>monotheism is not IE
Every time you think you've seen a moronic post on IQfy and you go "that's it, that's the dumbest post ever made, nothing will ever surpass this" you get a piece of stupidity like this proving you naively, arrogantly, tragically mistaken.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Why don't you make an argument moron? Oh right you don't have one, rabbi.
"Both IE and Christianity are israeli. That means it depends on your perspective."
no? IE is not Hebrew.
Even when the Israelites were pagans, their Pantheon was not "IE"
and again...
Zoroastrianism is monotheistic.
It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic ontology.
No, you didn't get my point, brainlet.
Christianity was reforming certain aspects of Judaic law. Some people claim it broke off from Judaism and can no longer be claimed as israeli.
Likewise, Zoroastrianism reformed certain aspects of IE polytheism. Zoroaster reformed their tradition to be more ditheistic in order to ground a moral dualism. This moral dualism was used to justify more care to cattle and less cattle raids, which the IE steppe warlords were always engaging in.
As you can see, it depends on your perceptive whether Zoroastrian is continuous or discontinuous with these Aryan/IE traditions. Am I clear? >Zoroastrianism is monotheistic.
No, it is ditheistic with monist elements. Vayu-Vata is an example of such a monist element... It also explains how Zurvan late grew.
It is more accurate to call Zoroastrianism as MONOLATRY.
>It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic ontology.
It is more complex than that. It requires a lot of study to figure out.
Ahura Mazda is only latently omnipotent. Later Zoroastrian schools also became very fatalistic fyi.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Zoroaster proposed a change in the dominant pantheon towards monotheism and dualism. (NON-IE)
From Zoroaster's perspective, the Aúras come to be seen as beings who chose good, and the daivas, as beings who chose evil. In India, the path would be reversed, with the Aúras representing evil, and the daevas representing good.
Philosophical system according to which reality (everything that exists) can only be reduced to a single principle, with beings conditioned to it.
Conception, doctrine or ideology, which opposes pluralism and the duality inherent to reality and beings.
it still remains monotheistic, and has undergone a reform of the ancient IE religions.
Unlike Christianity, which broke with traditions that had long been monotheistic, the break was not revolutionary in the theological sense, unlike Zoroastrianism.
2 months ago
Anonymous
What was the purpose of reversing the roles of devas and asuras? To be contrarian?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>Zoroaster proposed a change in the dominant pantheon towards monotheism and dualism.
he didn't
Zoroastrianism isn't monotheistic, as they worship a series of divine being besides Ahura Mazda
The 'monotheistic' interpretation only came after contact with islam as a way to avoid further persecution an with western schoolars trying to force it into a more familiar framework
2 months ago
Anonymous
>Christianity was reforming certain aspects of Judaic law
Judaic law did not exist until the 5th century AD
turkish mysticism. Irrelevant since the 6th century when islam took over. Pretty basic stuff work on your eastern esotercism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGUCMHJWwbI
Low IQ garbage. Gathas makes it clear he was just a renegade priest who was critiquing Scythian-like warlords. His message grew more among Iran_N derived peoples.
You can’t convert into it OP.
Who cares? The sect the Parsees follow was even more brutal than Pisslam. If they had just allowed Mazdak's reforms to grow, then Zoroastrianism would have preservered. He was popular among the masses and was reforming the negative elements.
The Parsee are just a bunch of inbred sanctimonious mongrels who fled the country because they were weak hypocrites.
Zoroastrianism was always about purity and honesty, yet the Orthodox clergy were the most hypocritical and deceitful homosexuals in existence. The Sassanian empire didn't just collapse because of Arabs, but rather, due to corrupt priestly caste making the people fed up. All heterodoxies brutally punished to the point it made people fatigued. Likewise, we see this same pattern with mullahs making Iranians fed up with Islam.
Another option is for Iran to try out Buddhism, which was always richer than Abrahamic and Mazdan traditions.
>Low IQ garbage. Gathas makes it clear he was just a renegade priest who was critiquing Scythian-like warlords. His message grew more among Iran_N derived peoples.
Do you have any proof that Zoroaster existed?
We don't know whether Zoroaster himself existed. But someone had to write the books, dummy.
Whoever wrote the books was a pre-vedic priest who broke off from the worship practice of war deities like Indra.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>Low IQ garbage. Gathas makes it clear he was just a renegade priest who was critiquing Scythian-like warlords. His message grew more among Iran_N derived peoples.
Do you have any proof that Zoroaster existed?
Yes Zoroaster existed but we don't know exactly when. Dates for his lifetime range between 1500 BCE to 500 BCE.
2 months ago
Anonymous
[...]
Yes Zoroaster existed but we don't know exactly when. Dates for his lifetime range between 1500 BCE to 500 BCE.
I swear the israelites in this thread trying to say Zoroastrian is IE. Lol. Lmao even. Lmfao. Trying to shill their Semitic monotheism in this thread. Lol we see you rabbis.
Non-IE.
I really don't care about that
It is IE.
No
monotheism is not IE
where is the equivalent of apollo, zeus, ares hades in zoroastrian?
Holy frick, what a moron
Zoroastrianism isn't monotheistic.
>where is the equivalent of apollo, zeus, ares hades in zoroastrian?
Yazatas.
Zoroastrians don't have any worse birthrates than whatever group is around them.
>monotheism is not IE
Every time you think you've seen a moronic post on IQfy and you go "that's it, that's the dumbest post ever made, nothing will ever surpass this" you get a piece of stupidity like this proving you naively, arrogantly, tragically mistaken.
Why don't you make an argument moron? Oh right you don't have one, rabbi.
It as IE as Christianity is israeli. This means it depends on your perspective.
Zoroastrian rough equivalents
>apollo
Sraosha
>ares
Verethragna
>hades
Aeshma
"Both IE and Christianity are israeli. That means it depends on your perspective."
no? IE is not Hebrew.
Even when the Israelites were pagans, their Pantheon was not "IE"
and again...
Zoroastrianism is monotheistic.
It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic ontology.
No, you didn't get my point, brainlet.
Christianity was reforming certain aspects of Judaic law. Some people claim it broke off from Judaism and can no longer be claimed as israeli.
Likewise, Zoroastrianism reformed certain aspects of IE polytheism. Zoroaster reformed their tradition to be more ditheistic in order to ground a moral dualism. This moral dualism was used to justify more care to cattle and less cattle raids, which the IE steppe warlords were always engaging in.
As you can see, it depends on your perceptive whether Zoroastrian is continuous or discontinuous with these Aryan/IE traditions. Am I clear?
>Zoroastrianism is monotheistic.
No, it is ditheistic with monist elements. Vayu-Vata is an example of such a monist element... It also explains how Zurvan late grew.
It is more accurate to call Zoroastrianism as MONOLATRY.
>It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic ontology.
It is more complex than that. It requires a lot of study to figure out.
Ahura Mazda is only latently omnipotent. Later Zoroastrian schools also became very fatalistic fyi.
Zoroaster proposed a change in the dominant pantheon towards monotheism and dualism. (NON-IE)
From Zoroaster's perspective, the Aúras come to be seen as beings who chose good, and the daivas, as beings who chose evil. In India, the path would be reversed, with the Aúras representing evil, and the daevas representing good.
Philosophical system according to which reality (everything that exists) can only be reduced to a single principle, with beings conditioned to it.
Conception, doctrine or ideology, which opposes pluralism and the duality inherent to reality and beings.
it still remains monotheistic, and has undergone a reform of the ancient IE religions.
Unlike Christianity, which broke with traditions that had long been monotheistic, the break was not revolutionary in the theological sense, unlike Zoroastrianism.
What was the purpose of reversing the roles of devas and asuras? To be contrarian?
>Zoroaster proposed a change in the dominant pantheon towards monotheism and dualism.
he didn't
Zoroastrianism isn't monotheistic, as they worship a series of divine being besides Ahura Mazda
The 'monotheistic' interpretation only came after contact with islam as a way to avoid further persecution an with western schoolars trying to force it into a more familiar framework
>Christianity was reforming certain aspects of Judaic law
Judaic law did not exist until the 5th century AD
turkish mysticism. Irrelevant since the 6th century when islam took over. Pretty basic stuff work on your eastern esotercism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGUCMHJWwbI
Frick wrong link
sisterfricking, monobrows, fire, panda-tier birth rates
Zoroaster was a composite character made of:
>Vedic priests in Persia.
>The Prophet Daniel.
Low IQ garbage. Gathas makes it clear he was just a renegade priest who was critiquing Scythian-like warlords. His message grew more among Iran_N derived peoples.
Who cares? The sect the Parsees follow was even more brutal than Pisslam. If they had just allowed Mazdak's reforms to grow, then Zoroastrianism would have preservered. He was popular among the masses and was reforming the negative elements.
The Parsee are just a bunch of inbred sanctimonious mongrels who fled the country because they were weak hypocrites.
Zoroastrianism was always about purity and honesty, yet the Orthodox clergy were the most hypocritical and deceitful homosexuals in existence. The Sassanian empire didn't just collapse because of Arabs, but rather, due to corrupt priestly caste making the people fed up. All heterodoxies brutally punished to the point it made people fatigued. Likewise, we see this same pattern with mullahs making Iranians fed up with Islam.
Another option is for Iran to try out Buddhism, which was always richer than Abrahamic and Mazdan traditions.
The Orthodox clergy were a lot like the corrupt monks in Senpou Temple in Sekiro btw*
>Low IQ garbage. Gathas makes it clear he was just a renegade priest who was critiquing Scythian-like warlords. His message grew more among Iran_N derived peoples.
Do you have any proof that Zoroaster existed?
We don't know whether Zoroaster himself existed. But someone had to write the books, dummy.
Whoever wrote the books was a pre-vedic priest who broke off from the worship practice of war deities like Indra.
Yes Zoroaster existed but we don't know exactly when. Dates for his lifetime range between 1500 BCE to 500 BCE.
He has less proof that he existed, then Jesus.
You can’t convert into it OP.
The religion itself doesn't have anything against conversion, it's a rule of the parsi ethnic group in India.
This shit was replaced by Ali worship in the independant northern dynasties after 2 centuries. That's so pathetic
Zoroastrianism wasn't strong in those regions in the first place
Anything but islam
The descendants of the OG Zoroastrian exiles are almost dead from low birth rates now. Clearly God isn't on their side.
I swear the israelites in this thread trying to say Zoroastrian is IE. Lol. Lmao even. Lmfao. Trying to shill their Semitic monotheism in this thread. Lol we see you rabbis.
Wouldn't that be the opposite? Wouldn't neo-rabs be arguing that Zoroastrian isn't IE?
They seem based enough to have visited Christ at his birth.
Another israeli inversion of paganism
I like incest so I like Zoroatrianism too on principle but I've never read about it enough to form an actual opinion.
Plagiarized by abrahamism.