1 new of 293 responses total.
Is not. Jews didn't much encounter Zoroastrianism until the Babylonian captivity, at least 600 years after Judaism was established. You aren't thinking of Mesopotamian myths (Gilgamesh) which are recounted in the Old Testament, are you? Or perhaps the monotheistic Pharaoh (Akhnaten)? Flem, I'd guess that the same forces that drove the scientific renaissance also drove the Protestant reformation. As such they'd be cousins rather than the reformation itself directly leading to scientific breakthroughs. Nonetheless I think this whole discussion is misguided. Europe was much more heavily influenced by the polytheistic Greeks than by many other things -- for better and worse. Recall that the Church was often pushing Aristotle's teachings, and great as he may have been on some fronts, he was nonetheless a victim of his time in scientific fields. John, I'm not sure there is a difference in saying that someone's skin color (or less superficially, their genetics) has less to do with this than someone's religion. What is it about the religion that propelled this? Did it teach to question or explore? Does it demand submission or did it tolerate a diversity of thought? Note: I'm not saying that genetics had anything to do with it, either. Just that a blanket statement that religion may have somehow contributed is not very convincing -- especially when the religion in question was often intolerant of questioning, exploration and diversity of thought.
You have several choices: