In studying the history of western civilization, I’ve come across an interesting little religion which follows the teachings of Mithras. Several key aspects of Mithraism include:
Born to virgin mother on Dec. 25
Born into human form to save the world from Ahriman"the evil one"
Died and descended to the underworld to defeat Ahriman
Ressurected to teach ethical virtues.
Belief in judgement day.
Held sunday sacred
Practiced both baptism and a communal meal of bread and wine as a religious rituals.
Took part in “last supper” with his 12 disciples after ressurection.
Ascended to heaven afterwards.
If you’re thinking, "That looks like it was copied from the bible, then might I point out that Mithraism preceded Christianity by 2000 years. Are these merely coincidences, or is Christianity a jewish adaption of Mithraism. Can anyone suggest any good reading on Mithraism in relation to Christianity?
It is true that tales of Mithras are at least 1,400 older than Christianity, but he was at that stage considered to be only a minor figure among a panoply of gods worshiped in India and Iran. His cult did not become important in Iran until hundreds of years later. The cult did not become important in the Roman sphere until the 2d century C.E. Most of what we know of the religion comes from the 2d to 4th centuries. Inasmuch as the similarities between the two religions are real, it seems probable to me that Mithraism borrowed at least as much from Christianity as vice versa.
When you look at the big picture, rather than just details, Christianity seems very different from Mithraism. As I understand it, Mithraism taught blind obedience to secular leaders (kings and emperors), which is one reason it got semi-official support from many early Roman Emperors. Christianity is far more concerned with the redemption and salvation of individuals than with any secular authority.
You may be interested in the site called Pagan origins of Christianity which has many links about the controversy. I can’t vouch for what he says, but the author of the page (apparently a Christian) says
As the the point about the importance of Dec. 25: Hardly any serious theologian really believes that Jesus was born on Dec. 25. Under the Roman calandar of the times, Dec. 25 was the winter solstice, an important day in any ancient calandar, and the date of many feasts in cultures around the world, including the ancient Roman Saturnalia.
These theories may have been popular around 1900 and then been discarded, but given the faddishness of biblical scholarship, that alone doesn’t discredit the arguments. One interesting treatment is Weston’s From Ritual to Romance, which indeed dates from the early 1900s, and traces the similarities of the Grail legend (which has many odd and non-Christian elements) and the “vegetation cults” of Mithras, Attis, and Adonis, which predated Christianity. An open question is whether these cults inspired Christianity’s doctrines, or the doctrines were modified so as to more easily recruit followers of other ‘lords’.
And as for Mithraism encouraging followership, didn’t one of Paul’s letters instruct Christians to submit themselves to wordly authorities, as these would not be in power unless ordained by god? Paul certainly did what he could to make Christianity palatable to the powerful Romans.
You might want to check out a book called “Pagan Christs”. The author’s name escapes me at the moment. It is a study of the many different cults, including that of Mithra, whose origins predate Xianity but which bear a striking resemblance to it.
The nature of Mithraism is subject to question, too. I was always a little troubled by Franz Cumont’s books – it didn’t all seem to FIT properly. Then I found “The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries” , and was very impressed. The premise is that the religion of Mithraism as practiced in the Roman Empire was a relatively new faith at the founding of Christianity. Well worth a read.
Sorry – the book on Mithraism is by David Ulansey.
I believe the book “Pagan Christs” is by J. Robertson, but it’s easy to get confused – there are a lot of J. Robertsons and Robinsons writing on early Christianity for some reason.
So if obedience of followers would have counted as a point for Mithraism with the Romans, it would have counted likewise as a point for Christianity. And don’t think this was an ignored passage – this, along with 1 Peter 2: 18-19 (“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God.”) was used to justify slavery and squelch democracy for hundreds of years.
I understand that an important rite of Mithraism involved something about drenching the initiate in the blood of a slaughtered bull. So there you can see the clear similarity to Christianity —or perhaps, like me, you don’t.
I would reckon a lot of religions revolve generally around the struggle between good and evil and draw on the metaphor of light vs. darkness and so on. In this, Mithraism and Christianity and just about everythng else are similar —but this doesn’t mean they are the same.
I cannot say I am totally up on the scriptures and doctorines of Mithraism, but I do believe their essential content differs substantially from Christianity.