Some Fascinating Religions That Have Died Out - And Some That Came Back.


Almost all religions throughout history, no matter how old or new, claim to be either the first, the last, or both. This was as true of Zoroastrianism 2,000 years ago as it is of Judaism today. It's still as true of Christianity or Islam as it was of ancient Greek or Egyptian mythology. But isn't that always the line between a "religion" and a "mythology?" The simple passage of time since it was last practiced?

If we were to list every single religion that has ever died out through cultural shifts, genocide, factionalization, replacement, or absorption into other religions, you'd still be reading this by the time we got around to worshipping Borg space otters. Instead we're going to focus on a few "dead" religions that might not be quite as "dead" as you think. Because much like the Borg, new religions have a fascinating way of assimilating the old; absorbing and modifying concepts from long ago and far away, then forgetting where they originally came from. 

But no belief system is the first, and no one alive today will likely survive to see the last. The things we believe today are but single links in the chain of human history. Some day, thousands of years from now, people will have trouble remembering when they started worshipping space otters. Otterism will feel like the first and last religion to them, too. But maybe, just maybe, someone will take a break from cracking clams on their tummy long enough to look back on Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism, and Buddhism. Maybe they'll see a bit of themselves in our "dead religions," just as you might see a bit of yourself in these.


1)Druidism Was Made Up by Nostalgic Brits in the 19th Century


You may know a few fans of paganism who would describe themselves as "Druids" today. But they aren't. First, because "Druid" wasn't a religion, it was a Celtic social class. A Druid was a member of the educated, professional class of Celtic peoples in France, Great Britain, and Ireland. They were teachers, philosophers, businessmen, and yes, priests. But they were priests of the same Celtic religions practiced by their contemporaries. And the simple fact is that nobody knows exactly what these people believed. Or if they even had a common belief system.

What we know of the religious practice today comes in part from the Celtic Revival of the 19th century, which saw Brits attempting to explore and return to their pagan roots. Some of the rest comes from the writing of Julius Ceasar and other Romans, who mythologized Druid priests in Gaul as sage, magical wise men, wandering the land with cloak and beard. Basically, Gandalf. But the best of our actual knowledge of Celtic or Druidic belief makes up only a small part of the modern Celtic belief structure. The vast majority of it was just kind of... made up, in the 19th Century. 
Including that bit about Stonehenge, which we now know was built some 2,500 years before the Druids were even a thing. Of course, it still could have been aliens.  


2)Japanese Emperor Worship Was Practiced Until 1946


It's not uncommon for ancient or medieval nations to position the monarch as some sort of divinity. Such was the case in Japan for most of the time when it had an emperor. This belief of Shintoism says that the emperor is an arahitogami, or human being who is also a god.

This belief only ended in 1946, at the end of the Second World War. After surrendering Japan to the United States, Emperor Hirohito signed the Humanity Declaration, stating that he had never been an arahitogami, and had simply inherited his title through family lineage. This was a critical step toward moving moving Japan out of its Imperial Age and into the modern age of democratic rule. By explicitly renouncing his divine status (and thus the divine status of all future emperors), Hirohito was no longer an imperial sovereign, but a constitutional monarch similar to the secular royalty of Great Britain or Canada.  


3) Mithraism Was Christianity Before There Was Even Christ


This dead religion is incredibly interesting mostly because it isn't exactly "dead." It just became Christianity. Mithras was a very popular god worshipped by Romans during the 1st to 4th Century BC, during the initial formation of Christianity. Mithras was a demi-god who was born of a virgin on December 25th. He was a great teacher who traveled the land spreading wisdom, had 12 disciples, and was identified with both the lion and the lamb. Romans called him "Good Shepherd," "Redeemer," "Savior," and "the Way, the Truth and the Light." All of which you may recognize from the New Testament - most of which was written well after worship of Mithras had already begun. 

Mithras was even buried in a tomb, and resurrected after three days. The Romans celebrated his resurrection on the feast day of the female goddess of fertility. Depending on the specific region, that would be Aphrodite, Ishtar, or Astarte, from which we get the word "Easter." Sounds like a pretty solid case that Jesus was really Mithras, right?

Maybe - or maybe not. Because Mithras himself was based entirely on the Egyptian demi-god Horus. Every single thing said here applies as much to Horus as Mithras and Jesus. In addition, Horus was born under an Eastern star, was attended by three wise men, walked on water, healed the sick, was baptized at 20 years old by "Anup the Baptizer," and was later represented by the ichthys fish symbol adopted by Christians.

Care to guess Horus's birthday? Here's a hint: You celebrate it every year... on Christmas. 
 

4) Canaanite Polytheism Consolidated Its Many Gods to Become Judaism


Funny - don't see many 
Canaanites around these days.
Whatever happened to those guys, anyway? Maybe the Amalakites know. In any case, Caananite polytheism (or Baal worship) was once a pretty big deal in the Middle East, and it lives on at least to some extent in the religion that ultimately replaced it.

Fans of the Old Testament know all about Baal and the Canaanites, but what fewer people know is that "Baal" wasn't a single god. It was just a title, meaning "Lord" or "God." There were many Baals worshipped in this area, the highest of whom was called El. As in "El Elohim," "Yahweh," or "the exact same god of the Old Testament."

The Old Testament also mentions other gods. Example: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." See, originally, the Hebrew god El was a Canaanite Baal - the father of all other gods, like Asherah (also mentioned in the Old Testament), Astarte, Dagon, and many others. Think of El as equivalent to Zeus, Apollo, or Odin; not a singular god, but an all-powerful father to the others. 

When the ancient Hebrews came through, they were flying the banner of the "god of all gods." Effectively, the Hebrews just cut out the middlemen and decided to worship the Baal El directly. Likely under the assumption that whatever Dad says goes among his kids, too.

This means two things. First: Baal worship is still alive and well in every church, synagogue, and mosque on Earth. Second: Judaism was not purely monotheistic. It was simply a version of pantheist Baal worship that places emphasis directly on the most powerful god. If that's your measure of "monotheism," then any temple devoted to Zeus, Apollo, or Odin could say the same. 


5) Catharism Was Brutally Eradicated by the Catholic Church


Those who know the history of the Catholic Church are already well familiar with the Cathars. Specifically, because they don't exist anymore.

Catharism was a gnostic religion. The Cathars believed there were two gods: the evil God of Creation spoken of in the Old Testament, and the good God of the New Testament. Essentially, the Cathars believed that the Yahweh of the Old Testament was really Satan, who had created every single physical thing in the world, including people. They believed that humans were essentially genderless, angelic spirits trapped within a body made by the Devil, and that only knowledge of the truth ("gnosis" could relieve the angelic spirit of its constant reincarnation into evil flesh. 

By 1209, the Catholic Church had mercilessly wiped this entire group of heretics off the face of the Earth. Only the Black Death killed more Europeans than the Catholics during this genocidal purge. Today, we remember the Cathars on one specific date, the day on which the last Cathar fortress fell. The Church burned over 200 Cathars alive at the foot of that castle. Cathars called this day "The Massacre of Montsegur" - today we simply know it as "Friday the 13th." 
 

6) Zoroastrianism Invented the Ideas of Heaven, Hell, and Monotheism


This fascinating Babylonian religion may not be well known today, but it's probably one of the most important religions of all time. Especially for modern Jewish and Christian culture. In fact, the more you learn about this supposedly dead religion, the more you may come to recognize some of your own beliefs within it. 

Appearing approximately 2,000 years before Jesus, Zoroastrianism far predates the earliest extra-biblical mention of Judaism. In Zoroastrianism, we find history's first verifiable mention of a supreme being of wisdom, love, and enlightenment. His name was "Ahura Mazda." This makes Zorastrianism effectively the first monotheistic religion. In it, we find history's first mention of a "hell" where evil people suffer for their bad deeds, and a "heaven" created for good people. 

It's worth noting that these concepts, so commonly believed by Christians, Jews, and Muslims, are actually nowhere to be found in any of their respective religious texts. You'll find nothing in the Quran or Bible that says people go to heaven just for being generally good, or hell just for being generally evil. This convention held by so many Abrahamic believers is strictly Zoroastrian, handed down orally by reformed Jews after the Babylonian Captivity. Zoroastrianism is a fascinating case of oral tradition surviving in parallel (or even direct conflict) with written tradition. 
Zoroastrianism is still being Practiced in Iran at the moment with temples.
 

7) Judaism "Died" and Came Back to Life as a New Religion


Huh? What is Judaism doing on this list? There are something like 14 million practicing Jews in the world. How is that a "dead" religion? And this is where we wrap up something briefly mentioned in the section on Zoroastrianism. To wit: modern Jews, aren't. And maybe never were. 

Modern Judaism is, like the Hebrew language, a notably "re-born" tradition. While the history of Judaism is said to span approximately 3,000 years, there was an approximately 100-year gap in the practice of Judaism known as the Babylonian Exile. Noted at length in the Bible, during this period the Jewish people were taken from their homeland to Babylon as captives. Between about 600 BC and 515 BC, the Jews were scattered, deported, and taken to Babylon with nothing but their oral tradition. It was more than likely during this period when most of the Old Testament was written, including books later attributed to Moses. 

By the time the Jews returned to Israel, several generation had come and gone between the practice of Judaism and its rebirth. Some old religious and historical texts still existed, but nobody knew how to read them anymore. All the Jews had were stories passed down from their great-great grandparents - and the rest was guesswork. 

It's hard to say how much or how little modern Judaism has in common with ancient Judaism. Certainly there are commonalities, but there's so much Babylonian Zoroastrianism in the Old Testament (again, even in those books reportedly written by Moses) that it's impossible to say. In any case, simply the fact that modern Judaism is strictly monotheistic, while ancient Judaism was clearly polytheistic, is enough to dispel the notion that ancient Judaism survives in practice today. 
 

Finnish Paganism Revolved Around Feminism, Equality, and Great Sex


Ukko was Finland's take on Nordic mythology. It shares many common traits and tropes with other polytheistic pagan religions of the area, specifically those which included Thor and Odin. The most interesting about this variation on Nordic Paganism is that the Thor figure (named Ukko) is its central and most powerful figure. Ukko is the god of the sky and thunder; thunder itself is the result of Ukko's apparently AMAZING copulation with his wife, Akka. 

Here we see something fairly unique among European religious traditions: a kind of yin and yang relationship between Ukko and Akka. They're actually spoken of almost synonymously, being essentially the male and female counterparts of one another. Neither Ukko nor Akka is more powerful than the other - rather, they share a complimentary relationship, co-ruling the Earth in a balance of the masculine and feminine. "Ukko" usually refers to both of them as a single entity; but only because the Finnish language uses default male pronouns. In point of fact, though, Ukko and Akka are two sides of the same coin. That's an idea very rarely seen outside of Eastern religions, and reason enough to explore the fascinating mythology of this long-dead religion.





9) The Greeks Gave the Peaceful Minoan Goddess Worshippers a Bad Name.


The word "Minoan" refers to the people of the island of Crete, so named for their first king, Minos. You'll probably recognize that name from the Greek story of the Minotaur. However, the story of the Minotaur was always a purely Greek fiction meant to make their Minoan rivals look like backward savages, having sex with bulls and torturing unwary travelers to death. "Propaganda" seems like too light a word.

It is a shame that we remember the Minoans that way, too. Because the Minoans were a fairly peaceful people who worshipped one or more nature goddesses. Not much is known about the religious practices themselves, apart from the fact that some of them involved snakes and an annual festival of leaping over bulls. (This was likely the practice that inspired Greece's hit-piece Minotaur story.)

There's been some suggestion of human sacrifice, but again: since the Minoan civilization was largely wiped out by earthquakes and natural catastrophes, we don't have much to go by outside of Greek records. Which is, at best, kind of like reading "A History of America" by Joseph Stalin.


10) Manichaeism Is Like a Best-Of Compilation of All the Other Major Religions


This gnostic religion was founded by an Iranian prophet named Mani about 250 AD. Manichaeism was one of those "fusion" religions that drew influences from all over the place in order to form some kind of coherent cosmology. Mani drew from the teachings of Buddha, Zoroaster, and Jesus, combining them with some apocryphal writings like the Book of Enoch, as well as a smattering of Vedic, Egyptian, and Greek traditions. Put it this way: If Mani were alive today, he'd be writing books on the Karmic Spirituality of Quantum Mechanics, and Aligning Your Kabbalah Chakras with Chiropractic Meditation. 


11) Genghis Khan Practiced Tengrism and Worshipped "Wind Horses"


Somewhere between the East and Middle East lay Central Asia, a place known for heavily influencing and being influenced by other cultures. Tengri was long the prevailing religion of the Turks, Hungarians, and Mongols - including Genghis Khan. Followers of Tengri see life as a matter of maintaining harmony and balance between two elements. Life is sustained by the blue sky (Tengri), the fertile Mother Earth Eje, and a unifying ruler who they regard as the spirit of the Sky, Heaven, and Earth. However, these spirits only account for existence; the needs of an individual are met by the spirits of ancestors, animals, and natural elements. 

Adherents of Tengri see the soul as a "wind horse," which is a horse made of wind. Obv. By living a good life, you become a powerful wind horse, sweeping forever across the plains and helping to bring needed rain or clear skies to your family. In Tengri, wind is literally the passage of souls, and whatever the wind blows is a gift from these souls.


12) Vedism Evolved Into Hinduism and Spread Throughout Asia and the Middle East


Vedism is a hugely important religion with far too many aspects to cover in one list entry. Suffice it to say, nothing written here would even scratch the surface. 

Vedism is a sort of proto-religion that served as a wellspring for many practiced today. All forms of Hinduism started out with the Indo-Aryan practice of Vedism. It was a pantheist religion with two classes of gods (the Devas and Asuras), which may number in the near infinite. However, only 33 of the deities are actually named. The concept of four elements (earth, air, fire, and water) come from the Vedic tradition. Vedism didn't so much "disappear" as evolve into many other religions, and you can still find echoes of it alive and well today throughout India and the Middle East.

https://m.ranker.com/list/religions-that-are-gone-and-why/richard-rowe

God have mercy

Great work. Fanatics and brainwashed gargoyles would love to have your head for dinner. Why are people afraid to read and ask questions?

Faponmile:
Great work. Fanatics and brainwashed gargoyles would love to have your head for dinner. Why are people afraid to read and ask questions?

@bolded, i really don't know.
But, it's obvious that a curious mind will eventually do away with religious beliefs since sooner or later, they will realise that religious beliefs doesn't make sense... This is the reason why religious beliefs thrives on faith induced conditioning, the only state of learning that doesn't follow any of our own personal human traits!
Since this faith induced conditioning focuses on the abstract, its no wonder then that most religious activities revolves around imaginary things and things science have not yet proved/understood.
The more we understand our universe, the more religious beliefs get relegated to the back end of irrelevance.
You will be surprised at the type of things people believed in the past. I'm sure that in another 5000yrs, the generation then will also be surprised at the type of absurdities people believe now.

may God have mercy on you

Rozz:
may God have mercy on you

What is the correlation between what you posted as a reply and the post on thread which you commented on?

Na wa o.

IamMichael:

What is the correlation between what you posted as a reply and the post on thread which you commented on?

Na wa o.

funny,you can type sha, I haven't really read it

It's high time that I put you under my radar and start watching you because you are spreading so much lies that you don't research on current facts on the subject matters you raise.

The idea of a relationship between early Christianity and the cultus of Mithras is based on a remark in the 2nd century Christian writer Justin Martyr, who accused the initiates of Mithras of imitating the Christian communion rite.

Based upon this, Ernest Renan in 1882 set forth a vivid depiction of two rival religions: "if the growth of Christianity had been arrested by some mortal malady, the world would have been Mithraic." But at the time that Renan wrote, before Cumont had collected the sources, very little was known about Mithras.

In fact the two groups had different objectives, and the cult of Mithras did not aim at a universal role, even at the peak of its popularity.

There is no evidence of direct influence in either direction between the cult of Mithras and early Christianity. Rather such similarities as exist are attributed to the common environment in which both arose.

The philosopher Celsus in the second century provides some evidence that Ophite gnostic ideas were influencing the mysteries of Mithras

Claim: Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th, in a cave, attended by shepherds
Truth: Mithras was actually born out of solid rock, leaving a hole in the side of a mountain (presumably described as a “cave”). He was not born of a virgin (unless you consider the rock mountain to have been a virgin). His birth was celebrated on December 25th, but the first Christians knew this was not the true date of Christ’s birth anyway, and both Mithraic worshippers and the early Roman Church borrowed this celebration from earlier winter solstice celebrations. Shepherds are part of Mithraism, witnessing his birth and helping Mithras emerge from the rock, but interestingly, the shepherds exist in the birth chronology at a time when humans are not supposed to have been yet born. This, coupled with the fact the earliest version of this part of the Mithraic mythology emerges one hundred years after the appearance of the New Testament, infers it is far more likely this portion of Mithraism was borrowed from Christianity rather than the other way around.

Claim: Mithras was considered a great traveling teacher and master
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he was a teacher of any kind, but he was could have been considered a master of sorts. This would not be unexpected of any deity, however. Most mythologies describe their gods in this way.

Claim: Mithras had 12 companions or disciples
Truth: There is no evidence for any of this in the traditions of Iran or Rome. It is possible the idea Mithras had 12 disciples is simply derived from murals in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs and personages of the Zodiac (two of whom are the moon and the sun). Even this imagery is post Christian, and, therefore, did not contribute to the imagery of Christianity (although it could certainly have borrowed from Christianity).

Claim: Mithras promised his followers immortality
Truth: While there is little evidence for this, it is certainly reasonable to think Mithras might have offered immortality, as this is not uncommon for any God of mythology.

Claim: Mithras performed miracles
Truth: Of course this is true, as this too was not uncommon for mythological characters.

Claim: Mithras sacrificed himself for world peace
Truth: There is little or no evidence this is true, although there is a story about Mithras slaying a threatening bull in a heroic deed. But that’s about as close as it gets.

Claim: Mithras was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again, and Mithras was celebrated each year at the time of His resurrection (later to become Easter)
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he ever even died, let alone resurrected. Tertullian did write about Mithraic believers re-enacting resurrection scenes, but he wrote about this occurring well after New Testament times. Christianity could not, therefore, have borrowed from Mithraic traditions, but the opposite could certainly be true.

Claim: Mithras was called “the Good Shepherd”, and was identified with both the Lamb and the Lion
Truth: There is no evidence that Mithras was ever called “the Good Shepherd” or identified with a lamb, but since Mithras was a sun-god, there was an association with Leo (the House of the Sun in Babylonian astrology), so one might say he was associated with a Lion. But once again, all of this evidence is actually post New Testament; Mithraic believers may once again have borrowed this attribute from Christianity.

Claim: Mithras was considered to be the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
Truth: Based on the researched and known historic record of the Mithraic traditions, none of these terms has ever been applied to Mithras with the exception of “mediator”. But this term was used in a very different from how Christians used the term. Mithras was not the mediator between God and man but the mediator between the good and evil gods of Zoroaster.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated Sunday as Mithras’ sacred day (also known as the “Lord’s Day,”)
Truth: This tradition of celebrating Sunday is only true of Mithraic believers in Rome and it is a tradition that dates to post Christian times. Once again, it is more likely to have been borrowed from Christianity than the other way around.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper”
Truth: Followers of Mithras did not celebrate a Eucharist, but they did celebrate a fellowship meal regularly, just as did many other groups in the Roman world.

Claim: Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th, in a cave, attended by shepherds
Truth: Mithras was actually born out of solid rock, leaving a hole in the side of a mountain (presumably described as a “cave”). He was not born of a virgin (unless you consider the rock mountain to have been a virgin). His birth was celebrated on December 25th, but the first Christians knew this was not the true date of Christ’s birth anyway, and both Mithraic worshippers and the early Roman Church borrowed this celebration from earlier winter solstice celebrations. Shepherds are part of Mithraism, witnessing his birth and helping Mithras emerge from the rock, but interestingly, the shepherds exist in the birth chronology at a time when humans are not supposed to have been yet born. This, coupled with the fact the earliest version of this part of the Mithraic mythology emerges one hundred years after the appearance of the New Testament, infers it is far more likely this portion of Mithraism was borrowed from Christianity rather than the other way around.

Claim: Mithras was considered a great traveling teacher and master
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he was a teacher of any kind, but he was could have been considered a master of sorts. This would not be unexpected of any deity, however. Most mythologies describe their gods in this way.

Claim: Mithras had 12 companions or disciples
Truth: There is no evidence for any of this in the traditions of Iran or Rome. It is possible the idea Mithras had 12 disciples is simply derived from murals in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs and personages of the Zodiac (two of whom are the moon and the sun). Even this imagery is post Christian, and, therefore, did not contribute to the imagery of Christianity (although it could certainly have borrowed from Christianity).

Claim: Mithras promised his followers immortality
Truth: While there is little evidence for this, it is certainly reasonable to think Mithras might have offered immortality, as this is not uncommon for any God of mythology.

Claim: Mithras performed miracles
Truth: Of course this is true, as this too was not uncommon for mythological characters.

Claim: Mithras sacrificed himself for world peace
Truth: There is little or no evidence this is true, although there is a story about Mithras slaying a threatening bull in a heroic deed. But that’s about as close as it gets.

Claim: Mithras was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again, and Mithras was celebrated each year at the time of His resurrection (later to become Easter)
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he ever even died, let alone resurrected. Tertullian did write about Mithraic believers re-enacting resurrection scenes, but he wrote about this occurring well after New Testament times. Christianity could not, therefore, have borrowed from Mithraic traditions, but the opposite could certainly be true.

Claim: Mithras was called “the Good Shepherd”, and was identified with both the Lamb and the Lion
Truth: There is no evidence that Mithras was ever called “the Good Shepherd” or identified with a lamb, but since Mithras was a sun-god, there was an association with Leo (the House of the Sun in Babylonian astrology), so one might say he was associated with a Lion. But once again, all of this evidence is actually post New Testament; Mithraic believers may once again have borrowed this attribute from Christianity.

Claim: Mithras was considered to be the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
Truth: Based on the researched and known historic record of the Mithraic traditions, none of these terms has ever been applied to Mithras with the exception of “mediator”. But this term was used in a very different from how Christians used the term. Mithras was not the mediator between God and man but the mediator between the good and evil gods of Zoroaster.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated Sunday as Mithras’ sacred day (also known as the “Lord’s Day,”)
Truth: This tradition of celebrating Sunday is only true of Mithraic believers in Rome and it is a tradition that dates to post Christian times. Once again, it is more likely to have been borrowed from Christianity than the other way around.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper”
Truth: Followers of Mithras did not celebrate a Eucharist, but they did celebrate a fellowship meal regularly, just as did many other groups in the Roman world.


You are one of those satanic pathological liar. You can fool some people but you can't fool all people. I need to start keeping a tab on you so we expose to the people your numerous lies and your ignorance on subject matters.

If you are ready and able. Take up the Challenge and let us dig further into your lying claims that Mithras was rebranded as Jesus Christ so we can dig further into the details between the two.

Iammichael Vs Pervertprophet

My kind of post...



Shouldn't this be on FP?

First time I heard anything about "Druids" or Druidism was from a movie. I remember I was watching The Legend of The Seeker that day.
At first, I thought they had invented it but a little peep through my dictionary convinced me otherwise.


Zoroastrianism, fire temples, Ahura Mazda and all that jazz... never went away. At least not for a second. Adherents of Zoroastrianism can still be found in Iran today even though they now constitute an insignificant religious minority. But still, they have managed to hold on to the belief of their ancestors even in a Shia-dominated Iranian State. They number about 20,000 in that country today. Many of them simply fled to India after the 1979 revolution in Iran and they have remained there ever since.

PervertProphet:
Claim: Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th, in a cave, attended by shepherds
Truth: Mithras was actually born out of solid rock, leaving a hole in the side of a mountain (presumably described as a “cave”). He was not born of a virgin (unless you consider the rock mountain to have been a virgin). His birth was celebrated on December 25th, but the first Christians knew this was not the true date of Christ’s birth anyway, and both Mithraic worshippers and the early Roman Church borrowed this celebration from earlier winter solstice celebrations. Shepherds are part of Mithraism, witnessing his birth and helping Mithras emerge from the rock, but interestingly, the shepherds exist in the birth chronology at a time when humans are not supposed to have been yet born. This, coupled with the fact the earliest version of this part of the Mithraic mythology emerges one hundred years after the appearance of the New Testament, infers it is far more likely this portion of Mithraism was borrowed from Christianity rather than the other way around.

Claim: Mithras was considered a great traveling teacher and master
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he was a teacher of any kind, but he was could have been considered a master of sorts. This would not be unexpected of any deity, however. Most mythologies describe their gods in this way.

Claim: Mithras had 12 companions or disciples
Truth: There is no evidence for any of this in the traditions of Iran or Rome. It is possible the idea Mithras had 12 disciples is simply derived from murals in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs and personages of the Zodiac (two of whom are the moon and the sun). Even this imagery is post Christian, and, therefore, did not contribute to the imagery of Christianity (although it could certainly have borrowed from Christianity).

Claim: Mithras promised his followers immortality
Truth: While there is little evidence for this, it is certainly reasonable to think Mithras might have offered immortality, as this is not uncommon for any God of mythology.

Claim: Mithras performed miracles
Truth: Of course this is true, as this too was not uncommon for mythological characters.

Claim: Mithras sacrificed himself for world peace
Truth: There is little or no evidence this is true, although there is a story about Mithras slaying a threatening bull in a heroic deed. But that’s about as close as it gets.

Claim: Mithras was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again, and Mithras was celebrated each year at the time of His resurrection (later to become Easter)
Truth: There is nothing in the Mithraic tradition indicating he ever even died, let alone resurrected. Tertullian did write about Mithraic believers re-enacting resurrection scenes, but he wrote about this occurring well after New Testament times. Christianity could not, therefore, have borrowed from Mithraic traditions, but the opposite could certainly be true.

Claim: Mithras was called “the Good Shepherd”, and was identified with both the Lamb and the Lion
Truth: There is no evidence that Mithras was ever called “the Good Shepherd” or identified with a lamb, but since Mithras was a sun-god, there was an association with Leo (the House of the Sun in Babylonian astrology), so one might say he was associated with a Lion. But once again, all of this evidence is actually post New Testament; Mithraic believers may once again have borrowed this attribute from Christianity.

Claim: Mithras was considered to be the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
Truth: Based on the researched and known historic record of the Mithraic traditions, none of these terms has ever been applied to Mithras with the exception of “mediator”. But this term was used in a very different from how Christians used the term. Mithras was not the mediator between God and man but the mediator between the good and evil gods of Zoroaster.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated Sunday as Mithras’ sacred day (also known as the “Lord’s Day,”)
Truth: This tradition of celebrating Sunday is only true of Mithraic believers in Rome and it is a tradition that dates to post Christian times. Once again, it is more likely to have been borrowed from Christianity than the other way around.

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper”
Truth: Followers of Mithras did not celebrate a Eucharist, but they did celebrate a fellowship meal regularly, just as did many other groups in the Roman world.


You are one of those satanic pathological liar. You can fool some people but you can't fool all people. I need to start keeping a tab on you so we expose to the people your numerous lies and your ignorance on subject matters.

If you are ready and able. Take up the Challenge and let us dig further into your lying claims that Mithras was rebranded as Jesus Christ so we can dig further into the details between the two.

At least put the link where you copied it from, that's a sign of maturity and respect.

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-jesus-simply-a-retelling-of-the-mithras-mythology/

I wanted to reply you, but just out of curiosity, I decided to see if you are one of those who go online, copy one thing verbatim and pose it as your own. As it turns out, you are!

Rozz:
funny,you can type sha, I haven't really read it

No problem.
Will be nice to see your comment in relation to the post.


Regards!!!

IamMichael:

At least put the link where you copied it from, that's a sign of maturity and respect.

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-jesus-simply-a-retelling-of-the-mithras-mythology/

I wanted to reply you, but just out of curiosity, I decided to see if you are one of those who go online, copy one thing verbatim and pose it as your own. As it turns out, you are!

That doesn't take away the fact that he, PervertProphet is correct. He copied his rebuttal to you from a credible source and you copied yours from another source.
Nobody invents any new knowledge. We all learn from the knowledge already on ground before us.
I was actually believing your lies on the Mithras as Christ story until I saw PervertProphet's response and I was like, Wait, a minute!!

If you, IamMichael can be wrong on the Mithras as Jesus story and the fact that what you yourself copied from another link was not up to date on Mithras Vs Jesus then how I am not sure that all the other subject matters you wrote up there are not lies just to push your Atheist narrative.

I checked what you copied from another link and what he, PervertProphet copied from another link and yours has been debunked especially as regards the Mithras Vs Jesus subject matter. What PervertProphet copied from the other source was in consonance with what Scholars assert which is that the Mithras as Jesus thing is a Myth.

Let's wait for PervertProphet's response.

Qudsi:



That doesn't take away the fact that he, PervertProphet is correct. He copied his rebuttal to you from a credible source and you copied yours from another source.
Nobody invents any new knowledge. We all learn from the knowledge already on ground before us.
I was actually believing your lies on the Mithras as Christ story until I saw PervertProphet's response and I was like, Wait, a minute!!

If you, IamMichael can be wrong on the Mithras as Jesus story and the fact that what you yourself copied from another link was not up to date on Mithras Vs Jesus then how I am not sure that all the other subject matters you wrote up there are not lies just to push your Atheist narrative.

I checked what you copied from another link and what he, PervertProphet copied from another link and yours has been debunked especially as regards the Mithras Vs Jesus subject matter. What PervertProphet copied from the other source was in consonance with what Scholars assert which is that the Mithras as Jesus thing is a Myth.

Let's wait for PervertProphet's response.

Oh, i see you have been monitoring me. By the way, monitoring update, I'm not an atheist...

Secondly, seems like you are sadly ridden with selective bias and amnesia...
You are justifying stealing just because for some reason you believed i have an atheist agenda(from your wrong information that I'm an atheist) and to portray me as a liar.

No sense of morality at all!
How can any reasonable person engage such a person in a discussion?

IamMichael:

Oh, i see you have been monitoring me. By the way, monitoring update, I'm not an atheist...

Secondly, seems like you are sadly ridden with selective bias and amnesia...
You are justifying stealing just because for some reason you believed i have an atheist agenda(from your wrong information that I'm an atheist) and to portray me as a liar.

No sense of morality at all!
How can any reasonable person engage such a person in a discussion?

Just read what you wrote up there and how you deviated from what I wrote in other to cover up your wrong claims.

It seems to me that without the links you usually copy from. You usually don't make much sense.

Without the links you usually copy from. Your reasoning capability is not up to par. This means you are posing as a knowledgeable person that you are not.

What has Stealing got to do with the two links that you and PervertProphet both copied from two different sources.

I as an independent viewer looked at the both information. I then ran my own digging and found out that yours had actually been debunked and is considered a myth by serious researchers. His own source of information is actually up to date with current understanding of the Mithras Vs Jesus subject matter.

If you get this angry when some of your information are found out to be untrue. Then how are we sure that most of what you put up here are not embellished lies masked up as true in other to push your Atheist narrative.

Look, don't be a Coward. Anyone who knows a thing or two knows most of the information you push here are narratives from Atheists. Come out as one. It's hypocritical to keep hiding what's already obvious. I am very sure that the Christians won't hurt you if you do so.

Qudsi:



Just read what you wrote up there and how you deviated from what I wrote in other to cover up your wrong claims.

It seems to me that without the links you usually copy from. You usually don't make much sense.

Without the links you usually copy from. Your reasoning capability is not up to par. This means you are posing as a knowledgeable person that you are not.

What Stealing got to do with the two links that you and PervertProphet both copied from two different sources.

I as an independent viewer looked at the both information. I then ran my own digging and found out that yours had actually been debunked and is considered a myth by serious researchers. His own source of information is actually up to date with current understanding of the Mithras Vs Jesus subject matter.

If you get this angry when some of your information are found out to be untrue. Then how are we sure that most of what you put up here are not embellished lies masked up as true in other to push your Atheist narrative.

Look, don't be a Coward. Anyone who knows a thing or two knows most of the information you push here are narratives from Atheists. Come out as one. It's hypocritical to keep hiding what's already obvious. I am very sure that the Christians won't hurt you if you do so.

Off point, like totally off the mark!!!

By the way, you are a christian, so no matter the indirect way you try to sneak in, I already know... And it's become more of too childish this days.

If at all your analytics skills are as good as you claimed, you will know that the said comments he stole and posted as his was written by a fellow Christian...which automatically means biased opinion.
But, the funny thing is that you said you verified it, but refused to post your own sources.
Next thing, you will go and bring a Christian link as your proof of confirmation and expect me to take you serious.

IamMichael:

[s]Off point, like totally off the mark!!!

By the way, you are a christian, so no matter the indirect way you try to sneak in, I already know... And it's become more of too childish this days.

If at all your analytics skills are as good as you claimed, you will know that the said comments he stole and posted as his was written by a fellow Christian...which automatically means biased opinion.
But, the funny thing is that you said you verified it, but refused to post your own sources.
Next thing, you will go and bring a Christian link as your proof of confirmation and expect me to take you serious.[/s]

It's obvious without your copy and paste links from Rowe and the rest. Your Low IQ becomes evident.
You might need a Rowe approved link for "these days" and not "this days" like you wrote. Your own link from individuals with a clear case of bias against Christianity is "alright", right?!! but his own link is suddenly the one with biased opinion.

I got into Christianity because I have seen that no other religion or non-religion belief system like Atheism really has the answer. Christianity as introduced by Jesus Christ remains the only faith with the answer and it remains standing despite the attacks against it for more than 2000 years. I once did that too but no more.

For your information. Even the source that PervertProphet copied from. I found this in there which is quite honest and commendable coming from a Christian rebuttal post to the ones of critics/skeptics like yours. Yours didn't include it's source which clearly shows a very dishonest move with a clear bias to attack Christianity.

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-jesus-simply-a-retelling-of-the-mithras-mythology/

Note: For more information about Mithraism, refer to three important volumes related to the Mithraic Cult. These later works are far more reliable than 19th century scholarship (often cited by skeptics who claim Jesus is a retelling of Mithras): The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries (Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World) by David Ulansey (Oxford University Press, 1989), Mithras, the Secret God by M. J. Vermaseren (Barnes and Noble Publishers, 1963), and Mithraic Studies (Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies – 2 Volumes) edited by John R Hinnells (Manchester University Press, 1975).

Your own link wrote what you consider such a serious subject matter and failed to cite their sources for us to see where Richard Rowe got his information from so we can investigate it further but J. Warner who wrote the rebuttal on the Cold-Case Christianity Site gave his Sources and Thank God you provided the link to that Site that PervertProphet failed to provide. I find the site to be filled with very rich contents. It deals with several more topics other that this one you copied and posted of which I can now see that yours is a lie. It's a blessing in disguise that you posted that link. Every Christian needs to check the website out and their YouTube videos. They really answer several questions by Atheists/Skeptics, etc who attack Christianity.

Qudsi:


It's obvious without your copy and paste links from Rowe and the rest. Your Low IQ becomes evident.
You might need a Rowe approved link for "these days" and not "this days" like you wrote. Your own link from individuals with a clear case of bias against Christianity is "alright", right?!! but his own link is suddenly the one with biased opinion.

I got into Christianity because I have seen that no other religion or non-religion belief system like Atheism really has the answer. Christianity as introduced by Jesus Christ remains the only faith with the answer and it remains standing despite the attacks against it for more than 2000 years. I once did that too but no more.

For your information. Even the source that PervertProphet copied from. I found this in there which is quite honest and commendable coming from a Christian rebuttal post to the ones of critics/skeptics like yours. Yours didn't include it's source which clearly shows a very dishonest move with a clear bias to attack Christianity.

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-jesus-simply-a-retelling-of-the-mithras-mythology/

Note: For more information about Mithraism, refer to three important volumes related to the Mithraic Cult. These later works are far more reliable than 19th century scholarship (often cited by skeptics who claim Jesus is a retelling of Mithras): The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries (Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World) by David Ulansey (Oxford University Press, 1989), Mithras, the Secret God by M. J. Vermaseren (Barnes and Noble Publishers, 1963), and Mithraic Studies (Proceedings of the First International Congress of Mithraic Studies – 2 Volumes) edited by John R Hinnells (Manchester University Press, 1975).

Your own link wrote what you consider such a serious subject matter and failed to cite their sources for us to see where Richard Rowe got his information from so we can investigate it further but J. Warner who wrote the rebuttal on the Cold-Case Christianity Site gave his Sources and Thank God you provided the link to that Site that PervertProphet failed to provide. I find the site to be filled with very rich contents. It deals with several more topics other that this one you copied and posted of which I can now see that yours is a lie. It's a blessing in disguise that you posted that link. Every Christian needs to check the website out and their YouTube videos. They really answer several questions by Atheists/Skeptics, etc who attack Christianity.

This is a direct uplift from your statement above:

I got into Christianity because I have seen that no other religion or non-religion belief system like Atheism really has the answer.

First of all, it's obvious you don't know what atheism means. Atheism is not a Religion. Atheism is not science. Atheism is not technology. Atheism is not a cult system. That Mr Z is an atheist doesn't mean that Mr Z is a scientist. The same way that for the fact that Mr B is a doctor doesn't make Mr B a heart surgeon.
Having cleared your mind, this is what atheism means:
]
"According to Wikipedia: Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

Therefore, be properly guided.
The same way an atheist believes that Santa Claus doesn't exist, the same way that an atheist believes that Zeus and Krishna doesn't exist, it's also the same way an atheist believes that Yahweh doesn't exist.
Atheism has nothing to do with your Christianity or attacking christians and whatever story you made up to justify your Hatred of atheists.


Having said all that, my question to you is:
"How did you come to realize that all the other religions and non-religions didn't have the truth?

Guys, let be careful of this IamMichael guy. He is a fraud.
Look at some of the things I have found out.

He said in the post that he copied from the link that Mithras was born of a Virgin but see what another independent site returned. That is Wikipedia.

Mithras was born from a rock and he was a Mythological figure. Not even a Historical figure.


Guys, we really need to be careful of some of these satanic seeds/agents spreading lies in other to weaken the faith of baby Christians.

I am still pouring through what he posted. It is amazing some of the old unrealiable source and authors with bias against Christianity that his information are sourced from. They have been debunked. Just some old Zeitgeist conspiracy theory that was even made into a movie that have been debunked that he is putting up as "new facts".

This is so wicked. There is no length that these satanic children won't go to in their fight against the peaceful Jesus Christ but in vain do they fight.
Psalm 2:1-5 KJV — Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

IamMichael:



This is a direct uplift from your statement above:

First of all, it's obvious you don't know what atheism means. Atheism is not a Religion. Atheism is not science. Atheism is not technology. Atheism is not a cult system. That Mr Z is an atheist doesn't mean that Mr Z is a scientist. The same way that for the fact that Mr B is a doctor doesn't make Mr B a heart surgeon.
Having cleared your mind, this is what atheism means:
]
"According to Wikipedia: Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

Therefore, be properly guided.
The same way an atheist believes that Santa Claus doesn't exist, the same way that an atheist believes that Zeus and Krishna doesn't exist, it's also the same way an atheist believes that Yahweh doesn't exist.
Atheism has nothing to do with your Christianity or attacking christians and whatever story you made up to justify your Hatred of atheists.


Having said all that, my question to you is:
"How did you come to realize that all the other religions and non-religions didn't have the truth?

I can see you attempts are really failing.

You are beginning to fumble at your attempts to explain things or comprehend them without your links.

You didn't have to go into defining Atheism for me. Let me repeat what I wrote up there and which you yourself quoted but as usual you failed at comprehending what I wrote. In my own words:

"I got into Christianity because I have seen that no other religion or non-religion belief system like Atheism really has the answer. Christianity as introduced by Jesus Christ remains the only faith with the answer and it remains standing despite the attacks against it for more than 2000 years. I once did that too but no more.

Guys, please everyone re-read what I wrote there. Please, IamMichael, read it carefully. Even if you have to do it letter for letter. Everyone, Please, can you all see what I wrote:


Non-religion belief system like Atheism....


IamMichael, haha! Always fond of the links. You can't have Intelligent discussions without those links. It's amazing that you uplifted that statement of mine and was unable to see that I wrote "other religion or non-religion......"

If you can fail at little stuffs like these. How do we continue to trust most of what you just copy and paste as topics without doing diligent check on current understanding of the subject matter.

Now, I can comfortably tell you about Atheism but since you are heavily reliant on links. Haha! Then let me get you one.

Qudsi:
Guys, let be careful of this IamMichael guy. He is a fraud.
Look at some of the things I have found out.

He said in the post that he copied from the link that Mithras was born of a Virgin but see what another independent site returned. That is Wikipedia.

Mithras was born from a rock and he was a Mythological figure. Not even a Historical figure.


Guys, we really need to be careful of some of these satanic seeds/agents spreading lies in other to weaken the faith of baby Christians.

I am still pouring through what he posted. It is amazing some of the old unrealiable source and authors with bias against Christianity that this information was sourced from. They have been debunked. Just some old Zeitgeist conspiracy theory that was even made into a movie that have been debunked that he putting up.

This is so wicked. There is no length that these satanic children won't go to in their fight against the peaceful Jesus Christ but in vain do they fight.
Psalm 2:1-5 KJV — Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Argumentum ad Hominem is a weak tactics used by people who have no self-esteem and cannot logically argue their point...
Whenever someone has nothing to say, they resort to insult to hide their Ignorance rather than logically state their thoughts!!!

Qudsi:


I can see you attempts are really failing.

You are beginning to fumble at your attempts to explain things or comprehend them without your links.

You didn't have to go into defining Atheism for me. Let me repeat what I wrote up there and which you yourself quoted but as usual you failed at comprehending what I wrote. In my own words:

"I got into Christianity because I have seen that no other religion or non-religion belief system like Atheism really has the answer. Christianity as introduced by Jesus Christ remains the only faith with the answer and it remains standing despite the attacks against it for more than 2000 years. I once did that too but no more.

Guys, please everyone re-read what I wrote there. Please, IamMichael, read it carefully. Even if you have to do it letter for letter. Everyone, Please, can you all see what I wrote:


Non-religion belief system like Atheism....


IamMichael, haha! Always fond of the links. You can't have Intelligent discussions without those links. It's amazing that you uplifted that statement of mine and was unable to see that I wrote "other religion or non-religion......"

If you can fail at little stuffs like these. How do we continue to trust most of what you just copy and paste as topics without doing diligent check on current understanding of the subject matter.

Lol... Did you even bother to read what you posted at all? Na wa o!
Honestly, you are just raving like a mad man bro, calm yourself down a bit.

If you have done that, then here it is again:
In the post you quoted, i asked you a simple question ==>
"How did you come to realize that all the other religions and non-religions didn't have the truth?

None of the ravings above bothered to answer the question. I will love to know how you came to that conclusion...

Regards!!!

IamMichael:

Argumentum ad Hominem is a weak tactics used by people who have no self-esteem and cannot logically argue their point...
Whenever someone has nothing to say, they resort to insult to hide their Ignorance rather than logically state their thoughts!!!

You have been sneaking little attacks of Argumentum ad Hominem at me from your first response to my post but I ignored them because I wanted to be sure if what you posted were facts or not. The difference between you and I is that I am unhypocritical about calling you out as a fraud posing as a "Scholar" since I have seen too many holes in just only a segment of your post which is the Mithras vs Jesus part of it. Imagine if I have to take a look at other information you put up in your post. When just one of it is bleeding from too many errors.

See some of your initial attacks at me while doing this sneakyily:

"Secondly, seems like you are sadly ridden with selective bias and amnesia...

No sense of morality at all!
How can any reasonable person engage such a person in a discussion?

Honestly, you are just raving like a mad man bro, calm yourself down a bit."

These are your own sneaky attacks at me. You know "throw a punch and hide your hands behind" smooth moves. Now you turn around to accuse me of Argumentum ad Hominem.

You are really an expert at this your high school debate tactics and muscling your opponent with your red herring tactics.

IamMichael:

Lol... Did you even bother to read what you posted at all? Na wa o!
Honestly, you are just raving like a mad man bro, calm yourself down a bit.

If you have done that, then here it is again:
In the post you quoted, i asked you a simple question ==>
"How did you come to realize that all the other religions and non-religions didn't have the truth?

None of the ravings above bothered to answer the question. I will love to know how you came to that conclusion...

Regards!!!

A vivid case of Red Herring tactics. You don't beat the gun. Do you admit first of all that the information you provided as regards Mithras as Jesus Christ is not up to date and you didn't do any research before posting them which has the potential to mislead many people on this forum?

Qudsi:



A vivid case of Red Herring tactics. You don't beat the gun. Do you admit first of all that the information you provided as regards Mithras as Jesus Christ is not up to date and you didn't do any research before posting them which has the potential to mislead many people on this forum?

Mithraism and Christianity belong to the same category and classification as myth's.

That said, you are yet to provide any evidence to disprove the comparison made in the post with regards to Mithra which you are so bent on disproving because the comparison was made with Christianity.


Answer yours!!!

Qudsi:


You have been sneaking little attacks of Argumentum ad Hominem at me from your first response to my post but I ignored them because I wanted to be sure if what you posted were facts or not. The difference between you and I is that I am unhypocritical about calling you out as a fraud posing as a "Scholar" since I have seen too many holes in just only a segment of your post which is the Mithras vs Jesus part of it. Imagine if I have to take a look at other information you put up in your post. When just one of it is bleeding from too many errors.

See some of your initial attacks at me while doing this sneakyily:

"Secondly, seems like you are sadly ridden with selective bias and amnesia...

No sense of morality at all!
How can any reasonable person engage such a person in a discussion?

Honestly, you are just raving like a mad man bro, calm yourself down a bit."

These are your own sneaky attacks at me. You know "throw a punch and hide your hands behind" smooth moves. Now you turn around to accuse me of Argumentum ad Hominem.

You are really an expert at this your high school debate tactics and muscling your opponent with your red herring tactics.

I wonder between me and you who is using the red herring tactics as you stated.

I answer any questions asked me, i don't deviate from topic/post/comment, i don't accuse people falsely, i don't copy and paste other peoples work as mine and neither do i support people who do.

Can you say the same thing about yourself?

IamMichael:

Mithraism and Christianity belong to the same category and classification as myth's.

That said, you are yet to provide any evidence to disprove the comparison made in the post with regards to Mithra which you are so bent on disproving because the comparison was made with Christianity.


Answer yours!!!

What you replied is that what I asked?
Haha!
You are really good at these dodge tactic concepts.
I asked if you you admit first of all that the information you provided as regards Mithras as Jesus Christ is not up to date and you didn't do any research before posting them which has the potential to mislead many people on this forum?

And Haha! What you replied me was that "Mithraism and Christianity belong to the same category and classification as myths and not myth's that you wrote.


Now, look at my question and your answer. Is there any correlation between the two of them?

Haha! Pride won't allow you admit you made a mistake. No problem. I get you are emotional about this subject matter rather than logical right now. It's not just you. Most individuals who oppose the gospel of Jesus Christ would do all in their power to make it possible to portray Jesus Christ as a myth. Let me see if you will try to at least remedy your reputation knowing that you messed up with the Mithras Vs Jesus story which you posted to deliberately misinform readers Let's see how honest you will be.

Do you know of any serious and relevant Scholars/Historian, etcetera whether they be Secular or Atheist you know in the mode of Bart Erhman, Dr. Williams Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, etc who says that Jesus Christ was never a Historical figure?

Qudsi:


What you replied is that what I asked?
Haha!
You are really good at these dodge tactic concepts.
I asked if you you admit first of all that the information you provided as regards Mithras as Jesus Christ is not up to date and you didn't do any research before posting them which has the potential to mislead many people on this forum?

And Haha! What you replied me was that "Mithraism and Christianity belong to the same category and classification as myths and not myth's that you wrote.


Now, look at my question and your answer. Is there any correlation between the two of them?

Haha! Pride won't allow you admit you made a mistake. No problem. I get you are emotional about this subject matter rather than logical right now. It's not just you. Most individuals who oppose the gospel of Jesus Christ would do all in their power to make it possible to portray Jesus Christ as a myth. Let me see if you will try to at least remedy your reputation knowing that you messed up with the Mithras Vs Jesus story which you posted to deliberately misinform readers Let's see how honest you will be.

Do you know of any serious and relevant Scholars/Historian, etcetera whether they be Secular or Atheist you know in the mode of Bart Erhman, Dr. Williams Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, etc who says that Jesus Christ was never a Historical figure?

Na wa o...

I just told you that you are yet to disprove the comparison between Mithraism and Christianity, and you are here rejoicing like you won a lotto over your own self-induced misinformation.

Na wa o!!!

mansakhalifa:
My kind of post...



Shouldn't this be on FP?

First time I heard anything about "Druids" or Druidism was from a movie. I remember I was watching The Legend of The Seeker that day.
At first, I thought they had invented it but a little peep through my dictionary convinced me otherwise.


Zoroastrianism, fire temples, Ahura Mazda and all that jazz... never went away. At least not for a second. Adherents of Zoroastrianism can still be found in Iran today even though they now constitute an insignificant religious minority. But still, they have managed to hold on to the belief of their ancestors even in a Shia-dominated Iranian State. They number about 20,000 in that country today. Many of them simply fled to India after the 1979 revolution in Iran and they have remained there ever since.

History is always written by the winners of war!
Religion is a war between different sects and cults.
The winner of this war will in the end impose their own theories on everyone and write books which they will label holy and the sacrosanct word of the god.
All religions are man made and man created. Religion is a kind of symbiotic relationship between man and the god. In reality god and religion cannot exist without mankind. :-\