Go Ask Your Daddy - Zoroastrianism?

Hopefully, a semi-regular feature here. Questions from my daughters that require a little bit more explanation and thought.

It’s just a title. There is no implication here that “Mommy” couldn’t answer the questions just as well, in fact, more often than not, better. I just liked the way it sounded and my wife does use that question. It is usually in the context of asking permission rather than asking for knowledge. Hmm, wonder if that means anything?

Who is Zoroaster? My AP World History book says that he was born before Christ and it implied that Christianity really came from Zoroastrianism. Is there any truth to that at all?

Are we sure that these AP classes are what we need to be in? Wow. I didn’t have to think about Zoroaster until after college, and even then there was no connection with Christianity at all. It was just another false religion. So maybe these AP classes are good. At least we can talk about it now before they head off to college on their own.

If anything came from one it would be the other way around. Zoroastrianism undoubtedly borrowed from Christianity. Let me state it plainly: Jesus is not a recycled version of any religion, nor did the writers of the New Testament plagiarize.

The Gospels are accounts of actual historical events and of real, flesh-and-blood human beings. They cite actual historical evidence with precise topographical locations. As one example, read the following and ask yourself if it sounds like Luke was writing a fairy tale that couldn’t be proved or disproved.

“Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. In the days of Herod, king of Judea…” (Luke 1:1-5)

There have been, and will continue to be, many claims that the story of Jesus was “borrowed” from other sources. These claims include Horus, Mithras, and Zoroaster (also known as Zarathustra), just to name a few. The popular book, "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown, even makes the absurd statement that, “Nothing in Christianity is original.”

There are a couple of things we need to keep in mind as we deal with these types of issues.

First, the “facts” stated generally aren’t factual. Specifically, Zoroaster’s “miraculous” birth, according to some scholars, dates to the ninth century A.D., i.e. 800 years after Christ was born and resurrected. If that were the case, all of the New Testament had been written. Yet other scholars say that Zoroaster lived around 600-500 BC. If that were the case, portions of the Old Testament would have already been written. This disagreement among scholars highlights the fact that we don’t know when Zoroaster lived so this claim is skeptical at best.

Even if we grant that Zoroaster was born before Christ that doesn’t negate the clear Messianic prophecies of resurrection and virgin birth in the Old Testament. Zoroaster could have as easily borrowed from the Old Testament as the claim that the New Testament borrowed from Zoroaster.

Once again, let’s grant his birth. What about Zoroastrianism’s ancient text, the Avesta? The Avesta would show us what Zoroaster actually taught, as opposed to what modern Zoroastrianism says he taught. Stated simply, the Avesta was not complete until possibly as late as a thousand years after his birth, whenever that might be.

“The oldest known manuscript of the Avesta stems from the 1200’s A.D., a fairly long time since its [supposed] composition, and it has been estimated that approximately 75 percent of the original Avesta has been lost. Furthermore, because Avestan is such a difficult language, many sentences in it seem to make no sense…There is no question that the majority of the Avesta, though claiming to stem from Zoroaster, was produced much later.” (Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe, Norman Geisler and Paul Hoffman)

As an aside, how completely ingenious of our God that He would provide his special revelation to us in the original languages of Hebrew and Greek that are clear to understand and still in use today.

“The origins of the Avesta are, for the most part, shrouded in mystery. Any information containing Zoroaster’s revelations is so deeply rooted in late mythology that it cannot constitute compelling evidence that the Avesta is inspired.” (Why I Am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe, Norman Geisler and Paul Hoffman)

The basis then for some of our information about Zoroaster is questionable.

Secondly, even if the “facts” were true it still proves nothing. As C.S. Lewis said, “You must show that a man is wrong before you start explaining why he is wrong.” In other words they have to show that Jesus is a fiction before they start explaining how the fiction came to be. They just make the assumption He is not who He says He is, without any historical evidence to back up their claim. They assume what they are trying to prove.

We do not believe in myths, we base our faith on eyewitnesses to history. (2 Peter 1:16) The writers of the New Testament knew that these questions would always be asked and they addressed it many times in the New Testament. They actually heard, saw and touched the Savior, Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:1-3) If Jesus Christ is a myth then they, and we, are truly to be pitied (1 Corinthians 15:19), especially since we see most of the disciples dying for their faith.

The evidence for Zoroaster being a Savior is lacking. The evidence for Jesus is overwhelming and objectively true.

(I encourage you to read the September/October 2009 edition of Solid Ground by Greg Koukl found at http://www.str.org/, from which the structure of this answer is based.)