No, only the practical religion they ALLOWED in place.
Stalin and his regime were atheist.
1 Like
Like blaming Chinese Catholicism, or something.
Nope, they were Russian first and foremost. I know it’s difficult to wrap your head around, but you cannot shoehorn Russians into the usually accepted definition of “Christianity” accepted in the US. And Stalin was basically a Tsar.
For example, Ivan the Terrible burned people alive and flayed their skin killing thousands and thousands in the medieval version of Stalin’s purges believing he was God’s instrument on Earth for punishing sinners and heretics.
In Russia, the Orthodox Church has always been the extension of the Russian state(s) and is consequently more concerned about worldly matters and customs and practices that help project Russian’s might and defeat it’s enemies - for example while the Pope may weigh in on deep theological issues and discuss abstract concepts, the Patriarch of Moscow will usually speak about reconquering Constantinople and whatnot.
So Russian Orthodoxy has a strong component of national and political violence - if Islam is stuck in the 7th century, they’re stuck in the 10th…
2 Likes
And I’m American…Being Russian, in whatever order, doesn’t discount his Atheism. 5 year plan?
Stalin. He thought no such thing of himself.
Loppar, you’re a well read guy. Moreso than me, I freely admit. But Stalin…Stalin was an atheist. If, and when, he tolerated religion it was purely practical and does nothing to discount the suffering of the religious. That’s like me being a theocratic ruler, and tolerating the atheists who will at least honor the regime. Stalin was an atheist. Russian or not.
1 Like
I’m not saying that Stalin wasn’t an atheist, whatever definition one uses. The current head of the Russian Orthodox Church is also very likely an atheist, for example.
I’m just stating out that in Russia religion is not a theological manifestation of one’s deep religious beliefs but a political statement and thus cannot be conflated with the Western concept of religion. Religion is there to expand the borders of Mother Russia, not to lead a virtuous life according to Scripture.
Theologically speaking, Russian orthodoxy is somewhere between Islam and Western Christianity (closer to the latter naturally) in terms of perception of the public/private sphere.
1 Like
Your insight is always welcome. Thank you.
Secular religion.
It was a similar situation in the Eastern Roman Empire. When there is no separation of church, religion and state, all wars become holy wars.
And communism was a secular religion in Russia.
And yet, no one has proven that God exists.
And atheism is a religious secularism…Yeah! So there!
1 Like
Just highlighting.
The state was the head, not the religion. Things like the atheistic 5 Year Plan of Stalin and the party, for instance.
No. That’s something believers tell themselves to feel better about their irrationality.
What’s irrational? Belief is nearly universal. Belief in a God or gods. Belief in good and evil. Belief in inherent rights. One or all. Perhaps in not those particular things, but in others. Nearly universal part of our nature, I would say. From a evolutionary view, maybe we’ve largely evolved to believe. Is it irrational then to cooperate with our natures? Is there a selective advantage for our species? Our capability to believe, and the nearly ubiquitous practice of some sort of belief, seems to suggest an advantage in belief. To me, at least. So then, how is it irrational to believe, as is in our nature?
Irrational belief = faith
Takes faith to believe and maintain that rape is evil. Takes faith to believe I, by virtue of just existing, have some right to my life, and you are obligated on a moral level to recognize as much. Faith isn’t wholly owned by the theistic realm.
Now, obviously you don’t have to believe in good/evil or rights inherent to us. But faith is likely one of the most common experiences within our species. Irrational? I say natural.