The Spread of Christianity in the Roman Empire Essay -- Religion Histo

Factors Which Led to the Spread of Christianity in the Roman Empire Christianity was not born in a vacumn. There were many social, geographical, historical and religious issues prevailing at the time of Christ and all of which were favorable to the spread of Christianity. Geograpicly, Christianity came into being in the Meditation world, the largest of the various centers of civilization at that time. Israel stands almost central to the five continents, dividing the east and west. Another factor, which many scholars believe to be the single most important in the spread of Christianity, is the Pax Romana. This saw a period of over two hundred years, between 30 b.c. and a.d. 193, in which there was almost total world peace, Antoninus Pius wrote in circa 150 a.d., " Wars have so far vanished as to be regarded as legendary events of the past". This peace brought great prosperity to the vast Roman Empire as money was not being spent on costly wars and so materialism became prominent, another consequence was that people now had more time to think about issues such as religion. Another benefit of the Pax Romana was that frontiers were removed and so early missionaries could travel between countries within the Empire with ease, "A man can travel from one country to another although it was his nature land" (Pius). Also, because of a "considerable civil service" (Frend) to police the roads, there was a great decrease in the amount of bandits on the main roads and so the missionaries travel was a great deal safer. Another factor, within the Roman Empire, was the growth of a proper system of roads and trade between countri... ...he line between Greek religion and philosophy because the various forms of philosophy were more than a group of intellectual systems: they were a leading influence in the moral education of both the educated and the masses and were increasingly religious. The remain schools of Greek philosophy represented in the Roman Empire were the Epicureans, the Peripatetics, the Pythagoreans, the Stoics, the Platonists and the Neo-Platonist. In conclusion, it is important to realize that it was not one single factor which was responsible for the spread of Christianity, all these figures came together to give the perfect platform for a new religion to develop, " Never before in the history of the race had conditions been so ready for the adoption of a new faith by the majority of the peoples of so large an area" (K.S Latourette).

Business: Management and Entire Selection Process

Evaluate the entire selection process for the position. Judge whether mistakes were made and discuss what could have been done differently. When I start evaluating the entire selection process, I have to start with the assessment process. The first thing that catches my attention is the fact that three of the four interviewers are men. As a woman interviewing for a job, I would be a little intimated being questioned by three men and one female. I would feel more comfortable being interviewed by a panel that was made up of two men and two women. I also think that the interview panel should have been set up to objectively view the candidate’s best and worst qualities for the position. Also, during the assessment process, I noticed that the only questions that made her feel uncomfortable were the questions that came from the men. I can see why she was feeling uncomfortable; it seemed to me like they were trying to bully her into reconsidering continuing the interview process. I think that some of the line of questioning was a little apprehensive. If I was her, I would probably feel the same way that she does. In the role playing exercise, I believe that she was set up to fail. I think that they totally sabotaged this part of the interview. George Montgomery did not have any confidence in her and he wanted to prove that she did not have what it takes to be a successful manager. He knew that if he did not cooperate with her, she would not be able to demonstrate her leadership, managerial, decision making or disciplinary skills. I do not think that it was professional for him to portray such an unrealistic character. I think that he wanted to show that she was weak and did not have what it took to be a successful manager. I think that they-the men-already knew who they wanted to hire before Jane’s interview. I am sure that was a very humiliating and â€Å"To Be Or Not To Be Promoted? †3 dehumanizing experience for her. The worst part of it was the fact that she still has to face the people on the interview committee day in and day out. Compare and contrast Joe’s, Jane’s, and Matt’s candidacy based on what you know about them. If you were the hiring manager and the final decision were yours to make, whom would you hire? Provide a persuasive rationale for your choice. Due to the fact that no information was given about Joe or Matt’s candidacy, I do not see how a competent answer can be provided for this question. The only information that was provided was about Jane. I am not able to provide a rationale decision about who I feel is most qualified to assume the role of Marketing Director, due to the fact that I do not know how any of their interviewers went. But if I had to make an assumption about who I would hire, I would hire Jane. I think that she handled herself very well under pressure despite the demanding line of questioning that some of the members of the members of the senior staff asked. I would also hire Jane because she has already proven that she is an effective leader in the organization.Business Management Study Guide She has worked her way up in the ranks and has tackled some pretty tough assignments. She is a dedicated employee and would be a great role model and leader for the organization. If you were advising each of the three final candidates for the position before the interview and before the offer was made to Joe, explain what you would advise each of them to do. Speculate about what you would say to each of them after the offer was made to Joe. I would advise each of them to practice their interview. Since they all work for the company, they should all have an idea of what the interview process should consist of. I would â€Å"To Be Or Not To Be Promoted? †4 also tell them to review the job description and make sure that they fully understand the requirements and qualifications. I would advise each of them to go in and be confident and do their best. Staying calm and composed is always good pre interview advice. Also by staying calm in a tense situation will show the panel that you can handle those types of environments. I would also tell them to show what they know about the position and convince the panel that they are the best person in the job. One of the most important things is to be on time for your interview and always dress for success. Be prepared and showcase your confidence. Even though this is an in house interview, I would also encourage each one of the potential candidates to follow up after the interview. Once the offer was made, I would reassure each of them that they did a great job during the interview and not to get discouraged because they were not chosen. I would advise them to offer assistance to Joe as he transitions to his new role and offer him a helping hand. I would advise against trying to find out why they are not selected for the position, due to the fact they do not want to hinder being selected for any other positions that may come available in the near future. Based on what you know about George Montgomery, assess his management style and describe what bearing it may have had on his selection of Joe. Based on what I know about George Montgomery, he kind of comes across as a prick. I see him as being this old guy who was introduced in the business world when it was predominately dominated by men. I do not think that he has any respect for women. I do not think that he feels like a woman deserves to be in a senior management level position. Joe may â€Å"To Be Or Not To Be Promoted? †5 be a lot like him which could have had some influence on the decision to hire him. I am sure that since they work together and have had many conversations about male and female roles in business. I am sure that there has been some office talk about expectations of the new project manager. I do not think that if all three of the candidates were from outside of the organization, the playing field would have been leveled out some. If you were Joe, the selected candidate, propose what you would do to ease any ill feelings with Jane and Matt. If I was Joe, I would offer a helping hand to Jane and Matt. I would try to help them out as much as possible and even recruit them to help me on special assignments. I do not think that it would be wise for Joe to rub the new position in their faces or make them feel interior to me because I was chosen for the job. I may even set some time aside to chit chat with them just to make sure that there are no ill feelings.

Biography of Daniel Webster, American Statesman

Daniel Webster (January 18, 1782–October 24, 1852) was one of the most eloquent and influential American political figures of the early 19th century. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives, in the Senate, and in the executive branch as the Secretary of State. Given his prominence in debating the great issues of his day, Webster was considered, along with  Henry Clay  and  John C. Calhoun, a member of the Great Triumvirate. The three men, each representing a different region of the country, defined national politics for several decades. Fast Facts: Daniel Webster Known For: Webster was an influential American statesman and orator.Born: January 18, 1782 in Salisbury, New HampshireParents: Ebenezer and Abigail WebsterDied: October 24, 1852 in Marshfield, MassachusettsSpouse(s): Grace Fletcher, Caroline LeRoy WebsterChildren: 5 Early Life Daniel Webster was born in Salisbury, New Hampshire, on January 18, 1782. He grew up on a farm, and worked there during the warm months and attended a local school in the winter. Webster later attended Phillips Academy and Dartmouth College, where he became known for his impressive speaking skills. After graduation, Webster learned the law by working for a lawyer (the usual practice before law schools became common). He practiced law from 1807 until the time he entered Congress. Early Political Career Webster first attained some local prominence when he addressed an Independence Day commemoration on July 4, 1812, speaking on the topic of the war, which had just been declared against Britain by President James Madison. Webster, like many in New England, opposed the War of 1812. He was elected to the House of Representatives from a New Hampshire district in 1813. In the U.S. Capitol, he became known as a skillful orator, and he often argued against the Madison administrations war policies. Webster left Congress in 1816 to concentrate on his legal career. He acquired a reputation as a highly skilled litigator and argued several prominent cases before the U.S. Supreme Court during the era of Chief Justice John Marshall. One of these cases, Gibbons v. Ogden, established the scope of the U.S. governments authority over interstate commerce. Webster returned to the House of Representatives in 1823 as a representative from Massachusetts. While serving in Congress, Webster often gave public addresses, including eulogies for Thomas Jefferson and John Adams (who both died on July 4, 1826). He became known as the greatest public speaker in the country. Senate Career Webster was elected to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts in 1827. He would serve until 1841, and would be a prominent participant in many critical debates. Webster supported the passage of the  Tariff of Abominations  in 1828, and that brought him into conflict with John C. Calhoun, the intelligent and fiery political figure from South Carolina. Sectional disputes came into focus, and Webster and a close friend of Calhoun, Senator Robert Y. Hayne of South Carolina, squared off in debates on the floor of the Senate in January 1830. Hayne argued in favor of states rights, and Webster, in a famous rebuttal, forcefully argued for the authority of the federal government. The verbal fireworks between Webster and Hayne became something of a symbol for the nations growing divisions. The debates were covered in detail by newspapers and watched closely by the public. As the  Nullification Crisis  developed, Webster supported the policy of  President Andrew Jackson, who threatened to send federal troops to South Carolina. The crisis was averted before violent action took place. Webster opposed the economic policies of Andrew Jackson, however, and in 1836 he ran for president as a Whig against  Martin Van Buren, a close political associate of Jackson. In a contentious four-way race, Webster only carried his own state of Massachusetts. Secretary of State Four years later, Webster again sought the Whig nomination for president but lost to  William Henry Harrison, who won the election of 1840. Harrison appointed Webster as his Secretary of State. President Harrison died a month after taking office. As he was the first president to die in office, there was a controversy over presidential succession in which Webster participated.  John Tyler, Harrisons vice president, asserted that he should become the next president, and the  Tyler Precedent  became accepted practice. Webster was one of the cabinet officials who disagreed with this decision; he felt that the presidential cabinet should share some of the presidential powers. After this controversy, Webster did not get along with Tyler, and he resigned from his post in 1843. Later Senate Career Webster returned to the U.S. Senate in 1845. He had tried to secure the Whig nomination for president in 1844 but lost to longtime rival Henry Clay. In 1848, Webster lost another attempt to get the nomination when the Whigs nominated  Zachary Taylor, a hero of the  Mexican War. Webster was opposed to the spread of slavery to new American territories. In the late 1840s, however, he began supporting compromises proposed by Henry Clay to keep the Union together. In his last major action in the Senate, he supported the  Compromise of 1850, which included the Fugitive Slave Act that was highly unpopular in New England. Webster delivered a highly anticipated address during Senate debates—later known as the Seventh of March Speech—in which he spoke in favor of preserving the Union. Many of his constituents, deeply offended by parts of his speech, felt betrayed by Webster. He left the Senate a few months later, when  Millard Fillmore, who had become president after the death of Zachary Taylor, appointed him as Secretary of State. In May 1851, Webster rode along with two New York politicians, Senator William Seward and President Millard Fillmore, on a train trip to celebrate the new Erie Railroad. At every stop across New York State crowds gathered, mostly because they were hoping to hear a speech by Webster. His oratory skills were such that he overshadowed the president. Webster tried again to be nominated for president on the Whig ticket in 1852, but the party chose General Winfield Scott at a  brokered convention. Angered by the decision, Webster refused to support Scotts candidacy. Death Webster died on October 24, 1852, just before the general election (which Winfield Scott would lose to  Franklin Pierce). He was buried in Winslow Cemetery  in  Marshfield, Massachusetts. Legacy Webster cast a long shadow in American politics. He was greatly admired, even by some of his detractors, for his knowledge and speaking skills, which made him one of the most influential political figures of his time. A statue of the American statesman stands in New Yorks Central Park. Sources Brands, H. W. Heirs of the Founders: the Epic Rivalry of Henry Clay, John Calhoun and Daniel Webster, the Second Generation of American Giants. Random House, 2018.Remini, Robert V. Daniel Webster: the Man and His Time. W.W. Norton Co., 2015.