[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

[Advertise on 4chan]

[Catalog] [Archive]

God killed them for a reason
9 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
And? Sex is not a sin. Make love, not war.
God isn't real, little one.
I can't find it but there are casts of two people having sex with a kid in the room.
Fucking degenerates.
Based Jesus cleaning up the mess.
Don't you think it's weird that none of the early Christians ever mention the eruption of Mount Vesuvius? Their apocalyptic prophesies described the world and sinners being destroyed with fire and brimstone. Jesus also said in one of his sermons that the end of the world would come while some the listeners were still alive, and Mount Vesuvius erupted right around the the time that the last of those people would still be alive. Yet, no early Christian even so much as mentions it. Kinda weird, don't you think?

File: Fgu_MplXwAIuWd2.jpg (162 KB, 1200x900)
162 KB
162 KB JPG
I have intrusive thoughts insulting it and I think I'm doomed to hell

But I researched it and I think it could mean 2 things

1) It's literal and if you insult it you are done

2) It's apostasy, because in hebrews 10:29 they say "they insulted the spirit of grace" and the verse talks about rejecting the gospel even though you know it's true

Which one do you think it's the real definition?
7 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
it sounds like ocd symptom honestly
It means the trinity doesn't make any sense because if they're equally God blaspheming one of them should be as bad as blaspheming the others. Tritheists have no explanation for this.
Dont sweat it innit.just seperate your identity from the intrusive thoughts, maybe start mindfulness meditation.
It is unbelief, plain and simple. Those who have witnessed or known someone transformed by the power of the risen Christ, yet deny the Spirit's work in producing fruit in their life through the ministry of grace are essentially 'blaspheming' in that they are attributing the action of God to something else, while knowing full well that it is.

Consider the context in which the phrase originally occurs in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. The Pharisees had just seen Jesus drive out demons by "the finger of God", something that most Jews took as a sign of Jesus being the very same prophet spoken of by Moses in Deuteronomy 18:15-19 and the "anointed one" (i.e. Christ) promised by Isaiah. But rather than acknowledge the origin of these supernatural deliverances as being from God, the religious leaders sought to slander the Lord by saying that "he cast out demons by the prince of demons".

Though they were without excuse for their unbelief, they sought all the more to confute and gainsay Him for the sake of envy, as Pilate quickly discerned.

Hence, the unpardonable sin is that of suppressing the truth in unrighteousness, and spitting in the face of the bountiful evidences that God has afforded men so that they might believe. As it is written: "The one believing in the Son has eternal life, but the one not obeying the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." John 3:36.

Hope this helps some.
>seeing literal magic should be just as convincing to you as seeing a cultist repeat their mantras that theyve brutalized their minds into believing
Abrahamists are really something else.

File: satanism.jpg (22 KB, 378x386)
22 KB
i freely dedicate my soul to the dark lord satan. 666 please take my soul straight to the depths of hell
No, do it yourself. Stop hitting on me.

File: 1673799753506437.jpg (226 KB, 800x549)
226 KB
226 KB JPG
What was the turning point where the nobility had to stop risking their lives in campaigns to keep their status and could just sit on their titles?

I know Richard III spearheaded a vanguard and died as a result. Henry V went hand to hand combating on campaigns.

In France, the Saint King Louis IX (I believe) died from wounds he got while campaigning.

So when has the public stopped requesting the nobles to actually be warriors? What changed?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
The other factor would be professionalization of armies, keeping discipline became easier with lieutenants at a certain point
But the king/prince can still become a fighter pilot or infantry man...

Didn't prince Andrew, despite being called not to, fly in an attack helicopter during the Falklands thing?
It really depends a lot on the place and culture.

But overall the shift took place with rise of concept of “The State” in the 1600s and around the time of the Peace of Westphalia that ended the 30 Years War.

Feudalism was out the door, absolutism creeping in, and European monarchs were quite satisfied with their current borders — the main focus began shifting to capitalism and colonialism. The emergence of importance of ambassadors and treaties to prevent war. The Balance of Power was important.

The stereotypical Renaissance king relied on the pen more than the sword.
Generally the more centralized rule became, the less the monarch needed to personally demonstrate his valor. Back when armies were largely made up of personal retinues going to war meant calling in a bunch of people who promised to fight for you, personally, so if you didn't show up personally to fight, they might not even bother themselves. As armies became less focused on retinues and more on mercenaries and conscripts, there was less need for a monarch to really be present except for satisfying their own need to be seen as a heroic warrior king. But as warfare became more lethal, being a warrior king fell out of fashion.
This makes sense, I guess they amassed enough power that even if the public cared they couldn't force them to risk their lives.
>their own need to be seen as a heroic warrior king.
It shouldn't be their own need, like if a roman emperor didn't go campaigning he would get thrown out of his post and exchanged by one willing to take the risk.

why do they cry about the fall of rome?
i thought rapin' n pillagin' was based?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.

Where do the genes for blond hair among Eurasians come from? Hunter-gatherers, farmers, or steppe herders?
4 replies omitted. Click here to view.
I agree, religion belongs on /x/.
Like genetics belongs on /sci/
The earliest confirmed case is in the Ancient North Eurasians. They were the ancestors of EHG, and EHG probably passed it onto Funnelbeaker and Globular Amphora cultures, which then selected for it. Yamnaya and Corded Ware definitely had it because they were largely EHG but it was still rare.
Try not using the soi term eurasian next time
Cite sources, or you are a liar.
A well-known info.

File: aalewis.jpg (1.27 MB, 1263x1600)
1.27 MB
1.27 MB JPG
>lifelong moocher
>despised by his bourgeois family
>overall a miserable unpleasant cheapskate
>knocked up his ugly maid

Do you think he wore a fedora?
I'm not a communist but he is literally me
>despised by his bourgeois family
Wrong, he was despised by everyone that knew him
same except i'm poor and didn't knock up a maid (yet)
wanna switch places?
Was he a jewish nigger himself, so to speak, despite throwing this insult towards Lassalle?

File: Crowley magick.jpg (24 KB, 393x465)
24 KB
Is Thelema just rebranded Hinduism? The concept of True Will and Dharma strike me as very similar and I know Crowley spent some time in India.
40 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
>It is syncretic to many eastern faiths
Should be
>It is a syncretic movement that draws from many eastern faiths
The first sentence is wrong. The second sentence is correct. Anyone who disagrees with this is completely retarded and does not deserve to live. Any comments that disagree with my assessment were written by GPT chatbots or niggers.

>it's unheard of to use the word syncretic with a preposition
In 99.9% of cases, including the one in question, it is wrong. Seeing an error multiple times doesn't make it any less of a mistake, like your mother's decision not to abort you.
File: pepe10.jpg (16 KB, 392x375)
16 KB
I'm really glad my thread on Thelema and Hinduism could turn into a grammar discussion, thanks guys.
File: syncreticwith.png (6 KB, 375x97)
6 KB
You can go to /x/, find the /omg/ thread and ask them, but something tells me you'll get a similar response

The khabs is in the khu anon.
You look more dumb with every post.

File: 1675434508410.png (115 KB, 4500x2592)
115 KB
115 KB PNG
Are Iberians and Latin Americans the true inheritors of the Roman Empire's legacy?
132 replies and 21 images omitted. Click here to view.
The “Spiritual Enrichment” in question:
dunning kruger would laugh:>>14578090
If you’re calling me a dumbass, fuck you.
If you’re implying Alexander Dumas is some sort of deep cultural link, he was a quadroon who spent the entirety of his life within France. I seriously doubt the Haitians revere him.
Are you telling me that cartels, a minority that focuses on hedonism and all kinds of anti moral activities represent the vast majority of a continet when it comes to spirituality? You must be really intelligent Anon

>Frogs?…. Seriously? You think I’m scared of that? I’m not a baby.
12 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
This. Clearest proof of predestination.
‘Jakposting is lé fun, faggot. I’m about to turn 27.
>Old Testament reads like Judean propaganda.
Because that's literally what it is. It's a bunch of myths that the Jews stole from other tribes and re-wrote to be about themselves to make themselves look better.
>the story wasnt written in 500 BC like your pastor said
Christians and Jews usually claim that it took place in the 12th century bc under the rule of Ramesses II.
>but probably written in the Library of Alexandria around 50BC by a team of Jews
The Septuigint, which you are referring to, was written in the 3rd century bc.
There is no archaeological evidence that Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt, or that they fled Egypt en masse.

File: cd34nk76nbs81.jpg (68 KB, 640x663)
68 KB
Why did blacks in South Africa start killing and violently assaulting foreign Africans after the end of apartheid?
wypipo did dis
blacks have never stopped killing each other since the dawn of history
post-toba humans are like that

File: Election_MG_3455.jpg (1.6 MB, 4368x2912)
1.6 MB
1.6 MB JPG
Was universal suffrage really born out of the elites fearing pleb revolts, or was there some other motive? Doubly so for women's suffrage, I can't imagine the ruling classes being afraid of women actually doing a revolution or some shit.
Goal is to institutionalize capitalism or communism, because both view the human being as an industrial unit. Identity politics only exist for us to keep eachother down out of spite, meanwhile we all work/produce for some kind of hierarchy (whether corporate capitalist or state communist). Universal suffrage is a crumb compared to the cookie that elites control: monetary influence over public policy. We literally live in techno-feudalism, politics is just a honeypot to get us looking to the government to solve our problems; but as you can see, the real issues get equal support across party lines, and never to the benefit of the common person. That’s why modern blacktivists rely on government lip service, and they’re free to have parades to “create awareness” as if that is comparable to getting hosed down during the civil rights movement.

To answer the question: suffrage was our gold star for being good goys and not enforcing our right to overthrow the government

The nationalism/revolution phase was a detachment of the nobility from direct control over the masses, but now they’ve figured it out and know that they don’t need to be directly lording over the commoners to get their work and money.
Literally caused the french revolution.....

File: 1646386968191.jpg (123 KB, 1276x470)
123 KB
123 KB JPG
Why is the irish language still dying, despite britain having left ireland over a hundred years ago?
55 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
> You invited normans in. Yeah, they probably would have tried to take it anyways but it was the irish who invited them in, not anyone else
It wasn’t “the irish” who invited the Normans, it was a single deposed regional king acting in rebellion against the High King of Ireland whose authority had been recognized by almost the entire country at that point
> And it was the irish who raided the coasts of romano britain and anglo saxon england,
The Irish very rarely if ever made incursions into Anglo-Saxon held territory, they did raid the coast of Roman-Britain at the same time the Saxons were destroying it from the east, and even then it’s likely that the Romans would have been raiding Ireland for slaves in the preceding centuries so even that was a kind of payback
>was the irish who conquered and assimilated the picts and destroyed their culture and language
I know a certain Scottish anon who will argue vociferously against that point, you should try talking to him.
>So if you want to go all the way back in history i can just state that the english and scottish protestant planters in ireland were just poor oppressed victims of the irish taking their revenge, right?
No… just no.
Didn't anti-treaty forces eventually win in the ballot box anyway?

>The first Irish independence leaders cared too much about what Britain wanted

Nigga we had a massive fucking trade war over multiple issue and almost went to war several times up to and including during WW2. These are not the actions of British sympathisers.
>nobody outside Ireland speaks Irish
>economy completely dependent on foreign investment and commerce
>all your major trade partners speak English
So globalism?

File: 1658862262223.png (288 KB, 1280x657)
288 KB
288 KB PNG
>first world empire
>born from a petit crusader kingdom
>"The Sun Never Sets on the Spanish Empire"
>built almost every city in the new world, just 700 were built at 16th century
>30 UNESCO World Heritage sites built in America
>first cowboys
>maintained a maritime monopoly in the atlantic and pacific oceans for 3 centuries
>leaded countereformation
>spreaded christianity and western culture as no empire before them
>breed entire new races & cultures by muh dick force
>lasted much more time than rest of colonial empires despite lacking of modern technology, railroads, telegraph, etc
>centuries later still cause butthurt, controversy and admiration
82 replies and 22 images omitted. Click here to view.
The first world empure was Portugal not Spain.
When Spain arrived in the Americas Portugal already had various colonies in Africa and had cornered Africa and entered in the Indic ocean.
Portugal were more advanced than anyone else in that time and were only held back by the need of manpower and still conquered one of the largest empires in history.
Its african americans. America is where you go when you want your culture to die. Its why i advise all hispanics not to move here.
their skin is their culture. they can't build empires because the moment they mix it's over for them. Their culture is individualist so they can never unite under one identity. Even Britain tried and they sill larp as different groups of people. Scots especially.
>he wrote, in a "snownigger" language
spics are retarded mutt golems that worship their masters, what else is new?

File: chumpsky.png (362 KB, 924x1184)
362 KB
362 KB PNG
What's the /his/torical consensus on Kissinger? If you ask Chomsky the man was a servile idiot savant who blundered his way into power, if you ask Hitchens he was an evil criminal who turned Washington into a den of gangsters who collude with fascist regimes. Are there any positive interpretations of Kissinger's diplomacy, particularly during his time as Secretary of State? The man won the nobel peace prize.
7 replies omitted. Click here to view.
>Kissinger at 98: 'If it were not for the accident of my birth, I would be antisemitic.'
Absolutely based.
The JEW didlos the goatse with niggers to cuckold your pilpul, GOYIMS.
you're the contrarian
Didn’t he only support Israel as a counterweight to the Soviet-backed Arabs? IIRC he shat on some UN resolution protecting Jews in the USSR or something like that.

[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.