Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryans

M

mojobadshah

Guest
I've come to the conclusion that at any third party e.g. Jewish Christian or Muslim useage of the concepts that originated with the Aryan cultural heritage including the religious or Zoroastrian heritage of the Aryan people (Afghans, Iranians, Tajiks, Kurds, etc...) in commerce and for non-prophet use are indebted to the Aryan community. This means concepts like "God" "Angels" "the Devil" "Demons" "The Messiah" "The Kingdom of God" "Heaven" "Hell" "The Resurrection" and "Judgment Day," the concepts which would make or break the Abrahamic religious institutions. Who's against me?
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

"True Aryan" just kinda sets off KKK alarms, you know. If you are saying that Judaism borrowed a bunch of concepts from Zorastrianism (and other related religions which predated them) you are totally correct. And then, of course, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, Bahaism, etc inherited them, again, totally correct.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Then, of course, there is the question of whether "God" "Angels" "Devil" "Demon" "Messiah" "Kingdom" "Heaven" "Hell" and "Resurrection" was unique to one group, or whether it is the common stock of humanity?

And then, of course, we must question the assumption that what a Zoroastrian or a Brahmin might mean by the term is the same as what a Sufi or a Christian might mean by it.

God bless,

Thomas.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Carl Jung: Analytical Psychology In Jungian psychology, the Collective Unconscious has roots in the deep ancestral past of the entire human species. These include distant ancestor’s experiences with universal concepts like God, mother, water, earth, that are transmitted through the generations so that people in every time have been influenced by their primate ancestor’s primordial experiences. The contents of the collective unconscious are the same (more or less) for people of every culture! This is what creates our myths, legends, and religious experiences.

Archetypes are ancient images that derive from the collective unconscious. They are similar in that they are emotionally toned collections of associated images. The Hero is one of the many archetypes and is represented in mythology and legends as a powerful person, sometimes part god, and one who fights evil.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Verily, the concepts may have been "the common stock of humanity" but, the notion of a monotheistic interpretation was not. I have not done a lot of research on monotheism beyond the nexus of the South Caucasus, but from there the cultural linkages are pretty firm. So even if the terms are common stock it does not matter since Zorastrianism begat Judaism begat Christianity and Islam....

But you are 100% correct that (given the vast diversity of monotheistic religions nowdays) the use of "G!d" is not now the same.

So my conclusion is that there was a source for monotheism and it's catch-words which propagated across the Middle East, influencing subsequent varieties of monotheism, all of which have diverged and evolved separately.

Does that sound sound, Thomas?

Peace unto thee, radarmark
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

no doubt - and we also inherited the idea of sacrifice and many other things; but it's what we did with them that made them special, influential and sustainable for thousands of years.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

I get to meet my first Zoroastrian in person next week at our interfaith service.

They've been invited for the past ten years but this year accepted and are sending representatives to speak.

I'd like to be honest mojobadshah, what I have perceived as your typical tenor for discussion of your faith, your issues of omission come across to me as a cross between Rodney Dangerfield and Louis Farakan....neither of which promotes interest and compassion much....for me that is. Now this might just be me, and I'm hoping that I am able to see this new encounter next week as more opening and welcoming.

I'll be sure to report back.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

radarmark said:
"True Aryan" just kinda sets off KKK alarms, you know.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a serious shame, and you only have "yourselves" to blame for that. And don't worry I was not referring to the Aryans in the racial sense or the Proto-Indo-European sense. I was referring the national and linguistic sense of the term, which is how the West should understand it if they expect to get along with the East, and I find it very insulting that scholars would seek to advise the true Aryans to substitute the term Iranian or any other alternative to designate the Aryan national ancestries and language family as a whole.

radarmark said:
If you are saying that Judaism borrowed a bunch of concepts from Zorastrianism (and other related religions which predated them) you are totally correct. And then, of course, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, Bahaism, etc inherited them, again, totally correct.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am saying that and I'm saying that Zoroastrianism is the living cultural heritage of the Aryans in the original sense of the term, but I am only concerned with the Zoroastrian concepts.

radarmark said:
Verily, the concepts may have been "the common stock of humanity" but, the notion of a monotheistic interpretation was not. I have not done a lot of research on monotheism beyond the nexus of the South Caucasus, but from there the cultural linkages are pretty firm. So even if the terms are common stock it does not matter since Zorastrianism begat Judaism begat Christianity and Islam....
Click to expand...

Sorry Etu Malku and Carl Jung are just wrong in that the concept of "God" and the other concepts I pointed out were universal or "common stock." Yes "God" was obviously the projection of the collective psyche of the human species, the Zoroastrian people. "God" as most of us know "God" as a concept is very distinct from the concept of "God" before the Zoroastrian people made their "reforms." It was a mystery to the rest of the world.

Etu Malku said:
Archetypes are ancient images that derive from the collective unconscious. They are similar in that they are emotionally toned collections of associated images. The Hero is one of the many archetypes and is represented in mythology and legends as a powerful person, sometimes part god, and one who fights evil.
Click to expand...

Archetypes are images that can be found in the real world, but where can you find an image in the real world as distinct as "God" as the Aryan people knew "God" (an all powerful all seeing all knowing just creator of the universe and Fatherer of the human race who was there in the beginning and who will be there in the end) and as the majority of the world knows "God" today? NOWHERE!

radarmark said:
But you are 100% correct that (given the vast diversity of monotheistic religions nowdays) the use of "G!d" is not now the same.
Click to expand...

That's irrelevant. Hypothetically, if it came down to what people most justly own the exclusive right to use the expression "God" in commerce the right would go to the true Aryan people.[/QUOTE]

bananabrain said:
no doubt - and we also inherited the idea of sacrifice and many other things; but it's what we did with them that made them special, influential and sustainable for thousands of years.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...

No, the Abrahamic people exploited the ideas in question for money, power, and politics, and I say exploited because they were never theirs to begin with. And I would wager that's why the Roman's were never able to take Khorashan, the Crusaders were not able to take Jerusalem, and why the English, nor the Russians, were able to take Afghanistan.

wil said:
I get to meet my first Zoroastrian in person next week at our interfaith service.

They've been invited for the past ten years but this year accepted and are sending representatives to speak.

I'd like to be honest mojobadshah, what I have perceived as your typical tenor for discussion of your faith, your issues of omission come across to me as a cross between Rodney Dangerfield and Louis Farakan....neither of which promotes interest and compassion much....for me that is. Now this might just be me, and I'm hoping that I am able to see this new encounter next week as more opening and welcoming.

I'll be sure to report back.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you feel that way my friend. I'm just trying to be real here, true, just, and all that good stuff. And you speak of compassion, but would you prefer it if I lied to you? For me, that you feel the way that you do, only confirms my contention that there is a lot of work to be done, here... in the West.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

So mojobadshah, I take it you beleive that G!d as a monotheistic diety originated with the Zoroastrians (I could not quite make this out in your reply). Do the history of the other Aryan (Kurdish, Yazidi, Alevis, and Yarsanis or even Mithraic) go as far back? Are instead they just a later Manichean-Sufi manifestation of monotheism?

Honest question, because I do not know and I know much of our Western researchers are highly prejudiced.

You must also realize that I am a "One River, Many Wells" sort of believer and therefore hold that G!d or The Divine or The Beyond or whatever-you-call it are, at some level interchangeable.

Pax et amore vincunt omnia, radarmark
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

mojobadshah said:
I'm sorry you feel that way my friend. I'm just trying to be real here, true, just, and all that good stuff. And you speak of compassion, but would you prefer it if I lied to you? For me, that you feel the way that you do, only confirms my contention that there is a lot of work to be done, here... in the West.
Click to expand...
No worries.

As I see it currently the followers of your faith thousands of years ago invented the stone wheel like in the comic strip BC (now this analogy is not intended to be demeaning in its reference)

And you somehow trace your lineage to the wheel.

Now you are pissed that Ford Chevy BMW Nissan don't pay homage to your ancestors...

That the gears in swiss watches and Rolex don't pay homage to your ancestors...

You are tilting at windmills my friend. We know the source, we are aware of it and have moved on.

Heck according to the numbers there are many more Zoroatrians than New Thought folks...I just don't know what you go on about.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Abraham, Zarathustra, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad... even Buddha, Rama, Krishna, Lao Tzu, variously through the Americas and Africa, Aborigines, everywhere people have attained to the peaks of consciousness and their words have become the basis of a religion. Still more, lost to time or simply that never spoke, have attained to this plateau as well. This has to be understood: they are all pointing at the same moon.

There is bound to be similarities, if you get 100 people to each describe the moon they will say similar things. They might use different metaphors, perhaps if you say "you cannot say it is a circle" they will each say it is "like an orange" or "like a basketball" or "like a wheel", there will be a wide variety of descriptions based on whatsoever comes to that individuals mind first but they will all essentially be saying the same thing.

So it is with religion, mind wants to differentiate, it wants to point to the descriptions of a wheel or an orange or basketball and say these are utterly different, only one is correct - they will spend a long time trying to prove the one they have decided is correct. If you see the moon for yourself, you will see that this is utterly foolish, they have all described the same thing according to their own leanings.

Now that you have seen the moon for yourself, though, you need not rely on their descriptions. Words are dead things, you now know their reality. Instead of simply looking up at the moon, we go on analyzing the finger which is pointing to it so all kinds of problems arise.

If you have seen the moon and you see the person arguing why the orange is more alike it than the basketball you will feel much pity for that person. It is utterly absurd, but few such people can be made to see that they are both really just spheres that approximate the moons shape. You will know, even though the wheel is seemingly totally different, it too is really saying the same thing - it is a little less accurate but still it is the same: a circle. You will try to point to the moon yourself, but always you will find clouds in the way and so you have to go on trying to describe as well. Then others will fall into the same trap of saying you are most correct, your description is more accurate than any other... problem is that still they have not seen the moon themselves.

This is how all religions have come to be, it is time to realize they point at the same thing and bring them all closer together that there is a more complete understanding. It has not been possible in the past, but now the world is much smaller... our technology allows us to go much further afield than ever before. In the past, if you were raised in a Christian town, you simply never discovered other traditions - even if you heard of them it was only to say that they are utterly wrong. Today, every individual can themselves look into all the traditions of the world and see what they are about.

We are extremely lucky to be born at this time, but many go on missing the opportunity.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

The aryans are not punk-ass warmongering boobs but refined ancient troglodytes who have not been given their due. The Zoroastrians are the ancestors of all rock bands and many have jammed in their graves for millenia. Christians, Muslims and Jews are stoned dope fiends who can't get laid.

I'm writing a book about it and I want anyone who disagrees with me to argue so that I can learn how to deal with their ridiculous objections in my book, thus adding extra pages and making it appear like the serious scholarship that it is. Does anybody know someone who is good with ms word?
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Dream said:
The aryans are not punk-ass warmongering boobs but refined ancient troglodytes who have not been given their due. The Zoroastrians are the ancestors of all rock bands and many have jammed in their graves for millenia. Christians, Muslims and Jews are stoned dope fiends who can't get laid.

I'm writing a book about it and I want anyone who disagrees with me to argue so that I can learn how to deal with their ridiculous objections in my book, thus adding extra pages and making it appear like the serious scholarship that it is. Does anybody know someone who is good with ms word?
Click to expand...

What in the world... lol
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

radarmark said:
So mojobadshah, I take it you beleive that G!d as a monotheistic diety originated with the Zoroastrians (I could not quite make this out in your reply). Do the history of the other Aryan (Kurdish, Yazidi, Alevis, and Yarsanis or even Mithraic) go as far back? Are instead they just a later Manichean-Sufi manifestation of monotheism?

Honest question, because I do not know and I know much of our Western researchers are highly prejudiced.

You must also realize that I am a "One River, Many Wells" sort of believer and therefore hold that G!d or The Divine or The Beyond or whatever-you-call it are, at some level interchangeable.

Pax et amore vincunt omnia, radarmark
Click to expand...

I don't just believe it I know that monotheism originated with the Aryan language family during the Zoroastrian era. It's not a gamble like hmm... (scratching chin) yes... yes... I believe there is a God, or na I think the creation of the universe was totally random. It's a well established proven fact. And to keep things simple: the aforesaid groups you mentioned are not traceable to an era contemporary with Zoroastrian scripture wherein evidence of monotheism was first attested to.

I totally respect that you're a "One River, Many Wells" sort of believer, and I'm not trying to tell you not to believe in "God." Personally, I don't. I am however saying that if it's not yours and you're making a living off of it then just comp is due. In this case when it when it comes to the "money" the river of "God" is Aryan property whether the law the respects the facts or not where ever in the world the Aryan people may be.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Dream said:
The aryans are not punk-ass warmongering boobs but refined ancient troglodytes who have not been given their due.
Click to expand...

You think all the bands who played at the Freddie Mercury tribute concert know it?

Dream said:
The Zoroastrians are the ancestors of all rock bands and many have jammed in their graves for millenia. Christians, Muslims and Jews are stoned dope fiends who can't get laid.
Click to expand...

You got that right. They dream too much.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

mojobadshah: the oldest texts on this planet are from the Vedas of Hinduism, Hinduism is actually monotheistic as well: Brahman is the only, but the other devas are aspects thereof. Some scholarly reports say this tradition can be dated as far back as 12,000 BC - how far back does Zarathustra go? Most report he was born in 650 AD.

Zarathustra is a beautiful man - although his tradition is too much exclusive for my taste - but you cannot say monotheism originates anywhere. The ultimate is a oneness, it has been experienced by perhaps millions of people down the ages, everything beyond this is utter fabrication and inference - completely imagination. The ultimate does not talk, does not incarnate in a particular form - this is all human projection. It cannot be angry or happy, this is all human personification. The ultimate - God if you will - is all there has been and all there ever will be. Science has proved this, it says no energy can be created or destroyed, it can only change form - we are all comprised of a dense energy. The nature of the energy is what we call God.

Perhaps better words are: the absolute or the source. Whatsoever you call it is irrelevant though, words can only point but we accept too much the opinions and definitions of people who do not know. So few, comparatively, have ever simply looked at the moon, they go on using human language to try to describe it. Language has constructed the mind, but language has limited our consciousness - now we only understand through language. Finding the ultimate necessitates complete consciousness, so no words can ever be sufficient - they are too much limiting. Likewise, mind cannot be used to understand it, this is why it is called the beyond - it is beyond mind, beyond our limited comprehension.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

If you try to explain the moon to one that has seen it, it will make perfect sense. You don't even have to explain it though, you can simply say "moon" and everyone knows what you mean. What can be done about things witnessed that you can't simply point to and be understood though? This is the nature of religion, it is a clinging to a particular knowledge - people acquire the knowledge of a particular knower and claim it for themselves. It is not going to help, you do not actually know anything, you have simply memorized someone elses description of it. It can become your own experience, but not through study.

Religiousness or spirituality is what the world needs, not this plethora of religions. I am not fond of the word "spirituality" though, it emphasizes too much a particular aspect - it is no better than materialism. I say religiousness because for me it is a synthesis of spiritual and material into a wholeness. Through language, we have gone on splitting everything, creating boundaries and deciding which side is better. Religiousness is an attempt to understand that the boundaries are false when I use the word... it is the very nature of plurality, but we can remember our natural state with a little effort. "Christianity", "Indian", "Female" these are all boundaries we have created through language.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

Thomas said:
Then, of course, there is the question of whether "God" "Angels" "Devil" "Demon" "Messiah" "Kingdom" "Heaven" "Hell" and "Resurrection" was unique to one group, or whether it is the common stock of humanity?
Click to expand...

"God" certainly not, and the Hebrew monotheism was independent of, and older than, the Zoroastrian conception of it, which includes all this apparatus of "Angel" manifestations from God and a "Devil" anti-God and "Demon" manifestations from the anti-God, all of which was alien to the Hebrew tradition but common in the flavor of "Judaism" which the early Christians took for granted-- this baggage has not survived into modern Judaism.
 
Re: Judaism and Christianity is indebted to Zoroastrianism the Heritage of True Aryan

mojobadshah said:
Sorry Etu Malku and Carl Jung are just wrong in that the concept of "God" and the other concepts I pointed out were universal or "common stock."

Yes "God" was obviously the projection of the collective psyche of the human species, the Zoroastrian people. "God" as most of us know "God" as a concept is very distinct from the concept of "God" before the Zoroastrian people made their "reforms." It was a mystery to the rest of the world.
Click to expand...
I kind of like being 'wrong' with the company of Jung! :p
That said, I don't know why you are 'only' associating the prototype-dualistic system of Zoroastrianism (Ahura Mazda & Ahriman) with the newer Abrahamic religion (Christianity).

From my studies I find that the Abrahamic religions are based on the glut of Sumerian, Assyrian, Akkadian, Chaldean, and Egyptian (Akhenaton being the first Monotheistic system in history) Belief systems.

Archetypes are images that can be found in the real world
Click to expand...
Archetypes are found in our unconscious mind, symbolism brings these archetypal images to our conscious mind. In other words, in the material / objective universe it is the Symbol that unlocks our archetypal world.

Jung related this ‘god' archetype to other areas of human culture. One such area was the medieval craft of alchemy. Alchemy was not so much a study of the elements as a philosophy.

Religion is a hierarchy of perfection or worthiness. Thus, God is at the top, with angels underneath, followed by man, animals, plants, ‘spirit', fire, air, water and earth as the least worthy. Within ‘earth', the metals had their own hierarchy of worthiness, with gold first, then silver and so on.

The alchemists' preoccupation with transmuting base metals, such as lead and mercury, into gold had a deeper meaning than the acquisition of wealth. They were trying no less than to recreate the death and resurrection of man in the destruction of the imperfect lead or mercury, and it's resurrection as the more worthy gold. In so doing, they were also attempting to be "spiritually transformed" along with the metals.

In contrast to the alchemical attempt to transform the soul by transmuting metals, the reverse can be seen in the Roman Catholic church's doctrine of transubstantiation. Here, the priest uses mystical means to transmute matter; the taking of blessed bread and wine during mass is taught as the actual - not just symbolic - conversion of the materials into the body and blood of Christ. "Christ is really present in the Holy Eucharist ... and is received by the communicant.

Here we have the plasticity of the god archetype and how this archetype has become what it is in our minds today. Before anyone points out that Alchemy is a silly Medieval art, I wish to state that long before it was smelting metals to gold in search for wealth, it was as stated earlier, a 'science' (philosophical art form) of Egypt and known as 'al khem ia' (the black art, black denoting the original name of Egypt, Khem translating to black because of the color of the soil after the inundation of the Nile).

Forgive for babbling so much . . . :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top