What if Pontius Pilate Had Pardoned Jesus?

What if Pontius Pilate had pardoned Jesus? Would Christianity exist?

I was in Costco's book section today waiting for some film to develop when I had came across a compilation of essays of alternative histories, sometimes based on the most subtle of cirumstances, that would have changed the course of world history. Often, these circumstances had to do with trivial circumstances-- a moment of indecision that saved George Washington's life early in the Revolutionary War from a soldier's bullet, for example.

I forget the historian who wrote the essay, but he made the case that Christianity may well have developed the way it did regardless of what most Christians think is the central fact of their faith-- Christ's death and resurrection. The counterfacts were that Pilate in defiance of the Jewish mob pardoned Jesus and Jesus went on to live until the age of 95 preaching, doing his miracles, and returning on occasion to Jerusalem to try to sacrifice himself in obedience to his Father's will. Jesus' pacifistic teachings and obedience to civil authority were condoned by the Roman Imperium and they became his protector. The missionary activities of Paul and his disciples spread the faith that was officially recognized by Constantine the Great around 300 AD.

Interesting,but possibly misleading.

Like all religions ,Christianity was a response to the needs of its society. It was and is a reflection of the societies in which it is found. That is one reason it has never been an homogenous belief system,regardless of claims by apologists. Had Jesus lived on,it is most likely he would have faded into obscurity. He was an very ordinary Jewish Rabbi. His actual teachings as far as I can tell, were Jewish,and meant for Jews. Initially,gentiles were not accepted by the followers of Jesus. The religion which developed into Christianity was invented almost entirely by Saul. It has very little do with Jesus.

Christianity contains no new moral code. The same code was taught by some Greek philosophers,in Hinduism by and by Siddhartha Gautama in the C7th BCE..In China The Dao and Confucian moral codes have many similarities with Christian moral values..Christianity contains no new theology or cosmology.Every single idea was taken from elswhere.

Until Constantine adopted Chrstianity,it seemed for that Mithraism might become the dominant religion insead of Christianity..The two religions have a lot of similarities.

Had Jesus lived,Mithraism may well have dominated the Roman Empire.That Christianity spread was more because it became the State Religion of the Roman Empire than any other single reason.Mithraism was an accepted mainstream religion until the C4th CE. It could easily have become the State religions instead of Chrsitianity--whether or not Jesus had survived.

Of course,that's the wonderful thing about alternate history.No one knows enough about affecting varaibles to be able to give more than a possibly entertaining guess.

Perhaps Christianity took root while competing cults such as Mithraism did not was because it was universalistic-- largely detaching ethics from tradition and legalism-- syncranistic-- absorbing ideas from other religions, especially Judiaism but probably other religions as well as you mention, and democratic-- appealing most especially to the marginal in society, which is necessary for creating any mass movement. The persecution the Christians suffered under Nero and other emperors also helped catalize the faith from a cult into a multinational religion by creating a future-based end-of-days narrative. The writings of Paul that effectively married Greek and Jewish thought and the very fact that the gospels and the epistles were made and preserved contributed to Christianity's early acceptance and growth, IMO.

I doubt that Constantine the Great simply by executive fiat made Christianity the official religion, for by that time the faith had penetrated all stratas of society, most particulary the officer corps, and like any good politician, he was responding to his constituency through identity politics.

This is one of those topics that can keep historians busy for years, since ther is no cut and dried answer. It seems to me to have been a combination of factors. Here are a few.

Once Paul had produced a version that did not require one to be or becoem a Jew, it was certainly open to all. Plenty of other cults were, though.

It developed a story that sounded very similar to many of the other religious stories going around, so it wasn't unaccepably bizarre.

Unlike the others, though, it had a one-way valve. Once you were a Xian, you were supposed to leave all the other cults alone.

I really have doubts about the Neronian persecution. Domitian seems to have been more interested in persecuting Jews. (Not surprising, since his father and elder brother were famous for winning the Jewish wars, while Domitian had to stay at home.)

Here's an interesting site about it.

http://users.drew.edu/ddoughty/Christianorigins/persecutions/index.html

"creating a future-based end-of-days narrative"

That seems to have been a part of Christianity from the beginning. Ehrman and others see Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, and Paul expects the end in his own lifetime.