Mystery Religions and Christianity

The religions in the ancient world had strange names. Some folks worshiped a god named Mithra(s), others the deities of Osiris and Isis, and still others worshiped Dionysus. What makes things more interesting is that these religions borrowed heavily from each other. The same deity might end up having multiple names. It is difficult to speak of common features of these diverse religions because there were so many differences. Yet many skeptics of Christianity claim to see common elements between the mysteries and Christianity.

The clear evidence is that this is not the case. Rather, the mysteries share far greater commonality with each other then they do with Christianity. In the Hellensitic age, the common thread among these religious was that they all had "secret ceremonies," mysteries to all but the initiated. These mysteries brought "salvation" to the participants. The major mystery religions included the Greek worship of Dionysus and Demeter and the later Elusinian and Orphic mystery cults.

In Phrygia (modern central Turkey) arose the cult of Cybele and Attis. Egypt contributed the cult Isis and Osiris. From Palestine and Syria came the mystery worship of Adonis and finally Mithraism, whose origin is disputed. Strange names, strange places, and stranger deities. Do they have anything to do with Christianity? The mysteries (excluding Mithraism) had five characteristics in common:

1. At the core of each mystery was the annual vegetation cycle in which "life is renewed each spring and dies each fall. Followers of the mystery cults found deep symbolic significance in the natural processes of growth, death, decay, and rebirth.

2. Each cult made "important use of secret ceremonies or mysteries, often in connection with an initiation rite... every mystery religion also 'imparted a "secret," a knowledge of the life of the deity and the means of union with him."' This "knowledge" was always an esoteric or secret teaching, unattainable by anyone outside the circle of the cult.

3. The focus of the myth of each mystery was on the deity's victory over something. This could be a return to life or conquest over his enemies. “Implicit in the myth was the theme of redemption from everything earthly and temporal. The secret meaning of the cult and its accompanying myth was expressed in a 'Sacramental drama'” that appealed largely to the feelings of the initiates. Most importantly, the vegetation cycle dictated this sense of “rebirth” and new life.

4. Doctrine and correct belief had little importance. Cults were primarily concerned with emotions. “Processions, fasting, a play, acts of purification, blazing lights, and esoteric liturgies” stirred emotional frenzy that brought one into union with the god.

“The immediate goal for the initiates was a mystical experience that led them to feel they had achieved union with their god.... Beyond this quest for mystical union were two more ultimate goals: some kind of redemptive or salvation, and immortality.”

There are similarities to Christianity in these elements, but the differences are greater. Both recognize the triumph of their deity as an important aspect of the religion, and both placed an emphasis on salvation. Such features are common to most religions. But what set Christianity apart was:

(1) its insistence on historical credibility, which the mysteries didn't even pretend to have, versus the “going nowhere” view of the vegetation cycle;

(2) Christian proclamation of the gospel as accessible to all people;

(3) its insistence of right belief instead of emotional frenzy; and

(4) the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the coming resurrection of believers.

As Robin Lane Fox has noted, while the mysteries “offered a myth of their god, Jews and Christians offered history; the pagan mysteries conveyed a secret experience, whereas Jew and Christians offered 'revelation' based on text.” Other difference could be mentioned, such as the Christian faith's exclusiveness. Christians proclaimed that their there is only one legitimate path to God and salvation, Jesus Christ. The mysteries were inclusive. Nothing prevented a believer in one cult from following other mysteries as well.

The mystery religions had for more common with each other than any of them had with Christianity. Yet, the mystery cults took note of the Christian movement and started to emulate it. Only after A. D. 100 did the mysteries begin to look very much life Christianity, precisely because their existence was threatened by this new religion. They had to compete to survive.

(Note: The information provided in this thread derived from the book entitled, "Reinventing Jesus," authored by J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace on pages 235 through 237.)

The arguement that mystery cults borrowed from Christianity has many holes in it.The biggest being that even early Christians admitted that Christainity had disturbing simularities to older mystery religions.Early Christians claimed that it was Satan who created most of these mystery cults,in an attempt to confuse belivers so he could send their souls to hell.Kind of like the arguement that God created dinosaur bones to test the faith of his followers,because the earth couldn't possibly be as old as science claims it is.Even St.Augustine admitted that the Pagans worshipped the same God as he did.

It makes more sense that this happened the other way around.Christianity adopted Pagan elements in order to gain more followers.

utterly untrue. christianity's scriptures are a false record of history and facts. it evolved out of mystic relegions as opposed to the opposite. the only one hyppocritical here is christianity.

mr. smiley-

I'm not going to entertain your statement regarding the issue "who borrowed from who." We obviously have different perspectives. St. Augustine has didly-squat to do with the origins of Christianity, not to mention the earliest of Christian Creeds written within the first generation of the death and resurrection of Christ. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Who cares what St. Augustine stated? Really! I would question your references and sources. And not all Christians embrace the theory that Earth--and the Cosmos--are 6,000 year old. I for one do not, and either does Christian Astronomer Hugh Ross (http://www.reasons.org/shop/catalog/The_John_Ankerberg_Debate_YoungEarth_vs_OldEarth_DVD_D030_p_520.html).

leonheartmm-

Anybody with a nose has the ability to regurgitate and rebuke one's statement(s), but anyone who wants to be taken seriously would provide supportive references. All you did was make empty statements. Are you opinions based on research or emotion?

Originally posted by ushomefree
mr. smiley-

I'm not going to entertain your statement regarding the issue "who borrowed from who." We obviously have different perspectives. St. Augustine has didly-squat to do with the origins of Christianity, not to mention the earliest of Christian Creeds written within the first generation of the death and resurrection of Christ. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Who cares what St. Augustine stated? Really! I would question your references and sources. And not all Christians embrace the theory that Earth--and the Cosmos--are 6,000 year old. I for one do not, and either does Christian Astronomer Hugh Ross (http://www.reasons.org/shop/catalog/The_John_Ankerberg_Debate_YoungEarth_vs_OldEarth_DVD_D030_p_520.html).

leonheartmm-

Anybody with a nose has the ability to regurgitate and rebuke one's statement(s), but anyone who wants to be taken seriously would provide supportive references. All you did was make empty statements. Are you opinions based on research or emotion?

At any rate paganism existed before Christanity so obvously Christanity has some pagan aspects.

Originally posted by ushomefree
mr. smiley-

I'm not going to entertain your statement regarding the issue "who borrowed from who." We obviously have different perspectives. St. Augustine has didly-squat to do with the origins of Christianity, not to mention the earliest of Christian Creeds written within the first generation of the death and resurrection of Christ. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Who cares what St. Augustine stated? Really! I would question your references and sources. And not all Christians embrace the theory that Earth--and the Cosmos--are 6,000 year old. I for one do not, and either does Christian Astronomer Hugh Ross (http://www.reasons.org/shop/catalog/The_John_Ankerberg_Debate_YoungEarth_vs_OldEarth_DVD_D030_p_520.html).

leonheartmm-

Anybody with a nose has the ability to regurgitate and rebuke one's statement(s), but anyone who wants to be taken seriously would provide supportive references. All you did was make empty statements. Are you opinions based on research or emotion?

I am well aware St.Augustine had nothing to do with Christianities orgins.I was giving an example of how even Christians admitted to the likenesses between the mystery cults and their own.

Originally posted by ushomefree
But what set Christianity apart was:

[B](1) its insistence on historical credibility, which the mysteries didn't even pretend to have, versus the “going nowhere” view of the vegetation cycle;

(2) Christian proclamation of the gospel as accessible to all people;

(3) its insistence of right belief instead of emotional frenzy; and

(4) the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the coming resurrection of believers.

(Note: The information provided in this thread derived from the book entitled, "Reinventing Jesus," authored by J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace on pages 235 through 237.) [/B]

(1) Every religion claims historical validity...until it is debunked. The smart ones are the traditions that just teach the stories as metaphoric truths, because otherwise there's dozens of influences on any major religion that were borrowed/stolen.

(2) Allah wants us all to be his children, the Buddha wanted us to become enlightened and even said it was within the power of every person to do so in this lifetime. How does accessability have anything to do with factual historicity?

(3) "Rituals to be in closer communion with their deity" sounds a lot like a Christian Mass, just diluted over a couple millenia. Connection with Jesus is supposed to be emotional....which is fortunate for your religion, because it sure doesn't appeal to much that is rational within us.

(4) Haha. All those things ushome used as describing pagan religions are basically just aspects of Christianity. All Christianity did was make 1 person the center (Jesus) rather than giving everything the chance to become "one with the deity". Instead, Christianity had only 1 person 'become God', and we can only do so as well through him. It's just creating a middle-man, and is a dogmatic version of the idea that we can all recognize that which is divine within us and acheive a form of transcendance....which was at the center of most pagan religions that Christianity assimilated.

...

To a person who has looked for proofs of the historical validity of Christianity (ad nauseum) and digested countless works on mythologies, religions, and their influences, reading your first post was like a refutation for the very thing you were trying to prove. You're mistaken. I'm sorry.

I won't say that it is impossible to find historical evidence for certain aspects of the Christian faith (nearly so, however)...but you certainly aren't going about it the right way here.

Originally posted by ushomefree
1. At the core of each mystery was the annual vegetation cycle in which "life is renewed each spring and dies each fall. Followers of the mystery cults found deep symbolic significance in the natural processes of growth, death, decay, and rebirth.

Hinduism particularly had, as well as many Egyptian Mythologies. Greek Mythology did not, however, as Greek Mythology had Tarturus/Hades (Hell) as the afterlife of the majority of mortals and fallen immortals, and the Elysian Fields (Heaven) as the reward for courageous mortals and fallen immortals.

But according to Greek Mythology, all humans, monsters, titans, and gods were born of Gaia the Mother of Earth.

Egyptians based thier creation upon the Sun instead.

Originally posted by ushomefree
2. Each cult made "important use of secret ceremonies or mysteries, often in connection with an initiation rite... every mystery religion also 'imparted a "secret," a knowledge of the life of the deity and the means of union with him."' This "knowledge" was always an esoteric or secret teaching, unattainable by anyone outside the circle of the cult.

Well that's what a cult is. There are many Christian cults however, and even cults which do not center around Gods or Goddesses (scientology- which is a very exclusive religion, which promotes division between those who think alike and those who think different)

Originally posted by ushomefree
3. The focus of the myth of each mystery was on the deity's victory over something. This could be a return to life or conquest over his enemies. “Implicit in the myth was the theme of redemption from everything earthly and temporal. The secret meaning of the cult and its accompanying myth was expressed in a 'Sacramental drama'” that appealed largely to the feelings of the initiates. Most importantly, the vegetation cycle dictated this sense of “rebirth” and new life.

Archangel Micheal is celebrated for his defeat over Lucifer. Is that not the same thing ?

To me that is not much different from Kali devouring the unstoppable army of demons.

Or Perseus defeating Medusa.

Originally posted by ushomefree
4. Doctrine and correct belief had little importance. Cults were primarily concerned with emotions. “Processions, fasting, a play, acts of purification, blazing lights, and esoteric liturgies” stirred emotional frenzy that brought one into union with the god.

Only people in power invested in these cults. Early Hindu , Egyptian, Greek, Norse, etc. mythologies were beleived and celebrated by the majority of those nations.

Originally posted by ushomefree
The immediate goal for the initiates was a mystical experience that led them to feel they had achieved union with their god.... Beyond this quest for mystical union were two more ultimate goals: some kind of redemptive or salvation, and immortality.”

Ancient Greeks who invested in the mythos did not beleive they were going to end up in the Elysian fields, unless they were a hero of some sort. Most of them beleived they would end up in Tarturus, with Hades Lord of the Dead.

In Egyptian mythos, only the Pharoahs could become one with God(s)

Originally posted by ushomefree
There are similarities to Christianity in these elements, but the differences are greater. Both recognize the triumph of their deity as an important aspect of the religion, and both placed an emphasis on salvation. Such features are common to most religions. But what set Christianity apart was:

Christianity's entire emphasis is on Salvation.

God and Archangel Micheal have victory over Satan, and will have another victory over Satan in the story of Armaggedon. I don't see the difference.

Originally posted by ushomefree
(1) its insistence on historical credibility, which the mysteries didn't even pretend to have, versus the “going nowhere” view of the vegetation cycle;

Historical credibility ? When did The Great Flood ever happen ? Why does the Bible ignore the Dinosaurs ? And Creationism is totally inconsistant with the evident Theory of Evolution.

Originally posted by ushomefree
(2) Christian proclamation of the gospel as accessible to all people;

Today it is. When Christianity began it wasn't. Ever heard of the Printing Press ?

Long ago, common people were NOT ALLOWED to read the Bible, they could only access any scripture through hearings at Mass.

The Council of Nicea put the Bible together after Emporer Constantine made Christianity the prime religion of the Roman Empire.

Read up on the Printing Press:

http://www.dailypast.com/technology/first-printing-press.shtml

The Gospels were not made available to common people, until copies of the King James Version of the Bible were printed and distributed.

Originally posted by ushomefree
(3) its insistence of right belief instead of emotional frenzy; and

Right Belief ? Hinduism centered its gods around Human Nature, our good and our bad, and Buddhism is ALL ABOUT Right Beleif.

Emotional Frenzy ? Ever heard of God's wrath and jealousy ?

(

Originally posted by ushomefree
4) the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the coming resurrection of believers.

Zoroastrianism, which preceded Christianity by a few centuries, already had the concept of Armaggedon, as well as a savior, and final battle between good and evil.

Jesus Christ is not the first being to be "resurrected" in myth, nor is he the first "savior" figure. I suggest you look up Krishna, Vishnu, and others before him.

Ask LIL B..she had an entire list.

Ah, some things never change.

Originally posted by ushomefree
[SIZE=2]The religions in the ancient world had strange names. Some folks worshiped a god named Mithra(s), others the deities of Osiris and Isis, and still others worshiped Dionysus. What makes things more interesting is that these religions borrowed heavily from each other. The same deity might end up having multiple names. It is difficult to speak of common features of these diverse religions because there were so many differences. Yet many skeptics of Christianity claim to see common elements between the mysteries and Christianity.

Or, not so much between the mysteries but between the religions themselves - themes, myths, world views.

And sceptics is, in way of connotations, probably wrong. People who make their life's works in studying history, theology find links. Labeling them sceptics detracts from serious, well researched nature of their work.

And no, the religions of the ancient world did not have strange names. They had names perfectly normal for the language and culture they existed in.

The clear evidence is that this is not the case. Rather, the mysteries share far greater commonality with each other then they do with Christianity. In the Hellensitic age, the common thread among these religious was that they all had "secret ceremonies," mysteries to all but the initiated. These mysteries brought "salvation" to the participants. The major mystery religions included the Greek worship of Dionysus and Demeter and the later Elusinian and Orphic mystery cults.

"The mysteries", which had been coexisting and developing together for many, many years share "Far greater commonality" then a religion that developed in a time of some cultural and spiritual change? How surprising.

And it is worthwhile noting that in the early days of Christianity, before it became the state religion of Rome, that many Romans and the state itself believed Christians to be involved in "secret ceremonies" and other strange rites. And they were, in terms of the relative way such things are perceived.

And you are overusing the term "salvation" - in the ancient world that concept was different, or far less evident. A large part of mysteries, and something that made them popular to jaded Westerners (who liked things like the Cult of Osiris) was that the mysteries, and being part of them, gave some greater insight into the world, universe, life. Many practitioners didn't go into them thinking "My "soul" is damned and needs saving".

In Phrygia (modern central Turkey) arose the cult of Cybele and Attis. Egypt contributed the cult Isis and Osiris. From Palestine and Syria came the mystery worship of Adonis and finally Mithraism, whose origin is disputed. Strange names, strange places, and stranger deities. Do they have anything to do with Christianity? The mysteries (excluding Mithraism) had five characteristics in common:

That made me laugh so much... "strange names, strange places and stranger deities." Seriously - and the question is "Does Christianity have anything to do with them?" Why? Because Christianity came after them.

1. At the core of each mystery was the annual vegetation cycle in which "life is renewed each spring and dies each fall. Followers of the mystery cults found deep symbolic significance in the natural processes of growth, death, decay, and rebirth.

And quite possibly due to one of the original purposes of religion - to other an understanding of the physical world and its processes. I believe a chap called Kirk postulated that all myths are in a way nature myths as they often have some allegorical link to the natural world and its workings.

4. Doctrine and correct belief had little importance. Cults were primarily concerned with emotions. “Processions, fasting, a play, acts of purification, blazing lights, and esoteric liturgies” stirred emotional frenzy that brought one into union with the god.

Actually sounds pretty sensible - God knows doctrine has been a stupidly constant point of conflict in more modern religions.

The immediate goal for the initiates was a mystical experience that led them to feel they had achieved union with their god.... Beyond this quest for mystical union were two more ultimate goals: some kind of redemptive or salvation, and immortality.”

I would once again question the significance placed upon "salvation/redemption" their significance really came to the fore with Christianity and the like, far more so then with ancient religions.

There are similarities to Christianity in these elements, but the differences are greater.

Why do you word it like that? Christianity is a religion that came after them, it should be the Christianities similarities to them. The way you word it gives the impression of greater permanence and validity to Christianity.

(1) its insistence on historical credibility, which the mysteries didn't even pretend to have, versus the “going nowhere” view of the vegetation cycle;

If you say so. And "going nowhere" view? What the? It's a cycle. And cycles aren't all that bad.

(2) Christian proclamation of the gospel as accessible to all people;

Well, eventually perhaps, what with the "if the people can't read them they need to rely on the priesthood" and the long term aspect of keeping it in Latin, once again keeping people reliant on the clergy.

No, sorry old bean, the "proclamation of the gospel as accessible to all people" only became a reality in relativily modern times.

(3) its insistence of right belief instead of emotional frenzy;

Ah, right belief. And like so many pooh-poohers of ancient religion the implied distaste of "emotional frenzy", or more accuratly the misunderstanding of what that really means. "Ooooh, emotional frenzy, so base, so barbaric! Jesus brings enlightenment!"

But what you are arguing here is that the marketing ofd the faith ("If you want to join my club you can't join any one elses club"😉 - a matter of doctrine - is justifiabe proof that there is no real link between the to. Which is flawed.

*Scoff, scoff!*

(4) the centrality of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the coming resurrection of believers.

And by extension bringing salvation far more to the fore by installing the belief that all humankind is fundamentally damned and doomed unless - you guessed it - they submitted to the "correct faith".

As Robin Lane Fox has noted, while the mysteries “offered a myth of their god, Jews and Christians offered history; the pagan mysteries conveyed a secret experience, whereas Jew and Christians offered 'revelation' based on text.” Other difference could be mentioned, such as the Christian faith's exclusiveness. Christians proclaimed that their there is only one legitimate path to God and salvation, Jesus Christ. The mysteries were inclusive. Nothing prevented a believer in one cult from following other mysteries as well.

Mysteries were inclusive? Outrageous. How wrong were the people back then to think they could experience many religious things without the fear of damnation for not following the right faith!

And there are no myths in the Bible at all. No sir-reeee. Not like aspects of Genesis have some similarities to Mesopotamian and Egyptian creation myths. And so on. Really this sounds like an attempt to remove a big similarity - myths. Oh no, the Christian faith is based upon text revelations and history, the ancient religions are all myths. No similarity at all. Hey look over there! *runs away*

The mystery religions had for more common with each other than any of them had with Christianity. Yet, the mystery cults took note of the Christian movement and started to emulate it. Only after A. D. 100 did the mysteries begin to look very much life Christianity, precisely because their existence was threatened by this new religion. They had to compete to survive.

There it is again - that Big Flaw. Compare ancient mysteries around long before Christianity to Christianity and say how different they were rather then compare Christianity to its predecessors and look at the similarities.

My scathing rebuttal of some Christian points is above, but I'm actually about to throw Christianity a bone for a second:

Counter-arguments are always good to find, if only to make sure you're right. And from what I can find (scholarly arguments both for and against Christinaity along these lines), the most commonly alluded-to mystery religions (Mithra, Iris, Osiris, Dionysius) do not bear enough in common with Christianity to formally debunk it. So no, they don't dis-prove Christianity.

A few, like the body/blood of Jesus inherited from Dionysius, are almost impossible to ignore. But the central argument of the resurrection remains intact, as do most of the stories....

...until you go further into pagan mythology. Christian scholars do well to focus on Mithraism more so than any other, because it is easily debunked, and many aspects of Mithraism actually borrowed from Christianity (in an ironic turn).

I read a chapter from a novel (The Case For Christ) recently that attempted to address this very topic and prove the opposite. To it's credit, it's the closest I've seen to a comprehensive rebuttal of the subject. It beautifully debunks Mithraic influence, while happily ignoring countless other myths. It even goes so far as to assert (in a very unscholarly blanket statement) that most of the myths in question came after Christianity, not before it. One need only read about the life and times of the Egyptian Horus (or others) to know that this is blatently false.

The book touches on Zoroaster, the Buddha, and a few other incidental stories that are easily dismissed. A few more blanket statements occur concerning The Golden Bough's findings (the author escapes me) and various other commerical publications. Few, if any, specific instances are pointed out to bolster their cause. It still misses the forest for the trees.

...

For anyone interested in a more comprehensive analysis of this phenomenon of shared mythological motifs, I'd highly recommend Joseph Campbell's The Hero With A Thousand Faces. I recommend it because he isn't trying to debunk Christianity, nor prove that it is right. He's simply one of the world's foremost experts on religion and mythology, and the results of such an analysis speak for themselves and allow the reader to determine his/her own conclusions. It is an enlightening book that doesn't debase anyone or any religious belief, but re-contextualizes many of them in exciting ways that transcend the limited viewpoints of individual religions.

Strange that its divided between mystery religions and christianity, the latter is just as much a mystery religion

I think all five of the world's major religions are mysteries. Especially Hinduism; talk about a religion that can't decide on anything. I guess that's what happens after 4,000+ years.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I think all five of the world's major religions are mysteries. Especially Hinduism; talk about a religion that can't decide on anything. I guess that's what happens after 4,000+ years.

Ok.....so you're not trying to say that Christanity is more certain and can decide on alot more?

mumbo jumbo the lot of them

Originally posted by anaconda
mumbo jumbo the lot of them

Whys that? That includes heathenism as well right?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I think all five of the world's major religions are mysteries. Especially Hinduism; talk about a religion that can't decide on anything. I guess that's what happens after 4,000+ years.

😆

Christianity was considered a cult at one time.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok.....so you're not trying to say that Christanity is more certain and can decide on alot more?

No, notice how I said "all five".

But now that you brought it up, Christians agree with eachother more than Hindus; you won't find very many atheistic Christian denominations.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
No, notice how I said "all five".

But now that you brought it up, Christians agree with eachother more than Hindus; you won't find very many atheistic Christian denominations.

However, some Christians use the words "TRUE CHRISTIAN" as a club to beat each other with.

"True Christian" is another way of saying "Haha you sinned, I'm more religious than you". It's a derogatroy term that's pretty meaningless. You're either Christian or you're not, the "true" is understood and granted.