Is this a good place to discuss hypothetical situations that may or may not happen in the future, or do folks prefer to talking about historical things?

For instance: What would happen if we found a "lost gospel" that could be verified as coming straight from Jesus or one of the 12 disciples? Would something like this be added to the Bible? Why or why not?

  • 1
    Welcome to Christianity.SE! I moved your question here to the Meta site because it is really a question about how the site itself works, not a question about Christianity. That said, I think you could ask such questions, but you would have to be very careful and deliberate in scoping it in such a way that it can actually be answered objectively. For instance, you could ask for writings from Catholic theologians that deal with this issue. I think it could work as long as the question doesn't allow anyone to answer with their own opinions. Aug 2, 2015 at 6:26
  • Are you asking about future hypotheticals only or also past hypotheticals?
    – Geremia
    Jun 1, 2016 at 15:32

2 Answers 2


In general these make for bad questions. This site is about the documented beliefs of groups of Christians, and it's the nature of hypotheticals that they won't have been addressed in much detail.

  • 2
    Thanks, That's exactly what I was wondering. I'll leave the hypotheticals for another place.
    – New Wine
    Aug 2, 2015 at 13:35
  • Actually, this specific example was discussed when I was in formal study. Paul references an Epistle to the Laodiceans that we currently don't have. So from our framework, evangelical literalists, we did talk about it a good amount. However, by detail, perhaps you mean that because the finding of the book is hypothetical we therefore cannot discuss the finer points (details) of that book. For this reason, hypotheticals make for bad questions.
    – user3961
    Aug 3, 2015 at 18:41
  • 1
    @fredsbend I did say in general! However even though that possibility may have been addressed by some evangelicals, the question would have to specifically ask about that perspective, otherwise it would be broad/opiniony, and you would generally only know that they had addressed it if you were able to answer it yourself. So although specific ones might be okay, hypotheticals are problematic overall.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Aug 3, 2015 at 21:23

Great theologians have discussed hypotheticals, so I don't see how it would make for bad questions here.

For example, St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica is chock-full of hypothetical questions such as:

  1. "Whether one Divine Person can assume two human natures?"
    (viz., could have Christ also incarnated as a martian?)

  2. "Whether in the state of innocence there would have been generation [i.e., procreation] by coition [marital relations]?"

  3. "Whether if Eve, and not Adam, had sinned, their children would have contracted original sin?"

  4. "Whether in the state of innocence children would have been born with perfect knowledge?"

  5. "Whether in the state of innocence children would have had perfect strength of body as to the use of its members immediately after birth?"

  6. "Whether, if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate?"
    (the famous "felix culpa" or "happy fault" question)

  7. "Whether, if this sacrament [the Eucharist] had been reserved in a pyx, or consecrated at the moment of Christ's death by one of the apostles, Christ Himself would have died there?"
    (one of the most far-fetched questions!)

  • 1
    If it's a hypothetical that has received authorative discussion, then it should be fine to ask questions about it on those terms. If it hasn't, then an answer is delving in to "original research"/primarily-opinion-based territory. Jun 2, 2016 at 3:39
  • @bruisedreed So no "off-the-wall" questions.
    – Geremia
    Jun 2, 2016 at 15:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .