by hamilcarr 32 Replies latest jw friends
Zoroasterianism predates christianity. I have seen claims that christianity draws huge chunks of belief from Zoroasterianism, but from the (admittedly very little) research I have done they don't seem similar at all.
Does anyone know more about this?
Sirona....Setting aside native Canaanite roots and Egyptian and Babylonian influences, Zoroastrianism was the predominant influence in the postexilic period. The whole eschatology of Second Temple Judaism (setting aside conversative Sadducees and Hellenized Jews who adopted Greek views), e.g. dualism between the fates of the wicked and righteous, the coming of a savior and a resurrection of the dead, followed by a final judgment and end of the world, and a fiery fate for the wicked, etc., has a clear Persian origin and manifests itself in the latest parts of the OT. The Sadducees, who followed a revival of the pre-exilic Temple cult, were most conservative in retaining the older Israelite eschatology, although they were probably influenced themselves by Greek Epucurianism. They did not believe in the resurrection, a coming judgment, etc. When Christianity arose, there was already a trend elsewhere in Judaism towards accommodating ideas of resurrection to Greek notions of immortality of the soul, and we can see signs of this influence in Paul, who drew on both.
If a "pagan" source for a savior figure must be sought, I would start with Soshyant -- the eschatological savior in Zoroastrianism. Unlike all the other "savior" figures appealed to in Hellenistic mystery religions, we have in Soshyant a savior who is already embedded within an apocalyptic scheme that directly parallels that in the NT. Pre-Christian expectations of a coming savior (roughly "messianic" in character, although this term is inadequate for the full range of Jewish speculation about a coming eschatological figure) were likely primed by similar expectations in the Persian state religion.
Edit: I wrote at the same time as your post, DoomVoyager. I hope it addresses your question. Let me know if there is more you wanted to know.
Your association of Eostre with Astarte/Ishtar is one such example. There is no connection between them.
The origin of Easter
The English word Easter and the German Ostern come from a common origin (Eostur, Eastur, Ostara, Ostar), which to the Norsemen meant the season of the rising (growing) sun, the season of new birth. The word was used by our ancestors to designate the Feast of New Life in the spring. The same root is found in the name for the place where the sun rises (East, Ost). The word Easter, then, originally meant the celebration of the spring sun, which had its birth in the East and brought new life upon earth. This symbolism was transferred to the supernatural meaning of our Easter, to the new life of the Risen Christ, the eternal and uncreated Light. Based on a passage in the writings of Saint Bede the Venerable (735), the term Easter has often been explained as the name of an Anglo-Saxon goddess (Eostre), though no such goddess is known in the mythologies of any Germanic tribe. Modern research has made it quite clear that Saint Bede erroneously interpreted the name of the season as that of a goddess.
Source: Francis X. Weiser, Handbook of Christian Feasts and Customs (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1958), p. 211. Copyright 1952 by Francis X. Weiser.
At least linguistically there is a clear connection between these names. The same is true for Jesus and Joshua, linguistically there are similarities, but of course there are few connections as to the literal events of their lifes. I think one should look further than the narative elements and also include the more symbolic parallels. Jesus can for example be seen as an anti-militaristic counterpart of the original Jewish belligerent hero. The Gospels are good examples of intertextuality because so many different mythological motives are intricately intertwined.
were there any pagans who were resurrected?
Resurrection is probably one of the most famous pagan motives. Well-known are the narratives about Osiris (Egyptian origin), Adonis (Phoenician), Attis (Phrygian) and Demeter/Persephone (Greek).
were there any pagans who were resurrected?
In point of fact it appears from the testimony of an anonymous Christian, who wrote in the fourth century of our era, that Christians and pagans alike were struck by the remarkable coincidence between the death and resurrection of their respective deities, and that the coincidence formed a theme of bitter controversy between the adherents of the rival religion, the pagans contending that the resurrection of Christ was a spurious imitation of the resurrection of Attis, and the Christians asserting with equal warmth that the resurrection of Attis was a diabolical counterfeit of the resurrection of Christ. In these unseemly bickerings the heathen took what to a superficial observer might seem strong ground by arguing that their god was the older and therefore presumably the original, not the counterfeit, since as a general rule an original is older than its copy. This feeble argument the Christians easily rebutted. They admitted, indeed, that in point of time Christ was the junior deity, but they triumphantly demonstrated his real seniority by falling back on the subtlety of Satan, who on so important an occasion had surpassed himself by inverting the usual order of nature - Frazer, J. (1922 [1993]) The golden bough, p. 361.
At least linguistically there is a clear connection between these names.
No, there isn't. That quote from Weiser only pertains to the Germanic name, not the Semitic one. My post shows that the two are linguistically unrelated.
The same is true for Jesus and Joshua, linguistically there are similarities,
Of course, they're the same name...
but of course there are few connections as to the literal events of their lifes. I think one should look further than the narative elements and also include the more symbolic parallels. Jesus can for example be seen as an anti-militaristic counterpart of the original Jewish belligerent hero. The Gospels are good examples of intertextuality because so many different mythological motives are intricately intertwined.
Yes, exactly, that's the kind of stuff I'm talking about, but not just Joshua, but also Elisha, Moses, David, Jeremiah, Jonah, and many other OT figures. That's where you will find very, very close parallels to various facets of the gospel narratives. There are real parallels to deities in mystery religions, but these are much looser.
Bear in mind too that Christianity was not one homogenous thing. And there wasn't any one "Jesus story". I believe different parts of Christianity drew on different influences.
My post shows that the two are linguistically unrelated.
No, you simply said 'there is no connection' without any further explanation. It may be someone told you there is no connection, but I was taught that the Indo-European root form which can be retraced in Greek Aurora, Latin Eos and Germanic Easter/Östern (modern forms) is related to the Semitic root of Isjtar/Astarte.
Bear in mind too that Christianity was not one homogenous thing. And there wasn't any one "Jesus story". I believe different parts of Christianity drew on different influences.
That's why I used the word 'intertextuality', it's an example of Eliots 'These fragments I have shored against my ruins', i.e. the Gospels are scrapebooks made up of heterogeneous elements or fragments. The Jewish tradition is of course the predominant source, certainly in Matthew, but I suppose most christians accept these similarities, so I disagree it would be an interesting topic to discuss. The pagan sources come second and are certainly more challenging to investigate, because of Christian's deep-rooted hatred toward paganism.
The Jewish parallels to the Gospel stories are "hidden in plain sight" as it were, inasmuch as Christian tradition (already perceptible in Matthew's and John's developments of Mark, for instance) claims them as fulfillment of prophecies or typology. But they are seldom thought of as the actual sources for the construction of Gospel narratives, as literary analysis often shows.
Gentile mystery cults of the Graeco-Roman period are imo less interesting for the occasional material they may provide to the Gospel narratives (e.g. the virgin birth or the anointing for burial, which have little apparent Jewish background) than for the general interpretive pattern of the Saviour figure. Iow, the reworking of Jewish tradition in the Gospels may be interestingly compared to the reworking of Egyptian tradition in the Osiris cult, etc. This may account for the fact that salvation myths made up of very different and often basically unrelated stuff do look alike in the end.
No, you simply said 'there is no connection' without any further explanation. It may be someone told you there is no connection, but I was taught that the Indo-European root form which can be retraced in Greek Aurora, Latin Eos and Germanic Easter/Östern (modern forms) is related to the Semitic root of Isjtar/Astarte.
I gave a full explanation. You probably did not notice the hyperlink. Click on that....I discuss there how the Semitic root for Ishtar/Astarte/Athtart/etc. is philologically unrelated to the Indo-European root for Aurora/Eos/Östern, etc.
As I said, Eostre = Ishtar is one typical error (made by Alexander Hislop, who made countless more spurious etymologies) that one can find repeated everywhere on the internet as fact.
Iow, the reworking of Jewish tradition in the Gospels may be interestingly compared to the reworking of Egyptian tradition in the Osiris cult, etc.
Yes, that was exactly my point on the last page.
If a "pagan" source for a savior figure must be sought, I would start with Soshyant -- the eschatological savior in Zoroastrianism. Unlike all the other "savior" figures appealed to in Hellenistic mystery religions, we have in Soshyant a savior who is already embedded within an apocalyptic scheme that directly parallels that in the NT
Interesting. I will look that up because I was oblivious to this.
Thanks
Sirona
