In a world where the Roman Empire never existed would christianity still exist?
- Thread starter moistrophile
- Start date
In regards to 1. I will have to strongly disagree with Dr. Henry Abramson. To say they weren't spiritual reeks of monotheistic bias. They may have had different spiritual practices then various monotheistic faiths, but that doesn't make them any less spiritual.
I think jewish zealots and an overall desire for Rome to be overthrown isnt necessarily a requirement
Hellenic oppression - something the seleucids were par if not worse than the romans before Jesus, compare Pompey wanting to enter the Holy of Holies(which according to judaism would just have resulted in him dead anyways) with the seleucids outright sacrificing a pig on the temple to their monarch dressed as Zeus - did indeed make people yearn for a Messiah, something that led to Christianity
However on the other hand Jesus was much more conciliatory than the other messiah candidates, yes he did talk about putting the world through his sword in the end of days, but aside from that he told people to accept the rulers God gave them and pay their taxes rather than be hypocrital by using roman money while protesting their rule
So more tolerance like what the persians promoted could more easily lead to something like Christianity, as it promotes integration, and it was the integration of Hellenic Judaism that preceded Christianity
Hellenic oppression - something the seleucids were par if not worse than the romans before Jesus, compare Pompey wanting to enter the Holy of Holies(which according to judaism would just have resulted in him dead anyways) with the seleucids outright sacrificing a pig on the temple to their monarch dressed as Zeus - did indeed make people yearn for a Messiah, something that led to Christianity
However on the other hand Jesus was much more conciliatory than the other messiah candidates, yes he did talk about putting the world through his sword in the end of days, but aside from that he told people to accept the rulers God gave them and pay their taxes rather than be hypocrital by using roman money while protesting their rule
So more tolerance like what the persians promoted could more easily lead to something like Christianity, as it promotes integration, and it was the integration of Hellenic Judaism that preceded Christianity
It is still very possible. A Greek successor State that conquered Judea and tried to assimilate the Jews could lead to a call for a Jewish Messiah. Most of the non-Jewish influences in early Christianity came from Greek influences, not Roman. The Romanized Paul was well versed in Greek culture, and spiritual ideas. The early spread of Christianity was strongest in the Greek speaking East. The first Christian Nation was Armenia. It is unlikely the Greeks would have organized the brutal suppression of what they would think of as a new cult, as the Romans did. Crucifixion was a form of execution employed by the Greeks as well as the Romans. Jesus might well have been crucified by the civil authorities for the same reasons he was in the OTL.
Christianity might develop along the lines of Eastern Orthodoxy, without a Roman Pontif. Of course, it's hard to know how far Christianity would spread, through proselytizing. "Behold I send you as sheep unto the wolves."
Christianity might develop along the lines of Eastern Orthodoxy, without a Roman Pontif. Of course, it's hard to know how far Christianity would spread, through proselytizing. "Behold I send you as sheep unto the wolves."
If we accept that logic no one has anything to discuss in AH because we have nothing to base any theory on. There are recuring patterns in nature that give some predictability to events, otherwise snowstorms would be as likely in Florida during August as heat waves. Elements would decay at unknowable rates, and space & time would bend randomly, so E = MC2 would be unprovable. There is the Theory of Recurrence Plots, that patterns tend to repeat, so over time there is some order in the Universe. With variations some events are more likely than others. That could give some order to human events, showing that there are trends in history rather than just random events. If all of history is only random then any AHTL is just a story no more plausible than any other, making absurd TL's as likely as any others.
kholieken
Banned
These isn't make sense at all.
Butterfly isn't about random thing happening ignoring reality. Its about History not following fixed path.
Nomad attacking China is pattern. But Temujin as Genghis Khan is going to exist in one tl OTL. If you argue that destruction of Rome STILL didn't affect Genghis Khan birth after more than thousand years of change. Then its not pattern, its forcing history to follow specific railroad.
True
But if you assume everything is randomized after the POD(like say Tokugawa not being born in Japan because someone died at the same time in Argentina, thus different spermatozoid) you could argue the same for stuff like particles or quantum strings
Im not talking about anything impossible or that contradicts the laws of physics mind you, Tokugawa could not be born due to that - it is a possibility - but likewise a atom could be split in Russia or China, its also a possibility, thats what chaos is after all
But equally as valid is the idea of our world being like in Steins Gate for example where there are multiple possible timelines(not necessarily meaning that physically exist) and most of them tend to converge, meaning small alterations in the timeline hardly can change the path something is hearding towards(in the show this being demonstrated by the main character failing time and time again to save someone from death) unless a great point of divergence happens(in the show this being exemplified as avoiding the Gulf War)
In the end we dont know what lawset our universe uses, we know both causality and chaos theory play a role but everything else is supposition and statistics(which can be distorted to suit one's view), so I think in Alternate History where multiple different outcomes can play out we should have the liberty to discuss both scenarios that play out somewhat like OTL and ones that go nuts
Depending on why there’s no Rome and what replaces it, as well as differences in the Jewish Diaspora, there could be a *lot* of Christianities. Imagine a bunch of Jewish communities in different areas each deciding on a different, local messiah over the centuries. Balkanized Christianity, only even moreso than OTL because they all have different founders.
Different AH fans have different preferences to how strongly the butterfly effect is used in their stories. I started out as an ardent butterfly effecter myself, but I've grown to like stories with weaker butterfly effects. You can agree to disagree, or one of you can create a new thread to discuss which style of fiction is better. That may be a very interesting and popular thread, but it's not this thread.
Now, that's interesting.
A specific person being born, a specific religion arising is not even remotely a "recurring pattern" in history.
I didn't say history is random, the point of chaos theory is that small changes anywhere can result in drastic difference everywhere, that doesn't mean that a farmer waking up 1 hour later will directly cause the Roman empire to collapse 1 century earlier, but it can mean that literally every single person born in a century will be completely different, totally changing the specific events.
We can't prove that the sun will rise tomorrow but that doesn't mean that believing that the world is going to end tomorrow is an idea "just as valid" as not believing that.
The point is not that people shouldn't be allowed to discuss railroaded scenarios where specific people are born and are the same in personality, the point is that when talking such long time periods having the same people exist is just not that realistic and no amount of obfuscating what we know will change that. It's an interesting thought experiment but not all thought experiments in this forum and even in this section have to be 100% realistic.
Mongol tribes growing stronger, and becoming better organized is a pattern, or trend that can set the stage for a leader to unite them under a charismatic leader. We can call him Temujin for familiarities sake. The same can be said for the birth of Christianity, Islam, or other movements that the time was right for. A violent thunderstorm in California in the Summer of 1000 AD isn't likely to derail the Norman Conquest.
The Israelites predate Rome, and Rome wasn't a power yet at the time of the Babylonian exile. In a world without them, the history of Judah looks similar for a long time.
All you need for !Christianity is an occupying power that isn't willing to leave Judah alone to live their lives, and they'll be looking for a Messiah.
Deleted member 90563
Indeed! However, he will be a different messiah, who'll come at a different time, and the last step, from Jewish sect to religion that accepts all into its fold, becomes highly improbable.
And if Alt Pontius Pilate decides to jail atl Jesus, or have an "accident" or exile him to alt Britain along with 20-30 other alt messiah's or discredit alt Jesus?
Or alt Samaritans are dominant over alt Jews or alt exile goes differently.
Seriously 1-2 of these alts kill alt Jesus and more than likely alt Alexander, though there are likely alt Conquerers. But even they can spread joys of alt dominant civilization over alt cultural footprints.
It's not chaos but seriously a century or two plus a few key "alts" which WILL certainly happen over 3-4 centuries.
Last edited:
With the POD given, I think you get a Carthaginian dominated western and southern Meditteranean, a Celtic Europe and the east a mix of Hellenistic and Persian states. I think the Celtic Druidic religion forbid writing down their lore, but the Celts were already using Greek writing. I think you end up with localized paganism staying the order of things but maybe the Druids start putting a "philosophical" spin on things influenced by the Greeks and maybe an expanding Carthage tones down the human sacrifice to keep trade profitable. The Jews probably chafe under the Seleucids until the Parthians or an ATL Persian dynasty overthrows them and lets Judaea run its own affairs as a satrap and messianism fades as a force. I could see Pontus and Mithradates, which had a mix of Greek and Persian traits becoming the big eastern empire after the Seleucids instead of the Parthians in this ATL.
Last edited: