Re: [AUXLANG] We do but jest, poison in jest,

On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:37:08 GMT Leo Caesius <leo_caesius@...>
writes:
> Jews.  Texts from this period (Esther, Tobit, Judith, etc.) reveal
> heavy
> influences from Iranian dualism, Iranian concepts of salvation and
> the
> afterlife, a detailed angelic (and demonic) hierarchy calqued on the
> Iranian
> hierarchy, and even divine figures from the Iranian pantheon, such
> as
> Asmodeus, make an appearance.  One might say that Judaism was never
> the same
> after Ezra was finished with it - although I personally would not go
> as far
> as to say that Judaism is basically a Zoroastrian sect, as some
> Bible scholars maintain.
> -Chollie
-

Esther?  The Scroll of Esther doesn't even mention God in it, much less
Persian angelic hierarchies!  Although if Tobit and Judith are full of
those kind of influences, it explains a lot about why Judaism ended up
rejecting them, and the sages of the Talmud declared hyperbolicly that
"one who makes public readings of the Outside Books [as if they were
canonical] has no share in the World to Come"!

Although, interesting from a sociological point of view, both Esther and
Mordekhai's non-Hebrew names aren't just non-Jewish, but come from Ishtar
and Marduk, Babylonian deities!  Imagine the amount of assimilation that
could lead to that - ¿ever heard of a Jew named Jesús? :-)  (i've
actually read an article that proposed the idea that the Scroll of Esther
was written in the style of a satire aimed at the assimilated Persian
Jews who had refused to return to Judea with Ezra).

Those bible scholars who claim that Judaism is a sect of Zoroastrianism
must have a heww of a time trying to find any kind of Z.-style dualism
there.


-Stephen (Steg)
 "do not fear sudden terror, nor destruction by the wicked, if it comes."