Dave31

Hi GDon, The worship of the Egyptian virginal goddess Neith is traceable to about 7,000 years ago.

Neith, Virgin Mother of the World

avi

The temple.... ????

What did I write that was a misnomer??

Jews, like other religions constructed temples. That was my assertion. How is it a "misnomer" to claim that Jews congregated in temples, synagogues, or buildings of some kind?

Wasn't there a Jewish Synagogue excavated in Dura Europos? Didn't it date from the third century, well after the Romans destroyed the Jerusalem Temple, i.e. "the temple", in your post?

If your purpose in writing that I had committed a "misnomer", was to argue that my central tenet was mistaken, i.e. that Jews did NOT congregate in temples/synagogues, "churches", in other words, buildings, then, in my opinion, you have not persuaded anyone. There are buildings devoted to religious practices, excavated in many countries, which originated in the second or third centuries, including buildings devoted to practice of both Judaism, and Mithraism.

To date, I have not yet found a convincing christian church from the second or even the third century. The oldest church I know of, is from Armenia, at the start of the fourth century. I don't comprehend the argument that Christians during the third century (Origen--regarded, (if I am not much in error,) as an heretic) forbade construction of churches as an act of disrespect to the central tenet of Christianity, but a century later, by the start of the fourth century, did encourage such construction in Armenia.....

I simply find it much easier to posit a third century origin to the whole business. We don't find churches before that time period, because there were none to be found. Accordingly, I maintain that the Christians did adopt practices from Mithraism, and surely from other religions, as well....

Well, everything we are doing here, on this forum, Roger, is modern, I hope that it is not all "rubbish".

I don't think it is particularly helpful as a method of refuting the notion that Mithraic customs and traditions influenced Christianity, to dismiss a source simply because it is "modern", or of Persian origin, hence likely to be sympathetic to "Iranian Royalist ideas".

I like DengXiaoPing's invocation of the ancient Chinese proverb, that it matters not a whit whether a cat is black or white, but only whether or not it catches mice.

I don't care if the source is contemporary, or ancient, I do hope that the Persian source is based upon Persian excavations, Persian ceramics, Persian textiles, Persian mosaics, Persian scrolls, papyrus, and books, and Persian coins.

Referring back to Franz Cumont, Roger, how would he have responded to your statement? He was a big instigator in the trend of seeking to learn more about the Mithraic tradition....I think he would have been very enthusiastic to learn more about the Angers excavation. I don't think he would have been dismissive of a Persian web site, simply because of a perceived orientation towards Persian Royalty, anymore than citizens of USA would dismiss archaeological inquiry from Britain, if the person reporting the findings professed admiration for the British monarchy.....

avi

GakuseiDon

Thanks for that, Dave31. I've been trying to trace the earliest date in Acharya S's "Suns of God". Interestingly enough, she quotes an author to the extent that Isis was the virgin mother of Mithras:

Berry further relates: "As Mithraism moved westward it proved a fertile ground for the addition of mystic meaning. Practically all the symbolism of Osiris was added to the Mithraic cultus, even to the fact that Isis became the virgin mother of Mithras." (page 133)

On virgin births, she takes it back around 15,000 years ago (my bolding below):

In Christian Mythology Unveiled, the author recounts the Buddhist contention for antiquity of 15,000 years...:
"Christna and Buddha are identical in principle... [both] were born of virgin mothers, and each was the son of a carpenter; both suffer death by crucifixion... (page 333)
...
The association of Buddha with Krishna is so concrete that one authority, Colonel Tod... pronounced the two "conjoined"... Ancient representations of both gods depict them as black men, not only in color but also in facial characteristics and hair, etc. It is believed that such figures suggest great antiquity, considering that there appears to have been a time thousands of years ago when the black race dominated a large portion of the inhabited world.

Acharya S also hints of an even greater date, though she doesn't say whether the cave drawings of Dionysus 20,000 years ago suggests a virgin birth:

Another of the motifs that Dionysus and Jesus share is the virgin mother. (page 100)
...
Oddly enough, despite his numerous paramours Zeus himself was called "the virgin"; thus, even in this version it could be argued that Dionysus was "born of a virgin".
...
The December 25th birthday of the sun god is a common motif globally, dating back at least 12,000 years as reflected in winter solstices artfully recorded in caves. "Nearly all nations," says Doane, commemorated the birth of the god Sol to the "Queen of Heaven" and "Celestial Virgin."...

Even the Greek father god, Zeus, was supposedly born at the winter solstice. The "Christmas" fetival was clebrated at Athens and was called "the Lenaea," during which time, apparently, "the death and rebirth of the harvest infant Dionysus were similarly dramatized." The Lenaea festival is depicted in an Aurignacian cave painting in Spain (34,000-23,000 Before Present), with a "young Dionysus with huge genitals," standing naked in the middle of "nine dancing women." (page 232)

Do any of these predate Neith for references to "virgin births", in your view?

Roger Pearse

"Berry" is Gerald Berry, Religions of the world (or via: amazon.co.uk), Barnes and Noble (1956) p.56. It can be "borrowed" (in a poor quality PDF) via the openlibrary. The book appears devoid of footnotes; not one in the chapter on Mithras, so we are left to guess where this weirdness comes from.

It's an example of the kind of popular book that was possible before the internet, when getting access to information was much harder than it is now. Such books cannot be sold today, I would imagine.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

On the contrary, it can be sold on the internet for 29 cents plus shipping and handling. :Cheeky: