Nazism, Christianity, and Fundamentalists

[Enforcer Talen]

? most of the books I've read said he was - why would you say he wasn't?

(very annoyed sigh) Because he openly embraced several elemnts of Christianity, because he worshipped a Nordic spirit religon of some sort, etc... There is just as much evidence that Hitler is an Athiest as there is evidence that Jerry Falwell is an Athiest.

oh, the nordic thing, sure. I thot he wasn't a proclaimed christian, tho. .

[HemlockGrey]

To GC:

of course nothing's meant literally in the bible. we can twist and turn it to mean anything we want it to. Hey!Hey! i think it means that the world will flood in 2006. of course nothing's meant literally in the bible. we can twist and turn it to mean anything we want it to. Hey!Hey! i think it means that the world will flood in 2006.

If you want to. I never claimed I believed in Biblical perfection.

is it polite to kill whores? or their children? i don't care if she's metapholical u kill people. i'm sure the jews in the holocaust were't innocents either, were they?

The Jews in the Holocaust weren't metaphorical either.

destroyed means killed. it means god's an evil son of a whore and kills people just because they believe in freedom of religion.

Do you know how many translations the Bible has gone through? The word 'destroyed' could very well have meant something else at some other stage of the translation - it's why you can't take every damn thing in the book literally.

i'm sorry but i don't believe damning a person just because he doesn't believe in u and wants to believe in something else

...which would be the reason you're not a Christian.

Now, to EJ:

Says who?
What's literal? What isn't? Who decides? You?

Me? Yes, as it's my belief.

Still violence though, ain't it?

To entirely deserving demonic *metaphors*, yes.

Apologist excuses.
It comes from that, it really means this. Blah blah blah

You want I should make something up that proves your point?

Who gives a flying fuck?
Because it's God's judgement it's okay?
He can send people to horrible flaming agony because he's so fine, he's so fine he blows his mind?
Damn I hate that.

They had a chance, they wasted it.

[Evil Jerk]

Quote:
Says who?
What's literal? What isn't? Who decides? You?

Me? Yes, as it's my belief.

You get to pick and choose what's meant literally and what's not?
How very convenient.

Quote:
Still violence though, ain't it?


To entirely deserving demonic *metaphors*, yes.

And of course, whether these judgements are entirely justified is not in question, right?
Whether violence begets violence is not in question, right?

Quote:
Apologist excuses.
It comes from that, it really means this. Blah blah blah


You want I should make something up that proves your point?

You ARE making something up. You just declare one thing to be a metaphor for something else.

Quote:
Who gives a flying fuck?
Because it's God's judgement it's okay?
He can send people to horrible flaming agony because he's so fine, he's so fine he blows his mind?
Damn I hate that.


They had a chance, they wasted it.

To cowtow to a power hungry, blood thirsty lunatic?
You call that a chance?

Excuse me, but that's pure authentic BULLSHIT!

[Mr Bean]

If you want to. I never claimed I believed in Biblical perfection

The point is made, Interpation is not a vaild method of aurgment becaues frankley you can interpet damn near anything to mean anything(Look at the Moby Dick Thread for an example)

The Jews in the Holocaust weren't metaphorical either.

Shall I dig up the New Testmate quotes about the Jews Burning in Hell-fire forever for killing the "Messiah?"

Do you know how many translations the Bible has gone through? The word 'destroyed' could very well have meant something else at some other stage of the translation - it's why you can't take every damn thing in the book literally.

Thers a diffrence inbetween the *Earth stod still for a day and the ordering of an extermination of a people, Sure you can't take everything litiraly but when somone says go forth and kill people in my name there is NOTHING metaphorical about it

which would be the reason you're not a Christian.

Could not have said it better myself

Me? Yes, as it's my belief.

Ahh so then your not a Christian according to your book, At least unless you want to take the Title of Neo-Chrisitan(Not Born agian those idiots are Fundies) or Meta-Chrisitan as you take the Bible and slice out all the Nasty and evil parts till you have a pretty little school book, oh but your still going to hell if you don't belive in that school book

To entirely deserving demonic *metaphors*, yes

Agian personal interpation there was nothing METAPHORICAL about it, but if you want to call it that by all means go ahead Strict Interpation is one of the founding points of the Bible but I guess thats one of the parts you cut out

You want I should make something up that proves your point?

It helps but then he nor we nor I depending on your point of view don't need to make anything up to prove the point

They had a chance, they wasted it.

Ahhh agian the Go to Hell part


Have we quite made the point yet to you Cyril? Or do you need a further insight on the subject

[Mr Bean]

oooh looks like EJ and I have a tag team going here

[HemlockGrey]

And of course, whether these judgements are entirely justified is not in question, right?
Whether violence begets violence is not in question, right?

How exactly would you beget violence against *God*?

You ARE making something up. You just declare one thing to be a metaphor for something else.

Um, no. I was stating it was in reference to another event. That's different from a metaphor.

To cowtow to a power hungry, blood thirsty lunatic?
You call that a chance?

Excuse me, but that's pure authentic BULLSHIT!

-shrugs- Your belief, not mine. I'm not forcing you to be a Christian.

Shall I dig up the New Testmate quotes about the Jews Burning in Hell-fire forever for killing the "Messiah?"

One, what does that have to do with the Whore of Babylon? And, two, anyone who kills is damned(divine judgement notwithstanding), but it doesn't mean every Jew *ever* is damned.

Thers a diffrence inbetween the *Earth stod still for a day and the ordering of an extermination of a people, Sure you can't take everything litiraly but when somone says go forth and kill people in my name there is NOTHING metaphorical about it

Odd, I never saw that bit in the New Testament. The Old Testament is *not* reliable as it has gone thousands of translations and re-rewrites. The NT is not pure as snow either, but it a lesser degree than the OT.

Agian personal interpation there was nothing METAPHORICAL about it, but if you want to call it that by all means go ahead Strict Interpation is one of the founding points of the Bible but I guess thats one of the parts you cut out

Revalations is nearly entirely metaphorical. Unless you actually think that four horsemen are going to ride out of the sky on the Day of Acopcalypse?

Ahhh agian the Go to Hell part


Have we quite made the point yet to you Cyril? Or do you need a further insight on the subject

Yes. You're atheists. You're entirely entitled to your own beliefs. I do not share them, and I am unlikely to ever share them. So?

[Evil Jerk]

And of course, whether these judgements are entirely justified is not in question, right?
Whether violence begets violence is not in question, right?

How exactly would you beget violence against *God*?

If not him, his followers.
Or maybe you expect all his victims never to strike back at their oppresors.

You ARE making something up. You just declare one thing to be a metaphor for something else.

Um, no. I was stating it was in reference to another event. That's different from a metaphor.

But you state it's a metaphor for that event, yes?

To cowtow to a power hungry, blood thirsty lunatic?
You call that a chance?

Excuse me, but that's pure authentic BULLSHIT!

-shrugs- Your belief, not mine. I'm not forcing you to be a Christian.

Irrelevant.
The point is, it encourages violence against innocents, God makes the non-believers suffer simply for not following him. Needless, sadistic violence, which you say isn't there.

Ahhh agian the Go to Hell part


Have we quite made the point yet to you Cyril? Or do you need a further insight on the subject

Yes. You're atheists. You're entirely entitled to your own beliefs. I do not share them, and I am unlikely to ever share them. So?

It's funny, because your Bible says we're not entitled to our own beliefs, it says that God has every right to make us suffer for all eternity, and you can't deny that.

[weemadando]

Because the new Christian regime moved the capital to Constantinople and virtually cut the Western Empire's throat by seizing all of the rich lands behind it.

Um, no. Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople because the Western Empire was already dintergrating. The Empire was then split bewteen two co-emperors(forget the official term). It was an attempt to preserve as much of the Empire as was possible by making it easier to govern, and it eventually worked to preserve the Byzantines for a thousand years.

And more and more that empire degenerated into intolerance and fanaticism while Europe descended into the Dark Ages.

Christianity may not have caused the fall of Rome outright, but it did contribute to it's degeneration.

Um, no! Christianity had nothing to do with the Empire's fall-if anything, it preserved the Empire longer than it would have lasted otherwise. The Dark Ages were not a result of 'intorerance and fanaticism' in the Roman Empire. The Dark Ages were a result of the Germanic tribes burning the Western Empire to the ground!

If anything, the scattered monasteries and convents helped preserve Roman and Greek ideas by keeping the arts of reading and writing alive.

ACtually Constantine didn't move the capital to Constantinople, that happened later. He merely founded Constantinople in the same place as an earlier Greek city. Why did he do this? Some would say he had converted to Christianity. Which is patently ridiculous. It is clear from contemporary sources and from comparing later sources (all of which are massively dubious) that he remained a pagan, but accepted Christianity as a religion. Allowing it to become a religion protected by the state, not persecuted as before. In order to secure safety for himself (every emperor for the past hundred years had faced continual uprisings and attempted assasinations). The collapse of the Tetrarchy established by Diocletian had meant that the four regional emperors and their allies were all fighting for the single seat in Rome. After eventually winning (thanks to some alleged divine intervention [don't start me on this]) he established a new court in Constantinople which meant he was away from the schemings of the politicians in Rome and in the part of the empire that he favoured, he was born in the Balkans after all.

It wasn't until nearly 50 years after the death of Constantine that the Christians became the dominant force and began persecuting everyone else. That was when the fall of the Empire really occured, as until then the Romans had fairly happily let people within their boundaries do whatever the hell they liked as long as they paid taxes and didn't attempt a revolution. The Christians just decided that everyone except them deserved to be persecuted and killed. As such the empire fairly rapidly collapsed in the West, while the "Holy Roman Empire" of the East kept going for many a year.

For anyone interested I have a 2700 word paper on this topic if they want to read it.

[lgot]

well, about the Catholic Church being a reason of the declyne of Rome, I would say that Catholic Church actually raising in power was already a sign of the declyne of western Rome. And it is not like there is much reason to judge over Catholic church destroyed roman (as Catholic Church is a roman institution and they used the church as political instrument) because it was a continuity, not a conquest.

Plus the NT have or not a better god...
Well, I think people sometimes are over zealous about it. The NT is really much less violent than the OT.
And the Christians believed that faith in god would bring rewards after death. if you do not had faith you would end suffering because you would not have the rewards God would give to the faithful. That is what mostly of those passages meant, not ordens to christians go killing every one not faithful (which is exactly what they did not, small in number, they wanted to convert the others, not go killing them), but the simple meaning that those who had belief would have life with god, and those dont.
So what ? Non-Believers get hell ? Hell is welcome.

Plus Hitler is not really a catholic fanatic. He was someone who used everything everyone to do his schemes. Its naive to belief that someone in the 20 century to achive political power would not have to deal with Church. Of course he did and lied to them as much he lied to Stalin and to the germans with that stupid nordic religion stuff.
Now the Catholic Church is a shame, the pope at that time knew about the jews and did nothing. (and they even started the process to make him saint...ugh). That was ridiculous and if I was the Catholic god, he would be in hell with the non-belivers.

[Coyote]

Well, in the "Jews and Germans in the Holocaust" course I took in Beer-Sheva...

Hitler was an opportunist who got his big start in Bavaria, southern Germany, and in order to be acceptable to the voters there he publicly converted to Catholicism. However, it was a publicity ploy and in reality he was enamored of the ancient druidic rites of the god Wotan, the "God of Battles". The swastika was, supposedly, the device used by the gods to 'stir the primordial soup' and create life as we know it today.

In order to get Christians aboard, he ordered the churches to disavow Jesus as a Jew and insist that he was, indeed, an Indo-European of Teutonic stock, who went south to deliver the piteous races and ended up as a martyr for his efforts. This was what the churches were told to preach. But Hitler hated and distrusted Christianity as it was a potential rival for the people's loyalties, and he knew that he couldn't have people turn to the Bible for ethical guidance when he needed them to devote themselves to his ideals of slaughter. Catholic bishops were beaten, threatened, harassed, and some 'disappeared' if they spoke against the Church.

But few did! Those that did were courageous souls that believed that the Bible was supposed to be used as a guide for higher ethics and morals... but the Catholic Church has, for centuries, taught that Jews were lesser creatures, things to be abhorred and shunned, and had no particular qualms about them being rounded up and killed.

Martin Luther, the leader of what later became the Reformation, himself had an epiphany one day regarding the divinity of Jesus and he went to Witness this to the Jews. After all, the coming Messiah and the Divinity of said Messiah is foretold in Jewish prophesy, so if he could 'explain' it to them, they'd see the light and join him in his Reformation. Alas, 'twas not to be. The Jews rejected his message and that set Martin Luther against them forevermore. He wrote that (inexact quote) 'when Judas Iscariot hung himself, surely his guts burst and spewed forth all his bile, and the Jews were there with their bowls of gold and silver to lap up this effluvia, this wretched poison that has ever since tainted their souls and blinded them to truth...' In fact, he was the first one to advocate, that for the safety of good Christians everywhere, the Jews should be 'rounded up and concentrated into camps where they can be guarded day and night and not allowed to mix with the saved...'.

Remember, as the early Church set off on the first Crusade, in 1095, they were commanded by their pontiff to settle scores with the 'infidels in our midst' (the Jews) before setting off on their raids to deal with the Saracens (Muslims). The 'blood libel' started with the Church, insisting that Jews required the blood of Christian children to make matzos for Passover. The Jews were officially blamed in many bishoprics for the Plagues which swept Europe.

It was very common, through Medieval Europe and especially in Germany, for the yearly 'Passion Play' of Easter to be reenacted, with Semitic-looking demons seen pestering the actor playing Jesus. The play ended up each year becoming inflamed into a riot, in which citizens would smash Jewish homes and shops and kill the inhabitants.

It was with this historical background that the psychological and social acceptance of the Holocaust was easily built. So, when Europe chastises Israel for the sin of existance, we pay little heed since we've come to expect very little from these so-called 'neutral' observers.

For more evidence, read...

"The Ideology of Hate-- Why the Holocaust Happened in Germany"
"The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany"

[Ryoga]

Incidentally, anybody recall that one quote attributed to Constantine, writing to the ruler of Persia?

I forget exactly how it went, but it was something along the lines of 'This is a god of war; look what he's done for me. You should convert too!' Anyone have the exact quote?

[Mr Bean]

Coyote, thanks for providing some of that info, I disagree with most of it, but I'll make sure to get ahold of those books if nothing else as to check the authors however most of this is directed at

Igot

Right now. So the book in question while it does contains nice morals and all(Most copied from the local reigions or aready in existance elsewhere, called the *No duh laws by most when refering to the 10 C)

It however contains over 200 Lines specficly devoted to the ordering of the extermination of non-christian people, Its in both the NEW(Mark, Relvations, Romans) and Old Testmates(Pretty much every book)
The ordering of killing of those who try and convert you away from god and the issuance that you can take SLAVES of those non-Chrisitans, its ok with God, The fact the Jews are the Master Race(Until the new testmate however the Racisim exists still, instead of Jews VS ALL its flip-floped into all VS Jews)
The Old Testmate calls for the killing preachers and leaders of others faiths and thier followers and the New Testmate calls for much of the same with the addition that the Jews are now bad thanks to Judas so go ahead and kill them to

What you fail to relise Igot is like the Isreialists of old HILTER was following the bible TO THE LETTER
He did EXACTLY what the Bible commands be done to un-beilivers and preachers of other faiths, Naturaly several dozen people each year in the US do the exact same thing. Its called a Hate crime...

Let me flip it up and around to try and force a new prespective on you


Consider Alyrium here, Your religion orders he be killed by Stoning due to his sexual orintation AND for the fact that he is an Atheist.
Can you honstley hold it aginst him if he where glad to have never met you or that he see your religion diying out is a good thing?

Can you honsetly?

[HemlockGrey]

EJ:

If not him, his followers.
Or maybe you expect all his victims never to strike back at their oppresors

I don't, since the event in question is the end of the world. Not much to strike back at.

But you state it's a metaphor for that event, yes?

Wha? It's a reference to something that happened hundreds of years before the quote. How is that a metaphor?

The point is, it encourages violence against innocents, God makes the non-believers suffer simply for not following him. Needless, sadistic violence, which you say isn't there.

No. You have a chance; life. You're not immediatly damned to hell. You get a chance, you blow the chance, you pay the price. Who are you to judge God's actions?

It's funny, because your Bible says we're not entitled to our own beliefs, it says that God has every right to make us suffer for all eternity, and you can't deny that.

Hold whatever belief you want. I'll wave to you when we're dead.

Weemadano:

I never said Constantine was a Christian himself. You're right about the actual change of capital; my bad.

The Christian persecution you refer to, if it did happen, had no effect on the fall of the Empire. The Germanic tribes did not attack because they were being persecuted by the terrible and oppressive Christians. They attacked because they wanted gold and land. Had the Empire remained happily in the hands of pagans, it still would have fallen.

BTW, you do realize that the 'Holy Roman Empire' is an entirely different nation composed of Germanic states, and has nothing to do with the Byzantine Empire?

Igot:

The Catholic Church was not officially formed until after the fall of Rome. I do agree that the Catholic Church is not exactly the holiest of institutions. I disagree with almost all of their practices and the Pope himself is more a political figure than a religious one, and the Papacy has been responsible for numerous atrocities.

Mr. Bean:



Why the fuck should Alyrium be glad he never met me? I don't believe he should be stoned. I realize that the Bible is not perfect. You don't do every fucking thing in the book, because said book has been corrupted by politicans and emperors and criminials for hundreds of years to justify their actions. Point out to me, in the NT, in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, where Jesus says 'Go forth and kill everyone who opposes me'. Aside from the damnation bit.

Aside from those four books, btw, the rest of the NT is composed of letters and such, and are/were not the words of Jesus Christ. They're the words of people, and thus they can not be taken as a true representation of Christianity.

[Darth Wong]

Well, in the "Jews and Germans in the Holocaust" course I took in Beer-Sheva... Hitler was an opportunist who got his big start in Bavaria, southern Germany, and in order to be acceptable to the voters there he publicly converted to Catholicism.

That is the traditional spin-doctoring. However, the fact that he was an altar boy as a child makes it rather unlikely that he had to be converted to Catholicism as an adult.

However, it was a publicity ploy and in reality he was enamored of the ancient druidic rites of the god Wotan, the "God of Battles".

Read "Mein Kampf". No mention of any of those things in there, and lots of mentions of his personal Saviour who died on the cross 2000 years ago. And those who insist that "Mein Kampf" was just a misleading publicity piece are on thin ice; everything he ever did while in power was foretold in that book, including the "surprise" invasion of Russia. Rather odd to give away so much if the book was meant to mislead people.

The swastika was, supposedly, the device used by the gods to 'stir the primordial soup' and create life as we know it today.

The swastika had many, many uses before the Nazis made it their symbol. The coat of arms on the Christian monastery near Hitler's childhood home had a swastika on it. Coincidence?

Martin Luther, the leader of what later became the Reformation, himself had an epiphany one day regarding the divinity of Jesus and he went to Witness this to the Jews. After all, the coming Messiah and the Divinity of said Messiah is foretold in Jewish prophesy, so if he could 'explain' it to them, they'd see the light and join him in his Reformation. Alas, 'twas not to be. The Jews rejected his message and that set Martin Luther against them forevermore. He wrote that (inexact quote) 'when Judas Iscariot hung himself, surely his guts burst and spewed forth all his bile, and the Jews were there with their bowls of gold and silver to lap up this effluvia, this wretched poison that has ever since tainted their souls and blinded them to truth...' In fact, he was the first one to advocate, that for the safety of good Christians everywhere, the Jews should be 'rounded up and concentrated into camps where they can be guarded day and night and not allowed to mix with the saved...'.

Yes. He also wrote a book called "On Jews and their Lies".

Remember, as the early Church set off on the first Crusade, in 1095, they were commanded by their pontiff to settle scores with the 'infidels in our midst' (the Jews) before setting off on their raids to deal with the Saracens (Muslims). The 'blood libel' started with the Church, insisting that Jews required the blood of Christian children to make matzos for Passover. The Jews were officially blamed in many bishoprics for the Plagues which swept Europe.

It was very common, through Medieval Europe and especially in Germany, for the yearly 'Passion Play' of Easter to be reenacted, with Semitic-looking demons seen pestering the actor playing Jesus. The play ended up each year becoming inflamed into a riot, in which citizens would smash Jewish homes and shops and kill the inhabitants.

It was with this historical background that the psychological and social acceptance of the Holocaust was easily built. So, when Europe chastises Israel for the sin of existance, we pay little heed since we've come to expect very little from these so-called 'neutral' observers.

Agreed, although Judaism and Christianity are two sides of the same coin, with much of the same ideology and problems (Islam is cut from the same cloth too). Israel's treatment of Palestinians (which nobody wishes to acknowledge as racism) is no different than the way Christians treated Jews in the past, or the way Arabs would treat Jews if they were in control of the region. The whole lot of them are raised in a culturally poisonous atmosphere where they are taught an enormous amount of religious/racial/cultural pride and loyalty (sounds good on the surface, but it's a double-edged sword; it tends to generate contempt for others).

[GoneCrazy]

The point is, it encourages violence against innocents, God makes the non-believers suffer simply for not following him. Needless, sadistic violence, which you say isn't there.

No. You have a chance; life. You're not immediatly damned to hell. You get a chance, you blow the chance, you pay the price. Who are you to judge God's actions?

i'm gonecrazy and I can judge god's actions. i think god's a sadist and an evil deity. (id think up something against that hell part but im busy with other things right at this moment)

It's funny, because your Bible says we're not entitled to our own beliefs, it says that God has every right to make us suffer for all eternity, and you can't deny that.

Hold whatever belief you want. I'll wave to you when we're dead.


u'll die before me unless u're a preteen and i'll get to laugh at u. he who thought he'd get to see light instead sees darkness. that's when all christians finally get to realize the truth when you're dead u won't be in heaven sucker.
[/i]

[HemlockGrey]

u'll die before me unless u're a preteen and i'll get to laugh at u. he who thought he'd get to see light instead sees darkness. that's when all christians finally get to realize the truth when you're dead u won't be in heaven sucker

So, if I'm wrong, I'll cease to exist. If I'm right, I live forever in eternal bliss. If you're right, you'll cease to exist. If you're wrong, you'll burn in a flaming abyss forever.

Think about that for a while.

[GoneCrazy]

i've thought and i've thought. i came up with a question. how can there be so many different religions and so many different afterlifes, hells, gods, and whatever if any of it were true? face it. a guy 2 million years ago told his tribe that if they weren't with him they'd surely be doomed to a horrible afterlife. his competition didn't have such a story. he won. after 2 million years his tribe spread and exaggerated and each time they told about an afterlife it became different. u end up witht housands of loony religions all preaching about basically the same thing (since they all came from that one storyteller) and THEY'RE ALL ABUNCH OF FAKES. that unfortunately, still quite a few of the population can't see through. kinda pitiful how one storyteller had that much influence.

[GoneCrazy]

sorry for yelling like that. if u ever think im being rude just ignore me or tell me to stop being rude or something. im waiting for a friend to check his inbox and email me though and its getting on my nerves.

[Tsyroc]

u'll die before me unless u're a preteen and i'll get to laugh at u. he who thought he'd get to see light instead sees darkness. that's when all christians finally get to realize the truth when you're dead u won't be in heaven sucker

So, if I'm wrong, I'll cease to exist. If I'm right, I live forever in eternal bliss. If you're right, you'll cease to exist. If you're wrong, you'll burn in a flaming abyss forever.

Think about that for a while.

OR well burn in the flamming abyss long enough to train with the armies of Hell and they we'll be knocking on your door.

Do you think eternal bliss can handle a firey trident stuck in its ass?

[GoneCrazy]

[Mr Bean]

The point stands Cyril your religion worsphip an evil evil guy who's also a gencodical murder and a racsist to boot

Thanks but not thanks I PREFER Burning in Hell-Fire rather than living with a guy who makes Hitler look like Mother Tersa after a nice pill

And you can quote me on that one

[HemlockGrey]

Were he truly evil, he wouldn't give you a chance.

[Mr Bean]

Heh

Does he realy?

To those that do not accept me or have never heard my voice I shall send to the lake of fire and there they shall burn forever

Tell me if I put a gun to your head and said give me your wallet or die... Is that realy a choice?





Look whos holding that gun Cyril and you'l see

THERE IS NO CHOICE

And that... THAT is the heart of the matter, that one simple thing most overlook, If your right...



We never had a choice...

[Stuart Mackey]

Then you had the Christians taking over the Roman Empire and as a result of their intolerant practices, the empire fell.

Actually what caused the fall of the Roman empire cannot be attributed to one thing alone, it was a number of things, certainly not christianity in and of itself. In essence what cause it was overstrech in far to many areas. In short, the the population was falling, {the eastern Empire had some 70% of the empires total} and taxes were far too high,esp for such a redused population base.
The buacracy was too large and it was corrupt.
The army could not be maintained in good order and the Emperors were puppets of the army. The Army itself was far to small to secure the borders, it was never much more than 500 000, and the borders required a force at least double that number.
There were no rules for succetion of a new emperor, which caused civil wars.

[Evil Jerk]

No. You have a chance; life. You're not immediatly damned to hell. You get a chance, you blow the chance, you pay the price.

Whatever.
I suppose a Gestapo officer could make the same claim about a German dissident, they had the chance to obey Hitler and didn't, it's their own fault if they get tortured to death, right?

No, it's not an unfair comparison, God is potrayed as a blood thirsty dictator a billion times worse than Hitler.

Who are you to judge God's actions?

I can judge the actions of a mass-murderor, even a fictional one.
Take the "God is perfect" fallacy elsewhere, it pisses me off.

Hold whatever belief you want. I'll wave to you when we're dead.

In other words: You can believe what you want, but I'm right.
Typical, and predictable.