It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mithras, the real Jesus Christ?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Anyone interested should do a search for Mithras on any search engine. Apparently the Persians had a legend of Mythras which is the almost duplicate story of Jesus that predated Christ by 3000 years. e.g.:
Mithras

"... He [Mithras] was mediator between heaven and earth and was a member of a Holy Trinity. The worshippers of Mithras held strong beliefs in a celestial heaven and an infernal hell. ... They looked forward to a final day of judgment in which the dead would resurrect, and to a final conflict that would destroy the existing order of all things to bring about the triumph of light over darkness. Purification through a ritualistic baptism was required of the faithful, who also took part in a ceremony in which they drank wine and ate bread to symbolize the body and blood of the god. Sundays were held sacred, and the birth of the god was celebrated annually on December the 25th. After the earthly mission of this god had been accomplished, he took part in a Last Supper with his companions before ascending to heaven, to forever protect the faithful from above. However, it would be a vast oversimplification to suggest that Mithraism was the single forerunner of early Christianity. Aside from Christ and Mithras, there were plenty of other deities (such as Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, Balder, Attis, and Dionysus) said to have died and resurrected. ... Virtually every pagan religious practice and festivity that couldn't be suppressed or driven underground was eventually incorporated into the rites of Christianity as it spread across Europe and throughout the world."

Mithraism was in competition with Christianity in the 1st Century C.E. Most notably, the former faith was widely practiced in the hometown of St. Paul, rather, Saul of Tarsus. Indeed, literature is repleat with evidence:

more and more et cetera et allini: The Essenes, Pagan Origins ...Under Constantine




posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 02:36 AM
link   
A book I have on this subject claims that the deity Mithras was established when "scientists" at the time discovered that the Earth periodically wobbled on it's axis, creating the effect that the stars, which were thought to be in fixed cycles, deviated from their usual positions. The effect of this was quite profound - Any force capable of moving the stars in such a way was surely a force to be reckoned with. So, in conclusion, so this study claims, Mithras was the God of the wobble.



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 02:52 AM
link   
Many of the ideas of christianity have been found in other religions as well.

Im pretty sure that I came across this chart here by way of this forum, so I apoligize in advance to the person who I stole this from, but here goes..........

go here........www.bluehoney.org...

It outlines, not only the cult of mithra, but others as well, and draws lines of similarity between many of the religions of the world.........



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Khieu: I've read similar explanations. Basically finding that the vernal equinox precessed from Taurus to Aries, the ancients concluded that the "bull" was slain. It's interesting to note that the hunter Orion is set perpetually against Taurus, performing the first "tauroctony" or slaying the bull as was performed in Mithaism. Of course, such a powerful god was worthy of veneration.

As I understand it, the cult arose about 5,000 years ago in Persia. Is that what you've seen?



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Dj: That's a great chart! I've noted some of the parallels and heard that many others existed. Actually I copied that into my growing file on the subject.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Study of religion would underscore the notion of Christianity and its steady rise. Reviewing the journeys of Pauline Christianity, one can envision the Jewish and Gentile struggles with the Apostle Peter. It came down to adaptation to local cultures, and revelation of the genius of what Jesus brought to the earth. One could then envision the emphasis of certain off subject topics branching out of and into what became the Church under Constantine. The Roman emperor consolidated what was considered proper, to unify the various versions of beliefs that were acceptable to the State.

Be unshaken in the life affirming aspects of Jesus as what really constitutes salvation. All the other things are window dressing.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkipShipman
Study of religion would underscore the notion of Christianity and its steady rise. Reviewing the journeys of Pauline Christianity, one can envision the Jewish and Gentile struggles with the Apostle Peter. It came down to adaptation to local cultures, and revelation of the genius of what Jesus brought to the earth. One could then envision the emphasis of certain off subject topics branching out of and into what became the Church under Constantine. The Roman emperor consolidated what was considered proper, to unify the various versions of beliefs that were acceptable to the State.

Be unshaken in the life affirming aspects of Jesus as what really constitutes salvation. All the other things are window dressing.


Such an edict belies only authoritarian motivation. BTW, please explain your allusion to "window dressing." For far too long I've attempted to muddle through vague metaphors that pass for wisdom.

The naive, preceding paragraph emphasizes the bloody hegemony of the "steady rise" because you don't mention it. Its rise was accomplished through oppression, torture and murderous armies. What Jesus brought to the Earth contradicts the actions of many generations of so-called Christians. Overwhelmingly, his message was of love, forgiveness and healing. One could envision many things, but that can not gloss over the "adaptations" which occured in battle. (And please don't try to justify that with the quote wherein He brings a sword, not peace. That is reserved for familial struggles, as I have often witnessed.)

Constantine, by your own summary, politicized the church for his own purposes of rulership. Specifically, that regime is responsible for eliminating, by whatever means necessary, any doctrine usurping his authority. So great was the oppression, that the the term, "Byzantine" has horrible connotations to this day.



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeon10101110

Originally posted by SkipShipman
Be unshaken in the life affirming aspects of Jesus as what really constitutes salvation. All the other things are window dressing.


Aeon

Such an edict belies only authoritarian motivation. BTW, please explain your allusion to "window dressing." For far too long I've attempted to muddle through vague metaphors that pass for wisdom.

Reply:

Please forgive me for being "non controversial," as I remember adding some stronger words, and so I said to myself, "heck with this," and said "window dressing."
As for "authority," thanks for the compliment, as faith goes a second mile. Perhaps I should explain further but the rise until Constantine was not so "bloody." Thereafter there are many problems. They are not "window dressing," which I dismiss as "doctrinal disputes," and "missing the point of the law of love."

Aeon

The naive, preceding paragraph emphasizes the bloody hegemony of the "steady rise" because you don't mention it. Its rise was accomplished through oppression, torture and murderous armies. What Jesus brought to the Earth contradicts the actions of many generations of so-called Christians. Overwhelmingly, his message was of love, forgiveness and healing. One could envision many things, but that can not gloss over the "adaptations" which occured in battle. (And please don't try to justify that with the quote wherein He brings a sword, not peace. That is reserved for familial struggles, as I have often witnessed.)


Reply: I agree and just put it all to a truth test, eg. "Is this consistent with the Law of Love, or is it not?"

Aeon

Constantine, by your own summary, politicized the church for his own purposes of rulership. Specifically, that regime is responsible for eliminating, by whatever means necessary, any doctrine usurping his authority. So great was the oppression, that the the term, "Byzantine" has horrible connotations to this day.

Reply:

Is it a matter of historic record that Constantine still believed in the Roman Gods, and probably just made Jesus the superior God to Jupiter in his own mind along with the Trinity?


Now standing outside this for a moment, please pardon my abrupt "window dressing," comment to "dismiss the unwashed masses," or whatever.

I stand by my comment on the essential truths, and honestly too many people are missing the point totally. Getting the shell game from their particular elites, we can see Constantine, making people wish to flee Christianity. Its essential message is total unconditional love not necessarily devotion to the Emperor or the Pope. The consolidation happened with the Council of Nicea, not really Constantine alone.

By the way the discussion began about Mythras the cult of the Bull, and the point was how Christianity adapted itself to the "Gentiles," until it became no longer a sect of Judaism, but a distinctive religion unto itself. Possibly the diaspora after the Roman destruction of the Jerusalem temple made the distinction. Sure there were historic difficulties, but who can argue too much with survival value anyway?



posted on Apr, 7 2004 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkipShipman

I stand by my comment on the essential truths, and honestly too many people are missing the point totally. Getting the shell game from their particular elites, we can see Constantine, making people wish to flee Christianity. Its essential message is total unconditional love not necessarily devotion to the Emperor or the Pope. The consolidation happened with the Council of Nicea, not really Constantine alone.

By the way the discussion began about Mythras the cult of the Bull, and the point was how Christianity adapted itself to the "Gentiles," until it became no longer a sect of Judaism, but a distinctive religion unto itself. Possibly the diaspora after the Roman destruction of the Jerusalem temple made the distinction. Sure there were historic difficulties, but who can argue too much with survival value anyway?


The essential truths (i.e. Jesus' messages) that were preserved by way of dogmatic Christianity could be a boon to humanity. But from the time of Nicea through the 13th century, remnants of other Christian sects were brutally purged. Indeed, the message of Christ was lost on those in the "established" church who conducted such purges and inquisitions. How much less is He disobeyed now, hundreds of years after the official purging ended? Only a few hundred years ago in the land of America, a non-denominational sect (the Puritans) brought the torturous old-time religion to the New World. And even since then, how often have religious groups under the guise of Jesus continued persecuting and killing anyone with divergent beliefs? All this from a tradition with dubious assimilation of multifarious cultural traditions. Of course the Mithraic legend is apparently primary among the influences that sully the origins of "gospel truth." Therefore, how sure can one be of the veracity of so-called original writings? At what cost, especially in human life and suffering, is the "survival value" maintained? Obviously, the teachings of Jesus are not important to millions over the centuries who committed barbarism in His very name. While certainly, just the opposite is true, though nothing justifies any holocaust. Personally, it is a very simple faith with love, forgiveness and healing in a "kingdom" within myself. However, I am utterly insensed by the continuing use of religion as weaponry.



posted on Apr, 8 2004 @ 09:17 AM
link   
If interested in relations between Jesus and other religions and their deities/prophets I suggest you look out for the current issues of the Fortean Times, which contains a very interesting article on the subject.

When i have more time I shall go into it in a bit more detail.



posted on Apr, 8 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I've studied this a bit and even presented a report of the fact that Christianity is simply a duplicate of this Mithras cult. Get this, it was at a Catholic school. Ha they ate my words and were speechless...

The Mithras cult were the inventors of the "blood and body" idea, as well as the savior idea. Christianity is nothing more than an elaborate, and rather successful hoax that brainwashed and destroys proper advancement of society.

Read my siggy



posted on Apr, 8 2004 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Fortean Times are good, a "must read" every day


And ice, that was brave, glad you did it and wish I could have been there!

It is amazing how so much doctrine could be completely stolen. And I guess I shouldn't be amazed that people utterly ignore the historical facts.



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Every time we have an excellent post like this, we never get a rebuttal from the 'bible-thumpers'.



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by nathraq
Every time we have an excellent post like this, we never get a rebuttal from the 'bible-thumpers'.



lol...they avoid topics that their faith may be successfully challenged.


Originally posted by aeon
And ice, that was brave, glad you did it and wish I could have been there!


Thanks! It was an enjoyable experience to say the least!


By The Way, here's an excellent site on Mithras and Christianity: www.vetssweatshop.net...

[Edited on 9-4-2004 by iceofspades]



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by nathraq
Every time we have an excellent post like this, we never get a rebuttal from the 'bible-thumpers'.



I posted this almost three years ago on the old board and I had many rebuttal from "bible-thumpers," one of them was Truth.

He said it was Satan who made those religions because he knew Jesus was coming to the earth so Satan made all those religions to fool the nations. It was Satan!



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   
[Quote]
I posted this almost three years ago on the old board and I had many rebuttal from "bible-thumpers," one of them was Truth.

He said it was Satan who made those religions because he knew Jesus was coming to the earth so Satan made all those religions to fool the nations. It was Satan!


lol..that's great



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   
lol!^^^

How rediculous huh?

Satan made Buddha, Krishna, Mithra, Heru(Horus), etc. before "Jesus"; so we would all be fooled into burning in "Hell" forever. Give me a break.



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67

I posted this almost three years ago on the old board and I had many rebuttal from "bible-thumpers," one of them was Truth.

He said it was Satan who made those religions because he knew Jesus was coming to the earth so Satan made all those religions to fool the nations. It was Satan!



That idea is based on the work of the early church scholar Justin Martyr.

As for Mithras being the blueprint for Jesus. He's just one of many. It's probable that a large part of Jesus comes from Mithras, but Mithras himself was based on other deities.
Mithras is only one piece of Jesus.

Jesus is a universal diety inasmuch as he incorporates a myriad of figures in different faiths.



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 03:32 PM
link   




That idea is based on the work of the early church scholar Justin Martyr.

As for Mithras being the blueprint for Jesus. He's just one of many. It's probable that a large part of Jesus comes from Mithras, but Mithras himself was based on other deities.
Mithras is only one piece of Jesus.

Jesus is a universal diety inasmuch as he incorporates a myriad of figures in different faiths.


Is that so? Would you care to name those figures?



posted on Apr, 9 2004 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by iceofspades


As for Mithras being the blueprint for Jesus. He's just one of many. It's probable that a large part of Jesus comes from Mithras, but Mithras himself was based on other deities.
Mithras is only one piece of Jesus.

Jesus is a universal diety inasmuch as he incorporates a myriad of figures in different faiths.


Is that so? Would you care to name those figures?


Sure.

Attis, Buddha, Osiris, Dionysos, Krishna, Zoraster, Iao, Prometheus, Ixion, Alcestis, Romulus, Heracles, Orpheus...... the list goes on.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join