#Mithraism and Christianity

[kemetic-dreams]

What did Roman Empire pagan soldiers think of fighting under Constantine and Christianity?

Probably not very much.

The Roman military was a world of its own. More than today, soldiers had their very identity shaped by the institution and people they served. Upon enlisting, they swore allegiance to the emperor and received new names as his servants — Valerius during the tetrarchy and Flavius under Constantine. Those who didn’t speak Latin were pushed to acquire a basic grasp of it, pretty much like the French Foreign Legion of today. Starting from the late republican period, Roman soldiers were accustomed to receiving salaries, booty and pensions from their commanders, not the state in an abstract sense. Under the empire, loyalty often lay with the emperor, as long as he was perceived as strong.

In that frame, Constantine never lost the faith of his men thanks to his talents, accomplishments and image. It surely helped that he was Constantius Chlorus’ son, but dynastic feelings were not so strong in the 4th c. What really mattered was that he was a victorious imperator, with plenty of experience both before and after his ascension. His CV included wars against, and victories over, foreigners (Franks, Goths, Alamanni) and rival emperors (Maxentius, Licinius) alike. That kept soldiers satisfied and himself secure on the throne. Besides, Constantine took care to associate his military exploits with the Christian God. On the contrary, his sons failed to live up to his legacy and had to face claims by men like Magnus Magnentius and Julian.

Another thing to consider is the role of religion in the then Roman military. In general, early Christianity wasn’t unanimously for or against military service, hence a decent minority of soliders were Christians even before Constantine. In the late 3rd c., you could find Christians like St. Marcellus holding even the rank of centurion. The statesman Cassius Dio is reported to have spoken of Christians in the comitatus of all four original tetrarchs. Cases of individual disobedience cannot be excluded, of course, but the military was, above all, a state mechanism. Under Diocletian, they persecuted Christians; under Constantine, they fought the Donatists and may have even destroyed the Asclepieion at Aegae, Cilicia.

On his part, Constantine didn’t adopt Christianity the way most people after his time imagine(d). There was a long, gradual process, for the most part inscribed into the norms of late antiquity. Nomenclature and visual language were preserved to a considerable extent. Separate Christian and non-Christian prayers are reported to have been taking place at the same time. At some point in the 320s, a group of veterans greeted Constantine with the traditional “May the gods preserve you for us” salute. Two elite army units, Diocletian’s Jovians and Maximian’s Herculians, were not rebranded, although their names recalled the gods Jupiter and Hercules whom the late tetrarchs associated themselves with.

With the benefit of hindsight, we now know that the dynamics of that complex situation ended up favouring Christianity — if anything, all of Constantine’s successors were Christians except for Julian. That, however, should not be taken out of context. Few have a panoramic view of their time or the acumen to predict the future, and the provincials who made up the bulk of the late Roman military were not among them. Even if they were, though, they may not have had particularly strong feelings about any potential outcome. At the same time, various (quasi-)henotheistic traditions like the cult of Sol Invictus and Mithraism were around. The period was transitional, hence quite fluid.

[castilestateofmind]

“At a particular level of spiritual development it is immediately evident that the myths of the Mystery religions are essentially an allegory of the states of consciousness which are experienced by the initiate on the path toward self realization. The various deeds and adventures of mythical heroes are not poetical, but real events; they are the specific actions of one's inner being and shine forth from within the one who attempts to follow the path of initiation which leads beyond the fulfilment of the merely human mode of existence“.

- Julius Evola, The Path of Enlightenment in the Mithraic Mysteries.

[askmalal]

“What, exactly, did the Romans have against Christians?”

(In full transparency, this question was asked in person, but I thought the rest of you might be interested in the answer.)

Part One of My Answer:

This is a very complex question to answer. After all, why exactly does anybody hate anyone else? That is not a question that can be answered here, little one, and as such, there is much more to this than meets the apparent eye, and much more that those of us who did not know the specifics of each person’s psyche cannot possibly know.

So? We look for broadly shared opinions and institutional prejudice.

First, it is important to point out that Christianity was not consistently outlawed under the Emperors. The religion, which was a Mystery Cult as far as the Romans were concerned, was initially ignored, outlawed, then alternately “tolerated” and persecuted at times and through the reign of Constantine (early fourth century AD) who formally legalized the faith and forbade repression thereof. Even Julian the Apostate (you MUST look him up, fascinating man) didn’t outright ban Christianity during the brief revival of the pagan state during his brief reign in the 360s.

That said, Christianity was more often regarded with intolerance than with tolerance, and we are fairly confidant that those martyrdoms recorded by early Church figures are almost certainly true events in the majority of times. We know this, because the Romans sometimes recorded them themselves, and because the Romans had a very strange thing (Slaaneshian even) for ironic torture and execution, lending further truth to the lost bizzare accounts. But you did not ask -how-; you asked why.

First, conservative Romans viewed any secret society as being a threat to the natural order of things . Indeed, this is perversely why so many Romans sought membership in such societies. It was the seditious, rebellious thing to do. For the most part, the authorities left non state-sanctioned religions alone. The disdain was a formal, intellectual sort of prejudice, but it did not often extend to active repression. Hence, Mithraism and the Cult of Orpheus were faiths that were neither legal nor illegal. They were in a grey sort of area. They simply “were.”

These could be tolerated in part because the Roman world viewed religion in a rather unique manner.

For Example: Roman Mithraists were themselves probably monotheists (there is only one god, and he is Mithras, messianic son of the creator, who slew the bull of chaos, yadda yadda.) However, they -also- did their state duties. They made their sacrifices, they observed their holidays, they took their oaths. They were personally devout, but did not see participation in a state religion that contradicted their own as sinful. At worst, it was play acting to keep grandma happy.

This was hardly exceptional amongst Roman citizens. Romans of the Pan-Olympian faith could accept most foreign faiths, reasoning that these were merely foreign interpretations of the gods. Re is really Jove, The Fates are simply agents of Janus, Osiris is the Egyptian Pluto, etc. Those who were members of other congregations, and Roman atheists for that matter, still engaged in the stare ceremonies. They were a unifying link, a part of the established system. Important to social and familial advancement.

But then there were Jews and Christians. Hellenized Jews were typically easy to integrate into Roman society, and were often tolerated even when their beliefs did not allow them to participate in all state rituals, mostly because they were well behaved, and seen as model, productive citizens. Non-Hellenized Jews were also granted a fair amount of leeway -outside- Judea, though within is a very complex matter not really germane to our conversation.

But Christianity did not fit so easily into this mold. Conservative Romans said that Christians refused to do their duties to the state. They said that they did not observe the holidays, make the sacrifices, swear the oaths.

This was, in part, true. Many Christians refused to take part in ceremonies or observe the holidays. However, other Christians -did-, either taking the pragmatic view that this was all just play acting in service to the state, or because they regarded such things in an entirely secular matter. (“Saturnalia means lots of time off work!”)

The main issue, however, the one about which most Christians refused to be adaptable, was the swearing of oaths. In particular, any oath that was directed toward the Emperor. Whilst most Emperors were viewed as high ranking, but ultimately mortal, several were in fact deified. Furthermore, the Romans viewed the Emperor as a sort of metaphorical representation of the state. And so, you didn’t make an important oath of allegiance to the state: you swore it to the Emperor as icon of that state, and you often did it by paying your respects to an image: a statue, or in some cases a coin bearing his likeness. This, the overwhelming majority of Christians refused to do. It was idolatry. Indeed, a large number of Christian soldiers (soldiers often being called upon to make such oaths) would ask to swear alternative oaths: to the state itself, for instance, or to the defense of the people. In intolerant periods, this was a death sentence, as during the reign of Diocletian for example when a group of forty Egyptian Legionaries, all Christians, refused to swear an oath to Diocletian despite proven loyalty to the state, and were executed en masse.

Disloyalty, was of course a very useful excuse for intolerance. Because there were other reasons to distrust the Christians, from the conservative Roman point of view. Some were nefarious, some were born of fear, and some were utterly ludicrous.

I’ll touch on those next.

M.

[hashems-truth-matters]

The Deuteronomy 13 Test for a False Prophet

The Deuteronomy 13 Test for a False Prophet This post may contain affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, I may earn a commission on sales. Have you ever pondered why the Jewish people fail to grasp the profound truth that Jesus, also known as Yeshua in Hebrew, is the long-awaited Messiah prophesied by the ancient Prophets? It appears incredibly straightforward to us. We often believe that if we simply introduce them to the New Testament, they will instantly comprehend its meaning. If they refuse it, the fault lies within them. However, should we not question our own role in this? What responsibility do we bear in the matter? If you are truly committed to your mission of evangelization, then prepare yourself for the ultimate challenge: Can you effectively demonstrate to someone of Jewish faith that Yeshua is the long-awaited Messiah?  Paul's daily routine in the synagogues, as portrayed in the Book of Acts, was dedicated to spreading the truth. Countless Jews were enlightened, recognizing Yeshua as the long-awaited Messiah who selflessly atoned for our sins.
But, that is not happening so much today.
Why? It's confusing to us that Jews today have no greater understanding of the Scriptures than their ancestors did in the first century. How would you approach a conversation with someone who is Jewish? Can you effectively persuade them that Yeshua is indeed the long-awaited Messiah? Is there any reason why they might have reservations about Yeshua? During the initial fourteen years following the crucifixion, an immense number of Jews, consisting of thousands upon thousands, eagerly sought knowledge about the first arrival of their Messiah and His true identity. At that time, the focus was primarily on the Jews, with the Gentiles not yet playing a significant role. The Book of Acts provides detailed accounts of this historical reality, which is widely acknowledged and accepted. Why haven't thousands, if not tens of thousands of Jews embraced their Jewish Messiah Yeshua as they did in the first century? What altered the course of events? What caused this to cease? Are many teaching something different from what our Messiah truly taught? Are many teaching something different from what the Apostles taught? Are many teaching something different from what Paul taught? These men managed to introduce the Messiah to a multitude of Jews. What could possibly be the obstacle today? What exactly is our dilemma? There are various issues that need to be addressed, but they are not insurmountable. It is possible that these problems stem from a misinterpretation of prophecy or an excessive attachment to traditions that contradict the teachings of God's Word. This can lead to a state of blindness, as highlighted in Mark 7:13. When one's own doctrine is contrary to the Word of God, it can be challenging to perceive Yeshua as the embodiment of God's message (John 1:14; Rev. 19:13). These difficulties are particularly relevant for certain individuals within the Jewish community. While overcoming these challenges may require a considerable amount of time and patience, they are by no means insurmountable. Paul experienced both success and failure throughout his journeys. Although it is true that some of the Jews were separated from the Tree, as mentioned in Romans 11, it is important to acknowledge that many of them truly embraced the message of Yeshua. This transformation was made possible through the teachings of the Apostles, especially Paul. Let's explore the primary obstacle that often prevents Jews from embracing Yeshua (Jesus) as the long-awaited Messiah. During the first century, Paul frequently engaged in teaching the Word of God and spreading the teachings of Messiah in various synagogues.  “Immediately he preached the Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20). “Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there” (Acts 17:17). “And he came to Ephesus, and left them there; but he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews” (Acts 17:17). “And he went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God” (Acts 19:8). To have impactful discussions with Jews, a deep understanding of prophecy and Yeshua's Gospel accounts is essential. Although challenging, Paul's efforts with the Jews proved fruitful on certain occasions. Additionally, as previously stated, Jewish leadership frequently opposed Paul, just as they did with Yeshua. Paul, similarly to Yeshua, posed a grave threat to the established religious system based on traditions and doctrines, which Yeshua condemned as a manifestation of lawlessness. Paul, like Yeshua in Mark 7, John 7:19, and Matthew 23, fervently denounced the traditions and doctrines that contradicted the teachings of Moses. Yeshua's message can be summarized as recognizing the goodness of what Moses wrote, while criticizing the Jewish leadership for their misguided traditions and doctrines that contradicted Moses. A significant number of Jews turned away from the misleading religious practices and traditions that arose from this theological evolution. Instead, they chose to devote themselves exclusively to the Word of God and Yeshua. As a result, the Jewish leadership grew increasingly anxious. Their nerves were rattled by the emerging threat to their power and influence.  To clarify, Yeshua and His followers did not oppose the teachings of Moses. Instead, they opposed the Oral Law or the "commandments of men", as they were known among the Jews of that day. Today, the ancient compilation of Jewish oral law is widely known and recognized as the Talmud. This sacred text encompasses the expansive wisdom that was meticulously transcribed and enriched with additional insights, thus augmenting the divine Law revealed to the Jewish people. They constructed barriers surrounding the Word of God, imposing their own intricate commandments dictating how God's people should follow His Commandments. They excessively restricted the guidelines and even created new ones. It's ironic that the same thing has happened within traditional Christianity. The construction of formidable barriers around God's Word had the unfortunate consequence of obscuring the essence of the Word itself within their teachings and behavior. Consequently, God's Word became veiled and, as Yeshua declared, rendered ineffective. A false religion was constructed, distorting the true essence of God's Word. Man-made commandments transformed God's Law into a heavy burden, to the point where it ceased to be divine and instead became a complex framework built upon God's Law.
On the Sabbath, our Creator commanded us to rest. However, the "oral law" developed numerous guidelines to determine the true essence of resting and abstaining from work. These instructions were provided by individuals who "claimed" to understand how to fulfill God's Commandments.

Instead of following God, they were actually following a mere man. In this system, men assumed the role of God. Those who held power in this oral law system started to feel their authority and practices being challenged by Yeshua and His followers. Yeshua and His Disciples were dedicated to guiding people to follow the Word of God, rather than the mere commandments of human beings. The profound impact of this approach led to the Pharisees and Sadducees making a decision to take action against those that threatened their false ways. It was necessary for them to create the impression that Yeshua was contradicting Moses' teachings, as opposing the Talmud's authority, since it did not directly originate from God's Law. They became infuriated when others refused to adhere to their doctrines and traditions outlined in the Talmud. This is where things start to get intriguing. Jewish leaders were unable to provide evidence that Yeshua and His followers went against the teachings of Moses. As a result, they resorted to fabricating false witnesses against them. Regrettably, Stephen's story is one of a Jew who strayed from his religious customs and instead chose to devote himself solely to Yeshua and the teachings of God's Word. They also set up false witnesses who said, “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law; for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us” (Acts 6:13). It is evident that claiming that Yeshua altered the ways of God, as stated by Moses, is categorized as false testimony here. However, if this were true, it would actually constitute true testimony, rather than false testimony. Just like Yeshua, they attempted to do the exact thing. In Luke 6:1-2, they unjustly accused Him of Sabbath-breaking, when in truth, He was merely challenging Jewish traditions and doctrines. When it comes to the Law of God, there is no violation of any of His Commandments when one picks and consumes grain on the Sabbath. Nowhere in the Bible can such a commandment be found. Nonetheless, it does violate specific rabbinical commandments. The Talmud says: 'In case a woman rolls wheat to remove the husks, it is considered as sifting; if she rubs the heads of wheat, it is regarded as threshing; if she cleans off the side-adherencies, it is sifting out fruit; if she bruises the ears, it is grinding; if she throws them up in her hand, it is winnowing'" Yeshua could not have broken any of God's Commandments, as doing so would mean committing sin according to (1 John 3:4). Therefore, He remained our flawless sacrifice. If any doctrine presents Yeshua as teaching or practicing anything that contradicts the writings of Moses or any established truth in the Word, it inevitably undermines the perfection of His sacrifice. The Talmud provides specific instructions for hand washing before a meal, and interestingly, Yeshua once challenged the Pharisees' beliefs regarding this practice. “Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him, “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands?” (Mark 7:5). Observe how the Pharisees and scribes emphasize the importance of following the tradition of the elders rather than the Commandments of God. They audaciously attempt to correct and admonish Yeshua and His Disciples, solely relying on human tradition rather than divine Commandments. It is evident that washing hands is not inherently harmful; in fact, most individuals nowadays practice the habit of washing their hands before meals. The association of spiritual purity and impurity with their commandments indeed posed a significant challenge. They went as far as detailing the proper procedure for hand-washing rituals. For those interested, all the information can be found in the Jewish Talmud. It is only God who can determine the circumstances and actions that make a person clean or unclean. In their arrogance, people have exceeded their limits by assuming authority that belongs solely to God. Yeshua was motivated by this to instruct them to return solely to what Moses wrote, forsaking their futile traditions and doctrines. He urged them to re-establish their submission to God's authority, rather than placing themselves above it. “He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.  And he said to them: “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and,‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus, you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that ” (Mark 7:8-13). The Jews held their ways in high regard, oblivious to their own errors. Yeshua, in Matthew 23, pointed out that despite reciting the Law of God word-for-word from Moses' Seat, they failed to actually apply it in their teachings and actions. Instead, they established their own set of commandments and practices. For example, they emphasized the importance of washing hands before partaking of bread, and adhering to the rule of not rubbing two grains together on the Sabbath. They taught two distinct sets of laws—one derived from the writings of Moses on the Seat of Moses, while the other originated from the Talmud, the oral law, which countered and invalidated the teachings of Moses. According to Yeshua, those individuals are referred to as hypocrites. He advises us to prioritize the former rather than the latter.

Only what Moses wrote would be read from this seat. Yeshua emphasized the importance of observing and doing what he said. “Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do” (Matthew 23:1-3) Regrettably, Jewish leaders, despite their initial adherence to the Law of God when reading from the Seat of Moses, deviated from its true teachings. They started promoting and enforcing their own interpretations and practices that directly contradicted the original teachings of Moses. As Yeshua said, “...but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.” The people who criticized the Disciples' actions were actually hypocrites themselves. They claimed to teach God's Law, but failed to follow it. Yeshua fearlessly exposed their hypocrisy, which earned Him their hatred and a death sentence. These individuals were rather fond of their religious practice: “Did not Moses give you the law, yet none of you keeps the law? Why do you seek to kill Me?” (John 7:19) Continuing to read Matthew 23, we discover that their hearts were misguided. Even when they obeyed God's Commandments and followed their own paths, it was solely to inflate their own egos and attract attention to themselves. They initially taught the Law of God, but then proceeded to establish a separate set of rules, their own law, which led them to be labeled as hypocrites and vipers. “Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (Matthew 23:28). “Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?” (Matthew 23:32). The true essence of obeying God's Commandments lies in our love for Him and for others (1 John 5:2-3). It calls for us to embrace humility, putting ourselves beneath others, rather than indulging in self-love and self-exaltation. That is what Moses wrote, and the Pharisees missed it. The author of Psalm 119 undoubtedly grasped this concept well, which is precisely why Jewish leadership wrestled so intensely with Yeshua and His Disciples. He fully revealed the true purpose of the Law of God, as written by Moses, despite the Jewish leadership's persistent attempts to safeguard their false religious practices that went against Moses' teachings. Paul, like Yeshua, faced unjust allegations accusing him of contradicting Moses' teachings. “And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law.” Pay attention to how these devout followers were fervent in their dedication to God's Law and how Paul is being wrongfully accused of abandoning Moses' teachings. James asserts that the allegations against Paul are unfounded, emphasizing that Paul upholds and imparts the entirety of God's Law, as it was written by Moses. James declares that living in an orderly manner, or what he refers to as "walking orderly", entails applying the Law of God. (Acts 21). Given that James affirms that Paul certainly upheld and transmitted the teachings of Moses, and considering that Paul heeded James' advice to demonstrate that he did not teach contrary to Moses, we can draw only three feasible conclusions. Either James and Paul were either: Liars Lunatics Legitimate Once again, James clearly states that "walking orderly" implies adhering to the Law as penned by Moses. Consequently, James implies that anyone who fails to walk and teach in accordance with Moses' writings is, in essence, walking in a disorderly manner. If we don't want to unjustly label Paul and James as dishonest or insane individuals, it is essential to trust their authenticity. Those who are absolutely convinced in their interpretation of Paul's letters and firmly believe that they contradict the teachings of Moses might find themselves deeply perplexed in this matter. This is precisely why Peter issued a warning concerning Paul's letters. He cautioned that they possess a degree of complexity, making them susceptible to distortion, and that they have the potential to facilitate disobedience. (2 Peter 3:15-17). Read the full article

[beatrice-otter]

Time Travel killing Jesus and the religion of empire

There's a post about time travel going around tumblr, and somebody tagged that they would kill Mary before the birth of Jesus, so that Christianity wouldn't exist. Problem is, while that might indeed kill Christianity, it would probably just mean that Constantine would slot Mithraism into his Imperial domination schemes instead. In the late 200s AD there were two mostly-underground monotheistic mystery cults rapidly gaining adherents in the Roman Empire. There were a lot of similarities between the two, at least superficially. For example, there was a lot of emphasis on communal ritual meals. One was Christianity. The other was Mithraism. Constantine was intrigued by both. We know he was involved in Mithraism in his youth. But what Constantine really liked the idea of using religion to unify the Roman Empire. By the 300s, the Roman Empire was beginning to fragment, with regular civil wars. Constantine came to power in one of those civil wars. He thought that if everyone worshiped the same god (instead of different gods worshiped in different places, with the Roman pantheon and emperors as a thin veneer of unity), it would help keep the whole ramshackle edifice together. (Spoiler alert: it did not.) So he picked one of the two monotheistic religions that was rapidly gaining in popularity, and encouraged people to convert to it, heaping power and wealth on (some of) them. And that's how Christianity became an imperial religion. Christianity changed rapidly in response to that. Major parts of the religion were changed or dropped entirely. For example, until Constantine, the vast majority of Christians were strict pacifists. In most communities, soldiers were required to leave the army and find a new trade before they could be baptized. Obviously, this was unacceptable if Christianity was going to become the religion of the Roman Empire. In a straight-up choice between pacifism and Imperial power, the Christian church as a whole dropped the pacifism like a hot potato. 100 years after Constantine you have St. Augustine laying out the "Just War" theory where war is fine as long as you have a good reason for it. That's a complete 180 from everything the early Christians believed. There are many other examples of things that got dropped or changed in Christianity to make it more palatable to Imperial might. There are a lot of toxic things in Christianity as we know it. But the thing is ... many of them come from this process of adapting their beliefs and practices to fit what Constantine (and later Emperors, and the entire power structure of the Empire) wanted Christianity to be. Namely, something tame that affirmed and enforced the existing Imperial power structure. And Christianity has been a partner and tool of the power structures of the dominant culture ever since. This is one of the reasons there's so much difference between Jesus' teachings and Christian teachings, in so many cases. In a straight-up choice between faithfulness and power ... a majority of Christians in the last two thousand years have most often chosen power. But here's the thing. If Christianity didn't exist, that doesn't mean none of this would have happened. It just means that Constantine would probably have chosen Mithraism instead. Do you think the Mithraists would have been any less willing to take the power and wealth on offer to them, in exchange for becoming a lackey of empire? Do you think Christianity was uniquely corruptible? I don't.

comments Comment? https://ift.tt/uspfvE9

[katakaluptastrophy]

So we've all heard that the Mithraeum is named after the temples of the god Mithras, who was depicted in temples in one of his key moments: the tauroctony (killing a bull). Haha, John, very funny cow joke.

But these images in Mithraism aren't just a guy killing a cow. There are also a bunch of other animals assisting, all possibly representing constellations. One ancient philosopher said a mithraeum was meant to be an image of the cosmos.

One theory about Mithraism suggests that it was rooted in Platonic ideas about cosmology - and that certainly tracks as far as relevance to Jod goes.

The ancient world had a geocentric understanding of cosmology: that is, they understood the sun to circle round the earth. In doing so, it followed a path of twelve constellations.

We understand today that the earth wobbles on its axis and that this can affect when equinoxes fall. In the ancient world, they originally thought the cosmos was eternally fixed.

The constellations referenced in a tauroctony are those that would have been on what the ancient cosmological model understood as the celestial equator during the 'Age of Taurus' - the period when this celestial equator passed through the Taurus bull. This directly preceeded the 'Age of Aries' during which the cult of Mithras began. It's worth noting that the next of these astrological ages would be the 'Age of Aquarius'...yes, that groovy Age of Aquarius where in popular belief there's the dawning of weird abilities and human mastery of the earth... Eh, I'm sure that's not relevant here...

One theory about the centrality of this shift from Taurus is because, unlike earlier theories that the planets themselves were gods, when this shifting of the equinoxes was discovered, it was thought to point towards a more powerful god who could control them. The theory goes that killing the bull - i.e. the literal shifting of the cosmological axis, moving from the Age of Taurus to the Age of Aries - symbolises this power over the cosmos. (You can see why this might also appeal to a guy who literally ate and then played dolls with the planets and then declared himself a god.)

Another part of this theory is that previously there had been a sense that the souls of the dead ascended to immortality through a convoluted passage through the stars. A god with such cosmological power would, it was thought, also have the power to convey a soul safely after death.

Mithras is often depicted holding the cosmological axis or the earth, or as Atlas holding up the sky. He is also depicted being born from a rock, a symbol of the cosmos - bursting it asunder, he is greater than the cosmos: his dominion is beyond it. Jod, the Lord Over the River, certainly makes a lot of claims about his abilities over the realms of death beyond the mortal plain.

For all the trappings of Christianity in the Nine Houses, it's interesting how in-depth a joke about a sexist mystery cult "the Mithraeum" turns out to be.

[dato-georgia-caucasus]

Sacramental bread, also called Communion bread, Communion wafer, Sacred host, Eucharistic bread, the Lamb or simply the host (Latin: hostia, lit. 'sacrificial victim'), is the bread used in the Christian ritual of the Eucharist. Along with sacramental wine, it is one of two elements of the Eucharist. The bread may be either leavened or unleavened, depending on tradition.

Catholic theology generally teaches that at the Words of Institution the bread's substance is changed into the Body of Christ (transubstantiation), whereas Eastern Christian theology generally views the epiclesis as the point at which the change occurs. Bread wasin the religious rituals of Mandaeism, Mithraism and other pagan cultures similar to that of ancient Egypt.

[barbariankingdom]

Mithra slaying the bull is a central motif of Mithraism, the oldest mystery religion practiced in the Roman Empire. It symbolizes the symbolic cosmic agreement and the triumph of light over Darkness. 

Mithras, an ancient Persian deity, is depicted as the solar god sacrificing a bull, representing the renewal of life and the victory of good over evil. The origins of Mithraism can be traced back to ancient Persia (modern-day Iran), where Mithra was originally a deity associated with the sun and the protector of oaths and contracts. 

The religion spread through the Persian Empire and later influenced Greco-Roman culture and religion, including early Christianity. 

 In the Roman context, Mithraism became popular among soldiers and generals and eventually gained the favor of the elite.

[buttcheesetaco]

Jesus Didn't Exist

The entire Jesus cult is based on Roman tax reform from the Fourth Century. The Legions were returning with "new" religions they picked up on their travels. The Roman fiscal system was based on the Temples to various gods which saw their revenue declining. Rome's answer was to create a universal religion or "Catholic" to correct the matter. The new religion was a law, you kept it by order of Rome and it was an amalgamation of the religions of the day. What became called "Christianity" was one of the religions. It was a regional faith based on a number of folk stories about a magic healer and prophet, fused with Dionysus and other religions like Mithraism. Several Mithraeum or caves were already present in Rome. A solar religion, it was kept on Sunday mornings. Rome had a deep disdain for the Jews following the bar Kokhba revolt in the former Judea in 131 to 135 CE. It was the most expensive war in Rome's history. Rome's new religion allowed for idols and icons, something forbidden in Judaism and early Messianic cults. Rome didn't care for Sabbath and things Jewish and outlawed the keeping of Saturday, proclaiming Sunday as "The Lord's Day." Rome took it upon themselves to edit the hundreds of codices concerning the story of the healer, Yeshu. Though spurious and contradictory, this didn't stop them. Their work is known as the New Testament. The Church's grip on Europe caused a deep seated religious faith to prosper in many forms after the dawn of Protestantism. It was the lie heard 'round the world and is told to this day.

Encyclopedia Britannica

#religion #catholic

[viktorkondrakis]

Greco-Roman cults: Mithraism

Mithraism is an interesting case of a foreign deity being wholly incorporated into Greco-Roman culture. We see examples of this in hybrid gods like Hermanubis (Ἑρμανοῦβις), but the cult of Mithras would assume influence these prior sects had never dreamed of.

Mithra is an ancient Iranian divine being (yazata) with a thousand ears and ten thousand eyes, associated with light, the Sun, justice and oaths. His name in Greek (Μειθρας) is numerically 365, the number of days in the year, associating him with the spheres of the heavens much like the archon Abrasax (Ἀβρασάξ) was.

Further connecting Mithras with the celestial spheres, the religion of Mithraism had seven ranks of initiation one could progress up:

Corax (Κόραξ): the Crow, associated with Mercury.

Nymphius (Νυμφίος): the Bridegroom, associated with Venus.

Stratiotes (Στρατιώτης): the Soldier, associated with Mars.

Leon (Λέων): the Lion, associated with Jupiter.

Perses (Πέρσης): the Persian, associated with Luna.

Heliodromus (Ἡλιοδρόμος): the Sun-Runner, associated with Sol.

Pater (Πατήρ): the Father, associated with Saturn.

The cult had many esoteric astrological symbols associated with its practice, most notably the Sacred Bull:

In each Mithraeum (Mithraic temple) there is an image of a white bull (Taurus) being slain by Mithras (Leo) wearing a Phrygian cap, who kneels on the animal with his right foot holding down the bull's right hind hoof and his left knee resting on the bull's back. He slays it with his right hand, holding it by the nostrils with the other, looking over his shoulder to face the sun on the left, and a dog (Canis major) and snake (Serpens) reach up to strike the bull. A scorpion (Scorpius) seizes the bull's member. A crow (Corvus) is flying around the bull. Three ears of wheat (Spica) emerge from the bull's wound. Two torch-bearers (Gemini) stand on either side: Cautēs (Καυτής, "Stone") with his torch pointing up and Cautopatēs (Καυτοπατής, "Stone of Opening") with his torch pointing down. The moon is on the right, parallel to the sun.

This layered symbolism required secrecy to remain obscure to the uninitiated, and as such Mithraism was an underground religion with select members, mostly military. During the Christian period many Roman soldiers would join the Mithraic religion, seeing Mithras and Yeshua as one and the same, with stories from the era claiming that Mithraists practiced baptisms and bread-and-wine communion. The religion eventually faded away from a lack of textual preservation and shrinking converts, though many of its Mithraea still remain. Judging by its size at its peak, it would have rivalled Christianity and may have even replaced it as the dominant faith in another timeline.

[shamsaddinmegalommatis]

Stalin in Ottoman Anatolia: his Spiritual, Religious and Historical Quests

The Mithraic Trajectory of an Unknown Transcendentalist

Сталин в Османской Анатолии: его духовные, религиозные и исторические искания

Митраистская траектория неизвестного трансценденталиста

Table of Contents

I. The erroneous perception of Stalin among most people today

II. The erroneous perception of WW II by average people today

III. The true Yalta Conference

IV. The Big Game never ended

V. Good intentions and evil purposes

VI. Roosevelt & Stalin: like Abraham Lincoln & Alexander II

VII. The real, hidden Stalin: an experienced mystic

VIII. A Turkish ambassador speaks about Stalin living in Artvin and Istanbul

IX. Stalin in Ottoman Anatolia: 1911-1912

X. Turkish statesman Rıza Nur noted that Stalin understood Turkish

XI. Stalin's cultural background: distorted & unknown to most

XII. The Mithraic Iranian cultural heritage of Georgia & Stalin

XIII. The long, heavy shadow of the Sassanids

XIV. An indelible stamp on Islam: the Iranian Intermezzo  

XV. The intertwined Islamic & Christian cultural heritage of Georgia, and Shota Rustaveli

XVI. Rustaveli's Russian translations and Stalin's pseudonyms

XVII. Archaeological excavations and Orientalist discoveries prior to Stalin's sojourn in Anatolia

XVIII. Stalin's textual sources of information about Mithra and the Mithraic mysteries

XIX. Spirituality, Religion, Eschatology, Soteriology, the Extinction of the Mankind, and Stalin

XX. Major themes of Stalin's spiritual quest in Anatolia – 1. Tauroctony and Crucifixion

XXI. Major themes of Stalin's spiritual quest in Anatolia – 2. Mithraic Trinity, Christian Trinity, Spirituality and Stalin

XXII. Major themes of Stalin's spiritual quest in Anatolia – 3. Solar nature of Mithraism / Immaculate birth from the rock

XXIII. How Stalin's Mithraic meditations in Anatolia formed his decision-making 

1. Pontus' King Mithridates VI's wars with Rome

2. Cilicia's Mithraic Pirates in fight with Rome, the desecration of Greece, and Stalin

3. Did Stalin travel to visit the world's greatest Mithraic monument at Nemrut Dagh?

4. Stalin's Mithraic meditations and anti-sacerdotal stance

5. The Mithraic version of the Assyrian-Babylonian Gilgamesh: Verethragna, and his association with Heracles in Nemrut Dagh

6. Mithraic Anatolian Imperial Spirituality vs. Nordic Mythology: Stalin vs. Hitler

XXIV. Rome, New Rome, the Third Rome, and Stalin

XXV. Mithraism, Christianity, Stalin and the Antichrist

The idea that most of the people around the world have about Stalin is entirely false. This is due to the fact that atheists, materialists, Marxists-Leninists, liberal socialists, socialist-democrats, evolutionists and all the trash of Anglo-Saxon and Ashkenazi Khazarian pseudo-intellectuals and bogus-academics have first perceived, then interpreted, and last analyzed/presented Stalin and his historical role through the most erroneous, Trotskyist misunderstanding/distortion of the Georgian-origin Soviet statesman. But Stalin was an unconditional transcendentalist and a remarkable mystic.

Mithraic Tauroctony from a Mithraeum in Syria (currently in the Israel museum in Jerusalem): a mythical-religious topic early conceived by evil forces as purely eschatological symbolism

Human sacrifice: dead bodies wait for cremation in Dresden after the bombardment of the 'Allied' forces.

I. The erroneous perception of Stalin among most people today

According to this irrelevant story, Stalin (1878-1953) was a resolute materialist, a convinced Darwinist, a devoted Marxist-Leninist, and a heartless dictator who decimated entire nations, before purging the old guard of Communist-Bolshevik partisans, relocating populations, and sending millions to jail. There is only little truth in all this. In fact, Stalin was as realist as Kemal Ataturk; he therefore had to appear to others in the way he did in order to succeed Lenin and eliminate Trotsky. Many may agree with the last sentence, stating that this is part of the well-known History.

But there is also the 'Other History'; the one that is unknown, because it did not happen. This is, in other words, the negative reflection of the reality. All the same, because this 'other' or 'unknown' History did not happen, this does not mean that it was not attempted. And indeed many secret and known organizations and 'societies' tried to prepare several developments which finally did not occur. It is essential for a true Historian to know well these failed attempts; in fact, he only then understands History as the Absolute Sphere that contains the outcome of all the desires, feelings, thoughts and attempts of the humans.

---------------------

Continue reading the remaining 25700 words of the 30200-word article here:

Read and download the entire book in PDF here:

[oswednesday]

reality au where mithraism bested christianity

[modwyr]

i am in love with the decision to use the cult of mithras in pentiment because you really could have used any part of roman religion, but mithraism was, from what we can reasonably tell, a prominent rival to early christianity and shared similar beliefs and practices, so even the concerns around the temple’s existence feels like its building on pre-existing fears about christianity and mithraism.

[mask131]

Fantasy read-list: A-1.5

I thought I had concluded the whole “A” part of my big fantasy read-list last spring... 

... BUT FATE WOULD HAVE IT OTHERWISE! In between then and now I found a collection of articles covering the evolution and chronology of fantasy literature, and they added a lot more of titles and informations that I think I will add to my “Fantasy read-list”. 

My original “A-1″ post dealt with works of fiction and poetry that, beyond being masterpieces of the Greco-Roman literature, were the key basis of Greco-Roman mythology as we know it today, and massive inspirations for the later fantasy genre. Here, I will use an article written by Fabien Clavel asking the question “Is there an Antique fantasy?” to add some names to this list.

Not the names of works written in Ancient Greece or Ancient Rome however. No, when it comes to the great classics from “before Christ”, the same names are dropped - Hesiod’s Theogony, Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, Virgil’s Aeneid, Ovid’s Metamorphoses... The only antique work Fabien Clavel mentions that I did not mention was Lucan’s Pharsalia. Also called “On the Civil War” it is, as the name says, an epic poem retelling the actual civil war that opposed Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great. Why would a historical work fit into the world of fantasy you ask? Because this epic retelling is pretty-fantasy likes, with several omens and oracles of the gods (including trees that start bleeding like humans), and even scenes of necromancy where the ghosts of the dead answer the protagonists’ questions. 

Fabien Clavel’s article, however, focuses much more on the modern fantasy inspired by the Greek and Roman myths, that he classifies into four categories.

1) The retellings. Works of fantasy that retell classic legends or well-known myth of Greco-Roman antiquity. You find in this category the works of the fantasy author David Gemmel, be it his Troy trilogy (retelling of the Trojan war) or his Lion of Macedon trilogy (a more fantastical version of Alexander the Great’s life). You have Gene Wolf’s Soldier of the Mist, about the titular soldier, cursed with both retrograde and anterograde amnesia, and forced to find his way home through mythical Ancient Greece. There is C.S. Lewis’ last novel, Till we have faces, his retelling of the Cupid and Psyche myth from The Golden Ass. And in French literature, you have Maurice Druon’s Les Mémoires de Zeus, an autobiography of Zeus himself. 

2) The “feminist” works - which technically are a sub-division of the “retellings”, since they are retellings of ancient legends and tales, but with the twist that the focus is placed on female characters, often side-lined or pushed away from Greco-Roman narratives. In this category you will find Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad (the Odyssey through Penelope’s eyes), Maron Zimmer Bradley’s The Firebrand (the Trojan War as told by Cassandra), Ursula LeGuin’s Lavinia (an exploration of the titular character, from the Aeneid). To get out of the  English literature, you will also have the work of the Hungarian writer Magda Szabo, The Moment, or the Creusiad, another Aeneid retelling focusing on the character of Creusa. 

3) The “appropriation” works. No, this is not used in a negative way but a neutral one. In this category, Clavel places all the works that are not a precise retelling of a given myth or legend, but rather a fantasy story reusing the elements, tropes, characters and settings of Greek or Roman mythology. You have Thomas Burnett Swann’s Trilogy of the Minotaur, Guy Gavriel Kay’s Sarantine Mosaic series - and in French literature you have Rachel Tanner’s Le Cycle de Mithra, an uchrony imagining what the world would look like if Mithraism had become the official religion of the Roman Empire instead of Christianity. 

4) The “interaction” tales - aka, fantasy works that take elements of Greek mythology and have them be confronted by elements not belonging to Greek mythology. For example, there is the Merlin Codex series by Robert Holdstock, describing how Merlin the Enchanter resurrects Jason and the Argonauts in the Arthurian world. There is also in France Johan Heliot’s Reconquérants, an uchrony fantasy about a group of lost Roman colonizers who built a second Roman Empire in Northern America, and fifteen centuries later try to return to the “old world” they left behind only to find it overrun with mythical creatures. Finally, Clavel adds the Percy Jackson series, the new best-selling series of teenage fantasy fiction/urban fantasy a la “Harry Potter”, describing the adventures of an American teenage boy discovering the Greek gods moved to America, that he is the son of Poseidon, and that monsters of Greek mythology are trying to kill him. 

Clavel concludes his article by saying how hard it is to pinpoint exactly where the influence of Greek mythology stops in the fantasy world, since elements of Greek legends are omnipresent and overused in the fantasy genre. To illustrate this he mentions the centaurs, that appeared in four of the classic works of fantasy for children that are however VERY different from each other: Harry Potter, the Narnia Chronicles, the Artemis Fowl series, and The Neverending Story. 

As a personal note I will add to this list the recent success of Madeline Miller’s Greek mythology retellings, which I have seen regularly pop up in book shops and that some of my friends fell in love with (I never read them though) - be it her Song of Achilles (the life of Achilles told through the eyes of Patroclus) or her Circe (a novel about the life of the famous Greek witch). 

[aethersquid]

Since this post is back on my dash I feel the need to once again analyze it. Because as I have pointed out, forgiveness is a really big thing in Christianity. Arguably the central thing. And people have already made a bunch of points on why there aren’t risen demons: they always know the consequences of their actions unlike humans, they have behold the true beauty of god, etc.

So instead I think I’m going to talk about why I think this weird deeply contradictory view of Christianity is showing up. And I think the answer is that Christianity started out as a tiny minority religion among an oppressed people in a massive empire and then eventually became the majority or even state religion for like four massive empires in a row. I think that this take or an equivalent would be true for any religion that had been left to steep in power for so many years, regardless of what its theology started out like. When you’re a poor carpenter-turned-preacher living in a backwater province of the Roman Empire your values will include a lot of things that are inconvenient to a Roman emperor. So when he converts he says those parts real quietly or leaves them out and hopes nobody notices. And thus, slowly, insidiously, anything the state touches becomes propaganda.

Who knows, if things had worked out differently Christianity might still be a minor religion preaching forgiveness and absolution while Buddhism is the major world religion and teaches that protesting government decisions only brings suffering, or Mithraism would be the main one and we’d get a version that emphasizes adherence to law. There’s nothing that cannot be twisted to justify power doing as it pleases.

hey uhhh but fr the concept of fallen angels existing but risen demons being an impossibility is kind of a great summary of sin in christianity

[tregomountainear]

Student Papers by Martin Luther King

I accidentally ran across a couple of student papers written by Martin Luther King during the 1949-50 school year.  The first was a brief paper “A Study of Mithraism” “A Study of Mithraism” | The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute and the second included the research on the first and is titled “The Influence of Mystery Religions on Christianity.”  “The Influence of the…