Greatest religions that never were

[Antiochus]

Maybe it is better as another thread, but.. there is a related topic that is neglegated in such threads, I discovered - the holy languages, or traditional languages of use in religions.

Alternate religions, alternate 'holy language'... would a form of persian take the position of latin by example, if europe choose zoroastrism? taoism over south asia, classical chinese a common scholar language?

I think that's an interesting question. If the religion has a holy language then its probably the language of the creator of the religion (as in Islam with Arabic) or the ligua franca of the most powerful country that it becomes dominant in (like Latin in Catholicism). So Latin, Greek, Persian or Mandarin Chinese would probably still be the most important religious languages for lots of religions. If there was no Islam, Arabic would probably not become important (assuming that Arabia does produce another global relgion and Arabia doesn't produced any empire, which it hasn't beyond the original Caliphate)

Monotheism has the advantage of being more easily centralised. Of course all religions are subject to ideological splits or power struggles but with Polytheistic religions its that much easier because you just create a new God or a cult to an already existing God. Monotheism is predisposed to a hierarchy and organised institution, Polytheism is more susceptible to syncretism or even assimilation. If the Gods themselves are at odds chances are their religious followers will be too.

Monotheism is inevitable in the sense that religion is inevitable, stories of heroes quickly become legend, legends are embellished with myth, and over time these myths are accepted as truth. Once you have your Pantheon, unless there's a greater theme of harmony (as often found in creation myths) then yes, the Gods have feuds and wars and one or other will rise to prominence. Sometimes this is even dictated by the social standing of that God's following here on earth, ie between babylonian city-states for example. Henotheism is not necessarily doomed, but it doesn't allow for religious fanaticism in the same way.

Monotheism is in no way inevitable, and most pagan religions have a main god of sorts. Egypt had Amon Ra, Rome had Jupiter (actually in his own trinity as well for a bonus!) and Hinduism has Brahma (again in a trilogy ). The irony with Christianity is that it became like pagan religions to appeal to a wider audience, hence becoming more polytheistic. Unlike Islam or Judaism there are three gods (combined as one), Jesus (who is basically treated this way in most branches of Christianity too) is generally treated as a separate and equal entity, so is the Virgin Mary and a million saints. Lastly, its the largest branch of Christianity and Hinduism is the third largest religion. None of this say monotheism is inevitable to me.

 

[iori]

and Hinduism has Brahma (again in a trilogy ).

As Flocc can attest Hinduism is'nt really a single religion per se, as more of an Umbrella term for many different groups who believe similar things and arelated to each other, hence their are Hindu's who are explicitly Monotheist, and some who are explicity Polytheist while Hinduism as a whole is mostly a mixture of Henotheism, Panentheism and Monism.

Also, Hinduism does not have a single accepted Supreme Diety, rather their are three different deities (Vishnu, Shiva and Shakti) considered to be the supreme god by different groups plus their's the Smarta who consider the latter three to simply be different represntations of the Brahman.

 

[Antiochus]

As Flocc can attest Hinduism is'nt really a single religion per se, as more of an Umbrella term for many different groups who believe similar things and arelated to each other, hence their are Hindu's who are explicitly Monotheist, and some who are explicity Polytheist while Hinduism as a whole is mostly a mixture of Henotheism, Panentheism and Monism.

Also, Hinduism does not have a single accepted Supreme Diety, rather their are three different deities (Vishnu, Shiva and Shakti) considered to be the supreme god by different groups plus their's the Smarta who consider the latter three to simply be different represntations of the Brahman.

I was talking generally, but thanks for expanding. This supports my point, monotheism is not inevitable. If the third most popular religion in the world can operate in such a manner then maybe South Asian history is the best real world environment to compare any possible religions to?

 

[iori]

I was talking generally, but thanks for expanding. This supports my point, monotheism is not inevitable. If the third most popular religion in the world can operate in such a manner then maybe South Asian history is the best real world environment to compare any possible religions to?

Probably, afterall India itself is home to millions of Monotheists from religion both from abroad (Christianity and Islam) and indigenous (Monotheist Hinduism and Sikhism, millions of Polytheists, several million non-theists (Jainism) and of course the various schools of Buddhism which range from Theistic to non-theirstic to Atheist.

 

[Morty Vicar]

Monotheism is in no way inevitable, and most pagan religions have a main god of sorts. Egypt had Amon Ra, Rome had Jupiter (actually in his own trinity as well for a bonus!) and Hinduism has Brahma (again in a trilogy ). The irony with Christianity is that it became like pagan religions to appeal to a wider audience, hence becoming more polytheistic. Unlike Islam or Judaism there are three gods (combined as one), Jesus (who is basically treated this way in most branches of Christianity too) is generally treated as a separate and equal entity, so is the Virgin Mary and a million saints. Lastly, its the largest branch of Christianity and Hinduism is the third largest religion. None of this say monotheism is inevitable to me.

I think you misunderstood my point, I did not mean that Monotheism is inevitably going to trump Polytheism, I meant that the development of monotheistic religions is inevitable in any TL. My earlier point I stated the general reasons why Monotheism has advantages as a political religion or a force for control, but again its no guarantee for success, the Roman Empire is a very good example of a polytheist religion conquering peoples of at least two montheist religions, Zoroastrianism and Judaism.

 

[willbell]

Major Religions I want to come back:
1. Zoroastrianism
2. Everything that was displaced by Islam
3. Everything displaced in China and Japan by Buddhism

 

[iori]

3. Everything displaced in China and Japan by Buddhism

Shinto was really the only thing in Japan when Buddhism was introduced, and it' still exists in large numbers their, albeit, like Buddhism, more as a cultural thing.

Also, in the case of China not only did alot of the things primarily practiced before it surive, they at several points went on to become larger/more important afterwards.

Ultimately Buddhism is'nt really something that displaces other religions, rather in many cases it's either co-existed equally or been blended with the other ones.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Back on my side subject - does Zoroastrians of modern days have to learn the Avestan(?) persian, or the texts can be translated? what is the status of Persian in this religion(s)?

 

[OS fan]

Aristonicus and his Sun Citizens, during the rebellion against Rome taking over the Attalid Kingdom of Pergamum, preached that they should all strive to build a 'Heliopolis' a Sun City where Egalitarian ideals ruled and there were no slaves or slavery.

Now I could simply state that this is a kind of Communism, so it naturally had to fail.

But even if this explanation doesn't satisfy you: It surely was an odd coalition. A self-declared king of royal blood, his courtiers, the army and navy - and on the other side, slaves and philosophers (or should I say, intellectuals?).

 

[willbell]

Shinto was really the only thing in Japan when Buddhism was introduced, and it' still exists in large numbers their, albeit, like Buddhism, more as a cultural thing.

Also, in the case of China not only did alot of the things primarily practiced before it surive, they at several points went on to become larger/more important afterwards.

Ultimately Buddhism is'nt really something that displaces other religions, rather in many cases it's either co-existed equally or been blended with the other ones.

I stand corrected.

 

[Gortian]

Now I could simply state that this is a kind of Communism, so it naturally had to fail.

What the Sun Citizens believed was first and foremost expellling the Romans from Asia and creating a land free of slavery afterwards, or so they were told anyway. Nowhere is mentioned of them overthrowing the nobles or the rich. Perhaps they only meant freeing local people enslaved by Romans. Details are sketchy becuase of contemporary historical apathy.

Any heroic figure who preached equality in a time of hardship has a chance of a cult building around them.

Religion was used before to overthrow the elites and upper classes like the Zoroastrian heresy Mazdakism in Persia which is more along your train of thought.

One of the Roman Empresses attemted to create a religion to rival Christianity based on Apollonius of Tyana a famed 'magician' and wise-man often compared to Jesus in the early centuries of its existence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana

 

[OS fan]

Nowhere is mentioned of them overthrowing the nobles or the rich.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana

I would think that a radical egalitarian society would include this, and I also think that this wouldn't be a good thing.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

I would think that a radical egalitarian society would include this, and I also think that this wouldn't be a good thing.

Actually, on a city scale, it could work, and well. (Not that I agree with communism, but...)

A recent book shown us that egality is quite good for man, actually.. But I am derailing the topic.

 

[Gortian]

Well you may have a point about them overthrowing the nobility as frankly Aristonicus may have had an axe to grind against them as more sided with Rome than with him. If he were to defeat the Romans there would probably be some upper class purges in Pergamum and across the Kingdom.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I kind of like the idea of Robert Owen and Thomas Spence turning early socialism into an anglosphere-based religious movement built around a competed version of Blake's mythology, though Albionism sounds too unoriginal as a name.





Other religions I want to come back in a different TL include:

1. Manichaeism
2. Zoroastrianism
3. Atenism
4. Tengrism
5. Hanifism – An alternate what-if version of islam founded by Musaylimah, with Hanifism not only referring to the pre-islamic Arab monotheists of the same name but also to the Banu Hanifa tribe from which Musaylimah was born into (that takes on a similar role to the Quraish Tribe in real-life), who managed to establish a short-lived kingdom in Al-Yamama. The Hanifs would also form the basis of alternate versions of islam-derived movements such as Baha’ism, Sikhism and others (possibly including the Druze and Alawites), though despite their name I somehow envision the Hanifs to be monolatrists (with gnostic elements) instead of monotheists who believe that the deities of other peoples are aspects of an evil creator god / devil.
6. Greco-Buddhism, maybe also a Syrian-Roman-Buddhism with elements of Mithraism and the cult of Elagabalus.
7. Perhaps a movement or two spawning from Syrian-Egyptian Gnosticism that like Manichaeism and Mandaeism became religions in their own right.

 

[mtg999]

I wondered always about Taoism, a neglected religion here. HOW, and it is even possible, to make it go farther - than China, evengelical? I heard cryptical comments that there IS/was taoism or influences of it in Korea and Japan, but...

What if Buddhism never existed? maybe taoism would have seeped around, a similar niche...

Syncretism of Taoism and Shinto or the related Korean Shamanism?

When I read this thread, I immediately thought of Taoism too.

Most importantly, would it be possible for it to spread outside East Asia?

Basically, how easy would it be to 'divorce' Taoism from a East Asian cultural setting (in much the same way that Buddism can flourish outside South Asia and Christianity outside the Middle East)?

My understanding is that Taoism is the most 'exportable' East Asian religion (in much the same way as Buddism is the most exportable South Asian religion), and does not have the connotations of being an ethnic religion in the way Confucianism and Shinto do.

 

[Antiochus]

I think you misunderstood my point, I did not mean that Monotheism is inevitably going to trump Polytheism, I meant that the development of monotheistic religions is inevitable in any TL. My earlier point I stated the general reasons why Monotheism has advantages as a political religion or a force for control, but again its no guarantee for success, the Roman Empire is a very good example of a polytheist religion conquering peoples of at least two montheist religions, Zoroastrianism and Judaism.

Fair enough. But my point is the strengths of religions like Christianity is their adaptability, which is an intrinsic part of paganism, allowing the pluralism for people to pick their favourite deity to worship. Meanwhile the power structure of monotheism to use religion on a state level was already in use. There is less difference between monotheistic and non-monotheistic religions than many people realise.

Now I could simply state that this is a kind of Communism, so it naturally had to fail.

But even if this explanation doesn't satisfy you: It surely was an odd coalition. A self-declared king of royal blood, his courtiers, the army and navy - and on the other side, slaves and philosophers (or should I say, intellectuals?).

Really?.

That sounds pretty similar to Christianity to me.

I kind of like the idea of Robert Owen and Thomas Spence turning early socialism into an anglosphere-based religious movement built around a competed version of Blake's mythology, though Albionism sounds too unoriginal as a name.






Other religions I want to come back in a different TL include:

1. Manichaeism
2. Zoroastrianism
3. Atenism
4. Tengrism
5. Hanifism – An alternate what-if version of islam founded by Musaylimah, with Hanifism not only referring to the pre-islamic Arab monotheists of the same name but also to the Banu Hanifa tribe from which Musaylimah was born into (that takes on a similar role to the Quraish Tribe in real-life), who managed to establish a short-lived kingdom in Al-Yamama. The Hanifs would also form the basis of alternate versions of islam-derived movements such as Baha’ism, Sikhism and others (possibly including the Druze and Alawites), though despite their name I somehow envision the Hanifs to be monolatrists (with gnostic elements) instead of monotheists who believe that the deities of other peoples are aspects of an evil creator god / devil.
6. Greco-Buddhism, maybe also a Syrian-Roman-Buddhism with elements of Mithraism and the cult of Elagabalus.
7. Perhaps a movement or two spawning from Syrian-Egyptian Gnosticism that like Manichaeism and Mandaeism became religions in their own right.

Yeah that would be awesome. If anyone knows of any good TLs than explore these, could you post a link please?

I can imagine the Greco-Buddhism one developing in a TL with a more successful Bactria, then spreading West into the Middle East and Europe.

When I read this thread, I immediately thought of Taoism too.

Most importantly, would it be possible for it to spread outside East Asia?

Basically, how easy would it be to 'divorce' Taoism from a East Asian cultural setting (in much the same way that Buddism can flourish outside South Asia and Christianity outside the Middle East)?

My understanding is that Taoism is the most 'exportable' East Asian religion (in much the same way as Buddism is the most exportable South Asian religion), and does not have the connotations of being an ethnic religion in the way Confucianism and Shinto do.

If Taoism was the most exportable, then why didn't Taoism gain momentum?

 

[EternalCynic]

When I read this thread, I immediately thought of Taoism too.

Most importantly, would it be possible for it to spread outside East Asia?

Basically, how easy would it be to 'divorce' Taoism from a East Asian cultural setting (in much the same way that Buddism can flourish outside South Asia and Christianity outside the Middle East)?

My understanding is that Taoism is the most 'exportable' East Asian religion (in much the same way as Buddism is the most exportable South Asian religion), and does not have the connotations of being an ethnic religion in the way Confucianism and Shinto do.

Absent imperial conquest or trade routes, religions generally aren't easily mass exported to new lands. So if Taoism were to be exported outside East Asia, you'll need one of these "Chinese ships discover America" TLs.

BTW, Confucianism is not a religion and is a philosophy which is (and has been) exportable. Shinto is like Judaism, too interwoven with a people, to be exported.

 

[Morty Vicar]

Absent imperial conquest or trade routes, religions generally aren't easily mass exported to new lands. So if Taoism were to be exported outside East Asia, you'll need one of these "Chinese ships discover America" TLs.

What about through Ch'ang Ch'un via Genghis Khan? They won't enforce it but under theor protection it could potentially take hold as far west as romania and poland.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

What about through Ch'ang Ch'un via Genghis Khan? They won't enforce it but under theor protection it could potentially take hold as far west as romania and poland.

Maybe a reformism emergeate, syncretism with Mohism(?) Confuscianism could oddly help maybe giving it an appeal..