I was recently baptized (Orthodox) and I'm writing this thread to talk about it. It seems like most of the discussion of Christianity here is polemical, so hopefully we can depart from that standard in this thread.
I didn't have to give a life confession. Whether or not you have to is a policy set by your bishop, but your baptism is considered fully Orthodox by all regardless. So we started with priest breathing on me, then the exorcism: this includes a lot of formulas the priest says for rebuking satan and his demons and commanding them to leave me. Once this is accomplished, then you are seen as having spiritual freedom, which is what you need to take your vows. It's concluded with you turning toward the West, the direction which represents the devil (we worship toward the East), and spitting on him, and renouncing satan and accepting Christ, all vows being repeated thrice, and being followed with bows toward the altar where you touch the ground. Then you affirm the articles of your faith by reciting the Nicene Creed, and then take vows again. You and your godparent ascend to the dais and there is a litany. Then the baptismal fount is sanctified in several very beautiful prayers. Then olive oil is poured into the fount, and the priest breathes on it, and more prayers are said, and the priest annoits you in several places with the olive oil. Then you climb into the fount, and are baptized by triple immersion, your head going completely under the water each time.
This is /his/ not /blog/
>>3262491
Then when I climbed out there was more annoiting, and I was given my baptismal cross, it being customary for all baptized Orthodox to wear a cross. Then I was clothed in my baptismal robe, a white vestament, which was handmade by someone in the parish for me--many of our articles are to be made and donation by people from the parish whenever possible, including the Communion bread and the priest's vestaments. After that, I recieved Christmation, called Confirmation among other Christians, which is the recieving of the Holy Spirit. That's something the Eastern Orthodox give tremendous emphasis to, for us the New Testament is as much about the Holy Spirit as it is about Christ, Christ himself even says it is important for him to leave his Apostles so that the Spirit can come. Only with Christmation do you actually recieve the Spirit in fulness, which was represented as dove descending when Christ was baptized. After that, I went back and changed, and was given my baptismal candle, which I lit for my first Communion. This candle is to be kept and used for your funeral. Communion is difficult to describe, in swallowing it I felt as if I were deep underwater and mingled with those near me, and I felt a sense of intense, dispassionate joy. Afterward I was given my baptismal gifts, which included a home censer, charcoal, incense, books, a prayer rope, and several holy icons (which the priest placed on the altar for consecration, I will take them home after forty days).
>>3262491
>o we started with priest breathing on me, then the exorcism: this includes a lot of formulas the priest says for rebuking satan and his demons and commanding them to leave me.
lol /x/tians
Were women even considered human during Roman times?
Not only they had no right to vote and no say on anything but they were not even given names, they were referred to as "First", "Second" and "Third", or some other scheme like that while men had their personal names.
>>3261803
men also had names like that, it was very common naming scheme.
Roman women actually had more rights than greek women, but the main structure of the roman society was based on the family, headed by the Pater Familius who theoretically had full power over everyone in his house.
You have to understand the idea that people should be equal under law was completely alien to Roman civilization.
>>3261803
Not really.
>>3261803
Are women actually human in the first place?
Can anyone expand on this idea?
>books to read
>shit to watch/listen to
>>3261291
In what possible sense are we created in the image of the Universe?
>>3261291
Are there any religions with a pantheistic god?
>>3261390
YES. thank-you, i was struggling to come up with the words. im fascinated by the idea of it.
>1453
>>3260428
>1453
>1169
>1783
Why were the British so useless in WW2 despite performing...kind of okay I guess...in WW1?
>>3258610
heh, that actually happened. my grandpa consummated with a british woman and he brought her back home to america once the war was over.
>>3258610
They had basically the weakest European military. After retreating they spent the rest of the war as an advanced airstrip for the USA.
>>3258620
same but I got a german one
Is it fair to judge history through modern political lenses?
Depends. Is it fair to judge another culture through an ethnocentric lens?
>>3257372
>ethnocentric lens
the hell is that?
>>3257375
It means
>Chinks were inferior to Europeans because muh Europe had guns when Chinks didn't
Also British tanks had such good armour that they used to run over German anti-tank guns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr4MdqXbk7c&t=0s
Is this man really francophobe or is this just a meme to get him more views? Asking an honest question there, I basically never watch his videos.
>>3257341
he's right though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ll90l2kWCbM
>>3257568
I'd say both to some degree
it's just ordinary international banter
ITT:
We post partitions that would have prevented WW2
>>3256736
Partition of Mr. Hitler's head with an axe, maybe.
more a post ww2 map but still
Germany is divided into Hannover, Pomerania, Rhineland, Saxony and Bavaria and some territories are transfered to Poland, Bohemia, Austria, Switzerland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Denmark. The new German states pay 0 tax to a central German state, 0 reparations, they get beneficial trade agreements from neighboring countries, they are constitutionally obliged to stick to demilitarization and political reforms and allow free movement of allied troops, a moderate social welfare system is set up and perhaps even a defense pact with the allies, all elected leaders travel to ww1 war memorials every year and kiss the gravestones of fallen French soldiers, all to deincentivize reunification and the surreptitious funding of a military. So basically maximum benefit to civilians, 0 benefit to militarists. If they militarize the French, Polish or British army moves in and occupies key transport conduits, crippling the country, for years if necessary.
Post maps of alternate history scenarios. Custom maps suggested. Flags allowed too.
>>3255724
And what the hell is up with "Das Ackerland", "Die Wüste" und "Die Großen Seen"?
Are you going to provide context or this just bullshit?
My own work.
>>3255972
Why 1830 specifically? Good map nonetheless
Every single actor in politics being a free agent must strictly follow in all cases the laws of morality, and, therefore, the laws of good politics are a subset of the laws of morality. Any political act, no matter why it is committed, if it is not committed in accordance with moral rules, should never have been.
For example, if you could save a whole nation by killing an innocent person, the whole nation should perish, as it would be immoral to kill an innocent live.
virgin politics
>>3255259
you could consider politics a game where the goal is to bring about a system to benefit your allies and harm your enemies, if that's the case then politics isn't a moral field
i don't know why you have a portrait of kant as your op as what you've written has virtually nothing to do with his political philosophy.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-social-political/
>Dionysius once had Philoxenus arrested and sent to the quarries for voicing a bad opinion about his poetry. The next day, he released Philoxenus because of his friends' requests, and brought the poet before him for another poetry reading. Dionysius read his own work and the audience applauded. When he asked Philoxenus how he liked it, the poet turned to the guards and said "take me back to the quarries."
B T F O
>>3251393
Bump
>>3251393
how can u arrest someone for not liking ur shitty poems
where all the greeks such fags?
>>3251561
Kings, despots and tyrants could generally speaking do mostly whatever as long as they didn't piss off any powerful people/cliques.
post erotic and pornographic art from any period of time, except 20th-21st century ofc
How does anyone take jewish history seriously, when it is so blatantly stolen from everywhere else in the middle east? Not even meming, it's really obvious even in the bronze age.
>>3268189
>in the bronze age
Jews are very much iron age people.
>>3268189
kot
While you're right about the general mythology of things in Genesis, like the garden of Eden or the flood myth, it's much more complicated than that.
The Myths of people like Abraham or other are probably rooted in older Hebrew myth, although it is interesting how Abraham is said to be a resident of Ur and not a Canaanite, so one may argue that Abraham may be a story the Babylonians had for the history of the Hebrews, much like how they had histories for other races.
As time goes on and the history of the Jewish peoples comes closer to the time of the OT's writing, history stops being mythological and starts being more historical.
If it helps, think of it in terms of the Greek canon, like so:
>Genesis=Hesiod's Cosmogony and the Homeric Hymns
>Exodus=Heroic tales of Europa or Kadmos, or Perseus
>Judges=The Iliad, a mythologized history
>Samuel/Early Kings=Herodotus
>Later Kings, Jehu and such=Thucydides
Why did Perfidious Albion join with france against Germany in 1914? Wouldn't it have made more sense to ally with Germany against their historic rival, France?
>both England and Germany are Germanic, France is latin
>both are constitutional monarchies, France is a republic
>both are protestant, France is catholic
>the English monarchy are German
>the German Kaiser was a massive Angloboo
>England always traditionally allied with Prussia
>England always traditionally allied with the Ottoman Empire against it's historic enemy Russia
>>3268168
Big ships that aren't English triggered them
Britain always backs the weaker side. If Germany had won the first world war, they would have been in a position to build a navy stronger than the Royal Navy.
>>3268168
The war was more against Britain than it was against France, especially when it comes to African colonies the Germans wanted.
this book says that the soviet union was in continual revolution until its collapse.
Jack Reed's take is good.
>>3268042
>>3268056
>>3268060
Nope