Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 3945. page

He meant it is ok to eat bacon and wear mixed fabrics

>>763634
He literally says the opposite

>>763592
>fulfill them
Here's the key words that hang into balance.
One could argue that it means once Jesus dies on the cross as the lamb, the prophets and laws are fulfilled (at least some of them). Or argue He's not influencing scripture and restating the need of obedience towards the laws.
Either answer caused a divide between Christians.

>implying the disease part was entirely on purpose

File: 12721925_1022750277785051_2048510087_n.jpg (18KB, 238x320px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 238x320px

>>763562
Happy now?

>>763554
Wonder where they pulled that 100 million from?

>>763342
It doesn't, really. I feel like the flaw in "I think therefore I am" is the assumption that thoughts are necessarily not external. The mind could be an unthinking observer, which has thoughts paraded in front of it indistinct from any other sort of information. I think that the unthinking observer is as little as you can reduce being to, since otherwise you have nothing rather than something, which there obviously is (even if that something is illusory, or created by the observer itself)

Of course, if we're going down the line of thinking that everything is unreal, there's no reason to assume logic is valid. It could simply be the system that the simulation deceives you into believing is consistent.

>>763391
>The mind could be an unthinking observer,
Sure, but it would still have to exist to even be an observer. Hence: I think, therefore I am.
>otherwise you have nothing rather than something, which there obviously is (even if that something is illusory, or created by the observer itself)
Congratulations, you've summed up pretty much exactly what Descartes meant.

It basically comes down to abandoning babys first solipsism.
>none of this could be real!
Fails to even define what "real" is or why being in a "computer simulation" would change anything.

>>762847
>civil discussion

Kek

That'll be the day

Haven't been to a Catholic Mass (I imagine it was more similar to Orthodox before Novus Ordo), but Protestant worship is very different from Orthodox Liturgy, so I do know what you're saying.

Catholics and Orthodox share a great deal of doctrine, but I can't really elaborate on how we're distinct from you unless you specify your sect of Protestantsim

>>762862
My father is Baptist and my mother Presbyterian l, so I've been to both

>>762721
How?

>>762725

What do you mean "how"?

Have you even read them?

Just a few examples.

a. According to Matthew 28:1, only "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary."

b. According to Mark 16:1, "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome."

c. According to Luke 23:55, 24:1 and 24:10, "the women who had come with him out of Galilee." Among these women were "Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James." Luke indicates in verse 24:10 that there were at least two others.

d. According to John 20:1-4, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb alone, saw the stone removed, ran to find Peter, and returned to the tomb with Peter and another disciple.

There were four women. Mark is just the most exhaustive about it, whereas John only names the principle woman.

I'm surprised you latched on to this, considering it's not really controversial.

>>762262
Austrians are not Germans, that's why.

>>762262
>and not Prussia
Because Prussia was just a kingdom within the German Empire like for example Bavaria, Prussia unified those states but she didn't annex them

>>762269
Swallow your pride, Austria

>>762247
ending up staunchly opposed*

>>762247
Marcus Aurelius. He made some mistakes, but the dude was largely successful, and his furthering of stoic philosophy has done a lot of good.

None, because I don't live through other people.

>>762044
This isn't really worthy of a thread, but ok that's nice anon, have a (You).

>>762044
>>762044
>>762044

Buying this makes you racist, like Hitler.

>>762044
Thks isn't really a history thread, but I like you so I'll make it one.

Why did the 1st British invasion fail so badly. Sure, Rorke's Drift was a good accomplishment but their main force was annihilated completely at that one battle I can't remember the name of.

>inb4 Anglo racial inferiority

None of that /pol/ shit here, real answers.

>>761831

Depends on what time period you are refering to.

The Byzantine horse archers were good if not great, allthough still inferior to the their sassanid counterparts.

>>761831
>Roman """"Cavalry""""
>Laughing_Asiatic_Entities.jpg

File: 3693031087_1774676aed.jpg (221KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 500x500px

In terms of earlier eras than the byzantine one (in which cavalry was the central part of the army) infantry was the primary component of the army.

IIRC the roman cavaly in the republic era was competent and tended to do well in battles allthough it was severly limited in size. Once the state started to expand however the role of cavalry was left more and more to the auxillaries as they had a greater experience and tradition of fighting on horseback. I wouldn't be suprised if the increased wealth of the state during its period of vast expansion following the second punic war also lead to a decrease in willingness from the the roman knight-class to go into military service as civilian life was much more pleasant and gave room for enrichment through trade etc.

>>761592
I don't know but we'd probably have figured out earlier that the earth is round.

We would probably have a lot of rings in our culture desu

>>762148
We probably wouldn't have found out the rings are actually rings until very late in our history.

File: 800px-MenandrosCoin.jpg (213KB, 800x780px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 800x780px

>>761498

Wikipedia - chase up the references (you can get loads of free history books on things like libgen) for more detail and then chase up the references in the references.

History blogs and magazines, podcasts, documentaries.

Books are the best way to go, but imbibing all of these things will help, and honestly, best thing to do is chase up what interests you, because you'll want to read/learn about it. Don't go looking for stuff you think you 'should' know, just go after what you find appealing (one of the great things about Wikipedia is the interconnectedness of the pages - you can go from Rome to the Axumite Empire and before you know it. you're reading about the White Rajahs of Sarawak).

Best of luck anon.

>>761498
Go on wikipedia and find a topic. Next read the page and with your middle mouse button click on those blue links that interest you. When you are done reading the page look at your tabs. Reapeat the same with the next tab. If you are really interested in history you will never be free of tabs.

This is how I did it
>be 5
>learn to read on my own
>tell grandma to stop buying fairytale books because its a load of nonsense and buy encyclopedies
>read all those encyclopedies

I myself experienced it, the hot weather makes people feel too lazy or dizzy to do anything.

>>761059
But cold countries like Russia and Finland are not too productive either

I guarangoddamntee that a tribe in a desert is different because it is in a desert in the same way that a tribe in a jungle is different because it is in a jungle.

In the same way, we can infer that tribes would act different in different climates, and since climates can change (IE Sahara), we can infer civilizations can change

If for the least of all, lack of food relative to when the Sahara WASN'T a desert.

No. But people have redefined to to be.

There is social constructed part and other part that isn't.

I'd say that there is most certainly a real and tangible sex, but a certain role doesn't necessarily follow.

Though, by virtue of being culturally enforced, it shouldn't matter.

Nice meme.

>>760233
First off you need to be a bit more specific on which area. French are arguably innocent, Brits were cunts, and the Spanish were actually pretty good. Americans are their own things and not really Europeans, and almost 100% cunts to them

It can't really be justified, but only accepted. Unfortunately some peoples just get trampled over by more dominant cultures/civilizations, it's happened before. The Indians who did get it good integrated and became a part of society.

>>760233
While there is a probably too much victimization of the natives, I think it's mostly backlash against the prevailing way the history books typically treated Natives before the 50's, as backwards savages killing all the good honest white settlers, with any hope in the next century maybe we'll see a more even tone given to events that doesn't marginalize Native Americans, but doesn't demonize the European settlers either, after all the story of the America's is the same as everywhere else, a bunch of people screwing each other over for their own best interest. However, I don't think you could say the Euro's were in the right. Something being human nature or the way things were always done, does not make it right, while I'll agree that the colonization of America was generally more tolerable than Africa, I don't think you can't morally justify it using modern morality.

>They are given plenty, though, and drinking alcohol and being generally degenerate is definitely not how their people sound when they claim "muh noble ancestry".
I think you're experience with modern Amerindians is biasing you towards history, you should be aware of that and try and curb it.

>>760092

Imperium Romanum 2 had a great little scenario on this exact hypothetical.

>>760140
Total War: Attila has a DLC about it as well.

>tfw Belisarius could've been a god tier Western Emperor ruling a united and restored Roman Empire alongside his bro Justinian if it wasn't for that slut Theodora