Archive for March 5th, 2011

Mentioning Zoroastrian Violates the Basic Rule of Accepted History

Recently a documentary on the history of the concept of Hell did the usual quotes from Dante and tried to trace it to the Old Testament. All that was standard.

But one thing they had that only I would actually notice was a picture of an old list of the Ten Circles of Dante’s Hell.

Throughout my schooldays the worst, the Tenth Circle, was cumbersomely described as “those who betrayed patrons who had done them good” or something of that sort. But the old writing showed its real name, “Traitors.”

Back in my school days, the word “traitor” was used by McCarthyites to describe Social Progressives., so there had to be a more complex term to use for Dante’s concept. Turns out that about every one of those Social progressives are in the KGB files.

Dante was right. A traitor is a traitor is a traitor.

Besides getting that right, however briefly, this documentary added one breathtaking quote describing Hell.

They had gone through the usual agonizing process of trying to trace Hell back to the Old Testament, using as always the name of that trash heap outside Jerusalem where things were burned.

Then they gave up on trying to cram the New Testament into the Old and quoted a ZOROASTRIAN in the fourth century about the nature of Hell. His description sounded a lot like what one would expect in Revelations.

For a good reason.

Revelations and St. Paul were heavily influenced by the largest monotheistic faith of their day, the faith of the Magi. But I have never before heard ANY quote in ANY documentary from a Zoroastrian.

So historians have tried agonizingly to somehow find out how child-bearing is talked about as a horrible sin in the Old Testament.

But Zoroastrians were, in their great days, an Aryans-only faith, just as the original Olympic Oath included, “I am of pure Hellenic blood” and Iran, like Erin, means Aryan.

In its later, DEGENERATE form, Zoroastrian became a rejection of all life, not a form of racial pride. That is where the doctrine of spaying and neutering became a part of Christianity.

It is where the seed of our present idea that the highest ideal is genetic self-destruction was planted.

But historians are aware of the Aryan roots of Z. So no one is more desperate than today’s historians to demand that everything about Christianity came from the Middle East, not from a bunch of Aryans up north of there.

The Zoroastrian Institution, like the later Christian one, was good and bad. But the real objection to its being included in our history is that it was an intellectual influence  By Aryans ON the Middle East.

All accepted history requires that ALL new concepts, good or bad, originate in the Middle East while the Aryan barbarians drooled and waited for Enlightenment.

That makes Zoroastrian influence impossible for the History Industry to explain.

So they do what they do with any inconvenient reality.

They ignore it.