No Christianity

[Leo Caesius]

Nonetheless, I indeed have heard about many Christians and Jews who tried to combine the Neoplatonic philosophy with Christian or Jewish theology. Usually with little success, by the way.

I don't know; I'd consider Philo of Alexandria and St. Augustine of Hippo to be moderately successful.

 

[Leo Caesius]

Paul! Welcome back!

Though Christians were certainly as capable of cruelty as any other group, I think that it may be considered significant that certain versions of Christianity was, as far as I know, the only religious movements in history to unequivocally comdemn slavery as evil.

You know, the Essenes condemned slavery... as did (and do) the Mandaeans.

Yes, yes, I suppose you all saw that coming a mile away.

 

[Dave Howery]

even if Christianity didn't form, I wonder if something similar wouldn't.... Christianity was successful because it was a monotheistic religion that had a strong interest in missionary activity, bringing everyone it could into the faith... a powerful combination... it seems to me that Europe was ripe for such a phenomenom... if not Christianity, then something else with similar focus...

 

[Ran Exilis]

Good point.

And even without Jesus and most Gnostic sects, there still is plenty of opportunity for a new monotheistic cult.
Possibly something derived from a Jewish sect, or quite possibly from one of the Iranian religions.

The concept of an absolute supreme deity was also known at that time,
which could quite easily lead to a henotheistic or even monotheistic religion.

If you want to create really unusual scenario's with earlier POD's,
then you could even consider letting the cult of the Aten survive.

 

[mojojojo]

This has been touched on before but not answered in depth, how do you think such a world would turn out for the native americans, polynesians and other non-western people under western control?

Anyone gonna take a crack at this?

 

[carlton_bach]

One thing that I'm pretty sure of is that European or "Western" culture as we know it is not going to exist. Depending on what you think of Euro-western culture, that could either be a bad thing or a good thing.

Ultimately, that will depend on what replaces it, I guess.

Though Christians were certainly as capable of cruelty as any other group, I think that it may be considered significant that certain versions of Christianity was, as far as I know, the only religious movements in history to unequivocally comdemn slavery as evil.

It was the Cynic school that taught that *all* power relationships among humans were to be rejected (the Cynics did not deal in terms of 'evil', but I'd say that is fairly clear). And Caius wrote (with that very familiar mixture of disquiet and regret common to the profiteers of injustice, one imagines) that slavery was 'an institution of the law of nations contrary to natural law'. The Stoics believed that a slave was as human and as deserving of human consideration as his master, but though they considered manumission a virtuous act, they did not advocate the abolition of the system (which really puts them closest to mainstream Christianity at the time). The one thing in the Christian social ethic of Antiquity that is radically new is the concept of charity for heavenly reward.

There is a school of thought which argues that the modern western conception of each individual human having great worth apart from whatever group this person is born into derives ultimately from the Christian view of each individual human soul having great worth apart from visible, worldly considerations. If this is true (which is of course debatable), at least one interpretation of the Christian world view may have been a vital component in the idea both individual rights and universal human rights.

Any serious student of Antiquity will be able to trace the development of most aspects of Christian ethics from the culture that this faith took root in. Thus the real question will have to be what effect the absence of Christianity will have on the cultural makeup of Europe. If the Ancient world develops any kind of cultural continuity, we may well see a somewhat similar system emerge. If not, we're probably a-Viking till the Chinese come.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Anyone gonna take a crack at this?

Probably worse than OTL. The Greeks and Romans merrily devastated any "barbarians" they came across if they felt it was in their interest to do so.

I am aware the Christian West did much of the same thing, but there were always people who criticized such behavior on moral grounds. Unless the replacement religion(s) for Christianity have similar moral codes, then there won't be a "societal conscience."

 

[mojojojo]

Probably worse than OTL. The Greeks and Romans merrily devastated any "barbarians" they came across if they felt it was in their interest to do so.

I am aware the Christian West did much of the same thing, but there were always people who criticized such behavior on moral grounds. Unless the replacement religion(s) for Christianity have similar moral codes, then there won't be a "societal conscience."

Very interesting, any other thoughts from anyone on this aspect of my question?

 

[Paul Spring]

Paul! Welcome back!

Thank you.

 

[Keenir]

Anyone gonna take a crack at this?

The butterflies would eat them.

 

[mojojojo]

The butterflies would eat them.

I like you, yer silly

 

[scouser]

At the time of Jesus it was estimated that neaarly 10% of the Roman Empire was Jewish or nearly Jewish (people who had become close to Judaism but were not willing to circumcize and it was from this"pool " that Christianity made its inroads) Absent Jesus and you would still have had a quasi -Jewish religion closely allied with the "real" Jews

 

[stevep]

Probably worse than OTL. The Greeks and Romans merrily devastated any "barbarians" they came across if they felt it was in their interest to do so.

I am aware the Christian West did much of the same thing, but there were always people who criticized such behavior on moral grounds. Unless the replacement religion(s) for Christianity have similar moral codes, then there won't be a "societal conscience."

Merry

Weren't there people during the latter days of the Roman Republic that criticised and opposed corruption and excesses by Roman governors. Some of this may have been political or a desire to avoid unrest in the provinces in question but that could be said for any similar situation in Christian or non-Christian times.

I think that any culture that enables a sizeable civilisation to be maintained must have mechanism for protecting the weaker elements of society. [They need not always be that powerful but they are bound to be present in some form or another]. This will inevitably have some moral format rather than just a purely mechanistic desire to avoid inefficiencies.

Steve