In the absence of Islam, which religion becomes the primary competitor to Christianity?

[Sārthākā]

Pretty much all of Europe converted the Middle east. African Animism has almost been completely wiped out by Islam and Christianity. And I would not call Buddhism or Hinduism pagan. Along with Confucianism and Taoism. In China and Japan they had had strong states that could stamp out such things. Even then it was a challange.

Christian scripts called Hinduism and Buddhism pagan. By definitions used by the papacy until the 1700s Hinduism and Buddhism were classified as pagan and are still in many places are considered pagan. The same is true with Confucianism and Taoism. However anyways the fact of the matter is that a third of the religious population of world is by Christian definition pagan and remains as such. Hinduism and Buddhism are growing in proportion every year as well in comparison to the declining Christian population. Even with strong states surrounding them, the Baltic's remained pagan until the 1300s. The same is also true for the Caucasus which whole it's ruling dynasties were Christianised, the Islamic conquerors found the population thoroughly pagan in many aspects with the sole exception being Armenia.

All of these places have one thing in common. Accessibility. The Baltic's and the Caucasus, important nexus's of trade and commerce remained mostly pagan for centuries before being brought to heel without a literal desert, sea and mountain range combined separating them. The Arabians have the latter advantage. And the advantage that unlike the Baltic and Caucasian pagans, their religion was consolidating every generation to the point that Rashidun and Abbasid Caliphs feared a pagan revival well into their reigns.

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

Christian scripts called Hinduism and Buddhism pagan. By definitions used by the papacy until the 1700s Hinduism and Buddhism were classified as pagan and are still in many places are considered pagan. The same is true with Confucianism and Taoism. However anyways the fact of the matter is that a third of the religious population of world is by Christian definition pagan and remains as such. Hinduism and Buddhism are growing in proportion every year as well in comparison to the declining Christian population. Even with strong states surrounding them, the Baltic's remained pagan until the 1300s. The same is also true for the Caucasus which whole it's ruling dynasties were Christianised, the Islamic conquerors found the population thoroughly pagan in many aspects with the sole exception being Armenia.

All of these places have one thing in common. Accessibility. The Baltic's and the Caucasus, important nexus's of trade and commerce remained mostly pagan for centuries before being brought to heel without a literal desert, sea and mountain range combined separating them. The Arabians have the latter advantage. And the advantage that unlike the Baltic and Caucasian pagans, their religion was consolidating every generation to the point that Rashidun and Abbasid Caliphs feared a pagan revival well into their reigns.

First lets difine paganism

I define it has a folk religion largely uncentralized that has many gods little to no written holy books and has a focus on nature worship.
Hindusism is holy books I challenge you to find a mainstream Hindu sect who rejects the Vedas the Upanishads ect ect.

Buddhism has a holy book written every early one and passed along. Buddhism is largely neutral on the god subject, Infact many theologians wrote texts trying to refute such ideas.

Your points about those holdouts does not prove that Paganism could hold out forever. It still died out in the Baltic. the economic and Political advantage of Christianity were to good to pass up. Simply Axial age religions seem to kill off older ones.

 

[Goldensilver81]

First lets difine paganism

I define it has a folk religion largely uncentralized that has many gods little to no written holy books and has a focus on nature worship.
Hindusism is holy books I challenge you to find a mainstream Hindu sect who rejects the Vedas the Upanishads ect ect.

Buddhism has a holy book written every early one and passed along. Buddhism is largely neutral on the god subject, Infact many theologians wrote texts trying to refute such ideas.

Your points about those holdouts does not prove that Paganism could hold out forever. It still died out in the Baltic. the economic and Political advantage of Christianity were to good to pass up. Simply Axial age religions seem to kill off older ones.

But who is to say a new religión doesn't form based ala re-formed paganism on them or heck old ones come many mentioned how a horde could come from central asia and settle in ukraine making the rus and maybe the Baltic buddhist.

Also paganism was already becoming re estructured in arabia were i can see it survive for centuries if not out reformed arabian paganism / local religion can win out .

 

[Sārthākā]

First lets difine paganism

I define it has a folk religion largely uncentralized that has many gods little to no written holy books and has a focus on nature worship.
Hindusism is holy books I challenge you to find a mainstream Hindu sect who rejects the Vedas the Upanishads ect ect.

Buddhism has a holy book written every early one and passed along. Buddhism is largely neutral on the god subject, Infact many theologians wrote texts trying to refute such ideas

It doesn't matter how you define paganism. It doesn't matter how I define paganism. I doesn't matter how some random guy in times Square or anywhere else defines paganism. It matters how Christianity defines paganism. Nd Christianity defined Hinduism and Buddhism as paganism and to this day while it has de facto taken its words back hasn't done it de jure.

Buddhists do not have a holy book. The triptaka and other scriptures are just that scriptures, which almost every religions, pagan or otherwise have. The Hindus do have a holy book(s) the Buddhists don't.

Your points about those holdouts does not prove that Paganism could hold out forever. It still died out in the Baltic. the economic and Political advantage of Christianity were to good to pass up. Simply Axial age religions seem to kill off older

The economical advantage of Christianity was so great that the Jews of Yemen worked in tandem with the polytheists to throw the Christians out. The southern nabateans found it so useful that they allowed with the interior tribes to push the encroaching Byzantine armies out repeatedly and politely showed the door to almost every Christian missionary group. Christian trade with Arabia diminished in Arabia after the 480s to the point that the merchants of Hejaz and Arabia were turning towards Persia, India and Africa according to the Book of Himyars. All in all not a guarantee and not at all Christian determinism like what many in this thread believe. In fact the book of Himyars mentions that Christian traders and political power in Arabia was minuscule in comparison to the economic power wileded by the iranics Indians and Africans. Again, Christianity is a possibility but it isn't determined not as likely as you make it out to be.

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

It doesn't matter how you define paganism. It doesn't matter how I define paganism. I doesn't matter how some random guy in times Square or anywhere else defines paganism. It matters how Christianity defines paganism. Nd Christianity defined Hinduism and Buddhism as paganism and to this day while it has de facto taken its words back hasn't done it de jure.

Buddhists do not have a holy book. The triptaka and other scriptures are just that scriptures, which almost every religions, pagan or otherwise have. The Hindus do have a holy book(s) the Buddhists don't.

The economical advantage of Christianity was so great that the Jews of Yemen worked in tandem with the polytheists to throw the Christians out. The southern nabateans found it so useful that they allowed with the interior tribes to push the encroaching Byzantine armies out repeatedly and politely showed the door to almost every Christian missionary group. Christian trade with Arabia diminished in Arabia after the 480s to the point that the merchants of Hejaz and Arabia were turning towards Persia, India and Africa according to the Book of Himyars. All in all not a guarantee and not at all Christian determinism like what many in this thread believe. In fact the book of Himyars mentions that Christian traders and political power in Arabia was minuscule in comparison to the economic power wileded by the iranics Indians and Africans. Again, Christianity is a possibility but it isn't determined not as likely as you make it out to be.

Fine you do make a compelling case

 

[Goldensilver81]

It doesn't matter how you define paganism. It doesn't matter how I define paganism. I doesn't matter how some random guy in times Square or anywhere else defines paganism. It matters how Christianity defines paganism. Nd Christianity defined Hinduism and Buddhism as paganism and to this day while it has de facto taken its words back hasn't done it de jure.

Buddhists do not have a holy book. The triptaka and other scriptures are just that scriptures, which almost every religions, pagan or otherwise have. The Hindus do have a holy book(s) the Buddhists don't.

The economical advantage of Christianity was so great that the Jews of Yemen worked in tandem with the polytheists to throw the Christians out. The southern nabateans found it so useful that they allowed with the interior tribes to push the encroaching Byzantine armies out repeatedly and politely showed the door to almost every Christian missionary group. Christian trade with Arabia diminished in Arabia after the 480s to the point that the merchants of Hejaz and Arabia were turning towards Persia, India and Africa according to the Book of Himyars. All in all not a guarantee and not at all Christian determinism like what many in this thread believe. In fact the book of Himyars mentions that Christian traders and political power in Arabia was minuscule in comparison to the economic power wileded by the iranics Indians and Africans. Again, Christianity is a possibility but it isn't determined not as likely as you make it out to be.

The only way I see christianity wining out in yemen it has to be for aksum ( since it's stronger with out islam) and climate change works both ways to creating an empire that it forces them to invest more in a navy re conquering the place and with the persians busy ...well dealing with post khosrow the only obstacle would be the locals .

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

It doesn't matter how you define paganism. It doesn't matter how I define paganism. I doesn't matter how some random guy in times Square or anywhere else defines paganism. It matters how Christianity defines paganism. Nd Christianity defined Hinduism and Buddhism as paganism and to this day while it has de facto taken its words back hasn't done it de jure.

Why are we using Christianity has a baseline here?

 

[Glory2Cabinda]

It doesn't matter how you define paganism. It doesn't matter how I define paganism. I doesn't matter how some random guy in times Square or anywhere else defines paganism. It matters how Christianity defines paganism. Nd Christianity defined Hinduism and Buddhism as paganism and to this day while it has de facto taken its words back hasn't done it de jure.

Buddhists do not have a holy book. The triptaka and other scriptures are just that scriptures, which almost every religions, pagan or otherwise have. The Hindus do have a holy book(s) the Buddhists don't.

The economical advantage of Christianity was so great that the Jews of Yemen worked in tandem with the polytheists to throw the Christians out. The southern nabateans found it so useful that they allowed with the interior tribes to push the encroaching Byzantine armies out repeatedly and politely showed the door to almost every Christian missionary group. Christian trade with Arabia diminished in Arabia after the 480s to the point that the merchants of Hejaz and Arabia were turning towards Persia, India and Africa according to the Book of Himyars. All in all not a guarantee and not at all Christian determinism like what many in this thread believe. In fact the book of Himyars mentions that Christian traders and political power in Arabia was minuscule in comparison to the economic power wileded by the iranics Indians and Africans. Again, Christianity is a possibility but it isn't determined not as likely as you make it out to be.

Modern scholar hows the Quran borrows heavily from the Talmud and Christians folks tales existing at the time. The quran borrowed they Syriac legend of Alexander and many popular eschatological prophecies regarding A Roman Victory over Persia that were in circulation at the tame. The influence was stronger than you think.

 

[Peppe]

I'd probably say other branches of Christianity as being the competition, since without the advent of Islam as a visible threat I imagine ITTL Christianity in general would see a larger and earlier fragmentation, with branches that in OTL died out or were heavily damaged by Islam (like Arian Christianity) remaining real contenders in relation to influence on the wider Christian World

 

[PrinceofApathy]

My mind says Buddhism, but my heart wants Tengriism.

 

[Zireael]

imagine a world where Muhammad had simply never been born. In such a scenario, what religion is most likely to be the most significant competitor to Christianity in terms of number of followers by the year 2021?

• Zoroastrianism: The state religion of the powerful Persian Empire before the Islamic conquest of that country.

As some other posters mentioned, Zoroastrianism didn't spread much if at all.

• Buddhism: Was already spread widely throughout Eurasia well before the point of divergence, and indeed, could plausibly spread in areas of Muslim dominance in our world (Central Asia, the islands comprising OTL Indonesia, etc).

Buddhism spread fast across Asia, and would also appeal to people in European "fringes" (the Anatolia-Ukraine region or Kaukaz). IMHO the most likely option.

• Manichaeism: A dualist, proselytizing faith that was also spread widely throughout Eurasia before the rise of Islam.

The other likely option apart from Buddhism.

• Hinduism: Now, certain scholars might quibble as to what point in history exactly we can truly speak of this as a distinct, coherent religion, but you take the point - we are talking about the Vedic faith indigenous to South Asia, and which was present in other parts of the world such as Southeast Asia before the arrival of Islam.

Like Zoroastrianism, it doesn't really spread (four-ish places in SE Asia do not a proselytizing faith make)

• Surviving/reformed/organized European paganism: Though Christianity was definitely on the upswing in Europe by the time that Islam really arrived on the scene, I do not think that some significant survival of Germanic, Slavic, and/or Baltic paganism was impossible by that point. It is certainly possible to imagine a scenario where, say, the Vikings introduce some brand of their faith to Britain and/or continental Europe that at least slows the spread of Christianity, and could even spread further by way of colonialism.

Britain is already Christian by the time of the POD, but Baltic-Slavic pagans can probably survive because no Islam means more fragmented Christianity (no Charlemagne, no push to unite, no Crusades). Germanic pagans I'm iffy on because Germany is already largely Christianized at the time of the POD, too - unless you meant Scandinavian pagans, who are also Germanic in culture and language...

• Tengrism: The native religion of the Turkic peoples before they largely converted to Islam, and which they may very well had stuck with in its absence. A large Turkic state in Eurasia, perhaps as an allohistorical counterpart to Russia, or even a Tengrist equivalent of the Ottoman Empire, could help spread the faith further.

No real opinions on this one.

• Judaism: Hard to accomplish, but worth mentioning as a possibility if only because at least the leadership of certain kingdoms, from the Khazars to the Himyarites, had converted at some point.

Does not really spread, Khazars were a weird one-off event (and only the top rung converted anyway).

• Other religion that exists in our world: Say, Chinese folk religion or Aztec paganism.

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

Britain is already Christian by the time of the POD, but Baltic-Slavic pagans can probably survive because no Islam means more fragmented Christianity (no Charlemagne, no push to unite, no Crusades). Germanic pagans I'm iffy on because Germany is already largely Christianized at the time of the POD, too - unless you meant Scandinavian pagans, who are also Germanic in culture and language...

To the best of my knowledge, the Saxons of continental northwest Germany were pagan until their conquest by Charlemagne, and the Slavic tribes occupying what is today eastern Germany (for instance, the Obotrites) were pagan until well into the High Middle Ages.

 

[Zireael]

To the best of my knowledge, the Saxons of continental northwest Germany were pagan until their conquest by Charlemagne, and the Slavic tribes occupying what is today eastern Germany (for instance, the Obotrites) were pagan until well into the High Middle Ages.

Yes, I worded the "too" poorly since it's only Britain and Saxons that were Christianized (my mistake on the Saxons, though). Slavs and their neighbors were pagan well into the middle ages, with Lithuania being nominally Christian but practically pagan, and the same was true of Prussians.

 

[Socrates]

Can I ask why? There were already at least a half dozen of those by the time we got something that explicitly considered itself distinct. Why didn't one of those play that role historically?

Didn't have state backing. I can see a no Islam world having a strong conflict between Catholic and Orthodox Christianity.

 

[NolanFoster]

One thing I never got clear, were the Jews in pre-Islamic Arabia from outside, as in Europe, or were there large numbers of Judaized Arabs?

 

[jackson3]

Didn't have state backing. I can see a no Islam world having a strong conflict between Catholic and Orthodox Christianity.

Unlikely as without Islam there wouldn't be a sufficient distraction from the Lombard invasion. Meaning the ERE maintains its hold on Rome and thus the Papacy with severely limits the possibility of a split in such a manner.

 

[AnonymousSauce]

My vote would be for religion that doesn't exist OTL, probably coming out of Arabia. I wonder if the emergent Arab monotheism/"Rahmanism," combined with Hindu/Dharmic influence (especially that of reincarnation) and Ethiopian Orthodox tradition coming out of Axum, couldn't stew together to produce a theology/cosmology similar to that of Mormonism, where the belief is that "As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be."

 

[Socrates]

Unlikely as without Islam there wouldn't be a sufficient distraction from the Lombard invasion. Meaning the ERE maintains its hold on Rome and thus the Papacy with severely limits the possibility of a split in such a manner.

The ERE's hold on Rome was highly tentative. It was likely to fall sooner or later.

 

[Goldensilver81]

The ERE's hold on Rome was highly tentative. It was likely to fall sooner or later.

Eh yeah depens if contans II does his lombard campaign in 663 in this timeline then he could really reconquer benevento and secure southern italy i mean he could have done it in the olt had a little things gone different if benevento falls the spoleto most likely follows allowing rome to be secure until some exchart gets ideas that he should rule italy or the franks go south and attempt to attack italy which they have been doing since the late 6th century.

 

[Carnivorous Vegetarian]

None of the religions mentioned proselytize like Christianity or Islam, much less as aggressively as them.