Jump to content

The Librarian

The Kremlin Cracks Down on Religious Liberty

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

The Librarian -
The Librarian -
1
288

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

April 7, 2016  •  From theTrumpet.com

57055ebb!h.300,id.13735,m.fill,w.540.jpeg

The Russian Orthodox Church has replaced the Communist Party as the ideological glue holding Vladimir Putin’s empire together.

By Andrew Miiller

During the Soviet era, thousands of churches were destroyed and millions of Christians were persecuted. Communist textbooks called religion “the opium of the people” and Christianity “a perverse reflection on the world.” In the 24 years since the fall of the Soviet Union, however, Orthodox Christianity has made an astonishing recovery. While only a third of Russians identified as Orthodox in 1991, over two thirds now identify as Russian Orthodox Christians.

Yet the rise of the Orthodox Church hasn’t brought religious liberty to Russia. It has simply replaced the Communist Party as the ideological state apparatus used to forcibly unite Russians!

In a court case under way in southern Russia, Viktor Krasnov is facing up to a year in prison for writing “There is no God” on VKontakte (a Russian social media network similar to Facebook). The authorities became aware of this comment when an online user contacted them, claiming that Krasnov was offending Orthodox believers. Police raided Krasnov’s apartment and forced him to undergo a monthlong examination at a psychiatric ward. Once he was deemed fit for trial, he was charged under a Russian law that makes it illegal to insult the feelings of religious believers.

It isn’t just atheists who are no longer granted religious freedom in Russia. Alexey Koptev was arrested in 2011 after undercover police officers established that he belonged to the Jehovah’s Witnesses Christian denomination. In 2009, the city of Taganrog banned the Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination for propagating the exclusivity and supremacy of its religion. This denomination now shares the same legal status as the Islamic State and the National Socialist Society.

In 2002, Russia enacted an extremism law with a provision defining religious extremism as “incitement of religious discord” in connection with acts or threats of violence. Five years later, the law was amended to allow prosecution for inciting religious discord even in the absence of any threat or act of violence. Mormons, Scientologists and even Pentecostals are now coming under increasing government pressure.

In return for public support from Russian Orthodox clergy, President Vladimir Putin attends church services and portrays himself as a defender of “Christian values.” Like the Byzantine emperors and Russian czars before him, he is using a de facto state religion to unify his empire!

“The Orthodox revival gave Russians an identity after the years of uncertainty that followed the fall of the Soviet Union,” private intelligence company Stratfor wrote last month. “The Kremlin has used this to its advantage, so effectively portraying support for Putin’s government as a religious duty that the church is now seen as part of the state apparatus.”

Post-Soviet efforts to remake Moscow into a representative government are failing. Russia has embraced an authoritarian leader driven to vaunt his nation back to the great power status he feels it deserves. This development has dangerous implications for the world. Russia is swiftly becoming a nuclear-armed czarist empire! ▪

 

See also the Russian Orthodox category

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      via
      A dispute broke out Thursday over whether the Ukrainian Orthodox Church should be independent from the Moscow Patriarchate after the Istanbul-based patriarch recognized several separatist churches and their leaders and gave them back control over parishioners.
      The Russian Orthodox Church described the proposed split as catastrophic for the Eastern Orthodoxy and millions of people in Ukraine and beyond. The Moscow-affiliated Ukrainian Orthodox Church said the synod’s decision was a hostile act and threatened the Constantinople patriarch with anathema.
       
    • By Bible Speaks
      VERY REVEALING PHOTOGRAPHY:
      THE PATRIARCH OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX SECTA, Kirill and the Minister of Justice A. Konovalov.
      BOTH PROTAGONISTS OF THE INQUISITORIAL PERSECUTION AGAINST THE ONLY TRUE CHRISTIANS IN RUSSIA, THE WITNESSES OF JEHOVAH.

    • By Bible Speaks
      WHO'S THE EXTREMIST? RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH GIVES ITS BLESSINGS AND MUSIC ?- ???
      His legacy lies in his eponymous AK-47 assault rifle, one of the world's most popular and lethal weapons, and now Mikhail Kalashnikov's likeness looms over Moscow in the form of a 30-foot-tall monument, but not everyone is happy to see it.
      Kalashnikov's daughter, Yelena, unveiled the statue Tuesday at a square off Garden Ring Road, a busy thoroughfare in Russia's capital city, according to Reuters.
      The bronze Kalashnikov, the man, wields a bronze Kalashnikov, the weapon. The late Russian lieutenant general is casually attired, his jacket unzipped and the top button of his shirt undone.
      The words "I created a weapon for the defense of my fatherland" are etched on the pedestal.
      Tuesday's ceremony included military music and a blessing by a Russian Orthodox priest, The Guardian reports. Russian Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky said the gun had become a "cultural brand of Russia." But not all Russians were on board with the tribute.
      NPR's Lucian Kim reports from Moscow that at least one protester was detained holding a sign that read "a weapons designer is a designer of death."
      http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/19/552044627/some-russians-fired-up-over-new-kalashnikov-monument?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170919

    • By El Bibliotecario
      Si alguien sabe la ubicación e idioma de esta asamblea favor comentar :) 
      via El Bibliotecario
    • By The Librarian
      Around 2,000 people gathered at Saint Petersburg's Field of Mars to denounce plans to hand over the city's iconic St. Isaac's cathedral to the Orthodox Church. One of St. Petersburg's most popular attractions, it is feared that the handover will result in restricted access for tourists, lead to the neglect of exhibits on display, and deprive the city of extra revenue.
       
    • By The Librarian
      Russian Orthodox ice water baptisms
       
       
      And they call JW’s “extremists”???
      Via
  • Forum Statistics

    61,680
    Total Topics
    114,512
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,508
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    AliciaBarbosa
    Newest Member
    AliciaBarbosa
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would this mean supernatural babies would not have received judgment because they are babies? Babies that turned into giants that caused the deaths of countless humans, including babies by a power given to them, they shouldn’t have received? Does everyone that possess the Holy Spirit have the ability for prophecy? No! That is made by design by God. 2 Peter 1:20-21, Romans 12:6 It would be unusual for a witness to be distinct to such honor and speak of prophecy as though it was relayed directly from God to that individual. Countering the written words of Paul. God gives that privilege, it is not taken by man. John 3:31-35 With that said, faithful witnesses should understand the meticulous groundwork that Pastor Russell laid-out for everyone to see. There are 2 instances within scripture of 1260. Revelation and Daniel. What witnesses shouldn’t do is project their independent understanding of prophecy, when they are not given that power of prophecy by God. However, I have seen where some people use genesis and Ezekiel as a reference guide. Therefore, there is no contradiction to Paul's words since the understanding of being enthroned in 1914 versus having taken control are two separate issues. Then, AD 1914 stands on its own Biblical merit.
    • I have a better idea, big boy. You write a letter—that way I do not have to—and ask about the specific reasons that Tim Cook was made part of the Governing Body. Specify that you want details.. Do not settle for “he was a pioneer for so many years, then a missionary, then a Bethel servant.”  No. Ask about specific praiseworthy deeds, abilities, or accomplishments that made the others think: “We have to get this guy on the GB!”  How bout it, sport? Write that letter. Make it certified. Send a copy to the BOE. Send a copy here, even, so that we can all see the answer. Hold their feet to the fire! My guess is that you will not get anything more than the generic, and you may not get even that. Instead, you may get references to verse like 2 Corinthians 10:12  For we do not dare to class ourselves among some or compare ourselves with some who recommend themselves. Certainly they in measuring themselves by themselves and comparing themselves with themselves have no understanding. or there might even be counsel not to fall into the pattern of “admiring personalities.” (Jude 16) When you get this reply, fire off another letter to them about how as MEN of HONOR, they owe it to you to SPILL when you say SPILL. Remind them of their scriptural obligation to TRUTHFULLY answer anyone who asks a question. Tell them that since you are asking them about good things, and not bad things, there is NO REASON for them not to oblige you.  The reason that they still will not satisfy you is that they are not into honoring persons. It is very hard to get the laudable specifics about any individual. They view humans, even themselves, as placeholders used by God, and when this or that is accomplished, credit goes to Jehovah, not the GB character or helper or branch servant who dreamed it up or got the job done. You have only to watch Sam Herd giving the Gilead talk in the most recent broadcast, shaking his jowls like Nixon, parodying those slobbering over the “Govnin Body” —a skit that I am still trying to get down pat for imitation—before he says it’s not any of them doing anything—you could do the same were you in their place—but it is Jehovah who should get all credit. They are not into zeroing in on the accomplishments of humans. Humans are placeholders. The good things they do are attributed to Jehovah, the bad things to human imperfection. I doubt you will get specifics for either.  Be a sport, JTR. Give it a go. Save me a stamp.  
    • Wouldn't a core doctrine be one in which we put "unwavering" faith. This is the whole reason I mention "core" or "key" doctrines. If we were to be killed unless we publicly renounced our faith in Jehovah God as the Creator, and Jesus Christ as the one through whom the Ransom comes, we should be willing to die for that doctrine. I would not be willing to die over my certainty that Jesus was only using hyperbole when he said that the men of Sodom would do better in a resurrection of the unrighteous on Judgment Day, than persons in towns that rejected Jesus during his earthly ministry. (Only the most diabolical of inquisitors would ask such a question anyway. I think I would go for "theocratic war strategy. 😉 )
    • I like that. It's an excellent explanation of one of the points made in the day's text and commentary. Perhaps. And so were all the 1 year old babies destroyed in the Flood. And so were the 185,000 of Senacherib's troops. I used that one because it's one for which most of us would be the least surprised if we discovered that the WT changed the teaching again.  Not sure what you mean. I already believe that the primary core doctrine is God's value through his Son's ransom sacrifice. Other doctrines are also just as necessary, though.  There actually is a contradiction between the Bible and AD 1914. And we don't need any independent understanding not supported by Scripture, such as the independent understanding of John Aquila Brown, or more specifically, that of Nelson H Barbour, neither of which were supported by Scripture. It should ALWAYS be the exploit of any faithful Witness to uncover truth and try to resolve any contradictions that can be resolved by Scripture itself, not anything independent of Scriptural support.  On the matter of the 1914 doctrine, an easier explanation with human controversy --but no scriptural controversy-- has already been posted. Easier isn't proof that it's better, but it's definitely easier. Here it is: Jesus came to earth to preach about a God's Kingdom through Christ and give himself over to death as a perfect ransom for sin, to fulfill the Law, and SIT AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND and therefore RULES AS KING since the time of his resurrection in 33 CE. That's it. Simple. No contradictions with any Scripture. From that point on, in 33 CE he SITS AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND and therefore RULES AS KING ruling in the midst of enemies, including war, famine, sickness, and will continue ruling as king until God has put all enemies under his feet, including the last enemy: death.  The current belief in 1914 creates a contradiction with this very point, because we are currently forced to ignore 1 Cor 15:25, which indicates that "sitting at God's right hand" is the same as "ruling as King." Right now, our current teaching is that Jesus sat at God's right hand in 33, and THEN LATER began ruling as king in 1914. Paul says that Jesus began ruling as king WHEN he sat at God's right hand. I'm swapping them because they mean exactly the same thing to me. No difference. Doctrine means teaching. True but notice the words that Paul used instead of "sit at my right hand" here: (1 Corinthians 15:25) 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. Turns out that when a king sits on a throne, this is actually an expression meaning rule as king. Just like when we say that a man "sat on the throne" starting in AD 1066, for example. Turns out that a king does not have to stand up from a throne to begin ruling as king. Turns out that sitting on a throne is not a synonym for just waiting around. By that logic, Jesus is not even NOW ruling as king, because God has not yet put the last enemy Death beneath his feet. (1 Corinthians 15:25,26) 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.
    • If only you would stop quoting outside sources, and just be more basic with your comments, then i may understand them . Yes I understand 'if your throw out all the good, only the bad is left.  But the reverse is, if you only see the good, you are not being honest with yourself or others.  @Arauna is a case in point.  
    • @JW Insider Quote " The day's text is about the resurrection, and the commentary speaks of the importance of including this among our key doctrines, as if it might not have been "up there" with the rest. " That seems rather strange to me. But then they are getting short of things to say.  However, i would have thought every Christian, no matter what ever 'sect' or  pigeon hole you put them in, would definitely believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and put it up near the top of important beliefs.  However making Bible Facts, doctrines, seems unfair to God and to the Bible itself.  doctrine a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.   It's as if the JW Org tries to 'own' such things. @TrueTomHarley quite often goes on about the things that the JW Org teaches. As if those things 'belonged to the JW Org'.  Whereas a lot of the same beliefs are held by thousands of people, and they not all being of the same organisation.     Quote " The Teaching about Christ's Kingdom -  Of course that final one might be a nod to "1914" as a key teaching, but it is worded here in such a way that no one could dismiss Christ's Kingdom as a key teaching. "   Now here we see a difference between Bible truth and JW doctrine.    Christ's Kingdom is Bible truth.   1914 is JW Org doctrine.   (This would bring us back to. Would a person be d/fed or 'watched' if they did not believe the 1914 doctrine?)    Matthew 22 v 44    ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet”’? So if Jesus was to sit at Gods right hand, until God had put Jesus' enemies beneath Jesus' feet.  Then Jesus could not have had the power to do it himself. Therefore surely Jesus was not ruling as King immediately ?    As for 1914, we know that no one of the Bible Students or JW leaders, were or are inspired of Holy Spirit. So maybe 1914 is just another guess or misuse of scriptures.    What is your view of the difference between 'Core doctrines' and Key teachings ?    And you seem to keep swapping expressions from Core doctrines, to Core teachings, to Key teachings.  Can you explain the difference please ?    
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.