>He told them still another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into about sixty pounds of flour until it worked all through the dough.”
Today science understands that the universe is constantly expanding, much like a ball of rising dough.
Jesus also knew this was how God designed dimensions, both heaven and the physical universe.
>>1614513
So then you are saying that heaven actually is in the sky? So then heaven, where God resides is not outside the bounds of the universe so he cannot be the "first cause" outside of space and time
>>1614530
>So then you are saying that heaven actually is in the sky?
No jackass.
It is a shared design choice by both the physical universe and heaven (a separate dimension).
>>1614548
If heaven is outside of space and time it is not expanding in a parallel to the physical universe and cannot just be another dimension in our universe
Where did the Austrian school of economics go so wrong?
It's not people friendly. Keynesian ideology is easier for regular folk to understand, if you spend money someone else must be earning it, keeping the wheel turning.
Believe it or not, but most people are ignorant of economics!
Though, there is no "right" school of economics, economics isn't exact science after all.
when they began to care about "ought" over "is"
They assumed that rational self interest is actually an accurate model of how humans work, despite that human beings are neither fully rational, nor always act in their own interest.
In fact, they've often tested the model of rational self interest, and the only group of people whose behavior it predicts fairly well is that of psychopaths
How did short hair come to be associated with men and long hair with women? Unlike a lot of gender differences, it doesn't seem to have a biological root.
>>1614477
good question.
Maybe it has to do with men balding and thus less hair is assiociated with masculinity
Short hair probably has to with the military.
>>1614477
Combat
do you think future generations will look at our memes as art and they'll like be framed in museums and people are studying them and analyzing them to better understand us
yes
and 4chan will go down in history as a cultural heritage (web)site
>>1614425
> you think future generations will look at our memes as art
Yes
>and they'll like be framed
No
>in museums
No
>and people are studying them and analyzing them to better understand us
Already happening
fuck man
if I'd live to see the day I'd kill myself
What historical misconceptions drive you mad?
>>1614342
Egyptians were white
>>1614342
Jesus existed
Fascism doesn't work.
What did he mean by "King of Italy"? Why did he chose this title? Was it just a ceremonial title? Was he the leader of Italy as well as France? Does it mean he considered himself Italian?
>>1614276
I'm pretty Napoleon considered himself Italian or at least Corsican more then he did French. I think he tried to flee back to Corsica when the revolution started but he was apprehended and the rest was history.
>>1614288
>dude just wants to go back home because the Frogs are chimping out
>gets blackjacked before boarding the ship
>wakes up on the French Throne
>>1614288
>I consider myself Italian and not French
>therefore I will conquer Italy for France and bring Italian artifacts and cultural wealth back to Paris
I went to the Habsburg crypt in Vienna a few months ago and the tomb of Maximilian I really caught my eye. Where's a good place to start learning more about the French attempt to set up a monarchy in Mexico?
La lejania del tesoro by Paco Ignacio Taibo II
don't know if it exists in english
>>1615906
i don't know spanish at all but this is looking like a novel?
i'd prefer nonfiction
>>1616104
it´s a novel
As a cheeky Anglo, how should I feel about old Churchill?
One side of the flag-waving population think he is a hero, the other half think he was a war-mongering dick?
Oy vey, he's a war mongering dick
>>1614210
He did a lot of retarded things, but I'm not sure about warmongering, unless that's something from his navy days prior to WWI I don't know about. He was wise to the Hun, I wouldn't call that warmongering.
He was a war mongering dick but also a real character, which is why I like him.
It's a good example of how beneficial being on the winning side is for your post-war reputation.
I've never read the New Testament nor am I a Christian. If I convert, why would it matter which denomination I am? As far as I know, what matters is that you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior and God as the one true god, why would it matter if I mistakenly believe in Catholicism/Protestantism/Orthodoxy/snowflake denomination if in my heart I am devoted to Christ and God, and in my works, even if deceived by some nefarious organization, or just the shitposting of some German priest, I dedicate them fully to Christ and his worship?
What would happen if a man, detached from civilization, who has never heard of Christ finds a standard New Testament, reads it, vaguely understands it and follows the main points of Jesus as best as he could although he falls astray from time to time, basically a Christian by heart, without baptism or any "official" conversion? He could even build a worship place for Jesus and make his own Church, believing he is the sole devotee, perhaps spreading to his village the word of the Lord and becoming THE religious leader of Christianity (since no one knows about Christianity). By all this, and the previous question, what I'm asking is, would it be legit in your opinion?
And what would happen if that man meets one day a Catholic, a Protestant, and an Orthodox, and each of them explains to him their differences. To whom would he be inclined to believe, if at all, assuming he did no particular interpretation of the NT?
And, last question, if such a man finds a NT, reads it, but dismisses it because he doesn't have a reason to believe it, would he still be damned by God?
Hard mode: THINK before you reply.
Nightmare mode: no one line answers.
find your own salvation you lazy fuck
>>1614202
read the OP again pal
If he follows the teachings of Christ, and tries to be the best man he can be, then he will most likely be welcomed in Heaven. The denominational component boils down to matters of interpretation, which humans love to fight over regardless of religious, political, or whatever context. If you were to convert I trust you would examine each brand carefully, picking over their theological histories and lineages, and ultimately pick the one you think "gets" it the most.
Let's talk about the Mary's Room thought experiment.
There are people who unironically believe Mary would not experience anything new upon leaving her room and seeing colors for the first time. Let's modify the experiment a little and see if you still agree.
Consider a typical autistic reddit neckbeard who smells of piss, tips his fedora all day and always gets rejected by women. Said neckbeard spends all day fapping to all kinds of degenerate porn. One day it happens that his mother can't take it anymore and kicks him out. Since he now needs money, he turns his hobby into a profession and becomes the leading expert on sexology.
Through watching every porn in existence and reading everything on the biology, psychology, neuroscience, endocrinology and whatever of sexual intercourse, he learns literally everything there is to know about sex. When he gives lectures, even the chaddest of all Chads are impressed by his seemingly more accurate knowledge of sex. However he is still a virgin, never experienced the touch of a woman, let alone penetrative intercourse.
Several decades later by lucky coincidence it happens that he finds a blind and olfactorily impaired, STD ridden whore - the first prostitute who does not reject him as a customer. This day he loses his virginity. Does he experience anything new? Or was this experience already implicitly known to him all the time?
tl;dr Do the Dennettian reddit goofballs actually believe they can lose their virginity through watching porn?
>>1614102
If you haven't had sex, you're a virgin. Simple as that really
>>1614151
And what exactly constitutes a sexual act?
>>1614159
Sex? What's your angle here man?
Sex is sex it's a pretty simple understanding. Intercourse is intercourse you've either done it or not. Researching might make you better at it, don't know for sure but if you haven't experienced it you don't fully understand it.
Why did he fuck up the Red Army so much in the 30's? it almost caused the Germans to fucking conquer the Soviet Union in world war II, what brought it on, delusional paranoia? general idiocy?
>have massive, well armed military
>get paranoid, purge officers, demob hundreds of thousands of trained troops
>cut the military's budget to ribbons
>Red Army gets memed on by Wehrmacht early on in the war, is nearly annihilated until it gets itself together
>>1613944
Well, for starters, the quality of the Red Army was pretty bad even before the purges, as their showing in the RCW and the invasion of Poland demonstrated. Even the victory at Khalkin Gol (which was done with mostly unpurged officers) pit the Russians with a massive advantage in men and material, and still only managing to win through attrition.
But mostly, it was fear that a military that wasn't personally loyal to him could and would bring him down. I would call it paranoia, but hardly delusional levels of such. Go look up the early history of the Soviet Union, and how many of its leading figures wound up dead.
>>1613997
but that was '39, which was post Great Purge, so basically right after the army had been gutted and the best and brightest either executed, in jail or at least booted from their jobs and the party
also fucking Molotov, seriously what the fuck was that guy's damage?
>>1614009
Yes, it was post great purge, but Zhukov had been in the Red Army since the civil war, and most of his subordinates were people who survived the purges, they too had plenty of experience, and their showing was average at best.
>also fucking Molotov, seriously what the fuck was that guy's damage?
Sadly, I don't know much about the diplomatic side of things. Can't help you there.
In the run up to the great war, did the German government make any attempts to negotiate with Belgium? I know they sent them an ultimatum in the first week of August, but I haven't heard or seen anything that says they attempted to reach out to the Belgium government at all. They drew up the schlieffen plan ten years before the war but never bothered to work something out with the Belgians? Or did they just figure the Belgians would never agree to anything in the first place and an attempt was pointless?
>>1613930
>Or did they just figure the Belgians would never agree to anything in the first place and an attempt was pointless?
Pretty much this i guess.
>>1613930
I don't think it was so much that the Belgians would never agree to anything, so much that the Belgians themselves were pretty puny, and their biggest threat was drawing Britain in behind them.
Given the civil unrest in Britian in the early part of the 20th century, and the trouble in Ireland, the constant reshuffling at the top of the military, etc. they didn't seem to think Britain was that much of a threat either, especially in the short war they thought would develop. 6 divisions more or less is chump change.
Belgium would never agree to give passage to Germany as that would make them Entente invasion targets.
What went right?
What went wrong?
>>1613911
>As of 2015, China's nominal GDP by Expenditure approach is 67.67 trillion Chinese yuan or 10.86 trillion US dollars.[3] China's nominal GDP by Expenditure approach surpassed that of Italy in 2000, France in 2005, the United Kingdom in 2006 and that of Germany in 2007, before overtaking Japan in 2009, making China the world's second largest economy after the United States. But adjusting for purchasing power parity (PPP), China become the world's second largest economy as early as 1999 surpassing Japan, and has toppled America to become the biggest economy since 2014.[2]
>From 1979 until 2010, China's average annual GDP growth was 9.91%, reaching an historical high of 15.2% in 1984 and a record low of 3.8% in 1990. Based on the current price, the country's average annual GDP growth in these 32 years was 15.8%, reaching an historical high of 36.41% in 1994 and a record low of 6.25% in 1999.
China pursued aggressive economic reform which while killing 100 million did make it an economic superpower.
India didn't, they instead pursued socialism and economic isolation until the 90s which stunted them, but now they are recovering.
China and India will be big players in the next century
>>1613911
>what went right
Liberalization.
>what went wrong
Excessive bureaucratic barriers to free enterprise. Preventing externalities is all well and good, but India goes beyond that and has rules just to have rules, with no clear purpose.
Is this the spookiest thing you've ever read?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37208404
>>1613893
>flag code
>a literally unenforceable set of empty rules
That's pretty damn spooky.
>>1613915
One of many in reaction to that footballer not standing for the anthem before a game in the last couple of days.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37205032
>>1613953
Who is the biggest cuck in history ?
You're dad lmao
>>1613832
Your dad 2bh
>>1613832
you