Was Christianity formed on the back of Mithraism? Did the cult of Mithras inspire the Christian religion? A sizable number of Christianity's critics, especially those on the Internet, say "Yes." Though they are outside the mainstream scholarly community in making this claim, they are nevertheless a highly vocal and visible minority. And if their position is correct, then Christianity - as they well know - is fatally undermined and discredited.
At its core, the central message of Christianity is that God came into the world in human form to atone for the sins of mankind. That Jesus of Nazareth was Immanuel - God with us - and that he:
The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the "Good News" that Jesus rose from the dead, thus validating his claim to be the Messiah and the Son of God - and that he therefore is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6).
Not so, say critics like Vexen Crabtree, who runs a website on Mithraism and Christianity. A student of pagan religions and a self-described Satanist, Crabtree writes: "Christianity grew out of a mixture of Persian Mithraism, Judaism and the works of individuals such as St. Paul who gave us written records of this synthesis."
Kenneth Humphreys, whose website "Jesus Never Existed," takes aim at virtually all of the major tenets of Christianity, maintains that Mithraism was a "dress rehearsal" for Christianity and that the two religions are virtually identical. Humphreys writes:
Mithras had had twelve followers with whom he had shared a last sacramental meal. He had sacrificed himself to redeem mankind. Descending into the underworld, he had conquered death and had risen to life again on the third day. The holy day for this sun god was, of course, Sunday (Christians continued to follow the Jewish Sabbath until the fourth century). His many titles included ‘the Truth,’ ‘the Light,’ and ‘the Good Shepherd.’ For those who worshipped him, invoking the name of Mithras healed the sick and worked miracles. Mithras could dispense mercy and grant immortality; to his devotees he offered hope. By drinking his blood and eating his flesh (by proxy, from a slain bull) they too could conquer death. On a Day of Judgement those already dead would be raised back to life.
Others make the claim that Mithras, like Jesus, was born of a virgin, but Humphreys readily grants this is a weak parallel. In fact, Humphreys argues that "Mithraism's failure to have anthropomorphised its god into a man - something which was to be accomplished so successfully by Christianity - weakened the cult's appeal to the uneducated and opened the door to the competition."
Tracing the Origins of MithraismAs the two religions (MIthraism and Christianity) are currently understood, the parallels are striking and difficult to dispute. However, it takes more than similarity and parallel to prove a connection, particularly a dependent one.
What we know about Mithraism comes primarily from Franz Cumont, a Belgian scholar who pieced together a theoretical understanding of the ancient mystery religion from various strands of evidence. His 1903 monumental work, Mysteries of Mithras, is regarded as a foundational milestone in the scholarly study of Mithraism.
Two facts should be understood about Cumont's work:
The biggest problem facing Cumont's thesis is that the earliest Mithraic inscription in the West dates to a statue from the year A.D. 101. And while the god Mithras has been traced to the fourteenth century B.C., the vast majority of texts describing Mithraic beliefs are dated after A.D. 140. So what, you ask?
The current understanding of Mithraic beliefs is based on Mithraic inscriptions and texts that date to the second, third, and fourth centuries in this common era. It is sheer speculation, at best, to argue that Mithraism (as explained by Cumont and 20th century scholarship) is the same form of Mithraism that stretches back to its ancient origins in Persia. There is no documentary evidence to support such speculation. That means it's possible that some of the tenets of Mithraism similar to Christianity may have been copied from Christianity as opposed to the other way around. One can speculate in either direction, and it's just that -- speculation.
Whatever the origins of Mithraism, there is documentary evidence attesting to the origins of Christianity. Agnostic, liberal, and conservative New Testament scholars agree that parts of the New Testament were written as early as the fifth decade of the common era (50s A.D.), and that these writings were heavily informed by oral traditions carried forward by Jesus' closest followers.
Furthermore, the core of Christian theology was fully developed by the end of the first century A.D., with Christianity's leading apostles articulating the basic tenets of Christianity - which can still be heard from pulpits today.
This means that the Christian religion can be traced, via documentary evidence, to the same century - even to within 20 years - of its founder! Very few religions in the world have such strong documentary evidence supporting them. Certainly not Mithraism.
*********
Sources for this article include:
The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel (Zondervan 2007)
Website: Vexen Crabtree's "Mithraism and Early Christianity"
Website: "Jesus Never Existed" (subsection on Mithraism)
Website: "Sacred Texts" (subsection with Frank Cumont's The Mysteries of Mithra - 1903)
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Brian Tubbs's Protestantism topic, please visit the Discussions page.