1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
elena-s [515]
3 years ago
5

What does Bryan mean when he says there is “no Gatling gun attachment” to preaching the Bible ?

History
2 answers:
ella [17]3 years ago
6 0
Some argue that American rule in the Philippine Islands will result in the better education of the Filipinos. Be not deceived .... (We) dare not educate them lest they learn to read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States and mock us for our inconsistency . 
... (A) war of conquest is as unwise as it is unrighteous .... It is not necessary to own people in order to trade with them .... 
Imperialism finds no warrant in the Bible. The command, "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature," has no Gatling gun 
attachment. .. 

diamong [38]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

He meant preaching of gospel did not have any relationship with imposition  of  religion via violence, speccially speaking to the use of guns.

Explanation:

William Jennings Bryan  was against to the spread of ideologies by imposition, by submission of other cultures. He was against impreliasim and rejected the idea of using any kind of violence to preach the gospel. The Gatling gun was a very known weapon on his time and this why he used the phrase "<em>no Gatling gun attachment</em>" as reference to his vision of preacing  without guns, swords nor any violent means.

You might be interested in
Which of the following nations does not possess nuclear weapons?
netineya [11]

Answer:

france

Explanation:

i hope it helps

8 0
3 years ago
What is considered the biggest
madreJ [45]
C… the first two seem more like strengths
8 0
2 years ago
Please help me with this homework
Anestetic [448]

Answer:

So the citizens of the government are able to petition for change.

Explanation:

Without the ability to petition the government for change, many things in modern America would be different, for example, women's rights would still be little to none compared to men's.

4 0
3 years ago
HELP!!
shepuryov [24]
It’s B, because if you think about it it’s the only one that make sense
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of the following best describes how Captain James Cook viewed the indigenous cultures of the South Pacific?
Leto [7]

What are your options?

6 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • Why did most people in the early 1800s travel by river
    10·2 answers
  • What was the significance of the War Powers Act? It granted more power to the president to declare a war. It prevented Congress
    15·2 answers
  • In McChulloch v Maryland, what did the state of maryland argue
    9·1 answer
  • What led to the creation of two different Christian societies in Europe
    6·1 answer
  • How did the Third Estate change the Estates General?
    12·2 answers
  • Neil Armstrong was a famous ?
    6·2 answers
  • U-boats were used primarily to?
    5·1 answer
  • What was the purpose of the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments?
    8·1 answer
  • What is the difference between prudential and moral reasons?
    13·2 answers
  • Question 10 of 50
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!