I know you feel deeply about this, but you started with the angle of "Christianity numba 1", then after I disagree you say numbers actually never mattered.
>Moments when faith didn’t arrive through conquest like most believe, but through divine encounter.
You imply that syncretism rather than conquest was the reason LATAM became catholic, but just an hour before you said:
>You’re absolutely right that many nations were converted by force or politics. History is full of that tension. The message of Christ abused in ways completely opposite to what He taught in the Scripture.
>What’s always struck me, though, is how the faith survived despite those abuses. Every empire that tried to use Christianity as a weapon eventually crumbled, but the core message kept resurfacing through people who lived it voluntarily. Saints, reformers, monks, ordinary believers who loved instead of coerced.
So after all it was conquest, but the divine message resurfaced despite the abuses. It all sounds very Groucho Marx "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well I have others".
>Moments when faith didn’t arrive through conquest like most believe, but through divine encounter.
You imply that syncretism rather than conquest was the reason LATAM became catholic, but just an hour before you said:
>You’re absolutely right that many nations were converted by force or politics. History is full of that tension. The message of Christ abused in ways completely opposite to what He taught in the Scripture.
>What’s always struck me, though, is how the faith survived despite those abuses. Every empire that tried to use Christianity as a weapon eventually crumbled, but the core message kept resurfacing through people who lived it voluntarily. Saints, reformers, monks, ordinary believers who loved instead of coerced.
So after all it was conquest, but the divine message resurfaced despite the abuses. It all sounds very Groucho Marx "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well I have others".