>LDS is a cult because um... the endowment is weird... because it just is ok!!
>>18010980Have fun burning!
>>18012998>Mormonism has an entire different holy book.They follow the Bible too though It's not just the Book of Mormon
>>18013058They "follow" the Bible like Jews "follow" the Torah.
>>18013058The Mormon Jesus is not the Christian Jesus. Nor is the Islamic Jesus the Christian Jesus. These are different religions.Do Christians believe Jesus went to the Americas after he was resurrected? That he was Lucifer's brother?You can't just take a bit of KJV onlyism, claim it was corrupted and the Book of Mormon supercedes it (since it was "translated correctly"), toss ALL of the Christian Creeds, invent a new theology where God was once a man, have your founder claim to have seen God(!) and Jesus and still get to be "just another denomination".For the record, I think JWs are their own religion too.
>>18013058Anon, if tomorrow a new religion was brought about that worshipped Barney the Dinosaur as the reincarnation of jesus christ, with a whole new holy book based on his show; and a belief system framed around killing and eating children and then feeding themelves to Barney so that the beautiful christian souls can all be reunited with God as one: would you say that this is a form of christianity just because Barneyism also acknowledged the bible? Or would you say having beliefs and canon completely separate makes it it's own thing, like islam, and these people are heretic loonies? What you believe matters more than what you call it. If you had a christian movement that firmly believed that jesus' name was Thronglorr the World Dongler, but otherwise were normal protestants without other differences then they'd still be christians (even if they found that name annoying). This is called heterodoxy, where a branch of a religion has beliefs which might be odd but which aren't actually heresy or against the whole.Conversely Mormons can *say* they're christians all they like, but just because they've stolen the name and some of the material they don't get to pretend they're anything but heretics following an obvious conman and criminal who was using these gullible fools to fuck.
>I 'pose you heard ob de battle New Orleans, Whar ole Gineral Jackson gib de British beans;>De Yannkee do de Red Coats up slew slick, For dey cotch old Packenham an rowed him up de crick!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubXiEW40bUAI've been looking for information about this line in the classic Southern minstral song 'Zip Coon,' did the Americans give the British food during or after this battle? Are the 'beans' a reference to the grapeshot that killed General Packenham? Or is it just a nonsense lyric, as was common in these types of songs?
Minstrel lyrics often mixed nonsense syllables with topical references to famous people. The Battle of New Orleans was fresh national mythology in the 1820s–30s, and Jackson was a folk hero, so the song drops him in.
>>18011255A beautiful song and probably the only reason why any modern American knows anything about the war of 1812.>>18012538I think you're absolutely right, but is the lyric about 'giving the British beans' based on anything in real history, or was it included just because it's a funny sounding lyric?
>>18010510he's talking about how American troops castrated bongaloids and fed them their own testicles before leaving them to be gater food
>>18013109Sounds fake but ok.
>>18010510>>18011255https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mIV5NjgcCw
obviously there was no other choice
>>18013121>kill the majority of your workforce and the only thing that enabled your shitty landed gentry larp in the first place.Why though?
I wouldnt worry about it anon
>>18013059The deity?A Roman god of likely indo-european origin who got conflated with Kronos but still had his own unique traditions in Rome. The Romans worshipped Saturn a lot, not as much as Mars or Jupiter of course but Saturn was still pretty important, and its weird how I've seen posters here try to pretend Saturn was some evil god that nobody in Rome worshipped when Saturnalia is the most famous holiday in Roman religion. There was also a myth about how Saturn ruled in Latium as a fair and benevolent ruler. The Romans also associated Saturn with wealth and so the treasury was kept in the Temple of Saturn during Republican times. As a side note the Roman government didn't have any official government buildings in the modern sense until the Imperial period so even the Curia Hostilia (the Republican Senate House) was officially just a temple
Its like Shrek explaining himself as an onion, except much bigger. And radioactive
Did Rome lie about the beliefs of the Cathars? Was John Foxe right when he claimed that they were actually a Proto-Protestant group?
I wish they were still around. I wonder what they'd look like today.
>>18013009The main branch of gnosticism around today is called "Judaism" and falsely identifies as Jews.
>>18013085Idk, the gnostics were pretty antisemitic, their whole theology was that the Jewish God is effectively the devil. I don't think they'd be like the Jews.
>>18013094>Idk, the gnostics were pretty antisemitic, their whole theology was that the Jewish God is effectively the devil.The gnostics have a dualist cosmology and believed in reincarnation (i.e. transmigration of souls). This is what talmudic and kabbalistic "Judaism" teaches as well.>I don't think they'd be like the Jews.Well, yeah. They'd apparently pretend to be Jews though while actually being Gentiles with zero connection to the Biblical and ancient Israel. That's what modern Judaism is. The first lie the impostors usually tell is that they claim to have anything to do with biblical Jews when they do not.That is also pretty anti-Jewish as well, pretending to be them while teaching absolute satanic lies. Also, them being literal sodomites, and trying to normalize sodomy and other things in society.
>>18013103Forgot pic.
She engineered the continental alliance that would finally put Prussia down for over a decade only for Russia to turn on them at the last moment when the war was essentially won because the tsarina had completely randomly had a heart attack and died at 54 leaving her chud son in power. God must hate women rulers.
>>18012500so today
>>18012505Two world wars too late
>>18012280Is this an actual example of a powerful woman? I hear she was genuinely deciding foreign policy and involved in the administration of her lands.
>>18012280Yet another world war started by Austrians.
>>18012280>Gay mans final boss fight are two w*men History is so fucking kino.
>polity that has never existed for 1000+ years of European history>destroys Europe in only 195 years of existenceWhat were they thinking when they summoned it and why
>>18009998You'd think if they were artificial they would have surrendered to the first German that crossed their borer, the first time.
>>18011174But enough about Switzerland
>>18009976>mindbreaks ethnonationalists monochrome worldviewI think for that reason alone they are worthy of existence.
>>18011343...so 9 years after belgian independence, belgium was created. got itdumbass
>>18010669>the only reason it exists is a perfectly valid reason that validates its existenceOk
How did the British memory hole the GENOCIDE they did against us in 1809? Thousands of women and children starved to death in an entirely preventable man-made famine created by the blockade of the British navy. Everyone knows about their crimes in Ireland and South Africa but this particular genocide has been entirely memory holed for some reason.
>Conquers France>Dies two minutes later
>>18010990>he says, about the people who hired litteral mercenaries with crossbows
>>18011398Bedford deserves to be remembered as one of the best Plantagenets, and not just because of Verneuil. This man had God-tier diplomacy skills. The Burgundian Alliance would have collapsed immediately after Henry V’s death if it weren’t for him.
>>18010174>killing good christians>he was a coomerQrd
>>18012483That poster is just a “no more brother wars” retard. Henry V wasn’t a coomer.
>>18012598I don’t know if Patay is that underrated, but it’s true that it usually gets overshadowed by the siege of Orleans
Why didn't the Soviets wipe out the Volga Tartars instead of the Prussians? Volga Tartars are literally Monghols invaders while Prussians are Russians with a p.
>>18013063Any evidence it was spoken in Europe prior to Hunnic invasions?
>>18013071I say so
>>18013081That's not evidence. that's a map someone made in microsoft paintThe first record of a Slavic language is from the 6th century
The ancient Baltic Prussians waved to the Goths passing them as they marched south to Europe, while the Prussians were already on the Baltic coast. And where were the Slavs? They were crawling out of the swamps in Polesie. The Prussians have rights to Polish land, not the Germans (Wielbark culture) or the Poles (Zarubintsy culture). Prussians were on polish territory first. Deal with that. Its time for Balts to DRANG NACH SÜDEN!
>>18013090>muh records
>Matthew says Peter received the keys and the ability to bind and loose, and the other apostles received the ability to bind and loose 2 chapters later.>Everyone agrees Peter was the leader of the Apostles, but disagree on whether or not Peter's successors have full doctrinal and dogmatic authority on the whole body of the church.>Peter, having founded three churches in Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome has 3 successors but the papacy insists that because Peter died in Rome, only the Roman bishop is Peter's trve successor and the others were just random appointees(?)>Also Paul died in Rome too so that somehow proves the Petrine succession in Rome is extra special.>Popes have been excommunicated for being in error with the rest of the church. There have been Arian popes. Other popes have tried to wrangle other patriarchs in error.>"Peter has spoken through Leo!" Except Leo's Tome was being tested to its congruence with Cyril of Alexandria, whom everyone agreed was proclaiming the true faith>First Millennium Popes seem to have varying views on the role of the papacy, some do seem to claim the Vatican I dictatorial powers, while some speak openly against the idea of a universal bishop. Roman Catholics are ok with doctrinal development, so this point isn't really a gotcha, but it does seem like a circlejerk>The papacy used forgeries like the Donation of Constantine to claim secular dominance as well>Rome is geographically separated from the rest of the pentarchy and it seems like a logical conclusion that such isolation would result in general accretions over time, including papal supremacy vs first-among-equals. The Western Empire's collapse also gives geopolitical reasons for the HRE to push the Roman patriarch into odds with the rest of the pentarchy.It seems like a lot of mental gymnastics to defend the development of papal supremacy. It doesn't seem like a very defensible view. Can any Catholics provide a counter claim?
>>18011753The Catholic church isnt all that rich whatsoever, idk where you loonie troonies get this from.
In their eyes, this isn’t mental gymnastics but the same kind of development that clarified the Trinity and Christology.
>>18012501Ok, but it seems like claiming sole Petrine succession and then bringing up Paul out of nowhere and "Peter died in Rome, so his only successor is in Rome" seem like non-sequiturs. Peter's voice is heard from Leo because he's in agreement with Alexandria on Miaphysitism. It's not because, "Leo said it, therefore it is doctrine."
The key was given to Peter alone but the other apostles could bind and loose too because of the ultimate authority given to Peter but ultimately through the authority they have from Peter. Peter moved the seat of his authority to Rome and appointed another as the bishop of Antioch who would be a successor in terms of being bishop of Antioch bit Antioch became relegated to a normal episcopal see and would not have inherited the same authority as Peter did because Peter had moved his seat so that only those appointed as bishops of Rome would have the same authority. There haven’t been popes yet who were excommunicated. But there have been popes who held incorrect theological views or compromises like honorius tolerated the monothelites, or pope John xxii who believed that the beatific vision was not experienced until the final judgement. Popes aren’t meant to be perfect in every way although they should ideally be they still can make theological mistakes or make errors in governing but not officially teach these things as doctrine. Gregory I was against the idea of universal bishop as in sole bishop over the church that the patriarchs of Constantinople were trying to claim but the official position at the time was that Rome was the head of the church and the title universal bishop belonged to Rome but not as meaning sole bishop but as the head bishop of the church universal. His successor boniface iii affirmed this when he got emperor phocas to decree to affirm this.
>>18012501>but the same kind of development that clarified the Trinity and Christology.They are incorrect about that too, and for the exact same reason. The Bible already has the Trinity and all Christology. It has all of that.
When the colonialists arrived in Peru, they asked the local tribes what place would be the best to make a city and they were recommended the location of todays 'Lima'. Little did the colonialists know that this was actually the area with the worst weather and they got tricked by de indigenous people. Little did the indigenous people know that a few centuries later they would gain independence and this would become their capital city forever.
>>18011817God truly works in mysterious ways.
>>18012948>However, this choice (for Sangayan) was briefLike extremely brief.For reasons unclear, Pizarro eventually chose Lima. The decision was likely influenced by the opinions of Spanish reconnaissance parties, who had visited the valley, like Pizarro's brother and a handful of Spaniards who traveled like Inca dignitaries to Pachacamac (most were carried on Inca litters), a journey arranged by Atahualpa, while Pizarro remained immobile for months in Cajamarca with the captured Atahualpa, waiting for the ransom. Almagro’s forces had also likely visited the area during their coastal expeditions.Pizarro may have also visited Lima’s valley, when they were settling in Sangallan. He chose to move the capital there because the valley of Lima was a perfect location, full of agricultural pastures due to the aforementioned precolumbian irrigation channels. It had been one of the most populated regions of precolumbian Peru, though its population was probably lower at the time due to political turmoil and diseases. In fact, Lima's valley is home to extremely ancient monumental architecture, such as the ∼5000 year old pyramids of Chuquitanta.Pizarro chose a specific spot in the valley where a minor local ruler, placed by the Incas, controlled the flow of one of the key water channels (see figure 9 in >>18012559 (You)).Pic is a hypothetical reconstruction of the settlement of Lima that belonged to curaca Taulichusco, the aforementioned minor ruler. His palace became Pizarro’s residence and orchard, and later the larger Viceroyalty Palace was built on top of it, followed by the even larger current Presidential Palace
>>18013024>In fact, Lima's valley is home to extremely ancient monumental architecture, such as the ∼5000 year old pyramids of ChuquitantaAnd then came the u-shaped temples
peru was better when it was spanish
>>18012909OP is lying thougheverbeit, there was already a native settlement at what would become Lima
It takes more blind faith to believe the atheist creation myth than the Christian one. And it's not even close.
>>18013013I would disagree. I don't think any meaning is "made up". You might take great part in its cultivation, but it's like to say that information on any photo is "made up" because it takes a subjective perspective and is guided by systems of aesthetics. There's a great deal of subjectivity there, but in the end it's a carrier for something that transcends your own means of creation.Though if you can change the meaning of your life like one could change a hyperlink, I do envy you. Imagine programming yourself that staring into a blank wall until you starve to death is the peak of meaning and then just doing it in extasy... sounds fresh af.
>>18013034>get to know your history. >Satre for instance describe the human being as "sentenced to freedom".Get to know your own sources. Sartre saw great dignity in existentialism and so did the rest of the school of thought. You're grasping straws.>>>> “[T]his theory alone is compatible with the dignity of man, it is the only one which does not make man into an object.”>At this moment, we do not talk about atheism anymore but about atheists.We talk about atheism as it exists in the world today. It's concerning that this is an issue for you.>Look at Spinoza's viewpoint or Schopenhauer's or the old Chinese views. They explain the world without a monotheistic creator.They definitely try.
>>18013035>So debunked you can't even bring it up because you know it's shallow reddit rhetoric.https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/70827-this-is-rather-as-if-you-imagine-a-puddle-wakingHave a good read.>The rest of your post are typical irrational non-arguments like quoting fallacies you don't even understand You have no idea what I understand and what not.You make up bullocks in order to immunize yourself form the argument.>and more importantly not presenting any arguments because you know yours don't hold any water.What arguments, please?Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>18011327>>18011467>My father was a fishPerhaps you should worship a fish God.
>>18013055>Get to know your own sources. Sartre saw great dignity in existentialism and so did the rest of the school of thought. You're grasping straws.May were still be seen as somehow dark...>We talk about atheism as it exists in the world today. It's concerning that this is an issue for you.Nope. We talk about ATHEISTS today, not ATHEISM.OP stated: "It takes more blind faith to believe the atheist creation myth than the Christian one. And it's not even close."There is no atheists creation myth. Period.Some atheists adapt the current scientific theories like evolution, big bang etc. The point is, they rearly do this because the idea of natural selection is so compfy... They adapt this view, because they believe it is the best explaination aline with the facts.Yet there may be some atheists out there who doesn't even believe in evolution but in other theories. Maybe even with creators. As creators doesn't need to be deities for any reasons...>They definitely try. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>“I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”-Jesus>"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."-Paul
>>18011906Why do orthodox (little "o", not big "O") Christians always shit on the Gospel of Thomas if it was written before both Mark and Matthew? Doesn't that give it historical precedence?
>>18012969On the left it has a range of dates that have been argued for, though they're ordered by the earliest suggested date. 50-140 has it anywhere from before Mark to after John, so before all the canonical gospels or after all the canonical gospels depending on who you ask, though I think after is currently the dominant view. There's also the possibility that has a earlier core which was added to over time.
>>18011837Those flames just got hotter. Tick tock.
Paul has no choice but to say the latter because if he actually agreed with jesus he'd be out of a job and couldnt extort gentiles for money anymore. There's no point in analyzing a claim someone is forced to make to continue their livelihood
>>18013045The list also has secret Mark listed between 70 and 160, but when accounting for the common opinion of it being a forgery it should instead be between 70 and 1960, lol.
What made the Red Army so effective at wiping out Prussia
Many of the troops defending Prussia were recovering from prior losses.
>>18012012Then why was Prussia specifically selected to be ethnically depopulated, if it doesn't bear disproportionate responsibility?
>>18011514Why didn't they wipe out the Volga Tartars instead?
>>18011731Russian conscript circa 1942:>I'm not going to let Germans exterminate the Russian ethnicity.fat 90 iq /his/cel 80 years later:>NOOOOOOOOO YOU SHOULD HAVE LET THEM MURDER YOU SO THEY COULD BUILD A HECKIN KITSCHY GOTHIC CATHEDRAL OVER YOUR MASS GRAVE, THINK ABOUT THE AESTHETICS!
>>18013054>GOTHIC CATHEDRALmore like drag a big stone for Wotan worship
