Saturday, October 11, 2025

The Frankfurt Inscription (a German Cross Amulet from 200s AD)

 According to this article by Tim Newcomb:

 

An 1,800-year-old silver amulet discovered buried in a Frankfurt, Germany grave, still next to the chin of the man who wore it, has 18 lines of text written in Latin on just 1.37 inches of silver foil. ... 
The amulet—and the inscription—are the oldest evidence of Christianity found north of the Alps.

Every other link to reliable evidence of Christian life in the northern Alpine area of the Roman Empire is at least 50 years younger, all coming from the fourth century A.D. But the amulet, found in a grave dating between 230 and 270 A.D. and now known as “The Frankfurt Inscription,” was made to better decipher the inscription. ...

... The Frankfurt Silver Inscription, based on the most updated translation:


(In the name?) of Saint Titus.

Holy, holy, holy!

In the name of Jesus Christ, Son of God!

The Lord of the World

resists with [strength?]

all attacks(?)/setbacks(?).

The god(?) grants well-being

Admission.

This rescue device(?) protects

the person who is

surrenders to the will

of the Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son,

since before Jesus Christ

all knees bow: the heavenly ones,

the earthly and

the underground, and every tongue

confess (to Jesus Christ).

 

Without a reference to any other faith besides Christianity, rare for amulets of this age, the purely Christian inscription not only shows the rise of Christianity to the north, but also the amulet owner’s devotion.


During the third century A.D., association with Christianity was still dangerous, and identifying as Christian came with great personal risk, especially as Roman emperor Nero punished Christians with death or even a date in the Colosseum. That was no matter for this man in Frankfurt who took his allegiance to Jesus Christ to his grave.


The scientific study is bolstered by references never found so early, such as mention of Saint Titus, a student of the Apostle Paul, the invocation “holy, holy, holy!” which wasn’t more common until the fourth century A.D., and the phrase “bend your knees,” which is a quote from Paul’s letter to the Philippians.


This amulet confirms what I have been learning from historians of early Christianity regarding how the Christian faith spread; how it was not just Christian hospitality and kindness but also the belief that the Christian God provided "admission" to godhood (theosis) among the "heavenly ones" and Christ was more powerful than the other gods (in whom "all kness bow") in providing protection and divine favor; i.e., the ability to gain success just as Constantine had first interpreted the cross as the sign through which he would conquer. 

Friday, October 10, 2025

Baptism as Spiritual Warfare

 

Excerpts from The Unseen Realm (Expanded Edition Content Only) (2025) by Michael S. Heiser:


Chapter 38 [of The Unseen Realm]:


The focus of this [chapter 38] was baptism (as it relates to 1 Pet 3:14–22) and the Lord’s Supper (as it relates primarily to 1 Cor 10:20–21). The chapter proposed that baptism was a spiritual warfare event—essentially, a loyalty oath. Choosing Christ was to break free from the spiritual forces of darkness. Baptism is, in that context, a ritual reenactment of our union to (choice of) Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection—during which he descended to the realm of the dead and announced his victory over the imprisoned spirits, the offending sons of God of Genesis 6 infamy. ...





Tuesday, October 7, 2025

Did Paul Say Gentiles Need to Become "Spiritual Jews" by Replacing their Gentile Genes?

 

The following is response to those who criticize Christianity based on their European ancestry, like the guy in this short video clip here. As someone of Germanic and Swedish descent, I understand this reaction in this video, that of feeling like Christianity is attempting to replace your ethnic Indo-European heritage.


There's also a biblical scholar named Matthew Thiessen who argues that Paul was teaching a literal Gene Replacement Therapy: where the Gentile's genetic code is literally supernaturally replaced with the Jewish genes of Jesus. But is this true? Upon reflection, it seems to me that Matthew Thiessen is engaging in a lot of speculation when the actual New Testament does not seem to support what he argues. Let's start with the apostle Paul responding to those demanding Christians obey the Jewish Law Code in order to be considered part of God's People, writing in Romans 2:27-30 (Amplified Bible):


27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps [the spirit of] the Law will judge you who, [a]even though you have the written code and circumcision, break the Law. 28 For he is not a [real] Jew who is only one outwardly, nor is [true] circumcision something external and physical. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and [true] circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by [the fulfillment of] the letter [of the Law]. His praise is not from men, but from God.


We see this echoed in the following written to Gentiles in Ephesians 2:12-19 (EXB):


12 Remember that in the past [at that time/season] you were without Christ [the Messiah]. You were not citizens [L excluded from the citizenship] of Israel, and you had no part in [L were aliens/strangers to] the agreements with the promise that God made to his people [L covenants of promise; C the Abrahamic (Gen. 12:1–3), Mosaic (Ex. 19—24), and Davidic (2 Sam. 7) covenants.] You had no hope, and you did not know God. 13 But now in Christ Jesus, you who were far away from God are brought near through the blood of ·Christ’s death [L Christ; C blood symbolizing his sacrificial death]14 Christ himself is our peace. He made ·both Jews and Gentiles one people [L both one], and broke down the wall of ·hate [hostility; enmity] that divided them [C the wall beyond which Gentiles could not pass in the Jerusalem temple, or the law of Moses that distinguished Jew from Gentile (see v. 15)] by giving his own body [L in his flesh; C this phrase may go with the following sentence]15 He did this by ending [setting aside; nullifying] the law of commands and rules by giving his own body [L in his flesh; C this phrase may go with the previous sentence]. His purpose was to make the two groups of people become one new people [humanity; person; man] in him and in this way make peace. 16 It was also Christ’s purpose to ·end [L put to death; kill] the hatred [hostility; enmity] between the two groups, to make them into one body, and to bring them back [reconcile them] to God. Christ did all this with his death on the cross [L …through the cross]17 Christ came and ·preached [proclaimed the Good News of] peace [Is. 52:7] to you who were far away from God [L far away/off], and to those who were near to God [L near; Is. 57:19]18 Yes, it is [For; or So that] through Christ we all have the right to come [free access] to the Father in [by] one Spirit.

19 Now you Gentiles are not foreigners or strangers any longer, but are citizens together with God’s holy people [T the saints]. You belong to God’s family [household].

 

Verse 14 above is clear that to be in Christ is for the person to receive a new pneumatic body, meaning there is to be a new creation of a new people. So it's not about the Gentiles becoming literally Jews supernaturally through a process of gene replacement therapy, but Gentiles and Jews becoming one as literal children of God through the donated divine gene of Christ. So what Paul was teaching is that Gentiles become a new type of body, a post-ethnic divinized body or pneumatic (what the Eastern Orthodox Christian Church calls theosis).  The fluid pneuma of Christ creates a new separate category beyond ethnicity where the Christian partakes of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) becoming eventually one of the divine beings in God's Divine Council (being exalted even above the angels).


The Christian is joining the Divine Family of the Elohim (Divine Beings) in the Divine Council. See the Naked Bible Podcast Episode 226 on Colossians 1:1-13 (July 28, 2018) with Dr. Michael S. Heiser, that explains that the term saints in most New Testament translations actually means holy ones and it refers to Christians literally joining the family of the divine holy ones (Divine Beings) in Heaven while yet on earth awaiting ones death and resurrection. Obviously the Divine Beings in God's Divine Family are not any particular ethnicity but a non-ethnic, non-human, "Divine Species" so to speak. 


Ephesians 2:18 on Bible Hub explains that word Spirit in this verse is from the Greek word "Πνεύματι (Pneumati)" which is a Noun that Strong's 4151 defines as "Wind, breath, spirit." In other words, the word Spirit is best understood as the omnipresent fluid energy and material substance of God that carries the divine "gene" capable of transforming mortal human Christians into immortal divinized gods (i.e. theosis); not Gods, upper case, but gods, meaning lesser gods in Jehovah's Council of gods (according to biblical scholar Michael Heiser).


Bible Hub also offers this commentary for Ephesians 2:18:


... The unity of the Spirit [Pneuma] is a key theme in Ephesians, as seen in Ephesians 4:4, which speaks of one body and one Spirit [Pneuma]. The Spirit's role in uniting believers is also evident in 1 Corinthians 12:13, where Paul writes about all being baptized by one Spirit into one body.  ...


... we both

• Paul is writing to a mixed church of Jewish and Gentile believers. “Both” means these two previously alienated groups now form one new humanity in Christ (Ephesians 2:14-16).


• The gospel levels every cultural, ethnic, and religious barrier (Galatians 3:28).


• Practical outflow: unity in worship, fellowship, and mission (Romans 15:5-7). ...


... by one Spirit [Pneuma]:

 

• The Holy Spirit applies Christ’s work, bringing us near and keeping us there (1 Corinthians 12:13).


• He indwells every believer—Jew and Gentile alike—forming a single temple (Ephesians 2:22).


• The Spirit assures, guides, and empowers our fellowship with the Father (Romans 8:26-27; Galatians 4:6).


Bible Hub goes on to provide these other related New Testament verses:


Galatians 3:28:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.


1 Corinthians 12:13:

For in one Spirit [Pneuma] we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free, and we were all given one Spirit to drink.

 

Romans 8:15-16:

For you did not receive a spirit of slavery that returns you to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption to sonship, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” / The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.


Acts 2:18:

Even on My menservants and maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

 

Matthew 28:19:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ...


John 4:21-23:

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father…


We can thus see that it is the spirit (pneuma) that is creating a new post-ethnic People that receive the literal "seed of divinity."


We then have the Gospel of John, again, repeating this idea that it's not about an ethnic transformation where a Gentile literally becomes ethnically jewish, but instead it is about Christ donating the DNA of the Divine Family in the heavens, who are not composed of human matter and genes with an ethnicity but instead the Heavenly holy ones are divine beings (gods) are of a separate divine species so to speak. 


This is the core message of Christianity, that Christ is donating a new holy genus (the "divine species"), which breaks down ethnic barriers since Christians are being transformed into a new category of being which transcends ethnicity; because when they are baptized they supernaturally die in their mortal bodies and receive a new pneumatic body which begins a process of theosis: which transcends ethnic boundaries and individual ethnicity altogether, as the Christians' mortal bodies have died so that ethnicity supernaturally disappears altogether; for even though they remain temporarily in ethnic bodies of flesh, they are becoming divinized pneumatic bodies as divine holy ones. Thus, Gentile Christians are not supernaturally  turned into ethnic Jews but have become literal children of God (the literal offspring of the Divine Family by adoption through theosis). 


This theme of theosis that transcends ethnic boundaries is not just in the writings of Paul but we see it as well in for example John 1:12-15, 29-34 (EXB):


12 But to all who did accept [receive] him and believe in him [L in his name; C the name indicating the character of the person] he gave the right [power; authority] to become children of God. 13 They did not become his children in any human way [by natural descent; by physical birth; L by blood]—by any human parents [human passion/decision; L desire/will of the flesh] or human desire [a husband’s decision; L desire/will of a man/husband]. They were born of God.

14 The Word became a human [T flesh] and lived [made his home; pitched his tabernacle; C God’s glorious presence dwelt in Israel’s tabernacle in the wilderness] among us. We saw his ·glory [majesty]—the glory that belongs to the ·only Son [one and only; T only begotten] of [who came from] the Father—and he was full of ·grace and truth [God’s gracious love and faithfulness; Ex. 34:5–7]15 John tells the truth about [testifies concerning; witnesses about] him and cries out, saying, “This is the One I told you about: ‘The One who comes after me [C in time] is greater than I am, because he was living [existed] before me [C a reference to Christ’s preexistence; 1:1–2].’”


29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him. John said, “Look, the Lamb of God [C lambs were used for sacrifice; Gen. 22:8], who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the One I was talking about [1:15] when I said, ‘A man will come after me, but he is greater than I am, because he ·was living [existed] before me.’ 31 Even I did not ·know [recognize] who he was, although I came baptizing with water so that the people of Israel would know who he is [he might be revealed to Israel].”

Then John ·said [testified; bore witness], “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven in the form of a dove and ·rest [remain] on him. Until then I did not know who the Christ was [or he was the one; L him]. But the God who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘You will see the Spirit come down and rest [remain] on a man; he is the One who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have seen this happen, and I tell you the truth [testify; bear witness]: This man is the Son of God.”[a]


This is why Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that basically through his death and resurrection, a new life-giving spirit (pneuma) would break down the walls of separation between all ethnic groups. You see the Samaritan woman was considered by Jews outside the boundaries of Judaism. So you had the Samaritans worshiping in their own ethnically boundaried locations separated from the Jews. While Jews had their own ethnic boundaries and seperated worshiping locations. So Jesus basically says to her that when he soon dies and resurrects, God's omnipresent fluid pneuma will flow everywhere and indwell anyone which will replace all ethnic boundaries which separates Gentiles from Jews and Jews from Samaritans; and so that instead, everyone will worship out in the open as one "pneumatic people" beyond ethnic boundary walls. Here is how Jesus says it, speaking to the Samaritan woman in John 4:23-24 (EXB):


23 [L But] The time [L hour; see 4:21] is coming when the true worshipers will worship the Father in ·spirit [or the Spirit] and truth, and that time is here already [has now come; is now here]. You see, the Father too is actively seeking such people to worship him. 24 God is spirit [Spirit], and those who worship him must worship in spirit [Spirit] and truth".


Remember that the the word Spirit here means Pneuma: a divinity donating fluid air-like omnipresent fluid substance that both inspires and divanizes as the  mind and power of God emanating from his divine nature. 


Another translation of John 4:23-24 (Amplified Bible):


23 But a time is coming and is already here when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit [from the heart, the inner self] and in truth; for the Father seeks such people to be His worshipers. 24 God is spirit [the Source of life, yet invisible to mankind], and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”


So it is clearly not about ethnicity at all but what is going on is the idea of theosis or deification which had become popular during this time; and was being utilized by Paul and New Testament writers to break down ethnic boundary walls and religious divisions; in order to create a new separate identity of everyone in Christ becoming  literal children/offspring of God.


What I take from this is that we cannot really know for sure what exactly Paul meant and in the end we are speculating. As the author of Two Approaches to Pauline Discourse, Albert Harril writes:


... I would like to ask Matthew Thiessen a similar question.  Your argument often relies on claims about knowing the mind of Paul (p. 96), even as you admit that “all of this thinking lies beneath the surface of Paul’s argument” (p. 147).  How can the historian know authorial intention?  Does this problem matter for your thesis?

Sunday, October 5, 2025

Introduction: The Case for an Indo-European Christianity

 


This is intended for a particular audience. I have noticed a rise in interest and curiosity about Norse Paganism. This blog covers in part my own learning about my European ancestry (Germanic and Scandinavian) and my interest in the Norse mythology of my ancestors. I have noticed that many people of European ancestry have become curious about Norse Paganism, and in some cases some (not all) of these Norse Pagan groups (or Asatru groups) have argued for a kind of racial mythology and racial identify, and reject Christianity because of its Jewish roots. While I personally reject any form of racist ideology, I can understand that desire to get back in touch with your European roots and identify with your own lineal genetic ancestry and even the indigenous religion of your ancestors. I truly sympathize with those longings and felt something similar for a time. And so it took me a while to overcome those ethnocentric tendencies and find value in Christianity. I came to realize that Christianity is basically a collaboration between Indo-European peoples and Semitic peoples; and so I am not abandoning or rejecting my Indo-European roots in finding value in Christianity as a worldview or spiritual practice because as I see it Christianity is a hybrid religion.


In the following blog series, I will make a case for why I, as a European, personally choose to be basically "Christian Adjcent" as a "Jordan Peterson type Christian," rather than becoming a Norse pagan in my worldview or spiritual practice.


The reason I choose to be a kind of cultural Christian of the type like a Jordan Peterson or Tom Holland (author of Dominion), is for basically pragmatic reasons. In my opinion, while I understand that Norse Paganism is the "spiritual way" of my ancient Scandinavian and Germanic ancestors, the fact is the Scandinavian Kings for example chose to convert to Christianity for pragmatic reasons. As the pro-pagan The Ark site admits:


... There was strong resistance to Christianity among Norse, Saxons, Frisians, etc. The Franks and some of the other Germanic tribes converted largely because of the authority of Roman culture which they wanted to adopt. Think of the impact of American culture globally today. But Charlemagne's conversion of the Saxons and Frisians was violent, brutal, and forceful


Norse conversion happened largely from the top down as kings converted for the sake of power. The religion had to be almost completely transformed and distorted to fit their heroic worldview. ...

 

(Source)

 

The magazine-book Book of Vikings Fom their Origins and Conquest to their Legacy by All About History (Issue 17 2024) states 


Ironically, some Vikings became fanatical adherents to the Christian cause. Kings like Harold Bluetooth of Denmark, Olafr Tryggvason of Norway or Gnut the Great, with his Anglo-Danish Empire, were avid sponsors of Christianity, doing any extravagant gifts to monasteries and churches and enforcing conversion to the new faith among their [people].


So it looks to me like Pagan Europeans were converting other Pagan Europeans to Christianity. Hence we have European descent essentially converted ourselves to Christianity. Why did we do that? We obviously had our reasons.  If part of that reason was, as The Ark author implies, was due to a watered down version of Christianity, i.e. a Europeanized version of Christianity, why not just go back to that version of Christianity? In fact, I already see that happening in many Christian circles with the trend toward a "Masculine Christianity" as exemplified for example by the "orthobos" phenomenon.


It's clear to me from history that Christianity was clearly "the winner" in the marketplace of ideas, as the more successful and powerful worldview as a more useful mythology for  organizing and civilizing a kingdom, nation or culture. In other words, I don't think my Germanic ancestors were idiots in converting to Christianity, they had their reasons and I think they were smart ones.


Because Norse Paganism was basically an oral tradition and nothing was written down in the form of "reliable scripture" like we have with the Bible, it is now basically a lost religion for the most part in my opinion. The Norse Pagan sources we do have about the Norse pagan gods were produced by Scadnavian Christians. So there is no way to know with any degree of certainty what in the Norse stories and mythology is of Christian origins. Did Odin really sacrifice himself to himself or was that a Christianization of a former story? Is Ragnarok authentically Norse pagan in how it's told or has it been Chrisrtianized by ideas from the Book of Revelation in the New Testament?


I think that I've actually come to the position that it's actually more respectful to my Norse ancestors to respect their own decisions, as most of the Germanic and Scandinavian Kings chose to convert to Christianity for practical reasons because they saw Christianity as an organizational tool for consolidating power and civilizing city states. I also think that Christianity in its post-Constantinian form is more of a "Germanic Christianity" anyway as it combines the best of Judaism and the Indo-European mythos into one after Constantine. 


As the author of A Vitalist Christianity? Don’t Bet on It, puts it:


The Western tradition is Christianity. Some try to deny this, but they’re wrong. Even if you just want to get rid of Christianity and start all over again, by reconnecting with what you consider to be the West’s pagan roots, you’ll have to go through Christianity to do so. Your opposition to Christianity ties you to it, and it to you.


Our access to the Classical World, and to European paganism of the ancient world more broadly —inasmuch as we can know anything about it at all — is mediated by Christianity. For a thousand years, Christianity guarded vital aspects of the pagan past and carried them forward, not least by preserving much of the institutional structure and the imperial aspirations of the Roman Empire. Christianity preserved the language and learning of the Classical World too; although much was also lost. 

 

T.S. Eliot was right when he said, in The Idea of a Christian Society, that the West would only cease to be Christian when a different positive ideology took its place. By “positive” he meant of course a substantive set of doctrines and beliefs, a worldview that actually has some meaningful content of its own, rather than being just a series of negations and denials. It’s not enough just to say “I don’t go to Church and I don’t believe, so I’m not a Christian.” The air we breathe and the very earth we walk on are Christian. ...

 

... a vitalist Christianity is possible. The evidence for this position is also based in history, in the brute fact that men like Hernan Cortes and Henry the Navigator existed. Such men were Christians as much as they were explorers, swashbucklers and heroes. Rather than denying the physical side of life, they embraced it with gusto. And if they existed before, so the thinking goes, they can exist again. ... 

 

While it’s true that these men existed and that they were, at least during their own day, numbered among the faithful, this is hardly less shallow a position than the cod-Nietzschean one. For starters, it underestimates the extent to which there is, and always will be, a conflict between priestly and warrior values at the heart of Christan morality. My friend Semmelweis wrote a fantastic essay on the subject in Issue Ten of MAN’S WORLD, using the fourth Rambo film (the one where he goes to Burma – you know, the really gory one) as an illustration. This split between warrior and priest is seen elsewhere, including in the Indo-European tradition – indeed, it may be an “eternal tension between compassion and power”, as Semmelweis puts it –  but in Christianity it takes a particularly acute form that seems to offer little hope of a reconciliation.

 

 For every incident like Jesus casting out the moneylenders from the temple or telling his disciples to go and buy swords, there is a myriad of instances that can be interpreted as fundamentally at odds with the warrior spirit championed by vitalism. Turn the other cheek, render unto Caesar, think not of the morrow and the entire message of the Sermon on the Mount… The central drama of Christianity, the Crucifixion, admits no easy answer to the question of Christianity’s attitude to the body and physical life. A pro-vitalist Christianity would always rest on interpretations that are easily disputed from multiple angles at once, not only from the Bible, but also from the works of the Great Church Fathers and events from Church history.

 

This is true, that the New Testament has many pacifist ideas, but this assumes there is only one consistent version of Christianity. As the book The Human Faces of God and Randel Holmes explains, the Christian tradition is more of an argument with itself, with constant internal power plays rather than a consistent dogma settled by egoless priests directed by deity. My own explanation of the integration and balancing of the "spirit of vitalism" and pacifism is explained by what I call the phases and strategies of God.


The author goes on to admit that Christianity became as powerful and influential throughout the West as it was because of the Indo-European energy, when he writes:


Men like Hernan Cortes and, much earlier, barbarian kings like Alaric who converted to Christianity, appeared during a very particular phase in the history of the Church. For the first 1700 years of its history, certainly up to the Siege of Vienna in 1683, Christianity was at war for its existence in the most literal sense. In short: the Church needed men like Alaric and Cortes to survive.

 

After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, an essential part of the continuation of Christianity in its territories was an accommodation with Germanic life. We can see this in the famous letter of Pope Gregory the Great to Abbot Mellitus, who was in the process of converting the Anglo-Saxons in the kingdom of Kent. Instead of destroying their pagan temples, Pope Gregory told Mellitus to reconsecrate them to God, the better to win the Anglo-Saxons over. 

 

The conversion to Christianity of the new barbarian kingdoms of Europe changed the Church as much as it changed the barbarians themselves. Many of these Germanic accruals were later washed away by the Reformation and the Counter Reformation, but it’s in this context – of a Church that had to change itself to survive, by cosying up to dangerous men – that we must understand the “vitalist Christians” of yore.

 

The author goes on to argue that this unification of cultural energies into different roles, the forming of the strong manly knight at the gates with sword alongside with the pious pacifist priest inside the guarded gates, was done out of necessity in order to cause the Christian institution to survive and flourish. He says that we need such strong men of vitalist energy today in Christianity; but then then he goes on to criticize the Christian Churches of the West, both Protestant and Catholic, providing evidence that they are by and large not supporting vitalist men.


 I agree with the author and yet he is denying the counterculture within Christianity, like the "Christian Vitalism on the Right who are pushing back, and the Eastern Orthodox Church and "Ortho Bro.s" who are definitely not bending the knee to the radical far-Left


The author concludes by stating, "The simple truth is that, even if a vitalist Christianity is possible – and I’m not saying it isn’t – there’s no question of the institutional Church [not] accepting it in any regard. ..." I agree but I don't see those espousing a Muscular Christianity caring whether or not the institutional churches support them; and it's not stopping them from moving forward and promoting a more vitalist Christianity.


The Indo-Europeans and ancient Israel both had a warrior philosophy and mythology because that was the environment that generated that particular warrior culture. Ancient Israel evolved culturally into civilized Hellenized Jews and later Rabbinic Judaism; and ancient Indo-Europeans spread out becoming Greco-Romans and new mythologies like the mystery cults and becoming Hindus and Zoroastrians which all influenced Second Temple Judaism and Christianity. Then there was the germanization of Mideval Christianity. So whether it is through the Hindus or through Roman Christianity, the Indo-European peoples eventually developed more sophisticated civilizing mythologies after the origional Proto-Indo-Euopean mythos or religion. So I see it as no big deal that Christianity as a hybrid of Israelite religion and Greek philosophy is the American religion, as a useful tool for to achieving higher states of consciousness and civilizing affects. I don't see why an Indo-European needs to fixate on the pre-Christian Norse mythology rather than seeing all mythology as remix, as maps of meaning, and Christianity is a collorbarion between Jews and Indo-Europeans. 


The bottom line is Christianity built our Western culture and is deeply imbedded in our public consciousness as North Americans. I will conclude by quoting from Jordan Paterson's book We Who Wrestle with God, pages xxx to xxxi, because I compleltely agree with what he says below:


For better or worse, the story is the thing—and for better or worse, the story on which our western psyches and cultures are now somewhat fragilely founded—however fragile they’ve become—is most fundamentally the story told in the library that makes up the biblical corpus, the compilation of drama that sits at the base of our culture and through which we look at the world. This is the story on which Western civilization is predicated. It is a collection of characterizations not only of God, whose imitation, worship, or, indeed, embodiment is held to be the highest of all possible aims, but of man and of woman, whose characters are held to exist in relationship to that God, and of society, in relation to the individual and the divine. It is, as well, the revelation of the sacrifice that makes such aim possible, and an examination in dramatic form of the transcendent target that is held to unite all things in the best possible manner. The biblical story, in its totality, is the frame through which the world of facts reveals itself, insofar as the West itself is concerned: it is the description of the hierarchy of value within which even science itself (that is, the science that ultimately pursues the good) is made possible. The Bible is the library of stories on which the most productive, freest, and most stable and peaceful societies the world has ever known are predicated—the foundation of the West, plain and simple.

 

The landscape of the fictional is the world of good and evil—the world of value, with its pinnacle ever receding into the promised land itself, and the eternal pit of abysmal and infinite suffering occupying the lowest of possible places. The biblical stories illuminate the eternal path forward up the holy mountain to the heavenly city, while simultaneously warning of the apocalyptic dangers lurking in the deviant, the marginal, the monstrous, the sinful, the unholy, the serpentine, and the positively demonic. God, in this formulation, is the spirit that leads up. Man is the being who struggles with that spirit with every decision, because a decision is a matter of prioritization; with every glance, as every glance is a sacrifice of possibility toward some desired end, and with every action as he moves toward some destination and away from all others. At every moment of consciousness, we are fated to wrestle with God.


There is also the practicality of being Christian as a North American. Where I live there's still a Protestant Church on almost every second or third street. Pagan groups that are available are so diverse and unorganized that I don't find most of them appealing and the groups I do find appealing are not even in my home state or hours away; and all of them are an extremely small minority of the population. Thus, belonging to any kind of Norse religion or social club in North America ends up being impractical.  


A recent pew research article here says that as of February 2025


After many years of steady decline, the share of Americans who identify as Christians shows signs of leveling off – at least temporarily – at slightly above six-in-ten, according to a massive new Pew Research Center survey of 36,908 U.S. adults. ...

 

...  The largest subgroups of Christians in the United States are Protestants – now 40% of U.S. adults – and Catholics, now 19%. ...


According to Google AI, "Norse Pagans, also known as Heathens, are a sub-group of modern Paganism, making their specific numbers too small to be broken out in a large, representative survey." According to the Wikipedia article here, the Norse religion (or Asatru)  in America appears to me to be less unorganized and split into various factions and struggling to maintain their numbers. In contrast, like it or not if you are of European descent, the fact is Judeo-Christianity is the dominant organized power in North America!

Thursday, October 2, 2025

Ehrman on Christian Success as Syncretic, Missional, Monotheist, Creedally Unifying & Effective at Requests for Divine Blessings

In the following guidebook, we learn that the main reason Christianity was successful in the first two centuries, is because it incorporated Greco-Roman (or Indo-European) mythologies about the nature of the gods and humans, along with it being a uniquely missional proselytizing religion combined with being a monotheistic exclusivist religion, which made it superior to any other religion of the time. 


Christianity was also more powerful than the other pagan religions, in the minds of many pagan converts, because Roman pagans became convinced that the Christian God was more useful and powerful than the pagan gods when it came to providing divine favor. In other words, many Gentile Romans converted to Christianity because they believed that the Christian God could provide more favorable results in life than the pagan gods. This made me think of Constantine's vision where he believed he was told, "In this sign (the cross or Christ's name) you will conquer."


As Bart Ehrman puts it (from a section below):


Pagans, as a rule, worshipped their many gods because the gods were powerful and could provide for humans what humans could not provide for themselves out of their own resources: rain, crops, health, safe childbirth, victory in war, life, peace, happiness, and so on. ... Divine power also explains why pagans began to convert to worship the Christian God: It was a matter of who was better able to provide what was needed in life. Christians succeeded in convincing pagans that Christ and his Father were more powerful than their gods; that they alone could provide what is needed for this life; and that they could, in fact, provide eternal life. Once they were convinced of this, pagans converted. There did not need to be massive conversions between the days of Paul and the days of the emperor Constantine to make Christianity a major player on the religious scene by the early 4th century. Usually, it is estimated that about 5 percent of the empire had converted at that time. .... So far as we know, there were no other religions like Christianity in the ancient world, that is, religions that were both missionary and exclusivistic. Judaism may have been exclusive, but it was not missionary; a number of Greco-Roman religions were missionary, but they were not exclusivistic. Christianity succeeded, in no small part, precisely because it alone among the religions of antiquity insisted on the exclusivity of its views. Because converts needed to renounce their former religions, Christianity destroyed all other religions as it grew. 


From How Jesus Became God Course Guidebook by Professor Bart D. Ehrman by thegreatcourses.com:


Loc 170-200:


Apollonius of Tyana

 

About 2,000 years ago, a remarkable man was born in a remote part of the Roman Empire. His mother was told that he would not be a mortal but, in fact, would be divine. She gave birth to him in a miraculous way. As an adult, this man collected disciples around him who came to believe that he was the Son of God. And he did miracles to prove dead. At the end of his life, he ascended to heaven. This man was Apollonius of Tyana, a pagan philosopher active some 50 years after Jesus and widely known in his own day. We know about the life of Apollonius from the writings of his later follower Philostratus, who based his account, he tells us, on earlier eyewitness reports. Later, there were debates between the followers of Jesus and the followers of Apollonius, concerning which was the Son of God and which was a fraud. We see these debates in a battle of words between the pagan Hierocles and the Christian Eusebius. But it is important to note that these were not the only two miracleworking Sons of God in the ancient world. There were, in fact, a was widely known throughout antiquity. To understand how ancient people could believe that a human could be a god or a god could be a human, we need to know more about religion in the Greco-Roman world.

 

Ancient Polytheism from Jews and, eventually, Christians. Scholars sometimes call these Greco-Roman religions “pagan,” which in this context does not have a derogatory connotation. Greek and Roman polytheists had thousands of different religions, but they had numerous features in common.

  •  function, purpose, and place imaginable.

 

  • Such worship pleased the gods, and in return, they could help ...

 

  • Polytheist religions did not maintain that there was a vast chasm that separated the divine from the human realms. This is the common conception today, especially in the Western religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), but it was not a widely held view in antiquity.

 For ancient Greeks and Romans, the divine realm and the human realms were heavily populated, and both humans and divinities...sometimes overlapped; thus, gods could be, in some sense, human, and some humans could be, in some sense, divine. It may be easiest to imagine the divine realm for ancient pagans as a kind of pyramid, with the very top spot occupied by the one ultimate god; the next tier, by the great gods of Greece and Rome; the next, by local and less powerful divinities; the next, by daimonia (spirit beings less powerful than the gods but more directly involved ... Below that tier were the humans, who themselves could be ranked in terms of their power, intelligence, and beauty. In this understanding, there is not a chasm separating the divine and human realms but a kind of continuity.


Models of Divine Men

 

In this ancient view of the divine realm, gods could sometimes be or become humans, and humans could sometimes be or become gods. There were three basic models for “divine men” in this world. Sometimes it was understood that gods could and would come down to earth in human form to make a temporary visit for purposes of their own. Sometimes it was understood that a person was born from the sexual union of a god and a mortal; thus, that the person was, in some sense, part divine and part human. Sometimes it was understood that a human was elevated by the gods to their realm, usually after death, and at that point divinized, made into a god.

 

Gods Becoming Human

 

There are numerous stories in the ancient myths about gods temporarily assuming human form to meet, speak, and interact with humans. These stories in many ways are similar to later Christian beliefs about Christ being a preexistent divine being who came to earth as a human, only later to return to the heavenly realm. The pagan stories, of course, can be found in ancient Greek and Roman mythology. One interesting example that serves to illustrate the point is the account told by the Roman author Ovid of the temporary “incarnation”of Jupiter and Mercury and their meeting with the poor elderly couple Philemon and Baucis. Incarnation sometimes did that, according to the mythical tales related by Ovid. Ovid was one of the great authors of Roman antiquity, who narrated stories that had been passed down for centuries, especially in his book Metamorphoses. In the story we are interested in, Jupiter, the chief god, and Mercury, the messenger of the gods, temporarily took on human form and visited a region of Asia Minor. Only Philemon and Baucis, a sweet elderly couple, welcomed the gods into their home. As a result, even though everyone who had rejected the gods was to be destroyed, these two were given any wish they desired. They asked to be made head of the gods’shrine and to die in unison. Here, we have a tale of gods who visit humans, in human form, for a relatively short time. They are indistinguishable from other humans; they interact with humans; and their interactions bring both judgment and blessing. Ovid’s Story and the New Testament The story of Jupiter and Mercury appears to lie behind an interesting account found in the New Testament, in the book of Acts, an account of the missionary activities of Jesus’s followers after his death Traveling in the same region of Asia Minor, the apostles Paul and Barnabas are mistaken, by a miracle they perform, as Zeus and Hermes. (Zeus was the Greek version of the Roman Jupiter; Hermes, the Greek version of Mercury.) The people in this region remembered the story of Philemon and Baucis and did not want to replicate the mistake of those who were judged by the gods. These two stories show one of the ways that ancient people imagined how something like divine men could exist: Gods could assume, temporarily, the guise of humans in order to visit people and interact with them.

 

... Humans Born of the Gods

 

In the ancient world, it was not uncommon for an exceedingly powerful or intelligent person to be thought of as more than human. In some cases that status was because he was not, in fact, a mere mortal but had one of the gods as his father. This was the case with Alexander the Great, rumored to be the son of Zeus. o A humorous account of such a birth is told by the Roman playwright Plautus in his work Amphitryon. Here, Alcmena, the mother of Hercules, is made pregnant by Zeus’s Roman counterpart, Jupiter. The god disguises himself to resemble Alcmena’s husband, Amphitryon, in order to spend a long night frolicking in her arms. o It is not clear that anyone actually believed that this story was history, but it was seen as a plausible view: Sometimes gods had sex with women, and the result was a demigod, part god and part human.

 

Apotheosis

 

A third way a human could also be or become divine involves a process known as apotheosis into a god. We have seen an instance of this already in Ovid’s story of the elderly couple Philemon and Baucis. More commonly this divinization of a human involved great philosophers or, more commonly still, incredibly powerful rulers. The Roman historian Livy tells of how Romulus, the founder the divine realm as a god at the end of his life. The Roman biographer Suetonius discusses the idea that Julius Caesar was thought to have been made a god after he died. In Caesar’s case, it is not surprising that his adopted son, Octavian (who was later to become Caesar Augustus, the had become a god. If his father was a god, what did that make Octavian?

 

The Cult of the Emperor

 

With Caesar Augustus, we have the beginning of the emperor cult, the practice of honoring emperors, both dead and living, as gods. Note that the word cult is not derogatory in this context but refers to the care of the gods. ... Thus, the Roman orator Quintilian speaks of gods who were born divine and of other gods who had “won immortality by their valor,” that is, those who had been made gods because of their amazing deeds. In the Roman world, this normally happened after an emperor had died, based on a vote of the Senate, seen to ratify an emperor’s divine status. But it often happened for living emperors, as well, as can be seen, for example, in an inscription from Pergamum dedicated to the god Augustus Caesar or one in Miletus dedicated to the emperor Caligula, who is called the god Sebastos. How are we to understand this adoration of the emperor as a divine being? The older view of scholarship was that we should not take it seriously. In this view, those said to be gods were known to be as human as anyone else. The emperor cult was simply political In other ancient societies, such as Egypt, it was thought that the ruler—the pharaoh—was an embodiment of a god. ... propaganda, which no one ever really believed, that encouraged people to worship their leaders as divine. Logically, if the ruler is divine, then he cannot be disobeyed. Recent scholarship has reevaluated this older view and offered a different perspective. There is little evidence that of Rome itself and rarely by the emperors. These were grassroots movements, in which rulers were revered for their superhuman power and authority. o Whether or not people actually believed in their hearts that the emperors were gods is impossible to know. However, the emperors were certainly treated as gods, for example, by them and by having temples built and dedicated to them ... thus, they had divine-like power. And as we have seen, they, too, could be called god. This adoration of divine rulers was not restricted to Rome. It can be seen clearly in an inscription dedicated to the ruler of Syria, Antiochus, and his wife Laodice in gratitude for their overcoming a foreign power. The city Teas set up cult statues of the two, an inscription in which they were placed on the same level as the local god Dionysus and said to be “common saviors of our city.”

 

Divine Humans

 

In short, Jesus was not the only divine man in the ancient world. Some were thought to have been gods who came down to earth temporarily in human form. Others were thought to have been literally the son of a god, the divine product of the union of a god and a mortal woman. Still others were thought to have been taken up into heaven at the end of their lives to live and rule in the divine realm. Jesus, as we will see, was thought to be all three of these things by different Christians in different times and different places.

 

... Divine Beings in Ancient Judaism

 

It is true that Judaism was distinctive among all the religions of the Greco-Roman world in insisting that only one God was the true divinity worthy of worship. In fact, by the time of Jesus, most Jews were monotheists, believing that there was only one God and that the gods of the pagans did not actually exist. But it had not always been that way in Judaism. For centuries, many Israelites were not monotheists but henotheists; they believed that other gods existed, but they were not to be worshipped, as evidenced already in the Ten Commandments. Eventually, a strain of monotheism developed within ancient Israel, as evident in such passages of the Hebrew Bible as Isaiah 45. If that was the case in the days of Jesus, is it true, then, that there could be no other divine beings who interacted with humans? Was there just God in heaven and we mortals on earth? In point of fact, even Jews who were monotheists still believed in other divine beings, that is, hyper-intelligent beings who were superhuman; who lived in the divine realm, not here on earth; and who were far more powerful than mere mortals. Among these mentioned in the Bible.

 

Divine Beings as God

 

Sometimes, the Bible speaks of one of these other divine beings coming to earth in the shape of a human, and sometimes, these other divine beings who appear as humans are actually called God appears on earth in human or other form. Already in the book of Genesis, the father of Israel, Abraham, is said to have an encounter with three “men.” Later in the story, two of these men are revealed to be angels, and the third is God. In Exodus 3, God appears as a burning bush, commanding Moses to bring the Israelites out of Egypt. occurs in Exodus 3 at the burning bush. Here, Moses is addressed by the “Angel of the Lord,” who is then later called “the Lord.” This Angel of the Lord also sometimes appears to humans as himself a human. We see an example in Genesis 16, when the Angel of the Lord speaks with and rescues a woman named Hagar from near death from exposure. In other passages of the Bible, we are told that angels are either sons of God or God himself and that they become human. This is implied in the famous passage in Job 1, when the “sons of God” appear before God in his divine council. Angels are explicitly called gods in Psalm 82. In other Jewish traditions, angels are said to become human, as in the text known as the Prayer of Joseph. In addition, and equally striking, we are told in some Jewish texts that humans can become angels. This is clearly laid out in 2 Baruch 51 and 2 Enoch 22. In sum, in the Jewish tradition, there are divine beings other than God who are called gods; these divine beings can become human; God himself sometimes appears temporarily in human form; and humans themselves can sometimes become angelic beings.

 

Beings Born of Divine Union

 

Moreover, we also have stories in the Jewish tradition of beings who are born to the union of divinities and humans. This is the point of the bizarre passage in Genesis 6, where the “sons of God” take wives among the “daughters of men” and produce semi-divine offspring. This story is expounded in the book of 1 Enoch, a later Jewish text that understood the offspring to be malevolent giants. The idea that other beings besides the one true God could be called gods is found not only in the pagan but also in the Jewish tradition, and just as pagans thought gods could temporarily become human and that some people were born to the union of divine and human beings, so, too, did many Jews in the days of Jesus.

 

 Loc. 1300-1600:


Early Christianity in the Roman Empire

 

To make sense of Constantine’s conversion, we need to consider a brief history of the relationship of the Christian religion to the Roman Empire. As we have seen, the earliest Christians were a group of Jews who came to believe that Jesus had been exalted to heaven when God raised him from the dead. These earliest Christians began to seek converts among their fellow Jews. As far as we know, this led to some opposition among nonChristian Jews but no opposition, at least at the outset, from Roman would have considered them an internal Jewish affair. But eventually, with the missionary efforts of the apostle Paul and others like him, Gentiles began to convert to the Christian faith, believing that Christ had died, had been raised from the dead, and had been exalted to heaven. As the church became increasingly Gentile, it became decreasingly Jewish.

 

Pagans and Early Christians

 

There are three key questions we need to ask and answer about pagans and their relationship to early Christians: Why did pagans worship the gods they did? Why did they persecute Christians for worshipping their own God? What compelled some pagans to convert to the Christian faith ... As it turns out, the answer to all three questions is the same. It all has to do with ancient understandings of divine power. Pagans, as a rule, worshipped their many gods because the gods were powerful and could provide for humans what humans could not provide for themselves out of their own resources: rain, crops, health, safe childbirth, victory in war, life, peace, happiness, and so on. Christians were persecuted not because they considered Jesus God or because they insisted on worshipping him and God the Father, but because they refused to worship the gods who were powerful enough to make life livable, happy, and prosperous for other members of the empire. If the gods are the ones who make life possible and successful, and all they require are simple, occasional acts of worship, then anyone who refused to worship them must be the cause of disasters, such as droughts, famines, earthquakes, military defeats, and so on. Because the Christians were the ones who refused to worship the state gods, they were the cause of problems in the community; that is why they were persecuted. Divine power also explains why pagans began to convert to worship the Christian God: It was a matter of who was better able to provide what was needed in life. Christians succeeded in convincing pagans that Christ and his Father were more powerful than their gods; that they alone could provide what is needed for this life; and that they could, in fact, provide eternal life. Once they were convinced of this, pagans converted. There did not need to be massive conversions between the days of Paul and the days of the emperor Constantine to make Christianity a major player on the religious scene by the early 4th century. Usually, it is estimated that about 5 percent of the empire had converted at that time. If that’s the case, then the faith that started out with only a small group of Jesus’s followers would have needed to grow ... So far as we know, there were no other religions like Christianity in the ancient world, that is, religions that were both missionary and exclusivistic. Judaism may have been exclusive, but it was not missionary; a number of Greco-Roman religions were missionary, but they were not exclusivistic. Christianity succeeded, in no small part, precisely because it alone among the religions of antiquity insisted on the exclusivity of its views. Because converts needed to renounce their former religions, Christianity destroyed all other religions as it grew. The steady conversions to Christianity often made the pagans’ former families and friends even angrier, which meant that persecutions ratcheted up as the church grew in size and importance. ...

 

Christian Persecutions

 

Contrary to what is often imagined, the Roman emperors were rarely involved directly with the persecution of Christians. under Nero (64 C.E.), a persecution that was localized and that was not an attempt to attack Christians for being Christian. Similar things could be said about persecutions during the time of Trajan (112 C.E., as seen in the letters of Pliny the Younger) and Marcus Aurelius (177 C.E., as seen in the Letter of Lyons and Vienne). persecution instituted by an emperor did not occur until 249 C.E., under the emperor Decius. Luckily for the Christians, it lasted only for a couple of years, until the death of Decius in 251 C.E. What is called the Great Persecution occurred under the Roman emperor Diocletian, starting in 303 C.E. Diocletian sought to rid the empire of the growing Christian presence. The emperor Nero tried to shift in 64 C.E. from himself to the Christians, thus instituting a localized persecution. Constantine’s Conversion Just three years later, in 306 C.E., Constantine became the emperor, and six years after that, in 312 C.E., he converted to Christianity. We have an account of his conversion in a biography of Constantine written by Eusebius, who was his contemporary. According to these accounts, Constantine was deeply disturbed .... receive divine assistance for his military cause. Constantine claimed that the night before the battle, he had a dream of the cross and was told in his dream that this was the sign that would give him victory. He had the sign embossed on his soldiers’s hields, went into battle, and emerged victorious. From then on, Constantine considered himself a follower of Christ. There are disputes over whether this was a “genuine” conversion or not, because there are some signs that Constantine continued to worship other divinities, especially the god of the sun, but it appears that his commitment to the Christian religion was genuine. ... Constantine saw to it that persecutions were put to an end. He donated large tracts of land to the church and ... he promoted the worship of the God Christ to the state gods. ... rather than being a god who was worshipped, [Constantine] was a servant of God who urged his subordinates to worship Christ. Now, rather than being the Son of God in competition with Christ, the emperor became the servant of God in subservience to Christ. It is wrong to say that Constantine made Christianity the state religion. That would not happen until the emperor Theodosius at the end of the 4th century. But Constantine certainly made Christianity a favored religion. And by intervening in internal church affairs, such as the Arian controversy, he guaranteed that Christian concerns would be the concerns of the entire empire. In the next lecture, we will consider why Constantine may have been so invested in solving this controversy, which on the surface may have seemed simply to involve a rather technical theological point of whether Jesus was a god who came into being before the world or whether he had always existed alongside God the Father.

 

...  Agenda of the Council

 

Even though the Council of Nicea was the most momentous and important church council in the history of Christianity, its agenda and decisions are widely misunderstood today. People often think that the Christian leaders at the council “invented” the New Testament by deciding which Gospels, epistles, and so on would be considered Scripture. But the bishops at the Council of Nicea did not discuss which books should be accepted into the canon. People also often think that the Council of Nicea is when Jesus began to be considered God. Sometimes, it is said that a vote was the Son of God and that it was a close vote. Of course, that’s not true either. We have already seen that Jesus was considered the Son of God in the Christian faith, soon after his death, as his own disciples declared that he had been taken up into heaven and exalted to the level of divinity. Jesus is called the Son of God and even God in the writings of the New Testament, and he was considered God by all the proto-orthodox and most of the heretical Christians that we know about in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. ...

 

Constantine’s Concern

 

Even before the council met, the emperor Constantine was concerned about this question, not because he was theologically Constantine was concerned because he saw in Christianity a potentially unifying force in his fractured empire. The empire was vast and was culturally, politically, and religiously fragmented. In contrast, Christianity emphasized oneness: There is one God, one Son of God, one church, one faith, one hope, and so on. Christianity was a religion of unity. Constantine believed it could be used to unify the empire. But the problem was that this religion of unity was itself split; thus, Constantine saw the need to heal the split if the Christian church was to bring real religious unity to the empire. Eusebius’s biography of the emperor, The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine, preserves a letter that Constantine himself sent to Arius and Alexander to try to get them to see eye to eye on the theological issue dividing them and their followers. He is quite forthright that his concern is that Christians should be united in their beliefs. Further, he considered the issue at stake to be petty and trivial. Constantine had the letter hand-delivered to the two opponents by Ossius, an important bishop of Cordova, Spain. After delivering the letter, Ossius came back by a land route that took him through Antioch, Syria. While there, he attended a conference of church bishops that met to debate the Arian issue and in which Arius and his views were condemned by the majority. The supporters of Arius at this conference were told, however, that they would have a chance to defend their position. Thus, the Council of Nicea was born.

 

A Worldwide Gathering of the Church

 

The term ecumenical comes from a Greek word that means “world.” These councils were not merely local in nature but were worldwide, meaning that leaders from around the world attended in order to determine what Christian beliefs were to be adhered to by believers everywhere. The Council of Nicea was originally scheduled to meet in Ancyra, a city in Asia Minor (modern Turkey), but it was eventually moved to Nicaea, also in Asia Minor. The vast majority of the 318 bishops who attended came from the eastern part of the empire: Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, and so on. Western Christians were not well represented; in fact, not even the bishop of Rome, Sylvester, came but sent two legates in his place. Still, the decisions of the council were considered binding on all Christians everywhere, in no small part because the emperor ...

 

The Nicene Creed

 

After debating the issues back and forth, the council decided against the views of Arius and his followers. It was not, in fact, a close vote. All but 20 bishops agreed with these decisions. And after Constantine himself twisted their arms, 17 of those 20 agreed to sign off on the concluding statement. This statement was a creed that expressed the now-orthodox position and anathematized (that is, uttered a divine curse against) anyone who thought differently. Several points in the creed are worth emphasizing: ... Because it was the nature of Christ as God that was the major point of contention, the creed’s statements about Christ are far more lengthy, involved, and nuanced than anything said about God the Father or the Holy Spirit. Christ in this creed is not a subordinate deity to God. He is “of one substance” with the Father. The word used here is homoousios ... According to the creed, Christ is completely equal with God and himself the “true God”; there was never a time when he did not exist.

 

Christ of the Nicene Creed

 

The Christ who emerged from the Council of Nicea is obviously a far cry from the historical Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was an itinerant apocalyptic preacher from the backwaters of rural Galilee, who offended the authorities and was unceremoniously [crucified]. Now, he was confessed to be God himself, equal with the Father from eternity past. Whatever he may have been in real life, Jesus had now become fully God. ... 

 

We might think that with the declarations of the Council of Nicea, Jesus was fully, substantially, and eternally God, and that was the end of the story. But of course, every ending marks a implications. They involve Christians in relation to the pagan world, to Jews, and to themselves. Results of Constantine’s Conversion The results of Constantine’s conversion and his intervention in Christian affairs obviously had an enormous effect on the broader Roman world. Now, rather than being a persecuted and relatively small minority within the empire, Christianity began to assert itself as a favored religion, with masses of conversions; by the end of the 4th century, nearly 50 percent of the empire was Christian. At that time, in less than 60 years after the Council of Nicea, the Christianity the religion of the state for all practical purposes. ... The emperors were no longer the enemies of Christ and persecutors of his people; they were the worshippers of Christ and patrons of his people. From that time on, Christianity was destined to become the religion of the West. This never would have happened had Jesus not come to be considered God. Christianity would have remained a small group of Jewish followers of Jesus who continued to think of him as an important teacher of the Law of Moses, which they would have followed and insisted that other members of their sect follow. Christianity would never have broken out of its Jewish matrix, converted masses of Gentiles, converted the Roman emperor, or become the dominant religion of Western culture and civilization. We never would have had the Middle Ages, Renaissance, Reformation, or arguably, the Enlightenment. That Jesus became God had historical, cultural, social, political, and economic effects that can scarcely be calculated.

 

Rise of Anti-Semitism

 

Some of the effects of Jesus’s becoming God were directly related to the Jewish people, most of whom retained their own religion and, of course, refused to acknowledge that Jesus was in any sense God. There was nothing in Jesus’s earthly proclamations that made him stand out as in any way non-Jewish. He and his followers kept the Jewish Law, followed Jewish customs, and studied the Jewish Scriptures. His followers believed, during his life, that he was the Jewish king of the coming kingdom, but they did not think that he was starting a new religion. ... Jesus’s followers maintained that the belief in the death and Resurrection of their messiah was essential for salvation. In their view, Jews who rejected that message rejected their own salvation, which meant that they were alienated from God and doomed for eternal destruction. Non-Christian Jews were soon seen as hard-hearted and rebellious against God. It was not long before Christians began to declare that because Jews had rejected God, God had rejected them. Thus began the long history of Christian anti-Judaism ... We can see the beginnings of this history already within the pages of the New Testament, where Jews are often characterized as the opponents of Christ, as hard-hearted sinners against God, and even as children of the devil. This kind of polemic against Jews came to more vehement expression in the second Christian century, as can be seen, for example, in a sermon discovered in modern times, delivered by a bishop of the city of Sardis named Melito. This sermon is an attack on Jews for rejecting the one God had sent to them for their own salvation. More than that, because Christ was God, Melito believed that Jews, who were responsible for his death, were guilty of murdering God. ... It is one thing for a small, persecuted minority to lash out against others with its powerless rhetoric. But what happened when this belief in Jesus as God came to be the religion of the state? What happened when it became the majority opinion and had the power of empire to back it up? The answer is that the rhetoric used earlier to attack Jews verbally was transformed into political power, so mistreatment, and in mob violence. Jews became legally marginalized under Christian emperors and made second-class citizens with restricted legal rights and limited economic possibilities. By the end of the 4th century, it became illegal for a Christian to convert to Judaism, for a Christian to marry a Jew, and for Jews to build or even repair a synagogue. Accompanying these forms of legislation were acts of violence against Jews, such as the burning of synagogues, which even if not sponsored by the state authorities, were tacitly condoned. Once those who believed that Jesus was God were given secular power, they used that power against their long-time enemies, the Jews who rejected the Christ. ...

 


The Frankfurt Inscription (a German Cross Amulet from 200s AD)

 According to this article by Tim Newcomb:   An 1,800-year-old silver amulet discovered buried in a Frankfurt, Germany grave, still next to...