WI: Christianity wasn't mostly trinitarian

samcster94

Banned
Many early forms of Christianity had very different ways to explain Jesus. One of the many not chosen was docetism, and another was arianism. Some of these had a more human Jesus, others did not. Is there a POD between 33 and 325 that can lead to this??
 
The Germanic tribes were known for their distaste for Trinitarianism, liking Arianism much more since it seemed a lot more logical for Jesus to have been "fully/mostly human" rather than godlike. In recognition of this, Constantine the Great had a Synod at Tyre that acquitted Arius for his "crimes" as he was making a lot of headway with the Germans. I'm not exactly sure about a POD between any of those years you have set, but a POD set in the Great Migration period could be much more likely, as the still-primarily-Arian German tribes manage to convert the Roman populations in the lands that they have conquered to Arianism.
 
One possibility would simply to have more people adopt Arianism, or the like, within 'Christian' lands so the Nicene Council knew at non-Trinitarians were a larger portion of Christianity than in our day. The POD could simply be a few more Arianist missionaries or them being more successful, etc.

If non-Trinitarians were known to be a substantially larger portion of the 'body of the Church' in 325, the Nicene Council might have gone somewhat differently. Some Church leaders would still wanted to push for a clear Trinitarian mandate, but politicians like Constantine may have deemed it better to be more inclusive so as to better promote unity (vice division). This may have led to a less specific Nicene Creed and associated doctrine. FWIW, I believe that most Christian principles are not inherently dependent on the exact nature/relationship of Christ & God and that I can share a huge body of beliefs with someone even if they picture God & Christ somewhat differently than I do.
 
The Germanic tribes were known for their distaste for Trinitarianism, liking Arianism much more since it seemed a lot more logical for Jesus to have been "fully/mostly human" rather than godlike. In recognition of this, Constantine the Great had a Synod at Tyre that acquitted Arius for his "crimes" as he was making a lot of headway with the Germans. I'm not exactly sure about a POD between any of those years you have set, but a POD set in the Great Migration period could be much more likely, as the still-primarily-Arian German tribes manage to convert the Roman populations in the lands that they have conquered to Arianism.

It is my understanding that the popularity if Arianism is just a mere quirk of history: The Imperial government was pro-Arian when the more successful missionaries like Wulifa were sent out, and the Germanic tribes of course went along with the doctrine that curried the most Imperial favor.
 
Although a controversial view, there are some scholars who believe that many Christians in the Second Century Church believed a doctrine called Modalistic Monarchianism, which denies a trinity of persons but teaches the One God manifested himself in three different roles. One of the proponents of this view, Sabellius specifically taught that the One God was Father in Creation; the Son in Redemption; and the Spirit in Sanctification and Regeneration. I read a book many years ago, which asserted that Pope Zephyrinus (d. 217) also believed this although I do not know where they got their information. Supposedly, his successor, Pope Calixtus I also believed it but did not want to rock the boat with the Trinitarian faction of the Roman Church and so did not challenge them, and they took over after his demise. If any of this is true, I do not profess to know, but if it was, for a POD, one could have Pope Calixtus excommunicating the Trinitarians, and then have his views stick as orthodox.
 

Perkeo

Banned
What would be actual impact on the church today and even in history?

Christianity is built on the principles:
1) Monotheism
2) Jesus being the son of God
3) Christian charity
Triniy is IMO just a method of dissolving the paradoxon created by 1) and 2). Other solutions are possible. But when God says love your neighbor, whats the diference whether you hear this from the father, the son or the holy spirit?
 
You're in the right time period here there (especially early), though I'm not sure if Docetism and Arianism are the best examples (docetism mostly differed in denying Jesus' humanity, and Arianism is non-Trinitarian mostly in contrast to Nicene Christianity. Interestingly, Paul probably didn't see Jesus as being on the same level as God the Father. Early Christianity was very diffuse so it's maybe possible one of those other groups would become dominant, although there was a tendency in early Christianity towards exalting Jesus higher up the scale of divinity.

I think the anti-Semetic angle would be somewhat lessened if mainstream Christianity didn't see Jesus as being (roughly) on the same level as God the Father, and merely a higher-level angle or a hypostasis of just an aspect of God, such as Wisdom. The 'They killed their own God!'-slur would have a much lower effect, though I can't imagine relations being that good regardless.
 

Artaxerxes

Banned
I think the Germanic areas had a lot in common with the Arabic areas at times in terms of the various groups used by the Roman Empire, you could have a Mohammed equivalent emerge to give a more Germanic take on Christianity.


What's lacking is a an equivalent to Persia or much of a shared identity between the Germanic groups to synthesise a new religion out of.
 
Top