Was Zoroastrianism the source for Christianity? | AskHistorians Archive Observer

Now, before we begin, just to clear up some of your premises:

Zoroastrianism was an Iranian religion, established several centuries before Christianity.

Zoroaster (or whoever authored the Gathas; for the purpose of this post, I will refer to this author as "Zoroaster") most likely lived in the mid-2nd milennium BC, with linguistic and circumstantial evidence converging around 1300 BC. Key development to practice, cult and tradition occured first in the Achaemenid period (such as the establishment of the fire temple cult, the worship of Anahita, the apparent conflation of Mithra with Shamash, and the likely identification of Aúramazda with the Elamite sky deity Humban), and then in the Sasanian period. While it is usually thought that an attempt to "codify" Zoroastrianism only happened in the early-mid Sasanian period, particularly as the Avestan corpus began to be put down to writing, many of those developments appear to have antecedents or roots in the Achaemenid era or earlier.

Was Zoroastrianism the source for Christianity?

Just to make clear to any reader: the "source for Christianity" as a religion was, of course, the cult surrounding the first-century apocalyptic preacher Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ. This is beyond meaningful dispute. What I will look at in this post is the ways in which Zoroastrianism (a term which I will use as a shorthand that includes e.g. Persian oral tradition) could have influenced Christianity.

With that settled...

Introduction

The question of Zoroastrian influence on Western thought is as tantalizing as it is controversial - for two hundred years, as many writers have fallen victim to drawing superficial and credulous comparisons, as those who dimssively refused to even acknowledge striking parallels. No doubt, the troubled history of philology and textual criticism, and the often dismissive views of non-classical traditions that ruled, contributed to this. The ideology of a "Western Civilization" beginning in Greece in the 8th or 6th century BC is, of course, not very receptive to the idea that a cattle-herder from Central Asia in the mid-2nd milennium BC could have made irreplacable contributions to this tradition. It is a topic ripe for miscommunication and strawmen, where the mere analysis of parallels is easily attacked as "unsubstantiated assertions" or "speculation". We must resign ourselves to the fact that the virtually complete lack of an Iranian literary record prior to the mid-first milennium AD means that we cannot prove that any particular parallel was caused by direct influence in one particular direction. What follows should therefore be understood as a kind of informed speculation.

Early Christianity had two primary sources of influence: Hellenic thought, and Jewish tradition (and their considerable intersection), and I will begin by looking at the Hellenic tradition. Please do keep in mind that while I am quite well-versed in Zoroastrianism and reasonably so in Christianity, my grasp of Classical and Hellenic thought is considerably weaker, and undoubtedly specialists in those areas will have things to add or comment on my take on these subjects. This also somewhat limits my ability to draw on classical texts for the purpose of comparison.

###Greek Philosophy and Zoroastrianism

Hellenic thought around the time of Jesus drew, of course, on a centuries-old tradition. particular, we may trace one philosophical tradition to 6th-century Ionian philosophers, the so-called Milesian school. The first generation of these philosophers, Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes (and perhaps Pythagoras?), were simply born too early to have been plausibly influenced by much interaction with Persian ideas - but they are likely to have drawn on mathematics and astrology from the "east", i.e., Egypt and Babylon, which sets a possible precedent for later drawing on Persian tradition. A plausible chain of transmission begins with Heraclitus, born around the death of Cyrus the Great, and his ideas, some important for Christianity, have in fact been often compared with Zoroastrian concepts, which I will take a look at, which will serve to be somewhat representative for how difficult this type of comparison is.

####The logos, or Word

This Logos holds always but humans always prove unable to understand it, both before hearing it and when they have first heard it. For though all things come to be in accordance with this Logos, humans are like the inexperienced when they experience such words and deeds as I set out, distinguishing each in accordance with its nature and saying how it is. But other people fail to notice what they do when awake, just as they forget what they do while asleep. - Heraclitus, Fragment DK 22B1

All this (I) ask, whether the husbandman shall find cattle in accordance with Right, he that is perfect in action, a man of understanding, when he prays to [Ahura Mazda], who hath promised unto the Wise the true Judge, in that he is Lord of the two destinies... - Zoroaster, Yasna 51.5

For his holy Spirit and for Best Thought, deed, and word, in accordance with Right Mazda Ahura with Dominion and Piety shall give us Welfare and Immortality. - Zoroaster, Yasna 47.1

It wasn't entirely easy to find representative examples in the incredibly obscure verse of the Gathas, but one of the central ideas that runs through Indo-Iranian religion is the idea of Asha/Rta, rendered "Right" above, a "natural order of things" that all things (ought to) happen in accordance with. This classic Vedic verse helps to paint the picture:

Rulership certainly belongs to me, as all the Immortals acknowledge ... I make the dripping waters flow, by Rta I uphold the sky; by Rta, I am the one who rules through Rta

This is uttered by Varuna, a Vedic deity who shares some features with Ahura Mazda. The concept of Rta connects the course of nature, and the motion of the heavenly bodies, with human law, proper conduct, and righteousness. This concept of a divine order has obvious parallels to the notion of a "Logos" - though it does not correspond perfectly, the trefoil of understanding/thought/purpose, words, and deeds, is another matching theme. The broader implications about the importance of constant vigilance about your actions, though, are shared between the two notions. Asha, it ought to be understood, is personified as an "angelic" divine being, an emanation of Mazda.

The "Fire" of Heraclitus

This world, which is the same for all, no one of gods or men has made. But it always was and will be: an ever-living fire, with measures of it kindling, and measures going out.

All things are an interchange for fire, and fire for all things, just like goods for gold and gold for goods. - Heraclitus, fragments

We worship thee, the Fire, O Ahura Mazda's son! We worship the fire Berezi-savangha (of the lofty use), and the fire Vohu-fryana (the good and friendly), and the fire Urvazishta (the most beneficial and most helpful), and the fire Vazishta (the most supporting), and the fire Spenishta (the most bountiful), and Nairya-sangha the Yazad of the royal lineage, and that fire which is the house-lord of all houses and Mazda-made, even the son of Ahura Mazda, the holy lord of the ritual order, with all the fires.

And we worship the good and best waters Mazda-made, holy, all the waters Mazda-made and holy, and all the plants which Mazda made, and which are holy.

And we worship the Mathra-spenta (the bounteous word-of-reason), the Zarathushtrian law against the Daevas, and its long descent. ...

... 15. And we worship the good and pious prayer for blessings, (16) and these waters and (these lands), (17) and all the greatest chieftains, lords of the ritual order;

And I praise, invoke, and glorify the good, heroic, bountiful Fravashis of the saints, those of the house, the Vis, the Zantuma, the Dahvyuma, and the Zarathushtrotema, and all the holy Yazads!

-Yasna 17, traditional part of Zoroastrian liturgy

The Fire of Ahura Mazda art thou verily; yea, the most bounteous one of His Spirit, wherefore Thine is the most potent of all names (for grace), O Fire of the Lord! 4. And therefore we would approach Thee, (O Ahura!) with the help of Thy Good Mind (which Thou dost implant within us), with Thy (good) Righteousness, and with the actions and the words inculcated by Thy good wisdom! - Yasna 36, very archaic part of Zoroastrian liturgy

Fire is undeniably more central in later liturgy than in the most archaic material, presumably owing to the fire cult of Achaemenid times, but in Zoroaster's own verses (which I haven't quoted above) it is invariably presented as a manifestation of Ahura Mazda's agency - things happen "by Ahura Mazda's fire". However, while Zoroastrian elements are complementary (part of the perfect creation), Heraclitus appears to have conceived of them in opposition.