BIBLE
- Started
- Last post
- 302 Responses
- ********0
what? literature you say? so there is no SCIENCE of Textual Criticism?
shock horror!
- discipler0
Must exit this lively and predictably disrespectful-intollerant- Christians, discussion now. Lot's to do. Have fun, folks. :)
- brtman0
Why is it that I don't mind Prince mentioning God in a song, but when I hear discipler-type-folks, I get mad?
- ********0
discipler
I did not say Zoroastrianism is the worlds oldest religion. I said it's the first monotheistic religion. The jews started of, like others believing in many gods, but believed their god was the best of all. Yahweh was thus defined as A JEALOUS GOD. Abraham and Moses most certainly (according to archaelogy) believed there were other gods, but Yahweh was the bestest. Zoroastrianism was the first to define monotheism and influenced Judaism thus.
Saying that your faith started from Adam and Eve and by default is the worlds oldest religion is a get out clause. Based purely on archaeological evidence there is no truth in what you say, just faith.
- Point50
I'm waiting for the boxed edition DVD to come out. Reading puts me to sleep.
- discipler0
Kes, Zoraoaster was a Persian (tradition tells us) that lived in the 7th century, B.C. The earliest evidence of his work come to us from the 3rd Century, A.D. But tradition tells us that he lived in the 7th Century, B.C.
Zoroaster did not teach monotheism. He believed in many Gods. Idols representing the "gods" are worthy of worship.
You have attempted to connect Zoroasterianism with Judiasm, since the Jews were carried into Babylonian and Persian captivity. Some try to connect O.T. teaching with Zoroasterianism. There is no evidence that any Jew in captivity was ever influenced in any way by the teaching of Zoroaster. In fact, just the opposite is true (i.e. see the book of Daniel).
- discipler0
More should be said about the alleged parallels between Zoroaster and The Bible/Christ...
Zoroaster was a Persian prophet, though some (perhaps erroneously) refer to him as a god. While some scholars claim he was first worshipped around 1700 B.C., the earliest existing references to Zoroaster come from around 600 B.C. However, almost everything we know about Zoroaster come from texts written over 300 years after Jesus walked the Earth, and the earliest existing copies of these texts are from the 13th century. This creates a serious problem for those claiming Christianity "borrowed" from Zoroastrism, since the evidence suggests that it was the other way around.
1. Zoroaster was born of a virgin and "immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason."
------------------
Zoroaster's mom was married when she gave birth to him, and there's nothing suggesting she was celibate while married. The "ray of divine reason" was apparently a purely spiritual thing, and Zoroaster's body actually was created the usual way.2. He was baptized in a river.
------------------
Zoroaster receives a revelation while on the banks of a river. That's the closest parallel to be found.3. In his youth he astounded wise men with his wisdom.
------------------
Sort of. At age 7, he was put under the care of magi, who he frequently argued with. Later, the magi had him imprisoned, but he was freed after he made the legs grow back on a horse.4. He was tempted in the wilderness by the devil.
------------------
There is a parallel in the Zoroaster story to Jesus' temptation, and, yes, it does apparently predate the Jesus story by a couple hundred years. However, Zoroaster's "temptation" wasn't by the "devil" (in Zoroastrian literature, Ahriman) and it may or may not have been in the wilderness (the texts don't say). Zoroaster is tempted by a demon, not by Ahriman himself. And his temptation doesn't involve turning stones to bread or leaping from towers, just dialogue between Zoroaster and the demon.5. He began his ministry at age 30.
------------------
True, but the earliest reference to his being thirty is post-Christian.6. Zoroaster baptized with water, fire, and "holy wind."
------------------
First of all, there's no reference to Zoroaster baptizing with any of these things. Second of all, there's no Biblical reference to Jesus baptizing with any of these things!7. He cast out demons and restored the sight to a blind man.
------------------
There's no reference to Zoroaster casting out demons, and the earliest reference to his giving eyesight to the blind is from the 10th century A.D.8. He taught about heaven and hell, and revealed mysteries, including resurrection, judgment, salvation and the apocalypse.
------------------
Zoroaster did teach about heaven and hell, and resurrection into a non-dying body. Judgment is done by other gods, but with Zoroaster pleading the case of those who are faithful to him, though, unlike with Christianity, the faithful are not automatically saved. Salvation is achieved by works alone, unlike Christianity. And the apocalypse Zoroaster spoke of was a flood of molten metal. Sounds like a pretty good comparison, huh? However, most of this is from post-Christian writings. Also, most of these subjects begin on the Bible's Old Testament, which predates the earliest Zoroastrian references by several hundred years.9. He had a sacred cup or grail.
------------------
First of all, Zoroaster did not have a sacred cup or grail. Second of all, Jesus (at least according to the Bible) did not have a sacred cup or grail. The Christian "holy grail" is believed by some to be the cup Jesus drank from at the last supper, and others say it was a chalice that collected Jesus' blood at the crucifixion. But as far as its being 'sacred', the Bible makes no such claim. This is a medieval non-Biblical legend.10. He was slain.
------------------
Ummm...okay. So were Caesar, Abraham Lincoln and John Dillinger. Is this supposed to be significant? Let's look at how Zoroaster was slain and see if there is any comparison to how Jesus was slain, shall we? One story has him murdered at the age of 77 by a wizard. Another has him killed in battle. Both of these stories date from the 15th century at the earliest.11. His religion had a eucharist.
------------------
Since they believe in salvation by works alone, why would they have a eucharist? The closest thing they have to a eucharist is a ritual involving the haoma plant, but they don't claim the plant is Zoroaster's body or blood. Besides, the earliest reference to this ritual is post-Christian.12. He was the "Word made flesh."
------------------
No reference to this, implicit or explicit.13. Zoroaster's followers expect a "second coming" in the virgin-born Saoshyant or Savior, who is to come in 2341 CE and begin his ministry at age 30, ushering in a golden age.
------------------
First, there's nothing about his being thirty, or of the redeemer being Zoroaster himself. Even the religion disagrees with itself on exactly what's going to happen, though the date of 2341 CE is given (although how this date compares to Jesus, I have no idea). A pre-Christian text (around 400 B.C.) refers to a single redeemer who ushers in a golden age. Later post-Christian texts suggest there will be three redeemers conceived by virgins who bathe in a lake in which Zoroaster's sperm is being divinely preserved. One of these redeemers will eradicate death. Only the one pre-Christian reference could be considered valid, but that one mentions nothing about the return of Zoroaster himself or virgin birth.
- discipler0
ok, NOW i leave. *bows.
:)
- grayhood0
i read the whole thing cover to cover 7 times before i got to high school. then once more while i was in high school.
needless to say i was in catholic school, i used to read a chapter a night when i was young b/c i was scared i would go to hell if i didn't. i read it once in high school b/c i thought my teachers were full of shit and wanted to catch them when they were making stuff up.
i am no longer catholic or interested in organized religion in any form. but i am glad i read and studied the bible b/c i pick up tons of references in Literature that i would have otherwise missed.
- xaoscontrol0
the only zoroastrian I know of ritualisticly shaved my testicles...
oh, that wasn't me.
- Ekard0
I did a book report on it in 11th grade... read the whole thing.
Took like 2 months
- ********0
Zoroastrianism is older than X-tianity
- Carty0
cover to cover.
rastafari.
its easier to grip if you see it as ancient stories rather than absolution.
- ********0
and smoke a little reefer too
- Mimio0
I like the bible, it contains some allegorical wisdom and some really entertaining and obscure ideas and stories. Can't say I've read every word though. I skip the "begets" portion of Genesis everytime. I've read everything else a few times.
- puzzack0
But why is it that the Christians hate the Jews if Jesus was Jewish as you claim? And why would the Jews crusify one of their own? This doesn't make sense.
- discipler0
puzzack, understand that many have done horrible things in the past in the name of "Christ". There are those who claim to Christians and those who actually are... and a vast chasm between the two. I don't know any fellow followers of Jesus who hate Jews are any other group. Christ instructed us to love everyone... period.
Keep in mind that it was not the "Jews" who put Jesus on the cross... ultimately, he went voluntarily in accordance with the Father's plan of remption. But, it was actually an elite and hypocritical sect of the Jewish religion called the "Pharisees". The Pharisees felt threatened by Jesus. He exposed their dark and hypocritical hearts. He came teaching that God was about love and about the heart. They were concerned with externals and appearing pius before others. He came to show the Father heart of God. They wanted to keep people in fear with the errant notion that God is an angry task-master.
- seed0
I read somewhere that there are 4 different levels of understanding the Hebrew texts. Literally, Symbolically, Allegorically and Mystically. Perhaps for some of you it would help to look at Genesis symbolically instead of just writing many of the stories off as nonsense.
- Mimio0
It might benefit some of you who take it literally to read it with the understanding that man made god in his image.
- ********0
From the Encyclopedia Brittanica:
"The oldest books of the Bible are the Pentateuch, also known as the Torah. They are written in Hebrew and are also called the 'Books of Moses'. Traditionally Judaism and Christianity held that these books were actually written by the lawgiver Moses, but many today believe that the current form of the Torah came about by a redactor bringing together several earlier, distinct sources
The original text of the Tanakh was in Hebrew, with some portions (notably in Daniel and Ezra) in Aramaic. From the 800s to the 1400s, rabbinic Jewish scholars known as the Masoretes compared the text of all known Biblical manuscripts in an effort to create a unified and standardized text; a series of highly similar texts eventually emerged, and any of these texts are known as Masoretic Texts (MT). The Masoretes also added vowel points (called niqqud) to the text, since the original text only contained consonants. This sometimes required the selection of an interpretation, since words can differ only in their vowels, and thus the text can vary depending upon the choice of vowels to be inserted. In antiquity there were other variant readings which were popular, some of which have survived in the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea scrolls, and other ancient fragments, as well as being attested in ancient translations to other languages."