What exactly is materialistic about Marxism? I don't quite understand it.
>Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with this their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking.
Who did more to destroy the Great Library of Alexandria? The Romans or Christians?
Is Nick Land the greatest philosopher alive? It took me a while to grasp his philosophy but now I realize everything he's predicted is coming true.
Redpill me on this man. Is he worth listening to? Why or why not?
What went wrong?
Who was Khidr?
This mysterious character has significant value in Islam. Unlike all saints, prophets and leaders mentioned in the Quran - he is the only one that is seemingly exclusive to Muslims.
As in you'll find all other characters in the Quran to be also present in the Bible and the Torah and other Judeo-Christian beliefs and documents. Except his man.
the tldr about this man as observed in the Quran:
Moses declares he is the wisest most knowing human on Earth after one of his sermons. God declares that that's not true and to seek out a wise man by taking a fish and roaming the Earth until the fish escapes him. Moses takes a young student of his and sets out to find this man. The fish escapes and Moses finds the man at the "junction/meeting of the seas"
Moses begs the man to take him along and teach him from his wisdom. The man famously and repeatedly tells him "you will not endure my ways"
What follows are three distinct stories that happened with Khidr and Moses:
1- Khidr punctures a ship
2- Khidr kills an innocent child
3- Khidr mends a stone wall in a town where the town folk were inhospitable and vile to them.
Moses confronts the man every time about his seemingly evil/useless deeds; the man then explains that he punctured the ship so that it would be deemed unworthy by a famously corrupt king would have seized it otherwise
He killed the child because he would grow up to be mischievous and evil. And God would replace him to his parents with a good son in his place.
He mended the wall because it belonged to sickly father whom would soon die and leave orphans behind. and that the wall would collapse unearthing a treasure underneath when the orphans are older.
Have these stories been mentioned before in any Judeo-Christian or even Greek mythology? or is this truly the only character / story line that is a new addition and exclusive to Islam?
it should be mentioned that Khidr is now and has been for quite sometime the poster child of Islamic mysticism. he is believed by many muslims to be timeless and immortal. he is said to eat like us but doesn't need to.
"Immortality" is exclusive to him and to Elijah in Muslim tradition. his wisdom and mystical nature also lead to him being adopted and heavily revered by many fringe sects in islam such as Sufis.
He sounds a lot like Utnapishtim, sometimes called "the Sumerian Noah", who was the sole survivor of the antediluvian world who knew the ancient ways of worship and taught them to Gilgamesh, allowing him to re-found the "true" religion on his return to Uruk. Even the fish part is mirrored in the Sumerian, it's one of the methods of achieving immortality that Utnapishtim teaches Gilgamesh.
Did people think of him in the 19th century like we do of Hitler now?
>dem hitler dubs
People did think of him that way in the 19th century though
"Well, Prince, so Genoa and Lucca are now just family estates of the
Buonapartes. But I warn you, if you don't tell me that this means war,
if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by
that Antichrist- I really believe he is Antichrist- I will have
nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend, no longer
my 'faithful slave,'...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Just because he was an aggressive war monger. Compared to actual tyrants Napoleon isn't that bad at all. Napoleonic Code is considerable less drastic than the final solution and whatever the Mongols did.
He just wanted to unite Europe under one language [French] and it has practically happened anyway with English.
Give arguments for and against religion.
Note: Here the issue of the existence of God will not be treated
Humans can't agree on what religion is right, the Universe is huge and people assume god would want anything to do with this planet. It's not really about religion though the real question is what happens after death, since we have limited time on this planet we want to do our best to get into a better life. Which is why people raised a certain religion won't ever question it because they want the best outcome after this life and questioning their belief is seen as bad because "have faith".
What went wrong, /his/?
They persecuted the Slovene minority and thus never received the help of their meme magic.
Seriously though from the accounts I read Austrofascism is one of the comfiest fascism, if we ignore their failed economic policies.
What was the origin or the myth?
Did they represent something else in life that was plaguing the peasants?
Related, how do most persistent myths get started?
Is it true that Arabs were admired by the British and the West in general as having a beautiful culture?
what's the point of roman empire -wank that many anons are so smitten with? wasn't the republic better?
>apologize to gays >>1359070
>wash refugee feet
>pray to Allah (see Lumen Gentium, Nostra Aetate)
>remember salvation comes not by works, but faith alone >>1358946
>even though atheists can go to heaven
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>truly believe in god
>live a life of sin and debauchery
>become a serial killer with hundreds of victims
>thanks to protestantism, end up in heaven
Did the Trojan War even happen?
The more I read about it, the more it seems to be a series of military campaigns than it was an actual war. And the City of Troy, whatever it was based on, appears to be very clearly embellished for the story.
I know that crusades were out of the fashion by 15th century, but I was always wondering would there be some form of reconquista of the Byzantium and Holy Land if the Americas were discovered like 50 or 100 years later.
>reconquista of the Byzantium
Crusades are what destroyed and allow the Byzantium to be conquered in the first place.
Latins and greek were seriously at each others throats for the whole duration of the crusades.
I know about 4th crusade and all that come after. I was thinking after the fall of Byzantium, well in into 16th century, because you had religious turmoil and population boom in western Europe that blow their steam on Americas.