The Devil Did It

Mithraism was so popular in the Roman Empire and so similar in important aspects to Christianity that several Church fathers were compelled to address it, disparagingly of course. For example, in his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr acknowledged the mysteries of Mithra and claimed in chapter LXX that they were "distorted from the prophecies of Daniel and Isaiah":

And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words?

Martyr does not maintain that the Mithraic mysteries were copied from Christianity; his appeal to "prophecies" purportedly written centuries before is a tacit admission that Roman Mithraism, with rites already developed and known by his time, preceded Christianity. Martyr's suggestion also implies that the Mithraists knew the Jewish scriptures, which is improbable, unless those who created Mithraic rituals were Jews. Even in the time of the emperor Vespasian, it was difficult, if not impossible, for a non-Jew (goy) to get his hands on the scriptures. In fact, it is alleged that one of the reasons for the befriending of Josephus and for the destruction of Jerusalem was the emperor's desire to procure copies of the Jewish holy books or Torah. In the Talmud (Sanhedrin 59a), it is debated whether or not a goy who reads the Torah should be put to death. In any case, Martyr is clearly indicating that Mithraic ritual preceded Christianity, in his attempted explanation that their existence was the result of "prophecies."

As regards the Eucharist in specific, Martyr says in his First Apology (LXVI):

And this food is called among us Eucharistia, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body"; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood"; and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

As noted, the phrase "which are called Gospels" is evidently an interpolation, as it not only is extraneous and gratuitous to the subject matter of the rest of the paragraph but is also the only time the term "Gospels" is found in Justin's works. Furthermore, the quotes Justin cites from the "memoirs," which are ostensibly the text called the "Memoirs of the Apostles" discussed earlier, differ from any found in the canonical gospels, such as at Luke 22:19. (It would seem that both Luke and Martyr used the same source, possibly the Gospel of the Hebrews, for this scripture. In-depth analysis is provided by Cassels.)

In any case, Martyr implies here that this Mithraic sacrament preceded Christianity and was not copied from the latter, since the "devil did it" argument is generally, if not always, used to explain away the similarities between Christianity and pre-Christian Paganism. If human beings had merely copied Christian rites and myths, why would Martyr not say so but instead irrationally ascribe the deed to a supernatural agency, thus putting himself at risk for incredulity and ridicule for what is now nearly two thousand years? According to Graves, the pious Faber interpreted Justin as admitting that the Mithraic eucharist predated Christianity, saying:

The devil led the heathen to anticipate Christ with respect to several things, as the mysteries of the Eucharist, etc. "And this very solemnity (says St. Justin) the evil spirit introduced into the mysteries of Mithra." (Reeves, Justin, p. 86)

Additionally, in The Prescription Against Heretics, Tertullian acknowledges the similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, in their use of baptism, a mark upon the forehead, the resurrection, the crown, etc. Like Martyr, of course, he blames these similarities on the devil, rather than admitting that Christianity took them from Mithraism:

Chapter XL.-No Difference in the Spirit of Idolatry and of Heresy. In the Rites of Idolatry, Satan Imitated and Distorted the Divine Institutions of the Older Scriptures. The Christian Scriptures Corrupted by Him in the Perversions of the Various Heretics.

The question will arise, By whom is to be interpreted the sense of the passages which make for heresies? By the devil, of course, to whom pertain those wiles which pervert the truth, and who, by the mystic rites of his idols, vies even with the essential portions of the sacraments of God. He, too, baptizes somethat is, his own believers and faithful followers; he promises the putting away of sins by a layer (of his own); and if my memory still serves me, Mithra there, (in the kingdom of Satan) sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers; celebrates also the oblation of bread, and introduces an image of a resurrection, and before a sword wreathes a crown. What also must we say to (Satan's) limiting his chief priest to a single marriage? He, too, has his virgins; he, too, has his proficients in continence. Suppose now we revolve in our minds the superstitions of Numa Pompilius [legendary king of Rome, 8^th-7^th century BCE], and consider his priestly offices and badges and privileges, his sacrificial services, too, and the instruments and vessels of the sacrifices themselves, and the curious rites of his expiations and vows: is it not clear to us that the devil imitated the well-known moroseness of the Jewish law? Since, therefore he has sown such emulation in his great aim of expressing, in the concerns of his idolatry, those very things of which consists the administration of Christ's sacraments, it follows, of course, that the same being, possessing still the same genius, both set his heart upon, and succeeded in, adapting to his profane and rival creed the very documents of divine things and of the Christian saints

Here Tertullian is acknowledging the resemblances between Mithraism, Paganism in general, and Christianity, using as an example some rites also similar that date back to the time of Numa Pompilius, eight centuries before the Christian era. Yet, Tertullian claims that these similarities were in imitation of the Jewish law, that Satan had "imitated and distorted the Divine Institutions" of the "Older Scriptures" or Torah. As stated, non-Jews could not readily know such things; hence, it must have been the apparently omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent devil, who is constantly getting the better of God!

In On Baptism, Tertullian describes baptism in the Roman Empire, but insists that it too is diabolical:

"Well, but the nations, who are strangers to all understanding of spiritual powers, ascribe to their idols the imbuing of waters with the self-same efficacy." (So they do) but they cheat themselves with waters which are widowed. For washing is the channel through which they are initiated into some sacred ritesof some notorious Isis or Mithras. The gods themselves likewise they honour by washings. Moreover, by carrying water around, and sprinkling it, they everywhere expiate country-seats, houses, temples, and whole cities: at all events, at the Apollinarian and Eleusinian games they are baptized; and they presume that the effect of their doing that is their regeneration and the remission of the penalties due to their perjuries. Among the ancients, again, whoever had defiled himself with murder, was wont to go in quest of purifying waters. Therefore, if the mere nature of water, in that it is the appropriate material for washing away, leads men to flatter themselves with a belief in omens of purification, how much more truly will waters render that service through the authority of God, by whom all their nature has been constituted! If men think that water is endued with a medicinal virtue by religion, what religion is more effectual than that of the living God? Which fact being acknowledged, we recognise here also the zeal of the devil rivalling the things of God, while we find him, too, practising baptism in his subjects.

Obviously, this baptism, so extensively carried out, was the order of the day long before Christianity had any influence. As stated, baptism is a pre-Christian rite, found in India and Egypt, dating back thousands of years. How, then, did Mithraism take it from Christianity?

Another one of these devilish nuisances to Christian apologists is the Mithraic mark upon the forehead, a rite similar to that within Catholicism. In The Chaplet (De Corona), Tertullian comments on the "mimicry of martyrdom," as well as the crown and the mark of Mithraism, and says:

Let us take note of the devices of the devil, who is wont to ape some of God's things with no other design than, by the faithfulness of his servants, to put us to shame, and to condemn us.

The mark on the forehead as a sign of religious respect is well known to have been used in India for millennia. Even the Bible records Ezekiel (9:4) as marking the foreheads of the "righteous":

And the Lord said to him, "Go through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it."

Concerning this Jewish mark, Lundy states:

The cross was marked on the foreheads of the men of Jerusalem that were to be spared from destruction, in Ezekiel's time, for it was tau [T]; (9:4-6) it was stamped on valuable documents, coins, and on the necks of camels and thighs of horses; it was woven into garments; and in various other ways it was used before the Christian era as a symbol of ownership, of safety and of solemn compact.

O'Brien says that the Jewish mark was the "cross X," as admitted by Jerome. Concerning this mark, the Catholic Encyclopedia relates:

Thus the Greek letter (tau or thau) appears in Ezechiel (ix, 4), according to St. Jerome and other Fathers, as a solemn symbol of the Cross of Christ"Mark Thau upon the foreheads of the men that sigh." The only other symbol of crucifixion indicated in the Old Testament is the brazen serpent in the Book of Numbers (xxi, 8-9). Christ Himself thus interpreted the passage: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up" (John, iii, 14). The Psalmist predicts the piercing of the hands and the feet (Ps. xxi. 17).

Nevertheless, despite its presence in Judaism, a Protestant Christian website protests that the sign of the cross itself is Satanic, representing a Mithraic ritual that has erroneously found its way into Christianity:

After baptism into the Mysteries of Mithra, the initiate was marked on the forehead. The sign of the cross formed by the elliptic and the celestial equator was one of the signs of Mithra.

There is no Biblical support for the inclusion of Mithraic ritual, which is the worship of Satan, in the worship of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Creator of heaven and earth. It is a Satanic scheme to disguise the transgression of Gods laws under the title of "Christianity."

While the writer wishes to denigrate all religions other than an imagined "pure Christianity," he nonetheless clearly contends that Christianity, or Catholicism in specific, took from Mithraism, and not vice versa. Obviously, the cross would not have been copied by Paganism from Christianity, as it is an ancient sacred symbol that pre-dated the Christian era by centuries and millennia. In fact, the cross was the "universal symbol of life and immortality," as well as of the sun god, entirely appropriate for Mithra.

In Contra Celsus (VI, c. XXII), Origen quotes Celsus as relating the Mithraic mysteries, which included the soul's movements through the seven heavenly spheres. This celestial soul-cleansing "ladder" begins with the leaden Saturn and ends with the golden sun. The Persian theology, says Origen, also includes "musical realms." From Origen's condemnation of Celsus, it is evident that Celsus compared Mithraism with Judaism and Christianity, apparently accusing the latter two of copying the Persian religion. In book VI, Origen says:

For the mysteries of Mithras do not appear to be more famous among the Greeks than those of Eleusis, or than those in Aegina, where individuals are initiated in the rites of Hecate. But if he [Celsus] must introduce barbarian mysteries with their explanation, why not rather those of the Egyptians, which are highly regarded by many, or those of the Cappadocians regarding the Comanian Diana, or those of the Thracians, or even those of the Romans themselves, who initiate the noblest members of their senate? But if he deemed it inappropriate to institute a comparison with any of these, because they furnished no aid in the way of accusing Jews or Christians, why did it not also appear to him inappropriate to adduce the instance of the mysteries of Mithras?

Ironically, the prolific and highly influential Origen--considered one of the best educated of the early apologists--was later himself condemned as a "heretic"; yet, the church continued to use his writings to gain converts.

Another early Christian author who writes about the analogous elements found in both Paganism and Christianity, and attributes these resemblances to the devil, was Julius Firmicus Maternus (4^th cent.). It is apparent from Firmicus's contentions that he believed the mysteries to have been prefigured by the devil. In other words, they anticipated Christianity.

Regarding claims that followers of Mithra copied Christianity, Robertson remarks:

Of course, we are told that the Mithraic rites and mysteries were borrowed and imitated from Christianity. The refutation of this notion lies in the language of those Christian fathers who spoke of Mithraism. Three of them, as we have seen, speak of Mithraic resemblances to Christian rites as being the work of devils. Now, if the Mithraists had simply imitated the historic Christians, the obvious course for the latter would be simply to say so. But Justin Martyr expressly argues that the demons anticipated the Christian mysteries and prepared parodies of them beforehand. "When I hear," he says, "that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this." Nobody now pretends that the Perseus myth, or the Pagan virgin myth in general, is later than Christianity.

Guignebert concurs that Mithraism did not imitate Christianity:

Is there any need to draw attention to the striking points of resemblance between these various rites, even if regarded superficially, and the baptism and the eucharist of the Christians? The Fathers of the Church did not fail to note these resemblances. From the first to the fifth centuries, from St. Paul to St. Augustine, there is abundant testimony to prove that they were struck by them. They explained them in their own way, however. They said the devil had sought to imitate the Christ, and that the practices of the Church had served as model for the Mysteries. This cannot now be maintained.

Concerning the "devil did it" excuse, Dupuis comments:

This may be an excellent reason for certain Christians, such as there are plenty in our days, but an extremely paltry one for men of common sense. As far as we are concerned, we, who do not believe in the Devilwe shall simply observe that the religion of Christ, founded like all the others on the worship of the Sun, has preserved the same dogmas, the same practices, the same mysteries or very nearly so; that everything has been in common; because the God was the same; that there were only the accessories, which could differ, but that the basis was absolutely the same.

Furthermore, a Pagan could just as easily have retorted that the lying devil, desiring to destroy the true faith, plagiarized Paganism in order to create Christianity.

Concerning the "devil did it" argument, in The Worship of Nature Sir Frazer remarks:

If the Mithraic mysteries were indeed a Satanic copy of a divine original, we are driven to conclude that Christianity took a leaf out of the devil's book when it fixed the birth of the Saviour on the twenty-fifth of December; for there can be no doubt that the day in question was celebrated as the birthday of the Sun by the heathen before the Church, by an afterthought, arbitrarily transferred the Nativity of its Founder from the sixth of January to the twenty-fifth of December.

The germane elements of Mithraism are known to have preceded Christianity by hundreds to thousands of years; thus, even if "Roman" Mithraism were not earlier than Christianity, these concepts nonetheless existed in other relhigions, sects, cults, etc., prior to the Christian era. In fact, these various elements were clearly developed over a period of centuries, if not millennia, becoming more detailed and refined, depending on the era and need. As Doherty says:

Cults do not form overnight, nor do the ideas underlying their rites and myths spring fully into being at one moment. The basic concepts and practices of the mysteries were ancient. They undergirded much of the religious expression of the era.

Regardless of attempts to make Mithraism the plagiarist of Christianity, the fact will remain that Mithraism was first, well established decades before Christianity had any significant influence. If Christian apologists will not yield to the well-attested assertion that Christianity "borrowed" from Mithraism in specific, they simply cannot deny that both copied from Paganism in general, from one or more of the numerous religions, cults and mysteries of the pre-Christian world. Hence, the effect is the same: Christianity took its godman and tenets from Paganism.

Concerning the various similarities and the defenses of the Church fathers, the author of The Existence of Christ Disproved remarks:

Augustine, Firmicus, Justin, Tertullian, and others, having perceived the exact resemblance between the religion of Christ and the religion of Mithra, did, with an impertinence only to be equalled by its outrageous absurdity, insist that the devil, jealous and malignant, induced the Persians to establish a religion the exact image of Christianity that was to be--for these worthy saints and sinners of the church could not deny that the worship of Mithra preceded that of Christ--so that, to get out of the ditch, they summoned the devil to their aid, and with the most astonishing assurance, thus accounted for the striking similarity between the Persian and the Christian religion, the worship of Mithra and the worship of Christ; a mode of getting rid of a difficulty that is at once so stupid and absurd, that it would be almost equally stupid and absurd seriously to refute it.

© 2006 Acharya S.