The winners shape the narrative of history, but those who look closely, read between the lines, fill in the gaps, and piece the story together may uncover the actual truth. When the Persian Empire (559 B.C.E. to 331 B.C.E) was at its height, the Zoroastrian religion was a mainstream religion of what is now modern-day Iran, but today its membership stands at less than 200,000 people (1). It is thought to have originated at roughly the same time as Judaism (the precursor to Christianity and Islam) and “shares a common heritage with the Vedic religion of Ancient India and Hinduism. It is thought to have taken root in Central Asia during the second millennium BCE and from there spread south to Iran.” (2)
Like the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Rastafarianism, or any religion including the Torah/Old Testament), they believe in one Supreme God and consider the body mortal but the soul immortal. Like Christianity, they feel a savior (called the Saoshyant in their religion) born of a virgin (like Jesus) is coming to defeat evil – but theirs has yet to arrive. According to their book, the Saoshyant:
“… will destroy all the evil in the world and lead the true Mazda (God) Worshippers to defeat Angra Mainyu (the devil) and usher in the future existence. When he is 30 years old [the same age the story of Jesus’ adulthood picks up in the Bible as his years between 13-30 are not described] there will be a cosmic sign in the sky announcing his identity and then when he is 57 years old he will vanquish all evil from the world. Humanity will be released from evil and temptation, which is shown in the changing diet of humanity – the passage states that humans will become vegetarian, then drink only water, and then eat only ‘spiritual food.'” (3)
According to Abrahamic Religions, in the Garden of Eden, before there was evil, Adam and Eve did not eat flesh (Genesis 1:29, 2:16; 3:18). Genesis 9:3 claims that it wasn’t until after the Great Flood that man began to eat animal flesh – yet another similarity between both religions, equating the absence of meat in people’s diet to people living in alignment with God’s will. The longest-known Israelite Tribe, Beta Israel, is an Ethiopian Tribe. The oldest known church is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, and the oldest Bible was found in Ethiopia from that very same church (which precedes the Vatican and has additional books not contained in the ‘Council of Nicea’-approved version today).
According to the Bible, Israelites left Egypt and went to Israel, which would have been in the Persian Empire at the time. There, they would have interacted with Zoroastrians and may have been inspired by the story of their savior. History shows that religion has many times been an effective tool to divide and conquer – is it possible that after leaving Egypt (or their homeland of Ethiopia, depending on what you believe), some of the Israelites became inspired by Zoroastrianism and incorporated some of their beliefs into the next version of their religion, Christianity?
This idea becomes a realistic possibility when we consider the fact that the authors of the Bible went out of their way to designate the Zoroastrians visiting Jesus as “Wise” even though the men followed a completely different belief system. We know they were Zoroastrians because they are described as Magi (a term specifically used to describe Zoroastrian priests (4)) from the East (where Zoroastrians would have lived, in Iran). Why would a religious book use the defining characteristic of “Wise” to discuss people blessing their savior of an entirely different religion? Wouldn’t that send the message that it’s wise to hold a belief structure outside of what the book you’re reading suggests?
The Three Wise Men believed that the savior would defeat evil by age 57, but Jesus was crucified at 33, and evil still exists. If the Bible is the inerrant word of God, why is it calling three people at the birth of their savior whose core beliefs directly contradict the teachings of the Bible “Wise”?
These coincidences could make one question the originality of Jesus’ story. In my opinion, it is likely that a highly influential individual by the name of Jesus existed and did his best to empower and help people. However, the existence of a savior who can (and will one day) fix everything inspires less rebellion today and helps pacify a population. According to Jesus in Matthew 19:26, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” This quote suggests Jesus believed miracles (like what he accomplished) are possible for anyone once you are close enough to God like he became. Could the Zoroastrian ideology surrounding a Savior with unique abilities that most people lack be incorporated into Christian dogma to keep people docile and easily oppressed?
Sources
(1) Zoroastrians.net
(2) Zoroastrianism is one of the oldest living world religions.
(3) The Coming of Saoshyant
(4) Secret Lives of The Wise Men
