Did Chr*stianity ruin the Roman Empire?

>DELETE THIS

youtube.com/watch?v=GHgW2z61_9k

The plebeians were the first christians.
Constantine making christianity the state religion was simply a populist move to appease the plebs.
The roman empire was what enabled the plebs to exist in the first place.
Conclusion: Rome ruined itself.

>Internal disunity
Christianity created an intolerant division of other faiths. leading to the loss of vast amounts of wisdom which caused a scientific stagnation, which culminated in dark ages.

The fighting between pagans and Christians was marginal at best, and rarely happened. Hypatia's death hasn't been seen as signifying the onset of a Christian inspired dark age for over a century in mainstream history, and the final part of your post is complete and utter bullshit. Christian priests did not encourage Germanic tribes to immigrate, it just happened that when certain tribesmen beyond the frontiers were converted and later forced into exile due to inter-tribal conflict, they obviously decided to seek shelter in the empire and got employment as officers in the Roman army. That wasn't Christianity's fault, unless you're willing to argue that indirect action is enough.

No. Any claims that Christianity or multiculturalism destroyed the Empire are poorly sourced and without merit.

The Empire lasted ~1,000 yrs. after the fall of the west with Christianity as state religion.

>Those foreign barbarians had nothing to do with Romes fall
>They were good people who respected and adapted to Roman culture
Said no one ever

No the Roman Empire ruined the Republic

The republic ruined itself. Julius Caesar could've saved it but the corrupt and mislead senate threw it all away. Imperium was the only solution that could save Rome.

>Christianity did it!
>multiculturalism did it!
>moral degeneracy did it!
>lead poisoning did it!

The fall of the Roman Empire is like an expensive call girl. She'll be whoever you want her to be, honey ;)

I get the feeling Caesar wanted to be cool with the people more then actually save shit tbqf senpai. Cicero made Caesar the tyrant he was.

>Be roman
>Transform your Empire into a multicultural shithole
>Use barbarians as soldiers
>They betray you for their fellow barbarians
>Blame Christianity

It remind me of something :)

What exactly are you getting at here?

>Do Islam ruin Western Europe?
Spreading some eastern religion was not a cause of ruin but a symptom.

>Diocletian's legalization of Christianity

Are you thinking of Galerius, Constantine or Theodosius? Diocletian persecuted Christians as far as I know.

no debasement of its currency did then the doors were open

>Reply
The reason Rome fell was because its entire economy was based on taking slaves and wealth from new conquests. The limits of technology (transportation, food preservation, communication, logistics, bureaucracy etc) in Roman times meant that Rome simply could not expand any further past roughly what they had under Trajan/Hadrian. They maybe could have expanded a little more on their eastern border but the roughly equally powerful Persian empires had already called dibs. Barbarians or not Rome's economic model had simply reached a point where it could no longer sustain itself.

it was germanics you fucking stupid pig

stop blaming christianity

remember that you invaded the roman empire

pic related, you brought the dark ages to them, not christiniaty

>this thread again

>Muh Edward Gibbon
>Not refuted by Augustine 1300 years earlier in City of God

>Refuted by Augustine 1300 years earlier
Wat?

No, the Roman Empire ruined itself and its decline was why thee people were vulnerable to the influence of Christianity.

It's the same thing as it happening with Islam in Europe right now. The Molsems didn't ruin Europe, they came to a place that was already on the downward slope and people lacked the will to stand against it.

The Germanic invaders were Christian though

No, it had zero effect beyond slight unified centralisation. It was over-extension and barbarians who ruined it.

Germans did.

>le Christian dark ages meme

No, Christianity saved it and continued its legacy

Shitty emperors, plagues, over extension, barbarians uniting and forming federations, massive migrations, political infighting, decadence, over taxation of provinces, overpaid army, corruption of praetorian guard, death of republic, bickering between noble families, precedent set by constant rebellions every time an emperor died, failure on rome to not expand further and return wealth to rome etc etc etc etc

Romes biggest enemy was itself

Rome was dead long before Christianity became the state religion. Rome was doomed the moment Sulla marched his army into the city. The empire itself was a sign of the decay of Roman virtue and their inevitable collapse into self-absorbed degeneracy.

This

Reminder Rome gained nearly all of its land and all of its wealth while it was a republic. The empire was a mistake

No. But it did ruin Veeky Forums.

Yes, everything that was good about rome finally died for good once Theodosius started persecuting polytheists, and that doesn't happen without monotheism to justify it.

>>Christianity saved it and continued its legacy
No it didn't. Rome was religiously pluralist and tolerant of other people's gods and goddesses, christendom was not.

>feeding Christians to lions
So pluralist and tolerant

Christians refused to offer sacrifice to other deities, pay taxes, or serve in the army, and some of them even attacked polytheist temples and worshippers in hopes of being martyred. They got what they deserved.

The Catholic Church served as what was the Senate for all of Christian Europe. The church served as the main governing body for kingdoms everywhere and was the only reason Europe didn't fall into an actual dark age. They pushed advancement, kept meticulous records which is the only reason we even know anything about Rome or Latin. They educated people, they built infrastructure, invested in churches, organized european armies and stopped europe from falling back into petty barbarism.

Also the romans were hardly tolerant of other religions, yes they may have let others follow their own religions but they slaughtered hebrews and treated anyone but the greeks with disdain. It was less the romans were tolerant and more they just couldn't give a fuck because the other pagans weren't roman citizens.

>The Catholic Church served as kingmaker for inbred dipshit nobles.

Fixed.

>>Also the romans were hardly tolerant of other religions,
Wrong, you lying faggot.

>>yes they may have let others follow their own religions
This is why you are wrong.

>>but they slaughtered hebrews
Oh look, another group of people who got precisely what they deserved for repeated rebellions. Oh and the hebrews actually participated in mass slaughter of roman citizens, which was worse then what the christians were doing at the time.

>>and treated anyone but the greeks with disdain.
I'd rather be treated with disdain for believing different things then be tortured and executed for it.

>>It was less the romans were tolerant and more they just couldn't give a fuck because the other pagans weren't roman citizens.
Oh and this is wrong too because the Romans were perfectly happy to adopt foreign deities and Caracalla did not so far as I'm aware outlaw foreign deities when he made everyone within the empire's borders a citizen.

>The Catholic Church served as kingmaker for inbred dipshit nobles.
Still the better method of doing things.

Yes.

good emperors managed to hold the empire at a decent level even at byzantine times.cucks like honorius and arcadius,zeno, a komnenian i dont remeber his name and angeloi dynasty were the absolut destruction of late roman and east roman/byzantine empire.
barbarians were always a thing since 100 bc in roman empire.some half barbarian people like Stilicho were true the roman standard of power and political stability

Christianity promotes multiculturalism.

Augustine was saying Christianity had nothing to do with Rome's decline because Rome was already sacked ~300BCE, despite being pagan. Augustine also argued that Yahweh allowed Rome to become great so that Jesus could be crucified to save the world from sin, and Christianity could spread "rapidly" using Roman roads, and land and sea routes. Finally he also argued that whatever happens to Rome is irrelevant, because the "worldly city" will inevitably pass away. Instead he urged people to focus on the "city of god", which is the only thing that matters.

Of course his argument ignores the damage rising Christianity did cause civilization: Constantine having to exile Athanasius to Trier because he threatened to stop shipments of Egyptian grain to the rest of the empire if the Arians weren't dealt with, Ambrose convincing Theodosius not to protect his pagan subjects from Christian mobs. Alaric, Ataulf, Genseric, and Odoacer; the great sackers of Rome, we're all Baptised Christians

Your post explain the economical collapse of the Roman Empire, while the Barbarians in the army explain the military failure of the Roman Empire.

>implying

Most of them were pagans like Arbogast

this is for you

>Exterminating the druids and forbidding the bacchanales

So tolerant.

Wrong.
Roman culture overwhelmed local cultures.

Gibbon wrote that of the many factors involved in the fall of the West, the largest weakening force was indeed, the christianizing of the Empire.

this

Arbogast fought for the Romans dipshit

>people unironically recycling arguments from 250 year old books and using moralistic terms like a god damn 1st century AD writer

Do you people know any fucking history at all other than what you've gleaned from glancing at wikipedia articles?

>roman's being degenerate and dropping christianity to moral depravity
>its the christians fault
123

America is right behind them

Gibbon pls go away you facking dumb cunt

No, Germans and plagues did. The Turks just finished the job.

Closest thing to the right answer on this thread

It's obvious that the increasingly christian population didn't support the Empire with the same determination as previous generations of pagan citizens who regarded the emperor as divine.

Early Christians like Tertullian and Hippolytus opposed military service.It's not surprising that the empire relied more on barbarian troops once christianity became predominant.

The empire was largely abandoned by its new christian populace.

>It's obvious that the increasingly christian population didn't support the Empire with the same determination as previous generations of pagan citizens who regarded the emperor as divine.
Pretty sure that had more to do with not being able to support a military of the necessary scale, as well as the Marian Reforms centuries prior. Not to mention ripping off their mercenary forces.

>Christianity did it!
>multiculturalism did it!
>moral degeneracy did it!
>lead poisoning did it!

3 of these things are inherently tied to one another, maybe even the 4th

>le revisionist faggot with religious agenda

much more tolerant than post-Teodicean Rome if you ask me, when all other non-Christian religions were ruled-out to death.

Christians failed to integrate with pluralistic Rome, and they keep failing to not hate non-Christians this day

Also note that the main problem the Romans had with the hebrews ad the Christians was the whole "doesn't acknowledge the emperor as a god" thing. Monotheism is a poison to any pluralistic society.

The Roman Empire was already well and fucked by that point. But it sure ruined their various and sundry successors.

>Monotheism fixes any pluralistic society.
FTFY

Arbogast fought for himself retard. If he had not been defeated it would have become a barbarian king like Alaric.

>Christians failed to integrate with pluralistic Rome, and they keep failing to not hate non-Christians this day

Christians hate but don't kill unlike the romans.

>>Christians hate but don't kill unlike the romans.

Ohhh but that is wrong you deluded christard, your religion has had a stupid amount of blood shed in it's name.

Christianity saved europe from the roman dark ages

During the Dark Age and until the Modern Era, you were obligated to kill (survival of the fittest), therefore blood shed were normal at that time. Now, we're in a peaceful era and christians don't kill, unlike violent muslims and atheists.

>Chr*stianity
What does putting the asterisk mean?

Okay the bait is too obvious now. 0/10.

>>Arbogast fought for himself retard. If he had not been defeated it would have become a barbarian king like Alaric.

Except this is wrong as he was under the command of Eugenius and fought for the Romans.

Furthermore, the Ostrogothic kings of italy did their best to preserve what remained of roman society and culture in italy at the time. Dismissing them as mere barbarians is stupid.

Nah, the best thing is to have some random chump as a figurehead king while you have actually competent people run things behind the scenes.