adalger: Earthrise as seen from the moon, captured on camera by the crew of Apollo 16 (Default)
posted by [personal profile] adalger at 08:41pm on 2009-10-15
The descendants of Israel are as much a "kingdom" in this sense as the "Kingdom of Christ." They have lasted far longer.

The Greeks have, too.

Also, it's really not fair you saying "I don't know anything about the Egyptians and Chinese, so they don't count."
metahacker: A picture of white-socked feet, as of a person with their legs crossed. (Default)
posted by [personal profile] metahacker at 09:38pm on 2009-10-15
I was looking for unbroken *kingdoms* to compare to. I brought the dynasties up as sidebars. Who is it "not fair" to? Who should I be being fair to?

Greeks: fractious, many civil wars. Hard to call it a good example of a kingdom with less civil wars, assuming you call it a kingdom at all (I can't really say 'a collection of city-state' nor 'a parliamentary republic' is a 'kingdom').

Israel: more of a direct comparison.
adalger: Earthrise as seen from the moon, captured on camera by the crew of Apollo 16 (Default)
posted by [personal profile] adalger at 10:45pm on 2009-10-15
I was looking for unbroken *kingdoms* to compare to. I brought the dynasties up as sidebars.

Well, then, is there any way you can define "Kingdom of Christ" such that it meets the criterion "unbroken kingdom"?

Who is it "not fair" to? Who should I be being fair to?

Anyone who disagrees with your statement based on their factual existence as counterexamples to the statement "no kingdom has lasted the entire time of the Kingdom of Christ".

(I can't really say 'a collection of city-state' nor 'a parliamentary republic' is a 'kingdom').

Nor can I say a loose collection of dozens of denominations who have rarely in the past thousand years all agreed on even the name of their ruler is a 'kingdom'.

Links

January

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31