- He was a saviour sent to earth to live as a mortal
- Sinners could be reborn through him and achieve immortal life
- He died for our sins
- Rose from the dead the following Sunday
- 3 shepherds were present
- Become known as light of the world
Can you guess who it is yet?
- 12 Disciples with whom he shared a last meal before dying
- Flesh and blood symbolically consumed by followers
- Often depicted with a Halo around his head
- HQ – Vatican Hill,
Both, actually.
No one knows which was given this story first; Christ or Mithra, but we know both Mithraism and Christianity began around the same time (1st – 4th Century AD).
Mithraism certainly had its HQ on Vatican Hill in
Both were desperate to grow and expand in
The benefit of having merchants and soldiers as followers is obvious and both religions no doubt desired them. In the most powerful city in the world two rival religions were fighting for followers, evidently Christianity won out. Let’s take a look at how that might have happened.
Many people find it hard to look at religion as an entity instead of a set of beliefs so forget we’re dealing with religions for a second and instead consider companies selling similar products.
Business A sees that Business B has all the best customers (followers) and realises its product isn’t appealing to the right people.
Business A adapts it’s product to match Business B and as such appeals to the same customers.
Business A applies the same process in other countries and becomes a Multi-national company.
Business B has nothing original to offer. Under pressure from Business A’s excellent marketing and management Business B goes bankrupt.
Early Christianity did this with multiple smaller religions and if you look for it, you’ll find the evidence. I’m not condemning Christianity for this, far from it, but it is fascinating to study.
That’s it for now, I’ve dipped my toe into the waters of religion based blogging and am curious to see the feedback I get.
February 17th, 2008 at 10:14 am
This isn’t really the central issue. First of all 25th December comes from the Church rejigging religious feasts to coincide or blend with the preChristian Winter and Light celebrations.
Also, the thing is that ‘Christianity’ wasn’t ’seeking followers’ like a ‘new religion’. It didn’t work like that at all. They weren’t trying to get people to subscribe to ‘this new way’ most of them were just getting the hell out of Palestine as quickly as they could - the leaders being the first to hop it as in Peter, Paul, Mary, Mary and many others. . . .literally fled the land.
The street level happenings of ‘christianity’ which wasn’t known as such then, is that people were aware that something huge had happened in that there were great wrongs done in Jerusalem. The Roman authorities were involved but didn’t want to be, hence Pilate offering Jesus to be set free before the Passover, he literally wanted to get this guy off his hands (the washing of his hands being the getting rid of this problem analogy) and his wife warned and warned her husband that he really shouldn’t be involved in the persecution of this guy as she had many dreams about the situation. But Pilate was being pushed by the Jewish elders who saw Jesus as a huge threat to their authority and wanted him out of the way sharpish so they put their stooges in the crowd to call for the other guy (Barabbas) to be set free. Jesus was seen as a radical and a trouble maker so he was expediently dealt with - by the Jewish pharisees - before the great Jewish holy day! So, it is not so simple as to put it down to well, there was this guy who brought a ‘new religion’; he didn’t bring any new religion he was a Jew through and through!
It is not a case of marketing in its original growth. I agree that many ‘religious’ sects that come under the banner of Christianity do use marketing but that doesn’t make it right. True following of the lessons that Jesus gave requires you to think for yourself and act on your own conscience. The Vatican Second council established this as the most basic human right in that you are free to worship/contact God according to your own conscience. This then, actually allows and broadens the scope because narrow ‘defining’ ‘christian religious groups’ do not do this. If you consider that the word ‘catholic’ means universal that gives a much wider aspect to how you approach anyone - Hindu, Buddhist, Jew, Muslim. Remember that Gandhi, when asked whether he was a ‘Hindu’ said words to the effect of Yes and I am also a Christian and a Muslim. He knew that the true base teachings of any religious sector are actually saying the same things and it is not necessarily which particular group you select which is always and absolutely right. It goes back to you, your conscience and what your direction is. The intent is all. We can compare, discriminate, analyse and dismiss any and all religions on the basis of contradictions and that some one group is right and so all the others are wrong; but this is not the Truth with a capital ‘t’. The Truth allows for and actively opens you up to challenge your own belief systems. An ancient saying along the lines of: Faith is about seeking the truth without fear. So it doesn’t matter if you lose all your beliefs. This is highly challenging and it leads you to put aside your preconceptions.
The Vatican Hill in Rome - St. Peter’s is the place where Peter was crucified as it was then a circus, an arena for games and slaughtering (usually both). It was on this site, that Peter was buried and then it became a burial ground. Underneath St. Peter’s is the original street (amazing to see) with many coffins. Later on, it became the site for the building of the Church - literally on top of Peter as it had now become a Holy site.
I shall look into the Mithraism thing connection to the same sites as it seems rather odd as you have explained it.
There were also the Essenes and we have the Dead Sea Scrolls. True Christianity isn’t about proving its right to exist and whether its marketing succeeded where another one’s failed; it is about abandoning restrictions, universally, and approaching the world with a very open mind and not discriminating against any one or group because of their own belief systems. In this way it is systemic, not systematic.
I should be interested to continue these discussions and I like your apple in the face and bowler hat picture.
February 17th, 2008 at 10:30 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithra
this initial search shows that Mithra long, long,predates Christ and is a much more ancient concept. Doesn’t mean to say it isn’t true - it looks very truthful and ancient and why shouldn’t it of course; it does show that its concept was not at the same time as Jesus lived so I cannot see the direct comparison here.
Perhaps you could let me have your sources for examination?
February 17th, 2008 at 10:40 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithras - ok I see the picture you have used on this link.
It includes
Sites of interest relating to the Mystery of Mithras include:
* Italy: The Basilica of San Clemente in Rome has a preserved mithraeum with the altarpiece still intact in the excavations under the modern church.
and indeed there are remains of mithraeum also in the UK, Hadrian’s Wall, Newcastle and London. So it seems to have been a movement indeed around the time of Christ but I still can’t see the connection for the comparison or parallels.
Here in Brittany, where I live, there is an ancient holy site. It predates Christianity in that it was a Druid site, then it became a Temple for Venus when the Romans were here and then it became a Catholic Church. Seems like an amazingly flawless passage through time without contradictions at all. Just because it is now Christian doesn’t mean that it cannot still relate to Venus and to the Druids. I think that one of the problems with looking at ‘beliefs’ or ‘religions’ is that it is done with either or, in mind, rather than All.
February 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Oops so forgot to say that the Rome connection - it is not the same site as St. Peter’s as the Mithrat is at San Clemente! I am still struggling to figure out the direct parallels though so shall leave it with you for now. Anyway I hope that I go to Heaven even if I am a rebellious radical! I hope that you do too.
April 24th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I’m not even sure where to start with this. This is just something else for non believers of God to throw at people who do believe, telling them that their religion is a lie to justify their own view that God is a fake. I guess everyone has their own view on ‘life’ but where exactly did you do you’re research to come to this conclusion.
I’m not impressed.
April 24th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Sammy for the win.
April 28th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Hello Sammy, if you have read my comments you will see that there is no truth in the claim, only that Mithra lived much, much earlier. So nothing to worry about there as I am sure that you will agree. Believers have no need to defend their religion, just to live it. I recall reading, when I went to Lourdes, that once, when Bernadette was telling someone her story, this person responded with the fact that they didn’t believe her and she replied that she wasn’t seeking to have them believe her, she was just telling them what she saw. Very wise response indeed. No one need convince anyone else; it is just important to know your own faith and what you believe.