So /his/ considering the romans knew about steam (also greeks) could they ever develop in an industrialization? Or they needed more than just know about steam and slaves?
They had slaves. That's literally the reason technological innovation was so slow during the Roman Empire particularly (though only compared to today). The Greek Alexandrian who built the first steam device was like "this shit is useless when you have slaves who can do this shit far more easily". Plus the major pitfall of mechanisation is that it puts people out of work, and most people in the ancient world were only seasonally employed to begin with.
The steam engine was a consequence of industrialization, and the knowledge of steam by the Ancients doesn't mean a steam engine anymore than the knowledge of oil mean an internal combustion engine.
Okay, so anything unholy and/or nonreligious is considered secular.
In Judeao-Christianity their God gave them ten commandments for people to follow.
So, when ever a Christian commit adultery, theft, lie/fraud, supplant the highest authority as your own, and murder, its only through secular influence.
Therefore, secularism is most dangerous ideology known to man.
the ten commandments comprised the mosaic law, which became defunct with the establishment of the new covenant ("spiritual Israel").
so no, you've shown yourself incredibly ignorant to how Christianity functions in modern times
verb: comprise; 3rd person present: comprises; past tense: comprised; past participle: comprised; gerund or present participle: comprising
1. consist of; be made up of.
2. make up; constitute
Not sure what you thought I meant.
Christian art thread? Christian art thread.
was it winnable?
If the bulk of German forces either took the Moscow-Leningrad railways or took Moscow, then yes. The problem originated with the splitting of forces attempting to complete each at once. If the entire force attacked only one object, then it would have been possible.
That do depend heavily on.
The Soviets had been bulking up their armed forces near Moscow, so if the Germans had attacked their they may very well just have ran into a wall without making much progress. Even if they would have reached Moscow it don't mean they would have taken it, just like they didn't take Stalingrad and I am rather sure that city was in a shakier position.
Not advancing towards the Caucasus may actually have crippled the German war engine as they then would have been without the large...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Is it true that after 1453, Russia has become the true heir to the Roman Empire?
So he's pretty much the greatest political theorist of the modern (read: post-Machiavelli) era, right?
What did he do right?
What did he do wrong?
what are some events in history with cool sounding names?
Like The Halloween Massacre?
its really just when Gerald Ford fired a bunch of people at once and replaced them with others he liked instead though.
>fired Kissinger, put H.W Bush in charge of the CIA, made Rumsfeld the secretary fo state
You see that and you assume rivers of blood, the dead and wounded laying all over the street. Instead, you get 5 deaths, 2 of them occurring afterwards from wounds, 6 other people hurt and the first guy shot is someone who basically only exists as a folk legend beyond his name.
Was he unprepared to face an organized enemy? Or did his luck just run out?
/his/, what was the actual point of the Winged Hussar's Wings?
I assume it was to look equally awesome, terrifying and impractical.
The wings were actually black and attached to the saddle, not white and attached to the rider's back. That is how it is depicted in virtually all period art. Unfortunately I can't remember where I have all of it saved.
ALL CAPS WHY IS THE BOARD FUCKED?
What's the deal with Jeremiah 10:11? It's a single verse of Aramaic in what is otherwise a purely Hebrew composition. Is it just some later scribal interpolation? If so, how did it get there? If not, what's the deal?
I realize I probably won't get this, but please, serious responses only, try not to make this theological shit-flinging, just scholarship as to the development of the Bible.
I'm not even sure Biblical Aramaic was a spoken language at the time of the composition of Jeremiah. It certainly wasn't a widespread one. And who is the quote directed to? The people of Tarshish and Uphaz? I'm not sure where Uphaz is, but Tarshish is usually identified either as Sardinia or Carthage, and neither of those are Aramaic speaking.
Tell me about the Sikh Empire /his/
I'm looking for up to 9 people to start proving my proof (proof is about a god-like being existing) to.
If your interested e-mail me at email@example.com with the subject "atheist here" without quotes.
For every e-mail I get (probably none lol, help me out and tell me where I should be recruiting atheists to turn into theists from) I'll post the count for how many spots left I have. So for the first e-mail I get I'll post "8 spots left" without quotes.
Let's do this.