On December 25, 274, Aurelian, after unifying the Roman Empire, instituted Roman monotheism under the god Sol.The other gods were relegated to mere saints focused on practical causes, such as the saint of marriage (Eros) and the saint of metalworkers (Hephaestus).Later, the only thing Flavius Constantinus and Flavius Theodosius did was replace the god Sol (Sol was the god's name) with Jesus, who had been created by his family during the time of Flavius Vespasianus and Flavius Titus.And, over time, the names of the saints were changed from pagan names to Catholic names.Until the 4th century, Christianity was merely a game played by the Roman elite, who controlled writing in the Empire. Only a small elite had full literacy, money to buy writing materials, and the right to produce and reproduce texts in the empire without being killed.The much-talked-about persecution of Christians was nothing more than conflicts between the elite who wanted to adopt Christianity as the state belief and the elite who opposed it.There is NOT A SINGLE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE of the existence of early Christian groups in the first two centuries. Nothing. Zero.We have some texts from the 2nd century written by members of the elite allied with the Flavian family, the elite who destroyed Jerusalem. Many of these texts were written using false names and based on lies and propaganda.THERE IS NOT A SINGLE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF EARLY CHRISTIAN GROUPS IN THE FIRST TWO CENTURIES. NOTHING. ZERO. NIENTE
>>18247883The cult of Sol Invictus was not monotheistic nor exclusive, Aurelian still worshiped traditional Roman gods alongside Sol Invictus (and Sol Invictus himself is just a syncretization of the Roman sun god Sol with the Syrian sun god Elagabal), he never sought to displace traditional Roman religious practices like Christianity did. The various mystery cults like Mithraism also heavily syncretized with Greco-Roman paganism as people still worshiped traditional gods alongside their gods of their mystery cult (and oftentimes equated traditional gods with theirs. For example, Mithras was equated with Sol). Historically, religious syncretism was the norm and outside of the Abrahamic religions, it is still arguably the norm. Look at modern Japan for example, according to several surveys Japan is both 70% Buddhist and 70% Shinto at the same time because historically Buddhism tended to syncretize with local religions and nobody ever saw any contradictions in that. Similarly in India, many other religions such as Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism heavily syncretize with Hindu traditions. “Paganism” itself is just a broad term for all non-Abrahamic religions, so by that definition, religions such as Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism, Taoism, Shinto, etc are also all technically “pagan.”The Abrahamic religions with their insistence on “orthodoxy” and “heresy” are actually a historic anomaly. The idea that people can only belong to one religious tradition is an Abrahamic invention that never would have existed otherwise.
>>18247919None of this is contradictory and illogical either. Neoplatonists already answered why this isn’t illogical; in Neoplatonism, all pagan religions are different shades of the truth rather than standing on their own. There's also Interpretatio graeca/Interpretatio romana, the practice where the Ancient Greeks and Romans equated foreign gods with their own under the belief that all cultures worshipped the same gods under different names. It’s why Tacitus claimed that the Germanic peoples worshipped Mercury as their chief god; even though it technically wasn’t Mercury but a local Germanic deity we know as Odin, both deities are similar enough that Tacitus didn’t bother to differentiate them.
I don't quite understand the Sol Invictus cult. Is Sol Invictus a hypostasis of Apollo? What's the relationship between the two?
>>18247883Ethiopia's Christian Church deboonks you, there's evidence for first and second century practice, with no Roman influence
>>18247947Syncretization of the Roman sun god Sol (himself the Roman equivalent of the Greek god Helios) with the Syrian sun god Elagabal
>>18247981Prove itI want archeological evidence
>>18247883>instituted Roman monotheism under the god Sol.Sol Invictus was not monotheistic. >The other gods were relegated to mere saints focused on practical causesThe cult of Sol Invictus was raised to an official state cult, it did not supersede the older ones and was in fact generally considered lesser because it was not an old cult.>Later, the only thing Flavius Constantinus and Flavius Theodosius did was replace the god Sol (Sol was the god's name) with Jesus, who had been created by his family during the time of Flavius Vespasianus and Flavius Titus.Constantine and Theodosius aren't even related, they aren't related to the Flavians either. >There is NOT A SINGLE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE of the existence of early Christian groups in the first two centuries. Nothing. Zero.Gospel fragments and Gnostic texts. Oxyrhynchus fragments, Christian graves in Rome and the Ichthys-fish exist.>>18247947We don't quite know where it came from in terms of influence. We know it was not from Baal or Helios though. It originated in the army in the 3rd century and seems to be effectively a Roman military god above all else and people did not associate it with either of the previous gods. Instead they kept it separate.
>>18247883Meds. Now.
