of these statements, all it does is provide how the doctrine of Christianity spread to the masses. Some argue that the message of Christianity had nothing to do with the mass conversions; it was all based on ulterior motives and coercion. Either the people decided to convert out or pure personal gain, and therefore did not truly believe, or early Christians forced conversions based on fear. Doctrines of eternal punishment for those who did not believe could invoke fear into those listening, while the stories of miracles show that the Christian God is a powerful God, and full of vengeance. But neither fear nor greed can sufficiently explain the mass conversions of the first few years of Christianity, before 313 CE. It is possible that some individual conversions could be based on those things, but not all the conversions. For one thing, in the first few centuries of Christianity, there were no profitable gains to be Christian. Quite the opposite, most Christians were discriminated against and persecuted. It is true that after this time period, during conversion of Constantine that it might have been possible to elevate to a higher social, or monetary level, but there is no evidence that urban populations actually lived better after becoming Christian. But during this time, there were no material incentives, only peace of mind, if that. Conversions out of fear might have more credence, but even that has holes in it. People would not fear the wrath of a vengeful God, if they do not believe in Him already. The eternal punishments of a god that a pagan does not believe in would cause him no fear, so therefore no conversion. So in some fashion the potential convert would have to already believe their God for fear to work. So fear could not be the primary reason to draw people towards Christianity, quite the contrary, fear would probably draw them away. The fear of a painful death to the lions is more a tangible fear than the fear of an unk...
