What would the modern world be like if Islam never existed?

[An Thuong]

The Islamic Golden Age was not caused by the beliefs of Islam, but rather by the confluence of scholars in Baghdad from all over the known world: Spain, Tunisia, Egypt, the Fertile Crescent, Persia and India. Without Islam there's a chance such a confluence still happens, eventually, among a united Christendom in Byzantium or Alexandria. However the lack of Persian scholars in particular is a pretty heavy blow. Or perhaps it happens in the secular court of a religiously tolerant 'Arab Genghis'.
People saying that this TL leads to a less advanced world also seem to be forgetting that the Islamic Golden Age ended, and after it had ended, left a more regressive Muslim World which shunned secular scholarship for centuries.

 

[An Thuong]

One possible butterfly is that the Americas are discovered far later, if at all. If Christendom has easy over-land trade routes to India and China then perhaps there's never a need to try a westward passage.
Of course there's every chance that Christianity's unrivalled position among the religions of Western Eurasia leads to a much deeper schism between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

 

[Sarthak]

People saying that this TL leads to a less advanced world also seem to be forgetting that the Islamic Golden Age ended, and after it had ended, left a more regressive Muslim World which shunned secular scholarship for centuries.

Well i guess the fact that the Ottoman, Mamluk, Safavid, Algerian Dey, Moroccan Alouite scholarships never happened then? And the fact that the majority of their benefactors were based on a secular basis? And that the Safavid and Ottoman Scientific Golden Ages didn't happen then.

The above statement is not true.......at all.

Azerbaijan or rather at the time caucasian albania was christian a good example is how Vache of Albania was forced by the sha to convert to Zoroastrianism but then reverted back to chirstianity

Caucasian Albania did have a minority/plurality of Christians, however even Byzantine and Sassanid and Arab records mention the region as overwhelmingly Zoroastrian before the Islamic Conquest. The Arabs also mention during the 1st Fitna how many 'folks of the Caucasian Mountains' used the disruption in Arabic prowess to try and return to the Zoroastrian ways by utilizing missionary approaches which was mildly successful until the Fitna was over. (source from Zoroastrians by Mary Boyce)

As for modern day Uzbekistan sure some irenians there did but i can tell you the sogdians and tocherians ( which were huge groups in the area )
If anything the area was buddhist before islam

Sogdiana, Margiana, and Northern Bactria are explicitly mentioned in the Tang Annals as The Worshippers of the Avestani Prophet, which has been considered as Zoroaster by almost every, though syncretism was also widespread. The southern tracts of Central Asia were predominantly animist until the Achaemenids conquered them. By the time of the Islamic Conquest the region was dominantly Zoroastrian and Buddhist, showing that the Zoroastrian faith did spread. (Source - Buddhism in Central Asia Baij Nath Puri).

 

[JanWellem]

One possible butterfly is that the Americas are discovered far later, if at all. If Christendom has easy over-land trade routes to India and China then perhaps there's never a need to try a westward passage.
Of course there's every chance that Christianity's unrivalled position among the religions of Western Eurasia leads to a much deeper schism between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Not only those, but also Nestorians, Syriacs, Copts and a plethora of other schisms/syncretisms, which never had a chance to arise IOTL. Regarding the discovery of the Americas, it would at most be delayed by a few decades, some of the fishermen fishing off the Grand Banks from the mid 15th century onwards were almost bound to stumble onto the American mainland sooner or later.

 

[Brahman]

I think Christianity might come out on top in places like Central Asia, Arabia, and especially Africa.

No Islam tearing Rome to shreds leads to at least a decent political reconsolidation, and if even if they halted any expansion and remained in the territories prior to the Islamic invasions, they'd still be a super wealthy state. Assuming there's still a Trans-Saharan Trade (which there should definitely be), the Christians fill the gap of the Muslims and trade with the West African Kingdoms, which would lead to the same sorts of conversion that the Muslims undertook OTL. Plus the Axumites would be a major trading force across East Africa, and like Islam before, would probably spread Christianity through trade.

Plus Persia in itself had already been swinging towards Christianity, the vast majority of Mesopotamia was Christian, and multiple consecutive Emperors like Kavadh II, Ardashir III, and Shahrbaraz were all extremely friendly to Christianity. Nestorianism had already spread even as far as Central Asia, and with no Islam to knock it down, and a pro-Christian Iran, it could largely come to dominate the region. Arabia as well was dominated by the Christian Lakhmids and Ghassanids, and the religion would definitely seep far in, but might be counteracted by the extremely large Jewish populations.

I disagree on Central Asia

Before Islamic conquests, Central Asia was one of the key centers of Buddhism, it took successive process of Islamisaton to replace Buddhism with Islam, without a Christian Kingdom conquering and holding it for a long time, it would have not been a Christian place, it would have just had Christians scattered here and there

 

[Silver01]

Well i guess the fact that the Ottoman, Mamluk, Safavid, Algerian Dey, Moroccan Alouite scholarships never happened then? And the fact that the majority of their benefactors were based on a secular basis? And that the Safavid and Ottoman Scientific Golden Ages didn't happen then.

The above statement is not true.......at all.

Caucasian Albania did have a minority/plurality of Christians, however even Byzantine and Sassanid and Arab records mention the region as overwhelmingly Zoroastrian before the Islamic Conquest. The Arabs also mention during the 1st Fitna how many 'folks of the Caucasian Mountains' used the disruption in Arabic prowess to try and return to the Zoroastrian ways by utilizing missionary approaches which was mildly successful until the Fitna was over. (source from Zoroastrians by Mary Boyce)

Sogdiana, Margiana, and Northern Bactria are explicitly mentioned in the Tang Annals as The Worshippers of the Avestani Prophet, which has been considered as Zoroaster by almost every, though syncretism was also widespread. The southern tracts of Central Asia were predominantly animist until the Achaemenids conquered them. By the time of the Islamic Conquest the region was dominantly Zoroastrian and Buddhist, showing that the Zoroastrian faith did spread. (Source - Buddhism in Central Asia Baij Nath Puri).

while true for the sogdians even trougth i have argued that soon after the conquest the chinise record mentions how these central asian people living in china these had zoroastrian inscriptions but dissparead after the 6th century most likely the merchants that lived there just quickly assimilated

i have to disagree with caucasian albania
for one if it was overwhleminlgy zoroastrian even by the 7th century why did a event like St. Gregory death occured were the albanians killed him and revolted agaist the king due to them been against christianity, also even by the end of the 5th century paganisim was still big on albania

also caucassian mountians is a bigger term than caucassian albania but even then Moqaddasī, (page 376), writing towards the end of the 10th century, describes the Christians as still a majority in the towns of Qabala and Šābarān (near Quba) , Movsēs, History 1.16, tr. p. 25 mentions that at the end of the 5th century many nobles had become apostates due to the sassanids and he fougth the pagans just as much as the zoroastrians (which zoroastrianisim had become syncretised)

now the statments that i mentioned and your source are likely not contradictory as caucassian albania from 5th the persian cut off the albanians of direct control of the south and east

while sources are scarce Javanshir joined the byzantines and join the king of iberia to expel the sassanids garrisons and forces from his lands and expaned his realm taking as far as north as derbent and south as the araxes river ( source : , The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire,) so its possible that areas around the caspian or the araxes river were heavy zoroastrian but the main center was chirstian so yeah i guess both our points stands here but in a none islamic world the zoroastrians have more to loose
i mean the monarchy is already chirstian and Varaz Grigor had made it the official religion

in fact . Mammedova F. Azerbaicanyn siyasi tarikhi ve tarikhi cografiyasi.Tercume edeni Rafig Savalan, Ahmed Asker.B., 1993,
says that zoroastrinisim reamined influential but that was the majority
i belive the sittuation in albenia was becoming some what the like late roman empire with them rising to almost full domination and with the zoroastrians in this case been important but not the dominant religion .