Why is Zoroastrianism so based

Why doesn't good and evil being equal jive with you?

Balance makes more sense to me.

But this is a common misconception. Angra Mainyu is not equal to Ahura Mazda. That's the Manichean heresy. Ahura Mazda let's Angra Mainyu for a limited time so that souls that incarnate on earth get to participate in the cosmic struggle and form character thereon. The evil spirit will, however, be destroyed in the end times and Mazda will rule with the just over a perfected earth.

I guess because I conceive an infinite God, who is good. Evil was a product of his creation which chose to be flawed, not something inherent in his design of the universe.

The fuck are you even arguing?

>Street shitters.

Buddy, there's a Zoroastrian counterpart to the mad- "redpilled" idea of "Jewish Grand Plot" in India, in which, according to mostly brahamins and what's left of the warrior castes, the subcontinent is actually ruled by wealthy Zoroastrians, that should tell you what we're dealing with.

>I don't understand religion
t. fedora who was molested as a boy

>molested as a boy
Christard projections everyone.

OP's post
>here's what zoroastrians do: inserts point
>here's what abrahamic faiths do: hur hur

get some fucking substance. you know, like wet wipes. or two ply, or something that you can use to wipe

>people shouldn't be forcefully converted;
Until the sassanids.

...

that's literally how they think people become atheists. they can't understand why anyone would leave the church for any reason other than emotional trauma

>cult of fire
>based

>Why is Zoroastrianism so based in comparison with its Abrahamic bastard children?

Because the sequels are never as good as the original

>Evil was a product of his creation which chose to be flawed, not something inherent in his design of the universe

Seems more like an idealism to me.

Honestly, I think the idea of good and evil being two equal but opposite forces makes more sense given how ubiquitous both are.

If God is almighty and good, why does he permit evil to exist?

In the case of Zoroastrianism, there is one entity that represents pure good (Ahura Mazda, or Ohrmazd), and one entity that represents pure evil (Angra Mainyu, or Ahriman).

Every other being in the universe (including humans) simply come in varying shades of gray, some with more good than evil, others the opposite, but none are pure good or pure evil.

It's actually interesting, Abrahamic religions seem to have much more optimism in them than Eastern religions, which tend to consider evil to be a naturally occurring, although negative, influence.

It's only Christianity and Islam which claim that the force of good always prevails.

Can you expand on that?

I'd vastly prefer if the Middle East was full of Zoroastrians instead of Muslims right now. If I could press a button and start a mass conversion, I would.

To me, it seems like zoroastrianism actually makes it so that the struggle for good from men matters for them as a whole rather than for the individual's own salvation, you're against a common enemy that looms and casts a shadow, but also your actions can trascend, it's up to you to create a world that can be saved, rather than to await god's decision.

> women are equal to men;
>tolerates other religions, people shouldn't be forcefully converted;

Looks like a beta religion, no wonder it died.

>the subcontinent is actually ruled by wealthy Zoroastrians, that should tell you what we're dealing with.

If that is true then why aren't they slowly converting India to Zoroastrianism or using India to remove the Mudslims from Persia like the Jews do with the Anglos and the Americans.
Also this

It's an Aryan religion, it is as great as it's people's thinkers. It is one based on the teachings of Hermes Trismegistis, much like the various old Pagan faiths of Europe, Egypt, and India. It is however, a cult promoting one force (Ahura Mazda, the force of light/wisdom) over the whole and therefore should be disavowed.

Abrahamic faiths were created by semites. Shit people will create shit religions, bastardizations of the old Aryan faiths.

See Kek: the god of light is the god of darkness, for light cannot exist without darkness. To understand duality is critical in understanding how existence came to be and how existence maintains being.

But the whole point of Heqet is that he existed before there was anything but darkness.

>existed when there was only darkness
>is darkness

Pick two.

>dem trips

See also: Greek pantheism origin theory, Germanic pantheism origin theory, and Abrahamic monotheism origin theory. They all began with darkness/Chaos until there was a moment of light. The big bang was probably pretty damn bright. I'll stop before I literally hand you the key to enlightenment.

>the subcontinent is actually ruled by wealthy Zoroastrians
WE IZ KAAANGS

Diaspora fags please off yourselves

t. Sanjay Schwarzkopf

It's a shame that they don't really accept new converts. The belief is that if god wanted you to be Zoroastrian, then you would have been born as such.

Plus, look how they dispose of their dead.

>Abrahamic religion is based on ritual sacrifice and slaughter

Zoroastrianism is a religion that stands for positivity and self actualization and self improvement, not self hate, being unworthy and self flagellation like Abrahamic religions, be it Judaism, Christianity or Islam

abrahamic religions r sacrifice based, moloch is one incarnation their sacrifice-feasting deities

>this is what the parsis sitting in london tell themselves.

Not him, but it's true.
>In the 18th and 19th centuries, the Parsis had emerged as "the foremost people in India in matters educational, industrial, and social. They came in the vanguard of progress, amassed vast fortunes, and munificently gave away large sums in charity".[42] By the close of the 19th century, the total number of Parsis in colonial India was 85,397, of which 48,507 lived in Bombay, constituting 6% of the total population of the city (Census, 1881)[citation needed]. This would be the last time that the Parsis would be considered a numerically significant minority in the city.
>Nonetheless, the legacy of the 19th century was a sense of self-awareness as a community. The typically Parsi cultural symbols of the 17th and 18th centuries such as language (a Parsi variant of Gujarati), arts, crafts, and sartorial habits developed into Parsi theatre, literature, newspapers, magazines, and schools. The Parsis now ran community medical centres, ambulance corps, Scouting troops, clubs, and Masonic Lodges. They had their own charitable foundations, housing estates, legal institutions, courts, and governance. They were no longer weavers and petty merchants, but now were established and ran banks, mills, heavy industry, shipyards, and shipping companies.

t.Ali Reza Pahlavi

>Christianity: hurr durr the world is evil.

But Christianity teaches that the world is good

>Christianity: hurr durr hide in a cave or monastery and wait for the end of the world.

Buy monastics aren't hiding from the world, I would say that it's more likelythe world is hiding from them.

>Christianity: hurr durr give the body is evil.

But Christianity doesn't teach that

>Christianity: hurr durr give all your money to the church.

>being attached to money

If zoroastrianism were mainstream, im sure it would be all oogabooga hurrdurr as well. Its not unlike Veeky Forums when summer rolls around, the quality just drops due to the mass influx of summerfag teens and college kids. Similarly, the mean quality of religion drops when you have a mass of idiots joining.

But there are still zoroastrians in iran

Kek your God is a car.

>hurr durr the world is evil

It's repeteadly called "very good" in Genesis.

>hurr durr hide in a cave or monastery and wait for the end of the world

But that's wrong, you fucking retard.

>hurr durr give the body is evil

It's not, see the "very good" created world.

>hurr durr give all your money to the church

There is nothing wrong with wealth in Christianity - avarice (state, in which someone's desires control them instead of the other way round) is a problem, not wealth - it's a blessing.

>hurr durr we should let our enemies slap us in the cheek

Gross misunderstanding of the passage. There is such a thing as just and necessary war in Christianity, OT is full of it.

I'm starting to see a pattern where people trying to attack Christianity attack strawmans instead and then they think they won.