saint john of sonkajanranta was karelian-finnish orthodox teacher, countermissionary and martyr.

in his time, the finns wanted to erase the culture of the karelians. they wanted the karelians to leave the orthodox faith, leave their culture behind and forget their language. traditionally, how have people been made to forget their own culture? so, how, for example, have the indigenous peoples of america been made to forget their own culture? by missionary work. finns did exactly the same in case of karelians. many forgot their language, religion and culture. some orthodox karelians gave up their culture, faith and language in order not to experience discrimination. their children were completely assimilated.

karelians have been orthodox even longer than finns have ever been lutheran or even catholic. lutheranism didn't even exist in the time when karelians converted to eastern orthodoxy in years between 1100-1300. even the church records of my own orthodox karelian family go back to the middle ages. your protestant "truth" isn't that old.

so, what are the reasons that karelian culture has withered almost to death? stalin and the protestant missionary work done by the finns. stalin was the reason why karelians could not live in their home regions in peace without finnish and russian assimilation. finnishization took place through lutheranization and russianization through the soviet persecution of peoples of finno-ugric origin.

so yeah, this is mainly why i hate protestant missionaries and communists.

in addition to the fact that the protestant missionary work has destroyed centuries of traditions of people's cultures, protestantism itself is pure heresy.

the type of protestant i despise the most is the one who tries to proselytize orthodox christians to their sect. they're uneducated. literally.

it just tells that they are laymen and clearly don't have theological higher education. usually lutheran priests can get along with orthodox christians, because they know basic church history and know that we are undeniably that same original church that jesus founded. they know how finnish lutherans treated orthodox karelians like shit so they have sensibility. i've seen many finnish protestant theology students who even convert to eastern orthodoxy because they find out the historical truth about holy and apostolic church from their studies. they're so educated that they can get along with jews as well.

i don't necessarly think that educated protestants who keep being protestants after finding the truth, are in denial. i understand the fact that many heterodox, so called "heretical" sects, are culturally important. i have healthy amount of cultural literacy. some ethnicities are ethnoreligious or some religions are part of that culture. however, i think that protestants who have no awareness how some of their tenets like sola scriptura or sola fide can be easily debunked and how they still keep demonizing catholics for their faith, it's clear that they don't know anything how christian theology, formation of biblical canon or church councils, and how they shaped christian faith as it is today.

protestants are not part of the true church because they have no apostolic succession and thus the presence of the holy spirit. apostolic succession means that jesus gave his disciples the task of continuing his work and wanted the apostles to then choose their successors who would continue their work. the apostolic succession is set by jesus himself, set by god himself, and protestants believe in this matter more in a german monk than in god himself. the protestants rejected the covenant of the holy spirit by asserting that a priest could be a priest without apostolic succession.

protestants do not understand that the holy spirit does not mean some vague state of personal ecstasy. holy spirit is more of a vibe check. jesus gave a vibe check to his apostles. the apostles gave the vibe check to their disciples. their disciples gave the vibe check to their disciples. all priests are therefore a continuation of the vibe check chain letter, which leads to the vibe check of the apostles and finally to the vibe check of jesus. jesus is a real priest, and all the priests of today are his disciples.

the purpose of vibe check is that the development of the church (and with it the development of christian culture) remains in the right hands. with protestantism, when the "priesthood" was "liberated", i.e. anyone can be a "priest" regardless of the lack of theological education, it has led to the birth of numerous christian-based cults and sects equipped with unhealthy mentalities. the activities of the large and open orthodox church can be monitored, the activities of the closed and small protestant sect cannot. with protestantism, there are an estimated 15 thousand different "churches" in the world. all born out of feuds where a splinter sect has a need to gain power or control its members. they never want to be one, but burn bridges. what is christian about that? shouldn't you get along with each other? to be one?

the finns converted from catholics to lutherans purely because the swedish crown did not want to pay church taxes to the catholic church. swedish crown also wanted to steal chattels of the catholic church of sweden to pay debts. the swedish crown wanted to boast more about its own nationalist excellence than to preach about catholic universal values. the reason why the british converted from catholicism to anglicanism was because henry viii thought that the king had sacred rights that were superior to the power of the pope. even though i'm orthodox and therefore i don't believe in the papal supremacy, it still seems strange to hear that some random english king who calls himself a "christian" thinks he's above the bishop of rome. the pope has more power than the king because he is subject to apostolic succession which is ultimately given by god himself. the king cannot even receive the so-called "the divine rights of the king" without the blessing of a priest who has received the apostolic succession. and even by then, they're not so divine that you're above the god. you will never receive those divine rights anyway.

the king cannot speak over christ. why did henry viii speak over christ? because he wanted to divorce his wife. he had six different wives. second, he wanted to create an absolute monarchy in britain. a monarchy so absolute that not even god is above it. louis xiv was also a supporter of the divine rights of the king and his absolutism led to the french revolution, after which the absolute monarchy was destroyed and the first declaration of human rights was made. if louis xiv had lived longer and his family had continued to rule, i would believe that france would be a protestant country for sure today.

in short, protestant kings (and protestant-spirited heretical catholic kings) were power hungry. that's why you all are protestants today.

usually protestants appeal to the "universal priesthood" without understanding its context and without reading about apostolic succession, both of which are found in the bible.

the context of the universal priesthood was that judaism had the same pattern of priestly succession and the jews of that time thought that christians were heretics and thus did not deserve the priesthood, even if they had studied the jewish holy texts of that time and therefore were rabbis. then the christians decided to break away from the jewish priestly institution by developing their own priesthood which they referred to as the universal priesthood. universalism did not mean that anyone could just be a priest. jesus still chose his disciples and the disciples chose their own disciples. universality meant that christianity, as a sect of judaism, is no longer jewish-centric in nature, but that anyone can become a part of it regardless of ethnicity. so the disciples of the apostles can also choose greeks, libyans, syrians and so on for their disciples. universality means that salvation is not reserved only for jews but for anyone. the jewish sect became a universal religion from an ethnic religion. the priesthood is still a closed and guarded matter. it is not just defined on the basis of ethnicity but on the basis of your knowledge and christian righteousness.

believing in sola scriptura automatically means that you do not know the history of the biblical canon and the importance of church councils in the formation of christianity. if holiness ONLY comes from the bible, then what do protestants think about the early church not having a new testament? no, it was not written during jesus' lifetime. parts of it were not written until 20-120 years after jesus' death, and the canon was not established until around 300 in church councils. does this mean that jesus' early church and congregations were not holy? does this mean that jesus and his disciples are not holy? or does this mean that only the old testament counts as the bible? should we only read the old testament then?

if you were a logical protestant you would reject protestantism as illogical unchristian heresy or convert to karaite judaism.

if you love bible so much, then how do protestants feel about the fact that one of the most important doctrines of christianity, the doctrine of the trinity, does not come from the bible but was decided at the council of nicaea? trinity isn't in the bible, how unholy and satanic trinity is! protestants generally say that venerating saints is heresy. well, did you know that the canonization of saints is an older doctrine than the doctrine of the trinity. if honoring the saints is heresy, then looking at the time window, the doctrine of the trinity should also be heresy. so by your logic, do you want to be jehovah's witnesses just because you hate saints? ironically, those who attended the council of nicaea were also canonized. so why do you listen to the saints? why do you listen to them talk about the trinity? why do you confess the apostles creed they made?