It's called a timeline.<quoted text>
For an atheist you sure have a persucution complex. Disagreement is not hate, but much like the gay left, anyone who disagree's with you is hatefull..
Your mirtha thesis is prety common and easily debunked. What is far more probable is that as Mithraism developed, it started to adopt Christian concepts.What is more probable is that with the explosive nature of the Christian church in the 1st and 2nd century, other cult groups started to adapt themselves to take advantage of some of the teachings found in Christianity. This is certainly the case with what are called the Gnostic "gospels" and is well noted by serious historians. even though there are similarities between Christianity and Mithraism, it is up to the critics to prove that one borrowed from the other. But, considering that the writers of the New Testament were Jews who shunned pagan philosophies and that the Old Testament has all of the themes found in Christianity, it is far more probable that if any borrowing was done, it was done by the pagan religions that wanted to emulate the success of Christianity..
You have the cart before the horse
Mithraism was already big before Christ was born.
Mithraism already celebrated December 25th with trees and gifts before Christ was born.
Early Christians did not follow these pagan rituals.
Christianity fully adopted this nonsense around the 4th century - so it was never a part of true Christianity. It just got blended in as a way of encouraging membership.
This is not some dumb rumor on the internet like you guys pretend. I was amazed to find this information in a real live library in the 80's. Go to the "World History" section and EVERY single book talks about Mithraism as a matter of fact when discussing religion in the Roman Empire.