A Conservative Christian Zealot Refutes Hell
-
Peace,
The author uses the Biblical "new testament" to refute the concept of hell/"gehennom", which is not even real scripture. Also, the Qur'aanic passages regarding hell/"gehannam" are completely allegorical, and they don't describe literal features of it. It is simply a place of punishment for sins committed, the same concept relayed in Orthodox Judaism. The specific differences between the two doctrines are that the Jews believe that everyone will eventually go to heaven/"gan-eden", and hell is only temporary, depending on the sins committed and adherance to the Torah. The Qur'aan implies that hell is a place of eternal (not temporary) punishment... If anything, the modern Xtian concept of hell is more in line with Zoroastrianism, not the Islaamic concept. The Xtian view is that the only way to be saved from hell is to accept Jesus as "lord and savior", which is very similar to the mode of salvation relayed in Zoroastrianism, which also includes crossing a symbolic "bridge" to attain safety. In other monotheistic religions, salvation is dependent on worshiping God ALONE.
Also, since Judaism predated Zoroastrianism, it's very plausible that Zoroastrians based many of their teachings, specifically regarding heaven and hell, on the doctrines of Judaism outlined in the Torah and Mishna... Therefore, it's presented as if Judaism influened Zoroastrianism, which influenced Xtianity, which influenced Islaam. However, Islaam uses many of the concepts from Judaism, while it removes many of the innovations added into Zoroastrianism and Xtianity. So, hell/"gehennom" itself is not refuted. Rather, the Xtian concept of hell is refuted...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace Bilal,
The author uses the Biblical "new testament" to refute the concept of hell/"gehennom", which is not even real scripture.
If the New Testament is not the Injil, where is the real Injil that the Quran is asking the people of the Injil to judge with? The old silly question again. D
Also, the Qur'aanic passages regarding hell/"gehannam" are completely allegorical, and they don't describe literal features of it.
Allegory of what? It is almost completely literal. If Hell is an allegory, then the Garden is an allegory too. But the companions of the Garden will say that they have been given this provision before. They are both very real places.
The specific differences between the two doctrines are that the Jews believe that everyone will eventually go to heaven/"gan-eden", and hell is only temporary, depending on the sins committed and adherance to the Torah. It is simply a place of punishment for sins committed, the same concept relayed in Orthodox Judaism.
The concept of afterlife in Orthodox Judaism is a bit shaky with no solid proof from the written scriptures. Some even say that the wicked will simply die out but the righteous will be resurrected.
If anything, the modern Xtian concept of hell is more in line with Zoroastrianism, not the Islaamic concept.
Ohh come on man, the Quranic concept of Hell is the Christian concept which are similar to the Zoroasreian concept. They are both Fires being kindled to toruture the rejectors. Actually the Quran is more clear on the details of the punishments. Christianity was affected by the brutal Islamic concept of Hell. The Quran says clearly that God scares His servants with it.
The Xtian view is that the only way to be saved from hell is to accept Jesus as "lord and savior", which is very similar to the mode of salvation relayed in Zoroastrianism, which also includes crossing a symbolic "bridge" to attain safety. In other monotheistic religions, salvation is dependent on worshiping God ALONE.
Agreed, Islam is like a hybrid of Zoroastrian afterlife and Judaism morality.
Also, since Judaism predated Zoroastrianism, it's very plausible that Zoroastrians based many of their teachings, specifically regarding heaven and hell, on the doctrines of Judaism outlined in the Torah and Mishna... Therefore, it's presented as if Judaism influened Zoroastrianism, which influenced Xtianity, which influenced Islaam.
This is a bit dishonest and this what many Jews are trying to say. But Eden and Gehenna are later developments. Read the Hebrew scriptures. You will find that it doesnt talk about an afterlife except very late and the most shocking it doesn't talk about Messianic prophecies!!. I had a theory that the Messiah figure the Jews are waiting cannot be a human and it is actually a misnomer. Almost always when Isaiah is referring to this abstract bright future, God is the one who will come (NOT Jesus btw). But again most prophecies are talking about this world and the return of the glory of Israel. When God blessed Abraham, he didn't promise him the Garden of Eden, he promised him the land of Canaan to be his and his descendants as an everlasting posession.
However, Islaam uses many of the concepts from Judaism, while it removes many of the innovations added into Zoroastrianism and Xtianity. So, hell/"gehennom" itself is not refuted. Rather, the Xtian concept of hell is refuted...
Again Islam is a controlled mixture of Judaism(deeds and history), Christianity(Jesus'Messiah', Virgin Birth, Feast from heaven) and Zoroastrianism(Garden of Eden, Punishing Fire)
Peace,
Rami
-
Peace Rami,
Theologically, this is incorrect. Islaam and Christianity are HUGELY different, and they're not even compatible. The only firm similarity they have is the status of Jesus (or "Esa" as the messiah. Other than this, Islaam is more like Judaism than anything... Now, in the case of Zoroastrianism, all of their doctrines are not false. However, their main stance on spirituality is the concept of duality, a stance that doesn't exist in Islaam or Judaism. Literally, Christianity is a replay of Zoroastrianism, just like Islaam is a quasi-replay of Judaism. Even though some of the doctrines are similar, this doesn't make the beliefs and ideologies of them the same. Many Jews consider Zoroastrians "pagans" (idolators), the same view they have toward Christians. However, the view is different in the case of those who practice Islaam, who are considered authentically monotheistic.
On the issue of "heaven and hell", we don't specifically know what either place will look like. The Qur'aan gives allegorical references for both places. The garden is probably not a place filled with trees, fruits, and animals, just like "gehennom" is probably not a place covered in flames. These are allegorical references to someplace pleasant and enjoyable versus a place that is uncomfortable and tormenting. None of us know what heaven or hell look or feel like, which is why the scriptures use allegorical descriptions.
Regarding the Injeel, my personal opinion is that it is lost (or hidden), but it definately exists within the scriptures. I do NOT believe, however, that it's part of the Biblical "new testament". The Biblical Greek scriptures, allegedly written by the followers of Jesus, are forgeries and exaggerations. The most solid of these texts are the letters of Paul, and many of his teachings directly conflicted with Jesus' own words.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace Bilal,
Jewish Acquiescence
Many factors factored into the Jews and the early Christians adopting these teachings of Zoroaster, or of syncretical mixing them into their system of beliefs. First and foremost is the continuous proximity with the Persians, and with the effects of Persian culture even during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. From 550 to 330 BCE, the Jews were under the dominion of Persian rulers, who practiced Zoroastrianism as a loosely held state religion. Consider this statement from a manual on Zoroastrian religious instruction regarding the Jews. This progress happened to be, for the most parts, in just those doctrines which were commonly held by millions of Zoroastrians among whom lived. The foremost among these is the belief for future life, those portions of the Old Testament written before the Exile scarcely mention. They knew no reward for their deeds other than what they found on this earth. Their hopes were centered around this world, prosperity in this world, and prosperity in this life . Further, with no central political or religious authority, no king or judge, and not always having a central temple, Judaism took on decentralized forms along kinship lines in communities, with nobody at the top of a hierarchy to declare what was orthodox. In the Palestinian homeland, the Judaean families lived in constant contact or confrontation with members of other nationalities. It was a constant battle to assert identity as a Judaean or to consider the neighboring religious beliefs now operating in such close proximity .
The second factor is the social and political conditions during the Jewish exile and later during the Hellenistic and Roman occupations. The horror of their living conditions can bring people to look otherworldly for comfort. This is especially true when the basic foundations of their religion are shaken, leaving them baffled, suffering, experiencing cognitive dissonance and deprived . The bafflement the Jews were experiencing was a result of what they saw as abandonment by God. While a few members of the reform party were glad that Judah had been taken, for most Jews, their theological picture had collapsed. Their scriptures had told them that they were the chosen and that God was going to save them and make them into a great nation. But when Nebuchadnezzar took control of Palestine and destroyed the temple, many began to question whether perhaps some of the other gods were mad because of their singular focus on Yahweh, and were keeping their eyes open for practices which may help them recover .
A third factor is the benevolence shown by Cyrus the Great, who not only freed them from Babylonian rule and exile, but allowed them to return to their homeland and gave them assistance in the rebuilding of their foreign temple . Because of his ability to help the nation of Judah back to its feed, they attribute to him messianic qualities, as shown in Isaiah 421-4 .
A fourth major factor may be the relative appeal of a heaven and hell afterlife, compared to the gloomy picture of Sheol. The religion of Israel before the exile period possessed a very different outlook than the one that emerged after the return. Based on the Torah, and the history books such as Joshua and Samuel, ancient Judaism held a Mesopotamian view of the afterlife. Sheol served as the abode for all the dead, and it was a dark and murky existence. The adherent to the law of Moses did not focus much on the existence of an immortal soul or a heaven. For a Jew who lived during the time of David and Solomon (tenth and eleventh centurys BCE), death was the end . In ancient Judaism, there was only the heavens and earth, with the heavens as the dwelling place of Yahweh, while under the earth was Sheol, an ambiguous term used to refer to the grave or tomb itself, an obscure land of shadows. Prior to Babylonian exile 597 BC, there was no individual identity for the dead, a faceless collective existing in a joyless realm . We see further proof from the bible itself in 1 Samuel 289, a story of medium raising Samuel for King Saul, in which she says I see gods rise from the earth. The Gods are the souls of the dead, deified in Sheol, having a curiously unenviable immortality like the shades of the classical Greek Hades .
The signs of the Jewish acceptance of a Heaven and Hell afterlife appear most obviously in writing in Ezekiel 37 and Daniel 12, where the lord shows He is going to resurrect the dead for judgment. Thus says the Lord God to these bones I will cause breath to enter you and you shall live. I am going to open your graves, and bring you up from your graves, O my people; and I will bring you back to the land of Israel . In Daniel, the wording is even more clear, and very parallel to Zoroasters teachings on the afterlife Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt .
A Misapplication of Good Wisdom
The Jews had previously been a tribe or nation concerned with survival as a nation, and had a deep concern with religion with god in this life condition. In their adoption of this teaching, as the people come under more imperial rule, the Jewish nation finds itself further splintering. Many Jews had been open to these new thought processes, but a few, most notably the Sadducees, resisted any teachings which were not written in the Torah . As all of the groups attempted to find identities for themselves, and to claim theirs as closer to orthodoxy, Jesus begins to enter the picture, in an effort to fulfill the prophecies and the teachings of this new Judaism .
However the Jewish people have misunderstood Jesus, including many of his closest followers, thinking that he was to be a messiah of a political form like Cyrus, to restore the nation of Israel to power with military might. So it was out of a Judaism enriched by five centuries of contact with Zoroastrianism that Christianity arose in the Parthian period, a new religion with roots thus in two ancient faiths, one Semitic, the other Iranian. Doctrines taught perhaps a millennium and a half earlier by Zoroaster began in this way to reach fresh hearers; but again, as in Judaism, they lost some of their logic and coherence by their adoption into another creed; for the teachings of the Iranian prophet about creation, Heaven and Hell, and the Day of Judgment, were less intellectually coherent when part of a religion which proclaimed the existence of one omnipotent God whose unrestricted rule was based not on justice but on love. They continued nevertheless, even in this new setting, to exert their powerful influence on mens strivings to be good .
Concluding Question
One fundamental problem with the Jews and Christians adopting this Heaven and Hell afterlife is the matter of original sin introduced with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, a concept that Zoroaster did not preach, and would not have made sense to Zoroaster. Mixing these two concepts together necessitates yet another concept, that of needing to be saved above and beyond just good deeds outweighing bad deeds, because if one is originally sinful, one can never be more good than bad. To a person outside of the Jewish or Christian religion, the layers of construction begin to get thick enough that questions beg to be asked (all the more when the Catholic church constructed purgatory, and the sale of indulgences).
Within the church, questions are asked regarding how the system of substitutional atonement through the messiah works to, in effect, turn the sword of the Chinvat bridge so it lays flat for every Christ follower regardless of how their scale weighs, because Christ pulls the good scale down for them. But the important questions that are not asked involve whether the system of substitutional atonement works. The dominant established Christian church has taken upon itself through over a score of ecumenical councils to do the construction and interpretation of Jesus teachings, and gone on numerous bloody crusades startlingly reminiscent of the actions of Tansar and the Sasanians. That they have done this without asking the important questions leaves a large margin open about whether the combination of substitutional atonement applied in lieu of good actions may actually nullify Zoroasters original intent, which was to make people behave less barbarically and bring the culture to a greater state of grace.
Bibliography
- Shahzadi, M.B., Message of Zarathushtra. Religious Instruction. Vol. 1. 1986, Westminster, CA California Zoroastrain Center.
- Boyce, M., Zoroastrians. The Sikhs, ed. J. Hinnells. 1979, London, Boston, & Henley Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- Farhat-Holzman, L., Strange Birds from Zoroaster's Nest An Overview of Revealed Religions. Oneonta Philosophy Studies Historical and Cultural Perspectives, ed. D. Shrader. 2000, Binghamton, NY Global Publications,IGCS.
- Boyce, M., ed. Textual Sources for the Study of Zoroastrianism. 1984, Barnes & Noble Books Totowa, New Jersey.
- Heever, G.v.d., Jesus in the World of Religions A Preliminary Plotting of a Route Map. Religion and Theology, 1998. 5(3) p. 311-334.
- Albertz, R., A History of Israelite Religion in the Old Testament Period From the Exile to the Maccabees. Vol. 2. 1994, Louisville, KY Westminster John Knox Press.
- Miller Jr, P.D., P.D. Hanson, and S.D. McBride, eds. Ancient Israelite Religion. 1987, Fortress Press Philadelphia.
- Howell, J. Zoroastrianism & Christianity. Historical Text Archive 2006 ; Available from http//historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=754.
- Tober, L.M. and F.S. Lusby, Encyclopedia of Religion. 2 ed, ed. L. Jones. Vol. 6. 2005, Detroit, MI Macmillan Reference USA.
- Niditch, S., Ancient Israelite Religion. 1997, New York Oxford University Press.
- Ezekiel 37 1-14, in The New Interpreter's Study Bible New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha. 2003, Abingdon Press Nashville, TN.
- Daniel 121-12, in The New Interpreter's Study Bible New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha. 2003, Abingdon Press Nashville, TN.
If Islam is true, then the ancient Israelite prophets should have been preaching Zorojudaism to their followers and that Solomon is an ancient Zoroastrian King and the Fire temples are the Masjid of the ancients.
Solomon being a ancient persian King is far fetched but there is a place in Iran that is called 'The Throne of Solomon'.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takht-i-Suleiman
http//www.iranataglance.com/historical-buildings/takhte_soleyman_azar_goshnasp.phpNote that the Zoroastrian temples have fires in it because it represents a state of purity. Thats why when God spoke to Moses, he spoke from a Firey Bush and that the criminals will be punished by the Fire.
2530 When he reached it, he was called from the tree at the edge of the right side of the valley on blessed ground "O Moses, it is Me, God, the Lord of the worlds."
278 So when he came to it he was called "Blessed are the ones in the fire and whoever is around it, and glory be to God, the Lord of the worlds."NB. The Fire was not burning the bush because it is probably cold. No body knows why Tuwa is a holy ground anyway but I think that this Fire is not haphazard. It is the same Fire that the people of Abraham tried to burn him with. When they challenged the God of Abraham to save Abraham from the fire, he neutralized it and remained cold forever.
Conclusion
Judeochristianity is Mesopotamian (burnt offering, sin offerings and the gloomy Sheol)
Islam is Persian (balance of deeds, good deeds eliminate the bad, ablution before prayer, timed prayer, and the dual eternal afterlife)Peace,
Rami
-
Peace Rami,
This is very interesting, and I was unaware of some of the factors concerning the "hidden" beliefs of the Zoroastrians, especially in the pre-Islaamic periods... Perhaps the Zoroastrians belonged to the group of "Sabians" mentioned in the Qur'aan, noted as maintaining a monotheistic system, at least a form of it. One of the biggest problem I see with their religion is their concept of supreme duality, meaning there is a powerful god who is completely good, and then there is a powerful god who is completely bad (i.e. "Satan". This is the same doctrine in modern Christianity, and it is blasphemous, relaying the idea that there are TWO gods instead of one, which is polytheism. They also believe in angels presiding over us, and they dedicate their prayers to the "archangels" above them, not to God ALONE. This is also idolatry, not compatible with Islaam or Judaism, even though Christians practice some of these same concepts in praying to Maryam and praying "in Jesus' name" (or through Jesus). These, among other things, clearly separate Zoroastrianism from the monotheistic, Abrahamic religions, namely Judaism and Islaam. This is why I believe it to be most compatible with modern Christianity. In fact, Christianity seems to have drawn most of it's central beliefs from Zoroastrian doctrines...
Still, very enlightening post, and I'll look more into this. Thanks...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
ahmadbilai- just like Islaam is a quasi-replay of Judaism.
- It seems all jews hold that belief; what a jew, who holds that belief, doesn't realise is that abraham & moses were muslims, not jews.
ma'a salaam.
God bless all.
al'hamd li Allaah Rabb al'aalameen
-
Peace,
The idea that fires in the temples should not be extinguished is not exclusive to Zoroastrianism. It is a commandment in the Torah!
Lev 69 Command Aaron and his sons, saying, This is the law of the burnt offering It the burnt offering, because of the burning upon the altar all night unto the morning, and the fire of the altar shall be burning in it.
Coupled with Vivek's description of Salat. So incense is offered twice a day in t hat Fire while reciting scripture after washing the hands and feet.
Do you have any doubt now that Zoroastrianism is the origin of Judaism and Islam? D
Peace,
Rami