Want this question answered?
He wanted to say sorry
Romans did not write the Bible and therefore had no say in what was said about them or what they were reported as having said. The Romans had no opportunity to lie in the Bible, but the Christian authors did have that opportunity. So, the question should perhaps be whether the early Christians lied in the Bible, and arguably they did do so.
Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.Generally yes. The Romans usually "took the omens" before beginning any major project and a long journey would be considered a major project in those times. They especially consulted omens or soothsayers before sea travel, as the Romans in general, were "landlubbers" and not natural sailors as were, say the Greeks or Phoenicians.
Some say 500 years some say 400 years but me, i would say at around 400 years (if you want to be precise it was from 43AD(anno domini) to 410AD).
Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.Marc Antony stabbed himself, or as the Romans would say "he fell on his sword". This was an honorable way for a Roman soldier to die.
If you are talking about Paul being beat by the Romans than it can be found in Acts 22:25
Some would say the Romans were civilised but others would disagree.
AnswerAs far as practicable, the epistles attributed to St Paul were included in the New Testament in order of length, with the longest letter by Paul, Romans, first and the short letter to Philemon placed last. So, although Paul did not write that this would be his longest letter, its placement shows us that it is the longest epistle of Paul.
He wanted to say sorry
I would say the Romans because they had better technology.
Paul and I is correct depending upon the context. It is incorrect to say "The forms were sent to Paul and I," because the forms were not sent to "I," they were sent to "me." In this case you would say, "The forms were sent to Paul and me." This is one of the most common mistakes people make, and you hear it even from people who consider themselves literate. The best guideline you can use is to eliminate (in your mind) the other person from the sentence. "Paul and me think the same way," is incorrect, because you would not say, "Me think the same way"; you would say, "I think the same way." And because you always put yourself last, you would say, "Paul and I think the same way." But you would not say Paul gave his way of thinking to my wife and I." You would say, "Paul gave his way of thinking to my wife and me." See? Crestryder
I would like to visit = ḣebib zur I would like to visit you (addressing male) = ḣebib zurak I would like to visit you (addressing female) = ḣebib zurik I would like to visit you (addressing plural) = ḣebib zurkon
Well the book of Romans was written to all of the believers who were in Rome. So I would have to say that Romans chapter 4 was written to the Believers in Rome.
Paul writes about renewing your mind in the book of Romans, which comes about by reading and meditating on the Bible each day. Romans 12:2 "Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind."
I would say that he's not Haitian
The general consensus seems to be that the Epistle to the Romans (of the New Testament; I admit to assuming this is the text you are referring to when you say the book of the Romans) was written by the Apostle Paul sometime between the years 55-57 CE.Bruce, F. F. (1983). The Epistle of Paul to the Romans: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.
It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.It's safe to say that most of the Romans had slaves with the exception of the very poor.