Latin Christians believe that Jesus was only of divine nature.

History

2 answers:

scoundrel [369]3 years ago

6 0

1. This statement is False.

The question of Christ's nature has caused much controversy during the history of Christianity. The discipline that specifically deals with this issue is Christology. There were various things about learning about whether Christ had only a divine or just human nature. On this occasion, many of the Churche Councils were held. One of them is called to discuss the teachings of Bishop Arius who claimed, for example, that Christ was not equal to the Father, he had a divine and human nature with exceptional human qualities. On the other hand, there was also a study in Egypt that Christ is only worshiping divine nature, which is why the Council has been repeated and rejected this claim. The Christian Church, both Eastern and Western, always argued that Christ had both the divine and human nature.

2. Musa I of Mali, or Musa Mansa, was the tenth line of the Mansa, which in translation means a sultan, conqueror, or emperor. He was the ruler of the West African Mali Empire during the Golden Age of Islam.

The answer is: Mali

Vinvika [58]3 years ago

5 0

Latin Christians believed that Jesus was only divine nature...A

Mansa Musa ruled during the Golden Age of.... Mali

You might be interested in

Although african americans were given the right to vote with the passage of the 15th amendment in 1870, it was not until 1965 th

abruzzese [7]

The rights of African Americans to vote was passed at the 15th amendments. However these rights were fully secured the passage of Voting Rights Act of 1965.

<h3>Voting Rights Act of 1965</h3>

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is the legal framework passed by the US legislature which prohibits racial discrimination in voting.

Prior to the passage of this right certain discriminatory voting practices were used mainly in the southern states such as literacy test to prevent African Americans from voting. These events happened after the civil war.

Learn more about the voting rights at brainly.com/question/744348

4 0

2 years ago

HELPPP

GenaCL600 [577]

I believe the answer is F. did all of these

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Federalists

Dafna11 [192]

Answer:

Alexander Hamilton is the answer

7 0

3 years ago

What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of these methods of direct democracy: Initiative, Referendum, and Recall?

Marina86 [1]

In the United States, where there is no direct democracy at the federal level, more than half of the states (and many municipalities) allow citizens to vote on initiatives, and the vast majority of states have mechanisms to promote initiatives or referendums. There are also community meetings (town meetings) and various institutions at the municipal level where citizens can interact with those responsible for administration in decision-making. The disadvantages of the initiatives is that any citizen could present it at any time and it should be analyzed and taken into account, which could take a long time.

Referendums are elections in which voters do not elect representatives but participate in taking direct participation on some important issue of the country. As advantages, it is highlighted that the Referendum can be used to solve problems of a political nature, or the improvement of the governmental image, when it is too deteriorated in front of the popular collective. Another aspect that touches a possible disadvantage, has to do with the circumstance that can be used as a strategy or political weapon to satisfy political interests or ambitions of power. It has also been argued that this figure has a meaning called "zero sum", that is, where the majority wins everything and the minority loses everything, originating a tyranny of majorities, that have answered one or several questions about a specific issue and that in the case at hand, has to do with the end of the armed conflict, questions that are closed and must be answered with the yes or no.
Revocation of mandate, revocation of mandate or recall referendum (in English, recall election), is a procedure by which citizens can cease their public office to an elected official, before the end of their respective period, by direct vote or by collection of signatures, depending on the geographic or population dimensions. Those who propose a revocation mechanism argue that these have a disciplinary effect on elected officials, in which elected representatives will make fewer unpopular decisions if this may cause them to be more likely to be subject to a recall campaign. However, the same argument is also used against the recall: opponents argue that the recall completely undermines representative government as it causes elected officials fear to make unpopular but necessary decisions. Another argument in favor of direct democracy is that it provides voters with a continuous opportunity to make a democratic decision about who governs them, since they not only have the opportunity to elect the people who represent them every two to six years, but also to maintain a degree of control over the decision of its duration in the position. However, its opponents maintain that the mechanism of revocation could be used irresponsibly, and that this could be used by the political parties as a political weapon against the rival of the holders. The assertion that the revocation mechanism is being used as a political instrument was made by many Democrats against activists of Republican parties in connection with the recall in California in 2003.

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Nationalist groups in Budapest, Prague, and Vienna demand independence and self-government. the effect?

user100 [1]

By mid-1830s the old order seemed to have reeestablished itself.

6 0

3 years ago