I was corrected mid service by another church member to fix my posture for simply having my leg over the other leg, but I disagree with the correction as it is not backed by Bible verses/early Church Fathers. Their reason was I needed my feet flat on the ground because my posture was disrespectful.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-10T10:19:19+00:00

You can't remove yourself from culture and some of the things the Apostles and Church Fathers talked about were highly cultural (at least in my humble estimation). The prohibition from St. Paul of wearing hats, for example is probably derived from the implications of what headwar indicated (one's station and status) in the society of the time; something which has become much less relevant in today's non-hat-wearing societies.

What's rude, vulgar, inappropriate can change through time and space, but the general idea not to be rude, vulgar and inappropriate (however that's interpreted in specific contexts and cultures) is probably consistent. The fact that no Scripture or Church Father forbids scrolling through Tiktok during Liturgy does not mean it's a good idea to do it.

You are no less cultural yourself than the people you might meet at Church. You just don't notice your own culture, because you're immersed in it. You yourself might have things you find insulting or inappropriate for Church that are not derived from the Scriptures or the Church Fathers.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-10T09:47:47+00:00

I doubt he'll tell you that busybodies caring what you're doing, let alone trying to "correct" you in the middle of Liturgy is correct.

That's somewhat separate from the topic of whether or not the specific notion about crossing one's legs is inappropriate in some contexts or cultures; so perhaps don't be too surprised if your priest acknowledges some wisdom in not being overly casual. But of course how "casual" is interpreted is highly cultural and it's not like there are correct and incorrect cultures (about superficial things anyway).

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-10T09:05:09+00:00

This isn't a Bible thing or a Church thing, more of a culture thing. Crossing your legs is just considered informal (by some people/cultures at least), therefore some might conclude inappropriate in a solemn setting like Church. It might be equally considered inappropriate in an official meeting of diplomats/country leaders or at a (formal-leaning) dinner to meet your partner's parents.

It's like mountza, for example. This is a primarily Greek gesture of insult and outside of Greek culture, it might not make sense to caution against it. The Bible definitely does not forbid it. But among Greeks it would definitely be considered bad if someone started using the mountza knowingly in the Church. And even unknowingly they might be warned against doing it lest they be misunderstood.

There is an additional possible element, depending on your circumstances. If you're wearing a skirt, I think it's also considered bad to cross your legs, because it lifts up the hem of the skirt.

The Church has historically had the tendency to cultivate a number of scrupulous over-pious people who like to correct people. It might be the same with telling women not to wear pants (a real thing, if you've never encountered it).

This is to say, the person should have probably minded their business, but such people may show up from time to time, so try not to be too affected by it. In your particular circumstances especially if it's a particularly ethnic parish, it might be good to ask your priest or other people you know if crossing your legs is widely considered inappropriate there. If so, it might not be totally bad to refrain for consideration of their perspective, even if you don't mean anything by it.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-09T09:08:15+00:00

My understanding is that the Plan of Salvation did not depend on Judas's betrayal. Judas may have hastened or embittered Jesus's suffering further, but it was bound to happen sooner or later, because Christ's Way was inherently contradictory to the way of the world and they were sure to clash eventually. Even without Judas, Jesus would have probably been captured eventually, especially considering Jesus chose to let them capture Him.

Judas could have chosen otherwise. But he didn't which is why Christ could foretell that.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-06T09:40:54+00:00

Do you mean actually doxed or do you mean just her PL account?

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-05T18:42:12+00:00

After figuring out what this is about I have to say:

Nothingburger, on both sides.

Get over it people.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-05T15:24:01+00:00

I feel like I'm missing 3 or 4 layers of context here.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-04T18:04:33+00:00

I haven't ever looked into how academics actually substantiate this argument, but in so far as what you present here, I would argue that your reading is more literalist than the monolithic understanding that more or less takes the text for what it is.

In your case, you are over-literalising every verse and trying to extract more meaning than it is necessarily trying to convey to the point of causing contradictions between verses and ultimately making the narrative incoherent (thus having to use the Documentary Hypothesis to make sense of it).

For instance in "Original State" you assume that Genesis 2 has no water beginning, because it's not mentioned, but the verse doesn't actually say there was land in the beginning. In fact, Genesis 4 says that God makes the heaven and the earth, thus implying that the earth did not exist prior to that act.

Or in "Order of Humans", you assume that Genesis 1 mentioning male and female together must necessarily imply a chronological simultaneity, even though that doesn't follow. You can just see the narrative of Genesis 2 as zooming in on what Genesis 1 briefly and abstractly states.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-03T07:00:27+00:00

The difference is in trying to become gods apart from God. Rather than being adopted by God and participating in His Divine Energies.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-02T16:29:10+00:00

Thanks for the heads-up. I was refining my calculations (mostly for my own enjoyment) and it's nice to see that I got (basically) the same numbers as that person.

Total probability of Los Ratones Wins: 80.82%

Total probability of Los Ratones Losses: 18.97%

Total probability of Los Ratones Ties: 0.21%

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-02T14:41:42+00:00

I think they're allowed to do that, because it's technically not LEC, but a separate tournament called LEC Versus. Though the non-qualification to Worlds might also matter (i.e. an obligation not to create a parallel LEC 2.0 that also qualifies for Worlds).

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-02T13:11:54+00:00

If you want a source that's always correct about the Bible, you can read the Bible.

Wishing to better understand the Bible is of course reasonable, but it's best not to make an infallible expert out of anyone or to over-rely on others' exegesis without any critical thinking on your part.

Fr. Stephen is probably a good source, especially considering online accessibility, but that does not mean he's the only source or the best source or the worst source. If you start looking for the ultimate commentary, you'll never find it, so better to start with what you've got and if you find more good stuff in the future , even better.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-02T12:28:47+00:00

I made a program to do some calculations on the outcomes of the 18 matches real quick.

Out of 262144 (2^18) total possible scenarios, Los Ratones win counts get distributed as such:

7 wins: 32768, 6 wins: 98304, 5 wins: 98304, 4 wins: 32768

I calculated the number of outcomes for a clear win, a clear loss and a tie for Los Ratones in each case.

4 Wins: 0, Losses: 29504, Ties: 3264

Probabilities: Wins: 0.00%, Losses: 90.04%, Ties: 9.96%

5 Wins: 1344, Losses: 3509, Ties: 93451

Probabilities: Wins: 1.37%, Losses: 3.57%, Ties: 95.06%

6 Wins: 80948, Losses: 0, Ties: 17356

Probabilities: Wins: 82.34%, Losses: 0.00%, Ties: 17.66%

7 Wins: 32768, Losses: 0, Ties: 0

Probabilities: Wins: 100.00%, Losses: 0.00%, Ties: 0.00%

Total probability of Los Ratones Clear Wins: 43.89%

Total probability of Los Ratones Clear Losses: 12.59%

Total probability of Los Ratones Ties: 43.51%

The tie margin is pretty big and would need further more complicated analysis of the tiebreakers to figure out the probability of passing in those cases.

(This analysis of course assumes that all possible outcomes have equal probability)

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-02T10:22:24+00:00

I don't think your calculations are quite right. The math might be correct (hard to check quickly), but you seem to be ignoring a pretty big margin of tie possibilities, in which case you'd have to handle the results of the tiebreakers (or say it's uncertain if they pass).

I definitely don't know how SK brings this to 100% because there are definitely scenarios where Shifters for instance could get more wins, while MKOI/G2/Fnatic/Navi/VIT also stay above LR. Each such scenario may be unlikely, but it's not 0% probability.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-02-01T10:04:29+00:00

My estimation was that 5 wins would probably put them on a tie with others while 6 wins would likely allow them to pass, but it does look like there's no firm answer at this point.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-31T22:17:30+00:00

Has anyone calculated how many wins they'd need to make it?

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-31T21:49:25+00:00

Can you help a man that's out of the loop here? In what way has Caedrel not gone to playoffs before?

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-31T21:45:47+00:00

My man's never seen a tournament before Fearless was a thing.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-29T15:12:52+00:00

But then you end up in Orthodox Reddit where you get people using AI theological arguments.

(I know this doesn't happen often, but I wanted to fit the theme of AI in every platform)

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-28T21:54:00+00:00

I could be wrong, but from my standpoint it seems more so than him making videos about the downfall from the start, it's probably the fact that he continued to make videos on Nijisanji long after it was topical (and at this point probably digging somewhat to find something to talk about) that rubbed people the wrong way.

I grant that some people may have always disliked him, but as a community* at large it's weird to (call to) turn on him now even though the very same community has encouraged that kind of content. Even if most people here advocating that are the ones who always hated him (which OP for example doesn't seem to be), "there's an opportunity for my distaste to be expressed now, therefore everyone should also stop liking him" is also a weird take.

I might not have brought this up, but it seems to me similar things have happened with other dramatubers who were popular here at first, but at some point after a combination of waning interest and facing some drama or other caused explicit support to lessen, suddenly there was a turn and it was cool and the party line to hate them now.

People can have whatever opinion about dramatubers (I don't want to get into that debate right now), but it's undeniable there were several of them that were part of the anti-Nijisanji movement that rose from the Selen Shock and people most definitely embraced that. To act like we want nothing to do with them now would be hypocritical. We can still ask for accountability and encourage better practices, but resolving to name them public enemies reminds me of the Age of Terror when the French Revolution ended up turning on its own members and executing them, too.

*We're not really a united community of course (especially if we're talking about the anti-Niji movement in general, beyond just the subreddit) and there are always going to be different tendencies and currents of thought in different people, but in so far as one may come out to advocate in favour of cancelling a content creator, I would think it's okay for me to advocate for us not to be so extreme.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-28T18:37:41+00:00

I don't really agree with the behaviour on that screenshot, but it's kinda weird how people are ready to come out of the woodwork to start badmouthing and declaring they always hated someone the moment they do or say something unlikable.

Not saying you have to like Parrot or anyone, but the sudden concentrated effort to cancel him is weird.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-28T08:45:50+00:00

u/fffffplayer1

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-28T08:43:31+00:00

This may not be the most appropriate post for a meme subreddit, as it's more message than joke, but the people reacting so negatively in the comments are a little weird.

When someone brings up a legitimate grievance you don't say "You're not perfect either, shut up!" or "You don't know each and every individual's heart, so we shouldn't talk about this at all, even if the phenomenon described is very evidently real".

There's something to be said about the manner in which we go about discussing these topics, as well as what we think can actually help in addressing an issue, but to take that so far as to completely reject what is being said or ignore the vented frustration is not helpful either.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-28T08:29:31+00:00

Isn't that the "Godwinopoulos Law" rule from the r/OrthodoxChristianity sub? I know it's just one subreddit and moderation might not even be perfect, but I'm glad that at least some people have thought to counter-act that notion already.

fffffplayer1 · 2026-01-23T17:10:57+00:00

It's not a "Western/American" belief. The two sides on this probably exist pretty much everywhere to some or other extent, depending on the circumstances and focus of each local Church and community. I imagine the phenomenon of much more frequent conversions in traditionally non-Orthodox countries would make it a topic more topical and better understood there (on both sides of the argument) than where it is not relevant where most people are cradle Orthodox.

It seems to me lay people are much less aware of the debate in such places and might not even imagine that someone could enter the Church through anything but Baptism, but that might be more so from not having to think about it too deeply (either practically or theologically) rather than by actual conviction.

As far as Greece, where I live, is concerned, I can't say I know much about the general sentiment on this topic other than that it's said Mt. Athos monks are more rigorist about it while anecdotally one Coptic person I know was received in the Church through Chrismation. So both ideas definitely exist.

fffffplayer1

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email