What a betrayal. Says a lot about them, doesn't it?
Aren't most Orthodox Slavic? We should just ban the religion
...maybe because NASDAP ideology contradicts the teachings of Jesus, and the Germans killed countless Russians and Serbs, including burning them within their Orthodox churches?
>>535689027>including burning them within their Orthodox churches?Wasnt this proven false? There was some contraversy on the official story if I remember correctly. It's hard to search this stuff after all the censorship. Like the hacking and taking down of cohoh.
>>535689228https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-1943-khatyn-massacre-became-symbol-nazi-atrocities-eastern-front-180977280https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glina_massacres
>>535689027>>535689391>NSDAP were Protestants therefore that means they contradict my specific denomination's interpretation of worshipping Mary!!You're absolutely disgusting. Everyone laughs at you when you make a thread about this, so you just resort to guerilla tactics whenever the prevailing ideology is spoken about here. You can't even get off the starting line, but you're talking about what to do in the 3rd lap. Absolutely pathetic.Also>the Croats did this one thing to 15 people therefore I'll look at millions of Germans one wayPathetic.
>>535689626That's a lot of hate you have there.1. I never said anything about the NASDAP being Protestant, about Protestantism, or about the Blessed Virgin Mary.2. The NASDAP contradicted the teachings of John Calvin as well. You cannot say that the NASDAP was Protestant either, nor can you say that they reflect Protestant values whatsoever.3. Some bishop says something about Israelis or the Holocaust. What's that to do with me, you, or your original question?
>>535688859Greeks too. Worldwide the ratio is about 1:10 or 1:15 Greek to Slav. But in USA it's 1:1.
>>535688859>We should just ban the religionBut not jews right shlomo?
>>535689626>the Croats did this one thing to 15 people therefore I'll look at millions of Germans one wayThis was a documented pattern across Eastern Europe. Just go ask around some elderly people in a random village in Poland, Serbia, Greece, or Russia.Now we cannot say that every SS officer was a villain. That would be wrong, and indeed there were some very decent and honorable warriors within the SS and Wehrmacht. But the overall ideology of the NASDAP was deeply mistaken, Hitler was a totalitarian dictator, and many mass atrocities were committed as a recurring pattern in Eastern Europe.
>>535689835Who cares about John Calvin, lmao. You love to hang out with the lowest hanging fruit. That's why Jay Dyer will cuss out a Protestant but have an hour long cordial talk with a "Messianic Jew" or a Mormon. Yes, the Nazis rejected "Original Sin". Yes, the Nazis believed in Free Will.Yes, the Nazis were Protestant (just like USA is) and therefore Christians.
>>535689981>the Nazis went around murdering Christians in Eastern EuropeShut your mouth you filthy kike
>>535690031Well I was running out of 16th century Protestant leaders. It is easy to produce quotes of John Calvin that directly contradict Nazism. Martin Luther is a more complex figure, with his own bitter polemics against the Jews that I figured you would quote-mine if I cited him.Forget about Jay Dyer. He is simply mean and unkind and not a good example.As for original sin, this is a core Western doctrine. Lutherans absolutely believe in it. Just read Martin Luther's "On the Bondage of the Will".
>>535688152Ortho is z bot. Z bot hates nazi. It's not deep.
>>535690389Saying that Nazism contradicts Christ is being a "Z bot"? Saying that Nazis killed people in Serbia is being a "Z bot"?
>>535690272Original Sin means an unbaptized baby goes to either hell or limbo, you illiterate. That is not a Western Belief, or one held by Luther.
>>535690594>Nazism contradicts ChristI don't care much about messianic jew infighting, but orthos need to go first.
>>535690727Except that's not what original sin, as a specific doctrine, means. Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Lutherans all believe in the doctrine of original sin. None believe in limbo, and Baptists do not believe in infant baptism at all.Article 1 of the Formula of Concord (authoritative statement of Lutheran doctrine) teaches that original sin "is a root and fountain-head of all actual sins."Protestant Reformers (i.e. Martin Luther and John Calvin both) believed that original sin completely destroyed freedom to do actual good: a loss of free will for anything other than sinning.This is a perfect example of where Nazi ideology contradicted Christian teaching, especially Protestant teaching. It is a perfect example of a fork in the road for you: "SS Faith" or Christianity.
>>535691103You're illiterate. Original Sin means a child has sin. That's why Calvin and Augustine taught that unbaptized babies go to hell, and Luther taught they did not. See how someone who knows what they're talking about can concisely explain something, while pseudo-intellectuals like yourself just talk and talk?
And lie, of course.
>>535691192>Original Sin means a child has sin.Yes, of course. But it means more than that. It means that all mankind inherit from conception guilt for Adam's sin, and are thus from conception in bondage to evil until regenerated by God.This is in contrast to ancestral sin, which is a related but distinct belief. The key word is "guilt". Are humans guilty for Adam's sin from birth, or do humans only inherit Adam's corruption resulting from his sin? These are two distinct questions.Martin Luther absolutely, unequivocally, and completely taught the doctrine of original sin. Go ask your nearest Lutheran pastor for a fact check.>See how someone who knows what they're talking about can concisely explain something, while pseudo-intellectuals like yourself just talk and talk?Well you are oversimplifying. I am no expert by any means on the foundational truths of belief. But this conversation did not start with me saying that I was. It started with you asking why American Orthodox do not like Nazis, as if that were some kind of mystifying question.
>>535691390You are an idiot.>it means much more than thatNo kidding, Sherlock. This is just like how Immaculate Conception doesn't refer to merely the Virgin Birth, although that what 99% of people think Catholics mean when they say it. They don't realize that capital I capital C Immaculate Conception carries tons of theological baggage, just like capital O capital S Original Sin carries theological baggage, and a sine non qua of Original Sin is no salvation for an unbaptized infant. This is why Tertullian's conception of original sin is completely fine and Augustine's "Original Sin" is insane heresy.
>>535691564>You are an idiot.Thank you for the compliment. You have been a very polite and cordial conversation partner.
>>535691764A child is sinless. It takes very little thinking to deduce that.>and said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings Thou hast perfected praise?Matthew 21:16 KJV
