One area I’ve always meant to learn more about is the history of the Old Testament. I have a fairly spotty knowledge of how it all fits together - mainly because my only encounters with it are through references by other sources, never as a subject of study in it’s own right. The reason I bring this up right now is I’ve been seeing references on and off for a while about the Pharisees. Dictionary.com has a rather simple definition of the word:

A member of an ancient Jewish sect that emphasized strict interpretation and observance of the Mosaic law in both its oral and written form.

While Wikipedia has a substantially more in depth explanation of them. The Pharisees seem to have arisen in opposition to the priestly caste, the Sadducees who were in charge of Judea under the control of the Persian empire. They also seem to have been the forerunners to the more modern Rabbinic tradition of Judaism.

One of the more tenuous connections I’ve found is between the Pharisees and the Persian Zoroastrian religion. I’m not finding a good solid linguistic connections, but the similarity between the word Pharisee and the word Farsi or Parsee (the Iranian language) is rather striking. This could be more easily written off as coincidence if the Pharisees hadn’t arisen during Persian rule. Also, there are some who claim that time spent under Zoroastrian rulers influenced the theology of the Hebrews, putting it into the form we’re more accustomed to today.

Exposure to Zoroastrianism substantially altered Jewish Messianism as well. Zarathustra predicted the imminent coming of a World Savior (Saoshant), who would be born of a virgin, and who would lead humanity in the final battle against Evil. Jewish Messianism incorporated these conceptions with their pre-existing expectations of a Davidic King who would redeem the Jewish nation from foreign oppression.

It was at this time, in response to their captivity, that the era of apocalyptic literature commenced in Judaism, based on Babylonian models and incorporating their symbolism. This was to have a strong influence on later Christian thinking/superstition. But with the key elements of resurrection, judgment, reward or punishment, a Savior, apocalyptical belief, and the ultimate destruction of the forces of Evil, it can be concluded that Jewish and Christian eschatology is Zoroastrian from start to finish.

[…] As a Messiah, Jesus functioned purely along Zoroastrian lines. While purportedly of the Davidic line, he offered only redemption from sin, rather than national salvation for the Jews. He was a World Savior, rather than a Jewish Messiah. Jews did not recognize him as their Messiah, and in a real sense he was not. Their Messianic expectations, those which originated prior to the captivity, went unfulfilled; in fact their nation was ultimately destroyed. Neither did Jesus effect a final triumph over Evil; this has been reserved for a Second Coming, in conjunction with the Last Judgment and the reward of Heaven or the punishment of Hell.

I’ve heard this theory elsewhere in a slightly different form. The Book of Daniel is the primary Old Testament text which uses apocalyptic themes - and these are supposed to have bled into the Jewish culture through their absorption within another culture. Anyway, if anybody knows more about this theory (either to refute or support it), please throw me some links and book references as I’d like to learn more in this area.