Christos Anesti!

@marshallpittman @OktayKl59931624 @kaizen000000000 To be 'correct' you have to assume your senses are guided towards truth, something Atheism fails to justify which was the point I was getting to.

Your biological wiring would be unlikely to tell you to do something wrong. You may have learned to misinterpret signals, or might even suffer from an abnormal condition. Or, some system of thought overrides your intuition and rational judgment. Genocide is a societal action done with ideological or political motivations. It has never been a base instinct or rational, objective action. (Anger is not base, but irrational..) Rape is violent and not possible to justify rationally. Anyone who does so either makes an excuse after the fact to avoid responsibility or premeditates the action by choosing to deliberately mislead reason and logic in theit own brains. Survival would not entell attack without provocation or self defense. That is why relying on religion or ideology is dangerous, because it can more easily let one skip careful consideration of each action, in favor of a "greater good" that is contradictory to objective moral action. That goal may not align with objective reality. Define an opponent as inhuman, and you can justify stripping them of their rights. Say they are "voting against their own interests" and you are not giving due agency to other cinscious living beings. [I cannot see the whole post I'm replying to in this view, so will look to see what i may be ignoring after sending this.]

Tell me again that believers/religious people are not arrogant... Alex o'connor 💯❤️

@marshallpittman @OktayKl59931624 @kaizen000000000 Biological wiring often tells us to do things wrong when overloaded. And the main point I made was chemicals/or neurons firing in your brain dont have truth values. A false thought is = to a correct one, the only difference is you prefer one with no real way to distinguish.

@vurp2001 @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Evil/Bad does not positively exist, Good does positively exist. Therefore the good is objective, our access to the good comes through the Eastern Orthodox Church.

@BritishArno @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 What did I ignore? happy to address it. Yes you claim Christianity is objective. I'm asking how you can prove this

@vurp2001 @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Yeah because of the totality/wholeness of the worldview, God gives his commands, things are either Good (And it has ontology its not just a title but things are physically Good) Or its bad (Something God did not create/corruption/privation) Light (Good/God), Bad (Shadow)

@vurp2001 @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 I'm an idiot, kinda don't use twitter thought you were different guy cause I'm replying through notifications and not the thread.

@MercifulMessage How do you know? Did Muhammad by a black slave with that name?

Jesus is a slave To Allah ﷻ

@goatesk_c @layeee09 Because modern civilization is a boiling pot with no love.

@layeee09 Faut qu’on m’explique pourquoi quand les femmes ont un peu de liberté et que leurs mecs tournent unpeu le dos Elle font les salopes ??

Un jeune homme voulant vérifier la sortie « entre filles » de sa copine la surprend en train d’embrasser un inconnu. il décide en rire et de tourner la page sans se retourner

@shagbark_hick But a layman can receive communion at any, all are involved in the whole of the eastern church even if they arent in communion with each other, I go to a RCCOR and a Greek Church.

I can't understand why the EO's make a big joke about the "which Orthodox Church?" question. If you ask 5 GOARCH Priests if ROCOR can receive Communion at their Churches, and 5 ROCOR Priests whether GOARCH can receive at their Churches, you will get ten different answers. If that's the one, singular, unified "Church," I'm confused. Is the sole basis of unity opposing the Bishop of Rome and doing the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom (or Divine Liturgy of St Basil)? Can "unity" mean "we may disagree on something as fundamental as divorce, and we cannot receive Communion at each others' Churches?" Is just doing the same Liturgy enough? Of course even with the Liturgy, the Russians have added some things to their Liturgy, the Greeks have shortened theirs, and many of the Churches disagree on which calendar to use. At times, they seem to squabble even about this. The unity they have even there is tenuous. So the sole unifier within Eastern Orthodoxy appears to be "opposing the Bishop of Rome." Which even many early Church fathers, such as St Irenaeus of Lyons, explicitly disagreed with. From this, are we to understand that the unifying element of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church consists of assenting to anti-Roman arguments that developed many centuries later? But if that development came later, why do so many EO oppose Rome because we've done "development of doctrine?" Why oppose development of doctrine in our case, but not in your own? It seems to me that understanding this very strange form of "unity" requires almost limitless degrees of intensive study, or it requires more or less not caring about the question. And if you ask these questions to the EO types online, they are far more likely to call you a retard than they are to offer a serious, helpful answer. They consider you hopelessly stupid for even asking. Offline, I find the vast majority of converts haven't really thought these kinds of questions through -- they mostly came for the aesthetics and the (very!) friendly parishioners. Exhaustion with both the vagueness and the cagey attitude of many apologists was a large contributor to my leaving the EO catechumenate and returning to Rome.

@vurp2001 @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Other justifications that are more externalist would be the liturgy, reading the life of the saints ect but many people claim confirmation bias on those so realistically TAG and the Cosmological argument are my main reasons for believing.

@BritishArno @OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Atheism doesn't deal with anything apart from the response to one question. I'm not convinced. That's it. Nothing else. But OK, what is the objective metric Christianity has? How can you prove it exists?

@OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 because my view doesn't hold your standards/position its not the same, I follow the one true Church thats had consistent and unchanging teaching/doctrine, which mean my view does not fall into relativism like yours.

@BritishArno @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 You’re applying a moral filter to my view that you explicitly deny for your own, since on your view, disagreement doesn’t track goodness, obedience does.

@OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 1. No actually I never said moral relativism is unacceptable, I personally think it is but that doesnt prove or disprove a position, however key thing to note, because I don't hold your position your point doesnt hold.

@BritishArno @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 You've used the idea that a view is unacceptable if it collapses into anything goes or permits horrific outcomes yet your own position includes accepting whatever the Church teaches even if you personally disagree with it.

@OktayKl59931624 @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Yeah my point isn't about the use of reasoning, its about having unjustified assumptions. (2ndly ur point was abt us being same same) Christianity has an objective metric to follow/track. Atheism does not, everything is assumed and granted without justification in atheism.

@BritishArno @marshallpittman @kaizen000000000 Even if someone says they arrived at Christianity through an argument they found unrefutable, they still used standards to judge that argument as “unrefuted.”

@marshallpittman @OktayKl59931624 @kaizen000000000 Its like the whole 'how do you not know you are a brain in a vat' even if I granted chemicals could guide us to morals it'd still require a justification to trust our individual chemicals, and trust that we arent deluded and other people exist. (Atheism doesnt have that)

This is a false premise: "Chemical reactions in the brain don't tell you if something is right or wrong." Yes, they do. Evolutionary Biology shows evidence that these reactions are calibrated, not random, to maximize beneficial behavior, like caring for vulnerable infants and elderly., or the urge to reproduce. This is moral intuition and we can examine it with reason and logic to verify the physiological activity. Then, we can codify it into a morality, once we see it provides a benefit (or a harm). Some talk about trusting a "gut feeling" that is faster and more trustworthy than relying on your thoughts, which can be coerced by psychology to doubt your initial feeling. Establishing a morality by objective reality helps to resist social or psychological conditioning to recognize and understand that gut feeling and what it means rationally.

@marshallpittman @OktayKl59931624 @kaizen000000000 Chemicals, thoughts ect, do not have inherent truth values. Like a tree isn't true/false, neither is a organic system producing a thought, meaning there is no way to actually say X is true/false. Its personal opinion that isn't binding.

@marshallpittman @OktayKl59931624 @kaizen000000000 When you use words like reality or reason and logic, in your view one where these things aren't normative/binding because they can't be justified using them to justify your morality also bottoms out anyway. They still remain preference in your view.

@AhmedSheta49481 @BeSaintly Well yeah, point is we both make claims to the same God, that doesn't = accepting each others worship or doctrine as valid. Unlike what the pope says, its hilarious tbh.

@BritishArno @BeSaintly Yes as a muslim that is true you worshib the the and the only god. But you belive that one god is three entities in one father, jesus and the holy spirit. We only belive he is one god. We donot beleive in trinity. So the diffrence here is in how we describe that one god

All 9 Eastern Orthodox patriarchs teach that Muslims and Christians worship the same God

@BeSaintly Do not have any binding authority in regards to the doctrine of the whole Church, unlike the pope. So if a patriarch steps out of line, he can be called a heretic. Because individuals don't bind doctrine in Orthodoxy, we aren't papist.

@BeSaintly Which is unlike the pope, because the pope described it as paths to the same God, where Orthodoxy just says 'they are aiming for the same God' but fail because they don't have the fullness of revalation which is trinity and EO doctrine. (Additionally individually patriarchs-