Posted on 08/25/2007 5:36:51 PM PDT by freedom44
Fire, the source of heat and light is not only revered in ancient Indo-Iranian rituals but also in modern day Zoroastrianism and Hinduism.
Zoroastrianism, which dominated the Sassanid Empire, is the religion ascribed to the ancient Persian prophet, Zarathushtra (Zoroaster), who lived 3500 years ago.
Fire (Atar), together with clean water (Aban), are considered agents of ritual purity in the Zoroastrian religion.
Despite the Zoroastrian respect for any form of fire, they do not worship it, rather it is used as a medium to communicate with God, whom they call Ahura Mazda, the Lord of Wisdom, the source of order and precision in the universe.
Standing before a sacred fire, Zoroastrians pay homage to a creation that represents life and the power of Ahura Mazda.
There are three kinds of sacred fires in Zoroastrianism, each standing for one sector of ancient society: Atash Dadgah, Adur Aduran, and Atash Behram.
Atash Dadgah is associated with the householder class and burns in houses and during celebrations such as weddings.
Adur Aduran is connected with the warrior class and burns constantly in fire temples. It is called the 'Fire of Fires' because it is made up of embers gathered from different fires belonging to different social classes, to symbolize social unity.
The highly revered Atash Behram is related to kings and the royal family. It must initially originate from lightning and is composed of embers gathered from the hearth of a thousand and one different occupations in society.
Atash Behram in Iran's Yazd. Atash Behran is called the 'Fire of Victory' and is kept in an undecorated temple, visible only to the worshippers.
Although there have been numerous fire temples in Iran, three are believed to have existed since the beginning of creation: Adur Burzen-Mihr, Adur Farnbag, and Adur Gushnasp, known as the 'Royal Fires'.
The 'Royal Fires' were also associated with social classes: Adur Farnbag with the highest class of priesthood, Adur Gushnasp with the warrior class, and Adur Burzen-Mihr with the lowest class of herdsmen and farmers.
In the olden days, fire temples were not only places of worship but also courts, treatment and learning centers.
This article is just one opinion.
Other scholars believe the Avestas were written in a form of Ancient Persian that predates 500 B.C. by at least 500 years and in all probability more than that.
Okay then...Hey stupid...your post puts the Avestas at only 2500 years old.
No...
...there isnt. /smirk
I ALalways thought it interesting that it considered monotheistic, but has demi-gods like Mithra. I have been looking at this religion because my family name seems to have ties to it and because I liked using elements of it for a religion in my fantasy novel.
Damn, beat me to it.
Predates it by almost 4000 years.
It would have been a better excuse to have tried to dig into Abraham’s background and as a result of his Father’s form of worship...imply Abraham was polytheistic.
I would’ve gunned that down...but it would have had a little more mustard on it than the shallow zoroastrinism spin. Oi...
Yes, but the one God was worshipped before Moses, indeed back to the time of Abraham.
There was evidence that the early Isrealites even thought God had a female consort
As you attest, you will find evidence of many kinds of straying by various Israelites; indeed these disobedient ones are a significant theme in the Old Testament to contrast to obedience to the ONE true God who is promoted throughout. The underlying religion was always monotheistic. The fact that the prophets spoke out about deviant behavior and attempted to draw them back to worship of the one, true God shows clearly that monotheism was alive and well. That many were straying toward OTHER religions does not negate the fact that the ISRAELITE religion as revealed well before Moses, was monotheistic.
Agreed, there’s no doubt that monotheism in the Jewish religion goes way, WAY back.
Need someone to set you on fire and douse you with water repeatedly in order to become purified?
I know a sadistic dominatrix I can put you in touch with. ;^)
I don;t think I have ever referred to another poster in this forum as “stupid”, but I imagine that encompasses the extent of your vocabulary.
Check out:
http://www.ancientscripts.com/avestan.html
I guess you never heard of the Elohist and Yahwehst traditions in the Old Testament.
I also imagine you prefer to ignore the continual references in the Old Testament to the Israelites putting up sacred groves and pillars and their continual wanderings through the pathways of polytheism from the Golden Calf to the time of Ahab and Manasseh.
I suggest you go back and read the Old Testament and check out a book called “The Harlot at the Side of the Road”, written by a biblical scholar.
Then do a little growing up.
Hmmm...looks like you are ignoring this fact... Certain individuals disobeyed the truth and veered toward foreign religions as they do in any age; however the Israelite religion itself was monotheistic back to Abraham.
I imagine some ignored Zoroastrianism and continued to worship false gods. Yet Zoroastrianism itself wasn't polytheistic. Same thing.
Well,perhaps.
The difference is we have written proof that Zorastrianism goes back before Moses.
With the Bible we have written tradition. I don;t know when the Hebrews developed writing. The question is, did it predate Avestan? If it didn’t the Biblical writings were oral testaments before they consigned to writing.
From a theological perspective, as a Christian, I wan to believe that there was an unbroken tradition of montheism going back to Adam. But the Old Testament doesn’t appear to emphasize angels to the extent Zorastrianism does, and I believe the concept of a life after death, a final judgment, a resurrection of the dead, the idea of the world as the site of a cosmic battle between good and evil, etc, doesn;t appear to make itself evident until some time after Moses, most probably after the Babylonian captivity. Even today, I don;t think most Jews believe in a life after death, a final judgement or a resurrection of the dead. That is only found in Zorastrianism and Christianity, although there may have been Jewish sects in Biblical times which believed this.
What the heck difference does that make?
So what?
The Bible speaks of Abraham. Either you choose to believe it or not.
In addition, oral tradition in its time was huge. It was sufficient to convey truth until later in history.
Your observations are simply incorrect.
With the exception of Abraham [who was what can only be termed a "baby" with regards to developing a relationship with the one and only God] there is not a single Old Testament spiritual authority figure who planted a so called [by you] "sacred" grove anywhere.
Quite the contrary...anyone with Spiritual authority tore them down and burnt them.
And the grove that Abraham grew...was far from sacred. It is best termed official. It was planted and grown in order to signify the natural covenant that he and Abimalech had forged between themselves.
Other than that, groves were planted by dummies and rebels who like some on this thread...tried their darndest to feign ignorance to the truth and deny reality. How far did it get them? ;o)
Your example is like saying because the right reverend Jesse Jackson goes around shaking down corporations for hand outs that his actions somehow impugns the New Testament or the doctrine of grace.
That my friend is a free-be. Thank me very much. As to the rest of your nonsensical post, at best you're intellectually dishonest.
~grin~ Like taking candy from a baby....or casting pearls before before swine.
Whatever.
:o)
:o)
You are simply intellectually dishonest if you choose to ignore the many references in the Old Testament to pagan, polytheistic practices among the Hebrews. It appears pretty obvious to me that there was a pattern of discord between elements in early Hebraic society which were polytheistic and some which were monotheistic. And the monotheism of the early Israelites was of a tribal, not a world-wide nature. The sacred groves, the offering of children to Moloch, the installation of pagan idols in the Holy of Holies, the Golden Calf, the continual preaching of the Prophets against the polytheism of the Israelites, the many and detailed descriptions of odd practices, like not boiling a kid in its mother’s milk - ALL point to the fact that there something not quite right with presumed pure and unanimous monotheism among the early Hebrews.
And what does the “Reverend” Jessie Jackson have to do with this? An assumption on your part that I’m black? Well I’m not. I’m a lilly-white Caucasian.
I suggest you do a little more reading in the Old Testament and conduct a little more study on ancient history of the Biblical period and the Ancient Near East before you presume to criticize me on these subjects.
“The Bible speaks of Abraham. “
So what? I do believe it.
And that is not really the point I was trying to make here. My point is that the early Hebrews had a different perspective of the Diety than did later Hebrews and the changes in that perspective were influenced by outside - non-Hebraic - elements, chief of which may have been Zorastrianism, an earlier form of monotheism to which the post exilic Hebrews hd been sxposed in Mesopotamia.
“In addition, oral tradition in its time was huge. “
Oral tradition has always been significant in preliterate societies. But it is very difficult to date oral tradition unless it is relegated to writing.
Well, it's clear that you are the one who is intellectually dishonest. The poster explained clearly, and DID NOT ignore, the polytheistic practices of disobedient Hebrews. As he stated, the authorities consistently preached monotheism. You seem to be hitting your head against a wall on that. You should be intellectually honest about that truth.
And what does the “Reverend” Jessie Jackson have to do with this? An assumption on your part that I’m black?
Again, you're being intellectually dishonest. It has nothing to do with skin color. The example could have been Jessie Jackson, Jim Bakker, Jim Jones, or many others. Those who dissent from true christianity like the above do not prove that christianity is not in practice and being preached; similarly the ancient Hebrews who peeled off to worship false religions did not negate the monotheism practiced by Moses, Abraham and all God's true followers of the time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.