A condescending aspect of current evangelical Christianity is its prescription for personal salvation: that one must be "born again in the Lord Jesus Christ" and "accept him as personal Savior." Of course, in spouting this codswallop, Christians thoughtlessly consign billions to the Christians' eternal microwave - Hindus, Jains, Muslims, Buddhists and others - whose only "crime" is they either refused to follow, or weren't privy to, the magic salvation formula.

In fact, the evidence shows that the Christian myth of the unique God-Man/Savior is not original, but probably plagiarized from earlier pagan sources - such as the Book of Mithras. This was the main source for the ancient religion of Mithraism, which predated Christianity by hundreds of years.

Exactly like Jesus, Mithras was "born of a virgin" (Anahita) in humble surroundings and later worked miracles, including walking on water and raising the dead. He was also crucified, died and was buried, to ascend three days later. Coincidence? Hardly! It is more likely the basis of a common myth (also present with the God-Man Horus, and Orpheus) present throughout antiquity. Thus, it would have made eminent sense for the early New Testament authors to copy these stories where they could. Why reinvent the proverbial Savior "wheel"?

In his excellent exposé article "How Jesus Got A Life" (The American Atheist, June 1992, p. 46), author Frank Zindler notes even more comparisons, such as the fact that Mithras was born on Dec. 25 (the Winter Solstice, according to then crude computations), he was also worshipped on SUN-days (being also a solar deity), and the leader was called "papa" (pope) and ruled from the "mithraeum" on the Vatican Hill in Rome.

Mithraic priests wore "miters" (from which current Catholic Bishops' head gear is derived), and they consumed a sacred meal "Myazda" which "was completely analogous to the Catholic Eucharist service." (ibid)

Why the need to copy wholesale earlier God-man stories? The Catholic historian, the Rev. Thomas Bokenkotter is clear on this:

"The Gospels were not meant to be a historical or biographical account of Jesus. They were written to convert unbelievers to faith in Jesus as the Messiah, or God."

In other words, the earlier pagan tracts and myths were copied to try to fulfill a Church agenda, not to disclose any historical or biographical truth. Later Protestant sects, formed after the Reformation, would simply alter the theme to making "salvation" contingent not only on the belief in the overall God-Man mythology - but BELIEF in the MYTHICAL MAN as GOD and SAVIOR. In other words, what evangelicals are effectively doing is threatening unbelievers with eternal perdition unless they embrace a God-Man account likely plagiarized by their Catholic forbears from ancient pagan works.

The whole thing would actually be laughable if it weren't so pathetic. One can imagine the ancient founders of Mithraism laughing hilariously from their graves at the gullibility and profound ignorance of modern day Christians who buy this hogswill and are really putting their trust in a unique "savior" and "god."

Did a real historical Jesus exist? According to Geza Vermes: "Jesus was an ordinary man, crucified because he clashed with Jewish and Roman leaders and was regarded as a potential threat to law and order."