Mobile Societies, Mobile Religions: On the Ecological Roots of Two Religions Deemed Monotheistic

Texts Deemed Religious

As noted in previous chapters, establishing reliable dating, fidelity of transmission, and accurate translation are a few of the issues that make the use of the Hebrew and Old Avestan texts in scholarly research difficult. In this chapter the information drawn from these texts is regarded as data that might be gleaned from any work of art, literature, or other cultural products of particular social contexts: potentially indicative of attitudes and perspectives held by the authors and/or those assumed to be held by the intended audience. Like other art, the survival and continued significance of the Hebrew Bible and Old Avestan texts to Judaism and Zoroastrianism, respectively, raises questions of rhetoric and messaging within various adherent populations across time. It is important to acknowledge the integral role that “people deemed religious” play in giving purpose and meaning to these texts in each context. In a highly literate social context, one might be tempted to assume that texts can “speak for themselves,” but this notion ignores the highly social aspect of learning in human groups.1 Put simply, there is a significant difference between the social value assigned to a library card and that given to a college degree. In the modern world, between community scripture study groups; the deployment of religious texts in discussions, sermons, and sales pitches; and curated “daily scripture” email chains, adherents and officials of various religions deemed monotheistic can be found to demonstrate the importance of social interaction on the use of texts deemed religious. Historically low rates of literacy emphasize the likelihood that the Hebrew and Old Avestan texts were composed in contexts in which social interaction would have been the only way of disseminating religious narratives. Furthermore, it is important to note that the survival and continued deployment of such narratives may be considered, to an extent, to be a signal of acceptance or approval by the communities of worship centered around Ahura Mazda and YHWH.

 

1 Deacon makes a compelling evolutionary argument for the interconnected development of hypersociality, symbolic thinking, and verbal communication: Deacon, The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain.

This page has paths: