as a case study and broaden the scope of the investigation at a later stage, time / brain power permitting.
I do think it is important that we do not focus on one specific pagan/pre-christ deity. We have to take a look at the entire spectrum that NT authors would have had to draw from. I hope to be able to spend more time on this thread at a later time.
Mithras was a warrior god, & Constantine was a fightin' man. How did he get the soldiers to follow JC the man of peace, is one thing I'm wondering.
3 edits
Originally posted by lucifershammerYou could always try on your comparative mythology hat, LH. If you're prepared to think about notions you don't believe in (like kiddy limbo) you could easily participate in this discussion, too.
[b]If you're not prepared to treat Christ as a myth, steer clear...
No problems. It'll be fun to watch an atheist Mutual Admiration Society at work.[/b]
As for your comment about Mutual Admiration, well, don't take it for granted, Mr Smartypants.
EDIT--for the sake of the innocent and uninformed, may I point out that the esteemed gentleman is talking out his ass when he assumes that everyone likely to post in this thread is an atheist.
editto--LH not LJ fer pete's sake.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageYou had me at "Mr. Smartypants". LOL
You could always try on your comparative mythology hat, LH. If you're prepared to think about notions you don't believe in (like kiddy limbo) you could easily participate in this discussion, too.
As for your comment about Mutual Admiration, well, don't take it for granted, Mr Smartypants.
EDIT--for the sake of the innocent and uninformed, may ...[text shortened]... hat everyone likely to post in this thread is an atheist.
editto--LH not LJ fer pete's sake.
editto--LH not LJ fer pete's sake.
I was about to make a LemonJello crack....
he assumes that everyone likely to post in this thread is an atheist.
That depends on how the discussion proceeds. 🙂
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI don't think Constantine needed his soldiers to be Christians.
Mithras was a warrior god, & Constantine was a fightin' man. How did he get the soldiers to follow JC the man of peace, is one thing I'm wondering.
For one thing, religion in the Roman Empire appeared to be all about public worship, rather than private belief.
For another, the cheif deity of the Empire changing with the Emperor does not appear to have been a rare occurrence.
In any case, we know that Roman Mithraism survived well into the 5th century CE.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageDoctorate? Let me finish my connect-the-dots puzzle first.
I agree, but unless your doctorate is ready for publishing some time soon, we could take Mithras / Christ as a case study and broaden the scope of the investigation at a later stage, time / brain power permitting.
Mithras was a warrior god, & Constantine was a fightin' man. How did he get the soldiers to follow JC the man of peace, is one thing I'm wondering.
I imagine Constantine's influence lay in the fact that he signed the soldier's paycheques, so to speak. Were the Jews quiet by that era? I seem to recall their belief was that the saviour would be warrior-like and lead them against the oppression of Rome.
Originally posted by lucifershammerI was about to make a LemonJello crack....
You had me at "Mr. Smartypants". LOL
[b]editto--LH not LJ fer pete's sake.
I was about to make a LemonJello crack....
he assumes that everyone likely to post in this thread is an atheist.
That depends on how the discussion proceeds. 🙂[/b]
Pray, what stopped you? Too much "mutual admiration" in the air, perhaps?
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI'm having a hard time locating any decent information on this topic. Very little published online that seems to provide any details of Roman Mithraism, other than a secretive cult that appeared around 67 BCE in Rome. Even in the ensuing generations, the secrecy surrouding the initiated seems to make this inaccessible to your average Roman soldier...
I agree, but unless your doctorate is ready for publishing some time soon, we could take Mithras / Christ as a case study and broaden the scope of the investigation at a later stage, time / brain power permitting.
I do find it interesting that much of the iconography relates to the Tauronctony...this would lead me to believe that Mithra (or his prototype) may be much older than 1st century BCE. Consider this image:
http://www.well.com/user/davidu/london_jp30.jpg
The Age of Taurus immediately preceeded the events on the Sinai. Moses ended that age by bringing Monotheism to the exiled Jews. Given that there is conjecture that Moses was actually Akhenaten himself (or, at the very least, a High Priest in his court), the saviour archetype that leads to Roman Mithra and Jesus of Nazareth may have had their roots in Ancient Egypt.
Have you found any links to a detailed summary of the Roman Mithraic sect? I see Hammy has posted a link to tektonic...hardly an impartial observer, and given to bouts of pro-christian hysteria.
Originally posted by David CYep, there he is on his bull, surrounded by the 12 signs.
I do find it interesting that much of the iconography relates to the Tauronctony...this would lead me to believe that Mithra (or his prototype) may be much older than 1st century BCE. ///The Age of Taurus immediately preceeded the events on the Sinai. ///Have you found any links to a detailed summary of the Roman Mithraic sect?
There isn't much source material on Mithraism because most of what's available was written by the other side. The Mystery Religions were very secretive, oath-breakers being subject to a particularly severe curse (in The Golden Ass, Apuleius talks about everything under the sun except his experiences at the Mysteries of Isis ) so when the Mysteries died out, there was nothing to go on but rumour, conjecture, slander...I guess the rituals were handed down orally to prevent secrets from leaking (the Druids had a similar system).
Have you read the article cited in the first post? It has a lot of information. It clearly states that Mithraism originated in Persia (Rome's great adversary) several centuries before its appearance in Rome. (If memory serves, Mithraism persisted in the Persia until the Sassanid dynasty was swept aside by them darn Arabs. Still, I think a fair amount of those old beliefs still persist in coded form in the Shi'ite version of Islam.)
Now, people are prone to scoff when astrology is mentioned, but perhaps they forget how much attention was paid to it in the ancient world. I think the Bible itself states that Moses was a high-ranking official at Pharaoh's court. (Who could forget the magical duel between Moses & the court magicians?) Considering how much thought went into coding the symbolism of Mithraism (read in no1's link about the alignment to Ahura-Mazda of previously independent deities--it wasn't a random process) Taurus (and Pisces later on) must be held in account.
The saviour archetype...We'll get there.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageHave you read the article cited in the first post?
The saviour archetype...We'll get there.
Yes, I've skimmed it. Bookmarked it for further inspection. Lines like this:
"According to Persian mythology, Mithras was born of a virgin given the title 'Mother of God'. "
...lead me to ask for sources. Without them, even hysterics like tektonics can post rebuttals (not that they've provided any objective sources, either).