How come almost everybody on the "yes" side point to Mithris. Those who make the Mithris comparison commit a common fallacy. They see something in the Mithris myth, then using Christian terms, say "see" Christianity is just like the Mithris myth. An example with help. Those in the yes side say, "Mithris had 12 disciples." This appears to be based on a painting (not a writing) that shows Mithris surrounded by 12 signs of the Zodiac. Ok, how in the heck does that translate to 12 disciples? It only does in the minds of people who are really stretching things to make their argument work. If you would like a reputable source, check out the Encyclopedia of World Religions. Furthermore, for the few myths that were actually written down, go ahead and read them, then compare them with the Bible. Almost no historical facts are given. Contrast that with the New Testament. People are identified, places given, leaders named. The Bible reads as a history, and has external facts that can, and have often been verified. Finally, scholars are finding the reverse is often true: other religions have often borrowed or adapted their beliefs to Christianity.