Episode:Melchizedek Gospel—Response in the Levant (Part 4)
The doctrine of the Abrahamic covenant was virtually extinct in Persia when Zoroaster appeared to revive the smoldering embers of the Salem gospel. This new religion was one of action—work—not prayers and rituals. And while failing to evolve the Trinity concept, it did in a certain way approach that of God the Sevenfold. The teachings of Zoroaster successively impressed three great religions: Judaism and Christianity and, through them, Mohammedanism.
Keywords: Urantia, Melchizedek of Salem, Persia, Zoroastrianism, Islam
Summary by Kermit
We emphasized how the definitive focalization of Egypt’s religious and moral world view through Ikhnaton’s teaching served to provide Hebrew religion and Greek philosophy with foundational elements that have come down to today. We also commented on the recurrent themes of evolutionary civilization involving the ever present tension between political and religious leadership, chiefs and shamans, kings and priests.
95:6. The Salem Doctrines in Iran
The Salem missionaries originally made headway for 500 years in Iran establishing the Melchizedek religion until political upheaval and persecution ended the monotheistic teachings. It was during the previously mentioned sixth century B.C. moral renaissance, when Zoroaster appeared in Persia to revive the “smouldering embers” of the Salem gospel.
As the result of a dream, Zoroaster determined to return to his homeland and remodel his people’s religion. Armed with the idea of a supreme God based on the Hebraic idea of a God of justice he consigned all other gods as devils and demons of which he had heard in Mesopotamia. He proceeded to create a galaxy of seven supreme gods with Ahura-Mazda (light-wisdom) at its head. We noted that the six gods subordinate to Ahura-Mazda are presented by the revelators in a form favoring their true meanings, such that a Zoroastrian who might happen to be perusing the revelation can be edified in his religion.
As has been mentioned throughout this series on the legacy of the Melchizedek gospel, the revelators are providing us with more than historical information. They are engaging us in a consideration of the whole system religious ideas of each of the major religions. As they pass on the validity or lack thereof of these ideas we are challenged to rework our own religious ideas. When ideas take precedence over ideals, religion becomes merely an ideology. When the ideas are false, spiritual progress is retarded. It is most important to recognize that times have not changed in this regard.
Throughout the revelation’s account of these times, our author gives subtle but important missing details that enable a discerning student to locate more accurately Zoroaster in time (6th century B.C.) and place (his pilgrimage to Ur). Further, Zoroaster had been directly influenced by the traditions of Caligastia and the Lucifer rebellion, the Seven Master Spirits and even God the Sevenfold.
We revisited another recurrent theme in our study of evolution versus revolution. There is a major problem in promulgating the fifth epochal revelation (5thER) coming from an exclusively spiritual viewpoint. Spiritual consciousness, detached from the full cosmic perspective has no relation to time and time is an essential element in evolution, the way of the Supreme. Evolution may appear to be revolutionary when the course of evolution experiences a “phase” change, a suddenly. Careful examination of circumstances surrounding such “phase” changes usually disclose predisposing evolutionary conditions which account for the apparent revolutionary event.
Zoroaster’s religion was based on action not prayers and rituals. It was a militant philosophy which dared to battle with evil, inaction and, backwardness. Zoroaster utilized fire as a symbol, his later followers did, succumbing to the age old error of substituting the symbol for the substance. Also, as is often the case when a religion becomes adopted by the political powers, it is thence spread by the sword. Such was the case for Zoroastrianism, the prophet dying in battle for his faith.
Interestingly Zoroastrianism is the only Urantian creed that perpetuates the Dalamatian and Edenic teachings concerning the Seven Master Spirits. Originally, Zoroastrianism was not purely dualistic. But, in later times the dualistic view of good and evil contending on equal terms gained credence. Current day Christians can be found doing a similar thing as a result of the echoes of Zoroastrianism.
The Jewish traditions of heaven and hell are derived from Zoroastrianism. Likewise, the traditions of “end times” come from both the Egyptian and Zoroastrian teachings. The teachings of Zoroaster were overthrown and the worship of ancient Mithra was resurrected, eventually being contemporaneous with Judaism and Christianity. The teachings of Zoroaster thus fed into Judaism and Christianity and through them to Mohammedanism. And again as we have seen before with the great teachers of the “class of 600 B.C.”, the exalted teachings of Zoroaster are far removed from the modern perversions of his gospel by the Parsees.
We are reminded of the revelators use of the two terms Mohammedanism and Islam. Mohammedanism being a militant form of Islam.
95:7. The Salem Teachings in Arabia
Melchizedek’s teaching of the one God was established in Arabia relatively recently. The Salem teachers failed here as well as in Greece because they misunderstood Machiventa’s instructions regarding overorganization. The Salem teachers lack of success was not on account of their refusal to extend the gospel through the sword. Their failure in Arabia was even more complete than in China or Rome. Even after the Orient and Occident had become Buddhist or Chrisitan respectively, Arabia was awash with olden fetishes, and household gods. The struggle for ascendancy among the contending concepts of Ishtar, Yahweh, Ahura, and even the Christian Father of the Lord Jesus Christ was long and remained unresolved. Scattered about in Arabia, families and clans held to the hazy idea of one God, treasuring the traditions of Melchizedek, Abraham, Moses, and Zoroaster. Many would have responded favorably to the Jesusonian gospel but the Christian missionaries were inflexible and unyielding in comparison to the more innovative and compromising missionaries in the Mediterranean countries. Their lack of grace and stringent social requirements effectively prevented and widespread favorable reception of the simple gospel of the carpenter’s son in Arabia.
Monotheism of a kind did take root in this land. But for the inflexible, ungracious, and unyielding nature of the Christian missionaries in Arabia, Islam would probably not come into existence. The only unifying factor of a tribal, racial, or national nature of these Arabians was the peculiar respect they were willing to pay to the Kaaba stone in Mecca. This subsequently led to the establishment of the Islam religion.
It was mentioned that a reactionary phenomena to the oppressive moral requirements found in the Levantine monotheistic religions, led to the rejection of the self-evident moral discrimination within cosmic intuitions in favor of the external authority of the mullahs as a moral reference point.
Yet the revelators in this last paragraph give Islam its due:
The strength of Islam has been its clear-cut and well-defined presentation of Allah as the one and only Deity; its weakness, the association of military force with its promulgation, together with its degradation of woman. But it has steadfastly held to its presentation of the One Universal Deity of all, “who knows the invisible and the visible. He is the merciful and the compassionate.” “Truly God is plenteous in goodness to all men.” “And when I am sick, it is he who heals me.” “For whenever as many as three speak together, God is present as a fourth,” for is he not “the first and the last, also the seen and the hidden”? [95:7.6]