Reputation
554
Next tag badge:
10/100 score
1/20 answers
Badges
6 17
Impact
~8k people reached

Mar
11
revised Can the new testament be a valid historical record on the real life of Jesus?
Several spelling changes and clarifying who is a proponent of the Apocalyptic prophet view.
Mar
11
comment Can the new testament be a valid historical record on the real life of Jesus?
This is a much more balanced answer. I've suggested a few edits and I have some minor quibbles, but ultimately it reflects current scholarship. I would like to direct both you and @Ali to a question on Biblical Hermeneutics: Bart D. Ehrman - respected critic? The textual criticism issues of the Gospels are very real. However, this is balanced by the rather remarkable variety of manuscripts we have. The more copies you have, the more chance a scribe will make a mistake!
Mar
11
suggested approved edit on Can the new testament be a valid historical record on the real life of Jesus?
Mar
11
comment Can the new testament be a valid historical record on the real life of Jesus?
Were I to answer this question (it's currently closed) I would likely proceed along the lines of Easter as a historical event. The Gospels are secondary sources, but much of the New Testament consists of primary sources (mostly Paul's letters) which are far better from a historical method perspective.
Feb
28
awarded  Yearling
Feb
4
awarded  Critic
Dec
26
answered When was “diablo” first used to refer to the Devil?
Dec
10
awarded  Commentator
Dec
10
comment Why did Civil War officers tell their men to “aim low”?
For future reference, the third answer was written by Guy F-W and the point 1 is: " If you don't allow for it, the recoil of a musket will tend to kick the muzzle upwards - an experienced soldier can ride the recoil and control it reasonably well, but inexperienced troops are likely to let it rise. ..."
Dec
10
awarded  Nice Question
Oct
4
comment Why did Civil War officers tell their men to “aim low”?
Even so, +1 and thanks for the answer. It's always good to have multiple options. ;)
Oct
4
comment Why did Civil War officers tell their men to “aim low”?
This is an interesting answer and certainly plausible. But your two factors seem to be extrapolations from other eras. Firearm technology certainly was improving in the early and mid-1800s. Both the Springfield Model 1861 and Pattern 1853 Enfield were rifled, for instance. On your second point, that might be true, but Civil War soldiers had another tactic that worked even better--not pulling the trigger. Accounts of guns found on the field after Gettysburg reveal that many were loaded with up to ten rounds, which means they were not fired between loading.
Sep
25
comment What involvement did Jonathan Edwards have with the Conspiracy of 1741?
This came up in an answer that further confuses matters by suggesting that "There was real evil afoot in America at the time, and Edwards was taking a necessary step towards ridding the country of it." It seems like this is even more speculative than the article I quoted. Should I add that to the question or is the question too tenuous as it is?
Sep
25
asked What involvement did Jonathan Edwards have with the Conspiracy of 1741?
May
21
awarded  Autobiographer
May
14
awarded  Scholar
May
14
accepted Why did Civil War officers tell their men to “aim low”?
May
13
awarded  Quorum
May
12
comment Why did Civil War officers tell their men to “aim low”?
Welcome to History.SE and thanks for the answer. That explanation makes even more sense when you consider the order seemed to come when officers exhorted their men to wait for the enemy to close distance (even until they "see the whites of their eyes").
May
12
asked Have American writing styles changed between the Civil War and Today?