How could Rome best stop/slow the spread of Christianity?

[CountPeter]

Not likely in this case.

The manner of Jesus' death, as a "rebel" against the Roman State, was a great embarrassment to the early Church, which they did their best to play down. The Cross didn't become the main Christian icon until after the Conversion of Constantine, and it is notorious how the Gospels bend over backwards to whitewash Pilate and put the blame for His death onto the Jews. Had His execution been fictitious, its inventors would almost certainly have Him being stoned to death by Jews, as St Stephen was, rather than crucified by a Roman governor.

I think that's imposing motive where there doesn't have to be one.
If you are pragmatically crafting the religion, then sure that makes sense. But, mistake, hallucination, dreams etc are all means by which people can believe the truth of a matter. Even without such extents, we are pattern seeking creatures who like to look for narratives, misremembering an event is yet another way that no motive can be present.

 

[Byz]

The actual list of martyrs that Romans killed is like, what? 30? The only reason it's played up so much is because Christians wrote history, and played it up. Romans were confused by Christianity, really, and inconsistently persecuted it. If they had really cracked down early, I think it would have failed.

One way would be to try to avoid the Third Century Crisis. This could require a PoD going back to Trajan, so it isn't easy. But that stops faith in the Empire and traditional religion being eroded. Christianity is still an important cult within the Empire, but it competes against others. Maybe eventually the Empire adopts some form of Henotheism, with several Emperors in succession agreeing that one God from Roman/Greek religion is the God that is associated with the Emperor/the power of Rome, and is more important than all of the others. Sort of like Sol Invictus, but adopted in a way that isn't too little, too late.

That's irrelevant. Jesus probably didn't exist.

POD is after 100. Can we please not go through the historical Jesus debate?

 

[Marc]

Rome had become culturally bankrupt by the mid-first century CE. Perhaps an uncomfortable truth, but still the truth.
Christianity (and the other mystery religions), had a deeply felt appeal because of that. For those who aren't religious, it's difficult to understand how powerful faith can be as a set of essential and sustaining values - and these are the things that transcend the significance of politics and military strategy.
It's immaterial whether Christianity was a minority belief when Flavius Theodosius Augustus made Christianity the official State religion (Much more than Constantine, Theodosius is the father of the Christian Roman state). Christianity, on its own dynamics, was the most effective belief system to fill the large psychological and philosophical hole that Roman society had fallen into. A non-Christian alternative had to offer an equally compelling and potent narrative. They, by and large, didn't.

Ah, and without the triumph of Christianity, you never get the Byzantine Empire...

 

[Byz]

Rome had become culturally bankrupt by the mid-first century CE. Perhaps an uncomfortable truth, but still the truth.
Christianity (and the other mystery religions), had a deeply felt appeal because of that. For those who aren't religious, it's difficult to understand how powerful faith can be as a set of essential and sustaining values - and these are the things that transcend the significance of politics and military strategy.
It's immaterial whether Christianity was a minority belief when Flavius Theodosius Augustus made Christianity the official State religion (Much more than Constantine, Theodosius is the father of the Christian Roman state). Christianity, on its own dynamics, was the most effective belief system to fill the large psychological and philosophical hole that Roman society had fallen into. A non-Christian alternative had to offer an equally compelling and potent narrative. They, by and large, didn't.

Ah, and without the triumph of Christianity, you never get the Byzantine Empire...

I'd argue it is less Rome having become culturally bankrupt, but more that it hadn't really added much culturally in the first place. You had it interfering in the whole Mediterranean world and uniting it in a way it really had never been before, not even by Persia or Alexander. This was a big upheaval, and as much as I like the Romans, they didn't really have a brand new philosophy to introduce. They just kept co-opting local cultures. So these local cultures had to figure things out in the wake of the Roman Empire.

 

[SwordLord]

We don't have that much information on 'Jesus in the Bible' as person outside it. as far we know, Early Christian could very well mix biography and teaching of several people into one. Bible itself had two separate genealogy. Even in Bibles, after he resurrected, his own disciple didn't recognize him.

Going off the bible, the reason was because he purposely hid himself from them to test their faith.

The actual list of martyrs that Romans killed is like, what? 30? The only reason it's played up so much is because Christians wrote history, and played it up. Romans were confused by Christianity, really, and inconsistently persecuted it. If they had really cracked down early, I think it would have failed.

In the hundreds to thousands actually. Anyways, execution isn't the only form of persecution. Mostly leaders were the only ones executed, as the Romans thought the church would die on its own without leadership. Obviously that was wrong, as the church grew massively despite(and possibly because of) the persecutions.

 

[SwampTiger]

The Manichaeist solution is probably a good one. The problem is Palestine is bubbling over with unrest and religious change.

 

[TruthfulPanda]

The Manichaeist solution is probably a good one. The problem is Palestine is bubbling over with unrest and religious change.

Palestine is not a problem.
Too small and poor.
Hmm - still, besides the relatively well known Jewish revolts IIRC there also were Samaritan (Jews with slightly different Bible) revolts in this time frame. What were the about?

 

[SwampTiger]

Poor and small Palestine led to the development of three of the worlds major religions, if you consider Judaism as major.

 

[Agricola]

The strength of christianity was the doctrine of salvation. The vast majority of the people these days had a very hard life and no chance to ascend in the roman society, or they simply failed already to do so. However, salvation offered the solution! Everything becomes better after your death, if you are just pious.

The only chance, to stop christianity longterm was another religion based on salvation. Or to develop the roman state religion into such a kind of religion. Perhaps Christianity could even be integrated into such an polytheistic or better henotheistic approach. Neo-Platonism looked like a very promising platform, but it never appealed to the masses. One reason was probably, that other religions had no Paulus, the genius who made christianity suitable for the masses.

I am afraid, nobody in the 1st or 2nd century recognized the dangerousness of christianity. Also no roman politician saw the importance to further develop the state religion artificially or scientifically, in order to empower the state religion to cover the changing needs of the people (salvation).
And after Constantines tolerance edict, the cat was out of the bag.

So best early solution: Protect Jesus by all means, let him become old and die like many of theses other messiahs. And kill Paulus on sight!
The hard way: find a plausible event, which starts a process to change roman state religion, so it can repel christianity.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

he strength of christianity was the doctrine of salvation. The vast majority of the people these days had a very hard life and no chance to ascend in the roman society, or they simply failed already to do so. However, salvation offered the solution! Everything becomes better after your death, if you are just pious.

Not to mention that unlike several other religions of the day (including Judaism), Christianity was marketable across the board since it didn't demand sacrificial animals or anything like that. If you're a beggar from Tarraconensis, which is going to appeal more? Belonging to the cult of whichever god this week where you have to bring a sacrificial bull/whatever, have to pay the dues to the priests and they tell you that you've offended the gods. Or Christianity, where it's come just as you are. No sacrificial animals, no priestly dues, etc necessary.

 

[Escape Zeppelin]

As others have said, no persecution would greatly slow Christianity's spread down if not stop it altogether.

I disagree. Japan shows that an organized, ruthless, and above all consistent policy of persecution can certainly stamp out even a popular religion but as people above have noted Rome really didn't notice Christianity enough to persecute it most times. I believe that Rome probably could have stamped them out if they'd truly wanted to but them caring enough to do so is extremely unlikely. After all there were dozens of religions in the Empire so what's one more?

 

[SwordLord]

I disagree. Japan shows that an organized, ruthless, and above all consistent policy of persecution can certainly stamp out even a popular religion but as people above have noted Rome really didn't notice Christianity enough to persecute it most times. I believe that Rome probably could have stamped them out if they'd truly wanted to but them caring enough to do so is extremely unlikely. After all there were dozens of religions in the Empire so what's one more?

In Japan, the people preaching could only enter through a few cities, so containing them was easy. There is also the fact that Japan saw how fast Christianity could explode, and put tons of resources into stamping it out. The Romans had no reason to do that, so without ASB telling them the future, they would never see Christianity as a threat until it was too late

 

[Alexander the Average]

Not to mention that unlike several other religions of the day (including Judaism), Christianity was marketable across the board since it didn't demand sacrificial animals or anything like that. If you're a beggar from Tarraconensis, which is going to appeal more? Belonging to the cult of whichever god this week where you have to bring a sacrificial bull/whatever, have to pay the dues to the priests and they tell you that you've offended the gods. Or Christianity, where it's come just as you are. No sacrificial animals, no priestly dues, etc necessary.

Also if you were a poor beggar the local Christians were probably organising local charity. Part of the reason Christianity was so popular with the downtrodden.

Perhaps if you could get the Romans to establish some sort of state-backed welfare system, a policy that Julian tried in order to undercut the Church, you could take some of the wind out of the sails.

 

[ArchimedesCircle]

Have the Romans embrace Manichaeism instead. Same universalist appeal as Christianity, its dualism would likely appeal to a people whose worldview was already centred on a division of the world into civilisation and barbarism and it gives the Roman Emperors a religious justification for going after the Iranians.

Manichaeism could work, as could the Isis, Bacchus or Sol Invictus cults. Basically anything that can become an organized religion that the emperor adheres to.

 

[JennyB]

In Japan, the people preaching could only enter through a few cities, so containing them was easy. There is also the fact that Japan saw how fast Christianity could explode, and put tons of resources into stamping it out. The Romans had no reason to do that, so without ASB telling them the future, they would never see Christianity as a threat until it was too late

Not to mention that Christianity in Japan was associated with foreign powers that they were able to exclude entirely. Even so they didn’t manage to extinguish it entirely, though the result after 200 years of trying was - decidedly odd

 

[JennyB]

Manichaeism could work, as could the Isis, Bacchus or Sol Invictus cults. Basically anything that can become an organized religion that the emperor adheres to.

Yes, any of them could work, or any combination of them. Rome did not have to invent a religion from scratch. All it asked was that you accept that the Emperor could be the Son of God. You didn't have to believe it, and it didn’t matter what sort of God you thought he was Son of. The trouble was, the Christians had their own Son of God, and the Emperor couldn't fight him because he was already dead.

 

[JennyB]

Post-Temple Judaism and Christianity were both homeless religions. They had two age-old survival strategies that no Empire could cope with:

1. The Daniel strategy: co-operate as much as possible with the ruling power while still holding on to your core identity
2. Move somewhere you are more welcome. The Empire was a big place, but there were lots of interesting lands beyond.

 

[Dfront21]

He is very likely to have existed.

Sorry, there's no evidence for his existence.

 

[Mike Stearns]

Sorry, there's no evidence for his existence.

Historians readily accept the existence of a historical Jesus. There is no other way to explain the emergence of Christianity. The part that is uncoertain is the exact timeframe of Jesus’ life and ministry.

 

[Frrf]

Perhaps a pod outside Rome? Buddhism seems to fill the whole charity hole quite well in much of Asia, and syncretises happily with local faiths. Perhaps a Buddhist king or emperor decides to pull an Ashoka and sends missionaries to the Roman Empire? If they can get the support of enough of the aristocracy and maybe an emperor or two, they might outflank Christianity entirely. Particularly in Gaul and Brittania, given that the druids were said to believe in reincarnation.