Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : History's effect on Religion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (114)	5/12/2003 1:26:09 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 520

I think they should be all lumped together for the purposes of our discussion because the lumped religion is what you had during the critical parts of Christianity. As far as I am concerned, the only way you can talk about Mithraism without taking Zorastrianism into consideration is if you are talking about Mithra prior to Zarathustra. This is what you had. Mithraism...then Mithraism being incorporated within Zorastrianism ...then Mithra rising within Zorastrianism ...then Mithra breaking free from Zorastrianism being on its own again. The first and last religions are both called Mithraism. BUT, it was the latter that was the religion of Roman Emperors. To not consider the effects of Zorastrianism on that, is like discussing some Christian cult without considering the Roman Catholic Church. You just can't do that. In terms of chronology, and I am speaking from memory so don't quote me on that, the original Mithraism came about around 3500 years ago. Zorastrianism came about 600 years later. By the time Cyrus the great freed the Jews, Zorastrianism was the official religion of Persia. This coincides with the rise of Persian Empire. By this time Mithra was not a god anymore, but the arch angel patron of Emperor and Empire. A growing Persian Empire meant a growing emphasis on Mithra. But this is not the same Mithra of a 1000 years before; it is Mithra of Zorastrianism . Constant wars and conflicts between the Roman Empire and the Persian Empire also mean a cultural exchange between the two armies. As it's been pointed out, by this time it was common for Zoroastrians to invoke Mithra's name on its own. And since he was the patron of the Empire, his name more than anything else was what the Roman Legionnaires heard. This is how Mithra was transferred to Rome. In short, the Mithra that went to Rome and the rest of Europe, was not the original Mithra but the one that was already highly influenced by Zorastrianism . And this is why it is wrong to separate it from Zorastrianism . ST