Regional and Transregional Interactions Essay Answer: The social structures of the Hindu caste system, the Bantu peoples of Africa, and medieval Europe differed greatly. Some structures were given different names while others just consisted of different kinds of people. Each class also had different responsibilities to their community, specifically the lowest and highest class members. The Hindu caste system only had four major classes which they gave different names based on their creator-godâ€™s body parts, the Bantu people only had one ruling class, and the medieval Europeans had three classes which they called estates. Each of the places had some version of Hindu caste systems but they were all called different names and consisted of different people. The highest caste of Hinduâ€™s caste system was called the Brahmins; the Brahmins only consisted of priests and teachers. This caste system came about from the different body parts of their creator-god named Brahma. Unlike the Hindu people, the Bantu peopleâ€™s class structure, specifically the highest class, were determined by the most prominent family in the community. The head of this well-known family was known as the chief of the community, though they worked alongside the ruling class. In Medieval Europe, their class identification system were named the estates. Medieval Europeâ€™s highest estate was made up of the wealthy and noble people of Europe but sometimes higher ranking church members would have more power and influence over theirÂ country than the people of the highest class. The next group of Hinduâ€™s caste system was known as the Kshatriyas, who were the rulers and soldiers of India, and the Vaishyas, who were the merchants and traders. Medieval Europeâ€™s second group wasnâ€™t quite as large, the members of the group were called the clergy. This clergy included people in the army and some of them had higher ranks than those who lived in the lowest classes. Unlike the European system, Hindu caste members could move up a higher class and be reborn wealthy if they acted well in their current life. The church members of the community didnâ€™t have a special class where they were classified in. They hovered in the middle of lower class priests but still held authority over farmers and high-ranking authorities. The legislatures of Europe, or parliaments, were the lowerâ€™s class membersâ€™ connection to the heads of state. The third and final caste of Hinduâ€™s social structure was known as the shudras, otherwise known as the societyâ€™s laborers. Hinduâ€™s lowest possible caste, which actually werenâ€™t even considered a caste, were known as the untouchables and were considered impure. They were shunned, insulted, and banned from worship services, and kept away from the higher class members. The untouchablesâ€™ jobs were to do tasks no one else wanted to do, such as butchering meat or taking care of the dead. Europeâ€™s last estate was not split up into two like Hinduâ€™s caste system but the lower class did do things for the higher class members, just as the untouchables did. The members of the estate consisted of mostly farmers and these farmers had to till the land and grow food for themselves as well as the people of higher classes. The Hindu caste system had five different groups, the Brahmins, the Kshatriyas, the Vaishyas, and the Shudras. The Brahmins were the highest class, the Kshatriyas and the Vaishyas were the second, and the Shudras were the third and final official class. The Bantu peoplesâ€™ ruling class consisted of the male heads of the families in the communities. Europeanâ€™s highest class consists of the nobles, the second estate were the clergy, and the third, as well as largest, estate were people who tilled the land andÂ grew crops. Each system had a higher class that controlled the people of their communities but only two of the systems had a second and third class. Though they have these similarities, as you can see, some have different class names and each class consists of different kinds of people that take on different jobs.
1/10/2020 0 Comments
Scripture Inerrancy - Thesis Proposal Example (The CRI Voice, 2006) From the era that such reservations were raised, Christian scholars and even ordinary historians have come clear with findings, facts and proof that try to confirm the perfection of the bible. Scripture inerrancy therefore has to do with the belief that the bible is free from any errors. The justifications given as far as accuracy of the scriptures is concerned are varied. For example Rhodes (2004) uses several instances of Jesusâ€™ view of the bible to explain why the bible could be regarded as accurate. Some of his defense has to do with Divine Inspiration: Matthew 22:43; Indestructibility: Matthew 5:17-18; Infallibility: John 10:35; Final Authority: Matthew 4:4,7,10; Historicity: Matthew 12:40; 24:37; Scientific Accuracy: Matthew 19:2-5; Factual Inerrancy: John 17:17; Matthew 22:29; Christ-Centered Unity: Luke 24:27; John 5:39; Spiritual Clarity: Luke 24:25; Faith and Life Sufficiency: Luke 16:31. The research design to be employed for this study will be survey research. Research Connections (2011) explain that â€œSurvey research is a commonly used method of collecting information about a population of interest.â€ In this study, the population of interest will be Christianity; whereby scripture inerrancy shall be bought under strict scrutiny. The sample population shall be a group of Christian scholars, historians and critics of scripture inerrancy. These three categories of participants will help in ensuring fairness and balance in data collection and presentation of facts in the study. This is to say that the inclusive of critics is necessary in bringing about fairness in the line of argument. There shall be two major data collection procedures, which will be primary data collection and secondary data collection. Secondary data collection will deal with the collection of data from existing literature on