Zoroastrianism The Forgotten and Lost Sources

by Lewis Loflin

For an updated version, click here.

The article below by Stephen Van Eck has several problems. He is a Christian basher whose only purpose is to discredit Christianity. There are also several questionable statements. I'm not here to debate him or the reader because we all have several problems which I will point out.

First, the question; Is Christianity and in particular Jesus just a rehash of the Persian Prophet Zoroaster? Did Zoroastrianism get into Christianity and how? Let's address problems with source material.

The following is the history of the Bible from http://www.catholic.com/,

The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament.

You've never even seen the autographs (originals) of the 27 books in the New Testament. Nobody today has. The earliest copies of those books we possess are centuries older that the originals. Like it or not, you have to take the say-so of the Catholic Church that in fact those copies are accurate as well as her decision that those 27 books are the inspired canonical New Testament Scriptures. You do accept her testimony as trustworthy, or else your Protestant Bible would not have those 27 books. See what I mean?" (SNIP) The fact is, the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church to recognize and determine the canon of the New and Old Testaments in the year 382 at the Council of Rome, under Pope Damascus I. This decision was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). You, my friend, (Protestants) accept exactly the same books of the New Testament that Pope Damasus decreed were canonical and no others.

There never really was an agreement forcing the church to resort to force and terror to get one. These "earliest copies of those books we possess are centuries older that the originals" only date to the 4th century. And this is after church heresy hunters and book burners destroyed everything they saw as a threat. The only other sources outside of fragments are the Dead Sea Scrolls that do nothing for New Testament Christianity, and the Nag Hammadi Gospels (Gnostic?) which date about the same time and contradict the official version of Christianity. We have no originals to go by and have to take their "say-so" for it.

See my Gnosticism section

Zoroastrianism is in even worse shape. After being nearly wiped-out by Islam in the 7-9th centuries, the survivors fled to India and still number about 300,000 today. In Religions of Antiquity (edited by Robert M. Seltzer) describes "considerable difficulties" in relation to Zoroastrian texts. The Avesta was written down between 4th and 6th centuries based on earlier oral traditions. Material from earlier periods, just like the New Testament, is lacking and open to debate. The Avesta has survived only in part. Most other Zoroastrian works only date to the 9th century.

What I offer below are differing opinions on this subject from Christian fundamentalist to secular. My view is that Zoroastrianism (or something close to it) didn't directly get into Christianity except through Judaism and Gnosticism and is limited to end-times and apocalyptic ideas and the concept of the Devil. Prior to the Captivity, Satan was a loyal and trusted servant of God and the Serpent in the Garden wasn't Satan at all.

But if we take most of Christianity, there is nothing new or original accept one thing: Paul's theology of Original Sin, which doesn't exist in Judaism or Zoroastrianism. (The term doesn't appear in the Bible.) The idea Jesus was some sort of human/blood/deity sacrifice for sin (even Christians can't agree on details) is unique to Christianity. Without Paul, all we would have is an apocalyptic Jewish cult. Paul's idea (in particular Augustine's version in the West) is an utter contradiction of the Old Testament while Augustine's views are rejected by the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

The Forgotten Source
By Stephen Van Eck

"Also Sprach Zarathustra" - This composition by Richard Strauss, featured in "2001", is a piece of powerful drama: rich in majesty, awe-inspiring, and with devastating portent. It is an appropriate memorial to the Persian prophet Zarathustra, whom the Greeks called Zoroaster.

Zarathustra's influence upon Judeo-Christianity and all of Western Civilization is little told, but should not be underestimated. His life and words changed the course of Western Civilization, setting it on a course that departed from the static cultures of the ancient Middle East. Without his impact, Judaism would be hard to recognize, and both Christianity and Islam would probably never have existed.

It is largely to Zarathustra that Western Civilization owes its fundamental concept of linear time, as opposed to the cyclic and essentially static conceptions of ancient times. This concept, which was implicit in Zarathustra's doctrines, makes the notion of progress, reform, and advancement possible. Ancient civilizations to that time, particularly Egyptian, were profoundly conservative, believing that the ideal order had been handed down to them by the gods in some mythical Golden Age. Their task was to adhere to the established traditions as closely as possible; to reform or modify them in any way would be a deviation from and diminution of the ideal.

Zarathusta gave Persian (and through them, Greek) thought a teleological dimension, with a purpose and a goal to history. All people, he declared, were participants in a supernatural battle between Good and Evil, the battleground for which was the Earth, and the very body of the individual man as well.

This essential dualism was adopted by the Jews, who only after exposure to Zoroastrianism incorporated both a demonology and an angelology to their religion. Retroactively, what was only a snake in the Genesis tale came to be irrevocably associated with the Devil, and belief in demonic possession eventually came to be a cultural obsession, as amply reflected in the Gospels.

Zarathustra claimed special Divine revelation, and had attempted to establish the worship of one Supreme God (Athura Mazda) in the 7th Century B.C., but after his death the earlier Aryan polytheism re-emerged. But many other features of his theology endured to the present time, through the religions that superseded it.

The Babylonian Captivity of the 6th Century BC transformed Judaism in a profound way, exposing the Jews to Zoroastrianism, which was virtually the state religion of Babylon at the time. Until then, the Jewish conception of the afterlife was vague. A shadowy existence in Sheol, the underworld, land of the dead, (not to be confused with hell!) was all they had to look forward to. Zarathustra, however, had preached the bodily resurrection of the dead, who would face a Last Judgment (both individual and general) to determine their ultimate fate in the next life, either paradise or torment. Daniel was the first Jewish prophet to refer to resurrection, judgment, and reward or punishment (12:2), and insofar as he was an advisor to King Darius (erroneously referred to as a Mede), he was in a position to know the state religion thoroughly.

The new doctrine of resurrection was not universally accepted by the Jews, and remained a point of contention for centuries until its ultimate acceptance. The Gospels (Matthew 22:23) record that the dispute was still going on during the time of Christ, with the Sadducees denying and the Pharisees affirming it. It may be a mere coincidence, but notice the similarity between the names "Pharisee" and "Farsi" or "Parsee", the Persians from whom the doctrine of resurrection was borrowed.

Exposure to Zoroastrianism substantially altered Jewish Messianism as well. Zarathustra predicted the imminent coming of a World Savior (Saoshant), who would be born of a virgin, and who would lead humanity in the final battle against Evil. Jewish Messianism incorporated these conceptions with their pre-existing expectations of a Davidic King who would redeem the Jewish nation from foreign oppression.

It was at this time, in response to their captivity, that the era of apocalyptic literature commenced in Judaism, based on Babylonian models and incorporating their symbolism. This was to have a strong influence on later Christian thinking/superstition. But with the key elements of resurrection, judgment, reward or punishment, a Savior, apocalyptical belief, and the ultimate destruction of the forces of Evil, it can be concluded that Jewish and Christian eschatology is Zoroastrian from start to finish.

Not just eschatology, either. Much of the tradition and sacramental ritual of Christianity, particularly Catholicism, traces back to Zoroastrian precursors. Zoroastrian faithful would mark their foreheads with ash before approaching the sacred fire, a gesture that resembles the Ash Wednesday tradition. Part of their purification before participating in ritual was the confession of sins, categorized (as Catholics do) as consisting of thought, word, or deed. Zoroastrianism also has a eucharistic ritual, the haoma ritual, in which  the god Haoma was sacrificed (or rather, his presence in a plant). The worshippers would drink the juice in expectation of  eventual immortality. Finally, Zoroastrians observed All Soul's Day, like the Catholics reflecting a belief in intercession both by and for the dead.

We should also note that the story of the Magi, who were said to have visited the newborn Jesus, resembles an earlier story of Magi who looked for a star foretelling the birth of a Savior, in this case Mithras. Magi were not kings, but Zorastrian astrologers, and the birthday of Mithras on December 25th was deliberately borrowed by the Church to be that of their Christ, whose actual date of birth is undocumented and unknown.

They may also have borrowed the story of the temptation in the desert, since an earlier legend places Zarathustra himself in the same situation. The principal demon (Ahriman) promised Zarathustra earthly power if he would forsake the worship of the One Supreme God. Ahriman, like Satan, failed.

For a final interesting parallel, the three days that Jesus was said to have been in the grave may have been due to the Zoroastriann belief that the soul remains in the body for three days before departing. Three days would establish that he was dead, yet leave his soul in a position to re-animate his body.

As a Messiah, Jesus functioned purely along Zoroastrian lines. While purportedly of the Davidic line, he offered only redemption from sin, rather than national salvation for the Jews. He was a World Savior, rather than a Jewish Messiah. Jews did not recognize him as their Messiah, and in a real sense he was not. Their Messianic expectations, those which originated prior to the captivity, went unfulfilled; in fact their nation was ultimately destroyed. Neither did Jesus effect a final triumph over Evil; this has been reserved for a Second Coming, in conjunction with the Last Judgment and the reward of Heaven or the punishment of Hell.

Although Zoroastrianism is almost extinct today, it lives on in its spiritual descendants. Zarathustra, a prophet beyond any in the Old Testament, still speaks today, unrecognized by his children.

More Things to Ponder

[ Homepage ] [ Deism ] [ Christianity in America ] [ Islam vs Deism ] [ Apostle Paul ]
[ Judaism vs Deism ] [ Article List ] [ Another Article List ]

Local Interest:

[ Introduction Page ] [ Living in Bristol VA/TN ]
[ Old Apartheid Page ] [ Sullivan County, TN ]
[ Local Schools, Immigration impact in Tennessee, Liberal Racism ]

Related to radical Islam:

[ Killing Children ] [ George Bush Defends Saudi Terrorism ] [ Islamic Fascism ]
[ Palestine Myth ] [ Arlene Peck on Arabs ] [ Muslim Immigration Must be Halted ]

Visitors since
March 2002