>>669704 I'm not a fucking Christian I just don't see why we should invalidate someone's achievements because of his religious beliefs. Also ''cuck'' is a buzzword it doesn't explain why Rome converted at all it's just some random verbal vomit.
>>669642 After the 3rd century crisis, roman traditional beliefs lost popularity. Diocletian tried to revitalize them, but he wasn't succesful. Oriental cults that offered different things that the traditional roman religion didn't became popular. Christianity was only one of them, and probably not the most widespread since it was persecuted by the state.
But christianity got a way of growing when Constantine, who had been a pagan follower of the Sol Invictus for most of his life like his father, started to favor this religion. He really was just established religious freedom, but he also compensated the christians for the persecution and eventually converted. It's not strange that he converted since his mother and other relatives of him were christian, as I said it was a popular religion. With this reparations the church became very rich and with this and the fact that the imperial dynasty was christian they were able to win the race against other similar cults. Eventually Theodosius made it the official religion of the empire.
Rome was iirc ~10% Christian when Constantine converted.
Constantine and his successors (other than Julian) basically making it the state religion gave Christianity the support it needed to replace the various forms of paganism throughout the empire as the dominant religion.
>>669679 There are loads of factors besides just that one. It's not like Constantine would have converted if christianity wasn't already starting to become a powerhouse within the empire.
Also, just because one emperor adopted a certain religious belief that didn't mean that it got universally embraced by the empire as whole. It took a decent amount of work for therising star of christianity to become and remain the majority religion of the state and later also the official state religion.
To boil it down to Constantine was christian therefore the empire became christian is a gross misunderstanding of the history of the roman empire. Especially considering that it wasn't made the state religion until the rule of Theodosius I.
>>669730 Sure there were Christians in the empire, but it certainly wasnt heading to full christianization. Before the council of Nicea, Christianity was a fragmented and scattered religion. Right before Constantine both Galerius and Diocletian were enacting widespread persecutions of Christians. It was with the rise of Constantine that brought about the end of these persecutions and the spread of Christianity, via the edict of Milan. He brought Christianity together too, during the council of nicea, so it was actually now a respectable and structured religion. He gave tax benefits to Christian clergy, promotions and Sundays off to Christian soldier, and donated tons of money to the churches. The things he did to create the Christian Roman empire were numerous and there is no way that Christianity would have spread so easily with Constantine. Remember too that the Senate remained pagan well after Constantine, and were some of the last to convert.
yeah I'm sure it was Christianity that destroyed Rome and if they were still pagan it wouldn't be sacked it's not like most of Legionaires were deployed somewhere else and cowardly shit eating germaniggers attacked easy pray or anything
>>669760 >Also, just because one emperor adopted a certain religious belief that didn't mean that it got universally embraced by the empire as whole. Or else Julian would have dismantled Constantine's little project.
>>669674 Really? Do you have to bring these stupid terms up no matter how irrelevant? In no way was economic theory developed enough at the time to be classified as Liberal/Conservative, and in what way does a specific sexual fetish about watching others pork have anything to do with either Constantine or gaining Christian converts?
>>669760 Technically it wasnt made the state religion, but actually using that in an argument is ridiculous. Under Constantius the Pagans were outlawed from practicing sacrifices, and their temples were destroyed, along with other persecutions that were enacted. Christianity was the state religion long before Theodosius I, whether officially or not. Im not trying to underestimate the work it took Constantine to convert the empire, or that just because he was emperor the empire decided to convert. For that see >>669766
>>669766 It would have been really interesting in comparing the differences from what happened IRL to what would've happened if Julian the Apostate would have ruled for a long time instead of fucking off to persia to die an unecessary death. I'm not some kind of edgy faggot who thinks that christianity would have been completely eradicated and that we would've seen the classical religions reemerging into complete dominace, but surely his somewhat misguided attempts to turn back the tide of christianity would have had some effects, especially if his successors continued an anti-christian or pro-something else official stance.
>>669642 Rome and the economic and technological changes it brought spread literacy to the masses, because most people are meek, they connected more with jesus than the old olympian gods, after a while christian tolerant and later openly christian politicians had an advantage over their competitors and someone like constantine the great was bound to reach the op
>>669792 Certainly would have. My guess is something similar to what happened in England with the English church. Basically monarchs constantly flip flopping until a compromise was reached or conflict started. In the first scenario, wed likely see a very different version of Christianity. In the second, Rome could have ended earlier. Just my thoughts though, who actually knows what would have happened.
>>669790 >Technically it wasnt made the state religion, but actually using that in an argument is ridiculous.
I wasn't saying nor were I implying that the roman empire wasn't heavily christianised during Constantine's reign. The fact that it took some time longer for it to become the official state religion would however suggest that christianity wasn't as all comprising during the Constantine's life times as during Theodosius I's.
>Im not trying to underestimate the work it took Constantine to convert the empire, or that just because he was emperor the empire decided to convert
Then why the hell did you make that argument before, or atleast felt the need to protect the guy who made it?
It grew popular with SJW tactics. It started at the bottem quickly picking up the lower members of society that responded well to a message about the virtues of being weak and that everyone was spirtually equal.
Than it went up the social ladder. By the time Constantine come up the religion already had a sizable popularity and was extremly hateful of rival religions. He saw a way to gather immense power by allying himself with it. He made the official religion and inexchange the priesthood acknowledged that he was the rightful ruler ordained by God and this right of kings continued into the Byzantine empire.
>>669807 Your post is highly misguiding as it leaves out the popularity of all manner of mystery cults that were making their way through the empire at the time of the emergance of christanity. At that time the traditional religious customs and practices had been steadily eroded and was considered more and more arcane. Also, claiming that christianity's rise was due to increase in litteracy is, to my knowledge, a falsehood. Litteracy wasn't exactly a requirement to spreading the faith.
>>669844 My argument is that Constantine initiated the massive spread of Christianity, which you seem to agree with. He certainly didnt single handedly create Christian Rome, but he was the first to begin the process. It was because of him that successive emperors were Christian, and continued to Christianize the empire. >Then why did you make that argument before? Where did I say that? The basis of my argument, and what I originally said was that because Constantine was Christian, the empire became Christian. This is still my assertion, and Ive put forth evidence for it already. I never said people simply looked up to him and decided to be Christian. I admit that I may have boiled down my original statement to too few words, because after all this is 4chan and not the republican debates.
>>669827 Actually what you are describing isn't that far off from what happened anyway as not all emperors were orthodox but instead (atleast privately) embraced one of the multitude of christian sects/heresies that arose.
Glad to hear that you agree with my original post and as such acknowledge that limiting it to Constantine therefore a christian roman empire is not an acurate description of the rise to dominance of the religion.
>>669760 It's not an emperor converting to a religion but an emperor giving the priesthood of said religion the economic means to become the richest and most powerful lobby on the empire. The reparations for the persecution and the allowance of getting inheritance from the faithful really benefited the christian church a lot.
Constantine prayed to every god he could before a battle, including the Christian one, and in the battle he saw a fiery cross in the sky, and since the battle made him emperor, he said Christianity is breddy gud.
It's a very common tactic for a leader to invoke the idea that he was ordained or guided by some super natural forces. All the Protestant and Orthodox kings had their rule supported by a divine right from God who arranged for them to get there, the Catholic did the same thing but the right travels from God to the Pope to the King (hence why a King that was excommunicated was in deep shit)
There were tons of Greek or Roman generals or kings that claimed some God told them something or was their father.
Back than if you told people God was helping you win wars people thought you were hot shit and the priests would fall in line behind you.
>>670582 >1000 years isnt that long Do you listen to yourself ever? Within only about a hundred years weve seen washing machines, computers, automatic rifles and nuclear fucking power. Get ahold of yourself.
>>670606 >Do you listen to yourself ever? Did you even read the rest of the post? I just showed why it's not that long when you put it into perspective.
>Within only about a hundred years weve seen washing machines, computers, automatic rifles and nuclear fucking power. Technology advancing this fast is completely unprecedented for most of history. The first industrial revolution was a complete paradigm shift in that regard.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.