Response to Classmate post:
Many arguments have been presented for the fall of the Roman Empire. One of the most common claims is that it was corrupted by immorality.
1 This assertion contends that the empire suffered from a combination of immoral values, excessive wealth, and simple laziness. Even the Bible declares that nations living in sin and rebellion will eventually perish (Isa. 60:12 [NIV]). The difficulty with this assumption is that Rome was always immoral and committed sinful acts that were tolerated throughout its history.
2 Personally, I agree that the assertion of immorality is too simplistic an answer. While the sinful nature of man is the ultimate reason empires, countries, and nations eventually fall, it does not explain exactly the specific details Rome's fall.
According to the text, there are 11 dominant explanations for the fall of Rome.
3 Apart from a morality issue, some past historians maintained reasons that include a Christian view that made way for a "City of God," and a rationalist answer that Christians did not care about Rome's success. Other claims presented are that it could no longer govern itself, a social collapse, economic stagnation, long-term negative environmental conditions, and even a pathological explanation. Some offer more extreme justifications such as a genetic breakdown or a cyclical account that reasons it was time for it to fail. The breakdown of the military also becomes convincing argument. Of these answers, the strongest appear to be a combination of a social, political, and military failure. Lack of leadership, breakdown of the social order, and a final military collapse illustrates an empire out of control. The text further concludes that this complexity is an example of circumstances that cannot be easily explained and are referred to as the historical problem. How Rome actually failed may never be truly known.