Share this comment
Fascinating stuff. The central role of fire symbolism seems to me to suggest a strong influence from Zoroastrianism, rather than Judaism. Of course, Moses did see God as a burning bush, a pillar of fire by night, etc.; but it seems to me this was itself likely also of Zoroastrian origin.
What I'd really like to know is what their mytholog…
Fascinating stuff. The central role of fire symbolism seems to me to suggest a strong influence from Zoroastrianism, rather than Judaism. Of course, Moses did see God as a burning bush, a pillar of fire by night, etc.; but it seems to me this was itself likely also of Zoroastrian origin.
What I'd really like to know is what their mythology was like. Every religion has one. Presumably it incorporated the pagan mythology, as a sort of pagan Old Testament, but there must have been something else. Did they have a prophet? Was the story of his life an important element? Was any of it written down, or was it a wholly oral tradition?
The central role of fire stood out to me too. We see a similar role in the early Greek and Roman religions (as documented in the book "The Ancient City") as well as in Vedic religion in India. It seems to be a primordial part of Indo-European religion that was sustained in several places.
As far as I can tell, the Hypsistarians would have taken pagan mythology as their mythology. I think they also would have incorporated things like Herodotus's reports on the cycles of the past and Plato's on Atlantis. The concept of prophets seems unique to Judaism, but I think the equivalent would have been great theurgists and philosophers. Pythagoras, for instance. Or, perhaps deified Emperors, like Aurelian Restitutor Orbus or Julius Caesar.
However, I don't see any evidence it has a central Christ- or Moses-like figure, which perhaps was its competitive disadvantage when confronted by a religion that DID have that.
I suspect the deified emperors likely played a somewhat minor role, alongside other deified heroes. Similar to the saint cults in Christianity. And I think you're right: having an embodied savior who existed in historical time was a crucial advantage. It made Christianity less abstract, more personal and concrete, and therefore more emotionally compelling.
I wonder if that was functionally the role of Dionysus!
Only without the wild Bacchanalias.
Need more Bacchanalias
More's the pity.
Anecdotally, I used to have some Zoroastrian friends who believed the Abrahamic religions worshiped the same God or, less charitably after a few drinks, ripped them off.
Given that the Zoroastrians predate the Abrahamics by a considerable margin, they're quite justified in their lack of charity.