please don't compare Jesus to Mithras

[Shadow Wolf]

For instance, the virgin birth. That is actually more unique to Jesus.

Krishna, Dionysus, Frigga, Hertha, and Horus are just a few of the many virgin births.
As for death and resurrection there is Inanna (Ishtar), Krishna, Dionysus, Baal, Odin, Persephone, and many more. According to Carl Jung, the death-resurrection theme is an archetype of the collective conscious, which is why it is found in so many religions around the world.

 

[Mehr Licht]

I believe the rock was symbolic of his birth from the cosmos. Leaving the world-rock or cracking the cosmic egg so to speak. In certain Iranian traditions Mithra was thought to have been born of the virgin Goddess Anahita but it's unknown if the Mystery cult of Mithras made use of this myth or not. It's said that she took on the role, as mother of Mithra, after having been identified with the Goddesses Ishtar and Nana. The Indian / Vedic Mitra was also born of a Goddess, Aditi, but I'm not sure if she specifically had the title "virign.**" She was thought to have incarnated on earth as Devaki where she conceived without sexual intercourse and gave birth to Krishna though.

** I've seen the term "celestial virgin" used on a few webpages but they don't give sources.

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]
[/FONT]

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Krishna, Dionysus, Frigga, Hertha, and Horus are just a few of the many virgin births.

Talk of the 'virgin birth' of Dionysus is an excellent example of intellectual sloppiness in the service of a shallow argument.

 

[michaelsherlock]

Krishna, Dionysus, Frigga, Hertha, and Horus are just a few of the many virgin births.
As for death and resurrection there is Inanna (Ishtar), Krishna, Dionysus, Baal, Odin, Persephone, and many more. According to Carl Jung, the death-resurrection theme is an archetype of the collective conscious, which is why it is found in so many religions around the world.

From what I have read on Krishna, his mother was not a virgin.

 

[fallingblood]

Krishna, Dionysus, Frigga, Hertha, and Horus are just a few of the many virgin births.
As for death and resurrection there is Inanna (Ishtar), Krishna, Dionysus, Baal, Odin, Persephone, and many more. According to Carl Jung, the death-resurrection theme is an archetype of the collective conscious, which is why it is found in so many religions around the world.

I think you misunderstood what I said. Jesus' birth was unique in the fact that before and after conception, Mary was a virgin. There was no physical union at all in this case.

As for some of those that you list as being virgin births, not really. I know for sure Horus wasn't. Neither was Dionysus. I also don't think Krishna's mother was a virgin either. So really, your list is suspect. That is why I have a problem with such comparison's. Primarily because the details are simply made up.

As for the death and resurrection idea, again, Jesus is unique in that it wasn't a cycle. We do see some stories of a god dying, and then coming back to life (not always a resurrection though, many times it is a rebirth), in a cycle. That is quite different. Dionysus, for example, never was resurrected, by was reborn.

 

[Falvlun]

I think you misunderstood what I said. Jesus' birth was unique in the fact that before and after conception, Mary was a virgin. There was no physical union at all in this case.

Are you claiming that Mary died a virgin, or that she merely remained a virgin until Jesus was born? Because I distinctly remember that Jesus had brothers, supposedly conceived in the normal way.

As for the death and resurrection idea, again, Jesus is unique in that it wasn't a cycle. We do see some stories of a god dying, and then coming back to life (not always a resurrection though, many times it is a rebirth), in a cycle. That is quite different. Dionysus, for example, never was resurrected, by was reborn.

I think you may be missing the forest for the trees in this instance. The point is that the incarnation of god dying on Earth, only to come back to life, is a common theme.

 

[Kathryn]

The word for "brothers" in the New Testament can also mean close relatives, such as cousins, or even a close friend. In that era of extended families often living together, the word was used loosely.

Furthermore, ancient tradition has it that Joseph was a widower with children. Now, the bible doesn't say he was, but it also doesn't say he wasn't - it's silent on the subject of his age or former marital status.

The bible also doesn't say that Mary gave birth to any more children after Jesus.

Mary is compared to the Ark of the Covenant in many religious traditions, which is a fascinating concept, by the way.

No man was allowed to touch the Ark because it was so holy and because it carried the Word of God.

 

[fallingblood]

Are you claiming that Mary died a virgin, or that she merely remained a virgin until Jesus was born? Because I distinctly remember that Jesus had brothers, supposedly conceived in the normal way.

Just until he was born.

I think you may be missing the forest for the trees in this instance. The point is that the incarnation of god dying on Earth, only to come back to life, is a common theme.

It may be a common theme, but only if one makes it very vague. Augustus nearly fits such an idea, as do a number of other historical figures.

To compare Mithras to Jesus, or to some other mythical figure though, simply does an injustice to Jesus, as well as the traditions that hold that other figure in high regards. That, and it is usually based on dishonesty.

There may be similarities; however, they are very vague, and really don't mean much.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It may be a common theme, but only if one makes it very vague. Augustus nearly fits such an idea, as do a number of other historical figures.

How is it at all vague? A plethora of god-figures were killed and resurrected, and not as some cycle.

 

[fallingblood]

How is it at all vague? A plethora of god-figures were killed and resurrected, and not as some cycle.

Not really. You claimed that a plethora of god-figures did such; however, even the list you provided showed something different. Dionysus, again, was never resurrected, but was reborn. There is a difference here. I do not believe Krishna was said to have been resurrected either (well not until quite later on).

For Baal, it was a death and rebirth cycle. As in it was an annual thing. This is true for Ishtar as well. I don't know about the others you listed, but when we see the majority of those that you list not being resurrected, the rest come into question as well.

More so, Jesus was not thought of as being unique in being resurrected. If we look at Paul, the earliest source for Jesus, we see Jesus only being the beginning of the general resurrection. Again, that is quite different from those "god-men" that you mentioned (some of which weren't even god men at all. Odin was a god, Ishtar a goddess. Baal also was a god. Maybe you could get away with Krishna). But seriously, you're really talking about gods/goddesses, when Jesus, in the earliest traditions, was neither. It wasn't until quite some time later that he was seen to be like God, or part of God, yet he was still seen as fully human.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I'm pretty sure the rock was a virgin. :cover:

But equally strange things have been known to happen.
(in mythos) so......

Rocks multiply asexually so it was a virgin but having children wasn't unusual for it either.

 

[roger_pearse]

neither rocks nor virgins can concieve children. I'm also willing to bet that the rock was indeed (also) a virgin.

Surely time for a public safety warning here:

If you can't tell the difference between a lump of sandstone and a human virgin, please do NOT experiment, as serious and intimate injuries may result. Instead, seek advice from your father. He will probably know the difference.

Atheists sometimes complain that they get treated with derision. I never understand why. But sometimes, I get a hint.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If you can't tell the difference between a lump of sandstone and a human virgin, please do NOT experiment, as serious and intimate injuries may result.

:yes:

 

[michaelsherlock]

Surely time for a public safety warning here:

If you can't tell the difference between a lump of sandstone and a human virgin, please do NOT experiment, as serious and intimate injuries may result. Instead, seek advice from your father. He will probably know the difference.

Atheists sometimes complain that they get treated with derision. I never understand why. But sometimes, I get a hint.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

And if you think that either rocks or virgins can conceive children then you have much bigger issues to deal with.

 

[Mehr Licht]

I believe the rock was supposed to be symbolic of this cosmos or the universe.

"...In the myth he is thought to be the primordial heavenly light which manifests itself as "god generated from a rock' (theos ek petras, to petroghenos Mithra). While standing on the bank of a river, he frees himself, escaping the obscure mineral by wielding the sword and torch which helped him while he was in the "mothers" womb...

This expression "theos ek petras" carries yet another meaning in the magical tradition. On the one hand, the precipitation of what constitutes the "heavenly light" into the dungeon represented by the dark "earth", is a negative and degenerate process; but on the other hand, it also represents an opportunity for the spiritual element to become individuated and actualized. The body's sophisticated organism witness the presence of a nucleus of qualified energy"
-The Path to Enlightenment in the Mithraic Mysteries J Evola

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Comparing Jesus with Mithras is silling. Twisting and turning to justify such silliness is absurd.