A Light Shines East: The World of a Christian Persia

Fairly significant retcon; the Restored Nazarene Church no longer exists. I had them split from the Apostolic Church over the OTL doctrine of original sin, which wouldn’t exist in the cultural milieu of TTL’s Christendom(although the idea of universal sin and redemption is still present in the Apostolic Church, since it dates back to Paul). Instead, the Arabs will be Ebionites(Christians who still followed Jewish law) since they seem to have been fairly popular in the Arabian peninsula IOTL and fit very well into a world where Christianity has a decidedly Near Eastern character. Everything else about the rise of Abu Yusuf and his empire will stay the same.
The Apostolic Church will go through all the same Christological debates that the Catholic and Orthodox Churches went through IOTL, before finally settling on Nestorianism, since it was popular in the Persian empire IOTL.

Probably just the Ebionite Church. It should be noted that the Ebionite Church has no centralized leadership like the Apostolics have with the Patriarch of Ctesiphon. Instead, they have a council of bishops who are charged with interpreting, debating, and enforcing(or attempting to enforce) the laws of the Bible.
Oh.

Well, that throws a wrench into what I thought this timeline was going to be.

It's your story, though. You have a right to create it as you please.
 
Wouldn't the 'three big Abrahamic religions' be Christianity (with both it's Ebionite and Apostolic branches), Zoroastrianism, which stays the majority faith of Armenia since it's seen ITTL as part of the Abrahamic religious tradition, and Judaism due to both Rabbinical Judaism as well as Ethiopia being Jewish ITTL? @danteheadman? I'm asking since how you worded it made it more sound like the two branches were different faiths than how they seem to be the saim religion ITTL but different denominations.
Yeah I was thinking of Judaism and the two different Christian churches and kind of skipped over Zoroastrianism haha

I wonder what the relationship there would be like, now that you mention it.
That actually does make me wonder just how Armenian Zoroastrianism will develop ITTL with ITTL Christianity almost certainly influencing it, since it'll be the main religion of the region after the Palmyrian Empire is kicked to Anatolia. I think what Zoroastrian scholars argue/claim in reaction to arguments by Apostolic Christianity and Christianity will in general of superseding Zoroastrianism will be the denial by Zoroastrians of the position that Jesus is the Saoshyant that ITTL Christianity adopted from what I understand on the matter as it became increasingly Persianized. Just as Judaism denies the position that Jesus is the Messiah.
Zoroastrianism positing itself as "the Messiah / Saoshyant hasn't come yet, and Mosaic law doesn't apply"? I can see that syncretism in the melding of the Jewish Moshiach and

Tbh I don't know anything about Zoroastrian daily practice. Do they have religious law like Judaism and the other Abrahamic religions?
The Ebionite Church I know is definately not Trinitarian as we understand the matter with its position of adoptionism. Though that has me wondering...did ITTL Ebionite Church adopt the pseudo-dualism that ITTL Apostolic Church adopted for the Problem of Evil? I'm asking since it isn't based upon the free will conception of evil that the original idea of the True Nazarene Church held. Or is their position on the Problem of Evil and the nature of Satan perhaps closer to Judaism's historical view of Satan as a 'prosecutor' of God to test humanity as I understand the matter.
I don't think that OTL Ebionites were a single thing with a single coherent theology. But I also don't know about the "normative Ebionite" opinion on this!
There were Hellenistic influences in the Parthian Empire IOTL and precedent going back to Paul, so I’s say the Trinity still exists. Plus, we’ve already established that the Apostolic Church is dyophysite, which basically requires a trinity. You’re right that the Ebionites are staunchly non-trinitarian, though. As for your question about Satan, in the Apostolic Church he’s viewed as being more akin to Ahriman in Zoroastrianism(i.e. a cosmic force of evil capable of legitimately opposing God/Christ, although ultimately still weaker) while the Ebionites are closer to the Jewish view of God’s prosecutor.
Dyophysitism doesn't require a trinity. The second divine nature of Jesus could be subordinate to God, following the model of the earlier Two Powers theology (Jesus as the "Angel of the Lord" and God's right hand). Perhaps ITLL for the syncretically minded Apostolics he could be seen as an emanation of Ahura Mazda, perhaps as one of (or all of??) the Asa Spenta?
 
@Merovingian can I write apocrypha for your TL? I have a couple of ideas for in-universe religious and philosophicsl texts that I want to toy around with. Like a debate between different Christian and/or Jewish scholars, or a snippet of Ebionite Talmud.
 
Oh.

Well, that throws a wrench into what I thought this timeline was going to be.

It's your story, though. You have a right to create it as you please.
Same feeling

My only grip with it really is that I actually think the rationale for the Nazarene Church was coherent even without a figure like Paul

Like Persian Christianity being dualist and diverging a lot from the OTL one is natural and the response for that being trying to go back to how Early Christianity was makes sense considering thats precisely what Protestantism did IOTL and seeing the arabs are christians here they doing that instead sounds like a logic conclusion

I also dont think the Original Sin part is that much of a issue since even without that doctrine being preached by the roman christians like IOTL the fact is that sin was seen as universal by Judaism & Early Christianity and a result of Adam & Eve eating the fruit in Genesis, so the arab christians coming to that conclusion as a result of rejecting the persian canon is very sound

However not only it is his story and he can take it in whatever direction he wants, but the arabs converting to Ebionite Christianity makes even more sense since...well, they were the christians that were actually there IOTL and so the "Alt Islam" being ebionite is also perfectly logical

So uhhh yeah conflicted feelings, not because the author is doing anything wrong hut because everything he did so far works so well, like both the original storyline and the retcon(or even a weird combination of the two) are possible in my opinion and I could see happening

Regardless, Im still very much enjoying the story and the discussion about where "Ebionite Islam" would fit with the other abrahamic religions ITTL and the idea of it being seen as still Judaism but with a whole different Torah fascinates me
 
From what I can tell @Aluma it's more 'Christianity but with a different interpretation of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God as well as keeping to Mosaic law" than "judaism with a different Torah" as it still sees Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Son of God (if anti-Trinitarian and adoptionist unlike both most OTL Christian denominations and ITTL Apostolic Church) as the fundemental break in regards to Christianity and Judaism is the argument on if Jesus is the Messiah or not. Which honestly is just as fascinating, if not more, a divergence from OTL.

That actually makes me wonder...Does that mean that ITTL Ebionite Church follows Kosher law in regards to their diets as they still follow Mosaic law? If so that may also make it generally easier for Jews ITTL 'Christendom' to recieve their dietary needs from butchers and such even outside of the Jewish community in majority Ebionite Christian regions as food would always be expected to follow Kosher food quidelines.
 
Last edited:
And speaking of which, what lesser branches of Christianity would be there aside from Apostolics and Ebionites? Also, "Ebionite" is IIRC an exonym, so maybe the Ebionite Christians could still call themselves the "Restored Nazarene Church"?
 
Last edited:
How would the Ebionites interpret Acts 10? That chapter is often held up as the beginning of the conversion of the Gentiles, as well as one of the justifications for releasing Christians from Jewish dietary law.
 
@Derekc2 @Aluma for a group like the Ebionites, it's not necessarily clear whether they're "Christianity with halacha" or "Judaism with Jesus." I guess it depends on what they believe about the metaphysical structure of God. If Apostolic is Trinitarian, then Judaism would double down on strict monotheism. And if that's the case, then what do the Ebionites believe?
That actually makes me wonder...Does that mean that ITTL Ebionite Church follows Kosher law in regards to their diets as they still follow Mosaic law? If so that may also make it generally easier for Jews ITTL 'Christendom' to recieve their dietary needs from butchers and such even outside of the Jewish community in majority Ebionite Christian regions as food would always be expected to follow Kosher food quidelines.
Haha this was the exact question I wanted to explore in an apocrypha section of "Yathribi Talmud." Debates over Kashrut in light of Mathew 15:8 would be interesting!

I bet that there would be differences, at least. So much of what Kashrut rules are was outlined and elucidated in the Talmud. A different Talmud opens the door to different rules and disagreements on their validity. Regardless, if Ebionites are Trinitarian, then Jewish Kashrut would not accept their rulings as legitimate, even if the rulings were similar.

I wonder when the "Yathribi Talmud" would be written, too. The compilation of the Jerusalem Talmud was completed in about 350-400 CE. The Babylonian Talmud (the one which all OTL Orthodox Jewish movements have and historically recognized as the more legitimate source of halacha) was compiled in the 500s. Would there be Ebionite Talmudic Academies in Arabia before Abu Yusuf?
 
Oh.

Well, that throws a wrench into what I thought this timeline was going to be.

It's your story, though. You have a right to create it as you please.
Same feeling

My only grip with it really is that I actually think the rationale for the Nazarene Church was coherent even without a figure like Paul

Like Persian Christianity being dualist and diverging a lot from the OTL one is natural and the response for that being trying to go back to how Early Christianity was makes sense considering thats precisely what Protestantism did IOTL and seeing the arabs are christians here they doing that instead sounds like a logic conclusion

I also dont think the Original Sin part is that much of a issue since even without that doctrine being preached by the roman christians like IOTL the fact is that sin was seen as universal by Judaism & Early Christianity and a result of Adam & Eve eating the fruit in Genesis, so the arab christians coming to that conclusion as a result of rejecting the persian canon is very sound

However not only it is his story and he can take it in whatever direction he wants, but the arabs converting to Ebionite Christianity makes even more sense since...well, they were the christians that were actually there IOTL and so the "Alt Islam" being ebionite is also perfectly logical

So uhhh yeah conflicted feelings, not because the author is doing anything wrong hut because everything he did so far works so well, like both the original storyline and the retcon(or even a weird combination of the two) are possible in my opinion and I could see happening

Regardless, Im still very much enjoying the story and the discussion about where "Ebionite Islam" would fit with the other abrahamic religions ITTL and the idea of it being seen as still Judaism but with a whole different Torah fascinates me
Now that you mention it, it’s possible that the Restored Nazarene and Ebionite Churches are both present in the Arabian peninsula, with the Restored Nazarenes predominating in major urban centers while Ebionitism is more popular among the bedouins. Since Abu Yusuf’s empire will be largely dominated by bedouin tribes, the Ebionites will be the ones to spread throughout the Near East. However, the Restored Nazarenes could persist as a mainly urban, occasionally persecuted minority similar to the Jews IOTL. Maybe later on once Ebionite Spain starts to explore the New World, we could see a group of Restored Nazarenes setting up shop in Brazil or Argentina similar to how the Puritans and Quakers settled the English colonies IOTL, although I’m less sure whether this will happen.
From what I can tell @Aluma it's more 'Christianity but with a different interpretation of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God as well as keeping to Mosaic law" than "judaism with a different Torah" as it still sees Jesus Christ as the Messiah and Son of God (if anti-Trinitarian and adoptionist unlike both most OTL Christian denominations and ITTL Apostolic Church) as the fundemental break in regards to Christianity and Judaism is the argument on if Jesus is the Messiah or not. Which honestly is just as fascinating, if not more, a divergence from OTL.

That actually makes me wonder...Does that mean that ITTL Ebionite Church follows Kosher law in regards to their diets as they still follow Mosaic law? If so that may also make it generally easier for Jews ITTL 'Christendom' to recieve their dietary needs from butchers and such even outside of the Jewish community in majority Ebionite Christian regions as food would always be expected to follow Kosher food quidelines.
The Ebionites do follow Kosher dietary laws(with maybe a few differences, since they use a different Talmud).
Dyophysitism doesn't require a trinity. The second divine nature of Jesus could be subordinate to God, following the model of the earlier Two Powers theology (Jesus as the "Angel of the Lord" and God's right hand). Perhaps ITLL for the syncretically minded Apostolics he could be seen as an emanation of Ahura Mazda, perhaps as one of (or all of??) the Asa Spenta?
Yeah, but if Jesus is both God and man, and the Holy Spirit is in the Bible, it‘s still pretty easy to come to the doctrine of the Trinity as a conclusion.
And speaking of which, what lesser branches of Christianity would be there aside from Apostolics and Ebionites? Also, "Ebionite" is IIRC an exonym, so maybe the Ebionite Christians could still call themselves the "Restored Nazarene Church"?
There is a relatively small but still large enough to be noticed Gnostic community based around Alexandria. The Apostolic Church also went through a lot of the same Christological debates as OTL, so there are several miaphysite/Nestorian/other communities scattered about. There’s also probably some sect that tried to further syncretize Christianity with Zoroastrianism(i.e. Jesus as an Amesha Spenta, yasna as part of their church services). The Ebionites will call themselves Ebionites, but I might reuse the name “Restored Nazarene Church” for some other group later on.

@Derekc2 @Aluma for a group like the Ebionites, it's not necessarily clear whether they're "Christianity with halacha" or "Judaism with Jesus." I guess it depends on what they believe about the metaphysical structure of God. If Apostolic is Trinitarian, then Judaism would double down on strict monotheism. And if that's the case, then what do the Ebionites believe?
The Ebionites lean more towards “Christians with Halacha“ than “Jews with Jesus”, since they acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah and consider themselves Christians. However, they don’t believe in the Trinity, instead believing that Jesus was an ordinary man who became the adopted Son of God at his baptism and considered him to be a prophet in the tradition of Moses rather than a divine figure.
Haha this was the exact question I wanted to explore in an apocrypha section of "Yathribi Talmud." Debates over Kashrut in light of Mathew 15:8 would be interesting!

I bet that there would be differences, at least. So much of what Kashrut rules are was outlined and elucidated in the Talmud. A different Talmud opens the door to different rules and disagreements on their validity. Regardless, if Ebionites are Trinitarian, then Jewish Kashrut would not accept their rulings as legitimate, even if the rulings were similar.

I wonder when the "Yathribi Talmud" would be written, too. The compilation of the Jerusalem Talmud was completed in about 350-400 CE. The Babylonian Talmud (the one which all OTL Orthodox Jewish movements have and historically recognized as the more legitimate source of halacha) was compiled in the 500s. Would there be Ebionite Talmudic Academies in Arabia before Abu Yusuf?
The Ebionite Talmud will most likely be compiled under Abu Yusuf, but being built on earlier tradition dating back to the first introduction of Ebionites Christianity to Arabia. Although they are not trinitarian, Jews will still not accept their rulings as legitimate because they see themselves as Christians first and foremost.
How would the Ebionites interpret Acts 10? That chapter is often held up as the beginning of the conversion of the Gentiles, as well as one of the justifications for releasing Christians from Jewish dietary law.
The Ebionites have a different canon, and so do not recognize the Acts of the Apostles anyway.
 
Yeah, but if Jesus is both God and man, and the Holy Spirit is in the Bible, it‘s still pretty easy to come to the doctrine of the Trinity as a conclusion.
But does Jesus say that he is God? I don't think that the CNT OTL makes that claim explicit. It was something elucidated by the Church Fathers based on what Paul wrote, and was contested in the early Church by e.g. Arianism.

AFAIK OTL Trinitarianism ("high Christology") developed over time as Greek Christians grappled with the low Christology of "Jesus is important and divine but we aren't sure exactly how," and it was a way for polytheistic converts to a monotheistic religion to square the circle of certain Hellenistic theological assumptions about God(s) incarnating into mortal bodies. Same with the adoption of iconography in worship, which built on the Hellenistic tradition of idols and understood to be permitted in specific limited ways ("Jesus was God manifest in the shape of a man, so bowing towards images of that man cannot be idolatry" etc.) and so on.

Are the Apostolic Church Fathers Trinitarian? I thought they were Adoptionist, which is a non-Trinitarian theology?
The Apostolic Church also went through a lot of the same Christological debates as OTL, so there are several miaphysite/Nestorian/other communities scattered about. There’s also probably some sect that tried to further syncretize Christianity with Zoroastrianism(i.e. Jesus as an Amesha Spenta, yasna as part of their church services). The Ebionites will call themselves Ebionites, but I might reuse the name “Restored Nazarene Church” for some other group later on.
... huh. Okay. Your story, you write it in the way that makes the most sense to you.
The Ebionites do follow Kosher dietary laws(with maybe a few differences, since they use a different Talmud).
....
The Ebionite Talmud will most likely be compiled under Abu Yusuf, but being built on earlier tradition dating back to the first introduction of Ebionites Christianity to Arabia. Although they are not trinitarian, Jews will still not accept their rulings as legitimate because they see themselves as Christians first and foremost.
...
The Ebionites have a different canon, and so do not recognize the Acts of the Apostles anyanyway.
Jews will definitely take note of the praxis and doxa of the Ebionites and make their own decisions about what the Ebionites are, within a Jewish halachic framework, despite their self-identification as one thing or another; look at OTL rejection of "Messianic Jews" based on their essentially-Protestant Christian theology.

Remember that Trinitarianism is seen as straight up polytheism, three gods in a trenchcoat, by OTL Jewish halacha. So if the Ebionites are monotheistic and not Trinitarian, then they will probably not be perceived as Christians by Jews ITTL. Instead, they will be seen more like Muslims are OTL (i.e., "Noahide-approved & fully legitimate for non-Jews" by the ecumenical and lenient, "at least they're not idolaters" by the parochial and stringent).

Or - and this is the truly radical improbability, and contingent on the Ebionite Talmud being very similar to normative Jewish halacha despite their modified CNT - like Chabad Messianics are OTL (i.e. somewhere on a continuum between "sketchy and weird, but still a Jewish enough heresy" to "the religion most similar to Judaism").

ITTL Judaism's acceptance of their halachic rulings will depend on where on that spectrum from "a Jewish heresy" to "polytheism pretending to be monotheism".
 
But does Jesus say that he is God? I don't think that the CNT OTL makes that claim explicit. It was something elucidated by the Church Fathers based on what Paul wrote, and was contested in the early Church by e.g. Arianism.

AFAIK OTL Trinitarianism ("high Christology") developed over time as Greek Christians grappled with the low Christology of "Jesus is important and divine but we aren't sure exactly how," and it was a way for polytheistic converts to a monotheistic religion to square the circle of certain Hellenistic theological assumptions about God(s) incarnating into mortal bodies. Same with the adoption of iconography in worship, which built on the Hellenistic tradition of idols and understood to be permitted in specific limited ways ("Jesus was God manifest in the shape of a man, so bowing towards images of that man cannot be idolatry" etc.) and so on.
The Parthian Empire’s state religion was essentially a Hellenistic take on the Mesopotamian myths with some Zoroastrianism in there, so it’s not unlikely that the doctrine of the Trinity might still develop.
Are the Apostolic Church Fathers Trinitarian? I thought they were Adoptionist, which is a non-Trinitarian theology?
The Apostolic Church is trinitarian. It’s the Ebionites who are adoptionist.
Jews will definitely take note of the praxis and doxa of the Ebionites and make their own decisions about what the Ebionites are, within a Jewish halachic framework, despite their self-identification as one thing or another; look at OTL rejection of "Messianic Jews" based on their essentially-Protestant Christian theology.

Remember that Trinitarianism is seen as straight up polytheism, three gods in a trenchcoat, by OTL Jewish halacha. So if the Ebionites are monotheistic and not Trinitarian, then they will probably not be perceived as Christians by Jews ITTL. Instead, they will be seen more like Muslims are OTL (i.e., "Noahide-approved & fully legitimate for non-Jews" by the ecumenical and lenient, "at least they're not idolaters" by the parochial and stringent).

Or - and this is the truly radical improbability, and contingent on the Ebionite Talmud being very similar to normative Jewish halacha despite their modified CNT - like Chabad Messianics are OTL (i.e. somewhere on a continuum between "sketchy and weird, but still a Jewish enough heresy" to "the religion most similar to Judaism").

ITTL Judaism's acceptance of their halachic rulings will depend on where on that spectrum from "a Jewish heresy" to "polytheism pretending to be monotheism".
In that case, the Ebionites will probably be seen as a Jewish heresy while the Apostolics are seen as polytheists pretending to be monotheists. They(the Ebionites) will probably be treated similar to how groups like the Sabbateans or Chabad Messianics IOTL.
 
The Parthian Empire’s state religion was essentially a Hellenistic take on the Mesopotamian myths with some Zoroastrianism in there, so it’s not unlikely that the doctrine of the Trinity might still develop.

The Apostolic Church is trinitarian. It’s the Ebionites who are adoptionist.
Oh that makes sense.
In that case, the Ebionites will probably be seen as a Jewish heresy while the Apostolics are seen as polytheists pretending to be monotheists. They(the Ebionites) will probably be treated similar to how groups like the Sabbateans or Chabad Messianics IOTL.
So their Talmud must track very closely with the Babylonian one! Interesting. Abu Yusuf must have had a copy during his compilation, or at least a Jewish scholar who converted. Interesting! The medieval theological debates must be extremely spicy.
 
Oh that makes sense.

So their Talmud must track very closely with the Babylonian one! Interesting. Abu Yusuf must have had a copy during his compilation, or at least a Jewish scholar who converted. Interesting! The medieval theological debates must be extremely spicy.
Who says that there will even be a Babylonian Talmud ITTL. By the time it was codified IOTL, the butterflies have been flapping their wings for long enough that the Babylonian Talmud as we know most likely will not exist. More likely than not, there will be a Persian Talmud used by Rabbinical Jews and an Ethiopian Talmud used by Haymanot Jews(and an Arabian Talmud used by Ebionites).
 
So I have ideas specifically for two apocrypha: a portion of a daf of Talmud Yathribi about kashrut, and a medieval responsa about the status of Ebionites in Jewish halacha written by an ITTL Maimonides-equivalent (Jewish scholar working for an Ebionite monarchy in Iberia).
Who says that there will even be a Babylonian Talmud ITTL. By the time it was codified IOTL, the butterflies have been flapping their wings for long enough that the Babylonian Talmud as we know most likely will not exist. More likely than not, there will be a Persian Talmud used by Rabbinical Jews and an Ethiopian Talmud used by Haymanot Jews(and an Arabian Talmud used by Ebionites).
The Babylonian Talmud was written in Mesopotamia because there had been a thriving Jewish community there for centuries, dating back to the Babylonian captivity (which is why the region is called "Babylonia," Bavel, in Hebrew). Here is a pretty good Wiki article about it. And since the Christian-Persian Empire would control Mesopotamia during the relevant period of time, it'd be strange for the normative body of Halacha to be written elsewhere unless there'd be good reason to do so. Like direct intervention by the Persian emperors.

The Palestinian Talmud likewise was written by the Jews who remained in the Holy Land, primarily in the Galilee. I doubt that can be butterflied away unless the Romans or Palmyreans get serious about ethnic cleansing.

But I completely forgot about the Haymanot!! You wrote that Ethiopia became Jewish during the period of Geonim codifying the Talmud. Oh man, and now you're saying that they'd have their own Talmud! There's fourth codification of Talmud!?

Judaism will look radically different ITTL: two independent bodies of normative Halacha, one from Persian-controlled Mesopotamia and one from independent Ethiopia, alongside an empire of Ebionites calling themselves Christians and acting like Jews, and four separate codifications of the Talmud!

The implications are staggering.
 
Wait I just had a thought. How would the Ebionites get a copy of the Mishnah? Why would they? The Mishnah was redacted in the 200s CE and codified Pharisee teachings after the development of Christianity. Would the Ebionites really choose to follow the Mishnah at all?

Hmm.
 
Top