Mithraism came long, long, long after Zoroatrianism, which is now agreed to have begun before 1200 BC.
Historians tried for centuries to push it up to 600 BC so it wouldn’t be older than the written Old Testament, but that’s out now.
Mithraism seems to have been a very late outgrowth of Zoroastrianism. It was a serious competitor with Christianity in the early stages, so historians have to talk about it a little.
Mathraism used a ceremony of bread of wine and preached a savior. Second-century Christians, who were as ignorant of history as today’s Jehovists, but with more excuse, naturally insisted these were stolen from Christianity. Actually both ideas had been part of Zoroastrianism log, long before they appeared in the Old Testament, and the Messiah preached in the Old Testametn was a Jewish nationalists, whereas the Zoroastrian one was a close parallel to Jesus.
Islam and Jehovists have called Zoroastrianism “duotheistic.” But the Jehovists, Islamic and Jewish, who do not call themselves Christians say that Christianity is polytheistic: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Jehovists call Zoroastrianism duotheistic because it has the Good God and the Devil. Again, this is a rather desperate attempt to be perfect Jehovists and to insist tha the only religion Cyrus ever had, the Cyrus that the Old Testament says “did God’s work,” the only religion the Magi ever had, was not God’s religion.
Believing in both God and Satan is not polytheism, or else Islam and Christianity are duotheistic.
This debate causd a HUGE problem for Islam. When they conquered Persia, they faced a population that was solidly Zoroastrianism.
The story that Islam is “tolerant” is nonsense. Medieval Christianity allowed only Jews to survive, but it put them under special restrictions. Islam allows Christians and Jews to survive, but it puts them under special restrictions. It had to. The areas Islam conquered had too many Christians and Jews to kill out.
Under Islam, anybody else died, just like under Medieval Christianity.
Islam ran into the same problem in Persia. It couldn’t just massacre most of the Persian population that wouldn’t give up Zoroastrianism. So Islam declared Zoroastrianism to be a religion on the same par with Christianity and Judaism.
Officially, many Moslems wanted to burn the Zoroastrians, but it just wasn’t practical. They called Christians “infidels,” too, which put them in the burning catagory, but it wasn’t practical. Zoroastrianism was subject to heavy legal penalties and was, in well over a thousand years, ALMOST wiped out. There are still some left in Iran.
No one talks about them because any study of Zoroastrianism busts up both Jehovist and secular history.
#1 by Don on 12/12/2004 - 10:32 am
RE: “There are still some left in Iran.”
Over on Stormfront at least one is claiming that one day they will sweep Islam out of Iran and return to their roots.
As far as Mazdaism and Zoroastrianism are concerned, I’m lucky if I can pronounce them, much less discuss them. Does Mazdaism have anything to do with the Wankel engine.
#2 by Bob Whitaker on 12/12/2004 - 10:47 am
Don, get off my back! Zoroastrianism is the only big word I know and I plan to use it.
#3 by Peter on 12/12/2004 - 6:15 pm
Woops, you crossed ‘M’ words.
Mithraism came from Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism came out of Mazdaism. (Yes, it is a little more complicated than that, but that gives you the picture.)
But don’t believe me, look it up.
#4 by Peter on 12/12/2004 - 8:09 pm
On Zoroastrianism again:
It is often said that Zoroatrianism was a reform of the polytheistic Mazdaism. Mazdaism was the Aryan religion (this is where we get the word Aryan) with Ahura Mazda as the Father God of gods who were his children. According to some Zoroastrians, Mazdaism picked up worship of many other beings, including nature spirits, and had rituals involving holy drunkenness brought about by magic potions during which priests could actually see and converse with gods and spirits. Zoroaster simplified the religion into worship of one Emperor-God. The other gods were reinterpreted as Archangels, or expressions of the one God. Use of entheogenic substances was also suppressed, although extensive references to Haoma was kept in scriptures. Zoroastrians consider Mazdaism and Zoroastrianism as one religion, although outsiders may find that the differences are so great, they should be considered separately.
Sometimes Zoroastrianism is regarded as dualist, but Zoroastrians say that is not so, since Ahriman is not a god, but a Devil, and therefore not Ahura Mazda’s equal. Thus Zorastrians rightly claim to be the world’s first monotheistic religion.
Zoroastrians are the source of Christian angelology, and of Astrology.
Mithraism can be considered a sub-sect of Zoroastrianism, that ran an independent course in the Roman Empire outside of Zoroastrianism’s home of Persia.
Bob was talking about Mithraism, not Mazdaism.