The Kanye West thread

Eusebius Erasmus

Ostrich
Orthodox
Both of these men were more important towards the salvation of mankind than any of us ever will be, and yet they couldn't have explained a single thing about the Theotokos or the triune.

How can you be so sure?

Holy Tradition is both oral and written. One doesn't need to be literate to understand Christian dogma.

St. Vladimir and St. Constantine converted a large swathe of their population to Christianity. You truly believe they didn't know what the Trinity was, and rejected the Theotokos?
 
Last edited:

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
He's making a different point.

It reminds me of the people that constantly talk about "the office of the president" and the desire for pomp and circumstance, who "couldn't stand" Donald Trump, the only guy that ever got anything done, regardless of his being flawed. Meanwhile, they played right into the hands of any other decision and distracted from any chance at winning, furthering the goals of the deranged and chaotic.
 

Roosh

Cardinal
Orthodox
and yet they couldn't have explained a single thing about the Theotokos or the triune.
Is this a fact or your opinion? You're presenting it as fact. And these are Saints you're talking about, so if you're wrong, you may be bordering on blasphemy (not for me to know exactly but you can examine yourself).

Also, to compare informational ability back then to now is not a good argument since we now have the internet, everyone can read, and Bibles are in every bookstore. It's not at all equivocal.
 

Tom Slick

Kingfisher
Orthodox
From what I understand, Ye is protestant, meaning he doesn't pray to Mary or the Saints, he only prays to God in Jesus' name. Obviously this is a disagreement between different groups of Christians. This isn't anything new to anybody.
Just a little "but akshually" action:

Orthodox Christians pray to God and also venerate the saints, such as the Virgin Mary, Mother of Jesus Christ, and ask them to intercede by praying to God for us because, as holy men and women in Heaven, they are closer to Him.
 

Thomas More

Crow
Protestant
Just a little "but akshually" action:

Orthodox Christians pray to God and also venerate the saints, such as the Virgin Mary, Mother of Jesus Christ, and ask them to intercede by praying to God for us because, as holy men and women in Heaven, they are closer to Him.
I understand that's what intended, but I often see people say they prayed to a saint, or ask who is a good saint to pray to for X. I'm sure if questioned, all of them could explain they meant that they asked the saint to pray for them.

It's all foreign to Protestants. We approach the throne with boldness (Hebrews 4:16) every time we pray. Christ is our intermediary, so it's hard to think of looking to a saint to pray for us.

Anyway, it's best not to get into distinctions like this. We Christians all look to Christ as our savior. I'm sure Ye is open to reaching all Christians of every denomination, and God bless him.
 
Last edited:

Tom Slick

Kingfisher
Orthodox
Anyway, it's best not to get into distinctions like this. We Christians all look to Christ as our savior.
Thanks, that's fine, I have also commonly heard Orthodox phrase it as praying to a saint, but I don't see why we shouldn't explain these distinctions to people who want to know.
 

Samseau

Peacock
Orthodox
Gold Member
How can you be so sure?

Holy Tradition is both oral and written. One doesn't need to be literate to understand Christian dogma.

St. Vladimir and St. Constantine converted a large swathe of their population to Christianity. You truly believe they didn't know what the Trinity was, and rejected the Theotokos?

Rejected?? When did I say that? All I said, and meant, was that these men started off their Christian journey as complete novices, with rudimentary, incomplete, or simply ignorant knowledge of many things, yet God used them for incredible purposes anyways because their faith was strong.

"God does not choose among the qualified, he qualifies the chosen."

Is this a fact or your opinion? You're presenting it as fact. And these are Saints you're talking about, so if you're wrong, you may be bordering on blasphemy (not for me to know exactly but you can examine yourself).

Also, to compare informational ability back then to now is not a good argument since we now have the internet, everyone can read, and Bibles are in every bookstore. It's not at all equivocal.

From what I can gather, it is true. It's not like I intend to deceive, so if I err, please forgive me. Constantine was taught a bit about Christ from his mother, but then went to a life in the pagan Roman military at around 12 or so. It wasn't until much later, when he was a total Emperor, that he could actually start learning. He actually appointed his mother for help with many important tasks of Christian policy, and it is said she was the one who discovered the true cross and Holy Sepulcher.

Likewise Vladimir only baptized after making an alliance with Byzantium, plus marriage to the Emperor's daughter, Princess Porphyrogenita, at the time. She was Vlad's 5th wife, and she carefully laid the foundations of Christian Russia behind Vlad's rule, as well as teach Vlad much of the faith.


Wikipedia is a fairly good source for basic matters in deep history, there is very little activism or bias in presenting these facts. According to French and American historians, Vlad liked Byzantium's style, beautiful religious services, that Christians can enjoy alcohol (unlike Islam), and the offer of a princess was extremely tempting. He took the leap of faith, converted, heavily influenced by his grandmother, St. Olga, and effect was mustard seed tier.

In both cases, each man had someone who knew a lot about Christ, Constantine had his mother, Vlad had his grandmother and then Byzantine wife, as leaders they did not have time to figure any of the Bible out. They simply relied on their instincts and love of those women closest to them.

As for Ye, his father is a priest, and that obviously has an enormous impact on him, and his beliefs. So even if they aren't fully explained or orthodox, it's not like he's just inventing things out of air.
 

OrthoSerb

Woodpecker
Orthodox
Wikipedia is a fairly good source for basic matters in deep history, there is very little activism or bias in presenting these facts.
:oops: I'm not sure how anyone that's made it to this forum can come to that conclusion. I mean wikipedia can present basic facts about when a battle happened or when someone was born and we can take those at face value. But if you think they have little activism or bias in interpreting history and, more specifically, someone's motivations for converting to Orthodoxy then I'm stunned.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
One thought:

I don't think Kanye is strictly controlled opposition or that this is an elaborate psyop for a very simple reason:

Previous stops NEVER name the group. They're always trying to incite white people against some combination of minorities, LGBTQ, or foreign enemies (e.g. Muslims or China).

Not once have they ever named the chosen people and when it does pop up they try to redirect it.
Very true. Only argument that could brought against it is that in the way he goes about it it's very triggering for the normies which leads to more conflict and divide ans conquer, but it's indeed extremely rare that the schoolboy who's been kicked out of 109 schools is addressed, and every ounce of truth will trigger the normies, attention is the currency of modern day's social media econ anyways.
 

RedLagoon

Kingfisher
Orthodox Inquirer
:oops: I'm not sure how anyone that's made it to this forum can come to that conclusion. I mean wikipedia can present basic facts about when a battle happened or when someone was born and we can take those at face value. But if you think they have little activism or bias in interpreting history and, more specifically, someone's motivations for converting to Orthodoxy then I'm stunned.

It took months for Wikipedia to change my edit from "subtropical" to "subarctic" climate for... Siberia.
 

Salt and Pepper

Pigeon
Orthodox Inquirer
:oops: I'm not sure how anyone that's made it to this forum can come to that conclusion. I mean wikipedia can present basic facts about when a battle happened or when someone was born and we can take those at face value. But if you think they have little activism or bias in interpreting history and, more specifically, someone's motivations for converting to Orthodoxy then I'm stunned.


This video is a good rundown, I should also note the guy who made this video became Orthodox a couple of months ago too.
 

Samseau

Peacock
Orthodox
Gold Member
:oops: I'm not sure how anyone that's made it to this forum can come to that conclusion. I mean wikipedia can present basic facts about when a battle happened or when someone was born and we can take those at face value. But if you think they have little activism or bias in interpreting history and, more specifically, someone's motivations for converting to Orthodoxy then I'm stunned.

They have whatever bias the academics of the 1910-70's had, which is when most historical sources are quoted from on Wikipedia. It's hardly a big deal. The further back history goes, the less and less intentional bias there is on Wikipedia. I've tried following sources on these articles before and they check out reasonably well. So the articles themselves aren't bad either. Sorry if everyone likes to bash wikipedia because its current sources are bad, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
 

Thomas More

Crow
Protestant
They have whatever bias the academics of the 1910-70's had, which is when most historical sources are quoted from on Wikipedia. It's hardly a big deal. The further back history goes, the less and less intentional bias there is on Wikipedia. I've tried following sources on these articles before and they check out reasonably well. So the articles themselves aren't bad either. Sorry if everyone likes to bash wikipedia because its current sources are bad, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I think a lot of Wikipedia is reasonably accurate, and it's possible to tell where the bias lies. If you look up the geometric method of finding the distance of a point from a line, it's pretty accurate. If you look up Miles City, Montana, you'll find reasonably accurate information, although you would discount things they say about native Americans in the area. Obviously if you look up French President Macron, you will find some bias, but his age, the college he attended, and jobs he worked will probably be accurate. A lot of people like to check the early life section for various public figures.

In particular, the things Samseau quoted about Constantine and the other guy are likely to be reasonably well accepted, even if some other things they say about Constantine could be biased.

It's not that hard to filter which info on Wikipedia is likely to be useful.
 

Nineteen84

Pelican
Moderator
Orthodox
Gold Member
A useful tool for researching Wikipedia edits:



Wikiwho is a tool that scans Wikipedia edits and extracts those coming from specific IP ranges associated to known organizations.​

About this tool​

When somebody edits Wikipedia without being logged in, his IP address is saved in the edit history. The complete Wikipedia edit history is available for download, and since IP addresses can reveal information about their ownership, it is possible to link these Wikipedia edits to organizations whose IP range is known to the public.

We have collected information about IP ranges of organizations, government agencies and companies, and have identified all the edits made by known organizations. This tool allows to navigate the output of this analysis, by providing a full text search functionality, complete edit history for each detected organization and filtering features.

Crossposted to the Wikipedia thread. Wikipedia specific discussion can continue there:

https://www.rooshvforum.com/threads/wikipedia-thread.42161/
 
Top