From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Far be it from me to contradict, but here's a passage from another encyclopedia, whose editor-in-chief is a noted religious scholar:

  • Due to its great antiquity, Zoroastrianism was tremendously influential on the history, culture and art of Persia, as well as on the development of the Abrahamic religions. According to scholars, Zoroastrianism was the first religion to believe in angels, a day of judgment, a Satan figure, and an ongoing battle between forces of light and darkness in the cosmos. These ideas later influenced the theological development of Judaism (and, by extension, Christianity and Islam). [1]

There are other scholars who say Judaism influenced Zoroastrianism -- 50 star flag.png User:Deborah (contributions) (talk) 22:24, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Don't the Abrahamic religions predate Zoroaster? If that was the case, it would make most sense that they influenced Zoroastrianism. DanH 22:28, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Judaism is much older than Zoroastrianism but there is a claim that concepts like angels and other things were stolen by the Jews from the Zoroastrians during the Babylonian captivity, yet angels are mentioned in the Torah which predates the earliest Zoroastrian text by thousands of years, the oldest intact Zoroastrian text post-dates the death of Jesus! But some scholars argue that the writing style of this Zoroastrian text dates to 600bc even if so you have to say the Torah was forged after this Zoroastrian text-- 50 star flag.png User:Deborah (contributions) (talk) 22:58, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

Indeed, claims that denigrate the written record of the history of Judaism and Christianity are common, and usually similar to what we have here. A text 700 to 800 years after the date that "scholars" claim it was written, but assumed to be from a much earlier time period based on estimates alone. So how does it help to have a text written in 600 B.C. when Abraham was born in 2000 B.C. and Moses was about 1500 B.C.? Well these same scholars have decided that the Bible was edited at a later date to fill in the information from Zoraster. Oh, the same scholars also believe that not only wasn't there an Abraham, but there wasn't even a Moses. Unless the name of our site has changed from Conservapedia to Wikipedia, it has no place here. Learn together 01:33, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Contemporality of Judaism and Zoroastrianism

Deborah is correct in that there are conflicting claims as well as the fact that most copies of the Avesta from far into the period A.D. The Gathas or religious songs which are of central liturgical and daily spiritual importance are believed to be the work of Zartosht or Zarathustra himself. However, this is a canonical tradition and not based upon carbon dating or archealogy as far as I have been able to determine.

The article should probably separate out the Gathas and explain them on their own and then name the various parts of the Avesta. I would also insert a section or separate article about Zoroastrian Revival which is a growing current event in exile Iranian communities around the world. The conversion debate currently going on (between Indian Parsis and the more liberal Iranian Mobeds) is also contentious and exiting as a subject. ----ExFin 21:04, 15 August 2009 (EDT)