Perhaps you've heard a claim that the Bible borrows from other religions. For instance, Daniel 12 tells us about coming the resurrection of the dead.  Yet, the popular culture (and sometimes academic) myth is that Persian Zoroastrianism influenced this belief. I asked Grok about this, already knowing the answer.  However, I was surprised how thorough it was.  It's a shame that anyone still believes in this myth today. Here's what it said: --------------------------- The “Daniel got resurrection from the Magi” claim is common in popular writing and still appears in some academic work. It is much weaker than it sounds once you look at the sources, the Hebrew Bible’s own trajectory, and the actual differences between the two systems. Daniel 12:2 is the first explicit statement of a dual, individual, eschatological resurrection in the Hebrew Bible: many who sleep in the dust wake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and contempt. That does not mean the idea dropped in from Persia. Several lines of evidence cut the other way. 1. The Zoroastrian evidence is later and less clear than the slogan implies. The oldest Zoroastrian layer, the Gathas, does not clearly teach bodily resurrection. Edwin Yamauchi’s judgment is still useful: there is no certain affirmation of resurrection by Zarathustra in the Gathas. Clearer language appears in the Younger Avesta (especially Yasht 19: the dead will rise, existence made brilliant, no more aging or decay). Dating those hymns is contested. Many put them in or after the Achaemenid period. The full, systematic picture—Saoshyant raising the dead over 57 years, bodies reconstituted from the elements, cosmic renovation (frashokereti)—is spelled out in Pahlavi books written in the 9th–10th centuries AD. Those books preserve older tradition, but they are not 6th-century BC textbooks sitting on Daniel’s desk. Greek writers (Theopompus, 4th century BC) report that the Magi believed people would live again and be immortal. That is a second-hand report of some Magian belief in revivification. It is not the later, detailed Zoroastrian system, and it does not prove Jews borrowed the doctrine of Daniel 12. 2. The Hebrew Bible already had the raw materials. Daniel 12 does not appear in a vacuum. It reads like a tightening of language already in Israel’s Scriptures: >Deuteronomy 32:39: “I kill and I make alive.” >1 Samuel 2:6 (Hannah): “The LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up.” >Individual raisings: Elijah (1 Kings 17), Elisha (2 Kings 4; 13:21). >Hosea 6:1–2 and 13:14 (8th century): revive, raise up, ransom from Sheol. >Isaiah 26:19: “Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy.” >Ezekiel 37: dry bones live (national in context, but the imagery is bodily and was later read that way). >Job 19:25–27. >Daniel 12:2 uses the same cluster as Isaiah 26:19—sleep, dust, awaking. John Day and others have traced a literary line Hosea → Isaiah 26–27 → Daniel 12. That is inner-biblical development, not an Avestan loan. Even if one dates Isaiah 24–27 late, the conceptual soil (God as the one who gives life, Sheol as not the last word, justice for the faithful dead) is older than the Persian period. 3. The two doctrines do not match closely. Parallels are real. Dependence is not thereby proved. Burial vs. exposure. Daniel’s dead sleep in the dust of the earth. Jewish practice is burial. Zoroastrian practice treats the corpse as polluting (nasu) and exposes it so it will not defile earth, fire, or water. Later Pahlavi texts then have the elements give the body back (bones from earth, blood from water, hair from plants). The “awakening from dust/sleep” metaphor fits Jewish graves; it is foreign to Magian funerary logic. Scholars noticed this mismatch more than a century ago. Who rises, and why. Daniel 12 is selective (“many”) and moral: everlasting life vs. shame. It answers theodicy—faithful sufferers and apostates will not stay in the same condition. Classic Zoroastrian expectation is universal resurrection followed by purification and cosmic renewal. Different problem, different shape. Theology. Jewish resurrection sits inside exclusive Yahwism and covenant. Zoroastrian eschatology sits inside a dualistic cosmos (Ahura Mazda vs. Angra Mainyu) and a savior figure (Saoshyant) who is not in Daniel 12. Jewish writers consistently refuse an independent evil principle (see Isaiah 45:7). Adaptation would have to be so thorough that “influence” starts to mean little more than “they both thought about the end.” 4. Contact does not equal borrowing. Jews lived under Persian rule. They did not live as theological sponges. Ezra–Nehemiah stress separation, Torah, and distinct identity. There is no contemporary Jewish text that says, “We learned this from the Magi.” Shared ancient Near Eastern concerns (justice after death, national restoration, God’s power over Sheol) can produce similar language without one religion copying the other’s system. Some specialists have even suggested the traffic could run the other way in later centuries, or that both traditions drew on older Near Eastern stock. Parallels are easy; a documented channel of transmission for this doctrine is not. 5. Why the myth persists. It is tidy. Daniel is often dated to the 2nd century BC; Persia is earlier; therefore Persia must be the source. That chronology is not required if one takes Daniel’s own setting seriously, and even on a late date the Hebrew precursors still exist. The claim also fits an older history-of-religions habit: treat Israel as a late borrower rather than as a people whose own Scriptures already speak of the God who kills and makes alive. Jon Levenson and others have argued that resurrection grew out of Israel’s own convictions: YHWH as life-giver, the land promise, covenant fidelity, and the intolerable thought that the wicked and the martyrs share the same dust forever. Daniel 12 is a crystallization of that trajectory, not an import stamp. None of this requires pretending there are no similarities. It does require distinguishing resemblance from derivation. Daniel 12 stands in the line of Isaiah 26, Hosea, and the older confession that the LORD brings down to Sheol and raises up. That is a better account of the text than the popular Zoroastrian-origin story.

"Let's take a beloved property and make it about us." --People who will be blaming "toxic fans" when this thing flops.

Pray for the kids of Lindsay Clancy supporters. Praise God this kid found the truth, but may he also find safety. May his mother also repent of her hatred.

“Stop Partaking of Demons” (1 Cor. 10:14–22) You might not think that idolatry is a temptation for Christians, but God tells us to flee from it. That's not only because the Lord demands exclusive worship, but because demons are real. -Notes: pastormarksbury.blogspot.com… -Livestream: lwbcfruita.org/live -Donations: lwbcfruita.org/give MANUSCRIPT: Series: “1 Cor: Holiness from Messes” #36 Text: 1 Corinthians 10:14–22 By: Shaun Marksbury Date: Sept. 13, 2026 Venue: Living Water Baptist Church Occasion: AM Service Introduction Last week, we left off in a hopeful place. We saw that the temptation that feels unique to you is not. We also saw that God is faithful, so He won’t not let you be tempted beyond what you are able. With Him, you will find a way of escape from the bondage of your sin, meaning you can endure temptation. It’s with that understanding that Paul comes to the command of v. 14: “Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry.” The hope of the gospel leads to holy application in our lives. We can and should endure temptation by the Spirit of God, and that sometimes means running from temptation! The temptation here is for idolatry, which seems like it should never be a Christian temptation. However, idolatry isn’t just a wrong idea about God. In this paragraph, Paul also defines it as a table — one with a cup, with food, and with fellowship. And, because the Gentiles use this table as a place of sacrifice to demons, he tells believers not to become sharers or partakers with them. Is that a concern today? We live in a moment when the church tends to fall into one of two ditches about demons. Consider: One ditch is the old Satanic Panic. Some of you might remember that, in the 1980s and early 90s, a lot of sincere Christians became convinced that daycare centers were running ritual abuse rings, that rock music records were recruiting children when you played them backward, and that Dungeons & Dragons were almost automatic on-ramps into the occult. Of course, there were a couple of real cases and a real rise in occult curiosity happening. However, most of the panic did not survive investigation. The other ditch is more common in churches now: functional materialism. Demons are a doctrine we affirm, but a reality we never expect to meet. We tend to think of idolatry as something that just happens overseas, and that maybe demonic activity occurs among some lost tribe in the jungle. Meanwhile, the culture around actively engages in real practices with demons. Plenty of people who would never bow to a carved idol will still look for power, guidance, or protection from something other than the Lord — and call it harmless because the object itself is “nothing.” Paul won’t let us live in either ditch. He agrees that an idol is nothing, but he also says the worship attached to it is not nothing. There is a table of the Lord and a table of demons, and Christians may not have both. So, we’ll see three ways to stop partaking of demons this morning. First, Christians must separate from demons (v. 14), a straightforward command. Second, Christians must not share with demons (vv. 15–20), which is obviously the core of the topic today. Third, Christians must sanctify themselves (vv. 21–22), choosing to set themselves apart for the honor the Lord exclusively. Let’s consider the first of these: First, Christians Must Separate from Demons (v. 14) Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. The word therefore ties this command to everything Paul just said. He spoke of God’s judgment on the wilderness generation, presenting it as a cautionary tale for Corinthian believers[1] — those who thought they were strong enough to stand or, in this case, sit at pagan religious functions without compromise. Paul says they are already accountable before the Lord. Notice his tone, though. Paul doesn’t condemn them as enemies. In fact, he calls them “my beloved.” The man who will warn them about demons first reminds them that they belong to Christ and to him. Some think we should not give an inch when disciplining others, but the Lord’s apostle always demonstrates love, even in urgency. Still, the application of Christian freedom to food sacrificed to idols begins here: flee. It is present tense in the original language, so we could see it as a command saying, “Keep fleeing!” This is, by the way, the same kind of language Paul uses for sexual immorality in 6:18. Some temptations you stand and resist, but this one you put distance between yourself and the thing. It may be unexpected to see the word “idolatry” here, but it’s a key thought for this chapter (cf. vv. 7, 19f). John also affirms the need for us to guard ourselves from idols (1 John 5:21). One of the ways in which we grow in righteousness and holiness is to flee temptations such as idolatry. And this goes back to the question of meat sacrificed to idols. So, is he talking about running from the meat sacrificed to idols? No! In fact, he’ll later say there are instances where meat in the marketplace or on a neighbor’s table is safe. He’s not even talking about being afraid of the stone statues. Rather, he’s talking about eating at the table of a pagan temple with those actively engaged in idolatry. Christians were fooling themselves into thinking that was okay! We’ll see some modern examples of this in a few minutes. For now, he has a simple command: Get up from the table and leave the room. Don’t linger to prove how strong you are! Take the way of escape that God provides and endure temptation by walking out from idolatrous situations. Do so because the Lord commands and so you do not share with demons, as we see next. Second, Christians Must not Share with Demons (vv. 15–20) I speak as to prudent people. You judge what I say. Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Look at the nation Israel. Are not those who eat the sacrifices sharers in the altar? What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. And I do not want you to become sharers in demons. Paul now appeals to their redeemed minds. The word “prudent” is the same word he used in 4:10, when they were treating the apostles as fools and themselves as the wise.[2] I don’t think the apostle is being facetious here, teasing them as before. Instead, here, he believed the “questions that follow would lead sensible people… to agree,”[3] and he invites them to do so. He is not asking them to feel a certain way. He is asking them to judge — to weigh the argument and come to a logical conclusion. He then lays out three pictures of a sacred meal — the Lord’s Table, Israel’s altar, and the Gentile sacrifice — and asks them to discern the one to whom each is offered. First, Consider the Sharing of the Lord’s Table (vv. 16–17) Christ truly communes with us in the Lord’s Supper. There’s a good deal of debate in church history as to how He is present with us — is He physically present in the elements, or is He somehow spiritually present? We would lean toward the latter. We don’t have time to parse that discussion out today, and because Paul will talk about this again, we’ll table that discussion (pun intended). Still, we can’t deny His presence. We call it communion because we are sharing in Him. Moreover, and because we are partaking together, as the body of Christ. That’s why this was the practice of the early church (Acts 2:41–42), and it is one of the ordinary means of grace the Lord uses to bless His people. Again, Paul will treat the Supper at greater length in chapter 11, but he raises it here because a religious meal always means something. The “cup of blessing,” for instance, is the communion cup for which Jesus gave thanks at the Last Supper (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:17, 20). MacArthur notes that this was the proper name given to the third cup during the Passover feast, the cup Jesus “set apart as the token of salvation blessing.”[4] Thus, the early church followed this custom[5] in remembrance of Him. The key word in all of this is “sharing” or koinonia. It means to have in common, to participate, to have partnership.[6] Paul uses the same word for fellowship with Christ and with the Spirit elsewhere.[7] In other words, by taking the cup, believers spiritually identify themselves with Jesus, with His sacrificial death, and with the new covenant in His blood. Similarly, this applies to the bread. We break it as part of the same meal. It symbolizes His body given for us. By partaking of the bread, believers testify to their union with Christ — not only His death, but also His resurrection from the grave.[8] It speaks of our union with Him in death and our hope of new life. So, one of the underlying theological realities here is the importance of Christ’s work on the cross in our justification from sins. We need the body and blood of Christ. It’s so important that we remember it in the Lord’s Supper. Verse 17 presses the corporate side of this. This isn’t just “you and Jesus” but “us and Jesus.” We who are many are one body, and similarly, we all partake of the one bread. The church is also called Christ’s body (12:12, 27), and we should be united. Participation at the Supper points to our unified faith in the gospel message. Are you starting to see where Paul is going? Partaking in a meal can hold such spiritual significance. Those who eat in the pagan temple, then, are demonstrating outwardly a commitment to idols. It’s naïve for the Corinthians to think they can sit at temple feasts without being involved in idolatry. Moreover, those who eat together show unity in belief. Therefore, we’re already seeing the reason why Christians should avoid eating in idolatrous temples. However, if that isn’t enough, Paul moves onto the next picture: Second, Consider the Sharing of Israel at the Altar (v. 18) This is “Israel according to the flesh” (LSB footnote). Under the Old Covenant, the offering was on behalf of all who ate (Lev. 7:15–18).[9] In other words, by eating, the people identified with the offering and affirmed their devotion to the God to whom it was offered. Priests ate, and the altar was their table.[10] They were “sharers,” “participants” (ESV), or “partners” (NET) in what they consumed. The Corinthians need not be Jews according to the flesh — even Gentile Christians can follow this logic. A sacred meal means you belong to the one whose altar it is, true of the Lord’s Table and Israel’s altar. It will be true at the Gentile table as well. Third, Consider the Sharing of the Gentile Sacrifice (vv. 19–20) Now, Paul knows that he has to back up and qualify what he’s saying: “What do I mean then?” He anticipates the objection from chapter 8 by repeating that “an idol is nothing in the world.” He isn’t contradicting himself here — that principle stands. This means that the food itself remains the same. The statue doesn’t transform it through the process of sacrifice. In fact, he’ll make it clear that we don’t need to even ask questions about the food to keep ourselves from potentially consuming the meat (vv. 25–27). The idol is still nothing. That matters, because Christians can become either superstitious or overly scrupulous. Some idols may even appear frightening, with many arms and teeth, but they cannot get up and chase you! In Jeremiah 10:5 (a passage talking about making idols, not Christmas trees!), the Lord says, “Like a scarecrow in a cucumber field are they, and they cannot speak; they must be carried because they cannot take a step! Do not fear them, for they can do no harm, nor can they do any good.” Moreover, distant association with an idol is not the same as present worship. Now, how might we apply this, since we don’t often run a risk of our meat being sacrificed to an idol? Well, Christians ask similar questions almost every holiday about whether it is right to engage in celebrations. Sometimes, they engage in the genetic fallacy — if there is even a possibility that Christmas, Easter, or even Halloween are linked to pagan practices, then we are being pagans today by acknowledging them! That is also often historically inaccurate, based on bad information, but it doesn’t matter, because this isn’t what Paul would have us believe anyway. This could also apply to certain stories Christians sometimes argue about. The possible evil feels more palpable because it’s in the narrative. So, they fear that, if their kids are reading certain narratives — even Harry Potter, but also The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings — they’ll fall prey to witchcraft because it depicts magic. However, Scripture itself tells of Pharaoh’s magicians, the witch of Endor, Simon Magus, and the sons of Sceva without becoming a how-to manual. Depiction is not participation, and imagination is not invocation. The “mature” Corinthians were not entirely wrong. I know Christians disagree on this, but here is where I see the line: practice. When the game or the fandom stops being make-believe and people begin referencing actual spell books and root work, people cross the line. Our kids dressing as superheroes and getting candy is one thing, but them gathering on Halloween for a séance is quite another. We don’t want to violate what God forbids and open ourselves for malevolent spiritual influence. While the idol is nothing, the worship is not. This is where we get into further application. Our materialistic age does not respect the spiritual enough, and that includes people within the church. It’s true that some Christians go too far and see demons hiding behind every bush, but that doesn’t mean we should be unconcerned. And, more to the point, while some of you might not engage in the kind of temple idolatry the Corinthians did, you may dabble in occult practices thinking there is no true harm. Consider v. 20 with this, the hinge of the paragraph. The Gentiles don’t sacrifice to nothing — they sacrifice to demons (and not to God). That is an allusion to Deuteronomy 32:17, and the same thought appears in Psalm 106:37. In Deuteronomy 32, Moses calls God “the Rock” — the term Paul already used of Christ in verse 4. The Jews were ignorant or perhaps overlooked the demons that were present in their sacrifices, though, and the Corinthian Christians needed to learn from their error.[11] The Gentile pagans are likewise ignorant, and Christians must know better. Remember that Paul already said in 8:5–6 that there are many so-called gods and many lords, yet for us there is one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. Christians understand that God is sovereign over all, but that there are also lesser spiritual beings in the universe. As one study notes, “False religions are not just created by humans. They generally have demonic power behind them (see Deut. 32:17).”[12] It’s not that there are actual other “gods,” but demons often play the part.[13] So, Paul says, “I do not want you to become sharers in demons.” As the Reformation Study Bible notes, “Although idols are nothing (v. 19), behind pagan rituals is the reality of Satan’s work, and Christians should have nothing to do with that.” Christians who sit at the table of idolatrous sacrifice aren’t neutral — they are sharing with the demons there, in direct violation of the Lord’s command. They must, therefore, separate and not share, lest they fall into the Lord’s severe discipline. The Lord’s Supper and the table of demons are mutually exclusive, bringing us to final point. As we consider this, we’ll also consider some of those further applications. We must be set apart as a holy people. Third, Christians Must Sanctify Themselves (vv. 21–22) You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He? “The temple of God” has no agreement with idols (2 Cor. 6:16), and there can be no union for good between Christ and Belial. Isaiah 65:11 pictures those who forsake the Lord as setting a table for Fortune and filling cups of mixed wine for Destiny. Paul contrasts the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Some of you might not actually go to pagan temples and have a meal there, though there are opportunities today in the United States. Yet, again, you may think that, because we shouldn’t be superstitious, we can dabble in divination. For instance, there may be some of you who read horoscopes, have astrology apps, use tarot cards “just for insight,” engage in palm reading, or figure out some numerology. Deuteronomy 18:10–12 and Isaiah 8:19 put this in the same category as consulting the dead: seeking hidden knowledge from creation or spirits instead of from God, and there are spirts involved. Even certain personality tests like the enneagram reportedly originated from mystical practices mixed with automatic writing from guiding spirit. Pew and similar surveys keep showing a large share of self-identified Christians accept at least one of these. We might also seek objects or techniques for extra spiritual power. For instance, some Christians carry crystals for energy, protection, or healing. Some use sage smudging to “clear space.” Some look to energy work and chakra balancing. Inviting a “guide” or “energy” to work is the same exchange Paul describes: treating a created thing as a channel that belongs to God alone. Others look to manifestation and “the universe.” For instance, years ago, when Oprah was promoting The Secret, Christians were getting into the law of attraction. There are those treating “the universe” as a personal power that rewards intention. That is a rival providence, for James 1:5 and the Lord’s Prayer already tell believers where wisdom and daily bread come from. Some get into spiritualized yoga and other Eastern techniques. Of course, I don’t want to go overboard in naming the problems — stretching is stretching. However, the historic practice is one arising from various Indian religious and philosophical traditions, such as the yoking the self to Brahman, opening the energy centers, and sometimes invoking deities. Some report encountering spirit guides. When the class includes mantras or kundalini language, it is not a neutral gym routine. The same principle as the idol meal — the form can look ordinary, but the meaning attached to it is not, and it might bring one into communion with a demon. There’s so much more we could list here. Christians sometimes engage in the wrong kind of entertainment. Ouija boards, seeking mediums “for a laugh,” WitchTok spells, and protection jars should not be named among believers. Paul does not say the danger is only for people who believe the idol is a god — the danger is simply sitting at the table. And, to be clear, we’re not talking about vague “maybes” like they were during the Satanic Panic — we’re talking about clear violations of Scripture. Some Christians might think they have wised up, though, by creating “Christian” versions of these things. For instance, Christian leaders have promoted the enneagram as a discipleship tool, trying to redeem it. There are professed believers who try to engage in “Christian” manifestation, and others who use “destiny cards” instead of tarot. Others promote contemplative techniques borrowed from sources that empty the mind or seek unmediated voices as prayer practices. There are some who think we can speak things into being, that God has given us the ability to shape reality around us for good or ill. Just as one example of that, since we’re going through the book of Job, note that Kenneth Copeland said that Job gave the devil license when he said “God giveth and God taketh away,” with Copeland saying Job was mistaken to say this. A supposed Christian sitting at this demonic table is practicing idolatry. I hope you’re seeing that the associations are more present than others. Verse 22 asks the question that should end the argument: “Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?” That is Deuteronomy 32 again, where Yahweh’s jealousy at Israel’s unfaithfulness is followed by consuming fire, calamity, famine, plague, and the sword. God tolerates no competition and will not allow idolatry to go unpunished.[14] The “strong” in Corinth were flirting with the same discipline Israel received after the golden calf, and so are we if we don’t stop engaging in such practices. We are not stronger than God! The Lord sanctifies us. However, He also calls us to set ourselves apart from such practices in holiness. Conclusion How might we think differently about the practices in which we involve ourselves? A useful test might be to ask: Are we seeking knowledge, power, or peace from something other than through the Lord speaking in Scripture and ruling by His Spirit? If yes, then we are sitting closer to the table of demons than we think — even if everyone in the room thinks it’s okay. We must avoid such things. Paul’s pastoral call is not to panic — it’s to holiness and faithfulness in the Lord. The cup and the bread already mean fellowship with Christ and with His body, so there’s no need for a second cup. We must keep fleeing idolatry — not because demons are stronger than the Lord (v. 22), but because He is a jealous God. You cannot drink from two cups, so drink from the Lord’s alone. [1] F. Alan Tomlinson, CSB Study Bible: Notes, 2017, 1825. [2] See Legacy Standard Bible translation note on φρόνιμος in 1 Cor. 4:10 and 10:15. [3] David K. Lowery, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, 1985, 2, 527. [4] John MacArthur Jr., Ed., The MacArthur Study Bible, electronic ed., (Nashville, TN: Word Pub., 1997), 1743–1744. [5] J. I. Packer, Wayne Grudem, and Ajith Fernando, Eds., ESV Global Study Bible, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 1617. [6] MacArthur, 1744. [7] Packer, 1617–1618. [8] John D. Barry, Douglas Mangum, Derek R. Brown, Michael S. Heiser, Miles Custis, Elliot Ritzema, Matthew M. Whitehead, Michael R. Grigoni, and David Bomar, Faithlife Study Bible, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016), 1 Co 10:16. [9] MacArthur. [10] Packer, et. al., 1618. [11] Tomlinson, 1826. [12] Packer, et. al. [13] MacArthur. [14] Ibid.

Are Christians idolizing psychology? Christians must find their ultimate hope for deliverance from soul issues in God and in His Word.

There is genuine hope for change in Christ! In the power of the Spirit, you can put off old behaviors, be renewed in your mind through Scripture, and put on the new man in Christ. Find a Bible-preaching church Sunday. You're always welcome at Living Water Baptist in Fruita!

Parents of "trans" children: "The kids know best!" Also these parents: