Zoroaster, the prophet of Zoroastrianism:
http://www.westminster.edu/staff/brennie/images/zoroaster.jpg
While reading the chapter by Mary Boyce, I was reminded (again) of our conversations about religious studies in general, and how objectivity is difficult, if at all possible. It really stuck with me how religious scholars distorted the study of Zoroastrianism, going so far as to incorrectly translate ancient texts or at least refuse to consider a translation with a different implication regarding their beliefs.
Not only did Thomas Hyde approach Zoroastrianism with the intent on "proving" its monotheism, but even today many religious scholars describe it as a "fire-worshipping" religion, rather than acknowledging that fire is only one part of the religious rituals, performed mainly as a means of purification. Those big distortions AND the small ones (respectively) are clear evidence for why the analysis of "religious studies" is so important: we must first acknowledge what it is we aim to learn about a group of people before we claim to understand them.
Again, overall I really enjoyed this chapter, as it was the first real taste of an ancient religious tradition in this course!
