Posts from philosophy

I have a Temple in my Insta.... every Friday the priest arrives in a Mercedes.... there is a chair of theology... and as for power to the people, that smells like socialism. The people deserve their rulers

The priest arrives in a Mercedes... AND WHAT? For your information—the priesthood is unpaid work; on weekdays, the priest works just like everyone else, as I've already said. If you want, ask own-samsa where he got the Mercedes from.

You misunderstood me. I don't believe that power should [again] go to the people. The experiment has already been conducted and it turned out to be complete garbage. I believe that the government needs to change. In my view, a monarchy is most relevant.

Alexey, no one called you an enemy; I agree with everything written in my last post, it's just that "re-poiks" like: "we are all going to die, nothing can be changed anymore, life is complete shit, etc." irritate me

When did we ever give power to the people?????? Just don't tell me it was in the 90s. Everything there was bought and paid for. True own-people-rule was during the period of 1917-1939. Soviets were the most democratic body. That is when we got everything the people wanted — repressions against those who live better, informing, etc., etc., same old story. As the people are, so is their rule. And there is no one to be a monarch now. True sovereigns have died out. You might as well invite some Arabian sheikh.
And as for priests being able to earn money for Mercedes. Well, why don't they preach love for one's neighbor by their own example? They should give the money they earned to those in need instead of buying cars. Christ didn't take money for healing; he preached by example. That is why people believed him. But there is no faith in modern priests.

Christ didn't charge money for healing; he preached by example. That's why people believed him. But modern priests are not trustworthy.

Those were different times; everything has changed now. Besides, just because someone has a Mercedes doesn't mean they have a lot of money. In families like mine, the system is roughly like this: save for a long time, and then buy a good item. For example: I used to have an old Pentium 1, which didn't even have internet. We saved for three months, then realized that with that salary, we wouldn't save enough for at least another 10 years. So, we took out a loan from a bank, bought a good computer (an Athlon or something like that), and then paid off the loan over six months. We finished paying it off in August. That's normal, right? This is what they call "we don't have enough money to buy cheap things." The rich buy a new mobile phone every week (figuratively speaking); they don't have to worry about it. It's more likely that the priest was given the car as a gift. After all, not only middle-class and low-income people go to church. Some bring fresh tomatoes from their garden, and some give cars as gifts. Parishioners are a grateful people. There was a case with our Temple when some businessman donated... I don't remember how much, but it was a lot. In other respects, I agree.

Interesting, how does that work? Saving for 10 years, but paying it off in six months? And why would a priest need a Mercedes? Is it for status? Otherwise, how can they preach when 99% of our "believers" don't even know the basic tenets of their faith? What do they actually believe in? I'm not denying that there are some truly devout people (I even know some). But that doesn't mean we live in an Orthodox country. Most people only believe in money.

We didn't accumulate wealth for ten years; I already said we took out a loan. Why would a priest need a Mercedes? I just explained that it could have been a gift. I don't know who told you that, but in our church, there isn't a single person who doesn't know the creed (with the exception of very young children). We live in an Orthodox country; it's just that those who believe in money have more earthly power, which creates the impression you described.

I don't know anyone (well, actually, I know one person) who knows the Nicene Creed, the difference between Catholicism, and the difference between Arianism, Nestorianism, and Monophysitism. Orthodoxy is a religion practiced "out of habit." I was also baptized (though without my consent), but I'm not Orthodox. And I will never become Orthodox.

Back then, he wasn't there. They shot him without his knowledge.

Did he tell you that??? Hmm... And where was he?????
And even if that's true... What kind of heroic death or death for the faith is that??? It's politics! He was added to the Pantheon because he was shot by the BOLSHEVIKS! The Church is tied to the government, and the government still has nightmares about the return of socialism.
And they shot them to decapitate the opponents of the revolution. You can only kill a snake by cutting off its head. These were FORCED measures.
And what do you think about the subsequent economic boom??? Would that have happened under the monarchy??? All the cruelty of that time was the key to stability! Alexei, during socialism, were Siberians considered second-class citizens??? And were me and other Ossetians called BLACK-BOTTOMS???:mad:
It's just always easier to blame all the problems on Lenin and Stalin, and to agree with those who are sucking our blood!!!

Added after 7 minutes

You know, I'm only willing to go out into the street when I have at least some chance of winning. I'm not a fan of a glorious death. If I can be of use to my people in the future, then I will endure.

That's why, because everyone thinks like that, no one goes to the government!!! But where there is one, there will be another... A Leader will come and lead the brotherly peoples to unity, victory over enemies, and prosperity!!!

SKIF Personally, I don't care about Lenin or Stalin, not one bit. And where have you seen Ossetians or Siberians being called "subhumans" or "black..."? No offense, but it seems like you made up these nicknames for yourselves, borrowing them from the Americans (black... - black people, subhumans - Iraqis). As for "juices," I personally don't know anything about it; maybe it's true, but don't generalize and say "you." Who is "you"? Muscovites? Petersburgers? You accuse "us" of looking for someone to blame everything on, but what about yourselves? And the "opponents of the revolution" could have been quietly deported to other "opponents of the revolution." And they did die, in part, for their faith, because the revolution is an enemy of religion. You can't justify it with "necessary measures." AlexeyPank Alexey, judging by your words, you have never been Orthodox (this is not a reproach), even though you wear a cross. But you know very little about Orthodoxy, very little, almost nothing. I am Orthodox from birth, and I still know little (for now). So don't rush to conclusions. Orthodoxy is not a religion "out of habit," and it never has been, and it never will be. Religion (any religion) cannot be "out of habit"; otherwise, it is not religion. Not everyone knows the Nicene Creed, but that doesn't stop them from being Christian-Orthodox. The main thing is not knowing the prayer. I would explain what is most important, but I'm afraid you won't understand. Not because you are incapable of understanding it – quite the opposite! It's just that I might not be able to explain it properly (I might have one thing in mind, but it will look like something else). To Everyone In general, let's not talk about politics anymore, or we'll end up arguing. Do you know this joke: - Why do you always stay silent when you go to the barber? - What do you want, that I discuss politics with a person who is waving a knife around my neck?

"....Considering that, as Magnus rightly pointed out, Nicholas was not at the palace that Sunday, he was completely unaware of what was happening! The communists imposed the "bloody" title on him to appear as heroes in the face of the people, whom they themselves were shooting at!..."
But this is a misleading statement, sir. At that time, modern means of communication allowed information to be conveyed via telephone and telegraph. Don't be fooled by the fact that Nicholas was not in the city at that moment. No one, absolutely NO ONE, would have dared to open fire on the columns without his DIRECT APPROVAL. And the title "bloody" appeared immediately after the Khodynka events, when hundreds of people died, and it was the common people, not the Bolsheviks, who gave him that nickname, and long

And also, Alexey, don't speculate about Christianity without knowing anything about it.

And even if that's the case... what kind of martyrdom or death for the faith is this??? It's politics! He was added to the Pantheon because he was shot by the BOLSHEVIKS! The Church is connected to the government, and the government still has nightmares about the return of socialism.
They shot them to decapitate the opponents of the revolution.

So it was a martyrdom; the entire dynasty was wiped out. The Church was accused of being greedy. Lenin decided to take all the money from both the nobility and the artisans.

Alexey, were Siberians considered second-class citizens during the time of socialism???

What makes you think they were considered second-class citizens?:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

And me and other Ossetians were called BLACK-ASSED???:mad:

This is because there was the USSR, the Russian people, who fought with the Pechenegs, the Ottoman Empire, and the Muslims throughout history. These peoples have always had animosity. Therefore, in the southern states, they staged a massacre and drove out all the Russians after the collapse of the USSR. In general, I support Novizard and his idea of ending the discussion. I apologize if I said something wrong.

Modern politics has absolutely no impact on our happiness, I ASSURE you!

As Zadornov rightly pointed out, modern politics has no impact on our lives; it simply doesn't care about us. Everything that happens to us is something we do ourselves. I would approve of the quoted post if Misha were truly one of our users.

I actually know a lot about Christianity. As a historian and ethnologist, studying religion is very important to me. I know the Nicene Creed, I know its difference from Catholicism, I know the reasons for the emergence of "heresies" and their essence. As a person who does not belong to the Christian religion, I can judge it impartially. I do not deny the leading role of Orthodoxy for Russia in the 13th-17th centuries. It united the country at that time. But then came the Schism, persecution of the Old Believers (they are still at odds with the official church), the subjugation of the church to the state (under Peter), and the transformation of Orthodoxy into an instrument of autocracy (Count Uvarov). Unlike some participants in the discussion, I don't like to turn a blind eye to historical facts. It is easy to create a myth for yourself, not knowing the reality, and then dismiss facts that do not fit into this myth. What kind of faith can we talk about now, when "sincerity" depends on the size of the cross? When bandits go to church to get absolution for new sins? When the official church believes that the basics of Orthodoxy should be introduced in schools, regardless of the multi-confessional nature of the country? This is how interethnic discord is fueled. Muslims, at least, behave honestly towards those around them, do not hide their intentions, and do not impose their faith by fire and sword. Now it has become fashionable to wear a cross, go to church, and even the most ardent atheists are now more Orthodox than the Patriarch (who himself is of Baltic German origin).
Nicholas the Bloody left the Winter Palace the day before the demonstration because he was warned about it, and he wanted to remain untainted. Do you think the shooting happened without his knowledge? Why, upon his return, did he not punish the guilty, but instead took up suppressing the revolution, which, by the way, turned out to be a surprise for the Bolsheviks themselves? History must be known, not invented.

You're talking about the HISTORY of Orthodoxy, I'm talking about its ESSENCE. You don't know the ESSENCE of Orthodoxy, so don't draw conclusions about something you don't understand.

Muslims, at least, behave honestly towards those around them, do not hide their intentions, and do not impose their faith with fire and sword.

You're right, they don't force their religion on others; they just kill "infidels."

(who himself was of Baltic German origin).

I don't understand, does that prevent him from being Orthodox?

Do bandits go to church to get absolution for new sins?

As I said, you don't know the ESSENCE of Orthodoxy; you only know its history. If a person repents insincerely, thinking, "Now all my sins will be forgiven, and I can go back to sinning," then his sins will not be forgiven. And if, after that, he dares to take communion, it will be to his condemnation, not to his purification. Such a person will suffer greatly in purgatory. However, there are also positive cases. Somewhere in the Moscow region, there lived a thief. And he was Orthodox. Moreover, he stole from the pension fund! Horrible, right? However, he didn't do it for no reason. Having learned that the pension fund, to which he and other people contribute money for the benefit of the poor, keeps most of it for itself and does not use it for charity, he began to steal this money from the fund and personally went to orphanages, nursing homes, and hospitals and gave the money to them. He was caught and put in prison more than once, and they asked him why he was stealing money from a charitable fund, but he didn't make excuses. Moreover, he came to church and repented that he was forced to achieve justice in this way.

P.S. I have already asked twice to change the subject. Everyone has their own views on politics, and arguing about whose view is more correct is pointless. The same is true for religion.

And who knows the essence of Orthodoxy? This essence has always been different. The fact that both Alexander Nevsky, a great prince, and the insignificant Nicholas the Bloody are considered saints already says a lot. Besides, which of the Orthodox religions is more correct: Greek, Russian Orthodox Church, Armenian, or the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad? And their essence is also different. And without knowing the historical context, it is also impossible to understand the essence. Muslims (and not those who simply consider themselves to be Muslims) do not beat anyone. Look at the Supreme Mufti of Russia - an intelligent, educated, and tolerant person. Look at Muslims in other countries (not radicals, but Muslims).