I Reject, I Affirm. ''Raising the Black Flag'' in an Age of Devilry. - Page 47 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

An atheist-free area for those of religious belief to discuss religious topics.

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be discussed here or in The Agora. However, this forum is intended specifically as an area for those with religious belief to discuss religion without threads being derailed by atheist arguments. Please respect that. Political topics regarding religion belong in the Religion forum in the Political Issues section.
#15193824
Potemkin wrote:"What is truth?" - Pontius Pilate

"One word of truth outweights the whole world." - traditional Russian proverb

The eternal struggle continues....


@Potemkin , well, perhaps not 'eternal' as such, but indeed the struggle continues.

That folk wisdom survives because it is a code, by which people cannot be fooled, and can survive.
#15194084
I've been too hard I think on Libertarian Socialists and Anarcho-Communists, the ''Anarchists'' I usually rail against are more of the whole Max Stirner/Ayn Rand continuum though. And I suppose none of it is possible outside of romantic daydreaming, if it isn't a ground-up popular phenomenon.
#15194667
Berdyaev once wrote about the Bourgeoisie that;

What are the spiritual roots of the bourgeoisie? It's an excessive belief in this
visible world and unbelief in another, invisible world. The bourgeois is struck by
this visible world of things, shocked by it and seduced by it. He does not take
another reality seriously; he rejects all spiritual things and sees all to be like
himself. The bourgeois always says to himself: we know you, you are all like me
but do not want to admit it; you are deceiving yourself. All of you live by the
blessings of this world and all accept nothing but external reality. The bourgeois
puts himself above others because he recognizes this and admits it. The bourgeois
is not a symbolist since the symbolic world outlook is alien to him (The Spiritual
Bourgeoisie,


But then Berdaeyev goes further in a critique of Socialism, embedded within his critique of the Bourgeoisie spirit (lessness);

The bourgeois realm is a realm of the quantitative. To it stands opposed the realm
of the qualitative. The bourgeois spirit builds everything on the basis of welfare,
felicity and satisfaction. The spirit as its polar opposite tends to build on the basis
of values, it has to gravitate towards the great spiritual far off. The bourgeois spirit
therefore does not love and indeed is afraid of sacrifice, whereas the anti-
bourgeois spirit at its basis is sacrificial, even when it asserts power. The
bourgeois were not created by socialism, it was created by the old, decrepit world.
But socialism accepts the legacy of the bourgeoisie, it desires to increase and
develop it and carry this spirit on to an universal triumph.


Perhaps as i've mentioned before, there is a serious Atheistical and Materialist affectation among many Socialists, which I cannot deny. But I'll say that that has more to do with the nature of Modernity in general, than Socialism in particular. Berdaeyev in any case (when considering these other quoted notions on Socialism and the Bourgeoisie) is a profound thinker, his ideas on Freedom and Consciousness and the Objectivity of the World, on Irrationality and Creativity, are ideas that deserve a better reading in this day and age.

Man is made in the Image of God, and has therefore a radical Liberty and Freedom far more real than the artificial naturalist concepts of the Libertarians who base ''Freedom'' on the vague, utilitarian, and elusive idea of individual ''Happiness'', and the pursuit thereof.

...I like Berdaeyev's idea on the distinction between ''Work'' and ''Labour''. Work is something that must be done in one's perception, out of consideration for Lev Shestov's ''Necessity'', one might say. Labour is done instead out of creativity and freedom, the application of Truth to the Chaos of Objective-seeming reality.
#15194669
Berdyaev was correct about the vulgar materialism of the bourgeoisie. But they actually do worse than merely deny the existence of the spiritual - they take over the legacy of past spirituality, and corrupt it with their own materialism, thus subverting and denying genuine spiritual experience to others. This has been the fate of the various Christian denominations in the USA, for example, with the 'Prosperity Gospel' being merely the most honest example of this materialist corruption of Christianity. The bourgeoisie embody Modernity in its most egregious form.

Matthew 6:19-20
#15194672
Potemkin wrote:Berdyaev was correct about the vulgar materialism of the bourgeoisie. But they actually do worse than merely deny the existence of the spiritual - they take over the legacy of past spirituality, and corrupt it with their own materialism, thus subverting and denying genuine spiritual experience to others. This has been the fate of the various Christian denominations in the USA, for example, with the 'Prosperity Gospel' being merely the most honest example of this materialist corruption of Christianity. The bourgeoisie embody Modernity in its most egregious form.

Matthew 6:19-20


@Potemkin ,

Indeed, I quite agree my friend. But the answer is not quite Berdaeyev's somewhat Gnostic and Aristocratic ''Freedom'' either, in order to generate ''genuine spiritual experience'', is it? His friend Shestov would have said that anyone is capable of knowing the Truth and are not sequestered from the Truth even if many are rendered ''mindless drones'' by Modernity, as Berdaeyev would characterize them. This suggests something even more radical is possible. Dostyoevsky's ''Underground Man'' insists that man can actually deny 2+2=4, and Shestov says God can too...

Does this mean a vulgar interpretation of this Freedom allows for people to not take anti-Covid 19 vaccines, for example, in good conscience, to give an example from our real world objective reality? Absolutely not in my opinion, precisely because modern man's individualistic decisions rest on the notion of natural rational self interest, are a calculation of strict loss-or-gain (no matter how defective individual calculations might be in this and other cases). This corruption goes back to ''Objective Reality'' and ''Necessity'' , not a denial of it. These Anti-vaxxers are not so much Science deniers, as they are the hypertrophic fruit of Modernity's Scientism. One might say; ''Every man a Scientist/Expert''...

What this might lead to, after the grotesque contradictions involved and mentioned in this discussion, is an end to the Bourgeoisie as we have known them. And that will lead to a revival of spirituality and true freedom.
#15194673
annatar1914 wrote:@Potemkin ,

Indeed, I quite agree my friend. But the answer is not quite Berdaeyev's somewhat Gnostic and Aristocratic ''Freedom'' either, in order to generate ''genuine spiritual experience'', is it? His friend Shestov would have said that anyone is capable of knowing the Truth and are not sequestered from the Truth even if many are rendered ''mindless drones'' by Modernity, as Berdaeyev would characterize them. This suggests something even more radical is possible. Dostyoevsky's ''Underground Man'' insists that man can actually deny 2+2=4, and Shestov says God can too...

It is important not to go to the opposite extreme and reject materialism as being altogether evil and corrupt. This would, of coursem be Manicheanism or Gnosticism - God created the material world, and saw that it was good. This, I think, is why Augustine was very careful in his commentary on Matthew 6:19-20 not to condemn the material world as such, referring to it as "silver" rather than "gold". Augustine had been a Manichean in his youth, before converting to Christianity, and was acutely aware of the dangers of that particular heresy.

Does this mean a vulgar interpretation of this Freedom allows for people to not take anti-Covid 19 vaccines, for example, in good conscience, to give an example from our real world objective reality? Absolutely not in my opinion, precisely because modern man's individualistic decisions rest on the notion of natural rational self interest, are a calculation of strict loss-or-gain (no matter how defective individual calculations might be in this and other cases). This corruption goes back to ''Objective Reality'' and ''Necessity'' , not a denial of it. These Anti-vaxxers are not so much Science deniers, as they are the hypertrophic fruit of Modernity's Scientism. One might say; ''Every man a Scientist/Expert''...

Indeed. They are caught up in the coils of Modernity, and can never even understand, let alone achieve, true freedom of the spirit.

What this might lead to, after the grotesque contradictions involved and mentioned in this discussion, is an end to the Bourgeoisie as we have known them. And that will lead to a revival of spirituality and true freedom.

The end of the bourgeoisie is a necessary prerequisite to that revival of spirituality and freedom, but it must necessarily be an economic - a material - end rather than just a cultural end. In other words, there must be a political and social Revolution.
#15194674
I'll pitch the causality notion to both ... in world of causality we can escape the same only with help from above thus dont judge easily eg. there could be Christian Socialists but also Capitalists i.e. particular circumstances creates particular reality even when we lean towards strong positive idealism spiritual social or cultural, simply too much free will plus too much ego and what we get is pure mess or extra stiff stew tho that exist so every Soul will have chance for Salvation yet mids the causality in this world if we reject to follow the Spiritual Path and Growth and acquire abundance of Christian Virtues - even we didnt focused on materialism and just boredom consumes us - we are stuck to reflections of the past wrong doings of our ancestors as individually so as collectively eg, the commie tradition of vodka overdrinking as it was morning tea, what about mortal sins that causaly follow us as Saints witness till few generations onwards ...

    yet observed generally from social aspect "berdaeyev has point" but knowing generalization can be mother of many fucks I'll say his stance is intellectual burgueousness too ... tho I've never had have contemplate on the role so this assertion goes for the quote only, actually the russian classics for me earlier in my life were for example literature aristocracy how they were trying to copy the prevalent european bourgeoisie, so the mirror should be applied here if we compare Dostoevski to any simple Saint earlier usually monastery shepherd as Christian Theologian or Hymnographer ...

I'll be honest I despise the idea to mirror many coz the trend of few, yes nowadays many are trapped in materialism through consumerism or mammonism, yet they are far from elitism altho chocking in possessivism and individualism, and since the main premise I've hooked to @annatar1914 is your bashing of libertarianism I'll conclude You are wrong here, simply Free Will can save except enslave one, depending of the broader cultural circumstances, seen from political aspect in world where elitism leans towards exploitation libertarianism means decentralization, so pardon my logic but here we are not on same page :)
#15194817
@Potemkin ;

It is important not to go to the opposite extreme and reject materialism as being altogether evil and corrupt. This would, of coursem be Manicheanism or Gnosticism - God created the material world, and saw that it was good. This, I think, is why Augustine was very careful in his commentary on Matthew 6:19-20 not to condemn the material world as such, referring to it as "silver" rather than "gold". Augustine had been a Manichean in his youth, before converting to Christianity, and was acutely aware of the dangers of that particular heresy.


I agree, and this is why Lev Shestov for one had such spectacular arguments with his friend Berdaeyev, because he saw this thought as a form of Manicheanism, or bordering closely to it.


Indeed. They are caught up in the coils of Modernity, and can never even understand, let alone achieve, true freedom of the spirit.


Berdaeyev is truthful enough on the Bourgeoisie about that. God knows that as long as they base their ''freedoms'' on a natural rights philosophy they will never find Truth in their pursuit of Happiness. (and that's knowing that they weren't initially speaking of ''happiness'' in some hedonistic calculation, but rather of the alleged joys of achieving personal virtue, the pride of the Stoic, of Epictetus...)

The end of the bourgeoisie is a necessary prerequisite to that revival of spirituality and freedom, but it must necessarily be an economic - a material - end rather than just a cultural end. In other words, there must be a political and social Revolution.


I agree, root and branch. But I think that the Agent of that final political and social revolution is One overlooked in this Modern and most darkest of Ages;

''They say, “With our tongues we will prevail. We own our lips—who can be our master?” “For the cause of the oppressed and for the groaning of the needy, I will now arise,” says the LORD. “I will bring safety to him who yearns.”
#15194819
@Odiseizam , you said;

''....so the mirror should be applied here if we compare Dostoevski to any simple Saint earlier usually monastery shepherd as Christian Theologian or Hymnographer ...''


Dostyoevsky was a man of his time, and also he was a man who took the forms of ''Holy Synod'' era Orthodoxy he received quite seriously, after his own personal crisis. What I do also know is that those superficial readers who think him a ''fan'' of the spirituality exemplified by ''Aloysha Karamazov'' and ''Father Zossima'' in his ''Brothers Karamazov'' novel, are quite mistaken.. Just as the censor he knew reading his work wished to think also.
#15194843
yes he had awakening i.e. metanoia, but he was brought up mids romanticism thus his works are heavily influenced by the european trends, as someone says he was ultimate heir of the european and russian romanticism [1] said this defacto he was diving in the enlightenment trends altho with antielitist mood interwoven with authentic russian mindset ...

anyway ... to be clear my objection in my previous post was more towards your generalizing logic about libertarianism even more when maybe unintentionally You are equaling it to liberalism, yes it could be seen as fruit from same enlightenment stem and from this respect I despise it too, yet libertarianism can be seen as political philosophy exempt from historicism and the false egalite of the enlightenment era tho as term resonates liberty, but one thing is history another philosophy and per'se is wrong to put everything in same mold, so I disagree labeling and comparing libertarianism even with anarchism even less with liberalism ... maybe coz I see myself on the political compass as social'libertarianist tho more leaning to center than left, simply in World that exists coz Salvation who am I to seek for heaven on earth and question Our Lords Providence i.e. its not accidental there are powers thrones etc. levels of hierarchy not just in the spiritual but also this world too, in this context bourgeoisie also has role at least so people would see what is wrong emphasis of salvation even tho even rich decadent people can evolve if they repent, yeah more time consuming to swim out from all the piles of temptations tho as Our Lord advice us with camel parabola ...

    what is interesting tho intellectual bourgeoisie is also deadly thing, as we are Warned that we will be judged in the end for every word we say, from this respect also generalization thing is problem to some extent too, but predominantly hate speech towards the different or usually envy and curses towards political counterparts , yeah I am really sick when will heard how common people on talk shows eforums or soc.networks are swearing and cursing without any care everything, everything? everything! even the weather ...

... its the decadence of the ego what with live now in more than wealth or lusts, the last ladder to freedom when even we balance hedonism and materialism in ourself we are struggling to calm our pride and not to judge even less to help with prayers those that deserve judgment, final frontier for all of us as temptation and last stronghold of the emptiness from the spirit of this world, tho in the end its not issue whether we are loosing our guard but whether we gave up the struggle within, the last true enemy our internal battle with our own demons-anathema-to-them, yep in right circumstances even Patriarchs have had raised a blade instead The Sword Of The Lords Word ...
#15194915
@Odiseizam , I want to thank you for your reply, and I hope to address your points you raise in a manner which is becoming to a fellow brother in Christ Jesus-may He enlighten! You said regarding Fyodor Dostyoevsky that;

yes he had awakening i.e. metanoia, but he was brought up mids romanticism thus his works are heavily influenced by the european trends, as someone says he was ultimate heir of the european and russian romanticism [1] said this defacto he was diving in the enlightenment trends altho with antielitist mood interwoven with authentic russian mindset ...


One might say then that he didn't go as far as he would have liked perhaps, where his ''diary of a writer'' and ''notes from the underground'' are more enlightening about his more personal beliefs than some of his more popular works.

anyway ... to be clear my objection in my previous post was more towards your generalizing logic about libertarianism even more when maybe unintentionally You are equaling it to liberalism, yes it could be seen as fruit from same enlightenment stem and from this respect I despise it too, yet libertarianism can be seen as political philosophy exempt from historicism and the false egalite of the enlightenment era tho as term resonates liberty,


Well, I do not actually conflate ''Liberalism'' with ''Libertarianism'', but what I suggest is that American ''Anarchism'' or ''Libertarianism'' is not exactly the same as the European political ideologies which are the true heirs of meaningful liberty loving political traditions.



but one thing is history another philosophy and per'se is wrong to put everything in same mold, so I disagree labeling and comparing libertarianism even with anarchism even less with liberalism ... maybe coz I see myself on the political compass as social'libertarianist tho more leaning to center than left, simply in World that exists coz Salvation who am I to seek for heaven on earth and question Our Lords Providence i.e. its not accidental there are powers thrones etc. levels of hierarchy not just in the spiritual but also this world too, in this context bourgeoisie also has role at least so people would see what is wrong emphasis of salvation even tho even rich decadent people can evolve if they repent, yeah more time consuming to swim out from all the piles of temptations tho as Our Lord advice us with camel parabola ...


I try to make considerate generalizations as a kind of shorthand which conveys facts while understanding that there are always exceptions and outliers.

    what is interesting tho intellectual bourgeoisie is also deadly thing, as we are Warned that we will be judged in the end for every word we say, from this respect also generalization thing is problem to some extent too, but predominantly hate speech towards the different or usually envy and curses towards political counterparts , yeah I am really sick when will heard how common people on talk shows eforums or soc.networks are swearing and cursing without any care everything, everything? everything! even the weather ...


External signs of an inner reality.


... its the decadence of the ego what with live now in more than wealth or lusts, the last ladder to freedom when even we balance hedonism and materialism in ourself we are struggling to calm our pride and not to judge even less to help with prayers those that deserve judgment, final frontier for all of us as temptation and last stronghold of the emptiness from the spirit of this world, tho in the end its not issue whether we are loosing our guard but whether we gave up the struggle within, the last true enemy our internal battle with our own demons-anathema-to-them, yep in right circumstances even Patriarchs have had raised a blade instead The Sword Of The Lords Word ...


I have not expressed a ''political'' aspect of Orthodox Christianity, because while we pray still for ''Right-believing Kings and Queens'', the possibility of their non-existence from now until the Second Coming is a possibility. Does this force upon me in any case a kind of de-facto ''Libertarianism'', since I cannot influence the wider non-Orthodox society? I have said as much before.
#15194927
I've made fuzz from nothing but think one glitch is enough so the story would evolve in more poetic waters, even tho as digression fractally stretched from reality through idealism till soteriology ... still think for chit chat is tied like kite in the clouds for those that follow this flow of electrophysiological energy ...

    somehow mids all political trending now I see libertarianism as hook for all people that lived long on "democracy" cliche which was by rule always misused by some elites clans or groups, and thats why I am trying to defend libertarianism as only centrist stronghold where emphasis is utmost on the Free Will on top by decentralization means, tho even that has frame eg. in contrast to anarchism where individualism is more pronounced in libertarianism strive for kind of arranged collective ...

when seen from historic logic the russian kremlins and Optinas are last rue libertarian settlements altho clanish one, yet cant say for certainty how big autonomy they had, time when in west or east rude feudalism existed, tho way more loosen in Ottoman Empire, still cant claim how long this trend was regular in Russia coz I've never explore it through studies but articles, hm I need to find some book where social evolution of the medieval russian ruling through the centuries is addressed neatly ... hoe You can help ...

    its interesting to note elites always existed in one or another form, but they've not always exploited the masses coz selfish possessive needs, from Chrstian aspect in eastern europe Tsars Vasilevs or Knyazes not rarely were employing archaic communism coz Christocentric Needs i.e. to defend Christianity, the same could be said for western europe too but there coz vatican became heir as ruler so as authority simply corruption (aside all the rest reflections) has eaten the free peasant and reached till serfdom, altho must note that on east were not always ideal circumstances ... seen from perspective of modern politics think exactly that momentum played big role for russians to embrace communism, even tho the same was foreign "good" even tho the same was atheistic, maybe somehow subconsciously the hope was forwarded towards Communia as Christian Ideal so the common people didnt gave extra resistance on the commie surge, altho from soteriological aspect defacto was punishment for the russian aristocracy which started heavily to lean towards european lavishness as Saint Jovan Kronshtadski prophesized ... needless to mention but will add the way how lenin disappeared from the scene all points to that too, in the end how russian empire consolidated and prepared itself for the later nazi surge also points to Providence From Above ...

finally will point even digressions have own aetheral mark what about the collective subconsciousness or traditions, thus mids western freemasonic rule in which we live nowadays only political freedom that can be achieve is through libertarianism as means of greater decentralization from the concealed neopagan hive, while on east if Christianity and Islam reviving as they are I am seeing Tsardom and Caliphate logical path, the question how big is the atheistic sentiment and neoliberal mood among young russians so they would reject such outcome, hope they are not enmasse enslaved by the spirit of this world, anyway even used as geopolitical argument for Russia to survive any future western temptation only greater consolidation of the power is way to go, and if that is through Christocentric manner that would be ideal, till some extent I can argue that also now this is the case, but is one thing when the Tsar is bound by Consecration by The Church completely different when derive own sovereignty from the masses, I'll stop here so I would not expand this argument till eschatology and causality, and will say we are living on tin ice in this time of history as east and west where there is no one happy solution for all like some euroatlantic determinists dream while chasing their utopian lusts for technocratic new world order, hm just imagine they wanted to balance and live the world to enhance itself as it wants ...
#15195016
@Odiseizam , I certainly understand your concerns, so let's discuss further;


somehow mids all political trending now I see libertarianism as hook for all people that lived long on "democracy" cliche which was by rule always misused by some elites clans or groups, and thats why I am trying to defend libertarianism as only centrist stronghold where emphasis is utmost on the Free Will on top by decentralization means, tho even that has frame eg. in contrast to anarchism where individualism is more pronounced in libertarianism strive for kind of arranged collective ...


Yes, this is true, which is kind of my point; that you don't see any trace of collective feeling or striving with American anarchism/libertarianism in contrast to european and other non-American libertarians and Anarchists.

when seen from historic logic the russian kremlins and Optinas are last rue libertarian settlements altho clanish one, yet cant say for certainty how big autonomy they had, time when in west or east rude feudalism existed, tho way more loosen in Ottoman Empire, still cant claim how long this trend was regular in Russia coz I've never explore it through studies but articles, hm I need to find some book where social evolution of the medieval russian ruling through the centuries is addressed neatly ... hoe You can help ...


In Russia's history one can point to the Cossacks before 1917 and the Old Believers (well, a lot of Cossacks were Old Believers also before 1917) with having autonomous self-governing communities that were pretty ''Libertarian'' in practice, I'll admit.

its interesting to note elites always existed in one or another form, but they've not always exploited the masses coz selfish possessive needs, from Chrstian aspect in eastern europe Tsars Vasilevs or Knyazes not rarely were employing archaic communism coz Christocentric Needs i.e. to defend Christianity, the same could be said for western europe too but there coz vatican became heir as ruler so as authority simply corruption (aside all the rest reflections) has eaten the free peasant and reached till serfdom, altho must note that on east were not always ideal circumstances ...


I look at Tsar Ivan ''Grozny'' as the last great and good ruler of Russia, terribly maligned just as Vlad Tepes was in the Balkans but beloved by the common people as the heroes they were. After Tsar Ivan, with the Romanovs.... Came downfall.

seen from perspective of modern politics think exactly that momentum played big role for russians to embrace communism, even tho the same was foreign "good" even tho the same was atheistic, maybe somehow subconsciously the hope was forwarded towards Communia as Christian Ideal so the common people didnt gave extra resistance on the commie surge, altho from soteriological aspect defacto was punishment for the russian aristocracy which started heavily to lean towards european lavishness as Saint Jovan Kronshtadski prophesized ... needless to mention but will add the way how lenin disappeared from the scene all points to that too, in the end how russian empire consolidated and prepared itself for the later nazi surge also points to Providence From Above ...


That's pretty much the way I see it, and possibly, just possibly, because of the ''Raskol'', which left the ''Old Believers'' as the guardians and reminder of the Old Russia, of Holy Rus.

finally will point even digressions have own aetheral mark what about the collective subconsciousness or traditions, thus mids western freemasonic rule in which we live nowadays only political freedom that can be achieve is through libertarianism as means of greater decentralization from the concealed neopagan hive, while on east if Christianity and Islam reviving as they are I am seeing Tsardom and Caliphate logical path, the question how big is the atheistic sentiment and neoliberal mood among young russians so they would reject such outcome, hope they are not enmasse enslaved by the spirit of this world, anyway even used as geopolitical argument for Russia to survive any future western temptation only greater consolidation of the power is way to go, and if that is through Christocentric manner that would be ideal, till some extent I can argue that also now this is the case, but is one thing when the Tsar is bound by Consecration by The Church completely different when derive own sovereignty from the masses, I'll stop here so I would not expand this argument till eschatology and causality, and will say we are living on tin ice in this time of history as east and west where there is no one happy solution for all like some euroatlantic determinists dream while chasing their utopian lusts for technocratic new world order, hm just imagine they wanted to balance and live the world to enhance itself as it wants ...


No, all these are valid points to make. Certainly in my opinion a new Tsar cannot but arise from both the popular will, but precisely because of a collective enlightenment and consciousness of their Christ-bearing mission, which would manifest as a people's Tsar like Tsar Ivan Grozny, Orthodox and Sovereign and at the same time, a bearer of the liberty loving and communalist impulses of the people.
#15195210
... yes Ivan could be seen as last true russian Tsar tho think his moe to get in royal intermarriage ties with byzant played big role in that event and eventually lead to various terrible things, the most problematic ending the Ruricks Leneage, as consequence could be seen after Groznys reign instantly serfdom was standardized in time of boris godunov [1][1] who actually first leaned towards the western trends [2][2][2] tho even Ivan wanted broader trade too [3] but not opening like godunov did, eventually later all elites followed the godunov trap, it would be interesting to find out how godunov was influenced by who for such momentum towards westernization, were jesuits or teutons more influential logically the later one but how think it would stay historical mystery if its not already witnessed, but as I know he removed all his opposition thus probably all peculiar things about his reign were removed too!?

regarding new Russian Tsardom normally that easily can be achieved by broad referendum now or later, the problematic question is would The Church Bless and embrace such event, eg. what about if the Tsar later cross to atheism or maybe Islam, which would be especially problematic for reverting mids eventual future enmasse surge of muslim migrants coz ww3 or alone world economy meltdown ...
#15195412
again sorry for my interruption about DostoevSki and his mental stamina, for my assertion tho there is nice thread where we can eventually continue deconstructing my point ...

    https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=179791


now here think would be interesting to ask for more clarification of the the next line from the first post in this one ...

annatar1914 wrote: and that the Earth is the center of the Universe, which rotates around it.


this is biblical allegory [1] and was never ecclesiological issue in the Early Church especially not on east, nor was flat earth too [2] yet there is wide popular misconception that this was case, hm probably due to more aristotelian mood among some scholars on east this was taken as probable geocentrism, but as I am aware was never theological orthodox issue how big or small allegory is in question ...
#15195534
@Odiseizam ;


again sorry for my interruption about DostoevSki and his mental stamina, for my assertion tho there is nice thread where we can eventually continue deconstructing my point ...

    https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=179791


It's not an interruption at all really, but I'll be happy to comment on the thread you've created.

now here think would be interesting to ask for more clarification of the the next line from the first post in this one ...



this is biblical allegory [1] and was never ecclesiological issue in the Early Church especially not on east, nor was flat earth too [2] yet there is wide popular misconception that this was case, hm probably due to more aristotelian mood among some scholars on east this was taken as probable geocentrism, but as I am aware was never theological orthodox issue how big or small allegory is in question ...


Traditionally, it is in Islam that a concept of a Flat Earth occurs. In traditional Christianity, the consensus is that the world is indeed round.
#15195676
@Odiseizam , @Potemkin , @Political Interest , and others;

Today is the feast of the Holy Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which condemned finally the Iconoclasm, and sealed up the Apostolic teaching, defending in truth the very Incarnation of the Son of God.

Apocalypse 10:1-4

“And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices. And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.



In light of this, I have been noticing in my reading online, a distressing increase of comments that are both Luciferian/Gnostic and Neo-Nazi/Fascist, echoing the teachings of Julius Evola, of Otto Rahn, of Miguel Serrano and Karl Wiligut, Lanz von Liebenfels and von List, etc...

In which the Jewish God is real but evil, the Demiurge of this Cosmos, fighting the Aryan ''gods'' and other teachings of the secret doctrines, such as racism and Nordic/Germanic-Celtic Supremacy, a cosmic anti-semitism and rejection of others as being of a different and inferior set of sub-species...

Is this what the Faustian Civilization is coming to? Right now, you'd think that it would be the last path followed. But I don't think so. I think people are being inoculated against certain reactions by hysterical and repeated Liberal over-reaction, Liberalism having lost the plot of it all of course.

But the Seven Councils, and these Fascist Scum... They're right, I worship a very real and very material in-the-flesh Jew, The King of the Jews, in fact. They cannot so much as look upon Him, I understand, He is Hitler's real ''Jewish International Poisoner of all Peoples'', He ''poisons'' them with His Peace.... And yes, Christianity ''weakened'' them and destroyed their Pagan teachings for an Age of the world, well and good.
#15195679
regarding this thread I can say Byzant started to decline when the paleloque dinasty started to embrace western trends namely western heraldry i.e. when substituted The Cross with the twoheaded eagle [1][1] unfortunately the same curse followed Russia when Ivan coz his spouse took the same emblem [2] after what followed the surge of westernization with all its neopagan vices in Russia, surely some will say nonsenses but I'll remind all even small tagging on personal arm has own aethereal reflex what about imperial one i.e. the bearers of Orthodoxy to have at least western neopagan heraldry stamp while at worst an dualistic symbol from central asia! probably later the Church on east willing to point to belongingness to byzant dwelt in some tradition of using the same symbol officially especially mids the ottoman realm, but I am in opinion that until Russia and the rest slavic countries dont dispose the same curse Orthodoxy will never see unification as in time of Byzant! I'll remind again dont underestimate the power of tagging even the same was superficial through sculptural simulacrums i.e. if it wasnt important issue wouldnt reach mids western neopaganism to such heraldry tradition on west! simply we live in space that breaths in and from the spiritual world where not always and everywhere dwelt goodness, even there are astrodynamicists if you like more onpoint arguments [3][3] yet the easiest way of recognizing the power of symbols is Christianity [4][4] and why we are blinded for this kind of knowledge hm as metaphysics if it was broadly understood then freemasons would have issue with their tags at least [5]
#15195683
Odiseizam wrote:regarding this thread I can say Byzant started to decline when the paleloque dinasty started to embrace western trends namely western heraldry i.e. when substituted The Cross with the twoheaded eagle [1][1] unfortunately the same curse followed Russia when Ivan coz his spouse took the same emblem [2] after what followed the surge of westernization with all its neopagan vices in Russia, surely some will say nonsenses but I'll remind all even small tagging on personal arm has own aethereal reflex what about imperial one i.e. the bearers of Orthodoxy to have at least western neopagan heraldry stamp while at worst an dualistic symbol from central asia! probably later the Church on east willing to point to belongingness to byzant dwelt in some tradition of using the same symbol officially especially mids the ottoman realm, but I am in opinion that until Russia and the rest slavic countries dont dispose the same curse Orthodoxy will never see unification as in time of Byzant! I'll remind again dont underestimate the power of tagging even the same was superficial through sculptural simulacrums i.e. if it wasnt important issue wouldnt reach mids western neopaganism to such heraldry tradition on west! simply we live in space that breaths in and from the spiritual world where not always and everywhere dwelt goodness, even there are astrodynamicists if you like more onpoint arguments [3][3] yet the easiest way of recognizing the power of symbols is Christianity [4][4] and why we are blinded for this kind of knowledge hm as metaphysics if it was broadly understood then freemasons would have issue with their tags at least [5]


@Odiseizam ;

Good points, indeed the Paleologi from the start-with Emperor Michael Paleologus, the murderer and intriguer who on taking Constantinople back immediately tried forcing a Unia upon the Orthodox!-were not good for the Empire or Orthodoxy.

And yes, the Symbolism is important, as long as it is understood as much as these Archetypal signifiers can be.
  • 1
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48

What I like about crypto is that it enables preda[…]

Did You Get Vaccinated?

Omicron will fuck the mudbloods harder than the pu[…]

Is Boris Johnson on the ropes?

Maybe, I could see China funding and installing a[…]

freemasonry and its goals

The last sentence sounds like assumption, exactly […]