In 2000 years, will future civilizations look back on the "ancient Americans" and accuse Kennedy of being a...?

http://kingdavid8.com/Copycat/Home.html

Who knows? We might lose all motion pictures of Kennedy. All the evidence might vanish into the thin air.

:-D

Apparently, some still think the alleged parallels between Jesus and the mystery religions are authentic. Although, a very popular argument at the beginning of the century, but it generally died off because it was so discredited. Is there anyone here who still thinks Christianity derived from paganism?

Hey, copycat theorist who think Jesus is merely echoes of ancient mysterious religions. You could win a thousand dollars if you prove your theory correct!

http://kingdavid8.com/Copycat/Challenge.html

Carly, I'm not asking anyone to question the existence of Kennedy.

As for suggestion that the New Testament doctrines of baptism or communion come from mystery religions as your link claimed, that's just nonsense.

For one thing, the evidence for these supposed parallels comes from after the second century, so any borrowing would have come from Christianity not the other way around.

And if you look carefully, the similarities vanish. For instance, to get to a higher level in the Mithra cult, followers had to stand under a bull while it was slain, so they could be bathed in its blood and guts. Then they'd join the others in eating the bull.

Now, to suggest that Jews would find anything attractive about this and want to model baptism and communion after this barbaric practice is extremely implausible, which is why most scholars don't go for it.

Thanks for the first star I've ever received Carly! I won't forget it. :-D

We have almost no evidence of Mithraism in the sense of a mystery religion in the West until very late, too late to have influenced the beginnings of Christianity.

The first public recognition of the Mithras in Rome was the state visit of Tiridates, the king of Armenia, in AD 66. It's said that he addressed Nero by saying, "And I have come to thee, my god, to worship thee as I do Mithras."

There is also reference earlier to some pirates in Cilicia who were worshipers of Mithras, but this is not the same as Mithraism as a mystery religion. Mithra as a mystery religion cannot be detected before AD 90, which is about the time we see a Mithraic motif in a poem by Statius.

No mithraea, or Mithraic temples, have been found at Pompeii, which was destroyed by the eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79. The earliest Mithraic inscription in the West is a statue of a prefect under the emperor Trajan in AD 101. It's now in the British Museum.

The earliest mithraea are dated to the early second century. There are a handful of inscriptions that date to the early second century, but the vast majority of texts are dated after AD 140. Most of what we have as evidence of Mithraism comes in the second, third, and fourth centuries AD.

That's basically what's wrong with the theories about Mithraism influencing the beginnings of Christianity. The timing is wrong.

I'm reviewing the link and I'm having trouble already. For example, any religious festivals were consolidated into one holiday to coincide with the winter solstice.

Christmas is only celebrated on December twenty-fifth due to this tradition. This argument already proves to be insignificant as there is nothing in the Scriptures which mentions this date.

Carly, I gave you a thumbs up.

Mithras did not have twelve disciples, but I can relate a far-fetched similarity to this allegation.

In two of the reliefs to the left, Mithras is surrounded by the twelve signs of the zodiac. Claiming Mithras had twelve disciples because there are twelve signs of the zodiac is the connection critics try to make.

The critics simply see twelve beings and claim the figures are disciples. Some go as

far to defend their position by mimicking Franz Cumont's theory, claiming the figures

were actually Mithras' twelve disciples dressed up in zodiac costumes!

How they can make this connection is unknown as no inscriptions accompany the original reliefs.

Savior, Redeemer, Messiah. Mithras is never referred to any of these.

Why would he be since he never served such a purpose? Messiah is also a Hebrew word which makes one wonder what the source is for this allegation.

Lamb of God, Good Shepherd. Skeptics try to use the depiction of Mithras holding the sacrificed bull over his shoulders as evidence but this is absurd as the bull is slaughtered!

Furthermore, the Old Testament references lambs and shepherds long before Mithraism ever surfaced.

The Way Truth and Light, Light of the World. Though the names are not an exact match I did find warrior angel of light but this is associated with the Iranian Mithras, not the Roman Mithras of Mithraism.

Lion. Again, not an exact match but I did find an association to sky/celestial lion, referring to the sign of Leo.

But like the reference to lambs, the Old Testament mentions the Lion of Judah long before Mithraism ever originated.

I can find no mention in any text or relief showing Mithras to be a traveling teacher. Regardless, it would hardly seem significant as many legends speak of mankind receiving wisdom from their gods.

The claim regarding Mithras atoning for sin leads me to as the question, how? There is no

mention of this in any record.

Mithras does sacrifice a sacred bull to create life but I see no reference to the atoning of sin, the atoning of sin through blood, or Mithras atoning for sin.

Some try to merge the bull and Mithras into one being but this concept is unanimously rejected by Mithras scholars.

There are two reliefs which show Mithras celebrating a banquet. The first relief shows Mithras and Helios dining together after the sacrifice of the bull.

The other depicts Mithras dining with the sun before ascending into paradise with the other gods.

But for some reason the tale becomes distorted with Mithras saying to his, imaginary, disciples, "He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved."

Yet this quote was added centuries later during the middle ages and is not even attributed to Mithras!

There is no mention of a virgin birth in Mithraism. The earliest reliefs depict a fully-mature Mithras emerging from a rock.