The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by archibald »

jferris wrote: Mon Jan 15, 2018 6:10 pm
archibald wrote:Personally, I think that your saying that syncretism is at least a very common feature of many religions (I'm not entirely sure about 'all religion, at all times') is a good point.
How do you imagine a non-syncretistic religion emerging or persisting?

What sort of words might you use to characterize a (hypothetical) non-syncretistic religion? Original? Authentic? Undiluted? Pure?
Isolated? Stable? Persistent? Coherent? Well-defined? Even if only for a time, or in a region.

So, rather than say "all religion, at all times", is syncretic, it seems better to say that syncretism might be a common factor, to some degree or other, at certain times and in certain places, during the 'lifetime' (birth, growth, adulthood, decline and death) of a particular religion. In other words, that there can be stability as well as flux. To think of syncretism as the only state or process seems to suggest there is only the latter. That is not to say that a religion, at a particular time, in a particular place, needs to be perfectly static, just that stasis might better describe it than syncretism, during some of its phases. It might even be better to say that a core can be essentially static during a stable phase, since this still allows for subgroups to peel away, perhaps.

Bear in mind that the usual definition of syncretism is not merely 'change', but specifically involves the merging of at least two religious belief systems.
jferris
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:50 am

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by jferris »

archibald wrote:Isolated?
The notion of a religion isolate is an intriguing one, but I can't think of any examples.
archibald wrote:Stable? Consistent? Coherent?
A religion can be syncretistic and all of these things in at least some dimensions; ultimately, stability, consistency and cohesion are not qualities which any religion exhibits over time. It's also hard to find terms which are not value-laden to describe a hypothetical non-syncretistic religion.
archibald wrote:...at certain times and in certain places, during the 'lifetime' (birth, growth, adulthood, decline and death) of a particular religion
I'm not sure that religions are discrete entities which undergo a process analagous to a lifetime. I think the best we can do is observe (or construct, deduce or posit in the case of historical religions) a snapshot at a particular time and place; a moment in a process. Terms like Christianity describe very vague fields, after all.
archibald wrote:To think of syncretism as the only state or process seems to suggest there is only the latter.
It's not the only process, but it is a process.
archibald wrote:Bear in mind that the usual definition of syncretism is not merely 'change', but specifically involves the merging of at least two religious belief systems.
It can describe many things: appropriation of rituals or liturgy; qualities ascribed to certain deities being transferred to one another; adoption of iconography; intentional reformulation of dogma for the purposes of harmonization etc.
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by archibald »

jferris wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:17 am It can describe many things: appropriation of rituals or liturgy; qualities ascribed to certain deities being transferred to one another; adoption of iconography; intentional reformulation of dogma for the purposes of harmonization etc.
Personally, I think your definition of what is and isn't syncretism is rather wider than mine. To me, it would need to involve the taking on board of ideas and beliefs from another religion, which is slightly different to other types of change. Judaism generally is not very syncretic and usually not seen as syncretic, and there are certain forms, typically the more orthodox ones, possibly also groups such as the Samaritans, which do not appear to be syncretic much at all, if any, but instead ploughing an established furrow.

Now you may say that the existence or emergence of branches or denominations is syncretism, but a better term, imo, would be fragmentation, where development takes place by splintering, which 'separating' process is arguably the opposite of the 'blending' process I think of as syncretism.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by andrewcriddle »

DCHindley wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:36 am

Larry Hurtado reviews the results of Tuccinardi's analysis as published in a 2014 article in Italian, here:

https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016 ... hristians/



There is an interesting suggestion in the comments that Pliny's use of Livy in the letter may be the issue.

Andrew Criddle
jferris
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:50 am

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by jferris »

archibald wrote:Personally, I think your definition of what is and isn't syncretism is rather wider than mine.
If you're interested in reviewing some literature around the subject:

Syncretism/antisyncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis, Stewart and Shaw, 1994
Dialogue and Syncretism, Gort, 1989. Dated and christocentric, but still worth a read. Droogers outlines some of the terminological issues.
Syncretism in Religion, Leopold and Jensen, 2004. Read this one if you don't read anything else.
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: The syncretistic origins of Christianity.

Post by archibald »

jferris wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:58 pm
archibald wrote:Personally, I think your definition of what is and isn't syncretism is rather wider than mine.
If you're interested in reviewing some literature around the subject:

Syncretism/antisyncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis, Stewart and Shaw, 1994
Dialogue and Syncretism, Gort, 1989. Dated and christocentric, but still worth a read. Droogers outlines some of the terminological issues.
Syncretism in Religion, Leopold and Jensen, 2004. Read this one if you don't read anything else.
Thanks.

I don't thing we strongly disagree, by the way. Perhaps I only thought you went a tad too far in saying all religions at all times, compared to what I would have said.

I do note that the Amazon.co.uk blurb for the third one says, "The essays reflect the full breadth of religious traditions that could be called syncretistic". Which might imply that some don't qualify.......?
Post Reply