The Truth About Jesus

I don't have a source for the fire. I remember this point from a Roman History class I took many years ago. It was taught by a Protestant minister who bemoaned the loss of these records. I'm not sure if the records were in Rome or Palestine, but I believe they were in Rome.
Yes the fish was first used as a Christian symbol as was the Greek letters Chi and Rho, when written over each other you get what looks like an x and p so many pronounce this a pax when it really stands for Christ. I'm not sure exactly when the cross first appeared, it was certainly during the church's earlist years since it appears in Roman chatecombs. Some say the cross symbol is actually based on the Egyptian Ahnk (sp) which is a sign of life. It's probably true that Christ was not shown on the cross until later, but here again I'm not sure when, but I doubt it was as late as 800, I seem to recall seeing a crux in earlier Christian art.
I don't know much about the Mithra cult, except that it is one of the earliest cults started in Sumaria. Wasn't Mithra the mother goddess essentially the same as Artemis? Zorastrianism still exists today in the middle east with few practicioners. Zarathustra, one, if not the first, writter of religious code. Zor.s influence is clearly evident in Quomron texts and John's gospel.
You can also see evidence of other Mediteranean cults in early Christian writtings. Personnaly I believe Christ's teachings jive well with Eastern philosophy more so than current Christianity. Today's version of Christ's teachings have been incredibly skewed in order to better fit the need for organized religions with a hierarchy of Priests. I believe Christ was teaching that we don't need these to gain access to the divine.

[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dave654,)
I don't have a source for the fire.  I remember this point from a Roman History class I took many years ago.  It was taught by a Protestant minister who bemoaned the loss of these records.  I'm not sure if the records were in Rome or Palestine, but I believe they were in Rome.
    Yes the fish was first used as a Christian symbol as was the Greek letters Chi and Rho, when written over each other you get what looks like an x and p so many pronounce this a pax when it really stands for Christ.  I'm not sure exactly when the cross first appeared, it was certainly during the church's earlist years since it appears in Roman chatecombs.  Some say the cross symbol is actually based on the Egyptian Ahnk (sp) which is a sign of life.  It's probably true that Christ was not shown on the cross until later, but here again I'm not sure when, but I doubt it was as late as 800, I seem to recall seeing a crux in earlier Christian art.
    I don't know much about the Mithra cult, except that it is one of the earliest cults started in Sumaria.  Wasn't Mithra the mother goddess essentially the same as Artemis?  Zorastrianism still exists today in the middle east with few practicioners.  Zarathustra, one, if not the first, writter of religious code.  Zor.s influence is clearly evident in Quomron texts and John's gospel. 
    You can also see evidence of other Mediteranean cults in early Christian writtings.  Personnaly I believe Christ's teachings jive well with Eastern philosophy more so than current Christianity.  Today's version of Christ's teachings have been incredibly skewed in order to better fit the need for organized religions with a hierarchy of Priests.  I believe Christ was teaching that we don't need these to gain access to the divine.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

My view of the cross was that it was not used very early, but was added when Christianity began to spread in Rome close to the time when Rome became Christian. The origin was a merging of the chi x in chi-x and rho-p, possibly the Ahnk. I consider it Greco-Roman in origin.

Mithra in ithrism had a close assoicaion with Artemis, but it is unclear to if Artemis is a goddess of Mithrism.

I think the records that the minister referred to are those that were burned when Nero's Rome burned. This is very hypothetical concerning if the records referring to Christ's crucifiction existed.

Hey Shunny

We may have a difference of opinion on what is considered "early." Christ's teachings spread quickly to Rome with Peter preaching in the city. The Empire was not officially Christian until Justinian in I believer the 3d century (don't quote me on that.) The cross was not the Chi/Rho symbol, that's the PX, written on top of each other that most people thinks meands PAX or peace. It is deffinitely a Grecco-Roman symbol. The cross was in use prior to the Christianity becoming the Empire's state religion. Justinian was said to have seen a cross in the sky and understand that with this symbol he would be victorious in some battle. He had his troops paint a cross on their shields and proceeded to win the battle. Afterwards he converted and changed the Empire's religion. What probably really happened is that Christianity had grown so popular in the Empire that Justinian was simply accepting the new reality.
Artimis and Mithra. It is difficult to find the exact roots of all these ancient deities. I believe the cult of Artimis originated farther East than Sumaria, maybe even East of Persia. Artimis was worshiped by many different names and was called Diane by the Romans. There was most likely a merging of Mithrism and Artimis and possibly a few other mother goddess cults as well.
It's all pretty interesting isn't it?

[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dave654,)
Hey Shunny

    We may have a difference of opinion on what is considered "early."  Christ's teachings spread quickly to Rome with Peter preaching in the city.  The Empire was not officially Christian until Justinian in I believer the 3d century (don't quote me on that.)  The cross was not the Chi/Rho symbol, that's the PX, written on top of each other that most people thinks meands PAX or peace.  It is deffinitely a Grecco-Roman symbol.  The cross was in use prior to the Christianity becoming the Empire's state religion.  Justinian was said to have seen a cross in the sky and understand that with this symbol he would be victorious in some battle.  He had his troops paint a cross on their shields and proceeded to win the battle.  Afterwards he converted and changed the Empire's religion.  What probably really happened is that Christianity had grown so popular in the Empire that Justinian was simply accepting the new reality.
    Artimis and Mithra.  It is difficult to find the exact roots of all these ancient deities.  I believe the cult of Artimis originated farther East than Sumaria, maybe even East of Persia.  Artimis was worshiped by many different names and was called Diane by the Romans.  There was most likely a merging of Mithrism and Artimis and possibly a few other mother goddess cults as well.
    It's all pretty interesting isn't it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I believe that Artimis, Mithrism, and Zorastrianism all have Persian and earlier Sumarian origins and they are related. Part of the spread of Christianity in Rome was due to the conversion of Mithrites, which was a popular religion in Rome at the time of Christianity and there is evidence they worshiped together in the early years.

I do not think we are that much in disagreement on the time and origin of the cross in Christianity. I do not consider the cross to originate in the early Christianity of the Holy Lands.

Your probably right about the cross not originating in the Holy Lands. They probably saw enough of their kinsmen hanging from crosses to sour their enthusiam for using one as a religious symbol. Bear in mind the apostles immediately started preaching all accross the Empire so when you say early "Christianity of the Holy Lands" your taking about anything less that 35-40 AD. After that there were converts all over the Eastern Med.

I was in a church in Assissi Italy. It was over 2000 years old and originally a temple to Mithra.
Much of the New Testament writtings reflect Greek philosophy that of other cults in the region at the time. If you expand your scope of Christian writtings of the times, you can find even more evidence of these influences since the books chosen for the Bible were done so because they were more conducive to supporting an organized religion and clergy.

[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dave654,)
Your probably right about the cross not originating in the Holy Lands.  They probably saw enough of their kinsmen hanging from crosses to sour their enthusiam for using one as a religious symbol. Bear in mind the apostles immediately started preaching all accross the Empire so when you say early "Christianity of the Holy Lands" your taking about anything less that 35-40 AD.  After that there were converts all over the Eastern Med.

I was in a church in Assissi Italy.  It was over 2000 years old and originally a temple to Mithra.
    Much of the New Testament writtings reflect Greek philosophy that of other cults in the region at the time.  If you expand your scope of Christian writtings of the times, you can find even more evidence of these influences since the books chosen for the Bible were done so because they were more conducive to supporting an organized religion and clergy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I did not think that crosses were used specifically for crucifiction. From the historical references I have studied. Trees, scafolding, and sometimes only a single post was used.

The reference to the ancient church is interesting. Do they know when it became a Christian church?

They probably do know when it was converted to a Christian church but I don't remember when. It would not be later than when Justinian endorsed Christianity as the Empires religion. I'm surprised it was still there since most temples were destroyed and or looted by the newly in charge christians during this period. You could definitely tell it was an older building than its neighbors.
In your references, what percentage of crucifictions were actually done on a cross. I've always thought it odd that the Egyptian ahnk would be the crosses predecessor.

[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dave654,)
They probably do know when it was converted to a Christian church but I don't remember when. It would not be later than when Justinian endorsed Christianity as the Empires religion. I'm surprised it was still there since most temples were destroyed and or looted by the newly in charge christians during this period. You could definitely tell it was an older building than its neighbors.
In your references, what percentage of crucifictions were actually done on a cross. I've always thought it odd that the Egyptian ahnk would be the crosses predecessor.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I actually do not think the ahnk was the predecessor of the cross.

In my studies in the past, (No specific references at present.) crucifiction was not diliberately carried out on a cross. The location where Christ was crucified was a common place for many people to be crucified and likely used rough scafolding and not crosses. If it was it would be an easy solution to the origin of the cross as a symbol.