Was christianity good for the Roman Empire?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

rense.com/general69/invo.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Yes. It brought them salvation through Jesus Christ.

No. It brought undesirable effects and a false sense with Jesus Christ.

Hard to tell since the west was in decline anyway. It doesnt appear to have hurt the eastern empire very much

No, it turned it into a giant church.

The problem wasn't really christianity, the real underlying problem was the massive plebeian class of weaklings in Rome who lived on bread handouts. They were the first to embrace Christianity and they were the reason Christianity grew massive in the empire. Christianity was just a symptom of a degenerative social policy of free bread handouts.

>Don't kill people, that's bad and will make it so you suffer eternally in hell. You should denote to Bishop Goldstein instead

GEEZ. IT'S A FUCKING MYSTERY IF CHRISTIANITY HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE FALL OF ROME. AMIRITE GUYS.

Good for europe but not good for rome.

...

Explain

Religious intolerance and strife which created fractures in an already unstable empire.

On the flip side, Christian monks are to thank for preserving a lot of classic literature and art and a great deal of the barbarians which took over after the fall of the west were in part civilized due to the influences of Christianity.

It was one of the nails in the coffin for the WRE but it did play a role in preserving Europe for the future.

Christianity held Europe together after Rome collapsed, they were the law, administration and government and they helped pass on hundreds of years of knowledge and encourage all kinds of development all over.

Christianity helped lead to Romes collapse in the west by compounding on top of thousands of other issues. It was a sign of the lack of unity that was building in the west.

>De Natus Aethiops

Come on what shitty bait is this

of course
imagine we still have slavery today and people would die in arenas for the entertaiment of the masses

Couldnt it be that they just had black man as husbands. And how did they think so bad about racemixing? They had a half arab emperor ffs. Or a half vandal one.

Sounds great.

it sounds great because its ancient history for us.
I bet you wouldn't really wanna live in a society where people are treated as property and are forced to slaughter each other on live tv

>Christian monks are to thank for preserving a lot of classic literature
U mean Islam

What if the gladiators volunteered and could make a living off it?

Religions tend not to effect the workings of empire.

>Held Europe together
What? are you clinically retarded? It fractured it into just above tribal level.

Hi Merkel, hows things?

is there any evidence that christianity was invented by jews to bring down the roman empire or is that just a meme a bunch of jews came up with

and I dont mean simply "jesus was a jew" I mean actual jews making up all of the gospels with the clear agenda of fucking with rome

laid it on a bit too thick to be convincing desu

We have that already
its called American Wrestling

But Christians ran the biggest and most brutal slave trade in history

...Most of those just look like men with a tan.
which makes sense since the men would be out working and the women would lounge around inside.

the majority of those slave traders were jewish

John may have used anti-roman symbolism in his Apocalypse, but otherwise they were regular citizens. The christo-judaic split happened before Christianity started being popular.

>the majority of those slave traders were jewish

[citation needed]

Western Rome was already beyond repair when Christianity made it to center stage. With no money to train professional legions, and instead subcontract the army to foreign mercenaries, and lose your most lucrative provinces to the East as a result of the division, bankruptcy and a military loyal to gold instead of Rome ate the empire alive.

that said, Christianity isn't the reason for the fall as the Christian Eastern Roman Empire still held up for another millennia, still advancing in mathematics and architecture and building upon Roman engineering well into the 1100's.

For the most part, no.

This book gives a very interesting picture on how ISIS tier early Christianity was

I know how your game works shlomo I could give you 1000 sources and you would just say they were "discredited" or "debunked" (most likely by some kike author)

I'd say Christianity weakened the Empire.

For one, look at the Muslim invasions of Egypt and the Levant - Christians actually sided with the Muslim invaders, because they were fed up with the Orthodox establishment from Constantinople being so heavy-handed and oppressive. A good example is that of the Paulicians, who broke away from the Byzantines and aided the Muslims in conquering parts of the Caucasus.

Or look at the Iconoclast controversies: the first one was disastrous, with various cities openly rebelling against the Emperor and the need for a military intervention. The Second controversy was somewhat more mild, but it still weakened the Empire at the time that it still could have fought back against incursions into Anatolia.

He means Irish monks

> I could give you 1000 sources

Yeah but you can't.
Give me some primary sources or secondary sources citing primary sources rather than a link from stormfront saying one slave trader's surname was Goldstein in 1701.

still better than the civil wars that came before.

No, the monks burned a ton of classic literature because it was pagan or heretic. So much wasted Roman learning. It don't think it even united the former Roman empire well, and I can't say whether it was a good phase for western civilization.

rense.com/general69/invo.htm

Neat.

I recommend the next time you make this claim you make it "The Jews participated in the slave trade" which your article supports not "A majority of slave traders were Jewish" which it does not. There is, in fact, a large difference in the meaning of those statements. So unless you're moving your goalposts to the former statement, your article hasn't proven your point.

There's also nothing in this article comparing these statistics to the broader statistics of the slave trade, it's focused entirely on Jewish participation, it doesn't give any perspective for the Jews' role compared to that of white Europeans. The very closest the article comes is saying the Jews had a "disproportionate influence" but usually when citing Jewish traders they number in the dozens to hundreds, so you could have a disproportionate influence without a majority influence.

Either way, interesting article.

What civil wars?

Yes, Christianity allowed for vast new networks of patronage and social achievement that were critical in keeping local Romanized elites happy.

Without it, we'd have seen more rebellions.

No not really, religious division and persecution of pagans just made things worse. Not to mention all the fucking riots and revolts by Jews and Christians until it became the state religion.

Tribes that knocked over WRE were weird becaus they weren't really what we consider when we say tribes. They were somewhere between tribal coalitions and outright flexible nation states. They identified with each other because they all spoke the same language, had the same mystical founder, had the same customs and the same clothing styles but they were also exceptionally adapt at creating states and kingdoms and moving to a level above tribal.

Depends. It inspired major controversy in the western empire among all the other problems that lead to its collapse, while the eastern empire was able to survive for over a millennia with orthodoxy.

Philip was fully Aramean retard. And there were Berber emperors too.

Christianity saved million of souls, it is a pretty good thing.

May God have mercy on you sir