What if constantine never converted

I read that before constantine was forced to convert by his mother, christianity had all but died out at that point. Everyone who is Christian today would be a member of whatever religion Rome used instead. If Rome had used Mithraism to conquer Western Civilization then today Mithraism would enjoy the popularity we see with Christianity.

Or if Rome had stuck with it's original religion then the Pontifex Maximus would have arrested Galileo for blasphemy against the god Jupiter. Who could dare to use a spy glass to look at a god? Then centuries later some new Pontifex Maximus would get a divine revelation that "the planets as gods" was simply a metaphor and the real divine truth is the god s of the gaps. I think we can't possibly make a prediction how almost years of history would have turned out differently without the cult; it's interesting though to speculate.

So many things could have happened Could probably well be the case like Zorastarianism. Also could have gone wholly extinct like Mithraism or Manichaeism but it could also have thrived even without official support until much later. Probably not for much longer-both henotheism and other Mystery religions were gaining ground in Rome. Most likely not, its likely the city would have been sacked one way or another unless someone invents a printing press really early.

Its possible but unlikely as science had reached a dead-end by late Roman times. The world could very well be more religious depending on circumstances. Um no. Constantine never converted because of his mother although I believe she was Christian and Christianity was pretty widespread in the Empire by the early 4th Century which is probably what allowed it to survive the savage persecution under Diocletian.

Monotheism existed for a long time before Constantine including its alliance with secular politics. Christianity would have survived with or without Constantine. It was already at least years old by that time, and had priests and congregations in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Armenia, and Persia. If it had died in the Roman Empire, it would have survived elsewhere.

Constantine really just legalized the whole mess. Things weren't even really worked out for nearly a century afterwards. This included a quick return to being illegal and then the fight over what "brand" of xianity would finally be the officially accepted one in the empire.

On top of this the tales of just when Constantine converted are sketchy in themselves. One has him converting because of a sign related to a big battle and the other was a death bed conversion after a life of worshiping Sol Invictus. Just like with pot today the fact that he legalized it doesn't mean he used it himself beyond a political means. I would really be interested in learning about all the various early forms of Christianity before Rome took over.

I bet they would be largely unrecognizable to what we have today. I've not really studied this much but I'm having a hard time believing that if Constantine hadn't put his stamp of approval on the religion that it wouldn't have become the mega religion it is today.

It's my understanding that xianity essentially replaced the infrastructure of the Roman pagan religions that preceded it, mirroring the priesthood, adopting the rituals, etc None of this stuff is found in the bible, it's all Roman.

I need some convincing to believe that the religion would be what it is today without the Romans because there are a lot of dead religions out there that xianity replaced or left behind. This is very interesting since I grew up in the Roman church. It seems to me that by the time Constantine came into the picture, the biggest issue was not the existence or number of Christians. Rather, the issue was what was Christianity.

Just take a look at the Gostic works Nag Hamadi and in some ways I have a hard time seeing what I recognize as Christianity. It was under Constantine's authority that the Nicean Council was called which eventually led to a far more united church, including eventually it's theology, canon, and the united Roman Church. If Constantine had played no role, it is possible that Christianity would have remained highly diverse and thus without the central control enjoyed by the Roman Church for so many centuries until Martin Luther successfully stirred the pot.

Constantine's "conversion" wasn't a legitimate one. If Constantine hadn't done it, someone else would have. The Roman Empire would never have been able to quell the spread of Christianity during Constantine's era, it was far too late their best bet was to ignore the Christians like they had the Jews and any other local religion-The Romans were very liberal on that point; so long as you abided by Roman law, you could worship whatever deity you wished.

By targeting the Christians, the Christians were forced to spread, and stories of martyrs only helped giving legitimacy to its teachings. The next person to become Emperor would have "converted" just like Constantine did, and would have established the official religion of the Roman Empire to be Christian without a doubt. Like Constantine, he would have used the religion to solidify himself and the Empire: If you say that there's only one true religion, and that to disagree with Orthodoxy will lead to being anathematized, and then you add that the Empire now subscribes to said religion, you have the perfect instrument to keep dissent toward the Empire down.

AD , when paganism in Rome finally fell. This influence was a largely pagan culture, interspersed with a faint Christian presence since Christianity had been legal for forty years, but not endorsed.

By the time of Diocletian , Christians were persecuted to a lesser extent than in times past. Even so, Roman officials that were Christian prayed and worshipped in secret.

At this time, a Church Council in Spain ruled that if some Hitchcock, James. History of the Catholic Church. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, Jones, A. Constantine and the Conversion of Europe. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Potter, David. Constantine the Empreror. New York: Oxford University Press, Stepehnson, Paul. Wilkin, Robert. London: Yale University Press, Get Access.

Good Essays. The Rise of Christianity. Read More. Satisfactory Essays. Better Essays. Powerful Essays. The History and Identity of Christianity.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser. What if Constantine never converted? Thread starter samcster94 Start date Jun 6, Prev 1 2 Go to page. First Prev 2 of 4 Go to page. Maoistic said:. Doubt so. Manichaeism is even more elitist than Christianity and had an utterly dualistic view of morality where everything evil was infected by Ahriman and had to either be transformed or destroyed, unlike the view of Christianity where Satan certainly controls mankind but everyone, even non-Christians, have the innate capacity to resist him and know God as Satan is not as all-powerful as Ahriman.

Manichaeism is also arguably even more anti-Semitic since they probably held the Gnostic view that the Old Testament God is actually Ahriman himself.

The idea that Gnosticism, and by extension Manichaeism, were almost a proto-Renaissance Protestantism simply has no validity, and all apologists of these religions should be ashamed of themselves for supporting religions that would have made Hadrian's anti-Jewish massacres look like a humanitarian mission by comparison. Click to expand What is likely to happen to the Roman Empire if Constantine never converts to Christianity??? I mean Mikestone8 said:.

He was only baptised on his deathbed, but Iirc that was common in those days. Baptism washed away all one's sins, but could only be done once. So if you were in a position where you might have to do a lot of sinful things,, there was a lot to be said for postponing it to the last minute. Spelf said:. Christianity will eventually overtake the Empire; Constantine was a product of this, not a driver yeah that sounds about right for a public infrastructure project.

A "Constantine" expy, but late. I think Christianity might develop differently theologically. Fabius Maximus. CountDVB said:. Manichaeism was actually fairly different when it came to Gnosticism. He viewed the material world as containing both light and dark. Furthermore, he was born as part of the Elcesaites. That, alongside with the fact he mentions Jesus as inspiration alongside Zoroaster and Buddha, kinda makes me think that he probably did view the Old Testament God as that.

While it was inspried by Gnostic traditions, that doesn't make them the same and presumably, the Mesopotamian ones would be different than that of the west.

The fact that Manichaeism did appeal to alot of people means that it clearly had a draw to it, enough to briefly challenge Christianity as the successor to paganism as the mainstream religion. The thing is Manicheanism was always a bit "too little too late. Maybe have Manicheanism become more accepted in Persia, and due to most ancient borders being extremely weak when it comes to travelers, it slowly seeps into the levant?

Christianity doesn't even need to take over the Empire.