HOPE

Self proclaimed Persian, Do you live in vaccume ?

Today, Iran stands tall and stands strong as a Moslem country.

Persian, Arab or Moslem You are one and the same in there eyes… There is no distinction or big leap of faith when it comes to grabbing Iran's Oil and Land …..

Weak up and Build on your strength ...

God Bless Iran.

No En Mass Conversion to Islam!!!!

Here we go again...the nonsense propoganda that we have been force-fed for the past 1400 years. There was NO voluntary en mass conversion of Persians to Islam. As stated below, if we you want to make historical claims cite your sources...or at least read some. My favorite source on this is Al-Tabari, who was a pro-Arab historian-- and before you jump down my throat saying that he was a Persian...he was...but the situation in his time necessitated a pro-Arab version of history because 1) all of his sources were Arabs, and 2) his writings had to be approved by the Caliph in order to be published and given the seal of approval. Anyway, read Al-Tabari's volume XIV, the Conquest of Iran, published by the New York University Press, 1994 (I hope that I have the volume # right, as I do not have immediate access to the book). The book shows, quoting from an all Arab source, that the Persians fought the invading Arab army for years, at multiple battles, large and small, at every town, large and small, and in any way they could, with organized armies, local armies hastily put together without involvement from a central leadership and ad hoc posses. People from various Iranian tribes and ethnic groups even came together on their own to fight the Arabs. (Example, the battle for Fasa and Darabjird where Kurds joined the local population to fight the invading Arab force). If was only after the military defeat that the population was forced to convert, by either being killed, threatened to be killed, taken into slavery or threatened with having their property taken away and having to pay taxes. And speaking of being rigid, are you implying that Muslims were kind, gentle and less "rigid" than the Sassanid era magi? Are you kidding me?!!! How can a religion that was spread by shear force be a less rgid an a "gentler" religion than that of the Persians themselves? Were the Iraninas better off being sold as slaves in Medina than being subjected to the magian influence in Persia? And yes, they were sold as slaves, the most famous one being Firuz Nahavandi (Abu LuLu) the kiler of Omar. So, please, please, please, before you talk about history, make sure you have accurate information from reliable sources.

flip floppin'

Flip Floppin text, yes all are true, all are factual, and all disagree with themselves in their own doctrine, and are not historically validated. That's a form of Heresy itself, more fun with Heresy, I guess it's the Golden Rule, He who has the Gold, sets the rules and then punishes everyone else with it.

Correction

and all are considered legitimate.

Weird

It is indeed weird to be criticized for something you haven't said, and then responded to with basically what you had actually said!
I never said Craig that being considered a heretic by crusaders was "preferable" than being called a pagan. I mentioned that Christians during the crusade acknowledged that muslims were heretics (and thus essentially a christian-based sect). That is not an inevitable christian position. Heresy applies to christian sects not to foreign religions, whether they mention Jesus or not. It is not the case for modern born again christians for instance, because they consider Allah to be a different deity than the Lord in the Bible. That makes muslims pagans in their eyes.
And while we're at this point, I never talked about Islam being a Roman christian plan?! I talked about Islam being a mixture of heretic (Roman christians usually are the ones who accuse others of heresy!) SYRIAC speaking christians of the Levant and Arab power struggles, including pro-Roman ARAB forces within this struggle. Please read what I actually say before answering them!

One last thing, there is no such thing as heresy in Judaism. The nearest thing you can find in this context is the Talmudic discussion about executing a convert to Judaism who then rejects his Jewish status or disregards it. And of course being a Talmudic decree it is in the context of a complex discussions and controversial positions. Heresy is a specifically Christian ( and later Islamic) notion, coming about in the power struggles within the nascent Christian religion. Jesus, even if a real figure was tried for sedition by a Roman court. He was condemned by a sanhedrin, not a trial!, supposedly, for falsely claiming to be the messiah (not a heresy, not an ideological difference). Difference of view point and understanding is a natural given in Judaism. read the Talmud, it is filled with sages disagreeing about almost everything, and all are considerate legitimate.

Fun with Heresy, it is all Relative

Jesus was tried for Heresy against the Jewish governoring body, though obviously today is commonly Heresy is any deemed conflict against his followers, and Islam which ironically accepts Jesus except for the concept of Trinity, is somehow tied to Heresy, but not convictible since we are convenianty trying to make peace. Noteworthy, John the Baptist was behead for same crimes and many sects still worship him, he is clearly outside of your jewish vs. christianity argument - read and follow the facts.
There is proof every where you look, and the ancients beliefs live on, long after Great Iranian libraries were burnt down by Alexandre the Great, the Arabian Islamic Conquests, and many many other attempts to hide our initial rites to divinity. In God we trust, and our names for God do not matter in bigger argument, it is quest for knowledge vs. ignorance.

Fun with Heresy, it is all Relative

Jesus was tried for Heresy against the Jewish governoring body, though obviously today is commonly Heresy is any deemed conflict against his followers, and Islam which ironically accepts Jesus except for the concept of Trinity, is somehow tied to Heresy, but not convictible since we are convenianty trying to make peace. Noteworthy, John the Baptist was behead for same crimes and many sects still worship him, he is clearly outside of your jewish vs. christianity argument - read and follow the facts.
There is proof every where you look, and the ancients beliefs live on, long after Great Iranian libraries were burnt down by Alexandre the Great, the Arabian Islamic Conquests, and many many other attempts to hide our initial rites to divinity. In God we trust, and our names for God do not matter in bigger argument, it is quest for knowledge vs. ignorance.

Zion, get a grip....

Zion, you said a lot of crazy stuff that I won't comment on. I will comment on the difference between a "heretic" and a "pagan" in Christianity, during the times of the Crusades. The penalty for heresy was death. The penalty for being a pagan was... nothing. Pretty major difference, and you make it sound like calling somebody a heretic is preferable to calling them a pagan!?

Muslims should be considered heretics, by Christians. Islam has borrowed many Christian tenets, but changed them in often profound ways. Jesus is even claimed as an Islamic prophet. Muslims seem to think Christians should be happy about these things, as if it does Christianity honor to have Muslims claiming to believe the same things Christians believe (when in fact, Islam is quite different on every major point of faith) - but, seriously, what could any Christian call a Muslim, but a heretic? The way Christian scripture is treated in the Quran is the very definition of heresy. The only reason nobody says so (anymore) is because we're all trying to get along, these days.

By the way, Jews could make the very same argument about Christianity and the way Jewish scripture is treated in the Bible. In fact, Jesus was executed for heresy, was he not?

Your statements about Islam being fomented by the (Christian) Romans are flatly bizarre. Christianity was doing quite well in the middle east, prior to Islam... why on earth would the Byzantines want to create a new religion that competed with their own? It makes no sense at all. It seems even more crazy than some of the theories I've heard put forth that the pagan Romans created Christianity to pacify the Jews. At least the latter theory makes sense, up until the point where the romans killed Jesus and exiled his followers to Asia Minor. It would seem their plans backfired somewhat at that point :P

Historical references from that time are few and far between, and often conflict with eachother. It's best to use a simple logic test when coming up with your own theories about the ancient world. If it seems like it would have been a profoundly and obviously stupid plan, then it probably didn't go down like that :)

Although recent events would seem to indicate that major (and minor) powers put stupid plan into play with some frequency. But still...

Jesuse is From Bandar Abas

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=VurYhGeuZNo&feature...

No Jesus Was from Bandar Abas

Look I have proof - look See this is an ancient Bandari Dance evidence!
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=lThIwTkL1fA&feature...

Go tell it to those peopl in living Gaza

Tell them how your kind kills the helpless children with jet-fighters.

Zionism i.e. Jewish Supremacy is not the same as
Jewish .

Tell me why do you think you are superior to Palestinians ?

As far s Persians, We Iranians will stand up for the weak at any cost. It is our human fault. It is the way we are wired. Unlike the Sociopaths...

Sociopaths mimic humans, Zionist Sociopaths mimic the Jews. Silent Jews are as guilty as Zionists.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUhXRh144I

Long Live Palestine.

Grow up already!

Although my last comment was meant primarily as a joke, there is a real sense in which it was actually true. It is not just them being Jewish. They were offsprings of the Davidic line. The Resh Galuta, the Exile Arch was the head of exile, the Prince of Jews, the government in exile, with rights and demands over their occupied homeland of Judea and Jerusalem. That makes them zionists of their time. Cyrus the great actually ordered the return to and the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple. That is essentially the re-establishment of the state of Israel in that time. Lord Balfoure actually was hailed as the Cyrus of the new age by zionist activists. Darius and the building of the Jerusalem wall, all the way to Sassanid kings like Shapur and Bahram Gur. They were indeed the equivalent of what we in modern jargon wold call zionist supporters of their time.
Grow up. There is no superiority in zionism. It is simply the nationalism of the Jewish people. It has always ad a strong leftist element in it. It was an anti-colonialist movement fighting the British colonialism in the land of Israel, while your beloved arabs were all pro British, pro French and in all senses puppets of their political wills.
You are made conditioned towards it. Brainwashed. There is nothing supernatural, evil or special about Zionism, neither is there anything wrong in calling your great ancestors as basically Zionists of their time. It is a form of praise if you are grown up enough to comprehend it.

Re: sources, I'm not a

Re: sources,

I'm not a scholar, I wrote down (rather quickly) my thoughts watching the PBS special. I will not defend my point of view. It is just babble to fire your own imagination.

It is easy enough to do research online in this day and age (I still recommend books :) if you're interested in a subject, and if you come up with anything novel, I'd be interested to read (with or without sources :).

Zion, If there is any jewish

Zion,

If there is any jewish blood in Iranian ancestry, that's fine. It's a known fact that Iranians gave shelter to many ethnicities. It's natural there would be some mingling of the blood lines. But it doesn't mean they were zionist! In fact, if they mingled with others, it means they didn't think they were better than others. Stealing land and all. Supremacy and all. Not to mention that these mixed marriages means that they were ALL IRANIAN BEFORE JEWISH OR MUSLIM OR ZOROASTRIAN or any other religion. Iran first.

Sources and Other Points

Am I the only one here asking for sources? It just seems that if you publish a historical essay, you should cite your references, and so far I have not seen any, aside from a couple of internet links of dubious value. And Zion is right, the whole Sassanid uprising against the Parthians had religious roots, i.e., to revive Zoroastrianism. Ardashir (Artxrexes I) was not only an officer in the Parthian army, but he was also a very religious man (I belive that he may have even been a magi, but I am not sure about this point) (Source: Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy. I think the author's name is Lwinson, but I do not have the book handy).

Re: Subtleties

You have crossed the line.
Zionism i.e. Jewish Supremacy is not the same as
Jewish .

Tell me why do you think you are superior to Palestinians ?

As far s Persians, We Iranians will stand up for the weak at any cost. It is our human fault. It is the way we are wired. Unlike the Sociopaths...

Sociopaths mimic humans, Zionist Sociopaths mimic the Jews. Silent Jews are as guilty as Zionists.

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUhXRh144I

Long Live Palestine.

Subtleties

One can't really jump to conclusions from similarities of such sort in questions of etymology. I give you a famous example. The word bad in Persian and English even mean the same thing but they are not related at all etymologically! Where as the words heart and del are actually etymologically related. SO you can't really tell so easily, especially when you are talking about two different families of languages. Persian and Parthian are related, being relative tribes with many blood and cultural commonalities. But as far as I know Perushim and Persian are not related and the similarity is coincidental.

I would be very interested if you could provide sources for the religion of the Parthians having been Zoroastrianism. As I said, the names suggest a more mithraistic influence. Also bear in mind that the Sassanids revolted against the Parthians in ordr to revive Zoroastrianism. Also bear in mind that Zoroastrianism and Mithraism were competng sects and worldviews within Iranic religious traditions (like the case of Brahmans and Buddhists as competing traditions in Vedic religions). For instance, Mithra is the god who kills the bull as the act of creation, where as in Zoroastrianism the primal Bull (Gaya-marathno) is given life by Ahura-Mazda and killed by Angrea-Mainu.
But you have a point in general. Zoroatsrinism, Mithraism, Judaism and other ancient religions were basically evolved to coexist with others, and none of them were looking for global domination. That started with Christianity and its offshoot Islam. The reason is a deep subject. It has to do with the fact that Christianity evolved in Greek speaking Hellenistic culture which had been already obsessed with the idea of ideologically and culturally dominating the world (Hellenization). The very word Judaism had to be coined in contrst to Hellenism to withstand that wave. There was no name for it before hand, it was simply the way of life of a tribe before that.

Oh one more thing I just found out. Another major Sassanid king had a Jewish mother! It seems Bahram V( Gur) was born as a union of the Persian and Davidic royal lines: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahram_Gur
There you go! Your ancient ancestors were quite evil zionists too it seems, weren't they? ;-)

The comment from my

The comment from my daughter is so funny! I had left the screen on and she must have read it. She is only 11! I laughed so much.

A couple of comments/questions.

Do you think it's possible for a word like Pharisee to not have connotations with Persia? P and F, as you know, in early arameic languages were interchangeable. Hence Persians now speak Farsi, and originated in the Province of Farse. The word Parth itself is no doubt related, either as propaganda or remembrance of the Achemenid glory, even though the Parthians originated from the Northeast. Th and S are related in the same way, and in current Farsi, Th (which has its own letter) sounds more like an S than an english th.

As far as the official state religion of Parthians, there is little doubt on this subject. Please keep in mind that Zorastrian is typically not preached. As a matter of fact Zoroastrians have a reputation for inter-family marriages for the preservation of the faith partly because conversion was frowned up (perhaps even not allowed). Their tolerance of other religions on the other hand is well documented, and in most cases encouraged, as long as taxes were received! So we have a state religion that services the monarchy and probably runs the government functions, but great many religions in different parts of the empire are thriving, including Mithraism and Judaism, and the new christianity of the Armenians.

The Magi were consul and priests to the King first and foremost. You can see the Ahura-Mazda symbol in many Parthian artifacts, and their costumes and hair style was more in line with the Achemenids and away from Helenic customs.

At the same time these were times of great cultural exchange and mixture, through commerce, but also through war and migration. It is not surprising that most of the monotheic religions saw their birth in this conjucture in time and space.

Side Note: Where does Islam stand?

It is very important to see where Islam originates and where it stands in this context. The Qureish was an ally of Persia in the great battle between Persia and Rome. As where the Jews in Arabian desert (who were mostly exiles from the fear of Roman christian empire). Islam how ever originates with pro Roman factions within Arabia. Look at the Sura Al-rum that begins with Allah's promise of a Roman victory over Persians. Islam is an offshoot of heretic sects of Christianity amidst Syriac speaking christians and pro- Roman arab armies and militias. See also how Alexander is exalted (in opposition to Cyrus in Torah). It is very interesting that in the Crusades, Muslims were seen as heretics and not as pagans (while before that Persian were seen as Pagans by the Byzantines). Jews still managed to live better under Islamic empires(Abbasids, Andalusian Moors and later Ottomans) but that is mostly because Islamic empires were not based on Islamic teachings but actually on older Persian governance systems and their world views.

Good Observation

This is a good article. Just some minor points. The main religion of the Parthians is not known, though by the prevalence of the names like ithradatesit can be inferred that Mithraism was a major player.
Pharisee comes from Hebrew Perushim, meaning those who separate themselves. The main division that separated them from the Zadukies was the idea of an afterlife, which the Pharisees believed in and the Zadukies didn't. THis might have been due to Persian influences, but the name most probably does not derive from Persian.
You are definitely in the right tracks there. Jews and Persians were always allies in the past. Most Iranians know today about Cyrus and the liberation of Jews from the Babylonian captivity. But that is just the beginning. The connection of the Persian influence on the political aspirations of the Jews is well known. The messianic revolts of the Jews were definitely political in nature and with backings of the Persians. It is already there in the Hasmonean revolts and kingship that are the origin of Channuka celebrations. The astrological element is also a common theme in Jewish uprisings. The much more important messiah figure than Jesus who was an obvious failure- was Bar Kochba, literally "the son of the star". Jesus figure in Christianity is not a real historical Jewish figure, but a Egypto-graeco-roman-Mithraic amalgam designed and worshipped by Greek speaking people of Asia Minor. The real Jesus was a failed Jewish political revolutionary and has very little to do with the God-like figure of later worship.
The Jewish Persian links continue. Did you know that during the Parthian and Sassanids, Jews had a government in exile in Persian kingdom, with a recognized prince (exilearch-resh galut) and a chief rabbi in charge and a Jewish military that fought battles along the rest of the Persian fleets. It was actually the Jewish fleet that saved Ctesiphon once from Roman capture in the years preceding the advent of Islam. In return Jerusalem was almost captured once by the Persian armies with a specifically jewish regiment among them from the Romans, again just before the advent of Islam, and there was going to be handed back to Jews just like in the time of Cyrus the Great? Did yo know that one of the greatest Sassanid kings, Shapur II, had a Jewish mother and was therefore a Jew and a close friend of the greatest rabbi of the Talmud of his time? //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapur_II
Although the fanaticism of Zoroastrian priesthood at certain times made life hard for everyone, in general Jews have lived with respect and as a recognized nation with princes and rights under various Persian dynasties unlike the Greek and Roman pagan and later christian sects from which the ideological roots of anti-semitism originates.

Khoda ..

Biamorze Issa Ra :) I am not so sure about "Virgin" Mary- I mean, "Virgin" - Really !!

Devine Intervention: Mithra - The Eastern Star

The story goes that Three Wise Men followed the Eastern Star to find the birth of Jesus, also depicted in your picture.

They were known as expert astrologers who had traveled far to anoint the arrival of a new King. We believe this is added as mythology after the story is needed to be re-written for common consumption by Constantine's convention that made Christianity the religion of Rome. Yet Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist - a practicing Mandean Priest, is where he first "sees the light," and had his revelations and teaching thereafter.

Mithra's (Mitra) life mirrors that of Jesus's life, and preceded it by thousands of years and is key to our beloved Zoroastianian and overall Iranian heritage. His birth is on the winter solstice, celebrated commonly now as Yalda. It is the time when the forces of good (light - knowledge) overcome that of the evil (darkness - ignorance). Duality theme that resonates in Christianity, Islam and has been alive and well in Zoroastrianism. Literally, the days become longer on the Winter Solstice, the ancient Iranians tracked the movements of the earth and stars and then recorded them as their calendar.

The Pope's crown is named Mithra for commemoration of Rome's allegiance to this ancient order.

In God We Trust.

I think this could be right

I think this could be right and as long as there are no visible flaws in this theory we never know. Because this kinda does make sense.

(This comment is actually not by jamh, but by his daughter)

Sources

Can you please cite your sources?

Re Parthian religion, a

Re Parthian religion, a couple of interesting links below:

"Parthian Zoroastrianism reinforced local Zoroastrian
communities in Mesopotamia left from the time of
the Achaemenians, and one of the Gnostic
baptismal religions, Mandaeanism,
which is still in existence, had its beginning at this time." from:

//www.angelfire.com/nt/Gilgamesh/parthian.htm...

Or

//www.parthia.com/parthia_religion.htm

Or

//www.iranchamber.com/religions/articles/chri...

Also remember that the Achemenid kings, who came before the Parthians were dedicated zoroastrians, perhaps even more so than the Parthians.

Jesus Was Iranian

This is good analysis. A different interpretation is also possible. According to Mary Boyce, Christianity and Zoroastrianism are 99.9% similar. Is this a coincidence that someone like Jesus came and introduced a new religion that that so close to Zoroastrianism? Was there a coincidence that three Magi from Persia come and greet the birth of this new religious leader? I think not. Jesus was most likely born and raised in Iran and was familiar with Zoroastrianism. Another words, he was Iranian.
Now a few corrections, Pharaat is Farhad in Persian language. Parthian did not have a state religion. Zoroastrianism did not become Iran’s state religion until the rise of Sassanid.