Zoroastrianism is it true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Startingcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Startingcatholic

Guest
Recently I came across Zoroastrianism. It’s seems to have a lot in common with the abrahamic religions and affected many books in the old testament. Does this mean that Zoroastrianism is right and Catholicism wrong and just an offshoot of Zoroastrianism. How do we reconcile the big connections between both religions as well as similarities between zoroastar and Jesus?
 
Startingcatholic said:
Recently I came across Zoroastrianism. It’s seems to have a lot in common with the abrahamic religions and affected many books in the old testament. Does this mean that Zoroastrianism is right and Catholicism wrong and just an offshoot of Zoroastrianism. How do we reconcile the big connections between both religions as well as similarities between zoroastar and Jesus?
Click to expand...
Zoroastrianism is a false religion with elements of truth in it. In other words, they get some things right.

There is no doubt that Zoroastrianism influenced Exilic Judaism which in turn evolved into Second Temple Judaism. It may even have been a factor in the shift from henotheistic Israelite Yahwism to strictly monotheistic Judaism. No doubt a lot of these influences made their way into Christianity via Second Temple Judaism.

Here is what Zoroastrianism is missing: Jesus. The key difference is that Zoroaster is a prophet, while Jesus claimed to be God. Because Jesus is the Truth, there is no need to fear what is true in other religions. Neither do we need to go overboard and embrace these religions altogether. Canaanite paganism, Israelite Yahwism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and even pagan Greek and Roman religion had elements of truth to them, all of which the Church had no problem embracing, because Truth is One.
 
It has elements of truth, but no it isn’t true, because a partial truth is still false.
 
The concept of free will and individual responsibility has Zoroastrian thought in it.

The devil as an evil spirit in opposition to God (In Israelite Yahwism, the satan, with the definite article is a member of the heavenly court whose job is to accuse man).

An advanced eschatology.

Among others.

Again, it’s snippets, a shadow of the truth, but no the fullness thereof.

These influences made their way into Second Temple Judaism and eventually into Christianity. That should not pose any problems or challenges for us. It’s perfectly reasonable to accept that God revealed his truth gradually until the fullness of time.
 
So when we say a religion contains some truth we mean only that which the Catholic Church holds to be true. Or to put it another way, any Catholic theology another religion has is true, but anything not Catholic is false and a lie. I can live with that.
 
Mrchatsworth said:
So when we say a religion contains some truth we mean only that which the Catholic Church holds to be true. Or to put it another way, any Catholic theology another religion has is true, but anything not Catholic is false and a lie. I can live with that.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t put it so crudely, but yes. The Catholic Church professes to hold the fullness of truth.
 
I’m not sure what was crude about that. But I’ve always wondered what we really mean when we say some religions have truth. We mean so religions believe some of Catholic theology. Those are the true parts.
 
The Catholic Church believes whatever is true, so you are not wrong that truth found in other religions is rightly believed by Catholics and should draw us closer together. But the truth can be set out in a way that differs from Catholicism, and still be true. Zoroastrians may have a clear sense of God, but they portray it in a dualist system of oppositions. The Church otoh might accept that description of God, but understand it within a united trinity instead of conflicting dualisms. Some core descriptions agree, but there is disagreement about the broader context.

Or something like that. That may not be a perfect example.
The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.
The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.
Nostra Aetate 2
Click to expand...
 
@kaninchen Well, at least in US they are opening up a bit to children of mixed marriages in which the Zoroastrian spouse is the father and to Persian Muslim that are joining as ‘reversion’ (technically almost all ethnically Persian were Zoroastrians before Islamization). Funny enough there is recently an increased interest in Zoroastrian culture and religion that some are connecting to the successful movie about Freddy Mercury.
 
Last edited:
So in your example the truth is that there is a God. The god is dualist in nature’s is false. Or are you saying it’s true that God is dualist in nature if you completely change the meaning of that to mean what the Church believes. That doesn’t seem right.
 
I mean Zoroastrians have a belief in a just God, who mercifully forgives your sins and guides you on the right paths, just like Catholics do. When Zs talk about God, they usually talk about an opposing dualist power. Catholics the same things about the same God, but in a unifying, trinitarian way. They share many beliefs about God but they are formulated in different ways. While similarities exist, they are formulated in terms of a struggle by Zs, while Catholics have a more cooperative view of life.
 
Is the Z’s view of God true where it differs from the Catholic understanding?
 
Beats me. I am a Catholic.

Maybe it is possible to conceive of God constantly in opposition to something else. That is not how I view it, but there are people around who are motivated by such cynicism. I can at best tell you that Zs idea of God is formulated differently from mine. It may need to be corrected, or maybe not. It may be a permissible way to express something true about God.
 
Startingcatholic said:
Does this mean that Zoroastrianism is right and Catholicism wrong and just an offshoot of Zoroastrianism.
Click to expand...
You ask this on a Catholic forum? What are you expecting us to say? Of course Catholicism is not “wrong”, nor is Catholicism an “offshoot of Zoroastrianism”.

You could point to many figures throughout history who have a few things in common with Jesus. They still aren’t Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Only Catholic Church has fullness of truth which cannot be found anywhere else. It doesn’t matter if some religion existed before.
Startingcatholic said:
How do we reconcile the big connections between both religions as well as similarities between zoroastar and Jesus?
Click to expand...
Jesus is God and Zoroaster was just a man, a self-proclaimed prophet and the founder of Zoroastrianism.
They cannot be reconciled in any other way than this: Jesus is God and Zoroastar was man for whom Jesus died as for every other man. The end.

Here is testimony of former Zoroastrian and his mother!

 
This thread has too many fundamentalist arguments…
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top