- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Mandy @ Feb. 26 2008,16:36) Hi Nick, Quote If you come to Christ to know all the answers you had better be very very very patient.
I certainly never wanted to know all the answers. I just wanted to know some key answers – answers that I felt were necessary for my mind to initiate faith. Those simple questions were not only answered but they were squelched by well-intentioned believer's telling me not to question or look back; telling me that presumptuous responses will cause lack of wisdom.Quote Full knowledge was never the hope of weak humans, but Jesus was the Christ of God. That is all we need to know to respond.
You say Jesus is the “Christ of God” and yet you side-step questions that ask why Jesus does not match the Christ promised in the OT. Your answer is a pat, “Have faith and do not question.” You must realize that that is not good enough for those who really want to know him.I want to believe what you believe, Nick. But as I have said before, a quick critical look at the promised Messiah of the OT and the given child of the NT – do not match. Am I supposed to just ignore that and continue on believing it anyway? Why should I do this? Because of tradition? Please, tell me why….
MandyThe Scribes and Pharisees of Jesus day thought they knew who the Messiah would be by their understanding of the Hebrew scriptures, yet they missed him.
A good example of this is the disciples on the road to Emmaus. After the crucifixtion These two talked of Yeshua and the things that happened, and while they talked Jesus drew near and went with them.
Their eyes were holden or blind so they did not know it was him, (maybe to test them), so Jesus enquired what were they talking about and why they were sad.
They told him of how he was betrayed and beaten and crucified and buried and how that after all that his body was missing. So Jesus mildly rebuked them for their unbelief and how they should believe the prophets. Then Jesus starting at Moses began to tell them all the scriptures concerning himself, yet their eyes were holden that they didn’t know him.
Then something beautiful happened,
And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. Luke 24:28-31When Jesus broke bread and blessed it their eyes were opened.
I believe that it was the Spirit at that moment that revealed to them that it was Jesus. The Spirit brought to their remembrance the words that Jesus had spoken before “Take eat” for this is my body which is broken for you. It is the Spirit that leads into all truth. Jesus is the “Truth”.
Then Jesus vanished out of their sight and they said to one another…
Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures? Luke 24:32
They heard his words and he opened the scriptures to them and their hearts burned within them, but it wasn’t until they had “Fellowship” with him that those scriptures revealed to them who he was.
I believe that when a person hears the living words of Jesus their hearts will burn and never be the same. Some will be hardened and reject him as the Pharisees and the Saducees, and some will come to him and their eyes will be opened to know who he is.
My heart and prayer for you and Kevin is that your hearts will burn. But I pray this for myself and others also. For we all need to know him. Please do not be offended. I do not look down my nose or with disdain to you or Kevin, neither do I claim a corner on truth. I only share what is real to me.
In his Love I wish you both all that God has for you.
Blessings Keith
Hi Mandy,
The anointed one was awaited by the Jews and they were eager to find out if Jesus fitted the bill.
They expected the Christ would be the Messiah, a Kingly son of God and of David, and he would abide forever.John 7:42
Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?John 4:25
The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.John 10:24
Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.Matthew 26:63
But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.Mark 14:61
But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?John 12:34
The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?Mark 12:35
And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David?Mark 15:32
Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.Luke 23:2
And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.Luke 23:35
And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God.
The devils knew his identityLuke 4:41
And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.The answer Jesus gave was that he had already told them but they could judge by his works if they did not believe.
Jn10
24Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.25Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. The same question remains for you as for them
John 7:31
And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,06:38) Hi cato,
No true doctrine.
Many humanistic religions are of this nature.
True doctrine is drawn directly from the teachings of God in the bible.Men teach that they can save themselves.
God teaches that it is impossible to do so.
How is this humanistic? Zarathustra/Zoroaster existed perhaps a thousand years or more before Christ, he taught one God, a great unmanifest who created the universe and wanted good for creation. He stressed the need to be good in thought and deed and that life was meant to be an active struggle against evil and that in the end good would triumph and the dead brought out darkness into God's love. How is this not relative? What flaws do you see in such teachings especially in light of the times they originated? Remember this was well before Christ and their view of God seems more in line with the way most Christians today view God, then I dare say the ancient Jews for whom God seemed a very petty, vengeful being. Do you think it possible that God may have sent revelations or influenced other people then Jewish prophets before Christ? You yourself mention the Zoroasterian Magi, if they were heathen devil worshipers or simply misguided humanists, would they be mentioned with such honor in Christian teachings? When the Jews were in Babylonian exile they would have had ample contact with largely Persian priests of Zarathustra. Does not the God described by Zarathustra sound more like the Christian description of God then even the ancient OT Jewish view?Another thing people don't realize is that there are still many in Iran who hold to Zoroastrianism AND Islam. What that means is that Islam was forced on people across the middle east about 1300 years ago, yet the tents of Zoroastrianism are still existent. Zoroastrianism is NOT a religion of terror in any fashion. The three G's still hold: good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. If Zoroastrianism could take a foothold and lessen the influence of Islam, what might Iran be like today?
Quote (Cato @ Feb. 26 2008,06:34) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,06:38) Hi cato,
No true doctrine.
Many humanistic religions are of this nature.
True doctrine is drawn directly from the teachings of God in the bible.Men teach that they can save themselves.
God teaches that it is impossible to do so.
How is this humanistic? Zarathustra/Zoroaster existed perhaps a thousand years or more before Christ, he taught one God, a great unmanifest who created the universe and wanted good for creation. He stressed the need to be good in thought and deed and that life was meant to be an active struggle against evil and that in the end good would triumph and the dead brought out darkness into God's love. How is this not relative? What flaws do you see in such teachings especially in light of the times they originated? Remember this was well before Christ and their view of God seems more in line with the way most Christians today view God, then I dare say the ancient Jews for whom God seemed a very petty, vengeful being. Do you think it possible that God may have sent revelations or influenced other people then Jewish prophets before Christ? You yourself mention the Zoroasterian Magi, if they were heathen devil worshipers or simply misguided humanists, would they be mentioned with such honor in Christian teachings? When the Jews were in Babylonian exile they would have had ample contact with largely Persian priests of Zarathustra. Does not the God described by Zarathustra sound more like the Christian description of God then even the ancient OT Jewish view?
Cato,Don't you understand? God only spoke to the Jews. Everyone else was shut out. So the only truth is found in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures, even though there are many different Gods described therein.
From http://www.zoroastrianism.cc/discussions_10.html
- # 40) Q: What does Zoroastianism have to do with Christians?
Demon possession, a Persian belief, is everywhere. The Jews do not even speak Hebrew any more, but Aramaic, the very language the Persians used as a common language for all their Empire. The Synagogue, had come into existence as local congregations , exactly alike in function as the Persian Dar e-Mehrs. The most theological dominant sect of Judaism, the Pharisees, hold onto, belief in resurrection, angels, heaven, hell, final, judgment etc., which are not present in Judaism before the Exile. All these beliefs are present in the older Persian religion.
Moreover, the Pharisees own name is a cognate for the word Persians. In Persian, the name is Pharsis, meaning those from Phars or Persia. Pharisee has no clear root in the Hebrew, but in Aramaic, as spoken in the Persian empire and Syria, it meant Persian. Indeed, even the expression Amen is Aramaic and not Hebrew. It means certainly, or truly, which is precisely the same meaning; as an Old Avestan word that is around 3700 years old and which was the name of a very important religious term of the Persian religion, Ashem. Indeed, it was also used by all Persian Zoroastrians for millennia, even if they spoke different dialects, because it is the starting and ending word in their most important prayer, the Ashem Vohu.
Should I go on, yes! Just as Christ could not ascend to heaven till after three days and nights, neither could the souls of the faithful ascend to Garo Demana, the House of Song in latter Persian religion, till after three days. When the Apostle Paul in 1st Corinthians 13 talks about 'the complete', he is, curiously, using a term that is not present in any other book of the Bible, BUT which is, again, a key term in Persian Religion, Haurvatat, which refers in the Latter religion to an archangel and in the original teachings of Zarathushtra, to the final stage in the ethical growth of mortals. Paul, was from the city of Tarsus, a city known as a hot bed of Zoroastrian activity, and in which there were two Zoroastrian Fire temples. Could Paul have, also, been influenced by Zoroastrianism? You decide.
When Jesus, himself uses the term 'born again' , not even Nicodemus, the utmost theological authority in Israel, ( He is called in the original Koine Greek THE teacher of Israel), could understand what Jesus was saying and Jesus had to spend the remaining of a chapter, to explain it to him. However, this teaching was elementary for any Zoroastrian at the time; since their Initiation Ceremony is called ( In one of its names) New Life.
Quote (Cato @ Feb. 26 2008,23:34) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,06:38) Hi cato,
No true doctrine.
Many humanistic religions are of this nature.
True doctrine is drawn directly from the teachings of God in the bible.Men teach that they can save themselves.
God teaches that it is impossible to do so.
How is this humanistic? Zarathustra/Zoroaster existed perhaps a thousand years or more before Christ, he taught one God, a great unmanifest who created the universe and wanted good for creation. He stressed the need to be good in thought and deed and that life was meant to be an active struggle against evil and that in the end good would triumph and the dead brought out darkness into God's love. How is this not relative? What flaws do you see in such teachings especially in light of the times they originated? Remember this was well before Christ and their view of God seems more in line with the way most Christians today view God, then I dare say the ancient Jews for whom God seemed a very petty, vengeful being. Do you think it possible that God may have sent revelations or influenced other people then Jewish prophets before Christ? You yourself mention the Zoroasterian Magi, if they were heathen devil worshipers or simply misguided humanists, would they be mentioned with such honor in Christian teachings? When the Jews were in Babylonian exile they would have had ample contact with largely Persian priests of Zarathustra. Does not the God described by Zarathustra sound more like the Christian description of God then even the ancient OT Jewish view?
Hi cato,
This religion derived from man and is a vain attempt to please God by our own righteousness and serves man.Christianity is a way given by God Himself that relies on the imputed righteousness of Christ and overflows into helping all men too.
Excerpts from Zoroastrianism & Christianity
- The wise men, or Magi, from the east, came not only to see the Messiah of the Jews, but the possible World Redeemer (Saoshyant) of Zoroastrianism. Ironically, the Magi came to see the center of Christendom their own theology had created.
While Ahriman corrupted the creation of Ahura Mazda, it is Ahura Mazda who possesses the final word. Hinted at in the Gathas, later Zoroastrian doctrine developed the idea of the Saoshyant (one who brings benefit/world savior). Over the final three millennia, three Saoshyants would be sent, each one born of a virgin. The virgin would bathe in a sacred lake where Zoroaster’s seed had been hidden. The final Saoshyant would come at the end of time and lead the righteous against Ahriman and his minions. Evil will be conquered and the Saoshyant will usher Renovation (Frasho-Kereti). Ahura Mazda’s creation will be restored.
This cosmic drama will be concluded with a general resurrection (both good and evil) and a final judgment. All mankind will be resurrected from the dead. Harkening back to the Iranian trial by ordeal of molten metal, the righteous and the wicked will walk through a river of molten metal. For the righteous, this ordeal will feel like a bath in warm milk. For the wicked, this river of judgment will feel like burning lava. This river will wash hell thoroughly. Ahriman and his hierarchy of spiritual forces will be destroyed. There is still hope for the unrighteous. Hell, in the Zoroastrian view, is not eternal. The wicked are cleansed by this ordeal, not annihilated. Thus, for even wicked mankind, hell and final judgment are corrective. In the end, all creation will be united with the ultimate source of good, Ahura Mazda.
One can quickly see the parallels between Zoroastrianism and Christianity. A brief catalog of shared concepts includes: a belief in God and Satan, a belief in angels and demons, a belief in heaven and hell, a belief in individual judgment at death, a belief in physical resurrection and the coming of a redeemer figure, and a belief that the world will culminate in a final battle between good and evil.
The religion of Israel before the exile period possessed a very different outlook than the one that emerged after the return. Based on the Torah, and the history books such as Joshua and Samuel, ancient Judaism held a Mesopotamian view of the afterlife.
Sheol served as the abode for all the dead, and it was a dark and murky existence. The adherent to the law of Moses did not focus much on the existence of an immortal soul or a heaven. For a Jew who lived during the time of David and Solomon (tenth and eleventh century’s B.C.E.), death was the end. Angels sometimes appeared in the early biblical narratives, but they always played a secondary role to Yahweh. These references may have been later redactions. Some have even suggested that many Jews were henotheists, with Yahweh being the chief of all the gods. Many Jews did look for the coming of the Messiah, but this figure would only usher in a political kingdom. He was not a player on the cosmic scale.
So why after generations of not looking for an afterlife, and not looking at life as a dualism of good verses evil did many Jewish writers, Old Testament and the Inter-testamental period, alter their out look? Many scholars, surveyed for this study, argued that the catalyst for change in Judaism came when the Jews encountered Zoroastrianism while subjects of the Persian empire. In his study, Zoroastrianism and Judaism, George William Carter surmised, “During all these years in which Judaism was gradually assuming form the most intelligent and active members of the Jewish race were brought into continued contact with the dominant peoples of the age (Mordecai, Daniel, Esther, Nehemiah).” Carter further pointed out that Jewish habits were influenced by their new environment, “it would have been strange indeed if their religion had been unaffected.” While not directly transferring Zoroastrian beliefs into their own, Carter proposed that “Jews took general conceptions form the Persians and molded them in accordance with their own habits of mind.”
One example can be found in the writings of II Isaiah (Isaiah 40-66). Isaiah must have been alive sometime after the ascent of Persia. The Jews welcomed the overthrow of the Babylonians and looked with approval on the religious tolerance practiced by Cyrus and the later Achaemenid rulers. Cyrus allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. II Isaiah goes so far to as to call Cyrus his Messiah or “Anointed One” (Isaiah 45:1, 13). Cyrus would be one who would establish justice and righteousness. One scholar who looked at Yasna 44 and several sections of Isaiah (40, 44, 45) found striking parallels concerning the cosmology of Ahura Mazda and Yahweh. Both passages ask a series of questions like “Who created the heavens?” In the Yasna, the answer is Ahura Mazda. In the Isaiah passages, the answer is Yahweh. Both are portrayed as the universal creator of all men. He concluded that Second Isaiah relied on the Zoroastrian Yasna as a textual source.
It is during the Inter-testament period (400-1 B.C.E.) where the infiltration of Zoroastrian doctrines are clearly seen. The book of Daniel bears all the marks of Zoroastrian influence. Most scholars believe that Daniel wrote this work during the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV around 168 B.C.E. Antiochus IV sought to force the Jews to deny their religious practices, and his atrocities culminated in the sacrifice of a pig on the altar in the Temple. Daniel places the revelations in the context of several Persian Kings (Cyrus and Darius are included). Yet there is no mistake he is referring to Antiochus. Daniel calls Antiochus IV “the abomination of desolation” (Daniel 9:27). Daniel takes several Zoroastrian doctrines and places them in a Jewish context. He looks to the coming of the Anointed One, one “like a Son of Man” who will come as a cosmic ruler and overcome evil (7:14-15, 9:26). Christians see this as Jesus Christ. In Zoroastrian’s scheme, this is the final Saoshyant (world redeemer). Daniel employs the dualism of the forces of good against evil, and even gives names to two of the “good” angels of Yahweh, Michael and Gabriel (9:21, 12:1). Is this not an obvious borrowing from the naming of the forces of Ahura Mazda and Ahriman? Whereas Jews before the exile viewed death as the end, and if there was an afterlife, it was a murky existence of shadows, Daniel says there will be a restoration and a physical resurrection at the end. Those who are righteous will experience eternal life, those who have lived lives of evil will experience everlasting shame and contempt (12:1-2). From books like these, it becomes clear that Zoroastrian’s shadow falls heavily on later Jewish writers.
Yet, these apocalyptic doctrines found root in many hearts. The forerunners of the New Testament Pharisees and the followers of Jesus held dear the doctrines of a dualistic battle between God and Satan, the existence of angels and demons, the coming of a Messiah, a general resurrection and final judgment, and a glorious millennial age of peace. These doctrines, first preached by Zoroaster, over a millennium before the New Testament era, would eventually be found in the sacred writings of the early Christian writers.
Early on, the virgin born, world redeemer (Saoshyant) theme is echoed. Obviously, Christianity differs from Zoroastrianism in that Christians believe that Jesus died as a substitute for their sins. Zoroastrianism does contain such a teaching, but the point is that Christians, and earlier Jews, borrowed concepts from Zoroastrianism and shaped them to fit their needs.
Throughout the chapters of Matthew, echoes of Zoroastrian doctrine can be seen. In chapter two, the Magi (Zoroastrian priests) a
ppear in order to pay homage. Once again, an angel appears to Joseph and Mary and warns them to flee to Egypt to escape being murdered by Herod the Great. This bloodthirsty tyrant would suffer no rivals to the throne. Unbeknownst to Herod, this baby would serve as the ruler of the cosmos, not just of Israel. Chapter three gives the account of John the Baptist of the baptizing of Jesus. Just as Spenta Mainyu (the good or holy spirit) is the servant of Ahura Mazda, the Holy Spirit descends from heaven and anoints Jesus for his mission.A final passage that will be addressed concerns the trial of Jesus in Matthew 26. The religious leadership brings Jesus up on charges and demands him to reveal if he is the Messiah. He responds by quoting Daniel 7:13, a passage that states that a cosmic redeemer will come and rule the world. The text of Matthew reads, “From now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64). This sends the religious leadership into a mad frenzy, and Jesus is eventually handed over to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, for crucifixion. All through Matthew, Jesus makes it clear that the world is in a cosmic struggle between God and the Devil, He is the Messiah/Redeemer, He will judge all men, and He will usher in a time of renewal and resurrection; all foundation stones of Zoroastrian belief. Early Christians (as well as the Essenes) built their theology on a foundation of popular Jewish theology, both of which harken back to Persia and Zoroaster.
Christianity was taken out of its Jewish context by Paul of Tarsus, and spread throughout the Roman world. A former Pharisee (a Jewish sect that believed in angels and the resurrection, Acts 22:6-10), Paul wrote and preached that Jesus is the resurrected cosmic savior who will resurrect and judge all men (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52; 2 Timothy 4:1). He claims that Satan (Paul called him “the ruler of the power of the air” in Ephesians 2:2) will rise up against God and lead one last great apostasy, but Satan and his followers will be destroyed in the second coming of Jesus (2 Thessalonians 2:1-10). Paul, while in captivity, stressed in Philippians 1:23 that he desired to die and go be with Christ, thus death is not the end. In all of this, Paul builds on a long Jewish tradition that reaches all the way back to the teachings of Zoroaster.
Hi KJ,
Fascinating reflections, echoes and shadows…. perhaps to some.
But we are not interested in being seduced by such illusions.Are you a father Nick? If so, tell me some reasons why you wanted to have children. Did you have them so they would worship you? Did you have them so you could have little versions of you that would obey you blindly?
Would you call any of that truly love?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,12:52) Hi KJ,
Fascinating reflections, echoes and shadows…. perhaps to some.
But we are not interested in being seduced by such illusions.
No one is trying to “seduce” you, just perhaps get you to realize that God may not have given all of His “truth” to Jews. You seem to think that the God who created it all turned around and ignored the rest of humanity and only spoke to a certain race of people. That's a very restrictive (and perhaps bigoted) view of God.Uh, and since all of these preceded Christianity, it would be rather difficult to called Zoroastrianism “reflections, echoes and shadows”. Rather, those terms would be more correctly applied to Christianity.
Quote You seem to think that the God who created it all turned around and ignored the rest of humanity and only spoke to a certain race of people. That's a very restrictive (and perhaps bigoted) view of God. In and of itself that is actually a truth. Paul said is he the God the Jews only? Is he not also the God the gentiles. For when the gentiles who know not God do the things contained in the law they show the law written in their hearts. For he is not a jew whose circumsion is in the flesh, but he is a jew who is one inwardly whose circumcision is of the heart and not the letter.
We see in Genesis the God appeared to gentile kings. King Abimelech said, wilt thou also slay a righteous nation. God has given to all men a conscious. Those who choose to do what is right will be saved from the being of creation, as long as they do not reject Christ. But under the law Christ was not revealed so many will be saved by their faith in God evidenced to their obedience to him in their consciences. These are many of those who appear in Matthew 25:31-46 who ask when did we see thee or visit thee in prison?
Hi KJ,
So the older the religion the truer?
So all subsequent religions are just ideas that evolved from them?
That seems a sad basis for any sort of useful belief. Better to accept the written truth of God.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,13:52) Hi KJ,
So the older the religion the truer?
So all subsequent religions are just ideas that evolved from them?
That seems a sad basis for any sort of useful belief. Better to accept the written truth of God.
No, because Hinduism is older than Judaism! It is perhaps the oldest religion existing today. Yet some could draw some parallels from Hinduism that would apply to any other faith. Why? Because all of the religions have one common factor: mankind.But your fetish with the 66 books of the bible shows that you believe that God only spoke with Jews. The rest of humanity oddly enough made it thus far, I wonder how that happened?
You accept the Hewbrew and Greek bible as the only truth. I do not. It is as simple as that. I do not accept any singular work as the only truth.
I could go on and point out many atrocities attributed to God in the OT, yet we are to blindly assume that both the NT God and OT God are the exact same God. In the end, there is one supreme God but you do not have a consistent human view of that God in the bible. The OT was given to temper tantrums, spite, hatred, jealousy, and many other HUMAN emotions. The NT God is practically unknown with Jesus standing in as his representative. Does the personality of Jesus seem in line with Yaweh of the OT to you? You're “blind faith” answer will be “yes” but I'm betting you gut will tell you “no”.
Jesus truly does reflect more of a Zoroastrian approach than a Judaic one. And by that I mean all of what Zoroastrianism had become, not what Zarathushtra originally taught.
There is no seperate evil entity in Gathas, but there is in the later Avesta. Satan is a generic term for an “adversary” in early Hebrew history but becomes more of a singular being during the exile, yet still fully obedient to God. It is only in the NT that Satan becomes an enemy of God rather than a servant, which more closely reflects the dualistic theme of later Zoroastrianism than Judaism.
Hi Kj,
All religions are indeed similar except one.
Christianity does not worship an idol, an icon of an imaginary god.
All others have to start from square one and try to develop a theory of a god and how to worship him.Christianity has a basis of truths revealed by the only true God.
It bridges the gap between men and God in the Son of God.
Salvation and worship of God is only possible through him.God unites men to Himself in Christ and gives us His Spirit to teach and help us even to worship Him.
So it is not a do it yourself and hope religion.
It is the way of truth.Excerpts from http://www.zoroastrianism.cc/discussions_4.html
- Yahweh is the name given to 'their' god by the Jews. Originally, Yahweh is NOT the God of the World, but the god of the Jews. Genesis 1 speaks of Elohim creating the Earth – Elohim means gods. It was not until Isaiah, a prophet of the Jewish Exile, that Yahweh acquires Universality. That happened under direct influence of Persian religion.
Yahweh makes his signature, as you say, through the Jews, because he was the Tribalist god of the Jews. But in reality , Monotheists, do not believe that there is a god of the Jews and gods of other peoples. Allah, Yahweh, Mazda, etc., are all names for the One and Only God. The reason Yahweh, Allah and Mazda appear different, is because different cultures created different religions in an attempt to define this One and Only God.The Jews and the Arabs, chose to picture God, at least originally, as a capricious, jealous wrathful deity. Indeed, Joshua pictures Yahweh ordering Genocide, Moses pictures him punishing the Israelites with 40 years of wondering in the Sinai, so that all the elders that reveled would die in the desert.
Zarathushtra does not see God as a Tyrant King, creating fallible creatures and then torturing them for an eternity when they do fail, like in Christian theology. Mazda is the friend of and creator of mankind which S/He treats as the adults, S/He would like us to become, with respect and freedom to choose. It is the consequences of our bad choices that punish us and that only, because the Cosmos , being the creature of Mazda, is ethical, like S/He is ethical. But even this is not for our chastisement, or for revenge, but so that we may learn how to choose right and not wrong. There is no eternal punishment, there is no sin that enslaves us, there is no fallen human race, incapable of doing right. None of these things are present in Mazdayasna.
The signature of Mazda is written in His/Her creation and what good it has and will achieve, is only because it has, and hopefully will increasingly, adhered to Her/His Right Order, willingly and by its own free choice. History is just the story of the human race. It is written by humans and changes its point of view according to the point of view of the one who is writing it. For example, to a Muslim it is Allah's signature that can be seen in history. To a Mazdayasni, on the other hand, the history of all people tells the story of man's struggle, to realize what God is truly about and to put away wrongfulness and replace it with Righteousness.
As to God leaving Zoroastrianism 'complete'. Zoroastrianism, like all religions, is a man made tool to teach man to harmonize his life with God's Right Order. It is a Vision or Conceptualization of HOW God is, indeed of How S/He must be in order to be God. So are all other religions. God does not have to complete anything – S/He is already complete. It is us that must become complete. In order to do so, we must exercise our free will and choose. When we choose wrong, eventually the consequences of our choices will catch up to us. So it was the wrongful choices of Mazdayasnis,
Christians, Jews and Muslims, which deviated their religion from its original teachings.Zarathushtra's religion was deviated from the original. This deviation sowed the seeds, that took it from the Worlds greatest religion in numbers, to a distinct minority. Other religions, including Christianity and Judaism, have experienced the same consequences. That is why there was a reformation and a Hundred Years War, that is why the Jews have so many sects, that is why Christianity is on the wane in many parts of the West. That is also why Islam went from the most civilized to the most backward and if it continues in its present course, it will either reform or perish.
These are the facts of Asha, God's order, and not the vagaries of human history. That does not mean much – its 'reality' changes with the nature of its writer. To the American, Indian Discovery means genocide. To the Arabs, the conquering and brutalization of most of the Middle East and Central Asia, was an Act of God. To Christians, the supposed coming of Jesus will end history, but yet 2000 years have gone by and Jesus is nowhere to be seen. History is just the story of man. God is interested not in History as such, but in righteousness.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Feb. 26 2008,14:19) Hi Kj,
All religions are indeed similar except one.
Christianity does not worship an idol, an icon of an imaginary god.
All others have to start from square one and try to develop a theory of a god and how to worship him.Christianity has a basis of truths revealed by the only true God.
It bridges the gap between men and God in the Son of God.
Salvation and worship of God is only possible through him.God unites men to Himself in Christ and gives us His Spirit to teach and help us even to worship Him.
So it is not a do it yourself and hope religion.
It is the way of truth.
A Muslim can say similar things about his faith. A Mormon can do so as well. A Hindu can expound why his faith is superior.Yet we see very real examples of Christians who further narrow this down by saying only those who do as they do, believe as they believe, are following the true way. All of this is vanity and selfishnessness of man.
So you are not saying anything inspiring or unique here Nick. You are just relaying what you believe, plain and simple.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
