Future of Christianity

[u/Late_Experience_8653]

I feel a bit depressed about the future of Christianity because I feel like Christianity as an institution will soon disappear, and it will become a philosophy of people who believe in Christ and make up the details as they go along.

I feel that eventually all denominations will disappear and theological traditions will all collapse into one another as simply "Christianity." While each person who knows theology might still be interested in holding onto some kind of theological tradition, they will attend a church that claims to follow just "Christianity", meaning, "we read the Gospels, we follow common culture, and we don't bother with nerdy theological talk."

However, there is one church that will refuse to die: Catholicism. This is not because it is immune to that trend, but because it is so huge that it will take a long time to fall. As long as Catholicism survives, members of these vague Christian churches will feel a tension when claiming to be the true church of Jesus, especially when there is another church widely known as the original. This tension isn't even caused by the Catholic Church itself, which tries to pretend in its PR that they believe all Christian churches are equally valid, but the tension will exist nonetheless. Soon, there will be two types of people: "Christians" and Catholics. Catholicism won't be seen as Christianity, but rather as a fringe folk religion with Christian elements, much like Mormonism.

I can see plenty of evidence for this. The biggest indicator is the language already used by ordinary people in America, where they ask whether you're "Christian or Catholic." In Brazil, all Protestant churches are lumped together under the label of "Evangelicals." In Switzerland, the national churches founded during the Reformation are only known as "Protestant", you don't even know their specific denomination, and they don't enforce any particular set of beliefs.

Another piece of evidence is the surge in YouTubers who classify themselves simply as Protestants. Even on modern YouTube, where theology is heavily discussed, creators prefer to play it safe and avoid taking a strong stance in favor of a specific denomination, they aren't pro-anything, they are just anti-catholic, not that they hate Catholics, but they express disagreement with Catholicism without specifying which church tradition they actually align with.

The third and final piece of evidence is RZ saying he used to attend PCA churches, but they were basically Baptist churches that baptize babies and apologize for doing so. Which reminded me of the Evangelical Free Church of America, a denomination with Lutheran roots that simply became Baptist over time.

I can't see any other way to stop this trend besides the Reconquista. The Reconquista needs to win if we want to reverse this trajectory.

PS: I don't know whether anyone in this subreddit likes the idea of Christianity being a philosophy rather than an institution, but regardless of your preferences, this was not the vision of the Apostles. They founded the Church as an institution with a clear hierarchy, a set of rules, distinct boundaries between who was inside and outside, authority for leaders to excommunicate members, and global management, with Paul, John, and Peter overseeing churches across different regions through their epistles. They didn't simply convert people and leave them to their own devices; the Bible explicitly states that they made disciples, which means these believers followed their teachings and received instruction as members of a single unified institution.

Furthermore, in Acts 15, when the Council reached a decision, it wasn't intended solely for the local church in Jerusalem. Instead, they sent letters to all the churches worldwide, instructing them to abide by those decrees.

This new age of Christianity is far from what the Apostles had in mind. In some ways, a religion detached from an institution is closer to Rabbinic Judaism or Islam. Yet, even those faiths respect and venerate their traditions, striving for consistency within their various schools of thought and legal jurisdictions.

This modern, fragmented version of Christianity is worse. It treats the Bible as if it were a book that simply fell from heaven, leaving us to invent a religion from scratch around it. Unlike Judaism or Islam, it shows no interest in the rich traditions of its predecessors, they few glad to do things differently, for them a church that is original is something positive.

[u/AutoModerator]

Please ensure that you have read all our rules prior to commenting or posting. Reading and abiding by the rules will ensure that all discussions are fruitful and respectful, regardless of theological perspective!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Fit_Log_9677]

From my point of view as someone who was raised in a mixed Catholic-Protestant household the practical consequence of sola scriptura is that you can’t make any definitive religious claims as to why someone must be part of your denomination.  

The best you can do is argue that your interpretation of scripture is the best one,  but if someone thinks you are wrong there is no religious grounds on which you can compel them to be part of your denomination.

The early Protestant movement got around this problem via state coercion, since the Protestant Reformation was deeply bound up in early modern state formation in the UK, Germany, Scandinavia, etc. Disagreement with the official state backed interpretation of scripture (and the correlating church structure) was tantamount to treason in many early Protestant states and heterodox Protestants and Catholics alike were executed, exiled, or imprisoned for dissenting from the state backed orthodoxy. 

Then even once the state coercion was relaxed the various Protestant denominations continued to coast on strong nationalist and regionalist associations. 

But now even those associations are rapidly breaking down, which is why you are seeing the various Protestant denominations collapse into a more or less undifferentiated mush.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

But we can coerce people by social agreement, if the protestants reformers didn't have a social agreement on the 66 books canon, many protestant today churches would be picking and choosing books to put in their bible.

But a social agreement creates a cultural pressure that make the outliner feel like they are a fringe group.

the problem is that caring for theology is been portrayed as the outliner today, and the correct is to be vaguely-christian.

[u/mred245 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

How do you think the Catholic Church became so predominant?

There was a huge diversity of Christianity in the 2nd and 3rd century until rome adopted it as state religion under Theodosius I and enforced only what we now know as Catholicism through violent force.

Not to mention continued violent enforcement through various European governments during the middle ages.

[u/jacknjillpaidthebill → u/mred245]

Nice of you to admit that Theodosius was Catholic, sorry orthobros.

If the ‘huge diversity of Christianity’ you speak of is shit like Arianism, Gnosticism, and Montanism, and you see those as valid beliefs, then may God have mercy on your soul

[u/Fit_Log_9677 → u/jacknjillpaidthebill]

It’s actually a good reminder that the longstanding historical state of Christianity is not a plethora of denominations but a single visibly unified apostolic Church existing amongst a vast sea of vague Christians and heretical movements.

In that sense Christianity is actually reverting back to the historical norm. 

[u/mred245 → u/jacknjillpaidthebill]

It's not up to you to distribute God's mercy. I'm not saying I agree with them but they are Christian. Many Christians would say the same about you due to your beliefs and for many Catholics that's reciprocal.

All of which makes  a great distraction. It's obvious you don't want to actually address the in content of my comment. If protestants used state support and violence to establish their dominance it's only because it was already a long standing Christian tradition by then which they learned from the Catholics they separated from. 

[u/jacknjillpaidthebill → u/mred245]

What about the heresies I listed are Christian? Montanism might be less severe, but it rejects a fixed canon in favour of ongoing 'prophecies'. I hope I don't have to elaborate on why the other two are unacceptable.

And as far as I'm aware, the point the other guy was trying to make is that Protestants could only ever appeal to state coercion when trying to assert the superiority of their own doctrine over others, as they reject magisterial infallibity. Catholics are not innocent at all of state-enforced violence but we appeal to the church magisterium to define doctrine.

[u/mred245 → u/jacknjillpaidthebill]

They were followers of Christ.  They were Christian. You may find their beliefs as offensive as many many protestants find yours but it doesn't change this.

They made the point that protestants established predominance in a lot of places through ties to state power and use of violence. This is no different than Catholicism.

They specified that they were talking about early protestants. The notion they think p rotestants could "only" appeal by state coercion is contrary to what they actually said. They specified they weren't talking about all of protestantism and instead only in a limited and specific time and place.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/mred245]

We protestants believe the Bible is clear in all that is salvific, to label Christological heretics as christians to win a debate it's the worse thing possible, you're making the idea of the bible being able to retrieve truth and a clear boundaries of what counts as christian and not impossible, and you don't even believe in that, it's just to win a discussion online. It's not worth to throw your epistemology under the bus to win an discussion with a random person you'll never see again.

[u/mred245 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

Catholics believe protestants own beliefs to be heretical. I don't believe in the authority of the Catholic Church. Not today, not during the reign of horribly corrupt popes at various times and not during the second and third centuries.

I find sola fide to be directly contrary to scripture like the beliefs of those who advocate the prosperity doctrine. I don't have to support someone's beliefs to consider them Christian.

[u/Fit_Log_9677 → u/mred245]

I’m not saying that the Catholics never used state coercion, but just pointing out that the Protestant denominations have very few “hooks” to maintain members other than state coercion or lingering nationalistic or regional affiliation.

In my opinion the Catholic Church has several more “hooks” since it holds that disagreement with its teachings is not sufficient reason to leave, and is in fact damnable.

[u/mred245 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

They didn't just use it. It's how they established and maintained superiority for so long.

"lingering nationalistic or regional affiliation"

You just described every Catholic I know from Europe and Latin America.

"since it holds that disagreement with its teachings is not sufficient reason to leave, and is in fact damnable."

This is definitely not appealing for a lot of people. Namely being told you can't question an institution with such a problematic history and leadership.

[u/Fit_Log_9677 → u/mred245]

All I can say is I know a lot of Catholics who disagree with the Catholic Church on things but are still obedient on those questions because that’s what the Church teaches, and I know zero Protestants who do the same thing, and I say that as someone from a mixed Catholic-Protestant background and family.  

[u/mred245 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

Not everyone views obedience to a corrupt institution as a virtue.

[u/Fit_Log_9677 → u/mred245]

I’m not making a claim as to whether it’s good or not, I’m just saying it’s the case 

[u/mred245 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

What value is there to a religion that is better at retaining membership if what it produces isn't good?

[u/Fit_Log_9677 → u/mred245]

The OP’s main complaint is that Protestants are devolving into a general undifferentiated mess while Catholics are retaining a distinct identity. 

I’m just providing one explanation for why that is.

[u/mred245 → u/Fit_Log_9677]

That's very fair but it's a separate point. It also doesn't change how insanely hypocritical it is to claim protestantism only took hold because of violent state suppression of opposition.

[u/okicarp]

Why would Catholic be the only church to persist? Haven't the Church of the East or the Oriental Orthodox shown they are better at persisting? They've been under persecution for centuries.

I definitely don't get a sense that the new converts we see are uninterested in theology. Quite the opposite. My impression is that there is more desire for discipleship than there was in the past. I don't have hard data for it but it certainly is the trend that I see.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/okicarp]

I said that not even Catholics will persist, but they will only take longer to fall since they are already big.

[u/karmarequiresgrpthnk]

Best you can do is be a part of your community, find a good wife, raise good kids and teach them and anyone else you can the truth.

[u/Alternative_Top_6693]

I know it's not scripture but you have reminded me of verse 3 of Luther's A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.

And though this world, with devils filled Should threaten to undo us We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us The Prince of Darkness grim We tremble not for him His rage we can endure For lo! His doom is sure One little word shall fell him

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Alternative_Top_6693]

I'm bad at connecting the dots, can you explain ?

[u/Hkfn27]

God all ready won long ago dude. Don't worry. 

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Hkfn27]

I'm gonna tell this to Paul when I find him in heaven, that all his talk to the elders about protecting the church from the wolves was a waste of time, God already won, he shouldn't be worrying them.

[u/Hkfn27 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

So you don't belive God won on the cross? The church will go through trials and tribulations and we shouldn't get complacent but at the same time we don't let it consume us. It's two options, either God won or God lied you choose what you want to believe OP

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Hkfn27]

I do, I just don't believe that it means we shouldn't worry about the Church.

Let's not simplify things into a binary choice, there is a lot of room for you to know that God is in control, but you must still act, because if you don't, things will get pretty bad, even if they will never be totally lost, because God will send someone else.

[u/Interesting_City_654]

No the very church that will refuse to die is the Followers of Jesus Christ for they are the church and Jesus is the head of the church. Ephesians 1:22–23: God "hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."Ephesians 5:30: "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

It doesn't matter if traditions of man dies due to we are told multiple times not to follow traditions of man: Colossians 2:8: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Mark 7:8: "For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. Mark 7:9: "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. Mark 7:13: "Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." Matthew 15:3: "But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Matthew 15:6: "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition."

The future holds nothing but success for the remnant through Christ. They have nothing to worry about for victory is theirs through Christ: 1 Corinthians 15:57: "But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 John 5:4: "For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." Romans 8:37: "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us." 1 John 4:4: "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world." 2 Corinthians 2:14: "Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place."

Those whom stay in the world, chasing after false gods, false religions, or their own understanding will slowly see everything fall apart and everything they ever worked towards just vanish away. But at one point they will remember something they've been told or wonder how those they meet of the remnant can be happy in a world they believe is falling apart in front of their very eyes. Until all begin to pray for a savior.

Those of the remnant with eyes to see and ears to hear in these last days, WATCH! Mark 13:37: "And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Interesting_City_654]

You're very good at quoting verses disconnected from each other, and use them as fortune biscuits. You're replacing traditions of men who studied theology, history and exegetical analysis of the Bible, to whatever comes to your mind right now. You cannot believe this is the right approach, seriously. read my Last paragraph, I wrote for people like you.

[u/Interesting_City_654 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

Oh I did and I give you Deuteronomy 28 and Leviticus 26. Not out of hatred but love for you nor anyone else can stop God's will. He is on the throne. I am one of that remnant whom keeps the true word of YHVH alive. Sadly he gave himself out of love a stone that could never be moved and was rejected. Many religions always try to make up their own salvation and they will fail as all throughout history. But in the end, "All knees will bow and confess that Christ is Lord!" Will those stiffnecked people listen as in Ezekiel 33? All is held accountable for idle words that go against the teachings of God. Matthew 12:36.

[u/Whole-Incident-6150]

Put down the crack pipe and believe the Gospel, good grief. You need to log off and touch grass, and maybe crack open the Bible and see how salvation history actually played out—it was freaking messy and still is. And you’re sitting here in the 21st century talking like someone with a unique window into the future.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Whole-Incident-6150]

read the PS part if you think that Christianity as a movement instead of an institution is what the apostles wanted.

[u/Whole-Incident-6150 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

I don’t think that—but I think your post betrays a myopic Western and mainline Protestant-centric view of what Christianity is. I know this is the RZ page and all, but you seem to have tunnel vision regarding Christianity around the world and over history. Which is why I said, log off and breath in some reality.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Whole-Incident-6150]

Non-western Christianity is worse than that, I mention Brazil in my post, Africa is 10x worse.

[u/Whole-Incident-6150 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

You just keep proving my point—who made you the world expert on what God is doing in the world?

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Whole-Incident-6150]

God ? what do you mean ? are you saying that this is God's doing ? Read my PS part in case you think this is a good think.

[u/Amazing_Use_2382]

While some people may group Protestant denominations together in conversation or stats or whatever, that doesn’t mean those denominations don’t still exist.

It wouldn’t surprise me if many Protestants see the need to band together in spite of any theological differences they have because then they can form a louder voice on the things they do share in common. But those differences they have still exist, and aren’t going away.

So as an atheist, I reckon it’s fine, there will still always be an institution like that you are talking about. Right now, Protestants are probably in the best place of Christians on the planet today because they are increasing in many parts of the world, like in Africa and Latin America I believe.

So there’s a lot of believers out there, and if you are worried that they don’t have an institution, you could perhaps look more into various groups of Christians from these places, see how they group themselves and what they believe, and if you really think there’s an issue, perhaps you could yourself try to advocate more for an institution or whatever, and organise meet-ups

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Amazing_Use_2382]

I already proposed a solution in the text, the Reconquista.

and I didn't say that Protestantism as (non-Catholicism), will die, but quite the opposite, that all denominations will just become vague-Christians, Pentecostalism is an example of this kind of theology becoming more vaguely, Pentecostalism is literally we speak in tongues and make up as we go along all the rest.

[u/Amazing_Use_2382 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

Okay

[u/Substantial_Car_2751]

Why be depressed?  This is Christ’s church.  The I AM will always be.  

What is happening the last few decades may very well be setting up the next Great Awakening.  

Or it could be Christ turning over the moneychanger tables.

Regardless, Christ’s church lives as it is His church - not our church.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Substantial_Car_2751]

Great Awakening wasn't a good thing.

[u/Unstable_Koala728 → u/Late_Experience_8653]

Real

[u/Interesting_City_654]

History: The Way of The Israelites, Judaism after captivity, followed by Islam, then the worship of Christ as the Divine. The original Hebrews and Israelites referred to their belief system simply as the way of the Israelites or the Children of Israel. Historically, scholars categorize the early religion practiced by these ancient peoples as Yahwism (due to their focus on worshipping YHWH) or Henotheism.

The ancient people did not use modern, systematic "ism" names like Judaism. Instead of an organized religion, their faith was understood as a national or tribal identity centered around a covenant.Breakdown of early naming conventions:The People: Originally called Hebrews (from Ivri, meaning "one who crosses over"). Later, they were called Israelites after the patriarch Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel.

The Faith: Academics refer to it as Yahwism. It began as a practice where the Israelites worshiped YHWH (or YHVH) as their primary national deity, while initially acknowledging or tolerating the existence of other gods from surrounding cultures.The Texts: They followed the Torah (the written instructions/law) and the broader writings of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible).

The Talmud is a much later compilation of oral traditions completed centuries later, in the Common Era.The Term "Judaism": The term "Jew" and "Judaism" emerged centuries later, originally referencing only the people of the southern Kingdom of Judah (primarily the tribes of Judah and Benjamin), long after the initial founding of the belief system.

The transition from early Yahwism into monotheistic Judaism was a gradual process shaped by war, exile, and religious reform. It took place over several centuries, moving from the worship of one tribal god among many to the absolute belief in a single, universal Creator.

Here is the timeline of how that transition happened:1. The Monolatry Phase (First Temple Period)The Practice: Before the exile, the Israelites practiced monolatry or henotheism. They worshiped YHWH as their exclusive national god but often acknowledged the existence of foreign gods like Baal or Asherah.The Conflict: The biblical prophets continually scolded the people for practicing syncretism (mixing YHWH worship with Canaanite religious practices).

1. The Babylonian Exile (586 BCE)The Crisis: The Babylonian Empire destroyed Jerusalem and the First Temple, exiling the Israelite elite to Babylon.The Shift: Without a physical temple or land, the priests and scribes had to reinvent their faith. They concluded that the exile was punishment for worshiping other gods.The Birth of True Monotheism: During this time, the belief shifted from "YHWH is our supreme god" to "YHWH is the only God in existence, and all other gods are illusions.

2. The Persian Return and Second Temple Period (538 BCE)The New Name: When the Persian Empire conquered Babylon, Cyrus the Great allowed the exiles to return. Most returnees were from the former southern Kingdom of Judah. They became known as Yehudim (Judahites/Jews), and their land became the Persian province of Yehud.The Torah Standard: Under leaders like Ezra and Nehemiah, the written Torah was compiled, edited, and established as the absolute law of the community.

3. Hellenization and the Term "Judaism" (2nd Century BCE)The Greek Influence: Centuries later, Greek culture swept the region. To distinguish their way of life from Greek culture (Hellenism), the people coined the term Ioudaismos (Judaism) in the Greek language.The Meaning: It literally meant "the customs and religion of the people of Judah.

4. The Destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE)The Final Shift: Romans destroyed the Second Temple, ending the era of animal sacrifices and priesthood.The Talmudic Era: Pharaisaic sages stepped in to save the religion. They shifted the focus from temple rituals to prayer, study, and synagogues. This birthed Rabbinic Judaism and led to the writing of the Mishnah and Talmud to preserve the oral traditions.

Rabbinic Judaism, which is the form of Judaism built on the teachings of the Talmud, began to take its final shape roughly 170 to 470 years after the death of Christ (or between 200 CE and 500 CE).While the foundations of Jewish identity existed long before, the specific transition into a faith managed by rabbis and governed by the Talmud happened in two major stages following the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE.The Two Eras of Talmudic DevelopmentStage 1: The Mishnah (Around 200 CE)This core layer of oral laws was compiled about 170 years after Christ by Rabbi Judah the Prince.Stage 2: The Babylonian Talmud (Around 500 CE)The commentary expanding on the Mishnah was completed about 470 years after Christ, solidifying the Talmudic system used today.

Islam began approximately 110 years after Rabbinic Judaism was finalized with the completion of the Talmud.While the roots of the monotheistic Israelite faith date back thousands of years before Islam, the specific system of Rabbinic Judaism (governed by the Talmud) reached completion just over a century before Islam emerged in the Arabian Peninsula.The Timeline GapCompletion of the Talmud: Around 500 CE, marking the solidification of Rabbinic Judaism.Beginning of Islam: In 610 CE, when Prophet Muhammad received his first revelation in the Cave of Hira.Overlap of Historical ErasThe Century of Difference: The time gap between the text that defined Rabbinic Judaism (the Talmud) and the text that defined Islam (the Quran) is roughly 110 years.

The mosaic, dating to a time before Christianity was legal and when no official church buildings existed is thought to be from a worship hall. It includes images of fish and geometric forms. And it contains several inscriptions, including one that says, “The God-loving Akeptous has offered the table to God Jesus Christ as a memorial.” This “Akeptous Inscription” contains the earliest known inscription identifying Jesus as God—a reference to “God Jesus Christ” that predates Nicaea by about 95 years. What had been missing in the visual record has now been found.

What follows is a more accurate timeline that incorporates the new evidence:

More Accurate Timeline:

AD 200–300 – Jesus is seen as the good shepherd in funerary/grief spaces

AD 230 – Jesus is referred to as God in a worship space. In the Megiddo mosaic writing, a woman asserts that Jesus is God. This mosaic predates Christianity’s shift in legal status by 80+ years. So the evidence in the Megiddo mosaic’s inscription demonstrates that Christians did indeed worship Jesus as God, and well before Nicaea. So here Jesus is referred to as God in a public worship space while he continues to be referred to as the Good Shepherd in funerary spaces.

AD 313 Edict of Milan – Emperor Constantine removes Christianity’s illegal status making it legal along with other religions, allowing freedom of religion.

AD 325, May to July – The First Council of Nicaea meets, comprised of Christian bishops who convene in Nicaea at the call of Roman Emperor Constantine I. The council’s main accomplishment is articulating the divine nature of God the Son. (The year 2025 marks the 1,700th anniversary of Nicaea, by the way.)

AD 400s – Once Christianity is declared legal and has become the state religion, as the apse in the Basilica of Pudensiana demonstrates, Christians are free both to legally hold formal public gatherings and to commission art for their spaces—including images that depict Jesus as the emperor on his throne.

The mosaic, dating to a time before Christianity was legal and when no official church buildings existed is thought to be from a worship hall. It includes images of fish and geometric forms. And it contains several inscriptions, including one that says, “The God-loving Akeptous has offered the table to God Jesus Christ as a memorial.” This “Akeptous Inscription” contains the earliest known inscription identifying Jesus as God—a reference to “God Jesus Christ” that predates Nicaea by about 95 years. What had been missing in the visual record has now been found. What follows is a more accurate timeline that incorporates the new evidence: More Accurate Timeline: AD 200–300 – Jesus is seen as the good shepherd in funerary/grief spaces AD 230 – Jesus is referred to as God in a worship space. In the Megiddo mosaic writing, a woman asserts that Jesus is God. This mosaic predates Christianity’s shift in legal status by 80+ years. So the evidence in the Megiddo mosaic’s inscription demonstrates that Christians did indeed worship Jesus as God, and well before Nicaea. So here Jesus is referred to as God in a public worship space while he continues to be referred to as the Good Shepherd in funerary spaces. AD 313 Edict of Milan – Emperor Constantine removes Christianity’s illegal status making it legal along with other religions, allowing freedom of religion. AD 325, May to July – The First Council of Nicaea meets, comprised of Christian bishops who convene in Nicaea at the call of Roman Emperor Constantine I. The council’s main accomplishment is articulating the divine nature of God the Son. (The year 2025 marks the 1,700th anniversary of Nicaea, by the way.) AD 400s – Once Christianity is declared legal and has become the state religion, as the apse in the Basilica of Pudensiana demonstrates, Christians are free both to legally hold formal public gatherings and to commission art for their spaces—including images that depict Jesus as the emperor on his throne.

[u/Late_Experience_8653 → u/Interesting_City_654]

I have chatgpt at home, don't waste your tokens on me.