Modern Mithraism Lib : Why Zoroastrian Christianity?

Why Zoroastrian Christianity?

4020.11

Q) I am interested to know what draws you to synergize Zorastrianism & Christianity?
What draws you to this religious position?
Very eager to hear your responses.

LL) To me Christianity is the convergence of 3 traditions ( some say perhaps 4, but more on that later).
Forensically, Christianity is of course building off the Mosaic / OT / "Jewish" scripture and covenant, and the fulfillment of it.
Then Greek philosophy, the early Church Fathers basically regarded Socrates / Plato and those of his school as something of Pre-Christian Saints. Justin Martyr is a grand example of this, but if you read proper / Orthodox Christian theology, you will find it is essentially Neo-Platonism ( really it should be called Christian Platonism as the school became entirely Christian )... applied to the axioms of the Mosaic/ OT scripture.
And then, the often overlooked piece, which I believe is the most important piece honestly - is the Persian Covenant ( or, anti-Covenant ) as I would like to call it.
Wherein Zoroastrianism is to be found.
The story of the Persians is integral as an inverse mirror to the experience of the people of the OT Covenant(s).
There are so many passages, and historical turning points to the people under the OT Covenant, that align concurrently with the Zoroastrians / Persians.
From Cyrus the Great ( a Persian Emperor ) freeing the Babylonian Captives again leading to them rebuilding the temple.. giving them a second chance.
To the most important, being that it was not the Greeks, or any Jews, who knew the Messiah was born, but instead the Persian Magi ( Zoroastrians ) who knew the Shaoshyant of Zoroastrian prophecy was born. It was they who showered him with the three gifts worthy of a King, a Prophet, and (a) God. Symbolizing that they knew his fulfillment.
The lost Persian line of Christianity and the extant notable influences of Christianity from Zoroastrianism are of particular interest to me as such, and is why I joined this chat. Manicheanism is often said to be an example of that, and worth researching as "Zoroastrian Chrisitans" despite many pieces of it being lost or misrepresented.

I am a bit puzzled with those who say you "feel" more Zoroastrian, and not Christian. I respect your freedom of conscience, but don't feel that that really makes any sense theologically.
As Zoroastrianism by itself is still awaiting their Messiah ( the Shaoshyant).
That Messiah is to be fulfilled by the Ahura Mazda made Flesh & Imminent for all men, in the exact way the Incarnate Logos came to all Mens' souls for his Salvation by the Lord Jesus Christ.
As I stated, the Shaoshyant was recognized as Jesus Christ by the 3 Magi who knew first that the infant Christ was the Savior and prophesised Messiah.
For this reason there was such an active fusion Christianity in the form of Manicheanism, and other Persians Rites of the Christian faith which are lost to us.
I must ask thus, do either of you two, or othes, consider Jesus Christ to be the Shaoshant / Ahura Mazda Incarnate?
If not, then please tell me why. I don't mean to start a debate here, it is just very interesting to me.

I always wanted to know that if the Magi were Zoroastrians, and if they prophesised the birth of Christ according to their earlier prophecies, then I would like very much to hear what their prophecy actually said and where is it written? Thanks!

Yes. The Magi were Zoroastrians this is universally accepted by secular scholars and legit / rigorous Orthodox scholars, as well as many Protestant scholars. It is the Catholic Church, that made a weird fluff about them that messed everything up.

Who is the Saoshyant?
Below is a prophecy for the Coming of the Saoshyant or Zoroastrian Messiah. Or rather that the Messiah is the Jewish version of the Saoshyant as the Zoroastrians had the idea of the future chosen one first..
'He shall be the victorious Benefactor (Saoshyant) by name and World-renovator [Astavat-ereta] by name. He is Benefactor because he will benefit the entire physical world; he is World- renovator because he will establish the physical living existence indestructible. He will oppose the evil of the progeny of the biped and withstand the enmity produced by the faithful.' - Zoroastrianism- Avesta, Farvardin Yast 13.129
And he will achieve these ends the defeat of evil and the re-establishment of virtue..
'And then when retribution shall come for their offenses, Then, O Wise One, They Kingdom shall be established by good thought. For those who in fullfillment, deliver evil into the hands of Truth! And then may we be those who make life renovated, O Lord, Immortals of the Wise One, And O Truth bring your alliance. That to us your minds may gather where wisdom would be in dispute! Then indeed shall occur the collapse of the growth of evil. Then they shall join the promised reward: Blessed abode of Good Thought, Of the Wise One, and of Right, they who earn in good reputation.' - Avesta, Yasna 30.8-10

Many of the original Zoroastrian texts are lost, were then oralized and their remnants and then reconstructed.
It is probable that the coming of the Ahura Mazda which subudes Ahriman can be found in lost texts, if not extant ones.
I will have to look.
Despite my seemingly formidable theology, I am but a novice, I do not have an in-depth study or knowledge of the Zoroastrian scripture.
I dabble.
Nonetheless, the intersections and the parallels between Zoroastrians and the OT scripture are too numerous too list. As well as so many unaccredited borrowings in the Christian faith from Zoroastrianism.

thanks for the answers! Can you list some parallels and intersections between them please. So that I could get a better idea

Abraham's Father Ekidu, was an exile from Ur ( what became the Persian lands ) and stared the Covenant. The lands of Ur fell under Zoroastrianism, ie came to be Persia... there is more on this and other things but as a Christian of my tradition cannot impart the Holy Mysteries with everyone... I unfortunately cannot relate the Holy Mysteries ( Sacraments ... terrible Catholic misnomer that is ) to the unknown and unnitiated. I will tell you more if we get to know each other, and understand your Christiaityn...but for now I cannot reveal everything.
Here are some links I can provide...

https://www.bibletools.org/.../Religion-of-Persians.htm
https://www.openbible.info/topics/persia
https://amazingbibletimeline.com/blog/persia-in-the-bible/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.../j.1749-8171.2011.00266.x
https://amazingbibletimeline.com/blog/persia-in-the-bible/

Interesting factoids...
Cyrus the Great ( Persian Emperor ) freed the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity, and thus rebuild the Temple.
Book of Acts identified the religion of the Zoroastrians as of an equal stature to the OT Covenant faith ( in its own way ).
In the book of Daniel it is stated: “But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia” (Daniel 10:13)
Who is the Prince of Persia... an Angel / Demon of course. More this I cannot say.
There are others.

Cyrus the Great was referred to as the "MESSIAH" by the 'Jews" ( terrible misnomer ) freed fro the Babylonian Captivity, and was a Persian Emperor.

MZ) Originally I was attracted to the theme of the battle of good and evil in Christianity. However I struggled to make any sense of the religious doctrines concerning Jesus etc. I wanted a religion that I could make sense of as a philosopher. After initially attempting to develop my own philosophical Christianity I discovered Zoroastrianism already existed and became a Zoroastrian. Since then I have slowly been moving away from traditional (i.e. Parsi) Zoroastrianism in favour of something that feels more connected with my own Western and Christian culture.

Q) Do you accept Jesus Christ / Logos Christ as the Messiah?
He was recognized as the Messiah of even the Zoroastrians by the Magi.

What were your sources for study of philosophy with regards to Christianity?
I am a bit at a loss at you feel that Christianity could come up short in the context of philosophy.
For the depth of philosophy of Christianity is greater than any other religion on Earth including Zoroastrianism.

This is in part due to the fact that Zoroastrianism is not well-represented due to its small size, but nonetheless when comparing Christianity philosophy to say Islam, Buddhism, and even Judaism. There is almost no comparison. The Jews are quite philosophical, but have some huge gaps in their system which makes it eligible for dismissal. The level of philosophy in every other faith is essentially a joke when put up next to Christianity.

MZ) No, I don't accept Jesus as the (one and only) Messiah. In a historical sense he was a prophet to the Jews. However even if we take him as a universal symbol of love in the way that Protestant Christians do then I feel he falls short of being a suitable Messiah for the current age.
I know that there is a Christian philosophy developing out of the Greek philosophy of Plato and Aristotle - and I am interested in Catholic Social Teaching for instance. However I don't see much connection between bible-based Christianity and the teachings derived from the Greeks.
The doctrine that Jesus - a particular historical figure - uniquely provides the answer to all the problems of life is something that I find very difficult to understand or accept.
In the past I have also had great trouble understanding how a historical man could also be a kind of supernatural being - though as my understanding of religion gets better this is not such a sticking point as it was.

Q) So you believe there were multiple Messiahs

MZ) I think anybody who works successfully to make the world a better place is a 'saviour' or 'saoshyant'.
However what you mean by Messiah I would talk about the 'angel for the current age' (and perhaps the prophet for the current age - though there could be more than one).
I think Mithras is the angel for the current age. I don't expect any one person to be a human Messiah.
To me it is a kind of heresy to make one historical person a kind of universal saviour for all time. The true saviour needs lots of different qualities - and no individual person will have all these.

D) Not even the jews saw him as a prophet, in reality mithra is a God

LL)If you studied proper Christianity Mystical Theology more, you would understand why your presumptions are incorrect.
I am so amazed at how many of you guys throw Christianity under the bus, without ever really digging into it.
I will apologize though, that so many common churches, are so superficial in their theology, and thus it leads you to dismiss the faith and search for something "more".

LL) If you knew the NT, you would know it was neither the Jews, nor the Greeks, who knew the Messiah had been born,but instead the Zoroastrians.
The Magi. Zoroastrianism was referred to as Magianism in this time. The three Magi recognized him as the Saoshyant, and not only did that but shielded him for the wrath of King Herod at their own risk. They travelled long and far to do this, and knew he was King / Messiah / God-Man ( hence their gifts ) by their most advanced astronomy and mysticism.
As for this "Messiah to the Jews", I don't get where you guys come up with these glib notions. It completely disregards the first people to recognize him as Messiah are the Zoroastrian Magi...
More importantly, even the most hardcore Atheist Biblical scholars will tell you that the question of "who is a jew" cannot be answered... The term Jew is neo-lingua from Judea, and has since just come to mean people with descent from that region who deny Christ, because the majority of those you imagine to be Jews, became Christendom. You can look that up in your secular universities if you don't believe.
Certainly, those who deny Christ, cannot be the one who Christ was for. That doesn't make any sense. This expands upon the misnomer / misconception that the modern Jews as somehow the same as the protagonists of the OT. That misconception is just a gigantic failure of neo-lingua and false appropriations.
Christ was said to be the New Adam. Adam is connotative of all people. Therefore the Messiah was for humanity as the New Adam.
In the line of those who were the protagonists of the OT, you will find countless races sprang forth.
From Noah we know directly the Armenians and Georgians were seeded. From Ishmael the Arabs. From the Scythians the Slavs, Baltcs, and Caucasians, perhaps with mixing with Japhteth.
At all times before they branched off in geneaology, these people were protagonists in the story of the OT.
Further, Christ's own admissions put him at odds with the "Judeans", as he was a Galilean, and dialogues between him and the Pharisees center on the fact they are different. Even of different lineages, and perhaps of different languages. Dialectical differences may have played a part, of this I am not sure. Certainly, Hebrew was the high language and may have been favored by the Pharisees to differentiate themselves from the commoners, and the Judeans may have even had their own dialect. Jesus was educated in Hebrew, but preached in Aramaic, a language of the people.
However, Aramaic has since gone on to form the language Syriac, which is of the Lebanese and Syrian people, sometimes called Phoenician. Thus you can just as easily consider Jesus to be an OT Phoenician ethnically of proper faith, as a neo-lingua Jew. Not to mention the fact his mother Mary was from a region largely populatied by people more like Georgians and Armenians than those you would consider modern Jewry. As I said, these people also descend from the line of the OT, so he certainly could be any and all of those while still following the Covenant Faith.
Lastly, I leave you with this to ponder...
1 Maccabees 12;
We have met with a certain writing, whereby we have discovered that both the Jews and the Lacedemonians ( Greeks / Spartans ) are of one stock, and are derived from the kindred of Abraham. It is but just therefore that you, who are our brethren, should send to us about any of your concerns as you please. We will also do the same thing, and esteem your concerns as our own, and will look upon our concerns as in common with yours. Demoteles, who brings you this letter, will bring your answer back to us. This letter is four-square; and the seal is an eagle, with a dragon in his claws.
&
John 8:30–35 (ESV):
30 As he was saying these things, many believed in him.
31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?”
34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever.
Is it not that the Jews were certainly slaves in Egypt? How then can the Kings of Judea claim to have never been?
The OT speaks of almost all peoples.

LL) The Roman Catholic Church is pretty much just historically ( and contemporaneously ) wicked brother... that is why so many things in Chrisitanity look like crap.
That goes back to old D's polytheism... if you want to see what a Fallen Angel does, look at Rome. The most salient of all the Fallen ones, that even managed to usurp the seat of the true faith to false worship.
If you want to worship a true badass powerful polytheistic God, worship Rome. He even brought Aphrodite back, see: excessive Mariolatry.
No need to reinvent any old lost mythology.

LL) The doctrine of Jesus Christ isn't really the point at all. While people typify as some kind of hippy Buddha that isn't the point. If you read the first 500 years of Christian philosophers and mystagogues you will soon understand that.
The point is a much deeper metaphysical system based upon the fallen souls that sprang from Adam, being alienated from the true God, and being ruled over by Satan & Demons. Only through the sacrifice of the New Adam, the God-Man, is the fallen system hacked to give men like you and I the potential to reach God through the Logos.
The Logos is the Asha ( of sorts ) the central numinous force within Zoroastrianism to my understanding.
Thus the role of the Messiah was to be the Logos / Asha as Flesh, the Flaming Light of Universal Order made Man. But it is not about his place and time as Man, as Jesus of Nazareth, it is about the hacking of all reality that came from his death on the cross. The conquered death and freed man.

LL) Why is Mithras the Messiah of the current age?

MZ) Mithras is the Messiah for today in part because he is Persian and associated with Zoroaster who is the father of religious philosophy of all nations - western, indian, chinese. Hence he is the best single leader of a modern world religion.

LL) To my undersanding there is no legit / extant community of Zoroastrians that even accept converts.
Hence why the religion is so small, and getting smaller.
As I have said in my previous posts, Zoroastrianism is a supplement that unveils the full meaning of Christianity... it does not seem sensible to me to leave Christianity for the remnant of Zoroastrianism. As the New Testament ( and OT ) are littered with Zoroastrian shout-outs, but specifically the New Testament specifically.
Christ was recognized as the Messiah by the Magi, and thus Christianity is a fulfillment of Zoroastrianism.
A more worthy endeavor for us would be to elaborate a Zoroastrian - Persian Rite in the form of a Brotherhood / Order that is non-heretical, but regards the mystical truths held within the Zoroastrian sophia.

MZ) I don't think I understand the last paragraph, but I would agree that it makes little sense for Westerners to try and become Parsi Zoroastrians when they could be Zoroastrian Christians.
However I think we need to recognise that there are two distinct types of Zorochristians: Those who are essentially Western Zoroastrians 'putting on Christian clothing', and those who are more traditionally Christian in their beliefs but want to recognise the Persian input into the religion.
NB The former group tend not to recognise Jesus as a special person whereas the latter group do.

LL) Explanation; Zoroastrianism awaited a Messiah and still does.
The Messiah was/is Jesus Christ.
It is attested in the Christian scripture.

LL) Interesting, I would like to know more about your experiences with these different types of Zoroastrianism.

MZ) The experience is really with different kinds of people. Those who are fairly conventional committed Christians but are interested in Zoroastrianism, and those who got interested in Zoroastrianism because they had big problems with mainstream Christianity and are looking for an alternative.