Mark Tabata’s Weekday Devotionals:
Monday January 26 2026
Jesus Versus Mithras
(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)
To Receive These (And Other) Free Bible Studies And Updates Via Email, Contact Mark Tabata @ 606-216-1757 (Text Message) Or hazardhomecoc@gmail.com (Email)
2 Peter 2:1-But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.
Sam (not his real name) had become an atheist while in high school. His indoctrination to the Darwinian theory of macroevolution, coupled with the death of several loved ones in his early life, had begun to create within his heart a doubt in the existence of God. When he and I first started studying, we dealt with these issues in detail.
But then, Sam explained to me one of the biggest reasons why he rejected faith in the God of creation, in the Bible, and in Jesus Christ.
We were having Bible study at a local Mexican restaurant when we had the following exchange.
Sam: Dude, Christians ripped everything they believe off of the pagans.
Mark: Really? I would like to see some evidence of that. Can you provide a few examples?
Sam: Mithras. Everyone knows that Mithras existed before Jesus Christ. According to the ancient texts of Mithraism, Mithras was born of a virgin in a manger and there were shepherds there! The Christians stole that from the pagan religions and added it into the Bible!
(End Of Relevant Conversation)
What Sam was describing is a very popular theory that many in our world have adopted. It has been espoused by many religious scholars in America, and multitudes accept it without looking any further into the matter.
Thankfully, after Sam and I studied on these issues and examined evidences that the Bible is the Word of God, it was my privilege to baptize him into Christ.
But what shall we make of the “copycat theory” as it is often called?
Let’s study.
First, that there have been many parallels between Christianity and other religions through the years is not some kind of new discovery. This was discussed often throughout the early centuries of Christianity, and easily refuted. Near the end of the second century A.D., the pagan philosopher Celsus accused the Christians of stealing the stories of Danae and the Melanippe in fabricating the account of the virgin birth of Jesus! The early Christians dealt with these arguments, in the same way that we do today. Christians have nothing to fear from these types of attacks against the faith.
Second, the evidence shows that in most of the cases where it is argued that Christians borrowed their teachings from the pagans, the reverse is true: the pagans actually stole their ideas from the Bible! Machen pointed this out in reminding us that many of the alleged pagan influences on Christianity come long after Christianity had been established.
“The hypothesis is faced by one obvious difficulty. The difficulty appears in the late date of most of the sources of information. In order to reconstruct that Hellenized oriental mysticism from which the religion of Paul is to be derived, the investigator is obliged to appeal to sources which are long subsequent to Paul’s day. For example, in reproducing the spiritual atmosphere in which Paul is supposed to have lived, no testimony is more often evoked than the words of Firmicus Maternus, “Be of good courage, ye initiates, since the god is saved; for to us there shall be salvation out of troubles.”[157] Here, it is thought, is to be found that connection between the resurrection of the god and the salvation of the believers which appears in the Pauline idea of dying and rising with Christ. But the trouble is that Firmicus Maternus lived in the fourth century after Christ, three hundred years later than Paul. With what right can an utterance of his be used in the reconstruction of pre-Christian paganism? What would be thought, by the same scholars who quote Firmicus Maternus so confidently as a witness to first-century paganism, of a historian who should quote a fourth-century Christian writer as a witness to first-century Christianity?…Every step is uncertain. In the first place, it is often by no means clear that the pagan usage has not been influenced by Christianity. The Church did not long remain obscure; even early in the second century, according to the testimony of Pliny, it was causing the heathen temples to be deserted. What is more likely than that in an age of syncretism the adherents of pagan religion should borrow weapons from so successful a rival? It must be remembered that the paganism of the Hellenistic age had elevated syncretism to a system; it had absolutely no objection of principle against receiving elements from every source. In the Christian Church, on the other hand, there was a strong objection to such procedure; Christianity from the beginning was like Judaism in being exclusive. It regarded with the utmost abhorrence anything that was tainted by a pagan origin. This abhorrence, at least in the early period, more than overbalanced the fact that the Christians for the most part had formerly been pagans, so that it might be thought natural for them to retain something of pagan belief. Conversion involved a passionate renunciation of former beliefs. Such, at any rate, was clearly the kind of conversion that was required by Paul.” (John Gresham Machen, The Origin of Paul’s Religion, 3716-3738 (Kindle Edition): New York, NY: The Macmillan Company)
This really shows up in the alleged parallels between Christ and Mithras. Lee Strobel shared a conversation he had with renowned scholar Edwin M. Yamauchi on the topic.
“I pulled out a list of parallels between Jesus and Mithras. “First, popular writers claim that Mithras was born of a virgin,” I said. “Is that true that this was what Mithraism taught?” Yamauchi looked pained. “No, that’s definitely not true,” he insisted. “He was born out of a rock.” “A rock?” “Yes, the rock birth is commonly depicted in Mithraic reliefs,” he explained. “Mithras emerges fully grown and naked except for a Phrygian cap, and he’s holding a dagger and torch. In some variations, flames shoot out from the rock, or he’s holding a globe in his hand.” I chuckled. “So unless the rock is considered a virgin, this parallel with Jesus evaporates,” I said. “Entirely correct,” he said. “And that means he wasn’t born in a cave, which some writers claim is a second parallel to Christianity.” “Well, it is true that Mithraic sanctuaries were designed to look like caves,” Yamauchi said. “Gary Lease discusses that in his chapter on Mithraism and Christianity….Returning to my list, I said to Yamauchi: “The third supposed parallel with Jesus is that Mithras was born on December 25.” “Again, that’s not a parallel,” he replied. “Why not?” “Because we don’t know the date Jesus was born,” he said. “The earliest date celebrated by Christians was January 6—in fact, it’s still celebrated by many churches in the East. Of course, December 25 is very close to the winter solstice. This was the date chosen by the emperor Aurelian for the dedication of his temple to Sol Invictus, the god called the ‘Unconquerable Sun.’ Mithras was closely associated with Sol Invictus; sometimes they’re depicted shaking hands. This is apparently how Mithras became associated with December 25.” “When did that date become Christmas for Christians?” “That seems to be in 336, a year before the death of Constantine, the first Roman emperor to embrace Christianity. We know that before his conversion, he worshiped Sol Invictus. We know for sure that Constantine made Sunday, or the Lord’s Day, an official holiday, even though Christians had already been observing it as the day on which Jesus was resurrected. So it’s conceivable Constantine also may have appropriated December 25 for the birthday of Christ. We know that Christian emperors and popes suggested that instead of simply banning pagan ceremonies that they appropriate them for Christianity.”45 “What about the fourth parallel that Mithras was a great traveler or master with twelve disciples?” “No—he was a god, not a teacher,” Yamauchi replied, sounding a bit impatient. “The fifth parallel is that his followers were promised immortality.” “Well, that can be inferred, but certainly that was the hope of most followers of any religion,” he said. “So that’s not surprising.” “How about the sixth claim, which says that Mithras sacrificed himself for world peace?” Yamauchi sighed. “That’s reading Christian theology into what’s not there. He didn’t sacrifice himself—he killed a bull.” “The seventh parallel—and one of the most important—is that Mithras was buried in a tomb and rose after three days,” I said. “Is there any truth to that?” “We don’t know anything about the death of Mithras,” Yamauchi said firmly. “We have a lot of monuments, but we have almost no textual evidence, because this was a secret religion. But I know of no references to a supposed death and resurrection.” Indeed, Richard Gordon declared in his book Image and Value in the Greco-Roman World that there is “no death of Mithras”—and thus, there cannot be a resurrection.46 I went on, though I had a feeling I could guess his replies. “Eight, Mithras was considered the Good Shepherd, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, the Logos, the Redeemer, the Savior.” “No, again that’s reading Christian theology into this.”…One by one, the grandiose claims that Christianity copied itself after Mithraism had been convincingly swept away by solid scholarship. It was staggering to me that writers could so irresponsibly—or maliciously—make claims about parallels that simply are not accurate….“There’s no evidence of Mithraism influencing first-century Christianity. Far from assimilating Mithraism, the church fathers—from Justin Martyr to Tertullian—denounced Mithraism as a satanic imitation.” (Edwin M. Yamauchi, PH.D., in Lee Strobel, The Case For The Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ, 170-176 (Kindle Edition): Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan)
Third, the alleged parallels fail in that the New Testament Scriptures are concerned with writing accurate history, while the pagan stories are simply retelling religious mythology.
Luke 1:1-4-Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.
While we are thinking on the historical reliability of Scripture, we would be wise to consider the words of former atheist, Jay Warner Wallace. Subjecting the Gospels to a rigorous examination by using modern forensic investigative techniques honed by a lifetime of experience as a homicide detective, Wallace was amazed to learn that the Gospels are indeed reliable history!
“It turns out my expectations of true, reliable eyewitness accounts were met (at least preliminarily and superficially) by the Gospels. All four accounts were written from different perspectives containing unique details specific to the eyewitnesses. They can, however, be assembled and connected to get a robust picture of what occurred. All four accounts are highly personal, utilizing the distinctive language of each witness. Mark is far more passionate and active in his choice of adjectives, for example. Several of the accounts (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) contain blocks of identical (or nearly identical) descriptions. This may be the result of common agreement at particularly important points in the narrative, or (more likely) the result of later eyewitnesses saying, “The rest occurred just the way he said.” Finally, the last account (John’s gospel) clearly attempts to fill in the details neglected by the prior eyewitnesses. John, aware of what the earlier eyewitnesses had already written, appears to make little effort to cover the same ground. Even before examining the Gospels with the rigor we will apply in section 2, I recognized they were consistent with what I would expect to see, given my experience as a detective.” (J. Warner Wallace, Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates The Claims Of The Gospels, 87-88 (Kindle Edition): Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook)
The alleged pagan parallels are no challenge to the historical reliability of the New Testament.
What can we do to help others see the reliability of the New Testament and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ?
Thanks Lord for Your tried and proven Word. Amen.