can anybody give me three main reasons?

Question

can anybody give me three main reasons why ancient Rome viewed Christianity as a threat? and reasons for each one

Answer 1

One reason is that you can't have a government if you can't kill people; that is, a government without the power to kill cannot possibly be effective. Jesus' "turn the other cheek" attitude was a wild idea at that time.

Answer 2

The Roman Empire viewed Christianity a severe threat to their corruptive governmental pratices that made them affluently wealthy. Christianity denounced personal wealth, greed and corruptive government and lifestyle pratices. If all Rome embraced this sweeping Christianity fad, vocalized by Jesus--it could spell the end of Rome as it's decrepit leaders knew it.

Roman governmental leaders also loved control of their territories and it's residential citizenry. Control was the flavor that gave power a rush; Christianity surrenders it's believers all power, surrendering all to an unseen God.

I think that pretty well much covers your question.

Answer 3

Rome was without a doubt the superpower of the time, they did not wish to lose power to those who had received the message of Jesus and His rekindling of the true faith. The lust for money, power and control made it necessary for them to incorporate a certain amount of this 'new faith' into their old beliefs. Rome is still a superpower in the form of the Catholic Religion. Catholics are good people but Rome was and is a great deceiver.

Answer 4

1. political balance requires a homogeneous population at that time, christianity was spreading fast.
2. christianity was a cultural threat to the Roman people, i remember an example at St. Paul's time when the people in the market had problem selling their hand made statues and they protested against him because he was a threat to their profession.
3. they burned Rome!

Answer 5

extra sensible define what you recommend by Karma, in the different case handle each version of karma one after the other. i anticipate you recommend karma as utilized to justice. From a sociological attitude there is a few reality to karma, in that a undesirable member of society might tend to get punished, and robust individuals are socially familiar (i will call this organic karma). additionally stupid movements get undesirable outcomes - as in reason and result. As you will get excitement from, organic karma is surprisingly tough and arranged and is manifested by a organic human urge for justice to be triumphant. As I see it the flaws are as follows (it is an atheistic view): - Karma implies a supernatural tension allotting or controlling justice in a honest way. there's a loss of a supernatural tension to dispense justice in a honest far extra than and above that of organic karma. - The tendency for individuals to work out kinds the place none exist; i.e. somebody does some thing undesirable, then some thing undesirable occurs to them. the two activities are unconnected, yet somebody wishing to work out karma will see a connection. - advance credit for the subsequent existence implies there is a few mechanism for accounting the credit and changing it to a suited rebirth. additionally, what connection is there between lives for a rebirth? - 'Gods plan' demands the two a planner and the thought the destiny could be predetermined. reality dictates that the a probability results of an adventure is set by its commencing state and the possibilities of it taking a undeniable process action; i.e. at the same time as that's in no way thoroughly random there is often some uncertainty as to the result. this ability the 'planner' might desire to be consistently interfering with organic methods as a fashion to maintain the 'plan' on course. there is not any information of this.

Answer 6

Because they wanted them to follow roman law, not the law that the old testament had set forth, the common citizens saw the Christians with their own customs so it gave a sensse of rebellion to the commoners.

Answer 7

To the Romans, Christianity was a rebel

Answer 8

1. It competed for power in the occupied territory.

2. It competed for money in the occupied territory.

3. It attracted those who resisted occupation.

The same three things are true of the US in Iraq and muslim countries in general.


.