• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Any Zoroastrians?

pmmg

Myth Weaver
Its Nietzsche. He's famous for saying god is dead. So, it would be kind of the anti-religion religion. Everyone secretly has religion ;).
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
I am familiar with Zoroastrianism, but i fear i would embarrass myself trying to have a discussion about it. As a philosophy, i would have thought it would organically spring up more commonly, but i dont see that it did (the dualism of it).

I am more well versed in some other religions. I am catholic and like being catholic. As many religions share many ideas together, there are probably some similarities and many differences.
 
Oh come on, you needn't be embarrassed, you clearly know well more than I do anyway. The only thing I know about it is that the religion is older than Christianity and Judaism, and that it believes a hero shall emerge after thousands of years (correct me if I'm wrong) to defeat Angra Mainyu, the evil spirit of Zoroastrianism.

Would you care to share those other religions? I was raised as a Christian as well, though I belong to the presbyterian church not catholic. But I've become a bit more agnostic as I grew up.😅
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
I think everyone is part agnostic. Logic and evidence are not really sufficient for anything else.

Zoroastrianism is kind of the idea that their are two opposing forces, which are often equated to good and evil. The principal idea is that one should try to live a good and virtuous life to attain a good outcome in the afterlife. Which is about as far I can go. There are some additional spiritual beings or concepts around it, and the idea of a hero at the end to cause good to prevail over evil.

I would have to go look up the names of the beings in it.

For myself, I enjoy religion, mythology, philosophy, and all of that. I cant say as I know certainly anything is true, but I can say many things I know are false. I identify Catholic, I question a lot, and I don't spent too much effort on stuff I can reject without much effort. I like the journey, especially when something pops up that makes me see something more clearly, or see a truth I'd not seen before. I have one rule I try to impart on my kids, which is always ask what is true, and keep looking for it. Most of the subjects I like, are unpleasant on a forum like this, so... Currently, I am interested in Hinduism, but I will take just about anything, so long as its not complete bunk.

All in all, though, I think most people are unthought out on this stuff, and don't have much patience for the topics. What can you do? I am not interested in Pokemon, but my kids...
 
I enjoy religions, myths and all that as well and I totally agree with you. Most people can be so closed minded when it comes to religions (especially the state where I am from, you are either Christian or atheist). Which is why I try my best to be unbiased when talking about folks lifelong believes. And very often when non-Indian heard India they usually associate it with Hinduism or Muslim and I've seen lots and lots of people get offended by that, which is just juvenile if you ask me. Even though some Indian Hindus are not that friendly to Christians, I still respect and find them fascinating.

'I think everyone is part agnostic. Logic and evidence are not really sufficient for anything else.' I really like this line of yours. I might use it in arguments someday should the need arise. 😅

I like that one rule you have for your kids. I hope they like One Piece as well, not just Pokemon. And thanks for indulging me in my interests, pmmg, I sincerely appreciate it.
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
I am not sure closed minded is really the right word. I liken it to the allegory of the cave often. Many people are still looking at the shadows and calling them real. But the shadows are not real. Some people have turned around to look at the puppets, and know the shadows are not real, but to those believing in the shadows, they just seem crazy. You cant make someone who things you are crazy turn and look at the puppets, they just reject it out of hand. I cant blame someone for thinking the shadows are real, they have no basis other than a mad man by which to question them.

For me, I don't know if the puppets are real, but I know the shadows aren't. If I could give any advice to those looking at the shadows, it would be to consider that the filter they are viewing the world through is not the only one, and until you can see it through many filters, you are not really in the conversation.

Course, they may say that to me (*shrug*). And of course, close minded does come in. Once I am sure something is not real, I become close-minded to its possibility. I'll consider it again if someone has new evidence, but I am dubious there really is something new.

I would reject Zoroastrianism as I think the idea of its many gods will not stand up to scrutiny. But I would still give it respect as having a depth of philosophical or theological material which is worth considering.
 
There are only 120,000 Zoroastrians in the world, at most, according to Wikipedia (not the ultimate authority, but that figure probably isn't far off the mark). Most of them live in Iran, India, or Pakistan.

While it's not impossible that there's a Zoroastrian on here, the odds are extremely low.

Some fun facts: the magi, aka wise men, who visited Baby Jesus were probably Zoroastrians. The word mage (magi is its plural) originally meant a particularly high class Zoroastrian priest. Magic is a derivation of that word.

So those of us who write stories featuring mages, or even just magic, are using a Zoroastrian concept!
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
I'm sure that got to them. Walking all the way over there and not finding an apocalypse, just some kid in a feeding trough.

'And I thought he was a savior, hardly worth the walk.'

'This one will never amount to anything.'

'Wha..what? Yeah, the gold is heavy. I am tried of carrying it, and what even the heck is Myrrh and Frankincense, just give it to them.'

'Good luck, kid, hang in there.'

'Stupid star, look it moved again.'

'Probably a comet.'
 
I'm sure that got to them. Walking all the way over there and not finding an apocalypse, just some kid in a feeding trough.

'And I thought he was a savior, hardly worth the walk.'

'This one will never amount to anything.'

'Wha..what? Yeah, the gold is heavy. I am tried of carrying it, and what even the heck is Myrrh and Frankincense, just give it to them.'

'Good luck, kid, hang in there.'

'Stupid star, look it moved again.'

'Probably a comet.'

"So what is he?"

"Capricorn."

(Oh, wait, that was Brian.)

Seriously, whatever these wise men were, they were definitely astrologers/astronomers (there was no difference between astrology and astronomy back then). Who else would have been looking at the sky and reading meaning into the stars? Which is part of the case for them having been Zoroastrian magi. Astrology was part of their practice.

And the star was most likely a grand conjunction, either the Jupiter/Saturn grand conjunction of 7 BCE or the Jupiter/Venus grand conjunction of 3 BCE.
 

Karlin

Troubadour
The Literature and History podcast has a good episode on this. You can listen, or read.

Freddie Mercury came from a Zoroastrian family.

I see that Zubin Mehta, a famous conductor, was in a film that explains about Zoroastrianism: On Wings of Fire - Wikipedia
 
The Literature and History podcast has a good episode on this. You can listen, or read.

Freddie Mercury came from a Zoroastrian family.

I see that Zubin Mehta, a famous conductor, was in a film that explains about Zoroastrianism: On Wings of Fire - Wikipedia
Hey, thanks, I didn't know such a film exist. I will watch it tomorrow and save that link as well. Thank you so much.
 

pmmg

Myth Weaver
BCE and BC are the same thing. One is just more honest about what it represents
No need to go back and forth on that. I know she used BCE, but I used BC cause of the Wiseman and the Christmas story. I know they are the same, she knows they are the same. But you know, if you are standing in front of the new born Christ, you cannot be in the time before Christ, common era or not. It was a joke.
 
No need to go back and forth on that. I know she used BCE, but I used BC cause of the Wiseman and the Christmas story. I know they are the same, she knows they are the same. But you know, if you are standing in front of the new born Christ, you cannot be in the time before Christ, common era or not. It was a joke.

Actually, you can be standing in front of the newborn Christ in the time before Christ if the Arian heretics were right.

How do we know they weren't? ;)

(Btw, I'm pretty sure there's a similar story in Zoroastrianism, that predates Jesus. Or maybe that's just Mithraism.)
 
Top