Jesus?

Seeing how Christians were consistently less tolerant then the Pagans they replaced(not to mention less tolerant the Dharmic faiths of the East, and Muslims once they arose), up until the last century, I think it would mean a safer world if anything. One without Christianity and probably without Islam... since monotheistic faiths seem inherently more assertive and aggressive, that surely means a safer world.
 
The world would be no different. Whether we be christian, muslim, pagan or atheist. Someone will find a way to exploit that and start a war. Religion isn't necessary to start a big war. It just makes it a bit easier.
 
The world would be no different. Whether we be christian, muslim, pagan or atheist. Someone will find a way to exploit that and start a war. Religion isn't necessary to start a big war. It just makes it a bit easier.

Exactly. Humanity is such a paradox, wanting peace yet bringing war on itself.
 

Laurentia

Banned
I'll assume he was a real person.



Probably about as dangerous as it is now. The Abrahamic faiths are pretty dangerous when practiced fundamentally, but I'd say we'd probably get some crazy fundies of ATL religions.

I thought it's already a fact that he was, and that it was his divinity that was in question.
 
to borrow a page from an author whose name escapes me (wrote "Flood," "The Navigator") Baxter I think,


([partial] SPOILER ALERT)

([partial] SPOILER ALERT)

([partial] SPOILER ALERT)






the Aztecs come across the Atlantic and massacre about one third to one half the population, until they catch the plague and bring it back home and then the total population loss stands at roughly eighty percent when the enhanced spread of the Bubonic Plague gets factored in.
 
I thought it's already a fact that he was, and that it was his divinity that was in question.

There's no direct evidence that supports his existence, only second-hand witnesses. So there's quite some crackpots out there that say he never existed, when it is nigh-certain he did.
 
Seeing how Christians were consistently less tolerant then the Pagans they replaced(not to mention less tolerant the Dharmic faiths of the East, and Muslims once they arose), up until the last century, I think it would mean a safer world if anything. One without Christianity and probably without Islam... since monotheistic faiths seem inherently more assertive and aggressive, that surely means a safer world.

Ahistorical nonsense, but that's more or less in keeping with the high intellectual tone of the OP.
 
I'll assume he was a real person.



Probably about as dangerous as it is now. The Abrahamic faiths are pretty dangerous when practiced fundamentally, but I'd say we'd probably get some crazy fundies of ATL religions.

I think, without Christianity:

- Graeco-Roman polytheism, incorporating various local deities under the umbrella of the Interpretatio Romana would be the dominant religion in the Euro-Mediterranean area.

- assuming the Roman Empire still meets it's demise similar to OTL and Germanic tribes seize large parts of the former Roman Empire, we would probably see some kind of syncretism between the Graeco-Roman religion and Germanic polytheism. In fact, the Romans also applied the Interpratio Romana on Germanic deities (ie, quating Odin/Woden with Mercury).

- without Latin as the language of the Catholic Church, latinization will be slower/less complete, and I hence foresee a longer survival of continental Celtic languages as well as of the Punic language, than in OTL.
 
Everyone would be Pastafarian. All hail the Spaghetti Monster.



YAH MAN!


behold, my humble offering,

9411spaghetti-bolognaise1.jpg
 
There's no direct evidence that supports his existence, only second-hand witnesses. So there's quite some crackpots out there that say he never existed, when it is nigh-certain he did.

Yeah, as it's already been stated prior in this thread, this is very, very dangerous discussion indeed.

Basically, the question "did Jesus ever exist?" is actually somewhat ambiguous, and should probably be rephrased as "did Jesus exist as described in the New Testament?"

It's quite impossible to make the case that there likely didn't exist some individual by the name of Joshua or Jesus or something similar in early 1st century Judea, who developed something of a following. To make the case that Jesus was purely fictional (as many people would for example make the case that Nephi, son of Lehi was purely an imaginary character of Joseph Smith, Jr.) is not just hard, but pretty much impossible, because even if it would be true, we don't have enough documentation from that era to demonstrate it.

However, many people would probably object to the statement that there existed some individual by the name of Joshua or Jesus in early 1st century Judea, who was born of a virgin, visited by three kings who found him by following a star, raised the dead, walked on water, cured the sick, exorcised demons, fed five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two fish, turned water into wine, was executed by the Romans, fulfilled the Law of Moses, suffered and died for ours sins and by his blood purified our souls, arose from the dead and was the Messiah and the Son of God, glorified the name of the Father, and that whoever takes upon him- or herself his name should not suffer eternal damnation but instead sit on his right side in the Kingdom of Heaven. They'd say that no individual ever existed as such.

I think Raëlism makes a good analogy here. Do I believe that Claude Vorilhon exists? Absolutely. Do I believe that Raël, who was visited by the aliens who calls themselves the Elohim on December 13, 1973, was taught by these extra-terrestrial beings of their creation of mankind and plan thereof, and was then designated to become their messenger for all mankind exists? Not really...

(Apologies to any Raëlians out there. I was not my intention to make fun or mock your religion, but merely to use it to illustrate an example!)
 
I accept that Jesus Christ was (in otl) a historical figure and by all accounts a fine human being, philosopher and teacher.


I am one of the very, very few liberals who didn't point and laugh when GW Bush said that Jesus was his favorite philospher. I had, at the time, taken it as potential cause for some optimism for the prospect of his being a "compassionate conservative."




I accept that other people have a religious relationship with Jesus Christ, sure.


(fwiw, I'm Jewish.)
 
Last edited:
Top