quote:Originally posted by PrometheusBound: "At the Catholic high school I attended it was taught in world religion class as FACT that Judaism's origins can be found in Zoroastrianism."
My Episcopalian High School taught it as being highly probable.
Weird. I mean, especially considering that Zoroaster is a Semitic name and that Zoroastrianism comes on the scene later than Judaism.
Unless, of course, you hold that Judaism was basically invented about a century after Zoroastrianism. But then, people who believe that God gave Judaism at Sinai (which I thought included Christians as well -- live and learn) wouldn't be impressed by that.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, I'm talking in the world where we don't automaticaly accept your version of Judaism is true. In this world, there are some compelling arguments that suggest that the original approach to Judaism may have been henotheistic. However, I'm okay with there being a disparity between the two worlds we work in.
edit: To soften what I was saying.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Lisa, I'm talking in the world where we don't automaticaly accept your version of Judaism is true. In this world, there are some compelling arguments that the original approach to Judaism was henotheistic.
quote:But then, people who believe that God gave Judaism at Sinai (which I thought included Christians as well -- live and learn)
It does include Christians. Unless you meant "all Christians," which would be a strange thing to mean, since not even all Jews believe that God gave Judaism at Sinai.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"that Zoroastrianism comes on the scene later than Judaism."
Debatable, to say the least.
"Zoroaster is a Semitic name"
It's a Greek name, actualy, from the Avestan Zarathustra. Avestan is an Indo-European language, not a Semitic one.
The history here is uncertain and the theology debatable. Many Jews and Christians have no problems with Zoroastrian influences on their faiths, others do.
Posts: 211 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PrometheusBound: "that Zoroastrianism comes on the scene later than Judaism."
Debatable, to say the least.
"Zoroaster is a Semitic name"
It's a Greek name, actualy, from the Avestan Zarathustra. Avestan is an Indo-European language, not a Semitic one.
The history here is uncertain and the theology debatable. Many Jews and Christians have no problems with Zoroastrian influences on their faiths, others do.
Like the dad in Big Fat Greek Wedding. You can probably find evidence with any word that it relates to what you want it to if you try hard enough.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Doesn't the Torah mention that Abram became monotheistic only when he became Abraham? It certainly implies that the Proto-Hebrews often strayed from G-d.
Posts: 211 | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Really don't care to argue it with you.
So in other words, there aren't any actual reasons, but you prefer to think it's the case. That's cool.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PrometheusBound: "We were monotheists from the get-go."
Doesn't the Torah mention that Abram became monotheistic only when he became Abraham? It certainly implies that the Proto-Hebrews often strayed from G-d.
No, the Torah doesn't say that. Surely you have access to a copy of the Bible. Even one in translation.
It does say that his father worshipped idols, but then, we see Abraham as the father of our nation. Not his father.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, it's more like I don't really care to dip in the pool of unpleasantness and disrespect and flat-earth-style certainty that, to me, characterizes your posting style, especially on issues like this, on something I don't really care that much about. I try not to engage posters I regard as very noxious, such as yourself, unless I have an important goal in mind. If I thought you'd behave like a respectful adult, it'd likely be a different story though.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In regards to Judaism and monotheism I do have a question. The way I read the English translation the Torah seems to allude to me that there may be other "gods", but it is forbidden to put them before God.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stephan, the Torah doesn't deny that people worshipped other gods. How would it have said not to do that without using that word? In English, we might say, "Don't worship other 'gods'" or "Don't worship so-called 'gods' (which are nothing of the sort)". Gets a little unwieldy. And the Torah doesn't have that kind of punctuation.
There are places where it's more explicit, of course. God says, "If you replace Me with a non-God, I'll chastise you with a non-nation".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, even the posters willing to argue until the cows come home find debating with you to be poisonous and pointless. Just food for thought.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PrometheusBound: "that Zoroastrianism comes on the scene later than Judaism."
Debatable, to say the least.
"Zoroaster is a Semitic name"
It's a Greek name, actualy, from the Avestan Zarathustra. Avestan is an Indo-European language, not a Semitic one.
The history here is uncertain and the theology debatable. Many Jews and Christians have no problems with Zoroastrian influences on their faiths, others do.
Like the dad in Big Fat Greek Wedding. You can probably find evidence with any word that it relates to what you want it to if you try hard enough.
Exactly! My instructors from back in the day said Zoroaster WAS a Persian name. From "zard" meaning yellow and "shatr", meaning camel. He was the man of the yellow camels. But that's according to people who tried to convince us that apples and English also have Persian roots....
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Lisa, I'm talking in the world where we don't automaticaly accept your version of Judaism is true. In this world, there are some compelling arguments that the original approach to Judaism was henotheistic.
Such as?
It doesn't take much knowledge of hebrew to know that Elohim is plural.
But the fact is, Lisa, that the point you're missing is not that the evidence is there. You've no doubt heard all these arguments before, and I'm not likely to tell you anything new.
Which is why I'm not going to argue the point with you either.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Main Entry: heno·the·ism Pronunciation: 'he-n&-(")thE-"i-z&m Function: noun Etymology: German Henotheismus, from Greek hen-, heis one + theos god -- more at SAME : the worship of one god without denying the existence of other gods
I've heard the claim before that Judaism was originally henotheistic, but nobody's ever provided me any evidence.
I did know that "Elohim" is plural in form, but I don't see how that could be used to imply that gods that aren't Elohim are really gods. (Christians have a plural -- triune -- God, but don't accept the existence of other gods.)
If there is further evidence, here's my suggestion: provide it and don't argue it, if it's too much effort.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
