Daily reminder that...

[Anonymous No.14329962]

all Abrahamic faiths are a Semitic perversion of Zoroastrianism, and there is absolutely nothing beautiful in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. The Gathas is far superior to the Old Testament, Bible, and Koran. All of West Eurasia was meant to be Zoroastrian. That Synagogue, Mosque, and Church over there? Was meant to be a fire temple.

Be smart like Heraclitus, Empedocles, and Zarathustra and kneel towards the fire today instead of Semitic bullshit. Thank you. Also, I am a prophet, and you should burn everything Abrahamic and follow me instead.

[Anonymous No.14329977]

Wow, lots of great evidence for your claim. Thanks OP

[Anonymous No.14330001]

>>14329962

Heraclitus wasn't a Zoroastrian; he boasted that he was completely self-taught. He said that fire was the first principle of things; he did not worship it, any more than Thales did water. It is interesting that you bring up a couple of the Greek classics, because nobody has any reason to follow Zoroastrianism when we have Socrates or Epictetus or Marcus Aurelius to guide us. The surviving Zoroastrian texts are extremely paltry things which, when compared with the Greek and Roman classics, seem like mere bones lying next to to a magnificent feast.

[Anonymous No.14330003]

>>14329977
The Gathas goes back to ~1000-1500 BCE and it came from Zarathustra, originating somewhere between Yaz cultural horizon and Sintashta. Also, the 7th chapter of Michael Stausberg's Zarathustra and Zoroastrianism, actually written by Anders Hultgard, details all Zoroastrian influences on Abrahamic faiths. I can post a very brief summary if interested.

[Anonymous No.14330019]

>>14330001
>extremely paltry things
Gathas are the unaltered words of Zarathustra. I think it's actually larger than the surviving fragments of Heraclitus.
Also, I think Empedocles was much better than Heraclitus. The problem with Heraclitus' views is they lead to antinomianism since they treat opposites as complementary and in harmony when in fact they are always conflict and trying to overcome or absorb the opposite pole.

[Anonymous No.14330039]

>>14330003

This is a sample of the Avesta.

"12 (39). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One 1 If a man break the hand-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Six hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, six hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 2.'

13 (42). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man break the sheep-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Seven hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, seven hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 3.'

14 (45). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man break the ox-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Eight hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, eight hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 4.'"

Will you explain to me why I should choose that rambling, dry jargon over thoughts like these:

"Understand however that every man is worth just so much as the things are worth about which he busies himself."

"Adorn thyself with simplicity and with indifference towards the things which lie between virtue and vice. Love mankind. Follow God."

"To live each day as though one's last, never flustered, never apathetic, never attitudinizing – here is perfection of character."

"Have I done something for the general interest? Well then I have had my reward. Let this always be present to thy mind, and never stop doing such good."

Are you able to show us anything in your holy books that compares with this?

As a matter of fact, I'm sure you could. But then I could provide a hundred times more from the classics to outweigh it. The point I'm making is that your religion doesn't have a monopoly on truth or wisdom; Zoroaster was simply one wise man among many hundreds.

[Anonymous No.14330053]

>>14330003

This is a sample of the Avesta.

*

"12 (39). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One 1 If a man break the hand-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Six hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, six hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 2.'

13 (42). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man break the sheep-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Seven hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, seven hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 3.'

14 (45). O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! If a man break the ox-contract, what is the penalty that he shall pay?

Ahura Mazda answered: 'Eight hundred stripes with the Aspahê-astra, eight hundred stripes with the Sraoshô-karana 4.'"

*
Will you explain to me why I should choose that rambling, dry jargon over thoughts like these:
*
"Understand however that every man is worth just so much as the things are worth about which he busies himself."

"Adorn thyself with simplicity and with indifference towards the things which lie between virtue and vice. Love mankind. Follow God."

"To live each day as though one's last, never flustered, never apathetic, never attitudinizing – here is perfection of character."

"Have I done something for the general interest? Well then I have had my reward. Let this always be present to thy mind, and never stop doing such good."

(Marcus Aurelius.)


*
Are you able to show us anything in your holy books that compares with this?

As a matter of fact, I'm sure you could. But then I could provide a hundred times more from the classics to outweigh it. The point I'm making is that your religion doesn't have a monopoly on truth or wisdom; Zoroaster was simply one wise man among many hundreds.

[Anonymous No.14330057]

>>14330039
Only the Gathas can be considered the fundamental teachings of Zarathustra. The Yasht to a lesser extent. Everything else surrounding the Gathas are commentary. The Gathas has far more depth than the latter quotes you gave.

[Anonymous No.14330074]

>>14330057

Are you able to you show us some of the impressive parts of these fundamental teachings then? I'm scanning through these Yashts, and all I'm finding is the same sort of gibberish. I can't discover a single wise or witty thought.

*

"'The Airyaman prayer smites down the strength of all the creatures of Angra Mainyu, of the Yatus and Pairikas. It is the greatest of spells, the best of spells, the very best of all spells; the fairest of spells, the very fairest of all spells; the fearful one amongst spells, the most fearful of all spells; the firm one amongst spells, the firmest of all spells; the victorious one amongst spells, the most victorious of all spells; the healing one amongst spells, the best-healing of all spells."

"'The brood of the Snake fled away; the brood of the Wolf fled away; the brood of the Two-legged fled away. Pride fled away; Scorn fled away; Hot Fever fled away; Slander fled away; Discord fled away; the Evil Eye fled away."

[Anonymous No.14330079]

>>14330074
I said Gathas. The Gathas are more philosophical in nature. Stop being a subversive liar.

[Anonymous No.14330092]

>>14329962
Daily reminder that Zoroastrianism is a perversion of the ancient and venerable fire worship of the Grug tribe. Death to OP, who is a fraud, and his heresy, which is abominable before the flames.

[Anonymous No.14330097]

>>14330074
Here are some excerpts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gathas#Excerpts
I read the translations of Mary Boyce, the translation on avesta.org, and Piloo Nanavutty. Boyce and Nanavutty's translations are good, though the former only did a partial one.

[Anonymous No.14330100]

>paranoid schizo megolamaniac neozurvan picture-book Jorjani-wannabe poster strikes again!

[Anonymous No.14330101]

>>14330092
>of the Grug tribe.
You mean Sintashta tribe, who were closely related to Scandinavians, Germans, or other NW Europeans. It's possible that Zarathustra himself was NW European or maybe half, given later Scythians & Sogdians were mixed.
I follow the teachings of an actual white men while whites follow an irrelevant Jew.

[Anonymous No.14330102]

>>14330053

Okay, now post evidence

[Anonymous No.14330111]

>>14330100
Jorjani actually stole my ideas and subverted them in his shitty book, believe it or not. Regardless, he is an unscholarly idiot, and the only reason people listen to him is because he comes off as charismatic. He is a charismatic bonehead.
I focus on literature of light and darkness, both. I have good tastes in both horror and children's literature. I am, indeed, one of the greatest intellectuals of this modern age, but the Jews don't want my message to get out. Granted, I did publish one horror story.

[Anonymous No.14330117]

>>14330097

Instead of telling me something from your own knowledge, you've given me a Wikipedia page with a paltry dozen or so quotations, none of which is particularly impressive. It contains a few prayers about wishing punishment to the evil-doer, and wishing for truth and good thoughts. It says nothing that you don't find, for example, in the Book of Psalms, except it lacks all the poetry.

>>14330079

You wrote "The Yasht to a lesser extent," so the only duplicity here is on your part. Looking for "Gathas Zoroaster" yielded nothing on Google, so I did the next-best thing.

[Anonymous No.14330124]

>>14330111

Cyrus the Great's behaviour towards the Jews would seem to indicate that the ancient Persians were not antisemitic. So your world-view doesn't really hold together here.

[Anonymous No.14330160]

>>14330117
The Gathas doesn't come off as poetic because Old Avestan is immensely difficult to translate, even moreso than Sanskrit. Zoroastrianism has a powerful elegance to it, one that is dangerous to reject. It was the first truly morally dualist religion. Let me explain, asha is equivalent to the three antidotes from Buddhism in many ways, though it has added an dimension. Asha means order, truth, and good-will, but it can also be interpreted as wisdom, generosity, and loving-kindness. Druj is the opposite of disorder, lie, and ill-will. It's just the poisons of delusion, greed, and hatred. Spenta Mainyu and Ahura Mazda are associated with asha. Angra Mainyu and Ahriman with durj.

The fact is, this duality can never be bridged. You cannot blur these dichotomies the way Heraclitus and later Mahayana figures attempted. If you blur them, you risk dangerous antinomian tendencies, and I can go into more complex metaphysical arguments if need be. Suffice to say, there is a level of duality in this world, which refutes nondualism or monism.

"Truly there are two primal Spirits, twins renowned to be in conflict. In through and word, in act they are two: the better and the bad. And those who act well have chosen rightly between the two."

A picture book or wholesome children's story cannot be one and the same with a macabre horror story. The light and darkness are in conflict, with one trying to overcome the other. Our purpose in life is to help Ahura Mazda when the cosmic battle against Ahriman. However, in t he modern age, you are dealing with those who revel in corrupting Spenta Mainyu with Angra Mainyu or with blurring the line between truth and lie.

[Anonymous No.14330167]

>>14330124
He was misguided and only helped the Jews out of realpolitik. Later Sassanian kings would have been more rightfully cruel to the Jews. It was a mistake to spare such wretched and ultimately destructive people. Plenty of European scholars from Schopenhauer to Ludwig Klages were correct in their antisemitism.

[Anonymous No.14330172]

>>14330160
>added an dimension.
an added dimension*
>Druj is the opposite of disorder, lie, and ill-will.
is the opposite, which means disorder, lie, and ill-will*

[Anonymous No.14330183]

>>14330001
Heraclitus was a subject of the Persian Empire and he considered fire to be the principle of all things...hmmm really makes u think

[Anonymous No.14330188]

>>14330167
Also, Cyrus wasn't Zoroastrian. He was probably a Mithraist (note, has little relation to the Roman variety). There is some scholarly debate on that.

[Anonymous No.14330194]

>>14330160
>through and word
thought and word*

[Anonymous No.14330204]

bbl

[Anonymous No.14330211]

>>14330160

Essentially you are using ancient Persian jargon to represent the simple concepts of Good and Evil, which all great writers and philosophers in the ancient world acknowledged. I could do the same thing with ancient Greek: "Socrates believed in promoting the kalos and agathos, and rejecting the kakos and poneros, and in doing erga of onesis and opheleia. He believed in one supreme theos, and devoted his life to philosophia." There is nothing in Zoroaster that you won't find in Hesiod and Homer.

"Make judgements that are straight with righteousness.. Listen to right and do not foster violence; for violence is bad for a poor man. Even the prosperous cannot easily bear its burden, but is weighed down under it when he has fallen into delusion. The better path is to go by on the other side towards justice; for Justice beats Outrage when she comes at length to the end of the race." -- Works and Days

[Anonymous No.14330218]

>>14330211
based greeks, fuck persians

[Anonymous No.14330224]

You have to be born into Zoroastrianism op. You are just a larping westerner. LOL

Also daily reminder that absolutely no one cares about your meaningless religion threads on /lit/ arguing about religions as if they are some sort of Pokemon to collect, trade, or mix together haphazardly.

[Anonymous No.14330226]

>>14330183

Thales believed water was the first principle, Anaximenes air, but when Heraclitus goes and chooses a third of the fourth elements and happens to say fire, you immediately draw the inference that it must be because of Persian influence.

[Anonymous No.14330228]

>>14329962
Has LARPing gone too far?

Anyways you just reminded me of trying Persian Zoroastrian run on CK2

[Anonymous No.14330229]

>>14330226
he was also a dualist....hmmmmm

[Anonymous No.14330240]

>>14330228
>tfw in my current hellenic playthrough the entire middle east including persia has been taken over by jews

[Anonymous No.14330270]

>>14330167

How could it be realpolitik to exercise clemency with respect to such a weak people? The Jews were nothing to be feared by Cyrus.

Antisemitism is a historically minority position among non-religious thinkers. Nietzsche, for example, called it an "accursed deformity" based on envy, and, most tellingly of all, he said in an 1887 letter to Fritsch: "And finally, how do you think I feel when the name Zarathustra is mouthed by anti-Semites?" It is the same with Napoleon, who abolished all their restrictions and oppressions, and granted them equal rights.

[Anonymous No.14330281]

>>14330229

Virtually every Greek was a dualist. In the very opening of Homer's Iliad he speaks of "many brave souls being loosed, and going down to Hades before their time."

[Anonymous No.14330294]

>>14330270
based philosemites

[Anonymous No.14330305]

>>14330281
he also supported strong charismatic authoritarian leadership, something unusual for a greek (see his fragment on hermadorus)...hmmmmm

[Anonymous No.14330318]

>>14330001
>He said that fire was the first principle of things; he did not worship it

Neither do Zoroastrians. Fire is the symbol of love, life, energy, and God. It's not literally worshipped. Do Christians literally worship THE CROSS? No, they worship the guy who was crucified on one, and the cross is a symbol of such.

>surviving Zoroastrian texts are extremely paltry things

Keyword being "surviving". After four major cultural conquests (the Greeks, the Arabs, the Mongols, and the Turks) the modern era is lucky to have any surviving ancient Iranian texts at all.

>>14330124
^this

daily reminder that Judaism and Jewishness are not the enemy, but Zionism and Cultural Marxism. Something Hitler couldn't understand.

[Anonymous No.14330325]

>>14330305

Actually that isn't very unusual at all. In virtually every Greek city you had aristocratic and oligarchic factions, and Plato and Aristotle opposed democracy.

[Poet OP No.14330340]

>>14330325
>Aristotle opposed democracy

Lol, no he didn't at all.

He had to eat crow and go back on his pro-democracy stance when employed by King Philip by saying, "oh, hurr durr, if the excellence of the royal family is greater than the entire ruled populace combined, then monarchy is justified, and obviously this is the case for you, my boss."

[Anonymous No.14330348]

>>14330318
>>14330124
>>14330167
>>14330270
Those were ancient Israelites, not Rabbinical Jews. They still had a temple cult and everything. Almost a totally different religion.

[Anonymous No.14330350]

>>14330325
>Aristotle opposed democracy

Lol, no he didn't at all.

He had to eat crow and go back on his pro-democracy stance when employed by King Philip by saying, "oh, hurr durr, if the excellence of the royal family is greater than the entire ruled populace combined, then monarchy is justified, and obviously this is the case for you, my boss."

[Anonymous No.14330353]

>>14330318

>Neither do Zoroastrians. Fire is the symbol of love, life, energy, and God. It's not literally worshipped. Do Christians literally worship THE CROSS? No, they worship the guy who was crucified on one, and the cross is a symbol of such.

However you wish to interpret the role of fire in Zoroastrianism, the point is that all Heraclitus was saying was that fire is the fundamental element. It was merely a speculative attempt to account, scientifically, for the existence of the universe.

>After four major cultural conquests (the Greeks, the Arabs, the Mongols, and the Turks) the modern era is lucky to have any surviving ancient Iranian texts at all.

If your religion really were favoured by God, you would think that his Providence would have done better at protecting your texts. Or if it made you such superior men, that you could have done better at defending yourselves against invaders. Surely that ought to tell you something?

[Anonymous No.14330358]

>>14330325
Aristotle and Plato lived hundreds of years after Heraclitus. They were both obviously influenced by him...and I wonder who he was influenced by...hmmmm

[Anonymous No.14330379]

>>14330270
Cyrus' actions placed a loyal ally against Babylonian and Egyptian power. The Torah was literally rewritten to reflect this (Moses origin is Cyrus' origin, to give the Israelites theological backing for supporting Persia). The Israelites weren't much, but they were dug in like a tick and were a pain to deal with. More importantly, they had population that could easily be siphoned off as mercenaries in war.

[Anonymous No.14330387]

>>14330379
>Moses origin is Cyrus' origin
wat

[Anonymous No.14330394]

>>14330353
this is such crap. If you want to really hold up the "muh God likes me" argument, then you ought to know by now that He is a cruel, absurd, unsentimental, chaotic ruler. Many good, strong, healthy, pious people were befallen cruel fates for no good reason, and plenty of bad, weak, corrupted, amoral people have found riches and rewards, again, for no good reason. That's the just the fate of chance and geopolitics and resources and etc. Actually, of all the peoples who were conquered by the Arabs/Islam, Persia/Iran is the one that stands alone as having retained the most of its original culture (language was preserved, culture and history preserved, etc.) The only greater exception I can think of would be Spain with its Reconquista. Power comes and goes. These same conquerers would later be conquered and cucked themselves. You have to look at the big picture overall and account for the whole story. It's not a zero sum game.

[Anonymous No.14330398]

>>14329962
>there is absolutely nothing beautiful in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism

You lose people when you make such absolute statements.

[Anonymous No.14330409]

>>14329962
>Semitic perversion
This is a nice myth in itself. Do you really believe the Semites as a whole are completely corrupt?

[Anonymous No.14330415]

>>14330398
Exactly. Nothing would keep up for that long if there weren't at least a few inherently good things about them. That's retarded. Here, I'm going to invent a religion called 'Painism'. All we do all day is hit ourselves in the genitals, eat shit, cry, and ruminate in our own self-hatred. That's it. Yeah, something like that really could be described as having "absolutely nothing beautiful" in it. But, guess what...it ain't gonna last long, if at all.

[Anonymous No.14330419]

>>14330240
Which schools, though? Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes..?

[Anonymous No.14330428]

>>14330409
There are too many "edeljudes" to justify an entire race as being worthy of scorn and eradication. The focus is to make any bad one a good one, or to ensure future generations good. Not wipe them all out. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Anonymous No.14330429]

>>14330415
Sounds like r/cuckold.

[Anonymous No.14330433]

>>14330419
Egypt was Karaite until I conquered it. Rest of middle east was regular rabinical Judaism, divided between ethnic turks and ethnic arabs

[Anonymous No.14330451]

>>14330358

The Seven Sages lived before Heraclitus, and some of them supported autocracy; Chilon, for example, was himself a tyrant (in the old sense of the word).

Your dates are not right. Plato was born only a century after Heraclitus.

>>14330394

If you were a Zoroastrian, I could understand your claiming that "He is a cruel, absurd, unsentimental, chaotic ruler," since he appears to have shown you little favour throughout history; but the rest of us don't have such a meagre view of the Divine Architect. At any rate, what you find, from a broad study of history, is that the coming and going of power is not random. Sir John Glubb, for example, has shown that virtue and vice are the strongest correlatives with the rise or fall of a nation. Generally speaking, we have what we deserve.

[Anonymous No.14330461]

>>14330224
>You have to be born into Zoroastrianism op. You are just a larping westerner. LOL


This is bullcrap. Nobody owns fire or the worship of God, energy, and the universe. Nobody has to be born anywhere in particular to want to think good thoughts, speak good words, and do good deeds. Fuck off.


t. Persian Zoroastrian

[Anonymous No.14330485]

>>14330461
>Nobody has to be born anywhere in particular to want to think good thoughts, speak good words, and do good deed
Ok cool. Not what I said. I said that to be Zoroastrian you have to be born into it. You can't convert. It is an ethnic religion. I'm not sure how you can't understand that, you are probably larping yourself.

[Anonymous No.14330493]

>>14330451
>Sir John Glubb, for example, has shown that virtue and vice are the strongest correlatives with the rise or fall of a nation
Is he defining virtue in the original, etymological sense of "manliness", or does he mean being a meek faggot?

[Anonymous No.14330504]

>>14330451
>since he appears to have shown you little favour throughout history; but the rest of us don't have such a meagre view of the Divine Architect.

I guess that means the 'Divine Architect' isn't so divine. How can he be so cruel and uncaring and unfair on one hand and then generous and loving on the other? He's a hypocrite at best and a fraud at worst.

>has shown that virtue and vice are the strongest correlatives with the rise or fall of a nation. Generally speaking, we have what we deserve.

Not true. Just as one example, the Kurds are some of the bravest, noblest, honest, and peaceful people on the planet. Yet they have no homeland and are under constant attack by outside forces. Just because sometimes, or even most of the time, 'things are right and fair', it isn't truly fair if that justice isn't constant and consistent. A truly just and divine God would make sure this excellence in order would hold true all the time. Further more, people are only 'bad' or 'good' based on their nature and nurture. So much of what makes a person tick was laid out before they were born or in their infancy, outside of their control. If God truly wanted everyone to be good, or at least not an asshole, he could've made these people be born with better genes and a better upbringing. Totally within His power to do so, yet he chooses not to. When you as a human can conceivably be more good than the ultimate ruler of everything, what does that tell you about the guy? He's a fool at best and a bipolar asshole at worst.

[Anonymous No.14330518]

>>14330485
>I said that to be Zoroastrian you have to be born into it. You can't convert. It is an ethnic religion.

100% not true. Go ahead. Who's going to stop you? You think God gives a shit what race you are when worshipping him and his energy permeating throughout the universe? If He does, than He's not a God worth worshipping in the first place.

[Anonymous No.14330520]

>>14330504
The Sassanids were shit and deserved to die. Persians experienced an intellectual Renaissance under Islam
>inb4 "despite" Islam
Would of never happened under Sassanid shits

[Anonymous No.14330531]

>>14329962
>instead of these three sand religions why don't you practice this other *much cooler* sand religion

The year is 2016. Humanity has peered into the darkest corners of the cosmos, and observed the universe on its smallest scale. You walk around with more computing power in your pocket than was available to all of NASA in the 1970s. You live twice as long as your ancestors ever could have dreamed of, you have food in abundance and the future is brighter than ever. Humanity has achieved more in the last century than it ever has in its entire history. People are happier, freer, crime is lower, you're safer, more secure, and the entire wealth of human knowledge is available to you at your finger tips. You live in the dawn of humanity, you were born after the long dark night and you will never know the suffering that every other generation did.

And you still think the words of dehydrated desert madmen in the middle east are literal truth, you unironically believe in God and think gender is biological.

You're literally a walking insult to everything humanity has ever achieved, lmao.

[Anonymous No.14330540]

>>14330531
I smell the stench of the axe wound through the screen

[Anonymous No.14330541]

>>14330531
Zoroastrianism is a progressive religion. Ahura Mazda is *literally* (yes, *literally*) Prometheus

[Anonymous No.14330549]

>>14330541
> Zoroastrianism is a progressive religion
what a cuckold, no wonder you got fucked by the abrahamic religions

[Anonymous No.14330561]

>>14330540
it was a bait post, god

>>14330541
the word "progressive" doesn't have positive connotations, at least to my ear

[Anonymous No.14330565]

>>14330493

The greatest heroes in the Iliad frequently shed tears, and show pity and compassion even for their enemies. That is the whole point of Achilles' meeting with Priam in the twenty-fourth book. So I'm afraid that your little scrap of etymology has only served to mislead you; "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing," etc.

>Not true. Just as one example, the Kurds are some of the bravest, noblest, honest, and peaceful people on the planet. Yet they have no homeland and are under constant attack by outside forces. Just because sometimes, or even most of the time, 'things are right and fair', it isn't truly fair if that justice isn't constant and consistent. A truly just and divine God would make sure this excellence in order would hold true all the time. Further more, people are only 'bad' or 'good' based on their nature and nurture. So much of what makes a person tick was laid out before they were born or in their infancy, outside of their control. If God truly wanted everyone to be good, or at least not an asshole, he could've made these people be born with better genes and a better upbringing. Totally within His power to do so, yet he chooses not to. When you as a human can conceivably be more good than the ultimate ruler of everything, what does that tell you about the guy? He's a fool at best and a bipolar asshole at worst.

The Romans arose from a little band of men to a world Empire by their valour. It is the same with Greeks, and their resisting of the invasion of Xerxes to preserve their independence. Great nations are not given what they have. We get exactly what we work for. We have no right to expect anything. Your calling people "good" or "bad" on the basis of their environment deprives people of freedom of will, and, in fact, contradicts all the facts of history, since it is impossible to think how little nations like Rome or Persia or Athens could become so great without a divine effort to do so, and raise themselves above their circumstances. They likewise fell when they ceased to exercise the virtues which had caused them to rise in the first place.

[Anonymous No.14330568]

>>14330518
Ok retard, post your source then. Zoroastrian doctrine literally states that you can't convert to it. Are you braindead?

My claim once again is not about some sort of supra-confessional God. God might not care according to your opinion, but that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about Zoroastrian doctrine.

[Anonymous No.14330572]

>>14330520
>Would of never happened under Sassanid shits

Doesn't mean it wouldn't have happened without Islam. Correlation =/= causation.

>you live twice as long as your ancestors ever could have dreamed of

This is a fucking lie. So long as they survived through childhood, people today maybe live between 10-30 years longer than our ancestors, not fucking twice as long.

>Humanity has achieved more in the last century than it ever has in its entire history.

Not necessarily. Depends how you rank "achievement". In terms of overall, I suppose, but if you 'adjust for inflation', or rather, rate in what people had to work with versus what they achieved with it, I'd say it's comparable to periods like Pericles's Greece, the Renaissance, etc., not greater than.

>People are happier, freer
This is not true in the USA, at least over the past 40 years. Life expectancy is going down as well.

>and the entire wealth of human knowledge is available to you at your finger tips.

A lot the good and thorough stuff isn't freely available on the Internet. It's either stored in books, archives, manuals, etc. or you have to pay for it.

>you will never know the suffering that every other generation did.

We have modern sufferings of loneliness, existential angst, being unnecessarily overstressed and depressed, have to deal with information overload, excess screen time, sedentary lifestyles, etc.

>And you still think the words of dehydrated desert madmen in the middle east are literal truth

If truth is truly true, then it was true then, true today, and will continue to be true in the future, no matter whose mouth it comes out of.
>and think gender is biological.

Lol, okay, pardon me. This was all obviously a troll. Nice work, 8/10

[Anonymous No.14330573]

>>14330565
>the heroes of the Iliad frequently show pity

[Anonymous No.14330585]

>>14330493

The greatest heroes in the Iliad frequently shed tears, and show pity and compassion even for their enemies. That is the whole point of Achilles' meeting with Priam in the twenty-fourth book. So I'm afraid that your little scrap of etymology has only served to mislead you; "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing," etc.

>>14330504

>Not true. Just as one example, the Kurds are some of the bravest, noblest, honest, and peaceful people on the planet. Yet they have no homeland and are under constant attack by outside forces. Just because sometimes, or even most of the time, 'things are right and fair', it isn't truly fair if that justice isn't constant and consistent. A truly just and divine God would make sure this excellence in order would hold true all the time. Further more, people are only 'bad' or 'good' based on their nature and nurture. So much of what makes a person tick was laid out before they were born or in their infancy, outside of their control. If God truly wanted everyone to be good, or at least not an asshole, he could've made these people be born with better genes and a better upbringing. Totally within His power to do so, yet he chooses not to. When you as a human can conceivably be more good than the ultimate ruler of everything, what does that tell you about the guy? He's a fool at best and a bipolar asshole at worst.

The Romans arose from a little band of men to a world Empire by their valour. It is the same with Greeks, and their resisting of the invasion of Xerxes to preserve their independence. Great nations are not given what they have. We get exactly what we work for. We have no right to expect anything. Your calling people "good" or "bad" on the basis of their environment deprives people of freedom of will, and, in fact, contradicts all the facts of history, since it is impossible to think how little nations like Rome or Persia or Athens could become so great without a divine effort to do so, and raise themselves above their circumstances. They likewise fell when they ceased to exercise the virtues which had caused them to rise in the first place.

With respect to the Kurds, I consider them a very fine people, and wish only the best for them, but I certainly don't think of them as being the morally perfect angels you do. And what have they contributed to humanity, for example, when compared with the nations of Europe? The difference is immeasurably vast. They are merely a nation of people, just like any other nation, and they have suffered quite like the rest of us.

[Anonymous No.14330593]

>>14330565
>since it is impossible to think how little nations like Rome or Persia or Athens could become so great without a divine effort to do so

"impossible"

They got lucky. It just happened based on their geography and natural selection. It would've and will happen to any other kind of people with a similarly favorable set up.

>They likewise fell when they ceased to exercise the virtues which had caused them to rise in the first place.

Sometimes flukes like sandstorms or other natural disasters, diseases, etc. will spread for no good reason. Where do natural disasters or birth deformities fit in with your "will" and "being good" narrative?

[Anonymous No.14330594]

>>14330585
They shed tears the same way children do when they throw a tantrum

[Anonymous No.14330598]

>>14330573

See as examples Menelaus's attempt to spare Adrastus, the friendship of the xenoi Diomedes and Glaucus, and the aforementioned meeting of Priam with Achilles which marks the climax of the whole poem.

[Anonymous No.14330602]

>>14330568
That doctrine was engineered by man to keep the royals' nobility and power in control. Once that hegemony ended, so did these arbitrary rules of having to be born into it. They were trying to keep to themselves what always belonged to everybody.

[Anonymous No.14330604]

>>14330598
See as example the countless multitude of acts of ruthlessness, like, idk, the sacking of troy and enslavement of its populace

[Anonymous No.14330614]

>>14330594

This is completely untrue. When Achilles sheds tears in the first book, it is because Agamemnon has disgraced him in front of the whole army, and kidnapped the woman he intended to marry (Briseis), and in the twenty-fourth because he pities a grieving father.

"But the old man went straight toward the house where Achilles, dear to Zeus, was wont to sit. Therein he found Achilles, but his comrades sat apart: two only, the warrior Automedon and Alcimus, scion of Ares, [475] waited busily upon him; and he was newly ceased from meat, even from eating and drinking, and the table yet stood by his side. Unseen of these great Priam entered in, and coming close to Achilles, clasped in his hands his knees, and kissed his hands, the terrible, man-slaying hands that had slain his many sons. [480] And as when sore blindness of heart cometh upon a man, that in his own country slayeth another and escapeth to a land of strangers, to the house of some man of substance, and wonder holdeth them that look upon him; even so was Achilles seized with wonder at sight of godlike Priam, and seized with wonder were the others likewise, and they glanced one at the other. [485] But Priam made entreaty, and spake to him, saying: “Remember thy father, O Achilles like to the gods, whose years are even as mine, on the grievous threshold of old age. Him full likely the dwellers that be round about are entreating evilly, neither is there any to ward from him ruin and bane. [490] Howbeit, while he heareth of thee as yet alive he hath joy at heart, and therewithal hopeth day by day that he shall see his dear son returning from Troy-land. But I—I am utterly unblest, seeing I begat sons the best in the broad land of Troy, yet of them I avow that not one is left. [495] Fifty I had, when the sons of the Achaeans came; nineteen were born to me of the self-same womb, and the others women of the palace bare. Of these, many as they were, furious Ares hath loosed the knees, and he that alone was left me, that by himself guarded the city and the men, [500] him thou slewest but now as he fought for his country, even Hector. For his sake am I now come to the ships of the Achaeans to win him back from thee, and I bear with me ransom past counting. Nay, have thou awe of the gods, Achilles, and take pity on me, remembering thine own father. Lo, I am more piteous far than he, [505] and have endured what no other mortal on the face of earth hath yet endured, to reach forth my hand to the face of him that hath slain my sons.” So spake he, and in Achilles he roused desire to weep for his father; and he took the old man by the hand, and gently put him from him. So the twain bethought them of their dead, and wept; the one for man-slaying Hector wept sore, [510] the while he grovelled at Achilles' feet, but Achilles wept for his own father, and now again for Patroclus; and the sound of their moaning went up through the house."

[Anonymous No.14330615]

>>14330614
Man, you are delusional

[Anonymous No.14330625]

>>14330211
>>14330218
Zarathusta said that before them. Also, not all Greeks and Romans believed in a good and evil.

[Anonymous No.14330626]

>>14330604

This would be after the Trojans kidnapped Helen, refused to give her back, broke a sacred truce by attempting to kill Menelaus, and failed to honour a holy agreement respecting his duel with Paris.

[Anonymous No.14330627]

>>14330615
>cites evidence
>"lol, you're delusional"

I don't have a dog in this race and can't say for sure either way, but you resorting to ad hominem attacks against him doesn't spell best for your case.

[Anonymous No.14330635]

>>14330627
I'm arguing against someone who thinks the Homeric heroes are compassionate and tender. What the fuck

[Anonymous No.14330638]

>>14330602
Ok cool. Show me Zoroastrians that believe that and accept converts. You are posting your opinion. We are not discussing your opinion, we are discussing the orthodox doctrine of Zoroastrianism.

[Anonymous No.14330642]

>>14330638
>Show me Zoroastrians that believe that and accept converts
Zarathustra, to name one

[Anonymous No.14330644]

>>14330626
>therefore, sack a town and enslave its citizens who had nothing to do with any of this

yeah, sounds fair

[Anonymous No.14330649]

>>14330229
Heraclitus was not a dualist.
Empedocles was though.
Heraclitus was a nondualist.
>>14330281
The point is, dualism first came from Zarathustra.
>>14330353
God is not omnipotent. In fact, it is typically the best religions that die out. God is all-good, but since we live in a time that is largely evil, the good is dying out.

[Anonymous No.14330652]

>>14330642
Ok, quote it

[Anonymous No.14330654]

>>14330635

My words were, "The greatest heroes in the Iliad frequently shed tears, and show pity and compassion even for their enemies." That is not equivalent to "The Homeric heroes are compassionate and tender" as if these were exclusive and primary characteristics. Homer doesn't hide the brutality of war, but his making the meeting with Priam the climax of his poem is obviously making a point.

[Anonymous No.14330661]

>>14330652
He was the first Zoroastrian, and he increased his religion by preaching and converting, retard

[Anonymous No.14330663]

>>14330520
Islam is trash.

[Anonymous No.14330664]

>>14330504
>Kurds are some of the bravest, noblest, honest, and peaceful people on the planet
Yes, they were so peaceful and noble when they massacred armenian and greek christians in anatolia all throughout the 19th and 20th century

[Anonymous No.14330669]

>>14330654
lmao

[Anonymous No.14330670]

>>14330531
Zoroastrianism comes from the steppe, you dumb edgelord. It comes from Northern Central Asia. You know, fucking STEPPES, not desert.

[Anonymous No.14330675]

>>14330644

We conducted mass bombings of civilians during the World Wars on the basis that the population were actively supporting enemy rulers. What is the difference?

Regardless, the meeting of Hector with Andromache shows that Homer himself did not support the brutal sackings of cities, since he obviously tries to rouse our pity for the Trojans in that scene. But he also makes the fury of the Greeks perfectly understandable.

[Anonymous No.14330684]

>>14330661
Converting people that were already in his community idiot. Do you think he went preaching to white bourgeoise yuppies

[Anonymous No.14330685]

>>14330638
From Wiki:

"Today Zoroastrianism can be divided in two main schools of thought: reformists and traditionalists. Traditionalists are mostly Parsis and accept, beside the Gathas and Avesta, also the Middle Persian literature and like the reformists mostly developed in their modern form from 19th century developments.[25] They generally do not allow conversion to the faith and, as such, for someone to be a Zoroastrian they must be born of Zoroastrian parents. Some traditionalists recognize the children of mixed marriages as Zoroastrians, though usually only if the father is a born Zoroastrian.[78] Reformists tend to advocate a "return" to the Gathas, the universal nature of the faith, a decrease in ritualization, and an emphasis on the faith as philosophy rather than religion.[25] Not all Zoroastrians identify with either school and notable examples are getting traction including Neo-Zoroastrians/Para-Zoroastrians, which are usually radical reinterpretations of Zoroastrianism appealing towards Western concerns,[79] and Revivalists, who center the idea of Zoroastrianism as a living religion and advocate the revival and maintenance of old rituals and prayers while supporting ethical and social progressive reforms. Both of these latter schools tend to center the Gathas without outright rejecting other texts except the Vendidad. Ilm-e-Khshnoom and the Pundol Group are Zoroastrian mystical schools of thought popular among a small minority of the Parsi community inspired mostly by 19th-century theosophy and typified by a spiritual ethnocentric mentality.[25]"

Just because many Parsis are ethnocentric assholes doesn't mean all of Zoroastriandom thinks like this. Yeah, if you're asking that ethnically homogenous group in India who are Zoroastrian if they accept converts, they'll probably say not. But anyone else will say yes.

[Anonymous No.14330688]

>>14330638
That guy is uninformed. I am OP, talk to me instead.
The fact is, during Sassanian empire attempts were made to convert Armenians and the Chinese, believe it or not. However, after Islamic invasions, a large population of them migrated to India and became Parsis. The king said they can settle there so long as they do not proselytize. Therefore, the Parsi no longer accept converts out of respect. However, some small Zoroastrian minority survives in Yazd, Iran, and they do accept converts.

[Anonymous No.14330690]

>>14330664
Fair, but that wasn't under their command. That was the order of the Turks who would've come for them if they hadn't carried out the orders.

[Anonymous No.14330691]

>>14330684
He migrated to Afghan/North West India region to preach, he didn't preach in his homeland. Do you literally know nothing about Zoroastrianism? If so, why argue?

[Anonymous No.14330695]

>>14330685
Yeah, that's a good quote. Even if Zoroastrianism is reformed, the Gathas should be placed in the center. Since I am a prophet, I can become one of the best reformers.

[Anonymous No.14330698]

>>14330649

Zoroaster is traditionally dated to the 7th century B. C. No earlier than Homer or Hesiod, and most probably later. However old you want to put him, the Egyptian religion is much older, and they believed in a soul; hence why they practised embalming, because they believed in a resurrection of the dead.

[Anonymous No.14330700]

>>14330695
In what sense are you a "prophet"? Define the term

[Anonymous No.14330705]

>>14330698
Most modern scholars like Richard Foltz say around 1000-1500 BCE. Check here: >>14330003

Also, the dualism of ancient Egyptian religions was different from Zoroastrianism's which is more explicitly more.

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14330709]

>>14329962
You are conflating Christianity with judeochristianity; Christianity/Gnosticism comprehends Zoroastrianism.

[Anonymous No.14330710]

>>14330705
>more
moral*

[Anonymous No.14330725]

>>14330705

You will find scholars who put the Hebrew books many thousands of years B. C., as likewise the Indian ones. You will also find scholars who put those books, too, in only the sixth or seventh centuries B. C. For the most part, everybody likes to choose the date which best concords with the agenda they have to promote in these sorts of matters. What can't be disputed is that the Egyptian religion _is_ older than Zoroastrianism, no matter how ancient you wish to make it. Your argument for religious supremacy becomes very tenuous when all you can say for yourself is that "We clarified things a little better than the Egyptians did, before the Greeks then came along shortly thereafter and overshadowed us a hundred fold."

[Anonymous No.14330726]

>>14330709
>christcuck doing mental gymnastics
your religion is based on judaism, no amount of twisting and turning will change that

[Anonymous No.14330729]

>>14330709
Those forms of gnosticism come from Manichaenism which comes from Zoroastrianism and Buddhism mostly

[Anonymous No.14330735]

>>14330691
He has something he wants to be true, a true bloodline religion that's identical to judaism but 'on the good side'.

[Anonymous No.14330743]

>>14330725
Based on linguistic analysis of the Old Avestan in the Gathas and archaeological studies of BMAC, Scythian and Sintashta sites, and more, it's around 1000 to 1500 BCE.
The dualism of older Egyptian and Indo-Iranian religions is not really comparable, and even if so, they come from entirely different origins, environments (steppe vs desert), and more.

[Anonymous No.14330769]

>>14330743
Depends who you ask. Some say the language of the Gathas suggests it was deliberately written in a way to sound "old timey" (kind of like if someone today with middling knowledge of the language were to try and write a new Biblical text in ancient Hebrew and pass it off as authentic). That would explain why so much reads like nonsense or is almost incomprehensible.

[Anonymous No.14330790]

>>14330769
The Gathas is not nonsensical or even incomprehensible. In fact, most translations show it makes a lot of sense. Have you even bothered reading the various translations?

[Anonymous No.14330803]

>>14330726
>your religion is based on judaism
Retard alert, you fell for the ad version of history.
The religion Christianity inherited from died in 76 AD or 144 AD. Judaism clung to some aspects of it and canonized an oral tradition that had nothing to do with it, which outranks the written one. They are incapable of holding the old covenant.
However, Christianity fulfilled the old covenant and formed a new one.

[Anonymous No.14330818]

>>14330790

There are some good thoughts scattered here and there in these Gathas, but a large part of it _is_ gibberish.

http://www.avesta.org/gathas.htm

The best thoughts are where it says that the righteous will be rewarded and the wicked will be punished, and that we should pursue truth and justice. Fine thoughts, no doubt; but it does not say anything that all the other great books do not already say. It is not the sum and total of wisdom. It is one gem in the enormous, overflowing treasure-chest of literature.

[Anonymous No.14330819]

>>14330803
man, you really love to pull things out of your ass, thats a lot of bullshit with no historic or scriptural evidence but its alright, wouldn't expect any less from a christcuck

[Anonymous No.14330824]

>>14330803
>Christianity fulfilled the old covenant and formed a new one.
and it's even more pernicious and insane than the old
>>14330790
Obviously the translations are understandable, but they are supposed to be very speculative at many parts because them meaning isn't known with certainty for many passages

[Anonymous No.14330844]

>>14330818
That translation isn't even good. The point is, the Gathas was the first one to ever make such claims. >>14330769
>>14330790
Does this part of the Gathas sound nonsensical? Yasna 44, Mary Boyce Translation:

(3) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who in the beginning, at creation, was Father of Order (Asha)? Who established the course of sun and stars? Through whom does the moon wax, then wane? This and yet more, Ο Mazda, I seek to know. (4) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who has upheld the earth from below, and the heavens from falling? Who (sustains) the waters and plants? Who harnessed swift steeds to wind and clouds? Who, Ο Mazda, is Creator of Good Purpose? (5) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. What craftsman created light and darkness? What craftsman created both sleep and activity? Through whom exist dawn, noon and eve, which remind the worshipper of his duty?... (7) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who fashioned honoured Devotion together with Power? Who made the son respectful in heed to the father? By these (questions), Ο Mazda, I help (men) to discern Thee as Creator of all things through the Holy Spirit.... (16) This I
ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who will be victorious to protect through Thy teaching those who are the progeny in my house? As Healer of the world, promise to us a judge. Then let Hearkening come to him with Good Purpose, Ο
Mazda - to him whomsoever Thou dost wish.

[rupi kaur No.14330855]

>>14330824
>and it's even more pernicious and insane than the old
It banned ritualistic baby torture and it invalidated retarded legalism. It's based.
You're just jelly like all you Cain-kikes have ever been.

>>14330819
They lost their lineages, including patrilinear heritage of their tribes, their entire tribal system, their priest class, their sacrifices, their prayers, their temple, their nation, their language, their names and their teachings.
Talmud was written down in 400 AD and OT makes no mention of it. It's fanfiction to justify rabbinical trauma-based tyranny over people.

[Nemo !!GgBWHLRiayD No.14330862]

>>14330726
Christianity is a spiritual doctrine, not a religion.

>>14330729
To what forms are you referring?

[Anonymous No.14330863]

>>14330818
That particular translation isn't even good. The point is, the Gathas was the first one to ever make such claims as "the righteous will be rewarded and the wicked will be punished, and that we should pursue truth and justice", but it also had a few more claims than that.
>>14330769
Does this part of the Gathas sound nonsensical? Yasna 44, Mary Boyce Translation:

(3) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who in the beginning, at creation, was Father of Order (Asha)? Who established the course of sun and stars? Through whom does the moon wax, then wane? This and yet more, Ο Mazda, I seek to know. (4) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who has upheld the earth from below, and the heavens from falling? Who (sustains) the waters and plants? Who harnessed swift steeds to wind and clouds? Who, Ο Mazda, is Creator of Good Purpose? (5) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. What craftsman created light and darkness? What craftsman created both sleep and activity? Through whom exist dawn, noon and eve, which remind the worshipper of his duty?... (7) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who fashioned honoured Devotion together with Power? Who made the son respectful in heed to the father? By these (questions), Ο Mazda, I help (men) to discern Thee as Creator of all things through the Holy Spirit.... (16) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who will be victorious to protect through Thy teaching those who are the progeny in my house? As Healer of the world, promise to us a judge. Then let Hearkening come to him with Good Purpose, Ο
Mazda - to him whomsoever Thou dost wish.

[Anonymous No.14330869]

>>14330855
I didn't mention the talmud, christianity and jesus are based upon the messiah of the Hebrew scriptures, without the torah and the prophets Christianity has no basis

[Anonymous No.14330870]

>>14330818
That particular translation isn't even good. The point is, the Gathas was the first one to ever make such claims as "the righteous will be rewarded and the wicked will be punished, and that we should pursue truth and justice", but it also had a few more claims than that.
>>14330769
Does this part of the Gathas sound nonsensical? Yasna 44, Mary Boyce Translation:

(3) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who in the beginning, at creation, was Father of Order (Asha)? Who established the course of sun and stars? Through whom does the moon wax, then wane? This and yet more, Ο Mazda, I seek to know. (4) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who has upheld the earth from below, and the heavens from falling? Who (sustains) the waters and plants? Who harnessed swift steeds to wind and clouds? Who, Ο Mazda, is Creator of Good Purpose? (5) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. What craftsman created light and darkness? What craftsman created both sleep and activity? Through whom exist dawn, noon and eve, which remind the worshipper of his duty?... (7) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who fashioned honoured Devotion together with Power? Who made the son respectful in heed to the father? By these (questions), Ο Mazda, I help (men) to discern Thee as Creator of all things through the Holy Spirit.... (16) This I ask Thee, tell me truly, Lord. Who will be victorious to protect through Thy teaching those who are the progeny in my house? As Healer of the world, promise to us a judge. Then let Hearkening come to him with Good Purpose, Ο Mazda - to him whomsoever Thou dost wish.

[rupi kaur No.14330874]

>>14330869
>I didn't mention the talmud
Talmud is the core of judaism, similar to how Christ is the core of Christianity.

[Anonymous No.14330879]

>>14330862
no, christianity is a religion, your efforts to make it special are pathetic

[Anonymous No.14330883]

>>14330874
again, you're a retard, the torah, the law of moses and the books of the prophets are the core of judaism, the talmud is secondary rabbinic texts

[Anonymous No.14330898]

>>14329962
In what way is Rupert the bear related to Zoroastrianism?

[Anonymous No.14330900]

>>14330844

These are very fine thoughts. It is just like the descriptions of God which we might find in Hesiod, Homer, or the Book of Job, or the Rig Veda (the latter two of which have their own fanciful claims to being old by thousands of years B. C.).

"Easily he makes strong, and easily he brings the strong man low; easily he humbles the proud and raises the obscure, and easily he straightens the crooked and blasts the proud, -- Zeus who thunders aloft and has his dwelling most high." -- Homer

"Hang me a golden chain from heaven, and lay hold of it all of you, gods and goddesses together - tug as you will, you will not drag Zeus the supreme counselor from heaven to earth; but were I to pull at it myself I should draw you up with earth and sea into the bargain, then would I bind the chain about some pinnacle of Olympus and leave you all dangling in the mid firmament. So far am I above all others either of gods or men." -- Homer

"God is one and the sole ruler of the Universe. Alone, he supports threefold the earth and the sky — all creatures." -- Rig Veda

These are all very good things, as I say. But they are by no means original, nor do they come from the repository of all wisdom.

[Anonymous No.14330908]

>>14330883
>the torah, the law of moses and the books of the prophets are the core of judaism
Which they can't fulfill at all until they have a temple or they form one of the twelve tribes of Israel (they form none). They are pretenders and have always been. It's at best a cope, and at worst a lie.
Right now they just obey their rabbinical overlords like retards and get circumcised despite being atheists.

[Anonymous No.14330909]

>>14330870

These are very fine thoughts. It is just like the descriptions of God which we might find in Hesiod, Homer, or the Book of Job, or the Rig Veda (the latter two of which have their own fanciful claims to being old by thousands of years B. C.).

"Easily he makes strong, and easily he brings the strong man low; easily he humbles the proud and raises the obscure, and easily he straightens the crooked and blasts the proud, -- Zeus who thunders aloft and has his dwelling most high." -- Hesiod

"Hang me a golden chain from heaven, and lay hold of it all of you, gods and goddesses together - tug as you will, you will not drag Zeus the supreme counselor from heaven to earth; but were I to pull at it myself I should draw you up with earth and sea into the bargain, then would I bind the chain about some pinnacle of Olympus and leave you all dangling in the mid firmament. So far am I above all others either of gods or men." -- Homer

"God is one and the sole ruler of the Universe. Alone, he supports threefold the earth and the sky — all creatures." -- Rig Veda

These are all very good things, as I say. But they are by no means original, nor do they come from the repository of all wisdom.

[Anonymous No.14330916]

>>14330900
Rig Veda and Gathas have the same Proto-Indo-Iranian root. They both predate Homer.
>But they are by no means original,
For their time, they were.
>nor do they come from the repository of all wisdom.
Depends on the metaphysics or ontology you ultimately adopt.

[Anonymous No.14330926]

>>14330909
I responded to you here:
>>14330916
I was reposting due to formatting issues.

[Anonymous No.14330937]

>>14330916

I think we can agree that both the ancient Egyptian, Iranian, and Indian religions are all very old, and that all of them concur in the existence of good and evil, the afterlife, and the immortality of the soul. So instead of trusting to anybody's narrow claim to exclusive truth, we should rather endeavour to seek it out wherever we can find it.

[Anonymous No.14330977]

>>14330937
>all of them concur in the existence of good and evil, the afterlife, and the immortality of the soul.
There are differences.
Most Indian religions tend to tilt towards nondualism or monism.
Most Iranic religions were dualistic or a ditheism.
Cult of Osiris was an implicit kind of bitheism, which is very different from true dualism

[Anonymous No.14331013]

>>14330977

I think there may have been a misunderstanding here, since, to me, dualism connotes a belief in a real distinction between the body and the soul. But I think you may mean the Zoroastrian opposition between the two principles of good and evil. But at any rate, a system which would rob God of omnipotence I don't consider to be very wise or great.

[Anonymous No.14331034]

>>14331013
A God who is responsible for the creation of the conditions of evil is not all-good. A truly loving, just God would not create Satan or evil. You cannot have both an omnipotent and all-good God.
Ahura Mazda has an edge over Ahriman, and he will most certainly win. However, how can you claim to feel the grace of God in a serial killer's chamber or other horrific place? Sometimes God wins, sometimes he loses, but he's prophesied to win in the end and beat Ahriman in the end.
Zoroastrianism doesn't have the Problem of Evil.

[Anonymous No.14331047]

>>14331034
Ahura Mazda and the struggles against evil also agrees with the concept of higher order over lower order and the struggle against entropy.

[Anonymous No.14331051]

>>14329962
Reminder, the TRUE indo-aryan religion is Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.14331057]

>>14331051
>TRUE indo-aryan religion practiced overwhelmingly by chinks and currys

kek

[Anonymous No.14331063]

>>14331034

You presume that what we think to be evil actually is such, rather than the mere semblance of it. We are only able to perceive a fraction of what the Divine Architect knows. For all we know, for example, Death is a happier state than Life, and the man who dies is more fortunate than we who survive him.--Besides which, if your God is not omnipotent, then he has no business making prophecies about his final victory.

[Anonymous No.14331069]

>>14331047
All forms of monism or nondualism which treat opposites of complementary, rather than antagonist, amount to antinomianism or nihilism.

[Anonymous No.14331082]

>>14331063

I might also add to this that the notion of God's impotence is logically impossible, because it contradicts the necessity for the First Cause to contain in itself more power than everything which proceeds from it.

[Anonymous No.14331091]

>>14331063
There are moments of happiness, bliss, order, serenity, tranquility, and etc. which reflect Ahura Mazda's House of Wisdom. Likewise, there are moments of despair, pain, disorder, malice, chaos, and etc. which reflect Ahriman's House of Lies.
When we immerse our minds deeply into artwork of the extremes, 'we' are temporarily tunneled a little bit to the higher or lower realms. In this sense, Moominvalley is real and closer to the heavens. Furthermore, Ligotti's carnival towns are real too and closer to the hells.
You are spreading druj and are currently in the hells. You must purify yourself with some Winnie the Pooh.
>>14331063
>opposites of complementary
opposites as complementary*

I am a prophet. I am a Saoshyant.

[Anonymous No.14331099]

>>14331091
moments and intentions*
The antidote is not the poison,
the poison is not the antidote.
There is no indeterminacy between them.

[Anonymous No.14331118]

>>14331069
meant to fix typo here:
>>14331091
opposites as complementary*

[Anonymous No.14331141]

>>14331091

You haven't actually addressed the rational arguments I made; you are simply making assertions. But rather than bind myself to the blind asseverations of dogmatists, whatever their creed happens to be, I would rather follow the light of Reason along with the ancient Greeks. That is the torch which God gave me.

[Anonymous No.14331160]

>>14331141
Right because arguments take a long time to detail, and in fact, I want to write philosophical books alongside my art, which has a large social media following.
The light of Reason is asha. You unknowingly use the metaphors Zarathustra created.
A few ancient Greeks like Empedocles were aligned with the message of the Gathas, in my view. However, many like Heraclitus weren't.
>That is the torch which God gave me.
Your God is a Semitic distortion of Zoroastrian Ahura Mazda.

[Anonymous No.14331166]

>>14329962
>"Abrahamic"
No such thing.

[Anonymous No.14331192]

>>14331160

Socrates and the ancient Greeks had absolutely no influence from the Hebrews, my friend.

Greece, India, and Persia all derive from the same Indo-European source, and to claim that any one of them "takes from the other" would be unjust.

[Anonymous No.14331195]

>>14331057
Its ironic. White europen practices an afro-semetic religion while the chinks practice true indo-aryan religion. European "culture" is African culture afterall.

[Anonymous No.14331226]

>>14331192
You do realize Greeks frequently disagreed and debated one another? So when you say you follow the Greek conception of God, what do you mean? Empedocle's Love, Anaximander's "apeiron", Heraclitus' LOGOS, the Stoic immanent conception of God, etc.?

I'm not a dogmatist. I'm not saying to drop all and follow my tradition. That's not my claim. What I am arguing for is a kind of rudimentary dualism on the ontological level, which opposes philosophies that propose dichotomies as existing in a complementary and harmonious relationship with one another rather than as antagonist and conflicting. That's how I interpret the philosophical message of the Gathas. Good and evil cannot coexist. They will always be in conflict, which is the ultimate metaphysical principle. I feel Empedocles truly touched on that unlike Heraclitus. In this sense, I would make an argument Empedocles was a Saoshyant.

So yeah, the Greek spirit was one of endless debate, though we see this to an extent in Iran and India too.

[Anonymous No.14331259]

>>14331192
>>14331226
To be more precise, I am like an anti-Derrida. Derrida argues that all dichotomies involve indeterminacy or uncountables, so you cannot privilege one side of the pole over the other. I am arguing that some dichotomies, in specific contexts, are quite clear, and one should always privilege one pole over the other.