Search results

Just a thought.... ...how is it, that there is a strong (VERY strong!) tendency here towards seeing OTL as more or less inevitable? As someone said (I can't remember who - otherwise I'd happily link): OTL is a Germanscrew, Jewscrew, Ottoscrew and Anglowank. I see the sentiment "It was bound...

True..he wouldn't have been the pushover that the alcoholic Yeltsin was... I'm also pretty confident that a Putin in charge of Russia could've made NATO quickly forget about its desire to try out its weapons...

If comments could be "liked".... :)

I do think it's fair to treat the Republic and the Empire as ONE. Same civilization, only a slight change in government from an open aristocracy to a, in different degrees, "absolute monarchy". Secondly, I think it's more than fair to call the ERE the successor to the Roman Empire (though I did...

Counter-points: - The Roman Republic/Empire can hardly be said to be democratic, and it enforced peace upon most of the known world...and lasted over a thousand years. - Or another one: The Athenian democracy only lasted for less than two centuries, before Philip II of Macedon crushed...

This is a sensitive subject indeed..... One needs to remember the fact that 800.000 Jews were forced to flee for their lives, from the Arabic countries, in the aftermath of the creation of Israel without the world giving a s..t. These Jews were assimilated into Israeli society, and the same...

Wrong. The black death was imported by merchants coming from the East, it had nothing to do with how many times people bathed. It raged in the arabic areas of Europe (and the Crimean) as well as the European areas. And the last part is just the standard "all evils come from the church" that has...

The "not created" does not refer to that distinction. It refers to the Christological disputes over the nature of Christ - was He preexistant or not? And if so, in what WAY is He preexistent? The "not created" isn't referring to anything in Jesus' conception, but to the question of His nature...

Well, it's true that religion can't be disproven, because the very object of their devotion (in Christianity: God) lies beyond what the natural sciences can say anything about. In the same way, you can't point to anything in the natural sciences and say: "THIS proves that Christianity is...

And...SUPPOSE God exists (it doesn't matter if you believe He does or not. If you don't, then pretend that he does anyway) - what a small matter would it be for Him (using the male pronoun as per tradition) to circumvent the laws that He himself created? You're extrapolating from a overly...

Borderline ASB, I think. It would require at least the following: - Arab-muslim conquest of Europe - ALL of it. Scandinavia is probably the last place a victorious Arab army would want, after all the other countries have been taken. - A MASSIVE colonization-effort across all of Europe for...

Yes. Your point?

I've yet to see that theory supported by anything more than wishful thinking, reading passages out of context, or circular reasoning, tbh.

Not if it isn't true, it doesn't.

You have a strand of Jesus' DNA? Where'd you come by that (and what Illuminati general did you have to bribe? :p )

No such thing as "objectivity" in a matter such as this. As has been pointed out ad nauseam: There's no doubt that Europe's technology was centuries ahead of the Indians' in MANY (not all) fields. The interesting question is, whether this is the same culturally as well. There are two factors...

That is, I should point out, a matter of some debate within scholarly circles. And there are pros and cons on each side. I, however, cannot see the pros as much more than wishful thinking and reading preconceptions into the texts...but others would disagree with me. Point is, that the matter...

Ahh, christianity-bashing.... The one PC form of bigotry....