WI: Baby Jesus dies?

[Tyr]

I've been interested in the Romans a lot lately, due to the big impact christianity had on the later Romans a bit of cross reading on early Christianity also came into this. From here the obvious old idea struck me- what if Jesus died when he was still a child, before he had time to go off and found his religion?

The big idea rattling around in my head from this is- John the Baptist. He becomes the head of some sort of Baptist Jewish cult which could possibly spread to the gentiles and become a sort of christianity lite?

Nonetheless...considering how bizzare it was some little cult took over the Roman empire IOTL its unlikely anything else whether it be Baptism, Mithrasism, etc... could replace it in quite the same way. The implications are of course very interesting...

 

[Kvasir]

Well this depends on what you believe Jesus was.

My take: John the Baptist gets his head chopped off for preaching unpopular things and his followers unite behind one of his underlings. The underling is forced to take the reins and ups the anti by having a go at the "corrupt" religious establishment at the temple. The Jewish leaders decide that this guy must go as well and is put to death.

After losing their second leader the cult go into moaning and people start saying they've seen him and that he's not dead. The cult had already taken on an "the end is nigh" aspect and soon ideas of there leaders return to smite the evil establishment grow.

Then some guy called Paul has a great idea of a scheme to get some power. He says he's had visions from the spirit of the later leader and soon John the Baptist and his cult is subsumed by ad-hoc tales and beliefs spread by people claiming the spirit of Jesus.

After two to three centuries of self persecution a new establishment faith is established and bares no resemblance to what happened or was preached.

What I'm suggesting is Jesus the man had no real baring on the modern day Christianity. But then again, many people will not like this interpretation of what happened.

 

[Earl_of_Somerset]

this will be a much debated topic.

For someone who is a good christian they would say that its not possible for Jesus to "die" in his infancy.

For others who are anti-christians they would say there is no Jesus whatsoever.

As a good christian i would say its impossible for Jesus to die in his infancy, and only possible on the cross, however this scenario may not sit with those who dont entirly believe Jesus existed.

 

[Zioneer]

As a Mormon Christian, I am obligated to believe that Jesus can only die when he needs to die, and cannot die at any other time.

Looking at it from a secular viewpoint though, it's entirely possible that John the Baptist or one of his followers manages to drive the Jewish community in a different direction than it was. They would probably stay a regional group; at best, they'd spread to Anatolia and/or Egypt.

 

[Inarius]

Well, i think that your thinking is too binary

For someone who is a good christian they would say that its not possible for Jesus to "die" in his infancy.

For others who are anti-christians they would say there is no Jesus whatsoever.

I am not very fond of Christianity, but i don't think jesus didn't exist. I just think he didn't exist as the gospels tell it, and i don't think i am alone. I think that the main argument for the existence of jesus is that nobody at that time could invent a die so humiliating as on the cross. Look at the old testament, deaths are much more funnier and mythological !

About the consequences of the absence of jesus, my current TL is about this subject (however, limited to Gaul "A pagan Gaul TL"), and i think that, eventually, Islam would have replaced the role of Christianity but only after a long time of coexistence with post gallo-roman cult or perhaps Mithra/Sol Invictus cult. And i think many northern lands would have kept their pagan beliefs.

I think also that there would be some syncretism between cults, which would lead to wars because of heretic cults (for example, a muhammad mixed with sol invictus, adored as the sun, or as a post-jupiter seems to me very plausible) .

 

[Sachyriel]

He dies and comes back three days later.

 

[Tony]

As a Christian, I would say one word - impossible, even with the help of alien space bats. Jesus Christ cannot die before his work on earth has accomplished. God is supernatural, and is above history, even if you use a time machine to go back and fire 100000000 bullets, you won't be able to kill baby Jesus. God and his servants may probably kill you by distorting time and space And if Jesus really dies as a baby, he would have been revived immediately.

But is it a topic that worth discussing? Yes, I think so. If common sense need not be applied, then how come Jesus and his family had to flee Palestine to avoid being killed according to the Bible? What if Joseph did not believe what he saw in his dream, and Jesus was killed by the forces of Herod the Great? And perhaps, what if Adam ate a fruit from the tree of life, and thus never died according to Genesis 3:22??

As a Methodist, I believe in Arminianism but not Calvinism, and I believe that God has its own plan, but things would develop according to the free will of human beings. Jesus really cannot be killed, but if Joseph did not listen to God's warning, God may still use another way to protect the life of Jesus. Had Adam eaten a fruit from the tree of life, God may still want to do something to save the mankind from sins, but through another way.

Things are never fixed, and everything could have gone differently, but God's plan shall never be changed, and even if history went alternatively, historical development will eventually develop with the help of God's plans but not decision, since God has foreknowledge but would not control everything. If Calvinism is true, I won't believe in God, because it is me who accept Jesus as my savior, and I'm not really truly "free" if everything is just God's drama.

Alright, let me stop talking about the topic as a Christian, as everything above is not about history. While one may argue that it was Paul not Jesus who invented Christianity, the teachings of Jesus can never be replaced by that of John the Baptist. John the Bapist did preach, but his influence was minimal, and was limited only to a small area of Palestine. Had Jesus died as a child, the Dark Age could be butterflied away, or perhaps not - the Roman rulers could just find another religion to justify themselves. The only thing I am pretty sure is that, had Jesus died as a child, there would be nothing known as the United States of America. Never.

 

[Kvasir]

While one may argue that it was Paul not Jesus who invented Christianity, the teachings of Jesus can never be replaced by that of John the Baptist. John the Bapist did preach, but his influence was minimal, and was limited only to a small area of Palestine.

Serious question, what source do you have that at the time that John the Baptist died he wasn't bigger than Jesus and was instead very limited in influence?

 

[Osk]

Kvasir, I agree with what you stated completely.

 

[Malta]

As a Greco-Egyptian Polytheist it is possible that he could die, as the gods ,pre t hen likely did a little dalliances amongst the mortals but its only the ones who died gruesome deaths that we hear about.

It would be fun to see a TL where a Jesus is the son of Dionysus.

 

[Joseph Solis in Australia]

If Jesus dies in infancy, well Christianity will not exist. Many butterflies. This is a list of POD that butterflies away Islam.

 

[Skokie]

Hold on a durn second. Outside the bounds of Christian faith, we don't know that Jesus actually existed. There is such a thing as the Christ-myth hypothesis: There is no need for a historical Jesus, just historical Christians.

There is also the belief that some Christian sects held that Jesus existed in the distant past; and still other beliefs that held that Jesus was a celestial being.

 

[Hapsburg]

Well, there was likely a historical Jesus. The historical accounts by Tacitus and Josephus, neither of which were any fan of hearsay and rumour and would have investigated any claims of people like that, demonstrate that.
It's just that the details about the guy are extremely limited, and we can hardly take the Gospel narratives as primary sources. All that we know is that the guy probably existed, had a brother or two, and preached in Judea in the early first century. We don't even know for sure how he died or when.

Regardless, there were enough messianic, apocalyptic movements in Roman Judea in that period that Jesus is superfluous to Christianity coming about.

 

[Germaniac]

Well in my humble opinion, only a secular look at history really matters when discussing Christianity historically. Since there are no facts to support or disprove god, all "facts" about a "his" existence must be kept separate.

Of course Jesus could have died as a child, just as every human could have died as a child. However, Monotheism was going to take root at some point I think, as the practice was expanding even in polytheist faiths. John the Baptist could have done it, but then again any other random person in history may have done it too. I vote for Ibrahim the bricklayer in Tyre.

 

[Skokie]

Well, there was likely a historical Jesus. The historical accounts by Tacitus and Josephus, neither of which were any fan of hearsay and rumour and would have investigated any claims of people like that, demonstrate that.

If we assume that both are reliable (they're both suspect, especially Josephus), they don't really amount to first or second hand testimony of Jesus having existed. They would confirm the existence of Christians and some of their beliefs, but that's not up for debate. We know Christians existed in the first century from various other first-hand sources.

To be as close to sure that Jesus existed as we could be about anyone else in ancient history, we'd need a source who said: "Dearest Decius Maximus Optime: O hai, whats up. I'm stationed here in the Galilee. It SUCKS. You know a new teacher is among the Jews? He calls himself Jesus. Weird huh?"

--or even better, "Hey mom and dad--I miss you. I met this Jesus guy. He's really cool. We believe he's God incarnate and have begun to follow him through the countryside."

No such first or second hand texts exist. Until that time, he's just one among many supernatural personalities in antiquity who may or may not have existed--such as Apollonius of Tyana.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana

That is, unless you partake in the Christian faith or Islam. Then belief in his historical existence is a matter of faith.

 

[Malta]

Of course Jesus could have died as a child, just as every human could have died as a child. However, Monotheism was going to take root at some point I think, as the practice was expanding even in polytheist faiths. John the Baptist could have done it, but then again any other random person in history may have done it too. I vote for Ibrahim the bricklayer in Tyre.

Actually, I don't think this is. A desire for being 'saved' was growing, not really monotheism, the upswing of Isis during the New Kingdom period of Egypt with universal chances of living a good afterlife was revolutionary enough for the region. The more fanciful parts of older religions were being scrutinized (underground underworld) and a major push was made for a more personal connection to religion (as the Polytheistic religions of the era were more civic minded) and so we see the rise of Mystery Cults, among them Isis worship and Christanity (and of course the Philosophe religions such as Neo Platonism).

Take for example the Golden Ass by Apuleius, where in the end Lucius because of his interest in the unaturalness of magic, becomes an Ass and through being saved by Isis turns human again and devotes himself to her name.

Which interesting enough was written to combat Christanity,

If this is evidence of Apuleius's antagonism towards Christianity (and it is supported by his representation of the cruel wife of the baker in Book 9 as adhering to a faith with a deity whom she proclaimed to be the only god), then it is not surprising, given the probable situation of Christian propaganda being spread both in Rome and in North Africa during Apuleius's life.

Thus, the Golden Ass--and Apuleius's rendering of the 'Cupid & Psyche' myth in particular--may be partially contrived as counter-doctrines to those of Christianity which Apuleius saw as threatening both the Isiac religion and Platonic philosophy. Thus his emphasis on the numen unicum multiformi specie (Apuleius XI.5), or 'single godhead with manifold forms' of Isis.

Such trends as putting a certain god as being the godhead of society was nothing new, for Athens it was Athena, Cartrhage Baal, etc but its just through a series of politically motivated events we got Jesus which happened to be Monotheistic. The drive for Sol Invictus, and what could have been Julian the Great's proposed 'Pagan Church' was really in reaction to Christanity, so without Christianity a drive for a universal church and universal godhead would not have happened and returned to being pluralistic.

 

[Hapsburg]

Yeah, the "monotheism as inevitability" as part of some one-track model religious "advancement" or "development" is pretty much a crock of shit. Not to mention blatantly insulting to a great number of present-day faiths and cultures along with ancient ones.

 

[Kvasir]

There are a couple of reasons to believe there actually was a "Jesus" living in and around Galilee and preaching. Basically the early Christians wanted to establish Jesus as the Messiah of the Old Testiment Prophets so the had to turn a Carpenter from Galilee into the descendent of the King of David born in Bethelhem in the South.

The fact is ancient writers (many of whom end up in Matthew) have to cook up a whole load of painful twisting to turn this Jesus into the Messiah. If they wanted to create an ideal Character they would probably not have made it so ridiculous. This points to an historical Jesus selected by Paul as the person from whom he is getting all his ideas and thus legitimising them.

 

[Chengar Qordath]

Well, there was likely a historical Jesus. The historical accounts by Tacitus and Josephus, neither of which were any fan of hearsay and rumour and would have investigated any claims of people like that, demonstrate that.
It's just that the details about the guy are extremely limited, and we can hardly take the Gospel narratives as primary sources. All that we know is that the guy probably existed, had a brother or two, and preached in Judea in the early first century. We don't even know for sure how he died or when.

Indeed; ideologically-motivated fringe conspiracy theories aside, there's a reasonable amount of evidence for the existence of a historical figure named Jesus. Now, it is entirely possible that the historical Jesus had only the loosest relation to the figure described in the Christian holy books, but his existence isn't in question.

 

[Kvasir]

Indeed; ideologically-motivated fringe conspiracy theories aside, there's a reasonable amount of evidence for the existence of a historical figure named Jesus.

Reasonable amount might be pushing it.

But yeah I'm prepared to say there probably was some person with whom we could identify the figure in question. Not that his actual life or teachings matter squat.