Roman Catholic Church is one and true Church created by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, based on three principles:
1.
>unity of the Church under the Holy Father
>schismatics and heretics never created a fully functional body, just thousands of small denominations fighting each other
2.
>unity of the Church in history
>apostolic succession proven by saint Irenaeus of Lyons in "Adversus haereses" (Fighting the heresy) between 180 to 185 AC
>St. Augustine interpretation of Credo (~374 AC) declaring that
>One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is an exclusive unity
3.
>unity of the Bible and Tradition
>protestant myth about "1st century Biblical christianity" can be easily debunked by a simple fact that there was no such thing as "the Bible" back in 1st century AC
>the canons of the Scripture were being formed for over six hundred years and contained thousands of texts divided by
>the Word of God - liturgical use
>interpretations - law and administratory use
>philosophy - science and scholastics
>"might makes right": the religion
>>1409658
Behold!
Bait!
Is this a topic for discussion, your Catechism notes, or just your blog?
>>1409676
A topic for discussion.
How did Yahweh become God?
He always was God. The rest of the gods are merely his fallen angels.
>>1409361
The Jews killed the other god's worshipers and so they lost power.
Think American Gods but with more sand niggers.
>>1409378
So the Holocaust was really an attempt to kill Yahweh?
Not sure if this is enough for it's own thread, but what the hell, I'm anonymous.
If I want to read about history or philosophy in my free time, should I go for university textbooks? I'm wondering if it would be suitable for a normal pleb (STEM student) or if I should go for pop history books instead.
Gustavus Adolphus unrelated.
yeah read textbooks why not
University textbooks are designed to give you an introduction, which if youre starting out is what you want.
>>1409094
Lol most of the people who take classes that require those textbooks don't even read them.
Was the moon landing faked?
yes also the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old and the holocaust is a hoax
It would have been harder to fake the moon landing than it would have been to just go there and do it for real.
>>1408863
No.
Soviets later admitted that it was them who deliberately started the conspiracy theory.
Has material prosperity blinded modern man to anything beyond the cyclical world of Becoming? How do we overcome the tyranny of the horizontal and sensible and inspire a yearning for the vertical and transcendent?
By ending liberal capitalism and democracy.
You would have to abandon the desire for progress and growth and revert to a subsistence level of survival. In that state people will be desperate enough for escapism that they will return to mysticism beliefs.
>>1408650
The belief that the end of desire necessitates stagnation, boredom, and death is a silly millenialcuck belief conditioned by a globalist society that cannot imagine life without the insatiable yearning for the Other its entire mode of existence is predicated on.
Not to mention the issue isn't about desire being wrong but desiring the wrong things
Was consciousness a mistake?
>>1408400
why would it be, /tv/-poster? you wouldn't be able to comprehend and articulate the concept of "consciousness" or "mistakes", without consciousness.
>but muh suffering, tfw no gf
wanting to undo consciousness because it's challenging is like wanting to cut off your legs when you get a charlie horse.
>>1408413
No comparison between wanting to shut down consciousness and something else works because if you're unconscious/dead you won't miss out on the positives but are spared from the negatives, which isn't the case with having your legs chopped off.
Hey /his/, I've been doing some searching to find a proper armed conflict between Spain and Germany, but I cannot seem to find anything.
Now, by Spain I mean the political entity found in 1492 or, at least, the Kingdom of Castilla, and by Germany I mean at least the >H>R>E.
I'm interested to know because I was thinking about how many European countries haven't actually been enemies or rivals, and I'm now stuck in German-Spanish conflicts, but I haven't yet found a proper battle, let alone war.
The closest I've come as of today: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_de_las_Carolinas
This conflict was stopped through negotiations, which surprised me quite a lot, I didn't expect Germany and Spain to be able to talk thorough differences.
I am not counting Napoleonic Spain as Spain because we all know it was just a puppet state that didn't have to do anything with proper Spain aside form usurping the name and was actually at war with the real Spain.
So, /his/, is there a war or battle I haven't realized? I need help.
All the Catholic-Protestant conflicts. Charles I of Spain and V of the HRE had to fight against Protestant princes and rebelsm
>>1408474
Do you have the wiki articles or some other links?
>>1408361
>I didn't expect Germany and Spain to be able to talk thorough differences.
Seriously, why not?
And Spain fought in the Coalition Wars with France before Napoleon decided to invade it.
Was there any possibility that the Western Allies could have prevented the Fall of France and the Low Countries in 1940? Or at the very least held on to a sliver of mainland Europe by forcing the Germans into a stalemate?
If so, what would've been the impact later in the war assuming Hitler still invades the Soviet Union and the U.S. joins the war in 1941?
There was a decent chance at a successful capture of the Ruhr area if Britain and France went all in when Germany was invading Poland. Then the front freezes, and we get strategic bombing of Germany, more complicated diplomacy with the Soviets and Italy (who could end up on either side), and Germany is slowly worn down.
But for that to happen, you'd need to get the Allies to gear up for War '39 instead of War '42. Remember, even Germany wasn't gearing up for War '39.
I think a more realistic scenario than the decidedly anti-war and/or reactive rather than proactive allies actively attacking Germany while it was busy in Poland is a much simpler and I think much more plausible successful defense during the Battle of France.
Going through the Ardennes was incredibly risky and at times the Germans had miles long traffic jams on the handful of roads through the area (as in single digits of roads, like half a dozen or something at times).
Should that advance be spotted earlier and more importantly this intelligence acted upon, the war would be over, I think. Germans lose the advantage of surprise, of cutting off the allied vanguard, and suddenly the war turns out the way the allies wanted to, with a slugfest in Belgium.
>>1408336
If we imagine the Front is on the Rhine, what would that imply for the rest of the war?
The strategic bombing is still happening. It didn't start 'by mistake' when a German bomber accidentally dropped it's bombs on East London after missing a military target in order to make it home; it was planned before the war by everyone. And everyone during the war invested in it, especially the WAllies.
Why is the field of economics bias towards liberalism? The economist, the FT, and several other publications are very liberal leaning.
It's not an indication of something based on the field. It's actually annoying reading through shit, bias articles. Take for example:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21693584-leaving-eu-would-hurt-britainand-would-also-deal-terrible-blow-west-real-danger
That would be grave news—and not just for Britain. A vote to leave would damage the economy, certainly in the short term and probably in the long run. (As financial markets woke up to the prospect, the pound this week fell to its lowest level against the dollar since 2009.) It would imperil Britain’s security, when threats from terrorists and foreign powers are at their most severe in years. And far from reclaiming sovereignty, Britons would be forgoing clout, by giving up membership of a powerful club whose actions they can influence better from within than without. Those outside Britain marvelling at this proposed act of self-harm should worry for themselves, too. Brexit would deal a heavy blow to Europe, a continent already on the ropes. It would uncouple the world’s fifth-largest economy from its biggest market, and unmoor the fifth-largest defence spender from its allies. Poorer, less secure and disunited, the new EU would be weaker; the West, reliant on the balancing forces of America and Europe, would be enfeebled, too.
They imply that:
>Britain would leave nato
>That the EU would straight up sanction them instead of letting them go to a trade partnership like several other countries do
>That market volatility evasion is a sign of long term economic consequences, even when there has is not a cent different in terms of trade revenue and taxes
>>1408141
>Why is the field of economics bias towards liberalism?
Explain what you mean by liberalism.
Social liberalism?
Economic liberalism?
>>1408141
Idunno OP, why are Science Journals fact-leaning? Hmm
Because it's the establishment m8. You are allowed to say the USSR was an evil state but you're not allowed to criticize the EU.
Ok..you are allowed, but nobody will take your seriously. At least in my country.
Oh and please folks, stop making the anti-EU a left/right thing. Because every country is different. In my country the right wing parties are the ones that favour EU as opposed to the left wing parties which want out.
What period or year was the height of the Samurai? If someone were to ask about Samurai, which would they be thinking about, what century?
Google it.
Asshole
Probably right at end of Sengoku period, it's all downhill once Hideyoshi and then Ieyasu took over
So mid 16th century-ish maybe, I don't know
>>1408022
It's not something that can be googled....
Why the best army and the greatest empire took 4 or 5 years to defeat Germany ?
Because Britain was a naval empire, not a land one.
>>1408394
This. And they were financially ruined since 1929.
They didn't wanted to get under the american's economic trade and decided to start their own shit with their colonies which didn't really worked as they found themselves more isolated than anything. The brits thought they didn't needed anyone else and that they could be self-sufficient with their colonies, like in the good ol' days. The war took a toll on them considering they didn't had any funds to update or even have a sufficient army. Add that to the fact that the majority of their colonies knew what the hell was going on and were in a better positions to make demands. The empire was weak and needed to make as many concessions as possible in order to gather sufficient supports for the war.
If it wasn't for the helps of the states (and indirectly the soviets and Hitler being a retard), britains would have gotten rekt by germany. It was only a question of time before they would have yielded. And they didn't much against Germany besides stalling them.
>>1408475
So you think that if Hitler laucnhed operation barbarossa towards the UK instead, they would've won?
Post historical feels
I will never be a white settler living in a homestead protecting my wife and 8 children from savage natives
>You will never personally shoot the Romanovs.
I will never be a dashing cocksure cavalry officer of the Napoleonic era
>>1407715
>you will never be a Confederate plantation owner who can rape and whip his slaves as they work to make money for his own gain
>you will be never be a Japanese soldier stationed in Korea who marries a Korean qt that lusts after your colonialist cock
>you will never be a Chinese merchant on the Silk Road having sex with various women of exotic ethnicities and phenotypes
![Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1990-023-06A,_Otto_von_Bismarck[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lcthcTL.jpg "Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1990-023-06A, Otto von Bismarck[1]")
Was he the perfect leader?
>>1407582
No.
>>1407590
Yes he was
>>1407599
no he's not
Is it accurate graph? Seems pretty fair to me, but there could be some bias... What country should be first from your point of view?
>>1407215
So Italy has like 70000 /int/ shitposting mana or something?
>>1407215
Saudis should be way higher considering Sunni Islam and all its arab cultural practices are done by a quarter of the world
>>1407229
Can't be, Australia's got to be at the top.
When did the western capitalist nations begin to adopt aspects of socialism like Better wages and Better working conditions?
I'd say Teddy and Wilson made it mainstream for America.
>>1407022
Germany was the first country that created social security. France was the first country to create paid vacations for the working class.
>>1407022
Cause the class war is bulshit, people can feel fraternity with you even if they're richer than you.
Also social peace & reformist communisme.
