Mohammed confessing to Christianity

What would be consequences if Prophet Mohammed confessed to Christianity before he founded Islam (before he heard the instructions of Allah)?

Did you mean confessing, or converting?

Then he would have founded a branch of Christianity radically opposed to anything else anywhere in the world.

The Byzantine Empire and the Papacy would see Mohammedan Christianity as a dangerous blasphemy and would be just as vervacious in their efforts to oppose it, especially vis a vis the Holy Land.

That depends on exactly what Mohammed does when and after he becomes Christian.

For example, if he becomes a Melkite (= adhering the official imperial Church), then the Byzantine government will leave him alone, and the Byzantines might even support him to spread the teachings and influence of the official Byzantine Church among the Arabs, both among Arabs in Byzantine Syria and Palestine (where the "heretical" Syriac Orthodox Church was popular among Arabs) as well as among Arabs in the Hijaz and maybe even the other parts of the Peninsula as well.

However, if he joins the Syriac Orthodox Church (a.k.a. Jacobite) or the Church of the East (a.k.a. Nestorian), then things would take quite a different turn.

The adherants of both of these Churches were repressed in the Byzantine Empire as well as the Persian Empire, and both Churches had significant numbers of Arabian adherants, including powerful Arabian aristocrats (The Ghassanids were Syriac Orthodox and ruled Syria on behalf of the Byzantines, and the Lakhmids were Nestorians and ruled southern Mesopotamia and parts of the northern Peninsula and were vassals of the Persians, until those same Persians destroyed their kingdom somewhere around 600 AD).

And several Ghassanid as well as Lakhmid kings had the desire to conquer and control the entire Arabian Peninsula and unite all Arabs under their rule. If Mohammed became either a Jacobite or Nestorian Christian, then, given what he did in OTL, it is not at all unlikely that he will unite the Arabs and inspire them to overthrow the Persians and Byzantines that oppress them and conquer the pagan parts of the Arabian Peninsula for 'the One True Faith'.

In that scenario, it would be interesting to see what he does next - will he preach Arab chauvinism and brotherhood, or will he extrapolate this "standing up for the oppressed" to the many non-Arab followers that his Church has?

If he would have become Nestorian, then this would give him a good reason to call his followers to liberate the oppressed Nestorians in the Persian Empire. And in the case he became a Jacobite, he'd propably do the same, but then with the Byzantine Empire.

...and then it would also be very interesting to see how he will treat the Arab Christians that follow a different Church and teachings; will he acknowledge these other Christians as real Christians, or will he reject their faith to the extent that he defines them as heretics or infidels?

Or will he just reject some of their teachings, and say "you have your faith, and I have mine"?

Or will he just say that in the end, no human being knows the Truth, and that that makes all our beliefs so flawed that none can claim that his teachings and dogma's are superior to those of all others?

..
And then there is of course also the possebility that he goes his own way, and establishes a new sect or Church alltogether.

That would propably result in some Church of Arabia, or if he is less successful, a Christian community that's not unlike the Maronites.

What this Church will look like depends on what traditions and teachings will influence Mohammed's teachings.

The Byzantine Empire had exiled many small heretical sects to Mesopotamia and Arabia, and because of that, there were several small Christian and pseudo-Christian sects in the Hijaz at the time. And all of these sects could affect Mohammed and his teachings in some way.

And then, according to some 6th century Christian writers (IIRC), there was also an Arab monotheistic sect somewhere in the Hijaz that had adopted much of the religious laws of the Jews, and sought to follow the religion of Abraham.

If this sect indeed existed (which is not unlikely), then it is also quite likely that a Christian Mohammed would adopt some of their teachings, and maybe even absorbs the movement at some point.

...and in that scenario, you'd propably get some kind of "Islamochristianity" that is quite different from the other branches of Christianity. This type of Christianity would most propably focus on Ishmael as an important character, and the things that God had promised his descendants, and it would propably observe many of the Mosaic laws as well, although this would not make them unique among Christians, as the Coptic and Ethiopian Christians also observe many of these laws.

MrHola said:

What would be consequences if Prophet Mohammed confessed to Christianity before he founded Islam (before he heard the instructions of Allah)?

Click to expand...

lol. There's a book about that somewhere.
Anyway, if Mohammad converted to Christianity he would have founded a new branch (which may have not been very different from the others) and nothing would be different.
Except that the Muslims would be called "Muhamid Christians" or somethin'.

Ran Exilis said:

according to some 6th century Christian writers (IIRC), there was also an Arab monotheistic sect somewhere in the Hijaz that had adopted much of the religious laws of the Jews, and sought to follow the religion of Abraham.

Click to expand...

There were Jewish Arab tribes at the penninsula. Mohammad even had some Jewish teachers.

Empror Mike said:

There were Jewish Arab tribes at the penninsula. Mohammad even had some Jewish teachers.

Click to expand...

True, but this sect was said to be different from the Jewish religion,
and it was mentioned as an Arab sect that focused on Abraham and Ishmael.

Nonetheless, you're most propably right that that sect was heavily influenced by Judaism.

There would be a large Christian population to all Asia till India and China...
No need for Crusades then...

I simply can't see Muhammad simply buying into any of the established sects, and furthermore I don't think any of the established sects would have had the same popularity among the Arabs or the Iranians that Islam did. After all, Islam harmonizes heterodox Christianity with a rabbinic approach to the law, adds a liberal dose of Iranian mysticism, packages it with a light veneer of Arabian rituals and traditions, and expresses it in the poetic language of the Bedouin. Islamic ritual combines the most vital elements of Jewish, Zoroastrian, Christian, and pagan Arab ritual. Ritual purity during prayer is essential to both Zoroastrianism and Judaism. Like the Zoroastrians, Muslims pray five times a day. Prostration during prayer in a common direction (the qibla) were the common practice in the Syrian Church at the time of Muhammad. The cult of the martyrs was an essential part of Coptic Christianity and remains so to this day. Even Islamic Christology appears quite similar to the Christology of heterodox Christian sects known from the region.

You might almost say that Islam was designed to appeal to people from these backgrounds, as each of them would find something familiar in the new religion. Christianity had mixed success in the extreme north and south of the peninsula, but nothing approaching the impact of Islam, precisely because it was so alien and did not appeal to the people living in the region. Only a religion as heterogeneous as Islam could have bound together such a large region.

Don_Giorgio said:

No need for Crusades then...

Click to expand...

Do you think the Catholic or Orthodox Churches would sit idly as a probable heresy spreads like wildfire to their south and east? It's not like heretics were treated with any more leniency than heathens.

Wait a minute. If Mohammad first become a Christian and then had his visit from Gabe to receive the Q'uran and found a definitiely non-trinitarian monothesitc faith, he would he a heretic rather than an infidel. It is more likely the Theology and Christology of Islam would become more widely understood in the west, if for no other reason than many apologies would be written by church scholars attacking Islam and explaining why it is not a legitimate form of Christianity. Or, it might grow in power and importance to the point that it influences Christian doctrine. Either way, I believe Islam would be much better understood in the west. Today Islam would be perhaps more like Mormonism in its relationship to little "o" orthodox Christianity - recognized as a faith which stemmed from Christianity and has more defined historical roots in Christianity, but which is nonetheless not Christian.

A lot would depend on how Mohammad presented his conversion to/creation of Islam - as an addition to the Christian Scripture or a Replacement of it.

But I defer to Leo as he obviosuly knows it all and I am but a worm. Seriously.

What would be consequences if Prophet Mohammed confessed to Christianity before he founded Islam (before he heard the instructions of Allah)?

Click to expand...

Is it just me that finds this to be in amazingly bad taste?

Tielhard said:

Is it just me that finds this to be in amazingly bad taste?

Click to expand...

Why? Mohammad had to convert from something to establish Islam. Perhaps he was called by God to recite the Q'uran, perhaps not. But it does create some very interesting options for the evolution of religion and culture in the west. And so far nobody has used this as a springboard to attack other people's religion. Even Hendryk, who usually jumps at the chance to attack Abrahamic faiths, has only stated the obvious about 1st Millineum Christian orthodoxies.

zoomar said:

A lot would depend on how Mohammad presented his conversion to/creation of Islam - as an addition to the Christian Scripture or a Replacement of it.

Click to expand...

Muhammad considered Islam to be the religion of Abraham and his descendants the Hebrews until Christ came along, whereupon God furnished him with another revelation, which was authoritative until Muhammad came along. In his view, Christians who declined to accept Muhammad's message and his status as a prophet of God were schismatics (!), and Jews who declined to accept either Jesus or Muhammad were guilty of the same twice over (!!).

The Qur'an clearly identifies itself as the legitimate successor to the earlier scriptures - called the Torah (Tawrat), the Gospels (Injil), and a third book which is probably the Psalms (Zabur). These are all considered revealed books and legitimate for spiritual guidance, except where they disagree with the Qur'an, in which case the text is clearly corrupt.

Actually, for most of history, Westerners couldn't decide whether Islam was some kind of Christian heresy (hence "Mohammedanism") or just plain idolatry. It was widely believed throughout the western world that the Kaaba contained an idol of the moon named Termagant or Tervagant (probably a corruption of Trivagante, the "thrice wandering" moon, which went by the names Luna in the heavens, Diana on earth, and Proserpina in the underworld) to which the Muslims prostrated in prayer. In the Chanson de Roland, the Muslims are depicted as following a blasphemous trinity of Apollo, Tervagant, and Mohammad.

This myth is perpetuated even today by Jack Chick, among others. For my money, the funniest thing is that, of all the possible accusations one could levy at Islam, idolatry is just about the most nonsensical, given how iconoclastic Muslims are.

Leo Caesius said:

Muhammad considered Islam to be the religion of Abraham and his descendants the Hebrews until Christ came along, whereupon God furnished him with another revelation, which was authoritative until Muhammad came along. In his view, Christians who declined to accept Muhammad's message and his status as a prophet of God were schismatics (!), and Jews who declined to accept either Jesus or Muhammad were guilty of the same twice over (!!).

The Qur'an clearly identifies itself as the legitimate successor to the earlier scriptures - called the Torah (Tawrat), the Gospels (Injil), and a third book which is probably the Psalms (Zabur). These are all considered revealed books and legitimate for spiritual guidance, except where they disagree with the Qur'an, in which case the text is clearly corrupt.

Actually, for most of history, Westerners couldn't decide whether Islam was some kind of Christian heresy (hence "Mohammedanism") or just plain idolatry. It was widely believed throughout the western world that the Kaaba contained an idol of the moon named Termagant or Tervagant (probably a corruption of Trivagante, the "thrice wandering" moon, which went by the names Luna in the heavens, Diana on earth, and Proserpina in the underworld) to which the Muslims prostrated in prayer. In the Chanson de Roland, the Muslims are depicted as following a blasphemous trinity of Apollo, Tervagant, and Mohammad.

This myth is perpetuated even today by Jack Chick, among others. For my money, the funniest thing is that, of all the possible accusations one could levy at Islam, idolatry is just about the most nonsensical, given how iconoclastic Muslims are.

Click to expand...

Assuming the Kaaba was there before Muhammed, what were the citizens of Mecca doing with it?

Leo Caesius said:

Actually, for most of history, Westerners couldn't decide whether Islam was some kind of Christian heresy (hence "Mohammedanism") or just plain idolatry. .

Click to expand...

Interesting. I just put that term down to ignorance, stemming from the notion that Moslims worshipped Mohammad in the same way Christians worshipped Jesus.

Quiet_Man said:

Assuming the Kaaba was there before Muhammed, what were the citizens of Mecca doing with it?

Click to expand...

They were performing something called "the Hajj," which involved traveling to the Kaaba and circling it seven times, before prostrating in prayer before it. This was also the best time to buy and sell goods in Mecca.

At the time, the Kaaba was filled with idols and religious icons, which were all removed, save for two - a fresco of the Virgin Mary and the Baby Jesus, and an icon of an old man thought to be Abraham. Eventually those were removed, too.

Leo Caesius said:

They were performing something called "the Hajj," which involved traveling to the Kaaba and circling it seven times, before prostrating in prayer before it. This was also the best time to buy and sell goods in Mecca.

At the time, the Kaaba was filled with idols and religious icons, which were all removed, save for two - a fresco of the Virgin Mary and the Baby Jesus, and an icon of an old man thought to be Abraham. Eventually those were removed, too.

Click to expand...

So it was a pagan shrine then? Seems a little odd that Muhammed would even leave it standing, or am I thinking of the early Israeli idea of herem?

Quiet_Man said:

So it was a pagan shrine then? Seems a little odd that Muhammed would even leave it standing, or am I thinking of the early Israeli idea of herem?

Click to expand...

There is a belief that the Kaaba marked the location where Abraham brought his son for the sacrifice. I'm not sure whether this belief originated with Muhammad or he merely employed it for his own purposes, but he certainly claimed that he was cleansing it and restoring it to its original function (just as Christ chased the money changers from the Temple).

The Muslims weren't really into destroying pagan centers of worship. Their general MO was to coopt them and turn them into mosques.

Leo Caesius said:

There is a belief that the Kaaba marked the location where Abraham brought his son for the sacrifice. I'm not sure whether this belief originated with Muhammad or he merely employed it for his own purposes, but he certainly claimed that he was cleansing it and restoring it to its original function (just as Christ chased the money changers from the Temple).

The Muslims weren't really into destroying pagan centers of worship. Their general MO was to coopt them and turn them into mosques.

Click to expand...

Seems an odd belief as I'm fairly sure the Jews believed it was Mount Moriah. I figure they'd know if anyone did. Still co-opting local beliefs and (name your religion) adapting them is an old trick.