The PoD is that the Romans are far more brutal in suppressing Christianity, which leads to a mass exodus of Christians to Iran (around the 2nd century AD). There they eventually proselytize the entire country.
Since Christianity in OTL was influenced by Greco-Roman civilization, how would Christianity be different since it'd be influenced by Iranian civilization in TTL?
I do not believe the prompt itself would be feasible. Rome had already arisen to dominate the Med, including Judea. The only workaround would be to have Rome not rise to fully dominate the Med in the first place.
What I feel would still satisfy the spirit of the prompt; what if Christianity took firm root in Iran, displacing Zorastrianism? Christianity was first an African and Asian belief before becoming a European one. We only view it as European today because the Islamic expansion decimated the Asian and African branches.
If Christianity takes firm root in Iran... that would have some interesting implications. It is likely that this would result is lessened hostilities between Byzantium and the Sassanids. Perhaps to the point where Islam doesnt have the opening it needs to explode out of Arabia.
I would expect Iran (or the Patriachs of Antoch and Jerusalem) to have significantly stronger influence within Christianity. We wouldnt have a "Rome v Orthodoxy" Great Shicism. An Iranian seat to Christianity would result in alternate doctrines gaining ground. Students of theology would rejoice.
This basically happened OTL with the establishment of the Church of the East in the 5th century
The only real changes are the Roman Emperors don’t convert. Meaning Magnentius is probably a Pagan that allows Christian worship to continue like under Constantine
That trend continues under Constantius II but then persecution returns under Julian before the rise of the Valentinian dynasty
Then someone who isn’t Theodosius needs to take power. Someone from Julian’s Anti-Christianity camp or adjacent to it
It honestly doesn’t change much. The Oriental Orthodox Churches would still develop on Sassanid Persia, Axum, Armenia and Egypt independently of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Both of which also exist in competition/opposition to a new form of Hellenism
Iran would also need Anoshazad to succeed in his coup to establish the church of the east as the state religion, but Zoroastrian society was largely secular. Religious Persecution were always politically motivated and Apostasy was frowned upon but not explicitly forbidden
That trend likely continues even under a new regime under the church of the east. Despite political attacks against Zoroastrian clergy and nobility at the start of his reign. Anoshazad likely relaxes his policies later on
The only real difference is Ctesiphon and Mesopotamia would end up speaking an offshoot of Aramaic
As for the dynastic changes…no clue if this avoids the last major war between the Sassanids and Byzantines
It's worth noting that Christianity was already influenced by Romans from near the very beginning because of Paul, but I get the prompt.
Christianity more than likely stays in the Middle East and either dies out or remains a minor religion. Meanwhile, Rome rallies around a similar system that offers universal salvation, such as Buddhism or one of the various other cults that were in the Empire. THAT is what most Westerners would wind up meditating under today.
If the Romans move toward an enlightenment-focused belief system, Rome may still collapse, but the empires that we know could leap out ahead of the pack even faster than they did.
Not going to be Buddhism. In fact, Rome doesn’t need to import belief systems at all. They’ll just rework Stoicism and Platonism and add some devotional flavor and a new can of paint. That’s basically what they did with Christianity, anyways.
On the surface, it’ll probably be some kind of Sol Invictus/Apollonian thing, or perhaps they’ll syncretize with an Greek or Egyptian tradition like Hermeticism or the Cult of Isis. Mixed with a healthy dose of state/emperor worship, of course.
I was just using Buddhism as an example because of its beliefs and the fact that Europeans were aware of Asia via the Silk Road. All that the monks have to do is make their way west.
Fair enough. I think my reaction is coming from a feeling that there's a common trope in alternate history that alternatives to Christianity in Rome had to be some other exogenous tradition, like Manichaeism or Buddhism. They had everything they needed for a devotional religion in their own philosophic and spiritual traditions.
Buddhist Romans is a pretty neat thing to imagine, though. And I have sometimes wondered why Buddhism failed to get any foothold in the West, given the Silk Road as you mentioned.
I'm not sure why Buddhism never went West, but it might just be a distance and money problem.
You are right to emphasize the traditions in the Empire, though. There was bound to be another cult that played with a universal paradise for the enlightened.