4 ms·
It's the basic thesis of the article. Did you read it?
by johnnienaked 1y ago
It's the basic thesis of the article. Did you read it?
- pqtyw 1y agoYou mean the linked article: https://debramaymacleod.com/blog/the-last-vestal-virgin-and-the-fall-of-rome https://debramaymacleod.com/blog/the-last-vestal-virgin-and-... ? If anything its implying the opposite?
- johnnienaked 1y agoYou think it's implying that the Christian religion (started with the crucifixion of Jesus) is not responsible for the fall of Rome?
- pqtyw 1y agoYes exactly. My point was the complete opposite, though. By the time of the "fall of Rome" and for the succeeding 500+ years during which the Roman empire had many ups and down, being the Roman effectively became the equivalent of being [the right kind of] christian. It's not at all obvious that it wouldn't have survived as long without christianity.
- johnnienaked 1y agoOK but the article is saying Christianity destroyed the Roman Empire because of its religious intolerance. Which is sort of rich considering the crucifixion was religious intolerance from the Romans/Jews