idahojeri

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I just finished "The Jews of Ancient Rome" by Harry Leon. THought you might be interested in what I picked up: The Jews were lucky when they backed Julius Caesar. Always one to shower benefits on those who helped him, Caesar granted them some great privileges (Josephus gives us the whole list in his "Antiquities"). They were allowed to practice their religion, which was the main benefit. Also, they even had their own courts of justice in many cities, and their men were exempted from serving in the army. Christians tried to claim status as Jews in the early years since the Jews had so many benefits. The Jews in ROme were mostly clustered around the Transiberine section. Jews tended to cluster together because their food was different, and their holidays. Jews from this section buried their dead in the catacombs. Those who had been archons, gerusiarch, archisunagogus, etc. were noted in their funeral incriptions. Of the 544 inscriptions Leon mentions 405 were in Greek, 123 in Latin, and only 3 in Hebrew and 1 in Aramaic. Many of the inscriptions had errors in grammar or spelling. Yet even for all their benefits the Jews, within the next hundred years or so, had two violent uprisings against the Romans. The first was surely the worst, It ended in 70 AD and the destruction of the Jewish temple. With the loss of the temple, the Jewish priesthood ended. In order to become a priest you had to have proof of your family in the scrolls that were kept in the temple So there were no more high priest, no more sacrifices. Sorry, this is getting too long. But it's interesting, isn't it? Blessings, Jeri

Incredible picture. Wonder if this is the equipment Tertullian wrote about in 203 "a flexible frame for opening the uterus...futher furnished with an anular blade..its last appendage being a blunted or covered hook, wherewith the entire fetus is extracted by a violent delivery. There is also a copper needle or spike by which the actual death is managed." (A Treastise on the Sout, 25) Anyone know of any studies about abortion and the death of Roman women? Rodney Stark mentions that abortion was a leading cause of death, which I believe he bases upon an essay? book? by Gorman. Blessings, Jeri

... or, indeed, whether or not Paul's letters to these people were supposed to apply to the rest of us, or whether he was speaking to those people only, making references to the particular cultures he was talking to. interesting debate. I have been reading and reading for years on the subject and hardly feel I have a toe hold. Yet I am always struck every time I read Ignatius (110 AD). 1 Clement (95 AD) and the Didache (variously put at 50-150 AD) how completely they mirror orthodox Christian views of today. Any good books on ancient civilization you really enjoyed? or that you thought were especially insightful? I just finished "Restless Youth in Rome" which was pretty good, but hardly answered all my questions on the subject. Blessings, Jeri

The first time anyone mentioned the Catholic church was in 110 Ad. Ignatius of Antioch (in his epistles) wrote: "Wherever the bishop appears, let the congrregation be present; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic church". Blessings, Jeri

[ [quthem.[/i] W The notion of Christianity not being even remotely similar to and/or influenced by the Mystery religions is complete rubbish. Then you disagree with thousands and thousands of scholars who have investigated the idea. No influence has ever been found. Rather, the evidence is all on the other side. The idea of Christianity struck the Roman world like a bomb. Within some 30 years after Christ's death "vast multitudes" of them were being tortured by Nero's minions. Within another 50 year4s Pliny was moaning that the temples were deserted because of the number of Christians. Christian ideas were so powerful that mystery religons stole them--look at the Mithric cult. Look at the gnostics. Think of all the hundreds of gnostic texts that stole Christian names--ie the gospel of Judas--no doubt to add a gloss to them. Why do you think the gnostic were so desperate to add Christian titles and Christian symbolism to their cults? Certainly not because Christianity was so unpopular. Think for a moment of what Christianity offered. A meaning to life in the vast, cold nothingness of Greek philosphy. The idea that there was an ultimate right and wrong, and that, eventually, all wrongs would be made right. Must have sounded pretty good to the poor. And then, of course, there was that promise of eternal life. Pretty heady stuff, compared to the cold, pale Greek philosphies or the majic and nonsense world of the mystery religions. No wonder Christianity conquered. Blessings, Jeri

o At least one section of Jesus' followers, under James (the brother of Christ) remained within or strongly associated with Judaism (and in Jerusalem). I am puzzled by your conclusion here. There was constant travel between the different Christian groups, not to mention a council in Jerusalem, to mitigate against any difference in belief between the groups. According to the information we have, James was not a believer in Jesus until after the resurrection. Then he became a believer. Also, his bleliefs could hardly have been in great conformity with the Jews, since they killed him in 62 AD. Blessings, Jeri [ It is here that the advocates of views partly enshrined in the da Vinci Code and elsewhere have a strong point - as a Jewish man of his time, it would be very likely that Jesus conformed (ie married etc) else he would have been outside convention and unlikely to find an audience, let alone be called rabbi. And the gospels are silent on the subject of his marital status or celibacy - interesting if he believed in something markedly different from the norm. I cite this here solely to demonstrate that that Jesus does not himself appear to have preached a radical message in any way ezxcept seeking personal moral reform of the individual. There were a number of groups of celibate Jews. The Essenes, for example Also those who took the Nazrite oath. i It It is only when we see the activities of Paul, and his tremendous journies (see how little time he spent in Palestine) that we see the mystic element in Christianity being emphasised. While there is no mention of "initiation" in the sense of a ceremony, the whole thrust of paul's teaching is that there is a mental, spiritual real, metaphysical and mysterious. I would argue, packaging it for the Hellenistic audiences in the great c Oh for a time machine!! I think we might be in for a few surprises if we went back. Phil Dear Phil, yes, Paul went on many journeys. The entire Christian community seems to have been on the move during the first 80 years of Christianity. Again and again Paul mentions those who are visiting from Jerusalem or from other cities. How could Paul have been teaching anything different from what was being taught in the other cities if there were these constant journeys? I love the time machine idea. Blessings, Jerii

As a Pagan I've always loved pointing out how the date of Christmas was an appropriation from the commemoration of the temple of Sol Invictus. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif) The earliest date for celebrating Christ's birth was May 20th according to Clement of Alexandria, circa 200 AD. However, many Christians were upset at the idea of celebrating Christ's birth, since birthdays were a pagan custom. Origen was very much against the idea. During the next two hundred years 7 different dates were suggested. The one that was agreed on, was, indeed, Dec. 25th. This was not because Christians didn't know the difference between the celebration of Sol Invictus and Christ's birthday. Hardly. It was a piece of pure triumphalism. [ t is here that the advocates of views partly enshrined in the da Vinci Code and elsewhere have a strong point - as a Jewish man of his time, it would be very likely that Jesus conformed (ie married etc) else he would have been outside convention and unlikely to find an audience, let alone be called rabbi.l Some temple Age Jews did practice celibacy, such as the Essenes and those who had taken the Nazartie oath.

Could you please post the quotes for these ? I can remember Pliny saying nothing like this ? First quote--Tacitus in the Annals says "Nero fastened the guilt...on a class...called Christians...an immense multitude was convicted...Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illunination...Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle". Second quote--from Pliny the Younger, in his tenth book, written around Ad 112. The letter is very long but says, among other things, that the pagan temples had been nearly deserted and 'sacrificial animals had few buyers". Pliny had two female slaves who were deaconesses in the church tortured to obtain information about Christianity. Only if the Christian denied Christ and "repeated after me an invocation to the gods, and offered adoration ...to your (Trajan's image) were they to be let go"; otherwise, they were killed.. Pliny explained that his purpose in all this was that "multitudes may be reclaimed from error". Blessings

Hi. I am simply reporting what 100 years of scholarship has found. There are hundreds, even thousands, of books and studies on the subject. No one was able to find a connection, either in the texts that are available (admittedly scanty) or in any archeological site. The earliest Mithric cult site, for example, is about 170. THere are no traces of it in Pompeii. On the contrary, all the influence was on the other side. Christianity appears to have exploded like bomb in the Roman world. Within thirty years or so after Christ's death "vast multitudes" of them were killed by Nero. By 112 Pliny was complaining that all the pagan temples were deserted because of the number of converts. By 150 the Roman world was awash in gnostic texts, Christian persecutions, and the arguing hasn't stopped since then. As for why the mystery religions didn't influence Christianity, from the very beginning participation of any kind of activity to any god except Christ was forbidden. Paul makes this very clear in Corinthians 10. He allowed for no flexibility at all. He says pagan sacrifices are offered to "to demons and not to God". Partcipation of any kind of cultic activity was regarded as idolatry and was condemned in the harshest terms. And all the other early writings are equally strong on this point. Blessings.

Phil, great questions. Were the scholars influenced by what they wanted to find? Biblical scholarship is pretty well divided into pro-God and anti-God types. If there was even the smallest proof that the mystery religons created/influenced Christianity the anti-God squad would be proclaiming it from the rooftops. I am talking about people like Elaine Pagels. Pagels' most famous book title pretty well sums up her attitude: 'Beyond Belief". Or people like John Crossan. Crossan is a fallen away Catholic priest who has spent the last thirty years writing books in an effort to squash Christianity like a bug. He's one of the founders of the Jesus Seminar. Ever heard of it? Anyway, my point is that there are a legion of atheist scholars out there trying to prove Christianity false, and they would be delighted if they could find proof that the Roman mystery religions influenced Christianity. . The anti-God scholars did give it their best, for about 100 years. Some of the stumbling blocks they ran into: Paul. Paul's first letter was written about 20 years after the death of Christ. Not a lot of time for "influence" of any kind to seep in. A huge number of people who knew Christ were still alive. Facts could be checked. Next, archeological and historical evidence. As I mentioned before, the very earliest site for the Roman-style Mithric cult is about 170 or so. This was about the same time that the gnostics were feverishly pouring out writings heavily influenced by Christianity (like the recent gospel of Judas discovery). Now, put that together with Tacitus' famous mention of the "vast multitudes" of Christians who were killed by Nero, and Pliny's letter in 112 in which he complains that the pagan temples are deserted because so many people had converted. All these things suggest that the Romans--at least a large number of them--were influenced by Christianity. But proof that Christianity had been influenced by the mystery religons? As hard as they looked, the anti-God types couldn't find anything. I think the only book on the market on this subject is "The Gospel and the Greeks". It goes into much more detail than my quick sketch here, and could probably answer most of your questions. Otherwise, if you are interested in hearing the various arguments, you may have to go back to books written over 50 years or so. Innerlibrary loans may be your only bet (and we all know what a pain innerlibrary loans are). Sorry. However, I have a copy of "The Gospel and the Greeks". I'd be glad to look up anything I can for you. I'm afraid I don't have any of Edwin Yamouchi's books. They are very expensive now. Blessings,

I am sorry--I must not have been very clear. Mithraism was a small cult in Iran. Mithra was the twin brother of the Zoroastrain god Ahura Mazda. However, although this formed the original kernal for the cult, it had little to do with the Mithraism that was so popular in the Roman military. That cult, which apparently borrowed much of its trappings and ethical content from early Christianity, was very different indeed. M. J. Vermaseren, who wrote about the excavations on Mithraism at Dura, suggested that there were no Mithraic sites that could be dated earlier than 168. There are none, for example, in Pompeii. My point was merely that there are no instances of mystery religions influencing Christianity, at least none that 100 years of scholarship could find. There are, however, as in the Mithric cult, instances of Christianity influencing mystery religions. I hope I've made it clear this time! Sorry for the confusion-- Blessings, I am sorry--I must not have been very clear. Mithraism was a small cult in Iran. Mithra was the twin brother of the Zoroastrain god Ahura Mazda. However, although this formed the original kernal for the cult, it had little to do with the Mithraism that was so popular in the Roman military. That cult, which apparently borrowed much of its trappings and ethical content from early Christianity, was very different indeed. M. J. Vermaseren, who wrote about the excavations on Mithraism at Dura, suggested that there were no Mithraic sites that could be dated earlier than 168. There are none, for example, in Pompeii. My point was merely that there are no instances of mystery religions influencing Christianity, at least none that 100 years of scholarship could find. There are, however, as in the Mithric cult, instances of Christianity influencing mystery religions. I hope I've made it clear this time! Sorry for the confusion-- Blessings,

I am very surprised that no one has brought up the evidence of the biblical scholars who studied the influence of the mystery religons on Christianity. Entire forests were felled to create the thousands and thousands of books on the subject. Of course, these books were written some time ago. As Nash writes, "During a period of time running roughly from about 1890 to 1940, scholars often alleged that primitive Christianity had been heavily inluenced by Platonism, Stoicism, the pagan mystery religons, or other movements". The reason that bible scholars stopped writing about it was that archeological and literary evidence proved the exact oppostie. Not only was Christianity not influenced by the mystery religions, instead, Christianity became a huge influence on the mystery religions, especially Mithraism. As Nash puts it, "Today, most bible scholars regard the question as a dead issue". Anyone interested in the subject will want to read Ronald Nash's "The Gospel and the Greeeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought?". It's a readable book (unlike many books on biblical scholarship) and it's just about the only book on the market on this subject still in print. The others are all only to be found gathering dust in libraries. Edwin Yamauchi is considered the greatest scholar on the subject, buy his books are all now out of print. About Mithraism: all evidence points to it being a small cult in Iran. Only much later, after it had borrowed a number of beliefs from Christianity, did it succeed in growing in Rome. There are so many books written on the subject I hardly know where to begin, but anyone interested in a list can email me. notw ...d'on

Jewish laws from the time of Moses forbade abortion and infanticide. The only exception to an absolute ban on abortion was to spare the life of the mother. Of all the cultures in the ancient world, only the Jews insisted on trying to raise every child that was born. The Christians, from the very beginning, followed the same practice. They also forbade contraception, and believed that sex outside of marriage was sinful. These practices would over time produce an ever growing Christian population. I believe you are incorrect about Christians ever debating whether or not women and souls. Would you mind supplying more information about this?