Pharisees - Persians - A Research Study
-
Salaam,
I do not often create new threads, but now I felt like I had to do it. I felt that the research I have conducted for several months must be reflected upon officially and I also have had one person, brother noshirk, actually agreeing that the Nazarene people of Qur'an is the Persians as well as partially supporting my theory. Certainly it is a work in progress and I have no conclusive evidence at all, but I decided that I have enough meat on my legs to make my philosophical thinking public.
Well, as the title of the thread suggests, I suspect that the Pharisees of the Bible are the Persians and that history as we know it is filled with falsehood. Many of the events of the Bible took place much further east than believed and certainly not in the state of Israel as we think today. I have no specific location to center events at and my studies seem to point at the region around the Persian Gulf (Khaliye Fars), and perhaps today's Iraq and Iran. It is important to know that the ancient city of Nineveh is located in today's Iraq near Mosul and which is frequently mention in the Bible. Apart from that, lots of locations from the Bible are beginning to be pinpointed from Iraq towards Iran, formerly Persia. Ecbatana, Iran, near today's Hamedan, I have found traces of importance from the past and that one place is also relatively close to the border to Iraq.
Obviously the Roman Empire spat out propaganda and also Christianity ate up the Roman Empire, so it is no wonder why history was hijacked and falsehood became widespread and the Greek sources might not be entirely truthful either. There is an interesting map allegedly drawn by a Greek historian named Herodotus, c. 484?425 BC, and Israel, the modern state of today, is not even on any of these maps I can link to while other obvious locations are and I doubt Jerusalem would be missing from a map like this if there was a big temple there and it carried a big importance and also considered Dariush and other Persian kings sponsored the rebuilding of the temple. Take a look at these two maps which the source suggests are written by Herodotus
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Herodotus_world_map-en.svg/788px-Herodotus_world_map-en.svg.png
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Herodotus_World_Map.jpg/800px-Herodotus_World_Map.jpgObviously a person like this would know and mark locations such as Jerusalem and Israel even if he primarily reported on the Greco-Persian wars, link http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Persian_Wars. See how little they knew about the surrounding world at this time even if they were historians. Note that Nineveh is marked on one of the maps. I have not missed that the region "Phaenicia" is marked on the map, but I doubt that will be of much value to the criticizers once I have got rolling. You need to observe that Persepolis is clearly marked on the map while it is officially said that Alexander the Great barely knew where Persepolis was located.
Certainly this is not all that I got and you will get more whenever I find more inspiration to write.
The king Herod the Great I think was Orodes I (c. 90 to 80 BC), Orodes II (57 to 38 BC) or Orodes III (2 BC ? AD 4) of Parthia (also called Hyrodes) and much of the information is likely biased by historical sources and not what it seems to be, but this part of the research has no stable foundation yet. Persian history decayed greatly during the years 1xxx to 2000 due to poor management of the state and I am sure if much of Iran's archeological discoveries were not just sold off cheaply and more research from this time was conducted in Iran then they would easily discover the flaws in the Roman or Greek history sources which our knowledge is much based upon.
Noteworty about Orodes III
He was killed after a short reign "on account of his extreme cruelty"
But I am determined to investigate further on what knowledge I can get my hands upon and then unwind the truth, God willing, hopefully with the help from others. What I know for sure is that I do not trust the official story about what happened in this time at all and I take all I read with a grain of salt. We must know that there is always written "propaganda history" and ignorance has also often led to faulty observations. What I wrote above is only theories and whenever I have reached as far as I know for sure, then I will try to test my hypotheses, but until then also take what I have written as a work-in-progress.
Unfortunately I lack more time to write and it is late in the night, but I will try to keep this thread updated as I discover more important data.
God bless you
-
Interesting. Thank you.
It is always admirable to see serious study with solid proofs.
Peace
-
Salaam brother,
I would not say that I have any "solid proof" yet, but I am very determined that the Pharisees is the group of people of Fars and that the Israel state of today is a fraud and just an occupation of the ancient people of Phillistines which are the Palestinians and one the archenemies of the Israeli state of ancient times which in my theory is Iraq and Iran. I am sure that Nineveh was part of it and even if Babylon was once a state on its own it was also part of the Israeli state of the past. Practically, I am sure that they had control over most of the areas around the Persian Gulf including the big river system seen at the inside end of the gulf.
I still need more evidence and I will probably meet many critical voices with this theory but to me it makes more sense than the traditional story.
Good night. Late here!
God bless you
-
salaam
No Herode in Palestine ? No Pharisians in Palestine ? Not even a little crucification there ?
The hypothesis is shocking even for me.
But why not ?
There is many things to review.He have not to forgot that ?christiannity? and last version of bible was ?officialised? by Emperor Constantin and His mother who made all ?archeological? discoveries needed in Palestine (325). There is an obvious ?political motive? for romans to move events from region of the old Persian enemy to Palestine. It seems that many roman soldiers were impressed by Zoroastrianism (and mithra cult) when they were fighting with Persians.
In Judea, disillusion about ?messiah coming? in Palestine took place in fact after the Bar Kokhba revolt (year 136 http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt ). It is from that date that christianism and Judaism was definitively separated in what we call Judea.
History of christianism until Constantin (325) is very troubled. In fact, actual christianism seems to have appeared in Rome, not in Palestine.
I never understood what are doing Popes in Rome since year 33 (http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes).
It seems like if that someone, in Rome, decided to build a roman controlled religion to block a strange invading religion coming from the country of an old enemy.
Even greeks (aristote and so on) have been impressed by Persians religion.Peace
-
Salaam,
Well. These scriptures were definitely highjacked by the Roman Empire who made it into a state religion of this Empire and the remnant of this are the pope. It was clearly used as a propaganda tool to keep the whole region under control. Perhaps Jupiter and co had no chance against the monotheism of Zoroastrianism and the Romans had to invent Christianity and to suppress the true religions from the Middle-East and the new threat of Muhammedans. Christianity is a product/trademark of the Roman Empire and the pope is a stubborn remnant of that. Jesus was a hijacked prophet from the Persians from documents found written in Greek, but I think they were not inventions although perhaps manipulated and mistranslated and likely not even originally written in Greek.
God bless you
-
Salaam,
Well. These scriptures were definitely highjacked by the Roman Empire who made it into a state religion of this Empire and the remnant of this are the pope. It was clearly used as a propaganda tool to keep the whole region under control. Perhaps Jupiter and co had no chance against the monotheism of Zoroastrianism and the Romans had to invent Christianity and to suppress the true religions from the Middle-East and the new threat of Muhammedans. Christianity is a product/trademark of the Roman Empire and the pope is a stubborn remnant of that. Jesus was a hijacked prophet from the Persians from documents found written in Greek, but I think they were not inventions although perhaps manipulated and mistranslated and likely not even originally written in Greek.
God bless you
Salaam Bro
Quran is here to say that a great part of Messiah History, as reported by christians, is true.
he came. He was rejected by bani israel. His mother is named Meriem/mary. she was a virgin dedicated to God. He made a dinner for his apostales. He raised the deaths...I think that God saved part of truth among lies of shaytan. Sincere believers, whatever is their faith, are always able to establish a direct link with god if they succeed to avoid idolatry.
Peace
-
Salaam,
Not directly related to the topic, but found an interesting quote in some historical documents made by Plato assigning Zarathustra as son of Ahura Mazda. Can in some far-fetched way N-zara be linked to this Prophet of the Zoroastrians? It would also make Jesus/Issa = Zarathushtra.
He teaches the science of the Magians, owing to Zarathustra, son of Ahuramazda. It is in fact the worship of the gods.
In other writings I am reading at the moment there are hints that there may have been two factions which have their own belief of who is a "son of God". There seems to have been certain disagreements on the topic of who was the "true son of God". I may be on the trail.
The scene of events seems to be around the inner part of the Persian Gulf, i.e. today's Iraq and (West-Southwest) Iran. The story is unwinding in midst of a lot of falsehood and misunderstandings. Interesting locations are Nineveh, Ur, Susa, Babylon, Ecbatana (today Hamedan), Persepolis (near Shiraz), Anshan, Nain (!) and a lot of other places I have searched. Abraham is even seeming to have been born in Ur and would from a traditional point of view have traveled from there to the illusive Israel relatively far away and back at least once with wife and all his possessions. One thing that leads him towards Israel is the mention of Canaan. Just Canaan I am doubtful that it refers to the lands near the Mediterranean Sea, not only because it is inhabited by the Phillistines who do not seem to be particularly friendly and are polytheistic.
Of course I still do not have any solid proof that it all happened around Babylon and Fars, but more leads hint towards this and I feel more confident the more history I delve into.
One of my mysteries is why the Persian kings funded and coordinated the construction of the second temple in Jerusalem and the Bible states that that was because God spoke/inspired them into doing the job, while the kings obviously were very soaked up by Zoroastrianism and felt that the construction of temples in Susa, Persepolis and Ecbatana were of high priority, not to mention that Jerusalem was very remotely located within the Persian Empire. I am not astonished that a righteous man, like it seems that Cyrus and Darius were according to historical sources, would heed the call of God and arrange the construction of a temple even if pretty far away and in a vulnerable location, but the records still do not make sense. Not to mention that the buildings of Persepolis and other temples within the Achaemenid Empire were constructed curiously identically as they boast Jerusalem was built in the Bible.
And Prophet Solomon has some spectacular similarities to some historical records of Kings of Persia and same goes for David. Especially Solomon controlled an enormous Empire-like region relatively similar to how the Empire of the Persians looked like and has extreme spoils and resources and was highly respected by neighbors and not to mention that Persepolis and Susa bear remarkable similarities. And any temple has never been found in today's Israel, only rumors and legends.
And as far as I can tell the Zoroastrians in the ancient past were monotheists even though they may have had religious practices strange to us, i.e. incense-burning, fire altars etc, but what is known about them today seem to be extra-religious practices much like in sectarian Islam although it is MONOTHEISM. Mankind has always suffered hard from conjecture and people follow it like lemmings.
Old Testament reflects ancient Zoroastrianism scarily close and it would be a very far-fetched coincidence if they were not the actual people who lived in today's Iran and Iraq. And my early research shows some signs that New Testament has locales able to be pinpointed. What many people do not seem to reflect upon is that much of the contents of the Bible takes place in today's Iraq and not in Israel of today, for example, Nineveh or Ur. If my theory is right very little if anything takes place in today's Israel. I think today's Israel was part of the Phillistines, which could be compared to the Palestinians today, a polytheistic and according to Bible pretty barbaric people. The Palestinians were archenemies of the Israelites back then, and also today funnily enough although they were just annexed somewhere out of the blue by the Brittish Empire anno 20th century into the current location.
God bless you
-
salaam man of faith
i support you in your research. Your knowledge about christianism and persia is very useful.i am still studyng zoroastrianim. As brother Pazuzu would say, it is not obvious to separate there the grain from the chaff. I have new hypothesis, but i have to confront them to facts.
We have to remember that at era of "sister of aaron", we have at least 4 prophets at the same time Moses, Aaron, Issa and Yahia. It was a very special era.
Peace
-
In other writings I am reading at the moment there are hints that there may have been two factions which have their own belief of who is a "son of God". There seems to have been certain disagreements on the topic of who was the "true son of God". I may be on the trail.
salaam bro
can i have more details on this ?
what are the alternatives ? i suppose they are Mithra and Zarathustra ?
It seems that zoroasters had they trinity too (ahura mazda, mithra and Anahita).
i am interested in the "two factions" chiism.peace
-
I doubt that the Palestinians were orginally the Philistines.
The Philistines were a non-semitic group(Obviously from Greece). DNA rather suggests that most Palestinians are descends of Canaanites/Israelites. The Israelites evolved from local Canaanites (archeological evidence).
"Genetic analysis suggests that a majority of the Muslims of Palestine, inclusive of Arab citizens of Israel, are descendants of Christians, Jews and other earlier inhabitants of the southern Levant whose core may reach back to prehistoric times. A study of high-resolution haplotypes demonstrated that a substantial portion of Y chromosomes of Israeli Jews (70%) and of Palestinian Muslim Arabs (82%) belonged to the same chromosome pool."
"In recent years, many genetic studies have demonstrated that, at least paternally, most of the various Jewish ethnic divisions and the Palestinians ? and in some cases other Levantines ? are genetically closer to each other than the Palestinians or European Jews to non-Jewish Europeans."
"One DNA study by Nebel found genetic evidence in support of historical records that "part, or perhaps the majority" of Muslim Palestinians descend from "local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD". They also found substantial genetic overlap between Muslim Palestinians and Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews, though with some significant differences that might be explainable by the geographical isolation of the Jews and by immigration of Arab tribes in the first millennium."
"Much of the local Palestinian population in Nablus is believed to be descended from Samaritans who converted to Islam. Even today, certain Nabulsi surnames including Muslimani, Yaish, and Shakshir among others, are associated with a Samaritan origin."
Palestinian villagers especially in Northern Palestine for hundreds of years and until today use the name Cana?an for their children and many have it as a surname. Second, designs on the cloths of villagers (the folkloric symbols) are canaanitic symbols (and are shared by location and by locals who are both Christian and Muslim).
e.g this brilliant Palestinian
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawfiq_Canaan
"Results of a DNA study by geneticist Ariella Oppenheim appears to match historical accounts that Arab Israelis ((Palestinian 194) and Palestinians, together as the one same population, represent modern "descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times", albeit religiously first Christianized then largely Islamized, and all eventually culturally Arabized."American Academy for the Advancement of Science."
-
salaam bro
can i have more details on this ?
what are the alternatives ? i suppose they are Mithra and Zarathustra ?
It seems that zoroasters had they trinity too (ahura mazda, mithra and Anahita).
i am interested in the "two factions" chiism.peace
The ?sons? of God
Ataropad-i Marspendan ? called immortal according to historical recordsThis is an entry in my document of a strange name I found while browsing documents, apart from that is a very suspicious name in Qur'an which I think I have pinpointed while browsing all data, but I did not copy it into my research file. The thing is because of linguistic differences the name are slightly different between the script languages and pronunciation might have been lost or altered and we may mispronounce some ancient words.
I have recently discovered a truckload of new interesting things, but it would take me a long time to write it here as it is in no way organized at the moment.
"Ataropad-i Marspendan" was a new alleged Messenger in Zoroastrianism who came a while after Alexander had spread havoc in old Persia.
- They say that, once upon a time, the pious Zartosht (Zarathustra) made the religion, which he had received, current in the world; (2) and till the completion of 300 years, the religion was in purity, and men were without doubts.
Zarathustra is often taken into a trinity with the Zoroastrian word for "Holy Spirit". He was so pure they often simply worship him as an idol.
Here is a quote with the possible "son of God" no 2
; (16) until the time when the blessed and immortal Ataropad-i Marspendan was born; on whose breast, in the tale which is in the Denkard, melted brass was poured.
Note that the passages say that he was immortal which may indicate a typical "son of God". "Ataropad-i Marspendan" is certainly a nickname or title so I need a more accurate passage. Ataropad-i is probably a title of sorts considered the -i in the Persian name. I am sure that Zoroastrianism is a monotheism gone idolatrous and was maybe even on Darius time a more "proper" monotheism. Some of the Messengers were so righteous that people begun to treat them as gods because of their righteousness. A dangerous trap which unfortunately happens with Muhammad in today's Islam and he seems to continue be more and more treated as a lord.
The levels Jesus is taken to is just silly and ridiculous.
AND Mithra is probably I mentioned in the beginning of this post and I suppose you knew it already. And the is Zarathustra.
Anyway, I will continue research, these are simply speculations and early theoretical philosophies. But I think there was "one of the sons" living before Alexander had burnt Persepolis to the ground and run havoc in Persia and approximately 200-300 years earlier than traditional Jesus age. A reason I suspect this is because this person suggests that the temple and all surrounding buildings will be destroyed a final time after his appearance there, and he was right too. This theory requires that I am right that Persepolis IS Jerusalem though or Estakhr http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estakhr. Also in the case of Persia the main temple was moved at least once. The problem is who of them? Was it Zarathustra or Mithra?
The religious importance of Ear was marked in the 4th century B.C.E. by the setting up at Persepolis by Artaxerxes II (q.v.) of one of his statues to Anaitis (Berossus 3.65; see ANHD).
Considered this quote I think the later kings reverted to idolatry which angered God and led to the fall of the Persian Empire. I guess this is why Persia had no chance against Alexander, and it is also why the nation in the Old Testament fails to withstand invasion because they are weakened by idolatry. There is much unknown history around here and the truth is not as it seems. I take all "dumb-proof" historical sources with a grain of salt.
It is the irony of that the Persian states always went the same path as the state in Old Testament which tickles my mind so much. I am soon going to study the chronological order of events in Bible and see if I can draw even more profound parallels there.
And do you not find it strange that there is no mention of Zoroastrianism even if it was one of the biggest religions when the Qur'an was being written? Well, it is strange until you understand that they actually are mentioned but under other terms. And Zoroastrianism is not really the name of a religion but just a definition for those who followed Zarathustra, just like they say Christianity for those who follow Christ. I am sure it was Islam and the same kind of stuff Abraham/Ibrahim was doing, following a pretty simple and straight Message yet hard for some people to do without shirk and following their egos. Notice that God says "those who call themselves Nazarenes", it does imply that it is only a group of people and not that God's religion is called that.
God bless you
-
No doubt the town flourished from 265 B.C.E. to 200 C.E., under the Persis kings, whose capital is believed to have been here; and, from A.D. 208, under the Sasanians, when it was the principal city and religious center of the province, but not normally a royal residence.
-
Salaam,
One thing I wonder about is that people always think their Messenger is always the last and think the era of Messengers is over.
God bless you
-
Salaam,
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Amarna_Akkadian_letter.png/220px-Amarna_Akkadian_letter.png
This is something like I think the Ark of the Covenant looks like. This "letter" is not about that, but I was thinking how the tablets which Moses made or got inscribed looked like and this is how I think they look(ed) like. This is how inscriptions looked like in the anticipated time of Moses and the time in Egypt, and I cannot think that the tablets on the mountain looked much different to this. This was the paper anno 1300 BC like we regard as paper today anyway. Not very editable, yes?
Another off-topic post, but indirectly related still as I ran into the http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarna_letters which were written in Akkadian cuneiform, the writing system of ancient Mesopotamia strangely enough.
Look at this map
http//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Amarnamap.png/772px-Amarnamap.png
We have to mind the existence of the Persians in the far East of Middle-East and their common writings, although for certain we cannot forget all the others states around there such as Ashur. And I do not believe Canaan is where it is commonly believed (within parenthesis on the map).
You see that my posts move more and more importance towards the east? Mesopotamia was quite important throughout time and in my opinion our illusive friends near the Mediterranean Sea will, God willing, soon lose some of their importance. The kings of the "Eastern region" sent mails to our friends in Egypt, in a language from Babylon.
God bless you
-
Salaam,
One thing I wonder about is that people always think their Messenger is always the last and think the era of Messengers is over.
God bless you
salaam
from the quranic point of view, there is no reason to consider Muhammad as last Messenger.
Expression "khatim anbiya" means "the sealer of informed people", that is the one who brought a sealed version of words of God for people.Peace
-
AND Mithra is probably I mentioned in the beginning of this post and I suppose you knew it already. And the is Zarathustra.
Salaam
Uzair is linked to Yahood (people of torah). As i said before, i think it is Mister Israel (Uzair is a pejorative form of God whorshipper).
Concerning Mithra, it seems that is was an old aryan divinity (before Zarathustra). Gathas of Zarathustra never mention it. That is very curious.
Mithra seems to have made a comeback.
The problem i have is this
-gathas and zoroastianism seems to indicate that Issa is Zoroaster.
-similarities between reported life events of Mithra (specially the roman one) and Issa, (and Jesus) seems to indicate that Mithra is Issa.It is possible for me that mytha mythology was mixed with Zarathustra events of life.
Interesting to note that in Avesta, Mithra seems like a great soldier.i will give you some thoughts
wikipedia
Citing the authority of the 8th-century al-Kalbi, the 9th- and 10th-century historian al-Tabari (i.64 reports that Zaradusht bin Isfiman (an Arabic adaptation of "Zarathustra Spitama" was an inhabitant of Palestine, and a servant of one of the disciples of the prophet Jeremiah. According to this tale, Zaradusht defrauded his master, who cursed him, causing him to become leprous (cf. Elisha's servant Gehazi in Jewish Scripture). The apostate Zaradusht then eventually made his way to Balkh (present day Afghanistan) where he converted Bishtasb (i.e. Vishtaspa), who in turn compelled his subjects to adopt the religion of the Magians. Recalling other tradition, al-Tabari (i.681?683) recounts that Zaradusht accompanied a Jewish prophet to Bishtasb/Vishtaspa. Upon their arrival, Zaradusht translated the sage's Hebrew teachings for the king and so convinced him to convert (Tabari also notes that they had previously been Sabis) to the Magian religion.this quote is interesting (Tabari was persian).
Zarathustra would have preached with a "Jewish prophet" confusedGathas mention these name (only few names are mentionned)
-Zarathusthra
-Frashaoshtra a great sage who helped/accompagned Zarathusthra
-Jamaspa a supporter of Zarathustra
-Vishtaspa the king who supported Zarathusthra.interesting to note that usthra points to camel and aspa point to horse (fors/pharis).
So ending of a name can be a good indication.
Frahaosthra can be the "jewish" prophet who came from the country of camels to the country of Horses.Sourate el kahf (1 mention a trip of Moses with his "young apprentice".
We have no information of what Moses did after delivering torah.
We know also that Aaron and his childs became the priests of "Jews".
I think that there is a possibility that Aaron remained with Bani Israel while Moses and Isaa went to persia (so Frashaoshtra is Moses).I still have a problem with yahia. What did he did ? Where did he preached ?
Cheikh Dukhani made the hypothesis that Yahia is known in torah as Caleb ben Yephunneh. His a kind of "binomial" of Issa.
Persian name of Yahia can also be Frashaoshtra if that person is not Moses.
Remamber that mandeans seems to have been "isolated" in mesopotamia. They don't recognize Abraham, Moses, jesus and so on. Quran says that Yahia will become a great leader (sayyidan).i no more think that "son of God" or "trinity" are good tracks.
it seems that they are "very old pagan belief" reintroduced in monotheism.Peace
-
Salaam,
i no more think that "son of God" or "trinity" are good tracks.
it seems that they are "very old pagan belief" reintroduced in monotheism.They do not relate to "authentic" history and only into hearsay, but they might anyway be a tool in searching further, although then only superficially. However, to reach further one needs to get beyond the trinity delusion. Like you see here in our research, discovering what the people actually go on about in Qur'an about "son of God" might have gotten us a hint on where to look. I suppose you mean that we cannot rely on this information to reach the Truth and that you are right about. We need to identify the true story and then prove to the world what the hell went wrong historically and which has repeated itself over and over again (take Christianity for example and the Muhammadans are risking reaching the same fate). Some people will take heed, but most will suffer the same fate as those of old the idolatry trap.
Gathas mention these name (only few names are mentionned)
-Zarathusthra
-Frashaoshtra a great sage who helped/accompagned Zarathusthra
-Jamaspa a supporter of Zarathustra
-Vishtaspa the king who supported Zarathusthra.I had that on my mind actually, regarding the titles, and had already noticed the ending of the names such as Zarath-ushtra.
I am not sure if it can give any hope about the Judaism research, but I have noticed that the Persian language seems to favor giving the sound instead of such as in Dariush and that the same phenomenon happens in Hebrew, i.e. shaloom instead of salaam. The sound is often used for consonant sounds as you see where the Arabs would favor . Another is Cyrus which is where I think the is because they simply pronounce it like that. Strangely enough such usage exists in the language of the Jews. It was an observation that I made and the actual truth can be something different. This is a linguistic question.
But if we return to the topic; in Zarathushtra, only Zarath is his "actual name" and -ushtra is more of a title (Iranians refer to him as Zartosht). The name itself with removed affixes is astonishingly like the Nazara of Qur'an and I think the N in Qur'an reflects some kind of prefix actually. To take a qualified guess, is Zarathushtra and not Christianity's Messiah, or in fact the Messiah in today's Christianity is Zarathushtra OR more likely the Uzair but a confusion has occurred. I suppose Zarathushtra gained "son of God' rank against his will after he delivered the Message.
My current issue is which of Uzair of Yahood or the Messiah of Nazarens is Jesus which the Christians (of today) believe in.
this quote is interesting (Tabari was persian).
Zarathustra would have preached with a "Jewish prophet" confusedI read what you mean, it is none but strengthening the signs that Zarathustra was a "Biblical" Prophet and likely the one the Christians today revere so much and treat as a god.
Jamaspa
Hint James of the New Testament? Apprentice of the Messenger, the Messiah.
-Frashaoshtra a great sage who helped/accompagned Zarathusthra
This can have been Yahya or westernized John the Baptist. He was contemporary with traditional Jesus and was imprisoned for his preachings and later executed.
interesting to note that usthra points to camel and aspa point to horse (fors/pharis).
So ending of a name can be a good indication.That indeed is a good sign. I should have thought about it before as I know you say asp in Persian for horse.
We have no information of what Moses did after delivering torah.
According to the Old Testament, Moses died before reaching "the promised land". I supposed Moses' people lived like a nomad tribe for those years when they were cursed to wander the deserts aimlessly. They likely did not find any place to settle down because God stopped leading them straight.
We know also that Aaron and his childs became the priests of "Jews".
Their priestly work portray Zoroastrianism very accurately in the Old Testament with incense burning and fireplaces. It would be strange if they did not lead the "new" religion during their lifetime. It could be that Moses and company might be the one who brought a new religion according to Zoroastrian sources and that the person I say came before the destruction of Persepolis is a later Messenger. The Persian people indulged a lot in idolatry on and off. Remember according to the Gospels in the New Testament, Jesus throws out all immoral and bad stuff from the temple which is probably the idols and gamblers and their things. I am relatively sure that the Gospel portrays a story almost right before the final ever destruction of the temple. Jesus said that the temple and all surrounding buildings will lay in ruins soon.
All pieces are starting to fall into the right places. Unfortunately there is no more time for me to write at the moment but I am happy for your contribution to my sea of information
God bless you
-
salaam man of Faith
Uzair is not a prophet. Quran never said so.Uzair is a pejorative form of a root that can mean many things
- a dictionnay meaning of beat someone in order to make him obey. Meanings also of blaming and empeachement.
- a quranic meaning of "support/making someone high". Probably using stre,ght if take into account the dictionnary meaning.
Uzair is probably a nickname, like Messiah for Issa, Muhammad probably for Ahmed, Dhul nun probably for yunes/jonas...
All what we know about Uzair is that bani israel said he is son of God
Exodus 422 "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, 'Thus says the LORD, "Israel is My son, My firstborn.Israel is the only candidate we have.
I dont think that we can find, one day, a proof, that another candidate is better.
I dont think that we fill find a guy worshipped more by jews than IsraelIsrael is as prophet as jesus of nazareth and probably as mithra.
Israel is not Jacob
Substituating a false messenger to a true one is an usuel "pratice" of shaytan.Mithra can be an old divinity who parasitized the story of a true prophet.
Please note that there is a false Muhammad also. False Muhammd lived in mekka, married with khadija and aisha ...
Peace
-
Salaam noshirk,
Perhaps you are right. I am only investigating and open to suggestions and trying to keep my mind open. It is true that it seems strange that Jacob was renamed Israel but my thought has been Ezra - el is the derivative for Israel.
Uzair is probably a nickname, like Messiah for Issa, Muhammad probably for Ahmed, Dhul nun probably for yunes/jonas...
You are absolutely right. It is a "nickname" just like the Messiah. But for reasons I draw it (ر towards the mystery figure Ezra although I might be wrong. I am sure it has to do with Israel, think about the phonetic pronunciation of these words when divided into roots and syllables or morphemes, Ezra - el and = el with help-letters such as in the word to make an '' sound in the ending of Israel. Yahood, as far as I have understood, means something like Followers of Yahweh, the name they give God which they think their salvation belongs to only themselves, much like Jehova's Witnesses today who also use the ancient derivative of God from the old scriptures. I know Israel is spelled with an 'alif', but I can still not exclude that it is a grammatical variation considered their far distanced historical past. I was delving into the connection between these seemingly Jewish origin words altogether. And the 'alif' on such words usually signifies a "help-vowel" as far as I know although I am not knowledgeable in Aramaic grammar.
Ezra is the mystery here and who he really was and Biblical tradition says he is Jacob who was told that he was no longer Jacob but to be called Israel. You also need to consider that Jacob's name begun with a "ya" sound which may be why Yahood could be derived from that original name.
Despite all these philosophical approaches, it does not solve the mystery of who "Ezra" was and I know you are stuck on the same point.
If we look on Messiah I also have a perhaps far-fetched, but still a logical approach and that is if we divide the syllables in Messiah, you can derive Issa's name from it, the same as I attempted to do with Uzair. It might not be as simple as that, but it could also be worth checking out. You need to remember that known official explanations of why may be distorted in conjecture and guesses by people who philosophized in the past and even within the Bible which is a collection of various books.
God bless you
-
salaam man of faith
i don't think that ezra is Uzair because- no pejorative form in ezra
- quran mention uzair once at a very important place (son of go for yahood). I don't think that quran would mention such an important person only one time. I am quite sure that he exist somewhere else in quran.
- no way to proove that ezra was considered as son of god. It seems that he is not considered even as a prophet but only a priest.
concerning yahood and allathina hadoo,i think there is trap in these word. Something is wrong in my actual understanding.
544 We have sent down the Torah, in it is a guidance and a light; the prophets who have submitted (aslamou confused) judged with it for those who are Jewish (hadou confused), and the Devotees, and the Priests, for what they were entrusted of the Book of God, and they were witness over. So do not be concerned with the people but be concerned with Me; and do not purchase with My revelations a cheap price. And whoever does not judge with what God has sent down, then these are the rejecters.
Peace