Religion The God Question (continued in Part 2 - link in last post)

[tesseract]

For this to be true, one must interpret your posts as completely meaningless. If they in no way reflect your views, what is the point of you posting them? Are you a being whose views provide no reflection of the way you think? If this be so, you are more ill than I first thought.

Hahahaha!!!! You're doing the same thing as you did in your last post, but with different words. You're a hoot! It's like you're programmed for one only type of response. It's fitting that you've posted that last sentence of yours, for it gives away that you're again making it up as you go. The start of that sentence, especially, is a dead give away. If Roboskilts finds comfort in his own made up narratives, by all means...

 

[Power Raid]

Why are the most religious places on earth the furthest from what we would imagine heaven to be?

 

[Roylion]

People tend to rile the bible, mainly the NT because the earliest copies are a couple of hundred years after Jesus.

There's no doubt that the various books of the Bible are older than this.

The earliest known Zoroastrian text is much younger, around the 10th Century AD if I remember.

The earliest surviving Avestan manuscript (the Avesta being the Zoroastrian scriptures), is a the 10th century AD fragment found in Dunhuang, China. The next earliest extant Avestan texts come from Iran and India and date from the end of the 13th century ACE - three hundred years after the Sogdian manuscript was written.

However the earliest surviving written references to Zoroaster are those of Greek writers from about 2,500 years ago. They in turn quote earlier sources now lost to us. Zoroaster in the estimation of the Greeks, lived some 6,000 years before their time, or 8,200 to 8,500 years ago. Pliny the Elder (AD 23-79) quotes Eudoxus of Cnidus (ca. 365 BC) and Aristotle (ca. 350 BC) as placing Zoroaster 6000 years before the death of Plato (347 BC) or 6365 BC. Pliny also quotes Hermippus (ca. 250 BC) as placing Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BCE) or around 6200 BCE. Diogenes Laertius (AD 230) states that according to Xanthus of Lydia (ca. 450 BC), Zoroaster lived 6000 years before the Persian king Xerxes invaded Greece (ca. 480 BC) or about 6480 BC. Diogenes also states that according to Hermodorus (ca. 400 BC), a follower of Plato, Zoroaster lived 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BC). Plutarch (ca. AD 46-120) also places Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war.

The late Mary Boyce (1920-2006), Professor of Iranian Studies at the University of London, stated in her book Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (page 18) that "to hazard a reasoned conjecture" was "that Zoroaster lived sometime between 1700 and 1500 B.C.".

Darius I (550-486 BC) was a devotee of Ahura Mazda as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription. He was mentioned several times in the biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, but also in the prophetic books of Daniel, Haggai and Zechariah.

This raises the issue of who borrowed from who and whether the similarities were in line with the real ancient beliefs or added to make the religion more appealing in a post Christian/Islamic world.

I think an examination of the theology in Judaism both before, during and after the Exile makes it fairly clear that it was Judaism that borrowed from Zoroastrianism.

There is also the question of when Zoroaster was actually around. Some say 2000 years BC, some say 1600 and others place him around the time of the Exile.

See above.

Then we also need to add that prior to the exile the concepts surrounding monotheism in Jewish tradition existed but were far less noticeable than after the exile. Jewish tradition centres on the exile being the jolt that finally made them see the light on one true God, unfortunately because he left them, others would say that not only Zoroastrian but other religions of the time influenced the religion enough to change some of the theology. .

The best you could say for Judaism before the Exile is that it was a form of monolatry - a belief in one God for a particular people, but recognising the existence of other gods. Continual references to the worship of Baal and Asherah in the Old Testament virtually confirm this. There was a continual battle by the priests of Yahweh to impose the doctrine on the inhabitants of Israel and Judah. Even the Ten Commandments reflect this, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me"

And in Psalms 86.8. "Among the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works."

Only during the Exile do we find the first ever declaration of belief in one, universal God by the biblical writer known as "Second Isaiah". Isaish 44.6 "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god". The Second Isaiah is believed by most scholars to be the work of an anonymous 6th-century author writing during the Exile.

 

[Bennett.]

I think an examination of the theology in Judaism both before, during and after the Exile makes it fairly clear that it was Judaism that borrowed from Zoroastrianism.

you're actually serious about this?

 

[Roylion]

you're actually serious about this?

Yeah I am. Got an alternative view on how and why a minor Edomite thunder god deity became the one universal god? I won't even mention the development of Yahweh's worship through the pre-Exilic period.

And why do I have to repeat myself?

As I said...... from Zoroastrianism, the Jews picked up a number of concepts: the immortality of the soul, angels, and of course Satan. After the Exile, the idea of a moralized afterlife, with heavenly rewards for the good and hellish punishment for the evil, appear in Judaism. One of the words for heaven in the Bible is Paradise - and this word, from the ancient Iranian words pairi-daeza, 'enclosed garden', is one of the very few definite Persian loan-words in the Bible and indicates a significant Zoroastrian influence. The idea of an afterlife in Paradise is central to both Christianity and Islam. Writings about "Satan" being the opponent of God in Jewish literature also first appear when the Jews were in exile in Babylon. The Zoroastrian / Persian dualism now concept appeared in other Jewish writings: God was now looked upon as wholly good; Satan as profoundly evil. History was seen as a battle between them. Satan, and his demons, were now humanity's greatest enemies.

For example in the story of Adam and Eve, the snake represents Satan, or the Devil, Ahriman, the Evil Spirit. According to the Persian legend in the Bundish, the full version of which will have been among the lost parts of the Zend-Avesta, Meschia and Meschiane, the first man and woman, were seduced by Ahriman, in the form of a serpent, and they committed “in thought, word, and deed, the carnal sin, and thus tainted with original sin all their descendants”. The six days of creation also in Genesis finds a parallel in the six periods of Creation described in the Zoroastrian scriptures.

 

[Moti]

There's no doubt that the various books of the Bible are older than this.



The earliest surviving Avestan manuscript (the Avesta being the Zoroastrian scriptures), is a the 10th century AD fragment found in Dunhuang, China. The next earliest extant Avestan texts come from Iran and India and date from the end of the 13th century ACE - three hundred years after the Sogdian manuscript was written.

However the earliest surviving written references to Zoroaster are those of Greek writers from about 2,500 years ago. They in turn quote earlier sources now lost to us. Zoroaster in the estimation of the Greeks, lived some 6,000 years before their time, or 8,200 to 8,500 years ago. Pliny the Elder (AD 23-79) quotes Eudoxus of Cnidus (ca. 365 BC) and Aristotle (ca. 350 BC) as placing Zoroaster 6000 years before the death of Plato (347 BC) or 6365 BC. Pliny also quotes Hermippus (ca. 250 BC) as placing Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BCE) or around 6200 BCE. Diogenes Laertius (AD 230) states that according to Xanthus of Lydia (ca. 450 BC), Zoroaster lived 6000 years before the Persian king Xerxes invaded Greece (ca. 480 BC) or about 6480 BC. Diogenes also states that according to Hermodorus (ca. 400 BC), a follower of Plato, Zoroaster lived 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BC). Plutarch (ca. AD 46-120) also places Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war.

The late Mary Boyce (1920-2006), Professor of Iranian Studies at the University of London, stated in her book Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (page 18) that "to hazard a reasoned conjecture" was "that Zoroaster lived sometime between 1700 and 1500 B.C.".

Darius I (550-486 BC) was a devotee of Ahura Mazda as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription. He was mentioned several times in the biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, but also in the prophetic books of Daniel, Haggai and Zechariah.



I think an examination of the theology in Judaism both before, during and after the Exile makes it fairly clear that it was Judaism that borrowed from Zoroastrianism.



See above.



The best you could say for Judaism before the Exile is that it was a form of monolatry - a belief in one God for a particular people, but recognising the existence of other gods. Continual references to the worship of Baal and Asherah in the Old Testament virtually confirm this. There was a continual battle by the priests of Yahweh to impose the doctrine on the inhabitants of Israel and Judah. Even the Ten Commandments reflect this, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me"

And in Psalms 86.8. "Among the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works."

Only during the Exile do we find the first ever declaration of belief in one, universal God by the biblical writer known as "Second Isaiah". Isaish 44.6 "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god". The Second Isaiah is believed by most scholars to be the work of an anonymous 6th-century author writing during the Exile.

Thanks for the reply Roylion and all the work you have done. Interesting stuff.

 

[Bennett.]

Yeah I am. Got an alternative view on how and why a minor Edomite thunder god deity became the one universal god? I won't even mention the development of Yahweh's worship through the pre-Exilic period.

And why do I have to repeat myself?

As I said...... from Zoroastrianism, the Jews picked up a number of concepts: the immortality of the soul, angels, and of course Satan. After the Exile, the idea of a moralized afterlife, with heavenly rewards for the good and hellish punishment for the evil, appear in Judaism. One of the words for heaven in the Bible is Paradise - and this word, from the ancient Iranian words pairi-daeza, 'enclosed garden', is one of the very few definite Persian loan-words in the Bible and indicates a significant Zoroastrian influence. The idea of an afterlife in Paradise is central to both Christianity and Islam. Writings about "Satan" being the opponent of God in Jewish literature also first appear when the Jews were in exile in Babylon. The Zoroastrian / Persian dualism now concept appeared in other Jewish writings: God was now looked upon as wholly good; Satan as profoundly evil. History was seen as a battle between them. Satan, and his demons, were now humanity's greatest enemies.

For example in the story of Adam and Eve, the snake represents Satan, or the Devil, Ahriman, the Evil Spirit. According to the Persian legend in the Bundish, the full version of which will have been among the lost parts of the Zend-Avesta, Meschia and Meschiane, the first man and woman, were seduced by Ahriman, in the form of a serpent, and they committed “in thought, word, and deed, the carnal sin, and thus tainted with original sin all their descendants”. The six days of creation also in Genesis finds a parallel in the six periods of Creation described in the Zoroastrian scriptures.

Do you leave any room in your postulating that perhaps Zoroastrianism may have been influenced by Judaism?
I do like that you pick certain parts of the beliefs though whilst discounting some of the teachings that are the antithesis of Judaism.

 

[Roylion]

Do you leave any room in your postulating that perhaps Zoroastrianism may have been influenced by Judaism?

Any evidence of that? I look forward to you providing the details of how post-Exilic Judaism influenced Zoroastrianism.

I do like that you pick certain parts of the beliefs though whilst discounting some of the teachings that are the antithesis of Judaism.

Such as? Do tell.

I don't think there's much doubt that Zoroastrianism had some influence on the theology of post-Exilic Judaism.

 

[Cooldude]

One word: deflection.

Ha, even that post is projection, no one deflects more than you do

I find it interesting, but not surprising, that many critics of the bible don't even understand its main point, or any particular point therein, before firing a shot. Such critics thus openly display their ignorance, and not only that, but their unwillingness to understand in which makes them either ideologues driven by dogma or just plain haters. Each to their own, though.

From my discussions with you, you really don't have a clue with what the bible and Jesus is about either, you interpret it in a selfish bias way that suits your own personal desires and prejudice just like most of them around. You talk as if you understand the bible, but whenever I rebutted you, it showed that you clearly are the one displaying the ignorance of the scriptures despite arrogantly claiming you understand it but apparently the rest of the world doesn't. Amazing and classic Christian hypocrisy

 

[Bennett.]

Any evidence of that? I look forward to you providing the details of how post-Exilic Judaism influenced Zoroastrianism.



Such as? Do tell.

I don't think there's much doubt that Zoroastrianism had some influence on the theology of post-Exilic Judaism.

When was Zoroaster born?
Zoroastrianism is a dualistic religion that predates Christianity, yes, but POST dates Abraham.
The psalms of David, mosaic law etc was written BEFORE Zoroaster was born and which is the basis of the MONOtheistic Judaism.

There is a good basis for an argument.

 

[Roylion]

When was Zoroaster born?

I've already addressed this. See above.

 

[Bennett.]

I've already addressed this. See above.

My post didn't go through. Re done.

 

[Roylion]

When was Zoroaster born?
Zoroastrianism is a dualistic religion that predates Christianity, yes, but POST dates Abraham.

What's Abraham got to do with this?

The psalms of David, mosaic law etc was written BEFORE Zoroaster was born and which is the basis of the MONOtheistic Judaism.

Mosaic Law was not written by Moses.

Once again....

The Old Testament had its origins in three major sources and possibly a fourth (the Elohim source) which may have been part of the Jahwist source.

1) the Deutronomist - as a school or movement of a number of authors and that they originated independently of both the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus (the Book of Law) and Numbers (the first four books of the Torah) and the history of the books of Chronicles. Most of what is ascribed to the Deutromonist is traced to the Babylonian exile in the 6th century. Some scholars argue that the writings known as the Deuteronomistic History was compiled during the reign of king Josiah of Israel (639 BC - 609 BC). The Deuteronomistic History promotes the idea that the entire land of Israel should be ruled by the divinely chosen leader of the entire people of Israel and emphasised that Jerusalem was the centre of the worship of Yahweh and that the members of the Davidic dynasty of Judah were the only legitimate representatives and agents of Yahweh's rule and were to rule over all the lands of Israel, including those of the former northern Kingdom of Israel.

2) the Priestly source written when Judah was a province of the Persian empire (the 5th century BC. It was written to show that even when all seemed lost, God remained present with Israel. This source is responsible for the first of the two creation stories in Genesis for Adam's genealogy, part of the Flood story, the table of nations and the genealogy of Shem (i.e., Abraham's ancestry) as well as most, if not all of Leviticus. The Priestly source shows signs of being perhaps a series of revisions to the Jahwist source. An increasing influential consensus amongst scholars is that the Priestly source which set down the Mosaic Law came about because of the Persian government requirement for granting autonomy to local communities such as the recently returned Jews to present the local laws for imperial authorisation. This provided a powerful incentive for the various groups that constituted the Jewish community in Jerusalem to come to an agreement. The major groups were the landed families who controlled the main sources of wealth, and the priestly families who controlled the Temple. Each group had its own history of origins that legitimated its prerogatives. The tradition of the landowners was based on the old Deuteronomistic tradition which had existed since at least the 6th century BC; and that of the priestly families, including "Mosaic Law" was composed in 5th century BC to "correct" and "complete" the landowners' composition.

3) The Jahwist source written in the 7th century BC made contributions to Genesis, Exodus and Numbers

Davidic authorship of Psalms is not accepted as historical fact by modern scholars.

There is a good basis for an argument.

A poor one for the reasons I've just given.

Yet again.

 

[Bennett.]

What's Abraham got to do with this?



Mosaic Law was not written by Moses.

Once again....

The Old Testament had its origins in three major sources and possibly a fourth (the Elohim source) which may have been part of the Jahwist source.

1) the Deutronomist - as a school or movement of a number of authors and that they originated independently of both the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus (the Book of Law) and Numbers (the first four books of the Torah) and the history of the books of Chronicles. Most of what is ascribed to the Deutromonist is traced to the Babylonian exile in the 6th century. Some scholars argue that the writings known as the Deuteronomistic History was compiled during the reign of king Josiah of Israel (639 BC - 609 BC). The Deuteronomistic History promotes the idea that the entire land of Israel should be ruled by the divinely chosen leader of the entire people of Israel and emphasised that Jerusalem was the centre of the worship of Yahweh and that the members of the Davidic dynasty of Judah were the only legitimate representatives and agents of Yahweh's rule and were to rule over all the lands of Israel, including those of the former northern Kingdom of Israel.

2) the Priestly source written when Judah was a province of the Persian empire (the 5th century BC. It was written to show that even when all seemed lost, God remained present with Israel. This source is responsible for the first of the two creation stories in Genesis for Adam's genealogy, part of the Flood story, the table of nations and the genealogy of Shem (i.e., Abraham's ancestry) as well as most, if not all of Leviticus. The Priestly source shows signs of being perhaps a series of revisions to the Jahwist source. An increasing influential consensus amongst scholars is that the Priestly source which set down the Mosaic Law came about because of the Persian government requirement for granting autonomy to local communities such as the recently returned Jews to present the local laws for imperial authorisation. This provided a powerful incentive for the various groups that constituted the Jewish community in Jerusalem to come to an agreement. The major groups were the landed families who controlled the main sources of wealth, and the priestly families who controlled the Temple. Each group had its own history of origins that legitimated its prerogatives. The tradition of the landowners was based on the old Deuteronomistic tradition which had existed since at least the 6th century BC; and that of the priestly families, including "Mosaic Law" was composed in 5th century BC to "correct" and "complete" the landowners' composition.

3) The Jahwist source written in the 7th century BC made contributions to Genesis, Exodus and Numbers

Davidic authorship of Psalms is not accepted as historical fact by modern scholars.



A poor one for the reasons I've just given.

Yet again.

What has Abraham got to do with it? He pre-existed Zoroaster! The Abrahamic religions pre-exist Zoroaster who could have been born within about an 800 year span according to 'scholars'. You claim, for want of a better term, tampering with the texts of the biblical scriptures, but the Avesta is from the 300's AD and the earliest manuscripts? 13th century. Now put on your critical of christianity cap and apply the same tests you use to disprove the bible, and place them on those texts and tell me who may or may not have added and subtracted from which texts and who may have influenced the other.

 

[Pie eyed]

One word: deflection.

Rejection, become deflection turned genuflection.

 

[Roylion]

What has Abraham got to do with it? He pre-existed Zoroaster!

That's not necessarily the case, assuming that Abraham even existed. Zoroaster may not be a credible historical figure either.

And how do you know that Abraham pre-dated Zoroaster?

Zoroaster in the estimation of the Greeks, lived some 6,000 years before their time, or 8,200 to 8,500 years ago. Pliny the Elder (AD 23-79) quotes Eudoxus of Cnidus (ca. 365 BC) and Aristotle (ca. 350 BC) as placing Zoroaster 6000 years before the death of Plato (347 BC) or 6365 BC. Pliny also quotes Hermippus (ca. 250 BC) as placing Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BCE) or around 6200 BC. Diogenes Laertius (AD 230) states that according to Xanthus of Lydia (ca. 450 BC), Zoroaster lived 6000 years before the Persian king Xerxes invaded Greece (ca. 480 BC) or about 6480 BC. Diogenes also states that according to Hermodorus (ca. 400 BC), a follower of Plato, Zoroaster lived 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BC). Plutarch (ca. AD 46-120) also places Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war.

These dates for Zoroaster may be wildly inaccurate, however the Bible's internal chronology for the dating of Abraham also cannot be relied upon.

The late Mary Boyce (1920-2006), Professor of Iranian Studies at the University of London, stated in her book Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices that "to hazard a reasoned conjecture" was "that Zoroaster lived sometime between 1700 and 1500 B.C.

The Abrahamic religions pre-exist Zoroaster who could have been born within about an 800 year span according to 'scholars'.

And how do you know the Abrahamic religions began with an individual called 'Abraham'? Through the Deutronomist, Priestly and Jahwist writers of the 6th and 5th centuries?

You claim, for want of a better term, tampering with the texts of the biblical scriptures, but the Avesta is from the 300's AD and the earliest manuscripts? 13th century.

The vast majority of scholars, including Mary Boyce who wrote Textual sources for the study of Zoroastrianism (published in 1984) and Peter Clark, Zoroastrianism. An Introduction to an Ancient Faith (published in 1998) agree that the Avesta is much older than AD 300. For example, They agree that the seventeen Gathas, possibly composed by Zoroaster himself, are the oldest part of the Avesta. The language of these hymns resembles that of the Indian Rigveda, hymns that were most likely composed in the Punjab between 1500 and 1200 BC. For example, the Gathic word ahura, "divine lord", is virtually identical to the Vedic word asura.
The bulk of the Avesta was almost certainly written before the Parthian period. (c. 247 BC) (That there was a large religious literature, can be deduced from a remark by the Roman author Pliny the Elder who wrote about the Alexandrine scholar Hermippus of Smyrna (third century BCE):

"Hermippus, who wrote most painstakingly about the whole art of magic and interpreted two million verses by Zarathustra, also added lists of contents and handed down the name of Agonaces as the teacher who instructed him, placing Zarathustra [Zoroaster] five thousand years before the Trojan War."

As I said, Darius I (550-486 BC) was a devotee of Ahura Mazda as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription, indicating that Zoroastrianism was well established during the Jewish exile in Mesopotamia

Now put on your critical of christianity cap

I'm not speaking of Christianity in this case. I'm speaking of Judaism.

and apply the same tests you use to disprove the bible, and place them on those texts and tell me who may or may not have added and subtracted from which texts and who may have influenced the other.

I've already explained in detail how and why some aspects of the theology of Judaism were influenced by Zoroastrianism. Re-read it.

 

[tesseract]

Ha, even that post is projection, no one deflects more than you do

From my discussions with you, you really don't have a clue with what the bible and Jesus is about either, you interpret it in a selfish bias way that suits your own personal desires and prejudice just like most of them around. You talk as if you understand the bible, but whenever I rebutted you, it showed that you clearly are the one displaying the ignorance of the scriptures despite arrogantly claiming you understand it but apparently the rest of the world doesn't. Amazing and classic Christian hypocrisy

It's deflection on your part for you haven't even made a case as to projection. To claim such you'd have to accurately know how much I know about the bible, without assuming. Because you can't do such, that's why it be deflection, for you've got nothing.

Such a claim coming from someone who thinks the bible's laws against homosexuality is in contradiction to showing hospitality. Hahahahahaha!
"You interpret it in a selfish bias way that suits your own personal desires and prejudice" is a fine example of your projection, for you twist the scriptures in order to rationalize that homosexuality isn't against God's law.

Here's the thing, I'm a student of the bible. Your hypocrisy stems from doing as you claim of I, which you've arrogantly projected onto me. Where did I say "the rest of the world doesn't"? What I do believe is that the majority on this forum know only bits and pieces of the bible but display their lack of in-depth knowledge by means of their own non-biblical rationalizations being attributed to God and/or the bible.

Ahhhh! A non-Christian attempting to distort scripture to his own ends as well as school an actual Christian bible student. What actually makes it funny is that you believe that's what you're doing.

 

[Bennett.]

That's not necessarily the case, assuming that Abraham even existed. Zoroaster may not be a credible historical figure either.

And how do you know that Abraham pre-dated Zoroaster?

Zoroaster in the estimation of the Greeks, lived some 6,000 years before their time, or 8,200 to 8,500 years ago. Pliny the Elder (AD 23-79) quotes Eudoxus of Cnidus (ca. 365 BC) and Aristotle (ca. 350 BC) as placing Zoroaster 6000 years before the death of Plato (347 BC) or 6365 BC. Pliny also quotes Hermippus (ca. 250 BC) as placing Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BCE) or around 6200 BC. Diogenes Laertius (AD 230) states that according to Xanthus of Lydia (ca. 450 BC), Zoroaster lived 6000 years before the Persian king Xerxes invaded Greece (ca. 480 BC) or about 6480 BC. Diogenes also states that according to Hermodorus (ca. 400 BC), a follower of Plato, Zoroaster lived 5000 years before the Trojan war (ca. 1200 BC). Plutarch (ca. AD 46-120) also places Zoroaster 5000 years before the Trojan war.

These dates for Zoroaster may be wildly inaccurate, however the Bible's internal chronology for the dating of Abraham also cannot be relied upon.

The late Mary Boyce (1920-2006), Professor of Iranian Studies at the University of London, stated in her book Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices that "to hazard a reasoned conjecture" was "that Zoroaster lived sometime between 1700 and 1500 B.C.



And how do you know the Abrahamic religions began with an individual called 'Abraham'? Through the Deutronomist, Priestly and Jahwist writers of the 6th and 5th centuries?



The vast majority of scholars, including Mary Boyce who wrote Textual sources for the study of Zoroastrianism (published in 1984) and Peter Clark, Zoroastrianism. An Introduction to an Ancient Faith (published in 1998) agree that the Avesta is much older than AD 300. For example, They agree that the seventeen Gathas, possibly composed by Zoroaster himself, are the oldest part of the Avesta. The language of these hymns resembles that of the Indian Rigveda, hymns that were most likely composed in the Punjab between 1500 and 1200 BC. For example, the Gathic word ahura, "divine lord", is virtually identical to the Vedic word asura.
The bulk of the Avesta was almost certainly written before the Parthian period. (c. 247 BC) (That there was a large religious literature, can be deduced from a remark by the Roman author Pliny the Elder who wrote about the Alexandrine scholar Hermippus of Smyrna (third century BCE):

"Hermippus, who wrote most painstakingly about the whole art of magic and interpreted two million verses by Zarathustra, also added lists of contents and handed down the name of Agonaces as the teacher who instructed him, placing Zarathustra [Zoroaster] five thousand years before the Trojan War."

As I said, Darius I (550-486 BC) was a devotee of Ahura Mazda as attested to several times in the Behistun inscription, indicating that Zoroastrianism was well established during the Jewish exile in Mesopotamia



I'm not speaking of Christianity in this case. I'm speaking of Judaism.



I've already explained in detail how and why some aspects of the theology of Judaism were influenced by Zoroastrianism. Re-read it.

I've read it numerous times but in your haste to disprove and cast doubt on Christianity, you have also become the very thing you dislike which is a non critical thinker who filters his information to suit your biases and preconceived notions. Naturally you will deny this of course.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Doesn't make sense. Maybe we all go off to heaven and live happily ever after for eternity.
The hardship on this earth is often connected to Jesus carrying his cross and then dying on it.
The saying we all have a cross to bear.
Funnily enough where there is more hardship and sorrow is where religion thrives.
Short answer from the church is that we don't know what God has in store for us....

A big lot of nothing?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I have been reading the last few pages or so about some of the theology, free will and sin and thought I would put in the view from my side. Quick note, God created things with order, whether that be commands given in the bible or the scientific laws that govern our world.


Free Will

Free Will is necessary if we are to make decisions about whether we come into agreement with God or not. You can’t say no to something if you can’t.

Angels have free will but do not have dominion over anything. They are assigned tasks and positions to carry out God’s will.

Man has Free Will to make decisions and has also been given dominion over the Earth, except man itself.

For God to have a true relationship, a created being would have to have free will to decide the depth and extent of that relationship. Otherwise we would be robots and that would be kinda boring.


Place of Sin

No other subject creates as much anguish as the concept of sin and what it causes on the earth. Whether you believe or not, there is usually a pretty big opinion somewhere.


Lucifer committed the first sin; he was the chief worshipper and led the other angels in worship. He was created with instruments as part of his body including percussion, strings and wind instruments. He was also very beautiful with a list of jewels over his body.


He wondered why only God should receive worship and he elevated himself as an object of worship. So the first sin was worshipping a being other than God. This led to the rebellion where he was cast out of heaven. God does not allow sin (being in opposition to God) so he had the authority to expel him. He created what we call hell (not created with the décor we know now) as it was a place to set apart the fallen angels from heaven. It was probably a pretty barren place without form.


As an interesting aside, as heaven lost its chief worshipper, you could say that there could have been a gap in the choir of heaven, a chance for Lucifer to tell God that he didn’t have anyone to fill the role and who is going to worship you now! God’s response was us, we have woodwind (windpipe), strings (vocal chords) and percussion (hands) and that is why we are “made to worship”. The church is also adorned with the exact same jewels as Lucifer was created with in Revelation when New Jerusalem descends from heaven.


When Earth is populated with humanity, we had the ability to sin if we chose but were not born inherently to do so. It took the snake enticing the woman with the same thought he originally had (being like God) to create a situation where God had to separate himself from man. However, he had already given dominion to man for the Earth so God left the Earth instead of casting us out. That is why we have a nature that is therefore able to and willing to sin without a change of mind and Spirit. That is why when we die, we only have two choices, heaven, or what we call hell. In the heavenly realm they are the choices. Unfortunately hell is already populated so not the greatest place to go.


Lucifer becomes Satan due to his changed nature. God changed Jacob’s name, so it isn’t a first. He hates man as we are his replacement and God didn’t end it all when we did reject him.

regarding sacrifices, the payment for a sin is the blood of another. God set the currency exchange and until Jesus we did not have the right amount to get back into contact with God. His blood needed to be spilt in order for a sacrifice perfect enough to pay for all sins to have the power.


So all will be good, right?

Jesus died to allow the saints access to God, whether that be on earth or heaven. That is why we can access God now directly. So that means we don’t need priests, Pharisees or other religious heads to intercede for us, forgive our sins or talk to God on our behalf. However, they can walk with us, join with you in prayer for intercession and teach according to their individual gifting.


Regarding the final destination, often we are told our goal is heaven, but that is wrong. We are actually destined to end back on earth in New Jerusalem. That is the city that descends from heaven with the Saints in tow. God will inhabit the city and walk with us. So does that mean is sin is done and dusted? Well the question is actually, do we have free will still?


The answer is yes and yes. Why build a city with 12 gates and angels designated to keep the city holy and keep sin out if it could not exist. Man will still have a choice, but unlike Lucifer, we will have a clear understanding of how that will turn out.

Very quick overview, but that is the state of play on those points.

After reading this I'm convinced.


The North Koreans can't nuke us quick enough.

 

[Boston tiger]

A big lot of nothing?

We came from absolute nothing?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

We came from absolute nothing?

Don't confuse the two.

God has nothing planned for you. You're not special.

 

[Boston tiger]

Don't confuse the two.

God has nothing planned for you. You're not special.

Yes I am

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Yes I am

No. You're an Ant. A malnourished raccoon. A dying tree.

An inconsequential collection of cells, that while appreciated by its surroundings holds no specific importance to the world or dreamt up higher being.

 

[Boston tiger]

No. You're an Ant. A malnourished raccoon. A dying tree.

An inconsequential collection of cells, that while appreciated by its surroundings holds no specific importance to the world or dreamt up higher being.

Yes but I exist . That's special. Got to be happy about that.