No Christianity
- Thread starter mojojojo
- Start date
Something similar would have probably happened. Other religions like it had sprung up anyway, such as Mithraism, and the cult of Sol Invictus. Most likely, mithraism would've filled the void or Roman religion would've adapted, as it always had, to changing times, maybe with Sol Invictus taking on a much more omnipotent role.
When Islam comes around, it probably would become much more popular in the near east, spain, and italy than OTL, or at least more widely accepted than it was.
When Islam comes around, it probably would become much more popular in the near east, spain, and italy than OTL, or at least more widely accepted than it was.
How different would Islam be though without influences from Christianity?
I don't see any reason why Islam would exist (as it were, I usually make the assumption that certain religious figures (under my biased eye- so Jesus and Mohammed (even though I'm non-Muslim) may make the cut, but say, L. Ron Hubbard won't, however if we can get rid of Jesus I would make the butterfly effect apply to Mohammed as well). Even if you discount the butterfly effect, there were certainly Christian influences on his message, and I vaguely recall reading something about Mohammed meeting Christian preachers in his days as a pagan merchant before he recieved his message? (I don't know...)
Anyway, I don't know how inevitable it really is that something would take it's place- Christianity had a missionary power that the other religions of the time lacked. I would say that you'd have the Germanic tribes eventually convert to the Roman legalist paganism (in the sense that it was obsessed with rules and rituals), as the Franks possibly did before becoming Christian OTL, and said religion would probably remain prevalent in the West. Gnosticism and Neoplatonism would be the most common in the east. Maybe some evangelical messianic breed of Judaism would arise, but that feels like cheating somehow, just replacing one Jesus with another...
It's quite possible that a religious leader could still inspire the Arabic tribes to unite. However, it would fall under quite different influences, and it's quite likely it may not claim an Abrahamic base (though there were a lot of Jews in Arabia)
Anyway, I don't know how inevitable it really is that something would take it's place- Christianity had a missionary power that the other religions of the time lacked. I would say that you'd have the Germanic tribes eventually convert to the Roman legalist paganism (in the sense that it was obsessed with rules and rituals), as the Franks possibly did before becoming Christian OTL, and said religion would probably remain prevalent in the West. Gnosticism and Neoplatonism would be the most common in the east. Maybe some evangelical messianic breed of Judaism would arise, but that feels like cheating somehow, just replacing one Jesus with another...
It's quite possible that a religious leader could still inspire the Arabic tribes to unite. However, it would fall under quite different influences, and it's quite likely it may not claim an Abrahamic base (though there were a lot of Jews in Arabia)
Isn't it terribly illogical to think that Islam would have emerged in the first place without Christianity?
I mean, to me that sounds like trying to create an Islamic Spain in a TL without Islam!
I mean, much of islam's theology was created by adapting much of the Jewish and Christian theology, as well as the fact that the resulting problems and conflicts from the Christian and Jewish theology played an important part in the formation of Islam.
And I assume that this no-Christianity scenario is realized because there is no Jesus in this TL...
And it just so happens to be, that even though very little of islam's variety of Jesus is actually based on pre-Islamic scripture, the character of Jesus is still very important in Islam.
It's as easy as this - no Jesus, no Islam.
Just like that Buddhism could simply never emerge without Hinduism,
hence the Buddhist teachings still work with Hindu concepts and within a Hindu frame of thought.
Besides - think of the major butterflies that a no-Christianity scenario would have.
In a TL without Christianity, we will propably see a quite different type of Judaism,
and propably much more converts to Judaism as well.
In OTL, the practice of actively converting others was pretty much abolished in
Judaism after this had become a capital offence in Christian and muslim dominated societies.
Something else, a Jewish sect that might resemble Islam somewhat, might emerge.
But Islam like we know it would be entirely impossible in such a TL.
I mean, to me that sounds like trying to create an Islamic Spain in a TL without Islam!
I mean, much of islam's theology was created by adapting much of the Jewish and Christian theology, as well as the fact that the resulting problems and conflicts from the Christian and Jewish theology played an important part in the formation of Islam.
And I assume that this no-Christianity scenario is realized because there is no Jesus in this TL...
And it just so happens to be, that even though very little of islam's variety of Jesus is actually based on pre-Islamic scripture, the character of Jesus is still very important in Islam.
It's as easy as this - no Jesus, no Islam.
Just like that Buddhism could simply never emerge without Hinduism,
hence the Buddhist teachings still work with Hindu concepts and within a Hindu frame of thought.
Besides - think of the major butterflies that a no-Christianity scenario would have.
In a TL without Christianity, we will propably see a quite different type of Judaism,
and propably much more converts to Judaism as well.
In OTL, the practice of actively converting others was pretty much abolished in
Judaism after this had become a capital offence in Christian and muslim dominated societies.
Something else, a Jewish sect that might resemble Islam somewhat, might emerge.
But Islam like we know it would be entirely impossible in such a TL.
Just one less prophet, as Smaug said. They could probably just as easily subsume Mithras as a prophet instead, and use him for thier goals, eased much by the fact that both Islam and Mithraism were very male-centered in terms of domestic life.
The muslim version of Jesus happens to be, according to the muslims themselves, the second-most important prophet of Islam.
Removing Jesus from history would mean for Islam what removing Mozes from history would mean for Christianity - neither could possibly exist.
I do not rule out that in a no-Christianity scenario a religion somewhat like Islam might just emerge, yet because of the absence of Jesus and the whole Christian controversy (which left quite a mark on islamic theology), it would be so radically different, that it would simply not be Islam.
The thing is, the situation that allowed Islam to rise as it did was very much a result of the Persian-Byzantine Wars of the 500s. Which reached their intensity in no small part because the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius (I think) used religious justification to inspire his people to go so far as to raze much of Mesopotamia to the ground... Remove Christianity from that equation, and you throw everything off- Byzantium and Persia could make an earlier peace that doesn't leave them exhausted, for example.
Utterly impossible to tell. Europeans have fits of fanaticism occasionally. The last two was about revolution and then nationalism rather than religion as we think of it, but the four before were Christian, ie. the Imperial Conversion, then prosilyzation(sp) of the heathen nations, then the Crusades, and finally the Reformation. These fits effect different parts of Europe at different times and the last one is often still going on somewhere when the first is popping up. All this is an oversimplification, though, but a lack of Christianity isn't going to stop Europeans from acting like monsters every now and again. I remember someone (I think it may have been Ian himself) writing an essay on the effects of an absence of Christianity. Not so bad for whites, but the world is even worse if you're not. One thing I feel for certain. Religion had next to no effect on technological advancement and, unless there is another set of accidents, European gg&s will still place a white boot on the rest of humanity's neck. Imagine that boot without anything approaching a conscience or respect for life behind it. The Romans were capable of killing anyone who they didn't know and personally like. The Celts, Germans, and Slavs were no better and maybe even worse. If no new ethic system, or an less morally intesive ethic system steps up, every European nation would've been a Third Reich. The only light I see is that Buddhism might've broken in (Christian monasticism ultimately derives from it). But I'm not so sure that Mithraism or Manicheanism would've worked.
I think that CV does make some good points. The Greeks and the Romans could be real treacherous bastards when they wanted to be and the tribes of Britain and Gaul could be absolutely psychotically violent. Without some sort of ethically grounding,you'd have complete and utter chaos.
Greco-Roman paganism had essentially degenerated into state propaganda and was spiritually dead. If that's their only alternative, I think the Germanic peoples would stick with their old gods.
Mithraism's recruitment pool was limited to elite men and soldiers. I believe the cult of Cybele, a "companion religion" to Mithraism, was for women.
However, I don't think Mithraism will ever become the *majority* religion of the Mediterranean world like Christianity did.
Perhaps instead of the hegemonic Christianity, we get a syncretisitic melange of the other "mystery cults."
Mithraism's recruitment pool was limited to elite men and soldiers. I believe the cult of Cybele, a "companion religion" to Mithraism, was for women.
However, I don't think Mithraism will ever become the *majority* religion of the Mediterranean world like Christianity did.
Perhaps instead of the hegemonic Christianity, we get a syncretisitic melange of the other "mystery cults."
To suggest that morality depends on christianity is not only silly but ahistorical. Of course there were very moral ancients before christian theology was even invented.
Later christian leaders were no less immoral than their pagan counterparts. Later christian leaders were no less ruthless than their pagan counterparts. And so on...
As for the POD being no Jesus, well.. There are so many doubts about what he supposedly said and so many contradictions in what the gospel writers said he said that whether he existed or not is largely irrelevent. Paul invented christianity so he either never existed or did not have his Damascus moment or whatever it was that persuaded him to invent the new religion.
What would take its place? Probably a mixture of the Imperial cult of Sol Invictus, mystery religions and gnosticism. In other words a continuation of pagan worship but with a more spiritual side. That is christianity but with a different god at its peak nd a different name and rather less exclusive.
Later christian leaders were no less immoral than their pagan counterparts. Later christian leaders were no less ruthless than their pagan counterparts. And so on...
As for the POD being no Jesus, well.. There are so many doubts about what he supposedly said and so many contradictions in what the gospel writers said he said that whether he existed or not is largely irrelevent. Paul invented christianity so he either never existed or did not have his Damascus moment or whatever it was that persuaded him to invent the new religion.
What would take its place? Probably a mixture of the Imperial cult of Sol Invictus, mystery religions and gnosticism. In other words a continuation of pagan worship but with a more spiritual side. That is christianity but with a different god at its peak nd a different name and rather less exclusive.
Hmmm, what I could also consider possible would be... umm... what about the Eastern Mediterranean getting zoroastrianiazed by Persian influence?
How about the introduction of Buddhism maybe? From the indian roman trade counters...
Buddhism was very highly regarded by the Greeks in Asia after Alexander and of course many of the Bactrian Greeks adopted it. One of their kings (Meander I think) was a Buddhist scholar and saint.
Very likely I would think. Could it spread? Unlikely since it would be thereligion of the Roman's enemies. But who knows?