RE: Mithra

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Mon Apr 04 2005 - 19:42:15 EDT

Commonality isn't the issue. Truth is. Which one is true. They are not
identical and unless theology is infinitely plastic, but acceptable at
the same time regardless of what the differences are, they probably
can't both be true at the same time. A and not-A are hardly ever true at
the same time.

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dick Fischer
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 10:42 AM
To: ASA
Subject: RE: Mithra

I think you have to look at the commonalities and decide whether or not
there is a link or it is simply a coincidence. For my taste, there are
too many points of commonality for me to believe there is no
relationship of some kind. I know, for example, that the Accadians
believed in three gods at the inception, only becoming polytheistic
through their association with the Sumerians. So a "trinity" associated
with Mithra doesn't surprise me at all if there is a Semitic influence.
Viewing Mithra as a precursor religion based upon Semitic prophecy is at
least a possible explanation if you believe a common link exists. If
you don't see enough commonalities to convince you of a significance,
well then, you don't see them.
 
Dick Fischer
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
Received on Mon Apr 4 19:43:01 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 04 2005 - 19:43:01 EDT