jules?

The great Christian proof

One of the most powerful arguments presented for the ‘power’ of Jesus is the faiths rapid spread, ‘despite all the drawbacks’. And in some respects they have a point. Dismissing the divinity or the resurrection as the reason for the growth still leaves a question poorly answered.

There are caveats to this enquiry; growth and popularity are debatable of course but given that Irenaeus in 170 is defining orthodoxy mentioning many heretical gospels in a region well beyond the eastern Mediterranean rapid expansion is evident. True Irenaeus’ parents were probably of the eastern empire but they were also converts who are presumably orthodox to a degree but this still leaves a healthy and diverse faith a few decades to century after Paul. Even being conservative Christianities spread is different to other religions. Mithra steadily grew and spread within an army that grew and spread, more so given that auxiliaries were stationed in lands distant from their home. Unlike Christianity it had centuries to mature and adapt to its new followers. Islam is another poor parallel, its expansion followed in the wake of empire building.

Christianity drew its supporters from the poor, women, dispossessed and enslaved which were groups whose travel was limited or non-existent. As much as I personally believe Paul’s constant assertions that he is prison and asks for more money to be sent make him a likely candidate to be a snakeoil salesman and crook, missionaries were the only way to spread the ‘good news’ but one wonders what the motive was. Pyramid selling could have been the powerhouse for the growth but that is probably a little too speculative. So why?

Before I give my pet idea, which is obviously open for debate, I need to present a principle assumption. Namely that early Christianity was effectively apocalyptic Judaism lite. A mass appeal to the outcasts that the stinking rich would burn and they would inherit an eternal kingdom of heaven. This conflicts with the idea that Paul was presenting a mystery religion but does not conflict with Christianity being a Hellenised Jewish hybrid. Yet the mass appeal that Celsus alludes to as charm of the faith to the foolish does not fully account for its relative rapid growth.

The solution is perhaps peace. It sound almost contradictory but the most recent parallel is the Cold War that sent modern day End Timers into the hills with canned goods, bible and shit load of ammo. The spectre of the end of the world was held over most of our heads that appear to have led some to the arms of their saviour. Christianities growth was during a relatively peaceful time. Sure, Germany, Britain and the Jewish revolt were all wake calls that challenged the might of Rome but the over riding threat was the uneasy truce with the Parthians. Although rumours of war probably abounded and politics was particularly bloody there seem to be no reference to any kind of climate change or volcanic or earthquake activity in fact a distinct lack of the horsemen but then for all the fear of the cold war there was actual western prosperity.

Jules

Amaleq13

It is only considered powerful by individuals with an inadequate grasp of the psychological and social processes involved. There simply is no connection between the speed with which a belief spreads or the tenacity with which it remains and the truth of the belief.

Irrational beliefs often spread quickly and stay around long after they have been shown to be false by any rational standard. This is, IMO, because the vast majority of our species prefers to feel rather than think to reach their conclusions.

No Robots

So whom would you consider "thinkers?" And where do they stand on Christianity?

Lucretius

IF we are to purely rely on "rapid spread" as a determinant on the truth of any religion then Mormonism and Scientology must also be considered "proven" as they have possibly advanced at a greater rate than early Christianity did and faced "drawbacks" with the established churches in a similar way as early Christianity did.

Ray Moscow

To mention another example: Islam spread very rapidly, and even took over areas that were formerly Christian. Does this prove Islam true?

No Robots

Both Mormonism and Islam are flavors of Christianity. Scientology is a version of the new scientistic superstition.

Ray Moscow

Most religions, perhaps all, are flavours of others and are built from elements of their predecessors. However, their adherents usually view them as either quite original, a restoration of something ancient (but almost lost), or a fulfillment of something foretold of old.

No Robots

Correct. We are trying to trace a genealogy of power here, specifically the genealogy of the power of Christianity. It would therefore be misleading and counter-productive to see late manifestations of that power (ie. Islam and Mormonism) as separate from that power. Likewise, it is misleading and counter-productive to fail to acknowledge that Christianity's power derives from Judaism.

andrewcriddle

One problem is that Christianity probably grew as fast or faster (in % per year terms) in the disastrous mid to late 3rd century CE than in the relatively peaceful 2nd century CE.

Andrew Criddle

jules?

To everyone! I did not want to imply that 'rapid' spread had anything to do with how good the faith was. Celsus and other critics mock it because it was so simplistic and appealed to the foolish. What I find curious is why it spread and what was the vehicle. Islam is not a good comparison as it rode on the back of conquest, Mithra was popular amongst troops who were constantly moving around the empire, and modern religions have the mass media to assist their spread. BUT, slaves and underdogs were by their position not big on travel. People rushing to join a fellowship that held things in common to await the end of the world would imply that they thought it was very iminant, so what gave them that impression? The 3rd century as a point of growth has validity on the basis that there was an awful lot of empire building activities, but what of the late 1st and 2nd?