The Bible: Symbolic or Literal?

[KCDAD]

The former criticism is of the claim tht the Gospels were first-hand accounts. Noone claims that Cumont had first-hand experiance with the Mysteries of Mithras.

.
I'm not sure where you get this, but all the sources I have read (alas, Wikipedia is currently down) state that Mithras was physicall born from a physical virgin (an event witnessed only by shepherds, no less).

Read the link I provided... it is rather different from the modern atheist's version of mithras.

 

[Gukkor]

Birth
Several stories exist concerning the birth of Mithras. According to many sources he was born of a virgin on December 25. Some stories say that he sprang from a living rock or a tree.[5] One sculpture found on Hadrian's Wall depicts Mithras hatching from a "Cosmic Egg."[5]. All stories agree that he was born on December 25, a date later adopted as the birth date of Christ by Christians in 320 AD.[6] This date was celebrated as the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, or the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun.[7] Some depictions of his birth show shepherds in attendance, while others show only two torchbearers.[8] The stories concur on the fact that it was Ahura Mazda that arranged for his creation.[9]

From Wikipedia via answers.com. So apparently, what you say is indeed a story of Mithras' birth, W_C, but certainly not the only one. This again brings things back to a chicken-and-egg scenario; assuming the two are directly related at all, did Christianity get the virgin birth story from Mithraism or vice versa?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Read the link I provided... it is rather different from the modern atheist's version of mithras.

"Mithras was born of a virgin given the title 'Mother of God'."
"Mithras was born of Anahita, an immaculate virgin mother once worshipped as a fertility goddess before the hierarchical reformation."

I have yet to see any reference to stones and serpents.
Also, what's with the 'modern atheist' thing? Are we to treat all beliefs held by an atheist with suspicion and doubt (at least, more than for non-atheists)?

 

[irateional]

Read the link I provided... it is rather different from the modern atheist's version of mithras.

It comes from the site for a lady that believes in psychic reading. It has no scholarly backing and disagrees with PhD bearing archaeologists and historians.

I'd have to say that it's not correct.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

It comes from the site for a lady that believes in psychic reading.

And YEC's helped put man on the Moon. Ad hominems are fallacious.

It has no scholarly backing and disagrees with PhD bearing archaeologists and historians.

I'd have to say that it's not correct.

It is a vast body of text, of which some is correct. Indeed, it agrees with what I have been saying, and not with what KCDAD has been saying. There is, for example, no mention of serpents and stones at Mithras' birth.

 

[KCDAD]

And YEC's helped put man on the Moon. Ad hominems are fallacious.


It is a vast body of text, of which some is correct. Indeed, it agrees with what I have been saying, and not with what KCDAD has been saying. There is, for example, no mention of serpents and stones at Mithras' birth.

From the web site I indicated...
"He is sometimes depicted as a man being born or reborn from a rock (the 'petra genetrix), typically with the snake Ouroboros wrapped around it. It is commonly believed that the cave in Mithraism imagery represents the cosmos, and the rock is the cosmos seen from the outside; hence the description of this god as 'rising from the dead'."

Sometimes one has to read the entire document to understand...

 

[Wiccan_Child]

From the web site I indicated...
"He is sometimes depicted as a man being born or reborn from a rock (the 'petra genetrix), typically with the snake Ouroboros wrapped around it. It is commonly believed that the cave in Mithraism imagery represents the cosmos, and the rock is the cosmos seen from the outside; hence the description of this god as 'rising from the dead'."

Sometimes one has to read the entire document to understand...

This is the myth of his rebirth, not his actual birth. Indeed, it parallels Jesus' resurrection in the stone tomb.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Why can't it be a type of 'prophesy'?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Why can't it be a type of 'prophesy'?

Because the cult of Mithras grew up at around the same time the cult of Jesus. A prophesy is someone saying 'A will happen', and later on, A does happen*. The myths of Jesus' birth and of Mithras' birth grew up simultaneously; the latter myth wasn't a 'portent' of the former.

*If A happens regardless of whether it was prophesied to happen, it is called a true prophesy. If A happens only because someone predicted it would happen (the rebirth of Israel, for example), then it is called a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[KCDAD]

This is the myth of his rebirth, not his actual birth. Indeed, it parallels Jesus' resurrection in the stone tomb.

If you want to look at it that way... without your prejudice, however, you would have to conclude that it might be his birth they were talking about.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

If you want to look at it that way... without your prejudice, however, you would have to conclude that it might be his birth they were talking about.

Loaded statement: you presume I am prejudice. I could accuse you of the same thing: you want to refute the parallels of the birth of Mithras and the birth of Jesus.

Looking at the text:
It is commonly believed that the cave in Mithraism imagery represents the cosmos, and the rock is the cosmos seen from the outside; hence the description of this god as 'rising from the dead'. According to some accounts, Mithras died, was buried in a cavernous rock tomb, and was resurrected.

That is, the cave is where he was buried, not where he was born.

 

[Gukkor]

Would everyone stop being offended for a second and read quote from wikipedia I posted? I'd say wikipedia stands a good chance of being an unbiased source, wouldn't you guys?

 

[david_x]

That's right. Specifically, I think that if you pray for A, the probability of A will not change. Where A is any event.

But your prayer is effective?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

But your prayer is effective?

If I ever decided to make a request-prayer, the evidence tells me it would be ineffective in bringing about said request. Indeed, it is a tenant of Wicca to 'use magick as a last resort', to do things ourselves before we defer to divinities and supernatural forces.

 

[KCDAD]

Would everyone stop being offended for a second and read quote from wikipedia I posted? I'd say wikipedia stands a good chance of being an unbiased source, wouldn't you guys?

Not ever. Wikipedia is a comic book source... it is Cliff's notes, or maybe more accurately the kid that sits in front of you in class's notes. It is a beginning, but don't ever stop there...

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Not ever. Wikipedia is a comic book source... it is Cliff's notes, or maybe more accurately the kid that sits in front of you in class's notes. It is a beginning, but don't ever stop there...

Well, since it correlates exactly with my own knowledge, I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

 

[KCDAD]

Well, since it correlates exactly with my own knowledge, I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

How open minded of you. So you both read the same the same Classic Comicbook.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How open minded of you. So you both read the same the same Classic Comicbook.

OK, I'll bite: comicbook?

 

[KCDAD]

OK, I'll bite: comicbook?

You can get the literary classics in comic book form, they are called Classic Comics...like Moby Dick, Tale of Two Cities, Huckleberry Finn, War and Peace, etc... you get the gist of the story, but nothing of the meaning the author wished to communicate. It is the same with Wikipedia, except, anyone can submit anything to Wikipedia and pass it off as fact.

 

[Gukkor]

Well, since it correlates exactly with my own knowledge, I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

But it doesn't. It explicitly states that there are other creation myths regarding Mithras besides the virgin birth one you are familiar with.

Also, I said wikipedia was unbiased, KCDAD, not complete or in-depth.