5.5 (pt 2 of 5): the Zoroastrian roots of Christianity's "Satan"

[zaggy3110]

The word "Satan" means "Accuser. He is some kind of prosecutor /attorney for god

(also a servant). Any myth as satan as a anti-god (like in christianity or in islam) contradicts the conecpt of a strict monotheism. The idea of hell as a place of eternal punishment is unbiblical and of pagan roots as well.

[ToddAllenGates]

@zaggy3110

> The word "Satan" means "Accuser. He is some kind of prosecutor /attorney for god (also a servant).

In the Old Testament, yes. His role shifts a bit in the New Testament. John 8:44--"The devil … was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. ...he is a liar and the father of lies."

> The idea of hell as a place of eternal punishment is unbiblical and of pagan roots as well.

Yes -- more Greek "Hades" than biblical "Satan."

[wetweasel56]

I'm so glad someone has made a series of videos like this. Christians need to have the truth opened to them (all religions really) or we are never going to evolve spiritually in this world.

[ToddAllenGates]

@wetweasel56

> I'm so glad someone has made a series of videos like this.

As per my most recent video, I actually need to do more research on Zoroastrianism to see how much it really influenced Christianity. For altho Zoroastrianism dates back to the 500s BC or so, its scriptures were written over many centuries--and much of it was written *after* the New Testament.

Anyway, much of Christianity's ideas about a "demon god" may have come from religions other than Zoroastrianism.

[doctorw2]

i dislike it when people say we zoroastrians worship fire when the fire is just a symbol of GOD just like the christian cross is a symbol of the christian faith. GOD appeared to abraham in a flaming bush, the blessed holy spirit came as tongues of fire to the christians at pentacost and a new testament verse even says our GOD is a consuming fire.

[ToddAllenGates]

> i dislike it when people say we zoroastrians worship fire

I don't remember everything I said in this video (I made it over a year ago, and I'm too lazy to watch the whole thing) ... but I don't think I said anything about Zoroastrians worshiping fire. (If I did, please let me know where!)

[doctorw2]

oh i wasnt addressing you sir, your presentation was very respectfull and informative i was just letting some people on this forum know that zoroastrians do not worship fire.

[ToddAllenGates]

Hi again Doctorw2 (aka Alexander),

I confess to not knowing many Zoroastrians ... so if you don't mind me asking, how much emphasis is made in Zoroastrianism on virgin births: Zoroaster's, and the virgin births of future descendants? Some sources say these Zoroastrian claims pre-date Christianity, and others say these are post-Christian interpretations of Zoroastrianism. Do you have an opinion on the subject?

Thanks,

- Todd

[doctorw2]

hi todd, nice to hear from you, there arent that many zoroastrians in the world there are only 20,000 us in the entire world so not too many people know about zoroastrians or have met one. there is nothing in the avesta that implies a virgin birth of the prophet zarathrustra all it says that when the prophet was born a ray of divine light shone upon him but, it does say that the sayoshant the saviour is born of a virgin. virgin births are the common in other religions that predate christanity.

[ToddAllenGates]

> it does say that the sayoshant the saviour is born of a virgin.

Do you know the passage in the Avesta that says that?

> virgin births are the common in other religions that predate christanity.

I know of pre-Christian Greek myths of gods impregnating virgins, but that's the only religion, so far, in which I've been able to find the source documents.

[doctorw2]

hi todd, it is yasna 43.16 even though many zoroastrians interpret the verse as a saviour born of the lineage of zarathrustra, i personly believe it is not in a literal sense but metaphoricly someone who embodies rightousness like zarathrustra. the wise men who visited the infant jesus were magi or zoroastrian priests they recognized him as a sayoshant i believe, incidently jesus is highly honoured in zoroastrianism. the persian god mithra was born of a virgin so was the hindu god krishna.

[Jhaub420]

But according to the teachings of Zarathushtra the devil does not exist!

have you not read the Gathas?

[ToddAllenGates]

1 of 2:

"The devil" is Christianity's term. But long before Christianity, Zoroastrianism's Avesta identified an "evil spirit" named Angra Mainyu (also known as Ahriman), and identified daevas (demons) that deceive humankind. I know the Gathas are older than the Avesta—and according to wikipedia's article, the idea of evil supernatural spirits is more developed in the Avesta than the Gathas.

[ToddAllenGates]

2 of 2:

But I confess to being no expert in Zoroastrianism. According to the Gathas, what is the source of the suffering caused by natural disasters, murder, hate, etc.?

[Jhaub420]

Hello! I have read the Gatha's many times and I feel very capable of answering the questions you put forth.

To answer your questions:

The source of suffering which causes murder, hate etc. are manifestations of Angra Mainyu (which means evil or regressive mentality, yes its basically a state of mind). Acording to Zarthushtra in the Gatha's, God gave mankind free will, and its man's responsibility to make the right choices.

Man's ignorance and poor choices are the source of evil.

[Jhaub420]

However the source of suffering that causes Natural Disasters is not the same of that which causes murder, hate, etc.

Natural Disasters are a force of Asha. Asha is a basic force of god which manifests itself physically, morally, and spiritually. In the Physical Sense, Asha is basically nature. Nature is a faculty of God which was put here are the unverse's beginning. The Law's of Nature govern the Physical Universe, not God directly.

[Jhaub420]

Thus, the natural forces of Asha (such as hurricans, earthquakes, even biology and evolution, etc) Are necessary elements of mother nature which are intended to secure stability in the universe, and are not evil. For example, if we did not have earthquakes or valcanoes, internal pressure from the center of the earth would continue to build up from not being able to relieve itself through eruptions and quakes, etc. This would be far more devastating to life on earth than a small quake.

[ToddAllenGates]

1 of 2:

Thus, natural forces of Asha ... are necessary elements intended to secure stability in the universe ... if we did not have earthquakes or volcanoes, internal pressure from the center of the earth would continue to build up

A problem for Christians who make this argument is that an Almighty Creator of the Universe wouldn't have had to create an earth with such a hot core to make *any* earthquakes / volcanoes necessary at all.

Omnipotence shouldn't have limits such as:

[ToddAllenGates]

2 of 2:

"well, God is *forced* to allow (and even *cause*) such & such tragedy to prevent even GREATER tragedies."

My limited knowledge of Zoroastrianism informs me that this is not a problem for Zoroastrianism, as Zoroastrianism doesn't have quite the same "God is All-Powerful, All-Knowing, and All-Good" monotheistic concept as does Christianity.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong—I appreciate your contribution, as my knowledge of Zoroastrianism is fairly surface.

[Jhaub420]

haha yes and looong before the Avesta, the Gathas identified Angra Mainyu (regressive mentality) as the Opposing force of Spenta Mainyu (progressive mentality).

Later on the the writer's of the Avesta (who they themselves admitted while writing it that they had a limited understanding of the already extinct language of Gathic Avestan) personified angra mainyu, thus inventing the Devil, who according to Zarathushtra does not exist, but is simply a immoral state of mind which everyone must avoid.

[ToddAllenGates]

> Later on the the writer's of the Avesta (who they themselves admitted while writing it that they had a limited understanding of the already extinct language of Gathic Avestan) personified angra mainyu, thus inventing the Devil

So in other words, the Christians not only borrowed their ideas from Zoroastrianism, they borrowed from a *misunderstanding* of Zoroastrianism!

[Jhaub420]

Exactly my friend.

Here is a scholar's quote on this topic:

"...These doctrines were to become familiar articles of faith to much of mankind, through borrowings by Judaism, Christianity and Islam; yet it is in Zoroastrianism itself that they have their fullest logical coherence.... - Mary Boyce, Op. Cit. p. 29

[sapiensape]

The New Testament presents Satan as able to defy God, he has rule over all the earth, his demons control and deceive all of mankind. Post Platonic Greek metaphysics claimed god was incapable of evil, it was therefore blamed on demons. Demons have power over all men from their moment of birth. Later Demons are divided into two classes: good and evil. Christianity added a new twist: all demons are evil. This is not Zoroasterism, its Greek Hermeticism: 400 BC to 200 AD. cf bibleorigins net demons

[ToddAllenGates]

1 of 2:

> Post Platonic Greek metaphysics ... blamed demons.

Greek philosophy no doubt had a huge influence on the New Testament authors. I go into this a bit more in my book ("Dialogue with a Christian Proselytizer"), but it's the kind of detail-heavy thing that I feel works better on paper than in this type of monologue video. So for better or worse, I left those kind of details out.

[ToddAllenGates]

2 of 2:

> This is not Zoroastrianism, it's Greek Hermeticism: 400 BC ...

Again, I don't deny the Greek influence. But I believe the Zoroastrian idea of "there's a good god, and there's a bad god" had a role too.

[sapiensape]

From 1862-2009 various Liberal PhD scholars have proposed Eden's serpent is a recast of earlier Mesopotamian mythical protagonist/s. Cf. bibleorigins net "Prebiblical Origins of Eden's serpent" as a fusion of Sumerian gods: Anu, Ea, Gishzida, Dumuzi, Enlil. Adam is Adapa & Enkidu; Eve=Shamhat, Inanna, Ningishzida, Dumuzi; Cherubim=Gishzida, Dumuzi, Huwawa; Eden=Sumerian edin. Garden of Eden=Eridu & Anu's heavenly abode.

[ToddAllenGates]

> Eden's serpent is a recast of Mesopotamian protagonists ...

I'll check out the bibleorigins articles--thanks for pointing them out!

[kmatzukaze]

I am very glad to hear that someone else has noticed the disconnect between the Devil, Satan, and serpent as portrayed in the Bible. I was just making this point to a friend of mine, that the serpent does not seem to be Satan, that Satan acts with God's permission, and that the New Testament in many ways is a huge deviation from the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures. I shall likely order a copy of your book sometime in the near future. Thanks and take care.

[ToddAllenGates]

> I shall likely order a copy of your book sometime in the near future.

Thanks!

[quebec10000]

todallegates.  What if satan had refuse to temp eve in the garden?

Answer= He would not have done god;s will.

This make the entire story nonsense. Thank;s

[ToddGates]

> What if satan had refuse to temp eve in the garden? Answer= He would not have done god's will. This make the entire story nonsense.

Or perhaps it reveals God's inner conflicts! Maybe He was picking daisy petals, saying "I hate them, I hate them not ..."

[quebec10000]

toddgates. I hate them,I hate them not... At least you do have a sense of humor.... Thank;s

[Disthron]

Ok, you make very good videos. but I wish you would also make playlists. XD

[ToddGates]

> Ok, you make very good videos.

Thanks!

> but I wish you would also make playlists

If you go to my ToddAllenGates channel and click on "Playlists" (toward the top of the screen), you'll see all 13 of my playlists.

Is there a better way to make them more visible?

[Disthron]

Hmmm... that's strange. Usually when a video is part of a play list there is a link to the side that sais "play all" or something like that. It is to indicate that it is part of a seerees and to automatically start the play list without going into your channel.

Sorry for not checking your playlist section. Maybe it's due to the recent changes that youtube has made.

[natewheatshelf]

Posted Comment!

[RabidAp3]

comment

[AbbeyNormal]

Sorry, youtube ate my first comment. I was saying that while Zoarastrianism may have influenced that shift in thinking, it was inspired by the hardships of the Persian occupation. The people couldn't understand how things could be so bad even though they followed God's law. Previously hardships were accepted as punishment for disobedience.

I guess I should watch the rest of the series though, you might have covered that already :)

[ToddAllenGates]

Hi Abbey,

I agree that the Persian occupation and Zoroastrianism influenced Jewish thought--and I discuss that a bit in one of my other videos (5.4: the evolution of the afterlife). But I don't really see "the devil" as one of those things ... that is, I don't see The Devil anywhere in the Hebrew Bible.

[AbbeyNormal]

Cont. But now they needed an explanation that fit their new situation, and Persian religion complimented it with a theology that included an evil god who causes hardships along with a good god. By the time of Christ, the various Satans of the Hebrew bible had coagulated into one big Satan who was responsible for all hardships. So it was influenced by that, but may have had deeper roots.

[trondreitan]

This sounds quite interesting. Looking forward to the rest of the clips in this series!

[ToddAllenGates2]

> This sounds quite interesting.

Thanks!

> Looking forward to the rest of the clips in this series!

Hope to get to it soon--but right now I'm looking at high schools for one my children and colleges for another, and that's been cutting into my time for video-making. I should be able to complete the series before the month's end though.

[kalsolarUK]

you've paced these new videos just right, excellent!

[ToddGates]

> you've paced these new videos just right, excellent!

If you mean I'm finally speaking slowly enough for people to understand me, yes, thanks ... I'm trying hard to fight my natural hyperactivity!

[templarart]

Hi Todd, great video as usual - glad I subscribed!

To Christians who believe this is Satan I like to point out the 1st verse of the story:

"Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made."

This sentence introduces the antagonist to the audience - it is a clever animal, not a demon. Had this been Satan, it would've started "3:1 Now Satan had taken on the form of a snake to tempt Eve."

Does the Bible EVER mean what it says?

[ToddGates]

> great video as usual

Thank you!

> Does the Bible EVER mean what it says?

Apparently only if you're extremely talented at reading between the lines!!

[klaron0]

I don't think anything at all in Genesis is metaphoric or allegoric. Probably it means exactly what it says... the serpent is just a serpent etc. What do you think about that ToddAllen?

[ToddAllenGates2]

1 of 2:

> I don't think anything at all in Genesis is metaphoric or allegoric. Probably it means exactly what it says...the serpent is just a serpent etc. What do you think about that ToddAllen?

Hi klaron0,

I put the serpent-to-snake story into the folk tale category--a story that depends on the fable-like premises that:

[ToddAllenGates2]

2 of 2:

- animals can talk;

- they're accountable for their actions;

- that the very first snake misbehaved;

- that it was "taught a lesson" through the punishment having its legs removed; and

- that this punishment was passed down to all descendants.

I see it as similar to fables that explain why elephants have long noses, why giraffes have long necks, why bees die after they use their stingers, etc.

[klaron0]

you are correct, sir

[Danmill23]

Great stuff. Great presentation as always.

[ToddAllenGates]

> Great presentation as always.

Thanks - much appreciated!!

[sulimon510]

Very good video. To me it seems like the serpent must have had free will in order for God to punish him...can serpents have free will?

[ToddAllenGates]

1 of 2:

> can serpents have free will?

I discussed this two Christian co-workers while preparing for this video--Christian "1" admitted he really couldn't explain it, but said that there must have been *something* about this serpent that gave it enough consciousness for God to consider it a willing accomplice: that it must have *allowed* itself to be used. I asked him if he thought lizards could think on that level, and he said YES they must think because they back off when startled.

[ToddAllenGates]

2 of 2:

Christian "2" seemed to recognize the sheer absurdity of his friend's arguments (I'm deducing this from the pitying embarrassed look on his face), but he then backed away before I could get his response.

[sulimon510]

Personally I think most animals may have some actions that could be to some extent "voluntary." Since we have some actions that are voluntary and some that are instinctual, I don't see why animals necessarily don't have a mixture as well (though we may have more voluntary control over our actions than many animals). The Christian view, however, seems to be that god gave humans and only humans free will...an idea which the serpent story seems to go against.

[zbambam5]

Awesome videos man. Can't wait to see the 1:30 second long video of the apologist "proving" how everything you're saying is out of context, along with proving that a god exists, and going even further and "proving" it's their god that exists. We all know its bound to happen.

[ToddAllenGates]

> Awesome videos man.

Thank you!

> Can't wait to see the 1:30 second long video of the apologist "proving" how everything you're saying is out of context ...

I'm looking forward to it too!