Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 07-30-2008, 04:07 AM

Not sure whether this has been covered and/or is reliable . The source page is entitled Tract 22b - The Story of Constantine - The Man who Changed the Christian Church - Supplement to Lesson 22 ....

Quote:

By the middle of the second century, Mithric sun worship was very popular among the influential Romans. Antoninus Pius (emperor from A.D. 138 to 161) erected a temple to Mithra at Ostai, a seaport town a few miles from the city of Rome. The emperor Aurelian (270-275), whose mother was a priestess of the Sun, made this solar cult the official religion of the empire. His biographer, Flavius Vopiscus, tells us that the priests of the Temple of the Sun were called "Pontiffs". They were priests of their dying-rising saviour, Mithra, and reigned as his vicegerents.

Under Emperor Antoninus Pius, Mithra was by official decree entitled Sol Dominus Imperil Romani ("The Sun, the Lord of the Roman Empire"), and his holy day was declared to be "the Day of the Lord". This name, and his other name, Sol Invicto ('Invincible Sun") appeared together on his coinage.

Sun worship continued to be the official religion of the empire until the time of Constantine.

Cumont, Olcott and other scholars clearly show that December 25 was the yearly date of the annual birth of Mithra. On that date, his followers held a special celebration of the fact that the sun was beginning to rise again higher in the sky. (It was lowest at the winter solstice, December 21, and not until the 25th could its rising be clearly seen.) This birthday of the sun-god was made an official holiday in the Roman Empire by Aurelian about the year 273. Here is what Williston Walker, a well-known church historian, has to say about this:

"December 25 was a great pagan festival, that of Sol Invictus, which celebrated the victory of light over darkness, and the lengthening of the sun's rays at the winter solstice. This assimilation of Christ to the sun god, as Sun of Righteousness, was widespread in the fourth century and was furthered by Constantine's legislation on Sunday, which is not unrelated to the fact that the sun god was the titular divinity of his [Constantine's] family."--Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, third edition, page 155.

The Christians living in the larger cities of the empire were gradually leaning toward pagan practices, while their rural brethren more carefully maintained the true faith. The people of God were gradually nearing a crisis, and only the intermittent persecutions kept them relatively pure. But then Constantine entered the picture--and the Christian Church has never been the same since. Here is how it came about:

and from another site:

Quote:

The Sun in Rome (218 CE) - -
Sol Invictus - Under the Reign of Emperor Elagabalus, a hereditary Syrian priest who became leader of Rome, the worship of Jupiter, the Roman "father god", was replaced by the worship of "Deus Sol Invictus" or "God, the unconquered sun". Also called 'Helio-Gabalus', meaning "Sun of Baal", Elagabalus devised "Deus Sol Invictus" as an epithet, describing the attributes of his personal Syrian God, "El - Gabal", whom he named himself after. Leading members of Rome's government were forced to participate in religious rites celebrating the worship of Sol Invictus which were personally led by Elagabalus. The most important of his festivals took place on the Summer Solstice, the time of the year with the longest period of daylight (compare: Celtic Litha). Upon the death of Elegabalus in 222 CE, the worship of the previous gods was reinstated (compare: worship of Aten under Pharaoh Akhenaten).

In 260 CE, Emperor Aurelian revitalized the religion of 'Deus Sol Invictus', however, it was now in reverence to the Roman Sun God, as opposed to the old Syrian version. His "temple of Sol Invictus" was dedicated on December 25, 274 CE, in a festival called "dies natalis Solis Invicti", meaning "The nativity of the unconquered Sun God" (compare: birth of Christ).

In 321 CE, Emperor Constantine decreed that a "dies solis" or "Sun-Day" should be put aside as a time of the week to worship the god of light and life (the sun god, who was called "Sol"), and that this day should be observed as a day of rest. "On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." (see: Weekdays)

The worship of Sol Invictus was prevalent in Rome through the following century, until 390 CE, when Emperor Theodosius I decreed that only the worship of Christ was acceptable. After this shift in Roman society toward the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, the title of "Deus Sol Invictus" was applied to Jesus, the Christ. During the third century, Christ was often depicted as riding in a solar chariot and was called the "Sun of Justice". Under Emperor Aurelion, in 274 CE, The day set aside to commemorate the birth of Christ was set at December 25, the "dies natalis Solis Invicti" ("The nativity of the unconquered Sun God"). (see: Christmas)

Toto · 07-30-2008, 09:29 AM

Hi Pete - your first source is a Christian sect that insists on celebrating the Sabbath on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday, and is intent on proving that Constantine corrupted the Truth. Reliable? Probably not.

Your second is a neo-pagan site.

There is so much misinformation on the web about Mithras, that I ask you not to post anything without FIRST investigating its reliability, so as not to waste everyone's time.

Thanks.

Roger Pearse · 07-31-2008, 12:08 AM

The spread of myths is so prevalent that I tend to take the view that we mustn't state anything about either Mithras or Sol Invictus without an ancient source to back it up, if only in self-protection.

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 01:51 AM

General Claim:

By the middle of the second century,
Mithric sun worship was very popular
among the influential Romans.

Specific Supporting Claims

CLAIM 1:
Antoninus Pius (emperor from A.D. 138 to 161) erected a temple to Mithra at Ostai, a seaport town a few miles from the city of Rome.

CLAIM 2:
Under Emperor Antoninus Pius, Mithra was by official decree
entitled Sol Dominus Imperil Romani ("The Sun, the Lord of the Roman Empire"),

CLAIM 3:
and his holy day was declared to be "the Day of the Lord".

CLAIM 4:
This name, and his other name, Sol Invicto ('Invincible Sun")
appeared together on his coinage.

CLAIM 5:
The emperor Aurelian (270-275), whose mother was a priestess of the Sun,

CLAIM 6:
made this solar cult the official religion of the empire.

CLAIM 7:
His biographer, Flavius Vopiscus, tells us that the priests of the Temple of the Sun were called "Pontiffs". They were priests of their dying-rising saviour, Mithra, and reigned as his vicegerents.

CLAIM 8:
Sun worship continued to be the official religion of the empire until the time of Constantine.

CLAIM 9:
Cumont, Olcott and other scholars clearly show that December 25 was the yearly date of the annual birth of Mithra. On that date, his followers held a special celebration of the fact that the sun was beginning to rise again higher in the sky. (It was lowest at the winter solstice, December 21, and not until the 25th could its rising be clearly seen.) This birthday of the sun-god was made an official holiday in the Roman Empire by Aurelian about the year 273. Here is what Williston Walker, a well-known church historian, has to say about this:

"December 25 was a great pagan festival, that of Sol Invictus, which celebrated the victory of light over darkness, and the lengthening of the sun's rays at the winter solstice. This assimilation of Christ to the sun god, as Sun of Righteousness, was widespread in the fourth century and was furthered by Constantine's legislation on Sunday, which is not unrelated to the fact that the sun god was the titular divinity of his [Constantine's] family."--Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, third edition, page 155.

CLAIM 10:
The Christians living in the larger cities of the empire were gradually leaning toward pagan practices, while their rural brethren more carefully maintained the true faith. The people of God were gradually nearing a crisis, and only the intermittent persecutions kept them relatively pure. But then Constantine entered the picture--and the Christian Church has never been the same since. Here is how it came about:

and from another site:

CLAIM 11:
The Sun in Rome (218 CE) - -
Emperor Elagabalus and Sol Invictus

CLAIM 12:
In 260 CE, Emperor Aurelian revitalized the religion of 'Deus Sol Invictus', however, it was now in reverence to the Roman Sun God, as opposed to the old Syrian version. His "temple of Sol Invictus" was dedicated on December 25, 274 CE, in a festival called "dies natalis Solis Invicti", meaning "The nativity of the unconquered Sun God" (compare: birth of Christ).

CLAIM 13:
In 321 CE, Emperor Constantine decreed that a "dies solis" or "Sun-Day" should be put aside as a time of the week to worship the god of light and life (the sun god, who was called "Sol"), and that this day should be observed as a day of rest. "On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." (see: Weekdays)

CLAIM 14:
The worship of Sol Invictus was prevalent in Rome through the following century, until 390 CE, when Emperor Theodosius I decreed that only the worship of Christ was acceptable. After this shift in Roman society toward the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, the title of "Deus Sol Invictus" was applied to Jesus, the Christ.

CLAIM 15:
During the third century, Christ was often depicted as riding in a solar chariot and was called the "Sun of Justice".

CLAIM 16:
Under Emperor Aurelion, in 274 CE, The day set aside to commemorate the birth of Christ was set at December 25, the "dies natalis Solis Invicti" ("The nativity of the unconquered Sun God"). (see: Christmas)

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

CLAIM 1:
Antoninus Pius (emperor from A.D. 138 to 161) erected a temple to Mithra at Ostai, a seaport town a few miles from the city of Rome.

He either did or he did not. There are a number of sources saying that he did such as Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire By Samuel Dill.

Some further background to the archaeological aspect of Mithra:

Quote:

Mithraism is known almost entirely from archaeological finds and dedicatory inscriptions; there are very few written references to it. This is largely because, as a mystery religion, the meaning of its iconography and rituals was a secret known only to initiates. Insiders did not record details of their religion and outsiders did not know much about it. There is much about Mithraism that is still not known.

The origin of Mithraism is not fully understood. It clearly derives from ancient Persia, but scholars are divided on whether the Roman cult is a westernized Persian religion or an essentially western religion with Persian trimmings. In any case, the cult of Mithras was well-established by the 2nd century AD (hundreds of inscriptions begin appearing after 136 AD), and died out with the rest of paganism after the conversion of Constantine in the 4th century.

Traces of Mithraism have been found throughout the Roman empire, from Rome to Turkey to Britain. It was especially concentrated in Rome (35 Mithraea found) and its port of Ostia (15 Mithraea). In total, over 400 archaeological find-spots related to Mithraism have been found, along with about 1,000 dedicatory inscriptions and 1,150 pieces of sculpture.

Where is the archaeological evidence for christianity?
Plenty for the Mithra God.
Zero for the Boss' man Jesus.

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The spread of myths is so prevalent that I tend to take the view that we mustn't state anything about either Mithras or Sol Invictus without an ancient source to back it up, if only in self-protection.

Typically many ppl deal with the textual ancient sources and totally ignore the monumental evidence. In this instance on the one hand we must learn to deal with the extremely rich archaeological testimony to the existence of Mithras and Sol invictus. On the other hand, we must learn to deal with the absolutely deplorable state of poverty of christian archaeological evidence before Constantine. I think the Boss started the myth about your man Jesus by taking over the publications enterprises and employing Eusebius' skills as an inventor of romantic theological fiction stories with a cast of (legions) hundreds. When he went to the underworld, the "christian business thing" was too good for the perpetuators of the Nicaean agreement. A new state tax exempt religion was implemented, but who has checked its authenticity?

Who has asked whether the Boss sold us a lemon? Do you think its a good idea to ask this question?

Best wishes,

Pete

ARIUS:
There was time when He was not.
Before He was born He was not.
He was made out of nothing existing.
He is/was from another subsistence/substance.
He is subject to alteration or change.

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

CLAIM 9:
Cumont, Olcott and other scholars clearly show that December 25 was the yearly date of the annual birth of Mithra. On that date, his followers held a special celebration of the fact that the sun was beginning to rise again higher in the sky. (It was lowest at the winter solstice, December 21, and not until the 25th could its rising be clearly seen.) This birthday of the sun-god was made an official holiday in the Roman Empire by Aurelian about the year 273. Here is what Williston Walker, a well-known church historian, has to say about this:

"December 25 was a great pagan festival, that of Sol Invictus, which celebrated the victory of light over darkness, and the lengthening of the sun's rays at the winter solstice. This assimilation of Christ to the sun god, as Sun of Righteousness, was widespread in the fourth century and was furthered by Constantine's legislation on Sunday, which is not unrelated to the fact that the sun god was the titular divinity of his [Constantine's] family."--Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, third edition, page 155.

This claim rests on the scholars cited (Cumont, Olcott, Williston Walker)

Is there anyone disputing this stuff?

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

CLAIM 15:
During the third century, Christ was often depicted as riding in a solar chariot and was called the "Sun of Justice".

This could be a simply typographic error. I know of zero jesus in chariot citations from the third century ... I think it was probably Helios. This is not a claim for mithra btw. It was just another erroneous and misguided claim about Christ being depicted in the army during the third century, specifically riding a chariot instead of a donkey. This is christian mis-information.

thentian · 07-31-2008, 02:44 AM

Here is a link to "OSTIA Mithraea"

I hope that helps inre Claim 1.

Cheers!

mountainman · 07-31-2008, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

CLAIM 7:
His biographer, Flavius Vopiscus, tells us that the priests of the Temple of the Sun were called "Pontiffs". They were priests of their dying-rising saviour, Mithra, and reigned as his vicegerents.

Anything out of the Historia Augusta needs to be treated with a grain of salt. Here is some background on Flavius Vopiscus

Quote:

The Augustan History (Lat. Historia Augusta) is a collection of biographies of Roman Emperors and usurpers during the period 117 to 284. Although it is supposedly an assemblage of works by six different writers (collectively known as the Scriptores Historia Augustae), there is considerable doubt concerning not only the authorship of the work, but also when it was written and how much of the content is fictitious. Even so, it is the only continuous account for its period and thus of considerable interest. The name originated with Isaac Casaubon, who produced a first edition in 1603, working from a complex manuscript tradition with a number of variant versions. The biographies are dedicated to Diocletian, Constantine, and various private persons, and so ostensibly were written around the beginning of the 4th century.

In 1889, Hermann Dessau proposed that the six Scriptores - "Aelius Spartianus", "Iulius Capitolinus", "Vulcacius Gallicanus", "Aelius Lampridius", "Trebellius Pollio", and "Flavius Vopiscus" - were all fictitious, and that the work was composed much later;

07-31-2008, 01:51 AM	#4
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	examination of some random 3rd party claims about mithra General Claim: By the middle of the second century, Mithric sun worship was very popular among the influential Romans. Specific Supporting Claims CLAIM 1: Antoninus Pius (emperor from A.D. 138 to 161) erected a temple to Mithra at Ostai, a seaport town a few miles from the city of Rome. CLAIM 2: Under Emperor Antoninus Pius, Mithra was by official decree entitled Sol Dominus Imperil Romani ("The Sun, the Lord of the Roman Empire"), CLAIM 3: and his holy day was declared to be "the Day of the Lord". CLAIM 4: This name, and his other name, Sol Invicto ('Invincible Sun") appeared together on his coinage. CLAIM 5: The emperor Aurelian (270-275), whose mother was a priestess of the Sun, CLAIM 6: made this solar cult the official religion of the empire. CLAIM 7: His biographer, Flavius Vopiscus, tells us that the priests of the Temple of the Sun were called "Pontiffs". They were priests of their dying-rising saviour, Mithra, and reigned as his vicegerents. CLAIM 8: Sun worship continued to be the official religion of the empire until the time of Constantine. CLAIM 9: Cumont, Olcott and other scholars clearly show that December 25 was the yearly date of the annual birth of Mithra. On that date, his followers held a special celebration of the fact that the sun was beginning to rise again higher in the sky. (It was lowest at the winter solstice, December 21, and not until the 25th could its rising be clearly seen.) This birthday of the sun-god was made an official holiday in the Roman Empire by Aurelian about the year 273. Here is what Williston Walker, a well-known church historian, has to say about this: "December 25 was a great pagan festival, that of Sol Invictus, which celebrated the victory of light over darkness, and the lengthening of the sun's rays at the winter solstice. This assimilation of Christ to the sun god, as Sun of Righteousness, was widespread in the fourth century and was furthered by Constantine's legislation on Sunday, which is not unrelated to the fact that the sun god was the titular divinity of his [Constantine's] family."--Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, third edition, page 155. CLAIM 10: The Christians living in the larger cities of the empire were gradually leaning toward pagan practices, while their rural brethren more carefully maintained the true faith. The people of God were gradually nearing a crisis, and only the intermittent persecutions kept them relatively pure. But then Constantine entered the picture--and the Christian Church has never been the same since. Here is how it came about: and from another site: CLAIM 11: The Sun in Rome (218 CE) - - Emperor Elagabalus and Sol Invictus CLAIM 12: In 260 CE, Emperor Aurelian revitalized the religion of 'Deus Sol Invictus', however, it was now in reverence to the Roman Sun God, as opposed to the old Syrian version. His "temple of Sol Invictus" was dedicated on December 25, 274 CE, in a festival called "dies natalis Solis Invicti", meaning "The nativity of the unconquered Sun God" (compare: birth of Christ). CLAIM 13: In 321 CE, Emperor Constantine decreed that a "dies solis" or "Sun-Day" should be put aside as a time of the week to worship the god of light and life (the sun god, who was called "Sol"), and that this day should be observed as a day of rest. "On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." (see: Weekdays) CLAIM 14: The worship of Sol Invictus was prevalent in Rome through the following century, until 390 CE, when Emperor Theodosius I decreed that only the worship of Christ was acceptable. After this shift in Roman society toward the adoption of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, the title of "Deus Sol Invictus" was applied to Jesus, the Christ. CLAIM 15: During the third century, Christ was often depicted as riding in a solar chariot and was called the "Sun of Justice". CLAIM 16: Under Emperor Aurelion, in 274 CE, The day set aside to commemorate the birth of Christ was set at December 25, the "dies natalis Solis Invicti" ("The nativity of the unconquered Sun God"). (see: Christmas)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-30-2008, 09:29 AM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Hi Pete - your first source is a Christian sect that insists on celebrating the Sabbath on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday, and is intent on proving that Constantine corrupted the Truth. Reliable? Probably not. Your second is a neo-pagan site. There is so much misinformation on the web about Mithras, that I ask you not to post anything without FIRST investigating its reliability, so as not to waste everyone's time. Thanks.

07-31-2008, 12:08 AM	#3
Roger Pearse Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: N/A Posts: 4,370	The spread of myths is so prevalent that I tend to take the view that we mustn't state anything about either Mithras or Sol Invictus without an ancient source to back it up, if only in self-protection.

07-31-2008, 02:44 AM	#9
thentian Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Norway Posts: 694	Here is a link to "OSTIA Mithraea" I hope that helps inre Claim 1. Cheers!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.