Do you know the primary source for a supposed inscription which has Mithra born of a virgin?
Question:
I did want to ask you if you have heard of an alleged inscription in the supposed largest near-eastern Mithraeum which was built in western Persia at Kangavar, which is supposedly dedicated to ‘Anahita’, with an inscription reading “the Immaculate Virgin Mother of the Lord Mithras” dated to around 200BC? I see this claim everywhere on the internet and in a few books by skeptics trying to make parallel claims of Jesus to Mithras. A skeptic I work with brought it up trying to make a Jesus/Mithra parallel, I have searched high and low for hours and can not find a resource for this inscription or archeological evidence for this inscription. The ones claiming this do not have a primary resource, I was just curious if you have heard of anything along these lines of a supposed inscription? I did a study on Mithraism parallels few months back and I never heard this inscription until recently.
Answer:
I believe the source of this claim is Payam Nabarz The Mysteries of Mithras: The Pagan Beliefs that Shaped the Christian World (Rochester: Inner Traditions, 2005), 19. The inscription was supposedly found in the area of Lake Humum, Iran. Nabarz is not very careful about giving his sources and he is very selective in his use of the primary sources, so we should be cautious about accepting what he says. Also, in order to judge his claims we would have to know the context and the full inscription. The Roman version of the birth of the god Mithra is that he was born from a rock. The inscription Nabarz uses has him born from Anahita, a “Virgin Mother.” What Nabarz does not mention is that there are many different and contradictory Anahita traditions. This is cherry-picking. Also, in the Mithraic tradition, Anahita and Mithra become co-gods who preside over the pastures (MIthra) and over the waters (Anahita). Any parallel between the Zoroastrian Mithra and Jesus of Christianity is minor, whereas the differences are great. For example, in the Zoroastrian story, MIthra is born from a god, whereas in the Christian story, he is born from a vulnerable human. Again, the parallel is minor and the difference is major. Add to this the fact that Mary was a real person and neither Mithra nor Anahita are real in any sense of the word. We know where Mary lived, we know the name of her husband, of her cousin and the names of four of her children. I would suggest a book by Paul Copan titled “Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Christian Apologetics” for a thorough discussion and debunking of the Jesus Myth myth.
John Oakes
