Christianity religious what-if

Timotheus · Post by **Timotheus** » 2008-09-05 12:43pm

We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times. They have thrown out sections and added new as different sects were destroyed or brought back into the fold.

So lets say that somewhere right before the Crusades a few new lines are added. Not only are they just new lines but they are in fact new quote from Jesus Christ himself.

"The failure of your neighbor to see the light is your failure to convert him and this is a sin."

Now one who sins goes to Hell or at the very least sits a bit of time in purgatory before making it to Heaven.

So with these words added in and given to the masses as the truth how does history change?

I am assuming here that no one challenges this addition and it is accepted as completely true.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2008-09-05 02:04pm

Failing to convert someone is now a sin?
But sinners don't go to hell?

Okay, then what's the point of a sin?

You just made the bible a little more confusing, and given it's worshippers even more reason to be aggressive. That fact failing to convert someone is now a sin... Yeah, let's not let up on the conversion!

Timotheus · Post by **Timotheus** » 2008-09-05 02:47pm

As far as I know you dont automatically go to Hell for sinning. Things like pennance and repenting will keep you out of Hell.

Also at least according to the Church doing certain good deeds (like giving money to the church of course) will balance your account and keep you out of Hell.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-09-05 08:47pm

Midaeval Christians become even bigger assholes than they were OTL, because it's now officially a sin to permit heretics and pagans to exist. You just upped the imperative for them to do their damndest to convert everyone else on the planet, because not doing so is now a sin.

speaker-to-trolls · Post by **speaker-to-trolls** » 2008-09-07 03:29pm

Yeah, if anything that would make it worse for heathens everywhere, considering that a conversion minutes or even seconds before you die of blood loss/organ failure/being set on fire is still conversion and in the catholic system your benefactor can even help you account for your sins by praying for you in purgatory. Plus, consider that if any new material is added to the bible then it will be hotly contested, especially if it supposed to have come from the mouth of the saviour, so some people (particularly knights) may ignore it as heresy or regard it as not ironclad (much like 'thou shalt not kill', you know, there are always extenuating circumstances).

Plus, whether or not he has technically lived up to his duties as a christian, the Eastern Roman Emperor is still not going to be happy about the idea of thousands of turks squatting on his trade routes, and likewise few Frankish lords are going to pass up an opportunity for glory and plunder. They can convert the survivors later.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2008-09-08 09:33am

The only way you could ease up the Christian faith would be something like

"When someone dies, if they have not accepted Jesus/God into their hearts, they go to Purgatory until they do. Sinners are redeemed if they accept there guilt, and those that do not go to hell for a time to be purified before ascending into Heaven."

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-09-08 10:04am

I don't see how it would make much difference. Christians ignore all the parts of the Bible which are inconvenient already. If they could read the Bible and conclude that Jesus was a big fan of wealthy monarchs, they could read this any damned way they wanted to. And since it would cripple their societies to declare endless war on the rest of the world, they would find a way to declare that it's one of those parts of the Bible which is meant to interpreted "figuratively", which is a nice way of saying "ignore it and suck my dick, altar boy".

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2008-09-08 02:29pm

We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times. They have thrown out sections and added new as different sects were destroyed or brought back into the fold.

Just to nitpick....they claim to have never rewritten a single word. In fact they wouldn't DARE touch the sacred text. All they did was remove the writings that were not actually 'divine'. They were false documents written by heretics and blasphemers. Of course the convenient truth that they contained contradictory stories (much more so then what was left in the 'approved' Bible), is just mere coincidence I'm sure.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-09-08 05:35pm

Timotheus wrote:We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times.

Not really?

They have thrown out sections and added new as different sects were destroyed or brought back into the fold.

Again, not really, most of the christian infighting was to do with interpretation rather than canon, and there are still churches like those in Ethiopia that continue with their slightly different canons.

So lets say that somewhere right before the Crusades a few new lines are added. Not only are they just new lines but they are in fact new quote from Jesus Christ himself.

"The failure of your neighbor to see the light is your failure to convert him and this is a sin."

Now one who sins goes to Hell or at the very least sits a bit of time in purgatory before making it to Heaven.

So with these words added in and given to the masses as the truth how does history change?

I am assuming here that no one challenges this addition and it is accepted as completely true.

Probably not much. Christianity is more than the Bible, it is a large collection of generally overlapping socio-cultural forces, and they're what dictate christian ideologies more than the Bible does.

Timotheus · Post by **Timotheus** » 2008-09-08 08:24pm

Justforfun000 wrote:
We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times. They have thrown out sections and added new as different sects were destroyed or brought back into the fold.
Just to nitpick....they claim to have never rewritten a single word. In fact they wouldn't DARE touch the sacred text. All they did was remove the writings that were not actually 'divine'. They were false documents written by heretics and blasphemers. Of course the convenient truth that they contained contradictory stories (much more so then what was left in the 'approved' Bible), is just mere coincidence I'm sure.

Just to nitpick. They are lying sacks of shit.

Timotheus · Post by **Timotheus** » 2008-09-08 08:28pm

Zuul wrote:
Timotheus wrote:We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times.
Not really?

Yep and the Donation of Constantine was real too.

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2008-09-08 08:33pm

Just to nitpick. They are lying sacks of shit.

Hehehe. No argument here buddy.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2008-09-09 07:25am

Timotheus wrote:
Zuul wrote:
Timotheus wrote:We all know the church has rewritten the Bible many times.
Not really?
Yep and the Donation of Constantine was real too.

Could you post a list of these rewritings and things rewritten?

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2008-09-09 05:45pm

Solauren wrote:The only way you could ease up the Christian faith would be something like

"When someone dies, if they have not accepted Jesus/God into their hearts, they go to Purgatory until they do. Sinners are redeemed if they accept there guilt, and those that do not go to hell for a time to be purified before ascending into Heaven."

The ironic thing is something like that might consign Christianity to being just another failed cult. I'd bet heavily that one of the biggest factors in the success of Christianity and Islam is the way they're set up to encourage their followers to spread them as widely as possible. Remove that impulse and they may not get anywhere near as far.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Christianity religious what-if

Christianity religious what-if

Re: Christianity religious what-if

Re: Christianity religious what-if

Re: Christianity religious what-if