Why Christianity survived.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Can we stick with that then with respect to the survival of Christianity rather than discussing typewriters? With regard to the cause for the failure of one loser - Mithraism - I suggested that one reason it failed is simply that it lacked the female element that Christianity provided. It was men only.
I'm interested in any ideas people may care to retro-fit onto Christianity, provided they don't deal with truth claims about divine inspiration (but believers are welcome to grind their axes). That was implied in my first post. Even Vlad suggested two ideas which do not have to be interpreted in a 'spiritual' sense (if you feel you are forgiven, it doesn't matter if there is no big daddy there doing the forgiving. Psychological explanations work just as well) All suggestions may be well be wide of the mark, but give it a go. Anyone want to expand of wiggi's views about Jung?

Sorry I misrepresented you earlier, blue.

Can I just try and tease out definitions here. What do you mean by Christianity?

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course, leaving mechanics aside, familiarity is crucial - I'd imagine most of us are competent on a keyboard and can type fairly fluently: anyone fancy relearning on a different keyboard layout?

That's right - and actually is relevant to religion too. Culturally the 'familiarity' with Christianity in the UK has been very important to its survival. People continue to cling to the familiarity of Christianity even if they aren't in any way active (and indeed probably don't believe most of its key theistic tenets). But we are reaching a bit of a tipping point I think. For someone of my age (51) most of us would have been brought up with substantial Christian 'mood music' all around - it was familiar. But I think that is no longer the case as we move on to the next generation (my kids generation). Christianity is far less familiar to them - they are a generation further detached and therefore much less likely to nod to Christianity even in a nominal manner. Hence the sizeable majority of under 24s self defining as non religious (71% define as non religion, with tiny proportions saying they are Anglican - 3% or Catholic - 5%).

[wigginhall]

Can we stick with that then with respect to the survival of Christianity rather than discussing typewriters? With regard to the cause for the failure of one loser - Mithraism - I suggested that one reason it failed is simply that it lacked the female element that Christianity provided. It was men only.
I'm interested in any ideas people may care to retro-fit onto Christianity, provided they don't deal with truth claims about divine inspiration (but believers are welcome to grind their axes). That was implied in my first post. Even Vlad suggested two ideas which do not have to be interpreted in a 'spiritual' sense (if you feel you are forgiven, it doesn't matter if there is no big daddy there doing the forgiving. Psychological explanations work just as well) All suggestions may be well be wide of the mark, but give it a go. Anyone want to expand of wiggi's views about Jung?

Sorry I misrepresented you earlier, blue.

I think Jung waxed lyrical about the role of Virgin Mary in Christianity as a kind of semi-divine female figure, although curiously, the Proddies got rid of her mainly.   There is also stuff about Self/ego in Jungian literature, rather obscure stuff, but Jesus sort of straddles both areas, going up the Father (Self), and down to the servant (ego).   I don't really know if this actually impacts on believers.   I think one of the Pope's titles is 'Servant of the servants'.  It's a nice idea.

[bluehillside Retd.]

DU,

Can we stick with that then with respect to the survival of Christianity rather than discussing typewriters? With regard to the cause for the failure of one loser - Mithraism - I suggested that one reason it failed is simply that it lacked the female element that Christianity provided. It was men only.

A perfectly credible thesis, though the misogyny that persists in much Christian practice (and for that matter in the other Abrahamic faiths) to this day is hardly particularly welcoming (let alone exemplary) in that regard. As is the way of theses things there may though have been many and complex and interacting reasons for its failure too, just as there would have been for the successes.   
 

I'm interested in any ideas people may care to retro-fit onto Christianity, provided they don't deal with truth claims about divine inspiration (but believers are welcome to grind their axes). That was implied in my first post. Even Vlad suggested two ideas which do not have to be interpreted in a 'spiritual' sense (if you feel you are forgiven, it doesn't matter if there is no big daddy there doing the forgiving. Psychological explanations work just as well) All suggestions may be well be wide of the mark, but give it a go. Anyone want to expand of wiggi's views about Jung?

Well, it’s a bit obvious but a large dose of Stockholm syndrome seems a likely candidate to me. The rigid intolerance and savage retribution of a displeased God that would also let you into his safer waters if only you genuflect and “worship” him seems pretty textbook to me. It's all a bit infantilising for my taste.

Sorry I misrepresented you earlier, blue.

Not a problem and no apology needed.

[jeremyp]

A perfectly credible thesis, though the misogyny that persists in much Christian practice (and for that matter in the other Abrahamic faiths) to this day is hardly particularly welcoming

In the earliest days, there was less misogyny. The last chapter in Paul's letter to the Romans attests to the fact that women played an important part in the early church. He even names one woman as an apostle.

My opinion as to why Christianity was more successful than other pagan religions is that it was aggressively evangelistic and intolerant of the alternatives. Only Christianity in first century Europe commanded its followers to go out and convert others. Only Christianity and Judaism commanded people not to tolerate other gods (at least, as far as we know).

[SteveH]

Hi blue

J Peasemold Gruntfuttock is almost certainly SteveH, since it's a moniker he has used before (along with Rambling Syd Rumpo) on other forums years ago, such as St Thads. The two rustic aliases first appeared as characters on old radio comedy shows such as Round the Horne and Beyond Our Ken.

Yes, I am Steve H. My signature is the giveaway - I haven't changed it.

[floo]

Yes, I am Steve H. My signature is the giveaway - I haven't changed it.

You must be so proud of that signature of yours!

[SweetPea]

Re the OP..

Christianity was Socialism at its finest back in the early days. The members helped each other when in need, including supporting widows. The religious aspect appealed to downtrodden people who saw no hope for a good life. The early Christians also provided education to everyone and started universities.

Constantine made Christianity an official religion of the Roman Empire out of political necessity. As the Christian religion grew and its power coalesced in Rome the Catholic Church became one of the most powerful military and political institutions in the world.... and it still is.

[ProfessorDavey]

Something I find interesting about Christianity, which is unique amongst the big 5 religions, and probably rare more generally, is where Christianity gained a foothold.

Check out this rather excellent little video:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/map-shows-how-religion-spread-around-the-world-2015-6?r=US&IR=T

Every other religion spread from the place where it was founded, and largely where the key figure lived and taught. But not Christianity - it failed to gain a significant foothold in Palestine, so the teachings of Jesus were not compelling enough for his contemporaries (both in time and geographical terms).

I think in most cases if a religion fails to take hold in the place of its inception it is dead in the water. So the interesting question here is why Christianity got a second bite at the cherry to cement itself, which happened later and in places a significant distance from the place of its inception. So in most cases the key 'early adopters' of a religion are the population local to the place of its inception, who probably had heard the key figure teach etc. With Christianity the key early adopters are not like that at all, rather they were people living a significant distance away, who would never had heard Jesus themselves, but might have heard about him second, third or fourth hand.

[DaveM]

Something I find interesting about Christianity, which is unique amongst the big 5 religions, and probably rare more generally, is where Christianity gained a foothold.

Check out this rather excellent little video:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/map-shows-how-religion-spread-around-the-world-2015-6?r=US&IR=T

Every other religion spread from the place where it was founded, and largely where the key figure lived and taught. But not Christianity - it failed to gain a significant foothold in Palestine, so the teachings of Jesus were not compelling enough for his contemporaries (both in time and geographical terms).

I think in most cases if a religion fails to take hold in the place of its inception it is dead in the water. So the interesting question here is why Christianity got a second bite at the cherry to cement itself, which happened later and in places a significant distance from the place of its inception. So in most cases the key 'early adopters' of a religion are the population local to the place of its inception, who probably had heard the key figure teach etc. With Christianity the key early adopters are not like that at all, rather they were people living a significant distance away, who would never had heard Jesus themselves, but might have heard about him second, third or fourth hand.

Perhaps confirmation of a profound truth.  There are in fact no earthly reasons why Christianity should have survived.  But perhaps there are sound heavenly reasons.

Even more so there are probably no earthly reasons why Judaism should have survived.  Or why after being forced to leave their ancestral homeland on three occasions, the political State of Israel again exists and many Jewish people are again living there.  The only reason I can think of is that God said it would happen and therefore it did.

[SteveH]

Perhaps confirmation of a profound truth.  There are in fact no earthly reasons why Christianity should have survived.  But perhaps there are sound heavenly reasons.

Even more so there are probably no earthly reasons why Judaism should have survived.  Or why after being forced to leave their ancestral homeland on three occasions, the political State of Israel again exists and many Jewish people are again living there.  The only reason I can think of is that God said it would happen and therefore it did.

Rubbish. The modern state of Israel is institutionally racist, and is in that respect as bad as South Africa in the worst days of aparthed. It is the antithesis of the ethics of both Judaism and Christianity.

[wigginhall]

The other reason is that Israel has used force of arms, terrorism, and ethnic cleansing.   How God works in mysterious ways!

[trippymonkey]

The other reason is that Israel has used force of arms, terrorism, and ethnic cleansing.   How God works in mysterious ways!

Sorry I thought you were on about Islam for a sec then ?!?!!?

[ProfessorDavey]

Perhaps confirmation of a profound truth.

In which case why wouldn't it have gained a significant foothold in Palestine amongst the very people who actually heard that 'profound truth' from the horse's mouth so to speak.

[DaveM]

The other reason is that Israel has used force of arms, terrorism, and ethnic cleansing.   How God works in mysterious ways!

The events of the last 70 years is of no relevance to the point I am making although it is perhaps a subject for future debate.  But I seem to recollect that for nearly 2000 years, from the time they were last forced out of the land, they were in no position to do any of those things.  In fact they were dispersed among many nations, during which time they themselves were the target of much persecution, attempts at genocide and ethnic cleansing.  How did they not only survive this time but managed to retain their identity, culture and religion without being absorbed into these nations, despite being a small minority.  Are in any other examples in history of anything similar over such an extended period?  The Saxons don't seem to gave done too well.   

[ProfessorDavey]

Even more so there are probably no earthly reasons why Judaism should have survived.  Or why after being forced to leave their ancestral homeland on three occasions, the political State of Israel again exists and many Jewish people are again living there.  The only reason I can think of is that God said it would happen and therefore it did.

The reasons why the international community allowed the state of Israel to come into being after WW2 is intensely political and inextricably linked to the holocaust. The huge suffering of Jews at the hands of the Nazis undoubtedly played a key part in the international community allowing a group of people effectively to annex someone else's land. Had there been no holocaust I cannot see how this would have been allowed.

So god were responsible for the 'good stuff' (formation of Israel) he/she/it cannot detach him/her/it self from the bad stuff (murder of millions) which was a necessary component to allow the state of Israel to be formed.

For the record, of course, I don't believe that god was involved in either for the simple reason that I don't believe that god exists.

[DaveM]

The reasons why the international community allowed the state of Israel to come into being after WW2 is intensely political and inextricably linked to the holocaust. The huge suffering of Jews at the hands of the Nazis undoubtedly played a key part in the international community allowing a group of people effectively to annex someone else's land. Had there been no holocaust I cannot see how this would have been allowed.

So god were responsible for the 'good stuff' (formation of Israel) he/she/it cannot detach him/her/it self from the bad stuff (murder of millions) which was a necessary component to allow the state of Israel to be formed.

For the record, of course, I don't believe that god was involved in either for the simple reason that I don't believe that god exists.

Well recognition of the right of the Jewish people to an independent homeland in the Middle East does, of course, go back well before the holocaust to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 (think that was the date). Very much a consequence of a certain bright Jewish chemist named Weitzman having developed a new route to the synthesis of acetone, essential for the production of smokeless gunpowder.

[floo]

Perhaps confirmation of a profound truth.  There are in fact no earthly reasons why Christianity should have survived.  But perhaps there are sound heavenly reasons.

Even more so there are probably no earthly reasons why Judaism should have survived.  Or why after being forced to leave their ancestral homeland on three occasions, the political State of Israel again exists and many Jewish people are again living there.  The only reason I can think of is that God said it would happen and therefore it did.

If that was the case it doesn't say anything god about the sky fairy! The State of Israel should never have been created without a similar state for the Palestinians, who had as much right to the land as the Jews.

[ProfessorDavey]

Well recognition of the right of the Jewish people to an independent homeland in the Middle East does, of course, go back well before the holocaust to the Balfour Declaration of 1917 (think that was the date). Very much a consequence of a certain bright Jewish chemist named Weitzman having developed a new route to the synthesis of acetone, essential for the production of smokeless gunpowder.

True, but parochial. While the Balfour declaration had support in the UK at the time there was very little support from the broader international community.

And support in the UK was pretty short-lived too - by 1922 it was dead in the water even in the UK.

[DaveM]

In which case why wouldn't it have gained a significant foothold in Palestine amongst the very people who actually heard that 'profound truth' from the horse's mouth so to speak.

True it did not gain a significant foothold there but nevertheless there were quite a large number of converts.  Three thousand on Day One of Church history  was not a bad start and we are told their numbers were being added to on a daily basis including quite a few of the priests.  But early on, once the sage advice of a certain Gamaliel started to be ignored severe persecution followed, spearheaded by a certain Saul of Tarsus.  Many of the new believers fled to other parts of the Roman Empire with its general tolerant policy towards religion.  It was only some 60 years after Calvary that serious Empire wide persecution was first seen during the reign of Domitian.  Nero's persecution in the late 60's was terrible but seems have largely been confined to the close proximity of Rome. 

Thus a number of the NT Letters, including that of James', which was probably written by the year 50, were addressed to those in the Dispersion.  So persecution and consequent dispersion helped keep the growing number of converts in the founding land to a small proportion of the population.

Of course, many Christians, heeding the prophetic warnings of Jesus in the Olivet Discourse, also fled ahead of the Roman destruction of the Temple in AD 70, thus adding to the growing number of exiles, while the longer term consequences of that event and others like Masada, led to a general dispersion of large numbers of people of ethnic Jewish origin, including those of the faith.

In summary there was only a short period of 40 years (now there is an interesting Biblical number) to spread the faith in its homeland before the wheels came off.  But this was achieved with a good deal of success, while dispersion, precipitated by persecution, proved an effective catalyst in spreading and planting the faith through the world of the time. In particular the large number of exiles were an important factor in spreading the faith into Asia (Turkey) and Europe.

Will try an respond to your final post (on the Balfour Declaration) tomorrow if I can find the time in what is going to be a busy day.  But it is getting late down south so for the moment I will wish you a good night.
 

[jeremyp]

Constantine made Christianity an official religion of the Roman Empire

No he didn't. Christianity did not become the official religion of the Roman Empire until a couple of decades later.

[Enki]

I think that many interesting and worthwhile points have been made on this thread.

My own feelings are that Christianity was first and foremost a proselytising exclusive religion from its earliest days, and it used the carrot and stick approach to swell its numbers. As a proselytising religion it didn't really have much competition, and most pagan religions weren't particularly exclusive. Indeed it is interesting that the percentage estimated increase in Christians in the first three centuries was about 40% per decade according to the American sociologist Rodney Stark, who incidentally also compared this with an equivalent increase in Mormonism during the 19th and 20th Centuries.(Stark 'The Rise of Christianity')

If God had a hand in spreading Christianity then perhaps He also had a hand in the spread of Mormonism. 

On the same basis He also seems to have had a hand in the explosive increase of non religionists during the 20th C,

The number of nonreligionists…  throughout the 20th century has skyrocketed from 3.2 million in 1900… to 918 million in AD 2000… From a miniscule presence in 1900, a mere 0.2% of the globe, [atheism and agnosticism] are today expanding at the extraordinary rate of 8.5 million new converts each year, and are likely to reach one billion adherents soon. A large percentage of their members are the children, grandchildren or the great-great-grandchildren of persons who in their lifetimes were practicing Christians.

World Christian Encyclopedia

That's a growth rate of circa 76%

God truly works in mysterious ways.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think that many interesting and worthwhile points have been made on this thread.

My own feelings are that Christianity was first and foremost a proselytising exclusive religion from its earliest days, and it used the carrot and stick approach to swell its numbers. As a proselytising religion it didn't really have much competition, and most pagan religions weren't particularly exclusive. Indeed it is interesting that the percentage estimated increase in Christians in the first three centuries was about 40% per decade according to the American sociologist Rodney Stark, who incidentally also compared this with an equivalent increase in Mormonism during the 19th and 20th Centuries.(Stark 'The Rise of Christianity')

If God had a hand in spreading Christianity then perhaps He also had a hand in the spread of Mormonism. 

On the same basis He also seems to have had a hand in the explosive increase of non religionists during the 20th C,
World Christian Encyclopedia

That's a growth rate of circa 76%

God truly works in mysterious ways.

That we are knocking on the door of argumentum ad populum here aside, perhaps we should have a thread on the success of non religion.

May I offer 4 rEasons in no particular order.

1: Theism but not expressed in membership or attendance.
2: what Peter Hitchens referred to as The rage against God
3: Neotenisation of European and NorthAmerican populations
4: apatheism


In any case trumpeted claims of the End of Religion have not come to pass.

[SteveH]

The events of the last 70 years is of no relevance to the point I am making although it is perhaps a subject for future debate.  But I seem to recollect that for nearly 2000 years, from the time they were last forced out of the land, they were in no position to do any of those things.  In fact they were dispersed among many nations, during which time they themselves were the target of much persecution, attempts at genocide and ethnic cleansing.  How did they not only survive this time but managed to retain their identity, culture and religion without being absorbed into these nations, despite being a small minority.  Are in any other examples in history of anything similar over such an extended period?  The Saxons don't seem to gave done too well.

Roma.

[Enki]

That we are knocking on the door of argumentum ad populum here aside, perhaps we should have a thread on the success of non religion.

May I offer 4 rEasons in no particular order.

1: Theism but not expressed in membership or attendance.
2: what Peter Hitchens referred to as The rage against God
3: Neotenisation of European and NorthAmerican populations
4: apatheism


In any case trumpeted claims of the End of Religion have not come to pass.

One of the reasons sometimes given for the survival and growth of Christianity is that it somehow, because of its success, points towards the existence of the Christian God. So, to show how nonsensical an argument that would be, I referred to the extraordinary growth of the LDS church, and the even more extra ordinary growth of irreligion in the last 100 or so years. They don't exactly fit well with such a presumption do they?

As far as the growth of irreligion is concerned, whilst it may well be explained by any number of things, it is not evidence for the existence/non existence of any god at all. That was the point that I was making, Vlad. The survival and popularity of a belief/non belief is not evidence of the existence/non existence of any god.

As far as your own reasons are concerned:

1)I don't really understand this. The success of non religion isn't dependent on theists not being members or not attending their various churches unless you are suggesting that might be a sign that they are losing their faith perhaps.

2)Undoubtedly this is true in some cases, more often perhaps though against how humans often express their attitudes towards this God.

3)I think you'll find that neotenization is strongly regarded as a characteristic of human evolution. Stephen Jay Gould, for instance, says we have been "retaining to adulthood the originally juvenile features of our ancestors". Nothing particularly new about that then, and the same characteristics are basically the same in all human races.

4)Here I think you have a strong point. I suggest that increasingly(especially in Europe, for instance) people find the idea of God rather surplus to requirements, when they think about him at all. Indeed, I think I would probably count myself amongst that number, as the idea of God has no emotional impact on me at all. I am interested however in how others are affected by their beliefs and how they justify them to themselves and others.