Pagan Gods Copied From Christianity???
As information becomes more available to wider audiences through the internet,
the subject of "pagan" Gods often enters into debates about Christianity.
The issue of whether or not Jesus was patterned after the stories and attributes
of some pagan gods is one that produces some amazing claims by Christians.
They will always deny that there were any pagan Gods who existed prior
to Jesus that could have influenced how Jesus was developed in Christian
writings such as the New Testament.
The following essay contains identified comments from a rabid Christian
writing in an Skeptic vs. Christian forum and are typical of the Christian
apologetics used to debunk the idea that there may have been pagan Gods which
served as templates for the Jesus story.
A skeptic introduced into the debate Christmas and the name "Mithra" who
was an ancient savior god of the Persians who has striking similarities
to Jesus before Jesus was supposed to have been born.
[Christian writes: Mithra? I have to assume that you're joking. In
order to have a serious discussion about Christianity and atheism, then you
have to turn aside your intense desire to disparage Christianity at every
turn and instead let's talk intelligently and objectively.]
Notice how the Christian starts out. He immediately dismisses the idea
that Mithra may have been a role model for the Jesus story by ASSUMING that
any talk about Mithra is a joke. Then the Christian accuses the skeptic
of not being objective and only interested in Christianity bashing.
This is a rather obvious ploy which attempts to discredit the idea that
Jesus may have been copied from prior savior gods by attempting to laugh
off the idea from the start.
In other words, in order to "intelligently" and "objectively" discuss Christianity,
silly notions that there could have been savior gods who existed prior
to Jesus and who had very similar attributes to Jesus must be put aside
as nonsense. When dealing with a zealous Christian, one must always remember
that there is NOTHING in the universe which has any "real" validity other
than Jesus and the Bible.
[Christian writes: Firstly, even the experts will acknowledge that
there is virtually no literary evidence as to the beliefs of Mirthraism (please
refer to "The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries" by David Ulansey).]
The experts? Experts are a dime a dozen. The experts at the Christian Institute
for Creation Research declare that the earth is only about 6,000 years old.
For every Christian "expert" on pagan religions, I can cite one who isn't
a Christian and establishes that Mithra was a savior God who was worshipped
prior to Jesus and whose origins date long before Jesus was supposed to
have been born.
The real problem is that if some parts of the Jesus story were patterned
after "pagan" Gods, then the validity of the New Testament as the word of
God is in jeopardy and Christians can't allow that.
[Christian writes: The simple reason that Mithraism could not possibly
have influenced first-century Christianity (in fact, the opposite was likely
true) is that the timing is all wrong. Mithraism didn't really begin to flourish
until AFTER the closing of New Testament canon (see "The Mysteries of Mithra"
by Franz Cumont) and in fact, no monuments to this religion can be dated any
earlier than AD 90 - 100.]
Here we see the mind of a Christian zealot in all it's radiant splendor.
Instead of Jesus being copied from Mithra, he asserts Mithra was copied from
Jesus. The Christian turns the tables by saying that pagan copycats used the
Jesus story to invent Mithra.
It's simply not possible in this persons mind that the Jesus story could
have been influenced by stories of other god/men who existed in history prior
to Jesus.
Since Mithra was a Persian God who was adopted by the Romans BEFORE Jesus
was ever written about, Mithra was around before Jesus. Notice how the Christian
dances around this by saying that Mithraism "didn't really begin to flourish"
until the NT canon was closed.
This Christian can sing and dance and quote any number of books he wants.
Here's what the Encarta online research source says about Mithra:
"Mithraism, one of the major religions of the Roman Empire, the cult of
Mithra, the ancient Persian god of light and wisdom. In the Avesta, the sacred
Zoroastrian writings (see Zoroastrianism) of the ancient Persians, Mithra
appears as the chief yazata (Avestan, 'beneficent one'), or good spirit,
and ruler of the world. He was supposed to have slain the divine bull, from
whose dying body sprang all plants and animals beneficial to humanity. After
the conquest of Assyria in the 7th century BC and of Babylonia in the 6th
century BC, Mithra became the god of the sun, which was worshipped in his
name (see Sun Worship). The Greeks of Asia Minor, by identifying Mithra with
Helios, the Greek god of the sun, helped to spread the cult. It was brought
to Rome about 68 BC by Cilician pirates whom the Roman general Pompey the
Great had captured, and during the early empire it spread rapidly throughout
Italy and the Roman provinces. It was a rival to Christianity in the Roman
world."
"Mithraism was similar to Christianity in many respects, for example, in
the ideals of humility and brotherly love, baptism, the rite of communion,
the use of holy water, the adoration of the shepherds at Mithra's birth, the
adoption of Sundays and of December 25 (Mithra's birthday) as holy days, and
the belief in the immortality of the soul, the last judgment, and the resurrection.
Mithraism differed from Christianity in the exclusion of women from its ceremonies
and in its willingness to compromise with polytheism. The similarities, however,
made possible the easy conversion of its followers to Christian
doctrine." (End quote)
Also, from a web site which examines Mithraism:
"Plainly, the worship of Mithras was well ahead of the worship of Jesus.
In any case there is a dated pre-Christian Mithraic inscription of Antiochus
I of Commagene (69-34 BC) in eastern Asia Minor. Mithras shakes hands with
the King, he wears the Phrygian cap, the Persian trousers, and a cape. His
hat is star speckled and rays of light emerge from his head like a halo. His
torq is a serpent. This is the image of the Roman Mithras in a scene taking
place 100 years before the crucifixion."
There were worshippers of Mithras in Rome in Pompey's time (67 BC). Christians
are more defensive about Mithras than perhaps any other pre-Christian Roman
god. The two religions had so much in common, it can hardly be denied although
Christians will try to deny it as a first shot. Their second shot is that
the followers of Mithras copied the Christians! Christians feel obliged to
take silly positions on these issues because they seek to defend Christianity
as a revealed religion, not one which evolved in a certain milieu and therefore
has common features with contemporary religions. So, no religious practices
that seem in any way to be like any Christian ones could have been original--they
must have been taken from Christianity!" (end quote)
It seems rather clear that Mithra was introduced to Rome around 68
B.C. and existed in some form as a worshipped deity long before Jesus or the
New Testament.
Even in the Old Testament, the Israelites were carried off into exile to
Assyria and Babylon which were captured by the Persians. This was all hundreds
of years prior to Jesus. The Babylonian exile is recorded in the Old Testament.
All the dancing and excuses by this Christian that Mithra was savior God
copied from Jesus is just a desperate attempt to discredit any gods which
existed prior to Jesus. If certain aspects of Jesus were indeed copied from
pagan gods like Mithra, the whole Jesus story and New Testament are called
into question.
Dishonest Christians will ALWAYS attempt to turn history on it's ear and
claim that pagan Gods were copied from Jesus.
N.B. At this point another Christian jumps in and writes the same
thing with an additional twist:
[Christian #2 writes: If there was any borrowing it was the pagans
from the Christians. Christianity is based on a historical person. A big difference
from mythology.]
Historical people are not the product of virgin births as Christians claim
Jesus was. Pagan god/men in mythology are however often the products of a
God mating with a human female. Christians always ignore this fact.
According to this historical twist employed by Christians, it means the
Persians must have borrowed the Jesus story to create their version of Mithra,
the savior god who was introduced and worshipped in Rome at least 68 years
before Jesus ever appeared. This is the type of spin Christians have to use
to keep Jesus unique and the only true savior of the universe.
[Christian writes: Now that we have settled this... ]
Notice the smug arrogance of Christianity on display here. This has been
settled??? This short burst of hubris has completely discredited Mithraism
as a possible source for some of the characteristics of Jesus as described
in the New Testament???
Did the basic foundation of Mithraism exist before or after Jesus was supposed
to have appeared? How tightly do you want to close your eyes?
This illustrates why Christians cannot allow anything to taint their spin
of how history actually was. If Jesus the savior god was in ANY WAY patterned
after savior gods who existed prior to him, the whole doctrine of salvation
through Jesus is called into dispute. The claims of a virgin birth, blood
sacrifice of a human being to redeem people, the resurrection, being the bringer
of light and life, and other attributes of Jesus are not unique but may be
part of belief systems that existed long before Jesus appeared.
[Christian writes again: Let me chastise you on one thing: the celebration
of Christmas in December has NOTHING to do with Scripture. So, telling us
that it should really be celebrated in mid-year tells us nothing. It is accepted
that the early Church established December 25th as the day in order to celebrate
Christ's birth in order to coordinate Christianity with the local customs.
Hardly blasphemous and certainly not in any way a discredit to Scripture.]
The fact this Christian acknowledges that the celebration of Christmas has
nothing to do with scripture and was simply a custom which the early church
established Dec 25th as the birthday of Jesus points to evidence which this
Christian doesn't want to have highlighted. That evidence is that Mithra's
birthday was supposed to be Dec 25th (also the winter solstice).
The Christian attempts to brush off this adopted custom as "hardly blasphemous."
What a hypocrite!!! This Christian needs to read his Bible more carefully.
Lev 20:23,26
You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going
to drive out before you. Because they did all these things, I abhorred them.
You are to be holy to me because I, the LORD, am holy, and I have set you
apart from the nations to be my own.
The Bible God gives clear instructions NOT to adopt customs of other nations.
Adopting the birthday/holiday of a pagan God like Mithra as the birthday of
Jesus in order to, as this Christian asserts, "coordinate Christianity with
the local customs" most certainly DOES qualify as blasphemy!!!
Bringing customs of pagan gods into God's congregation is a violation of
huge proportions.
Deut 6:13-15
Fear the LORD your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his
name. Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you; for the
LORD your God, who is among you, is a jealous God and his anger will burn
against you, and he will destroy you from the face of the land.
How are Christians serving God by following and adopting the custom of recognizing
a pagan god's birthday as the birthday of Jesus??? Who does this Christian
think he's kidding when he says that the adoption of this holiday is hardly
blasphemous??? These actions laugh in the face of the instructions God gave
in the Old Testament.
To make matters worse, Christians pretend to observe the Sabbath on Sunday.
It's probably no coincidence that Mithra who was a SUN God and whose day was
SUN DAY, had his day adopted by Christians as their "Sabbath" or Lord's day.
Did Christians once again "coordinate Christianity with the local customs"
by adopting Sunday as their day of the Lord? The Sabbath is the 7th day of
the week which is Saturday.
Exo 31:15-16
For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath
of rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be
put to death. The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for
the generations to come as a lasting covenant.
Since Christians also deem themselves to be God's chosen people and that
they want to worship and praise the Lord, they violate the Sabbath by not
observing it on the 7th day of the week as instructed. These pious hypocrites
then advertise to the world that the Bible God's laws are the moral foundation
of the universe and that his laws should be followed by all "moral" societies.
The very fact that the early Christian church made these "changes" and disregarded
God's instructions doesn't help the case that Christianity represents a unique
religion based on the "truth" of the Bible God. Since Dec 25th as the
birthday of Christ is not scriptural, there is no valid reason why Christians
should celebrate it. Yet, almost all Christians do.
Regarding Christmas:
The scriptures aren't discredited by the celebration of Christmas, but Christians
who celebrate it ARE. They are celebrating the birthday of their LORD and
SAVIOR on a pagan holiday. Jesus never instructed that his birthday be celebrated,
nor is there any birth date given in the New Testament.
Apparently Christians want an excuse to celebrate without authority do to
so. They set up trees, decorate them with silver tinsel and religious ornaments,
gather around it, put up lights, put on pageants, and engage in exactly the
things God told them NOT to do.
Jer 10:2-5
This is what the LORD says: "Do not learn the ways of the nations
or be terrified by signs in the sky, though the nations are terrified by them.
For the customs of the peoples are worthless; they cut a tree out of the
forest, and a craftsman shapes it with his chisel. They adorn it with silver
and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so it will not totter. Like
a scarecrow in a melon patch, their idols cannot speak; they must be carried
because they cannot walk. Do not fear them; they can do no harm nor can they
do any good."
God instructs his people NOT to learn or practice the ways of the nations
around them. It's astounding how Christians will ignore what the Bible tells
them when it conflicts with what they want to do.
Situational ethics is the order of the day. These same religious chameleons
then proclaim and advertise to the world that they want to "serve God." All
of the excuses Christians employ to prop up their belief system as the only
valid and true way to know God are concoctions straight out of the seemingly
limitless capacity of the human mind to rationalize anything and then claim
God backs them up. Let any buyer of Christian advertising.