[krapp]

Christianity was monotheist because it began as a cult of Judaism. Islam was monotheist because it began as a cult of Christianity. It's a mistake to treat these religions as entirely separate, even though dogmatically each believes the others to be heretical. And Judaism itself was probably just cribbing from Zoroastrianism.

Although I would argue the Trinity (which is a modern Christian invention) and many aspects of reverence for saints and angels is pseudo-polytheistic, and likely a result of the syncretism of the various pagan traditions into Christianity as it spread throughout Europe, although that came later.

[michaelsbradley]

> the Trinity (which is a modern Christian invention)

The theological language of hypostases in relation to the divine persons of the Trinity was worked out in the late 300s but proto-Trinitarian language is found in Christian writings nearly 200 years before that, i.e. butting up against the close of the apostolic age. So, how is it you propose it’s a modern invention? That is, what timeframe constitutes “modern”? Even 300s is considered early Christian history.

Likewise, from the early Church onward, Christians were careful to distinguish reverence for and intercessory invocation of martyrs, saints, and angels, who are all just creatures, from worship of God.

[krapp]

>So, how is it you propose it’s a modern invention? That is, what timeframe constitutes “modern”? Even 300s is considered early Christian history.

I consider it "modern" because it was invented when the Christian church was already established to address controversies with existing doctrine (the divinity of Jesus, the nature of the Holy Spirit, etc.) It wasn't a concept that would have been recognized by Jesus or the disciples, or any Christian for centuries. It isn't in any of the Gospels except as language that was later ex post facto interpreted as referring to the Trinity.

>Likewise, from the early Church onward, Christians were careful to distinguish reverence for and intercessory invocation of martyrs, saints, and angels, who are all just creatures, from worship of God.

Christians can justify it however they like, to an outsider there is little if any difference between praying to a saint or angel in their specific domain and praying to a household god of that domain. In some cases these beings are direct reinterpretations of pagan deities. You have families and people "protected" by specific saints or angels, and using artifacts and symbols to summon the power of those beings which outside of the Christian context would be considered occult practice.

I called these things pseudo-polytheistic because they seem to draw from similar cultural impulses and have similar features but exist within a contrary theological context.

[michaelsbradley]

> I consider it "modern"

You can use words however you like, of course, but others may struggle to understand your perspective if your usage is novel and/or strained. General consensus is the early modern period of theological development in Christian history began in the 1500s.

> To an outsider there is little if any difference

Fine, but… two people could be sitting at similar looking computers, one playing Minesweeper while the other is doing chemical engineering in MATLAB. There are objective differences in those human activities. If someone insisted they are doing pseudo-same-thing, it would be fair to say that’s a stretch and tends toward missing the point. But I do (maybe) understand what you mean: inculturation was a real phenomenon as Christianity spread Eastward and Westward.

[dormento]

> Although I would argue the Trinity (which is a modern Christian invention) and many aspects of reverence for saints and angels is pseudo-polytheistic, and likely a result of the syncretism of the various pagan traditions into Christianity as it spread throughout Europe, although that came later.

Good point. There are many "local versions" of Mary, for example, in Latin America. All of them display unique traits indicative of "synchretization" (sp?) of say african Orishas, probably dating back to the time of the slave trade.

[krapp]

Haitian "voodoo" is the result of combining African religious beliefs with Catholicism by slaves they could continue to practice their religion in secret. A similar process happened with Christianity in Japan after it was outlawed - it took on the appearance of local Shinto and Buddhist practice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Vodou

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakure_Kirishitan