Did God reveal himself to other peoples and cultures before the Jews?

[thephilosopher6]

Before the Jews, there were some other monotheistic religions. In fact, most scholars believe the early Israelites believed in the existence of other gods while still strictly worshiping one God (Yahweh) as creator and ruler of all. Zoroastrianism is considered the first true monotheistic religion and it does have many similarities to Judaism and Christianity. It even has a concept of a messiah and a future resurrection of the dead. Other groups and peoples, such as the Hindus (while considered by many to be polytheistic) do believe that there is one all powerful all sustaining God and that all other “gods” lead back to this one all powerful all knowing God. Is it possible that God could have revealed himself in some way to these peoples even before the Jews? Of course, they do not have full revelation. But did they in some way have “contact” with God? Were there other non-Jewish prophets before that we just do not know about? Could a person such as Zoroaster be counted as one?

 

[phil19034]

Before the Jews, there were some other monotheistic religions. In fact, most scholars believe the early Israelites believed in the existence of other gods while still strictly worshiping one God (Yahweh) as creator and ruler of all. Zoroastrianism is considered the first true monotheistic religion and it does have many similarities to Judaism and Christianity. It even has a concept of a messiah and a future resurrection of the dead. Other groups and peoples, such as the Hindus (while considered by many to be polytheistic) do believe that there is one all powerful all sustaining God and that all other “gods” lead back to this one all powerful all knowing God. Is it possible that God could have revealed himself in some way to these peoples even before the Jews? Of course, they do not have full revelation. But did they in some way have “contact” with God? Were there other non-Jewish prophets before that we just do not know about? Could a person such as Zoroaster be counted as one?

What do you mean by “before the Jews”? Do you mean before Abraham? If so, yes, because God revealed himself to Adam & Noah, and others.

Is it possible that some of Adam’s or Noah’s descendants formed other religions based on misunderstandings of God? Sure, I suppose it is.

 

[dmar198]

Before the Jews, there were some other monotheistic religions. In fact, most scholars believe the early Israelites believed in the existence of other gods while still strictly worshiping one God (Yahweh) as creator and ruler of all. Zoroastrianism is considered the first true monotheistic religion and it does have many similarities to Judaism and Christianity. It even has a concept of a messiah and a future resurrection of the dead. Other groups and peoples, such as the Hindus (while considered by many to be polytheistic) do believe that there is one all powerful all sustaining God and that all other “gods” lead back to this one all powerful all knowing God. Is it possible that God could have revealed himself in some way to these peoples even before the Jews? Of course, they do not have full revelation. But did they in some way have “contact” with God? Were there other non-Jewish prophets before that we just do not know about? Could a person such as Zoroaster be counted as one?

Four thoughts come to mind.

First, I don’t think it’s traditional to believe that there were prophets in other nations who were equivalent to the biblical prophets. Possible exceptions may include Balaam son of Beor.

Second, I Do think there is support in tradition for favorable comparisons between the biblical prophets and the leading thinkers of other cultures. St. Clement of Alexandria, I think, noted that Jews were given the Law and the Greeks were given Philosophy. Some of the philosophers, including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, understood that the Greek deities were not what philosophy required. Philosophy required one Almighty Creator. Perhaps men like Zoroaster could be praised along similar lines.

Third, this Scripture seems relevant: “In past generations [God] allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways. Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness.” Acts 4:16-17. Could not monotheism develop from people who noticed the unity of creation, and could not such people be further “witnesses” of God in other cultures?

Fourth, Scripture says clearly that some Jews believed in other gods besides God. I think this was always a point of criticism by the prophets. Nonetheless, I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the early Israelites “believed in the existence of other gods.” It makes it sound official, whereas I think the evidence from Scripture suggests these false beliefs were officially rejected and only lingered among idolaters.

I hope that helps. Please let me know. God bless!

 

[carefullytread]

Before the Jews, there were some other monotheistic religions. In fact, most scholars believe the early Israelites believed in the existence of other gods while still strictly worshiping one God (Yahweh) as creator and ruler of all. Zoroastrianism is considered the first true monotheistic religion and it does have many similarities to Judaism and Christianity. It even has a concept of a messiah and a future resurrection of the dead. Other groups and peoples, such as the Hindus (while considered by many to be polytheistic) do believe that there is one all powerful all sustaining God and that all other “gods” lead back to this one all powerful all knowing God. Is it possible that God could have revealed himself in some way to these peoples even before the Jews? Of course, they do not have full revelation. But did they in some way have “contact” with God? Were there other non-Jewish prophets before that we just do not know about? Could a person such as Zoroaster be counted as one?

That’s a really interesting question. I would note that in the OT, there is at least one non-Jewish prophet, Balaam, from the Book of Numbers. And according to this Jewish FAQ, Jewish tradition holds that there were hundreds of thousands of prophets.

So given that there were many more prophets than are recorded in the OT and we know that at least some of them weren’t Jews, could it be that there were prophets in India and Iran? Maybe, but I suspect claiming that a particular person, e.g. Zoroaster, was a prophet is we can’t do.

Also, because Zoroaster taught things that are in error about God, that might mean he couldn’t be a prophet. I’m not entire sure what the Jewish teaching would be. Is a prophet allowed to be told somethings by God and then make up some other wrong things? Maybe someone more informed can tell us.

 

[Vouthon]

The OP is correct: modern scholars do seem to concur that the early Israelities were henotheists - worshipping one deity while believing in the existence of others.

The emergence of monotheism in ancient Israel was a gradual process, much more elongated and complicated than the traditional understanding would have us believe.

The Psalms, for instance, clearly refer to other “gods”. In later readings, these were interpreted to mean angels but it is not entirely clear that the sacred authors would have thought the same had you asked them.

By the time of Deutero-Isaiah circa. Babylonian Exile (sixth century BC), the Jews were staunchly monotheistic. Interestingly, the Jews would have come into contact with early Zoroastrians in Persia. This is the same era when Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Achaemenid Empire (First Persian Empire) - praised in the Book of Isaiah as ‘God’s anointed’ - allowed the exiled Jews to return home and build the Second Temple. Israel was a satrapy (province) of Cyrus’ Empire.

He would likely have been a monotheistic Zoroastrian and believed in the resurrection of the dead, which only became critical to Judaism in this period. In the OT, Cyrus - despite being a Zoroastrian ‘pagan’ - is recognised as an instrument of the Almighty.

So through him, in a sense, Zoroastrianism intersects with the biblical story of salvation. It would do so again with the Magi at the birth of Christ, who were more likely than not Zoroastrian (or Mazdaist as its also called) priests.

 

[Vouthon]

dmar198:
Good post but I would go a “little” bit further than that tbh.

Consider the perspective of Blessed John Henry Newman, who adhered to the idea of a ‘Dispensation of Paganism’:

"…We must confess, on the authority of the Bible itself, that all knowledge of religion is from God, and not only that which the Bible has transmitted to us. There never was a time when God had not spoken to man, and told him to a certain extent his duty. His injunctions to Noah, the common father of all mankind, is the first recorded fact of the sacred history after the deluge. Accordingly, we are expressly told in the New Testament, that at no time He left Himself without witness in the world, and that in every nation He accepts those who fear and obey Him.** It would seem, then, that there is something true and divinely revealed, in every religion all over the earth**…

The word and the Sacraments are the characteristic of the elect people of God; but all men have had more or less the guidance of Tradition, in addition to those internal notions of right and wrong which the Spirit has put into the heart of each individual.

This vague and uncertain family of religious truths, originally from God, but sojourning without the sanction of miracle, or a definite home, as pilgrims up and down the world, and discernible…may be called the Dispensation of Paganism, after the example of the learned Father already quoted. And further, Scripture gives us reason to believe that the traditions, thus originally delivered to mankind at large, have been secretly reanimated and enforced by new communications from the unseen world…

Accordingly, there is nothing unreasonable in the notion, that there may have been heathen poets and sages, or sibyls again, in a certain extent divinely illuminated, and organs through whom religious and moral truth was conveyed to their countrymen…

These were based on the mystical or sacramental principle, and spoke of the various Economies or Dispensations of the Eternal. I understood these passages to mean that the exterior world, physical and historical, was but the manifestation to our senses of realities greater than itself. Nature was a parable: Scripture was an allegory: pagan literature, philosophy, and mythology, properly understood, were but a preparation for the Gospel. The Greek poets and sages were in a certain sense prophets; for “thoughts beyond their thought to those high bards were given.” There had been a directly divine dispensation granted to the Jews; but there had been in some sense a dispensation carried on in favour of the Gentiles…

The process of change had been slow; it had been done not rashly, but by rule and measure, at sundry times and in divers manners…As far as we know, there never was a time when…revelation was not a revelation continuous and systematic, with distinct representatives and an orderly succession…"

- Blessed John Henry Newman (circa. 1845-65), cardinal & theologian of the Catholic Church

Zoroaster IMHO is the best example of this phenomenon, even more than Plato and Socrates.

The key part is this:

“Scripture gives us reason to believe that the traditions, thus originally delivered to mankind at large, have been secretly reanimated and enforced by new communications from the unseen world…and [thereby these pagans became] organs through whom religious and moral truth was conveyed to their countrymen”

According to Cardinal Newman, the pagan ‘prophets’ were not merely attesting to primordial truths that had been preserved and that could be accessed through natural means (i.e. conscience, natural law, observations the natural world): rather they possessed not only this but “new communications” from God that enabled them “reanimate” this ‘dispensation of paganism’, which in turn enabled them to become “organs” of divine illumination for “their countrymen” - in Zoroaster’s case the Persians and Babylonians, in Plato’s case the Greeks.

Hence why a previous Pontiff contended:

“…The various religions arose precisely from this primordial human openness to God. At their origins we often find founders who, with the help of God’s Spirit, achieved a deeper religious experience. Handed on to others, this experience took form in the doctrines, rites and precepts of the various religions…”

- Pope Saint John Paul II, General Audience Address, September 16, 1998, Vatican

Notice the bolded words.

 

[CrucisLucia]

If this was really the case, in what way are the revelations given to the Jews, or the Biblical prophets, or the Judaism and Mosaic Law superior to other revelations God gave to other peoples and cultures aside from the Jews?

 

[Vouthon]

If this was really the case, in what way are the revelations given to the Jews, or the Biblical prophets, or the Judaism and Mosaic Law superior to other revelations God gave to other peoples and cultures aside from the Jews?

The revelation to the Jews was unique in its mode of delivery, scope, accuracy and totality.

The Bible is the written Word of God; the pagan prophets attained something more akin to ‘fragments’ - sometimes substantial ‘fragments’ but certainly lacking the completeness of the biblical revelation.

Their mission as the chosen people, the people from whom the Messiah would be born, also meant that they received (again) an entirely unique divine pedagogy.

Yet the source was ultimately the same in both cases, so it would be unfair to label the seeds of truth in the pagan religions and philosophies as “false”.