What are mystery religions and how (if at all) do they relate to Christianity?

The mystery religions were a special category of religion that flourished in the Roman Empire about the time Christianity made its debut. Various atheist writers and bloggers have made much of the similarities in beliefs and practices between the mystery religions and Christianity. In fact, Christianity could be considered to be a mystery religion. I spent a lot of time (Jesus Myth thread) arguing that many alleged similarities are exaggerated. Here, I’d like to explore similarities and differences, and the possible reasons for them.

 

What Were the Mystery Religions? What Caused Them?

The mystery religions (6th century B.C.E.-4th century C.E.) were an effort to find more personal, emotionally satisfying forms of religious expression than was available from the official state religions of the time. The official state religions tended to be formal and impersonal, public, expected of all citizens, and rather perfunctory in emphasizing animal sacrifice and civic ritual. Examples in the Greco-Roman world would include rites for the Olympian gods and deceased emperors worshipped as gods. In Judaism, sacrifice at the Temple in Jerusalem would be the equivalent. In contrast, the mystery religions were largely secret, highly personal and emotional, ecstatic and a matter of individual choice, binding participants together in brotherhoods and sisterhoods based on initiation.
Early Greek examples of mystery religions include the Eleusinian mysteries, the Dionysian mysteries, and the Orphic mysteries, all of which made their way to Rome after the Roman conquest of Greece. Later mystery cults arose in other parts of the world: e.g., the cult of Cybele and Attis, Isis and Serapis, and Mithras. All of the cults were active proselytizers and quite adaptable in modifying beliefs and rituals in response to market demand.

What caused mystery religions? Three conditions seem to be associated with them: (1) socio-political upheavals and accompanying personal insecurity; (2) widening of the basic political unit beyond tribal and city-state boundaries; (3) cosmopolitanism resulting from elimination of barriers to international travel and communication.; (4) possible use of hallucinogens like ergot, mushrooms, and cannabis.

 

This:

Is not congruent with this;

So either they were secretive and personal or they were overt and impressionistic. Or there is a dichotomy here of a public face versus a hidden heart. Running through both mystery religion and mainstream religion is esoteric understanding, keys to the kingdom, which is the basis for the similarities of all substantial organic religious movement.

 

Good points. But I think the statements can be reconciled. The mystery cults were certainly secretive, in that members were pledged not to disclose the fundamental mysteries of the cult. There were leaks, more prevalent in some cults than others. We know little about many of the particulars of Roman Mithraism, for example. Most of our knowledge of it is deduced from artwork. The statement about proselytization comes from S. Angus's The Mystery Religions; writiing of the Roman Empire after Augustus, he says that the religious spirit was marked ""by an aggressive religious propaganda such as no other age has surpassed. Each religion in the Roman Empire became a missionary religion; to enlarge its prestige and increase its adherents was an obligation and a privilege resting upon the humblest member" (p.9). Without disclosing the secrets, the adherents would spread the word that initiation into the mysteries would bring invaluable personal benefits to the believer. And they had a public face: processions, etc. But the sacred rituals and initiations happened in secret. That's why they're called "mystery"religions. In a way, they were the masonic lodges of the day--public face, private interior.

 

Where am I going with this?

By way of an overview as to where I'd like to go with this, I'd like to explore the middle ground between Christian apologetics, on the one hand, that denies any connection at all between early Christianity and the mystery religions; and on the other hand, the glib assertions by atheist bloggers that early Christianity was practically identical with the pagan mystery religions in virtually every detail, and "stole" it all from the pagans. In a post on a different thread, I've explored this issue in some detail, and also made a nine-point prima facie case (as yet, unrebutted) that Jesus was a real historical figure who was crucified under Pontius Pilate early in the first century C.E.

However, I think it's quite likely that similarities between the mystery religions and early Christianity were not accidental: that there may have been some mutual borrowing going on, and more importantly, that both were responses to similar conditions in the Roman Empire at the time. Christianity developed a distinctive pattern because it developed in the context of a distinctive religion, Judaism, which was quite different from pagan religions in several respects, notably: its intolerance of other beliefs, its insistence on exclusive monotheism, greater moralism, far greater emphasis on doctrine and correct beliefs, and the possession of a unique ancient book of divinely revealed knowledge-- borrowed, of course,from Judaism, but with a New Testament canon within four centuries. Christianity was a remarkably successful set of memes reflecting a marriage of two great traditions: the Greco-Roman and the Judaic. Which is why it's the largest religion in the world today (if you could call such a motley collection of diverse sects and churches a single religion). I consider myself to be a Progressive Christian heretic. So this should make me lots of enemies on both sides of the fence. Fire away!

 

many were born in the middle ages as attempted answers to the inequities of christianity in the same way that marxism was prompted by those of capitolism.

others though, both far older and some newer, are completely unrelated to it in any way.

 

[SIZE=12pt]Critics of Christianity sometimes say it was “just another” mystery religion and “stole” all of its ideas from one or more of the others. If that’s true, how is it that Christianity was so much more successful in spreading throughout the Roman Empire and leaving its rivals in the dust? The number of Christians grew from about 1000 in 40 C.E. to 5-8 million just before Constatnine’s conversion in 312 C.E..—a growth rate of about 40% per year (Starks, The rise of Christianity , p.7. Was it the power of the Holy Spirit, dumb luck, or something different about Christianity that gave it the edge? I think the latter explanation is the most plausible one. The spread of the religion was rapid, though not miraculously so—comparable to (and a little less than) that of the Mormon Church over the past century.. (Stark, p.7) What were Christianity’s advantages over the others? I think the following are notable:[/SIZE]

1. [SIZE=12pt]Missionary zeal: Christianity differed from both Judaism and pagan mystery religions in its drive to proselytize, pursuant to the Great Commission (Mat.28(16-20);[/SIZE]
2. [SIZE=12pt]The Jewish diaspora network: Christianity began its initial spread using the network of the Jewish communities spread across the urban centers of the Roman world, and especially attracting the so-called “God fearers”, Gentile Jewish-wannabees who attended synagogue services but were kept from full-fledged membership by barriers of circumcision and Jewish dietary laws;[/SIZE]
3. [SIZE=12pt]Doctrinal modification: Paul, a diaspora Jew, realizing that the greatest market for Christian converts lay with gentiles, relaxed Jewish dietary laws, the requirement of circumcision, and the emphasis on keeping the Law (works) instead of simply accepting Jesus (faith). He also preached a more universal message of love than the Jewish version.[/SIZE]
4. [SIZE=12pt]A Sacred book. Unlike the pagan mysteries, the Christians claimed the authority of a prestigious sacred book said to be divinely inspired, the Jewish Old Testament, and by the mid-100s Christians were well along in developing their own sacred canon; [/SIZE]
5. [SIZE=12pt]Reveled moralism and the love ethic. Pagan philosophers had highly developed ethics, but they were known mainly to philosophers, and were not generally demanded nor practiced by the gods. Aristotle taught that the gods could not love humans. Christians adopted Judaism’s loving God and extended it to a universalistic level;[/SIZE]
6. [SIZE=12pt]A realistic hero god portrayed as having walked the earth as a human in recent times, unlike the more remote mythical-gods of the mystery religions; Although I’ve argued that Jesus was a real person, He soon acquired attributes characteristic of pagan hero gods of the divine-king type, scoring 20 out of out of 22 points on the Rank-Raglan hero-type scale, ranking just below Oedipus and just above Theseus ; [/SIZE]
7. [SIZE=12pt]Hell. Christianity accepted and extended the belief in hell, not universally accepted by Jews (except for the Essenes and Pharisees) and foreign to most pagans (except Persian Zoroastrians, from whom the Jews probably got it.) The terror of eternal punishment for rejection of Christ’s message was a powerful incentive for conversion; [/SIZE]
8. [SIZE=12pt]Doctrine. Mystery religions were not doctrinaire. Christians provided a set of beliefs purporting to explain reality and mandating adherence to certain beliefs; [/SIZE]
9. [SIZE=12pt]Exclusiveness of m[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]embership[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]. Like the Jews, Christians did not allow membership in more than one religion, nor worship of more than one god. Pagans could belong to any number of mystery religions, which, according to Stark, tended to dilute attachments to any one of them; [/SIZE]
10. [SIZE=12pt]Broad appeal to different socio-economic strata: While Christianity began in Jerusalem as a lower-class movement of peasants and slaves, it soon acquired a following of middle class artisans and traders, and some upper class support; in that sense, it followed the pattern of cults instead of sects;[/SIZE]
11. [SIZE=12pt]Special appeal to women.: Because Christianity condemned divorce and infanticide, and emphasized a duty of marital fidelity, and treated women as equals in the early church, it attracted a large number of female members, including some of high status; These eventually often brought in their spouses and/or sons.[/SIZE]
12. [SIZE=12pt]Social services. As a practical matter, Christianity offered a variety of social benefits and services for members, including support of widows and orphans, and burials; gravediggers became prominent in Christian circles and were interrogated during the persecutions of the early fourth century;[/SIZE]
13. [SIZE=12pt]Reputations for courage and caregiving. Although persecutions of Christians were relatively sporadic in the Roman empire, they did occur, especially under Nero, Decius, Domitian, Diocletian/Galerius, Maximin, Aurelian ,and Valerian. For the most part, Christians comported themselves with dignity and courage under such pressure—a fact that greatly impressed the pagan citizenry, the example of such martyrs as Perpetua being an outstanding example. Also, during the great plagues of the second century, when over a quarter of the population died, Christians distinguished themselves in caring for their won sick and even the pagan sick.[/SIZE]
14. [SIZE=12pt]Christianity was less exotic and secretive than the other mystery religions. Much has been made of the fact that Christians were suspect for impiety toward the imperial cult in refusing to sacrifice to Caesar and the traditional gods of Rome, and that they met in catacombs.. Yet,with the exception of some Gnostic groups, they did not have secret messages known only to initiates, and they outperformed pagans in observing the traditional Roman virtues.[/SIZE]
15. [SIZE=12pt]Hellenistic-Hebraic hybrid. Most adaptive Christianity succeeded because it was the most adaptive hybrid, forging an effective synthesis of the two great cultural traditions of Western civilization: the Helenistic and the Hebraic.[/SIZE]
16. Openness. It was open to anyone. Mitraism was open only to men.
17. Organization. it was better organized than others. Even Paul felt it necessary to get his message approved by the Church leaders in Jerusalem, implying a central hierarchy lacking in other mystery religions.
18. Constantine's Conversion. Last but not least, there was Constantine's embrace of Christianity, which began the transfer of resources and prestige from the pagan temples to the Christian churches. But Stark makes the point that the Emperor's conversion "would better be seen as a response to the massive exponential wave in progress, not as its cause." By that time Christians were already the largest religious group in the empire. [SIZE=12pt]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/appeal.html ;[/SIZE] [SIZE=12pt]http://vridar.org/2010/08/27/why-christianity-spread-so-rapidly-to-become-the-main-religion-of-the-roman-empire/; http://www.unrv.com/culture/spread-christianity.php; http://www.jewishhistory.org/the-spread-of-christianity/; http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=95; http://www.unityinchrist.com/history2/print/QuotesFromRodneyStarkpprt.htm; http://www.christianity.com/blogs/trevin-wax/the-rise-of-christianity-a-summary-of-rodney-starks-proposal.html; http://bookoutlines.pbworks.com/w/page/28663569/The%20Rise%20of%20Christianity[/SIZE]

 

Rudolph Steiner claimed that Christianity was a kind of rolling out to the masses of the content of the initiatory rites of the mysteries.

I don't really think he was correct about that. Work by many scholars indicates that in the Eleusinian mysteries, a psychoactive substance was consumed by the initiate. Albert Hoffman looked into this and came down on the side of this being some form of beer brewed from ergot, which contains LSD like substances.
If Hoffman was correct, then it becomes pretty obvious that the mysteries were about a consciousness changing experience brought about through consuming psychedelics. If that is so, then it's hard to equate it with anything that emerged into Christianity.

I agree with many of the points you make about the differences between the two things. The mysteries, or at least the Greek mysteries, were only ever for a small group of people. An elite.It's well known that Plato and Aristotle were both initiates of the Eleusinian mysteries.

Christianity was a religion for the masses, for anyone who wanted to join, unlike the mysteries which were only open to a few.

Probably the mysteries originated in ancient Egypt and were part of the knowledge held and guarded by particular groups of priests. The ceremonies etc were adapted as they spread through the middle east and into the Hellenic and later the Roman worlds.
Steiner claims that in Egypt, there was an initiation where the initiate went through a 3 day ceremony of a symbolic death, descent into the underworld and re-birth (presumably with a new perspective!). He thought this was what was acted out in Christ's passion.

I remain unconvinced.

 

how does christainity relate to anything, other then being massively popular because of its appeal to the human ego?

 

bogus - everything is known - search bitch

 

it is bogus that everything is known. that is shere fantasy to imagine so. what is pretended to be known about the unknown is of course fantasy equally.

it is only the ego that damands to pretend to know what is not.

 

Sounds a lot like Scientology, a bunch of bunk.