>The Christian belief that pagan gods were “demons powerless to protect Rome” is schizophrenia
lel
>The fall of Rome was punishment for embracing Christianity
Correlation isn’t causation. Rome’s decline involved economic collapse, barbarian invasions, and internal corruption, which were issues predating Christianity’s rise. Pagan worship didn’t save Rome during earlier crises like the Third Century. Blaming Christianity ignores these broader factors. Nice try, though.
>Roman pagans believed in Pax Deorum... When Rome worshipped the gods, Rome prospered.
Pax Deorum was a contractual view of divine favor, but Rome’s "prosperity" under paganism wasn’t as universal as you wish it was. Plagues, wars, and civil strife persisted. The empire’s peak under Trajan preceded Christianity’s spread, yet decline followed despite pagan rites. The gods’ "blessings" seem spotty at best.
>The gods do not rely on human worship... withdrew their blessings as punishment
If gods need no worship, why punish its absence? This smells like post hoc rationalization. If they’re so powerful, why didn’t they crush the Christian upstart? Sounds like divine temper tantrums, not cosmic justice.
>Pagans believed that the gods were personifications of forces of nature... above human morality
Fair point, but it undercuts your punishment narrative. If gods are beyond morality, their "wrath" is arbitrary, not principled. Pick a lane.
>Neoplatonism... Stoicism... Hermeticism... gods are intermediaries between the ineffable One and the material world.
These philosophies reinterpreted myths, but their abstract gods didn’t stop Rome’s fall either. Neoplatonism flourished under Christian emperors like Constantine. If anything, Christianity absorbed and outlasted these schools. Rejecting intermediaries doesn’t sever a “cosmic chain." On the contrary, it prioritizes direct communion with the divine.