6 ms·

>> no other religion is like Christianity Isn't that a tautology? LDS, JWs, Messianic Jews, Oneness Pentecostals, Iglesia ni Cristo: are they Christianity or a

>> no other religion is like Christianity Isn't that a tautology? LDS, JWs, Messianic Jews, Oneness Pentecostals, Iglesia ni Cristo: are they Christianity or another religion? How different can a religion be until it isn't "like Christianity"? Soundbite doing some heavy lifting out of context. The NT writers used Koine Greek to evangelize a Hellenistic world. Anybody from a pagan tradition reading those books could've found aspects of Dionysus in Jesus, and because Greek Paganism wasn't untrue but simply incomplete, bound to a territory and lacking in universality. Pagans personify and explain nature and the supernatural through deities, while for Christians, the Holy Trinity is the lens through which we see all truth, beauty and goodness.

krapp 2y ago
The Trinity is a recent addition to Christian doctrine, relatively speaking, and certainly not universal if one considers the entire history of the religion. It is delightfully weird, though, in a "we have polytheism at home" kind of way.
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  Many, perhaps most, mainstream Christian churches define Christianity as Trinitarian, and that dogma is the “bright line” between Us & Them. It's absolutely not “recent”. You're confusing “additions/accretions to doctrine” with the way the Church worked in reality. Doctrines and dogmas were believed but not defined or formulated until heresies and controversies arose. The definition of a doctrine is a final way to settle a controversy in favor of orthodox belief. The definition of the Holy Trinity was simply when the reality was put into human words. Lest we forget that the Church produced Scripture, because it seems like folly for this to be turned upside down, but for 500 years, Scripture has begotten churches.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
  Christianity has an entire pantheon, and always has. It's replete with angels and demons, even a Zoroastrian-like evil deity not to be worshipped. Multitudes of saints in most traditions. For that matter, they can't even all agree on the name of their primary deity, and I think one might be forgiven if they were to confuse the many names as not "many names of a single deity", but "many names for many deities".
  - krapp 2y ago
    A lot of this is the result of forcing syncretism with pagan religions to more easily convert their adherents. Gods become saints or demons and their mythologies retconned as needed. Saints Olaf[0] and Brigid[1] being two possible examples from Norse and Irish mythology, respectively. And from an outside perspective there's very little daylight between venerating and praying to the saints for intercession, and praying to household gods, possibly by design. Also (more interestingly) there's still evidence in the OT of the time when the religious precursor of Judaism was polytheist[2][3] ("let us create Man in our image", "God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.") [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Olaf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Olaf [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigid [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism [3]https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4nys70/what_do_we_know_about_judaisms_polytheistic/ https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4nys70/what_...
  - AStonesThrow 2y ago
    Yes, it's a matter of perspective. Looking over history and geopolitics, you'll see paganism absorbed and syncretized (Christians call it "baptizing" cultures) From within mainstream Christianity, ancestor worship [communion of saints] and worship of the Mother of God [Marian devotion] and adoration of God himself are three categories, and the former two are different not in degree, but in character and quality entirely. Internal squabbles among Christian sects often come down to semantics, definitions, and what language is used to formulate them, because when you change the language, you shift cultures and meanings shift inexorably. So while it was once called "worship of Mary", for example, we don't use that word anymore, because even the same English word has connotations for people that would be misunderstood. One interesting paradigm shift to consider is the extension of familial relations beyond the genetic. Christian succession is not by birth but by transmission, anointing, and laying on of hands. Every religious order is a family unto themselves. And so, out of blood and water, the faith has forged familial bonds that are thicker than both. I don't know about neopaganism, but classical paganism was tribal, territorial, and ethnocentric. Another is the naturalistic cycles of the pagan calendars vs. the humanist and person-centered cycles for Christians. We celebrate saints, actual human beings, personal accomplishments and sanctity, and while they're undeniably still linked to the land, the heavens, seasons and agrarianism, Christianity elevates the human person above nature (and "a little less than the angels"), and places humans front-and-center in everything we dream of in our philosophy, for better or for worse.

krapp 2y ago

The Trinity is a recent addition to Christian doctrine, relatively speaking, and certainly not universal if one considers the entire history of the religion. It is delightfully weird, though, in a "we have polytheism at home" kind of way.

AStonesThrow 2y ago
Many, perhaps most, mainstream Christian churches define Christianity as Trinitarian, and that dogma is the “bright line” between Us & Them. It's absolutely not “recent”. You're confusing “additions/accretions to doctrine” with the way the Church worked in reality. Doctrines and dogmas were believed but not defined or formulated until heresies and controversies arose. The definition of a doctrine is a final way to settle a controversy in favor of orthodox belief. The definition of the Holy Trinity was simply when the reality was put into human words. Lest we forget that the Church produced Scripture, because it seems like folly for this to be turned upside down, but for 500 years, Scripture has begotten churches.
NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
Christianity has an entire pantheon, and always has. It's replete with angels and demons, even a Zoroastrian-like evil deity not to be worshipped. Multitudes of saints in most traditions. For that matter, they can't even all agree on the name of their primary deity, and I think one might be forgiven if they were to confuse the many names as not "many names of a single deity", but "many names for many deities".
- krapp 2y ago
  A lot of this is the result of forcing syncretism with pagan religions to more easily convert their adherents. Gods become saints or demons and their mythologies retconned as needed. Saints Olaf[0] and Brigid[1] being two possible examples from Norse and Irish mythology, respectively. And from an outside perspective there's very little daylight between venerating and praying to the saints for intercession, and praying to household gods, possibly by design. Also (more interestingly) there's still evidence in the OT of the time when the religious precursor of Judaism was polytheist[2][3] ("let us create Man in our image", "God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.") [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Olaf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Olaf [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigid [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism [3]https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4nys70/what_do_we_know_about_judaisms_polytheistic/ https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4nys70/what_...
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  Yes, it's a matter of perspective. Looking over history and geopolitics, you'll see paganism absorbed and syncretized (Christians call it "baptizing" cultures) From within mainstream Christianity, ancestor worship [communion of saints] and worship of the Mother of God [Marian devotion] and adoration of God himself are three categories, and the former two are different not in degree, but in character and quality entirely. Internal squabbles among Christian sects often come down to semantics, definitions, and what language is used to formulate them, because when you change the language, you shift cultures and meanings shift inexorably. So while it was once called "worship of Mary", for example, we don't use that word anymore, because even the same English word has connotations for people that would be misunderstood. One interesting paradigm shift to consider is the extension of familial relations beyond the genetic. Christian succession is not by birth but by transmission, anointing, and laying on of hands. Every religious order is a family unto themselves. And so, out of blood and water, the faith has forged familial bonds that are thicker than both. I don't know about neopaganism, but classical paganism was tribal, territorial, and ethnocentric. Another is the naturalistic cycles of the pagan calendars vs. the humanist and person-centered cycles for Christians. We celebrate saints, actual human beings, personal accomplishments and sanctity, and while they're undeniably still linked to the land, the heavens, seasons and agrarianism, Christianity elevates the human person above nature (and "a little less than the angels"), and places humans front-and-center in everything we dream of in our philosophy, for better or for worse.