"Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition" — Dispute (interview) the Orthodox Christian with Baptists

The following persons participated in the dispute:

On the Orthodox side: Priest Evgeny Veselov, Alan Bedoev (speaker), Priest Pavel Bochkov and others.

On the Baptist side: Pastor Sergey Antonovich Didovets, Pastor Alexander Finogenov (speaker) and others.

* Minimal literary editing of the text was carried out for ease of reading. Comments of the priest Evgeny Veselov.

Report of the Orthodox (Alan Bedoev)

Orthodox: We have already partly covered the subject of Tradition in our first meeting. We have the same revelation, so we will partially repeat it, but we will try to delve into this topic today. Speaking of Sacred Tradition, I would like to immediately define this term, and from this we can build a dialogue further. According to the teaching of the Orthodox Church, a Sacred Tradition is undoubtedly a part of Divine Revelation, one of its forms, which is transmitted by believers from generation to generation, unmistakably, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In what, in fact, can we see the expression of the Sacred Tradition? First of all, this is, of course, in the interpretation of the Holy Scripture. The decisions of the seven Ecumenical Councils and the ten Local Councils, the writings of the Holy Fathers, and ancient liturgical texts are also the most authoritative exponents.

Thesis 1. Tradition is primary, Scripture is secondary. As much as this may hurt the ears of our dear guests, it really is. We know that there were no sacred texts from Adam to Moses, but can we conclude from this that since there were no sacred texts, there were no sacred texts? Was there no Holy Scripturein general, and no Divine Revelation in the world? Of course not. God did not abandon His creation, He gave knowledge about Himself, He gave him some moral standards, moreover, even some ritual regulations. We know that even Noah clearly distinguished clean animals from unclean ones, although the criterion of distinction appeared much,much later, already in the time of Moses. The Divine Revelation certainly was. We remember that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself did not write a single book, but He taught His disciples with the word that He received from the Father, and, in fact, with His life. Speaking of the primacy of Tradition over Scripture, it is important to note that the first book of the New Testament appeared eight long years after the ascension of Jesus Christ to Heaven. And here the question is – how did the Church live these eight years? Why, it lived there, spread and grew enormously, without having the text of the New Testament, freely and easily, because it was based on Sacred Tradition.

We go further-the canon. Probably everyone knows that the Holy Scripture as we know it today did not fall to us from heaven, as the Koran once fell on the head of Muhammad.

No, this is entirely the work and merit of the Church. In the first centuries, there were a huge number of texts that claimed to be inspired by God, that is, a huge sea.

According to the latest data, only the Gospel was counted in more than 20 different variations. The Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of childhood, the Gospel of James, and so on. A huge layer of different writings that claimed to be inspired by God.

But the Church, being moved by the Holy Spirit, by a conciliar decree established the canon that we have today.

How? That's right, it is based solely on the Sacred Tradition, because the canon was initially already known through the apostles to their disciples, and so on. That is, this is not a human invention.

The canon was approved only in the 4th century, but even before that, since the 1st century, the Church knew perfectly well which books were inspired by God and which were not, through Divine Tradition. Moreover, in the Bible itself (this is a very important fact, and this also needs to be discussed) there are texts that were not present in the early manuscripts. There are several of them, but, for example, we will touch on one of the most obvious, this is the Gospel of John, the eighth chapter, the story of a woman who was taken in adultery, they brought her, so to speak, to "catch" Christ.

In all the early manuscripts, this story is absent; it is undoubtedly a Divine Revelation, undoubtedly part of a Divine Tradition, but in the written variation, in the early texts, this story was absent.

Only in the fifth century, for the first time, it appears to us in that place of Holy Scripture, which is indicated in the “Code of Beza”. It is a late insertion, but no one has any questions about the truth of this story.

And so Protestants and Baptists, in order to be honest with themselves and consistent with all of us, need to completely abandon this story. They should also (following their logic) include in their list of books, in addition to the four Gospels, at least sixteen more, quote not only the Gospels of Luke, John, Mark and Matthew, but also the Gospel of childhood, the Epistle of Barnabas and so on, because, I repeat, in the first century there was a huge layer of these books. texts that we don't see in our canon right now.

Now, as for the text itself, here we are again. We know that the Old Testament was written in consonantal letters only. The Old Testament was not written in Russian, but in Hebrew. Last time I tried to touch on this topic in some way, but I realized from the feedback that I couldn't get my point across. Now I will try to dig a little deeper and not only tell you, but also show you by example.

So, 50 books of the Old Testament were written in consonantal letters alone, without vowels and their replacement signs. Rather, 39 books were written in Hebrew. The total number of these books contains about 28,000 words.

Relatively speaking, the specifics of the text are as follows: since these texts are written in consonant letters, the same combination of consonant letters can have a huge number of meanings depending on the arrangement of vowels. Thus, the Old Testament without Tradition is simply unreadable in itself.

To explain and show by example, let's imagine, for example, that I am an ancient Jewish writer. I did not write 28 thousand words, but at least let's look at the example of one word and see what it means (shows a sheet with the letters "KRV"):

I wrote the word in consonantal letters (because, as I said earlier, the very specifics of the text imply this) and put a certain meaning in it.

How many of you will be able to read what idea I have laid down, what word is written here? (Three people give their own answers).

Baptist: "Cow".

Orthodox: Why a cow? But what do you think?

Baptist: I think "shelter", most likely.

Orthodox: Or blood. And you're right, and you're right. Who else thinks so?

Baptist: "Blood".

Orthodox: Absolutely, right. Look, everyone is right and, at the same time, everyone is wrong. Because the meaning of the word will change depending on the vowels that we put down. For example, someone puts the letter "O", and you get "shelter" over your head, absolutely. Someone will put " O " and "B", you will get "blood", a completely different meaning. Someone will put two letters "O" and "A", you will get" cow " and so on. And there are twenty-eight thousand such combinations of letters (forming certain words) in the Old Testament, each word can have hundreds of different meanings depending on the vowel letters that we put there. Therefore, this text was read exclusively according to the Old Testament Tradition and in no other way.

When King Ptolemy wanted to get a translation of the Old Testament, he invited 72 interpreters, not two scholars, not three, but 72 (!!), because he understood that this text has a certain specificity, that people read it exactly according to Tradition, and he wanted to check how exactly the translation of different interpreters coincided. And when 72 interpreters translated the text of the Old Testament in the same way to one iota, he simply admired and realized that there really is something supernatural here.

Let's move on.

Thesis 2. The necessity of Sacred Tradition in the Church is repeatedly confirmed by the Holy Scripture itself. The Church has never limited the revelations of God to the Holy Scriptures alone, and there are good reasons for this.

First, the need for a Sacred Tradition in the Church is indicated by the word itself.The Holy Scriptures. We have previously analyzed one of the most obvious texts. The Apostle Paul instructs the Church of Thessalonica and says: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and keep the traditions which you have been taught (attention!) or the word or (i.e. the second option) our message" (2 Thess. 2: 15). In this text, we see a clear indication in which form the apostles conveyed Divine Revelation-either by word (we consider teaching by word to be a Sacred Tradition), or by epistle (which is Holy Scripture). Further, the apostle Paul even commands that "every brother who acts outrageously and not according to tradition should be put away" (2 Thess.3:6). The apostles themselves, giving us an example, repeatedly referred to the Holy Tradition, and we say this at every meeting, and I want you to see it. Thus, the Apostle Paul, instructing Timothy, says: "As Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men of corrupt minds, ignorant of the faith" (2 Timothy 3:8).

But where do we find this inThe Holy Scriptures? Then you can ask the apostle Paul: "Paul, why do you think beyond what is written, where it is written that some Jannes and Jambres even existed and terrorized Moses. There is nothing about this in Genesis, Exodus, or any other books of the Old Testament." But we see that the Apostle Paul refers to the ancient Jewish book "The Ascension of Moses", which contained this well-known tradition. Does the Apostle Paul look like a modern Baptist who would walk around with the sign "Solo Scriptura"? No, we see that it is not at all similar. Take another apostle. The Apostle Jude says that the Archangel Michael once argued with the devil (Jude 1: 9). He can also be rebuked: "Well, what are you making up there, where is it written in the Bible? Isn't it enough for you to save the Bible? Why should we quote some Archangel Michael if he is not mentioned in the Holy Scriptures?" But again, we will see that the apostle Jude honors the entire Divine Revelation, speaks of it as an indubitable fact, and refers to it. The Apostle Paul himself quotes Christ's words in Acts 20. He says that the Lord Himself said: "it is more blessed to give than to receive." (20: 35), that is, such a risk, such a responsibility (to convey the words of Christ). He understands that this is an indubitable fact (part of the Divine Tradition), but these words of Christ are not found in the Gospel itself.

Let's go further. Thesis number 3. Tradition is the key to a correct understanding of the Holy Scriptures. The tradition is preserved in the Church of Christ, which is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Timothy 3: 15). It is older than the Scriptures, as we said earlier, and therefore serves as a guide to the Holy Scriptures.

Scripture itself shows that without interpretation, its correct reading (understanding) is very difficult or even impossible. To Philip's question to the eunuch: "Do you understand what you are reading?" (Acts 1: 4).8: 30), - we remember that the eunuch replied: "How can I understand if someone does not guide me?".

It doesn't make much sense to delve into deep antiquity to prove the necessity of a Sacred Tradition. This can be understood if you just look around. There are a huge number of Christian denominations in the world, according to the latest data-33 thousand, a terrifying figure. Each of these denominations has its own interpretation of Scripture, and based on this reading, its own creed, its own subjective theology. Often the beliefs of one denomination completely contradict the beliefs of another, but each of them considers themselves to be the bearer of the Holy Spirit, Who leads them to Heaven. And here the question arises: how can we find the truth in this ocean of different creeds? It is certainly one, and it exists, because "the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth." How to find this treasure trove, this gold that those who were instructed by Christ had. After all, it is there.

Can a person act as a criterion for the truth of understanding the sacred text? That is, can any person who reads the Bible act as a criterion of truth?

Baptist Pastor: No.

Orthodox: I agree with you, but many Protestants disagree. A person cannot be a criterion for understanding the sacred text, because everyone judges according to the extent of their depravity. Some, relying on the Holy Scriptures, already approve of both women's bishoprics and same-sex marriages. I was shocked when in one of the dialogues same-sex love was justified by the text that Jonathan loved David more than his own soul (1 Samuel 18: 1). Further, in accordance with their own interpretations, they create commercial schemes of prosperity (as the neo-Pentecostals do), and moreover go to the point of deep blasphemy. For example, they deny the Divinity of Christ, as Jehovah's Witnesses do. You can say, of course, that they have their own Bible, that they argue and wonder, but this is a weak argument. The witnesses started using their own translation only in 2004, and before that they had been quietly reading our synodal translation, and this did not prevent them from building their blasphemous Christological, anthropological and eschotological heresies. It can be said that this is simply the fruit of their ignorance. Also not so. I was born, lived and grew up in Vladikavkaz. For reasons that I don't understand, there was a certain concentration of Jehovah's Witnesses, this particular sect, in the 1990s. There was no house where [they] did not go, and people accepted them (also it is not clear why). We all had them. I know for a fact that there are people among them who read the original Greek versions of the New Testament. Not the way you and I read – with lame phonetics and mistakes, relying on a subscript in our hand, but, indeed, they read and understand. Moreover, I knew a natural Greek (Jehovah's Witness) who had no problem reading the New Testament in the original, but this gives him absolutely no advantage. He also perishes in his sins.

Among the teachers of the Church, if we touch on the history of the Church, there were many Greek-speaking figures who also readThe New Testament was written in their native language, but this did not prevent them from building some blasphemous doctrines. So, thank God that you agree that a person cannot be a criterion of truth.

What does the Scripture tell us? When the apostles had some doctrinal questions, they did not say to each other, " Here is the truth."God told me so, and so God told me. They held a Council, as described in Acts 15, and by the council's decision, being moved by the Holy Spirit ("For it pleased the Holy Spirit and us"), they determined not to impose any burden on the newly converted Christians other than what was necessary (Acts 1: 15).15:28–29). It was this principle that the Orthodox Church adopted for the future, and so 7 Ecumenical Councils were held, at which the Church confirmed the truth. Important: I didn't come up with something new that wasn't there before, but I confirmed an existing fact, and, so to speak, cut off heresies. Therefore, the decisions of Ecumenical Councils are for us a great compass leading to Heaven, this is what we focus on, what we compare our understanding of the Bible with, and what we are guided by. Therefore, the existence of a Tradition, namely a Sacred Tradition in the Church, in our opinion, is simply necessary and fully justified by the Holy Scriptures.

Baptist Pastor: Please repeat three theses.

Orthodox: Thesis 1: Tradition is primary, Scripture is secondary. Thesis 2: The necessity of Sacred Tradition in the Church is repeatedly confirmed by the Holy Scripture itself. Thesis 3: Tradition is the key to a correct understanding of the Holy Scriptures.

Transition to the Baptist Report

Baptist Pastor: I'll start with a simple question. Imagine this hypothetical situation: the first Council of Nicaea met in the fourth century. If you remember, it was mainly held in connection with the Arian heresy. So imagine that all of a sudden, hypothetically, they all decided that Ariane was right. How would you, as believers, react to this decision of the Council, what would be your reaction, I'm just wondering...

Orthodox priest: Well, this is from the series, if you and I now took and began to walk not on our feet, but in a meter from the ground. Theoretically possible, but practically impossible. The Holy Spirit, Who leads His Church, He could not allow this, because "The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth "(1 Timothy 3: 15). So what happened, happened.

Baptist Pastor: Then the next question. If the Holy Spirit could not allow this, then why did He allow an iconoclastic council in his time? This is the first question. And the second question: how do you understand the text fromGalatians 1: 8?: "But if we..."? Of whom is Paul speaking?

Orthodox: About the apostles...

Baptist Pastor: "...or has an angel from heaven preached to you a different gospel from what we preached to you..." (earlier, before that, when they came to you), so be it what?

Baptist: Anathema.

Baptist Pastor: That's right.

Orthodox priest: I suggest you answer these two questions now and go on to your report, because I don't understand the meaning of the questions, and I'm waiting for the report.

Baptist Pastor: I will explain now, this is the beginning of the report, the introduction.

Orthodox priest: As for the Iconoclastic Council of Jeri, it was headless, even in name it was without heads, it was held without patriarchs, it was attended by members of only one local Church out of five, so it did not reflect the fullness of the teaching of the entire Ecumenical Church, other local Churches did not accept it, rejected it. False councils were held not only in the Church of Constantinople, but also in other local Churches.

The fourth century is full of false councils, yet the Holy Spirit does not act in such a way that every meeting of bishops is guaranteed to lead to a correct dogmatic result, but only a meeting of faithful bishops. Human passions sometimes seem to overcome the Divine power, but it only seems so, because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth, and He is Omnipotent. Over time, the Lord so arranges that those who have been carried away by an erroneous opinion come to repentance, some more clearly reveal their heresy, and over time the truth triumphs.

As you said about the First Ecumenical Council, after it, you probably know, there were many councils of the 4th century, but Arianism, which won at these councils, has gone into oblivion. Iconoclastic Cathedral... Yes, indeed, the Headless Council met in 754, but a little over 30 years after it, the 7th Ecumenical Council met, and some members of this Headless Council participated in all possible repentance; then there was a second wave of iconoclasm, and then iconoclasm ended, and the Holy Spirit shone forth in His Church and gave us the right teaching about icon veneration. But from the way you put the question, I understand that this teaching is not obvious to you. This is a topic for another good conversation.

As for the Epistle to the Galatians... It's very simple here, I'm even surprised by your question. For example, if you think an Angel comes from heaven and says, "Christ is not God," can you imagine that?

Baptist Pastor: Well, I can imagine hypothetically...

Orthodox priest: I can't imagine.

Baptist Pastor: So it's not an Angel...

Orthodox priest: And for what reason can I not imagine? An angel is not a human being to change. Angels – they are blameless in their goodness after they have made their choice. And the devils are perfectly firm in evil after they have made their choice. A demon cannot become an Angel of light, in fact, but only appear to be; nor can an Angel become a demon and not appear to be one. If an Angel lied to people about Divine Revelation, he would be a demon, which is impossible, and you agree with this. So here the apostle says that this is absolutely impossible, but if it suddenly happened... That is, here he brings the situation to the point of absurdity and shows that even if heaven fell to earth, your faith should still be unshakable, and he compares himself to an Angel who is always firm in faith and in honoring God, shows that the measure of his faith is equal to the measure of an angel. And so, just as an Angel cannot sin in faith, so he (the apostle)cannot sin in faith. he cannot sin in his faith, but even if he did, you already know the faith, and I have already given it to you. If we were to say anything else, let us be anathema, and since what is transmitted beforehand is a condition for accepting what follows, the question arises: and where did the Galatians get the word of truth? From texts? No, from an oral sermon, which the apostle reminds them of in the same epistle. So, we see the validity of the words that the sermon is primary, and the text is secondary, this is the first thing.

Secondly, we know that some of them were already dying, as the Epistle to the Thessalonians says. It is clear that they have not yet received the entire corpus of Holy Scripture, but they have rested in the New Testament era.

At the same time, the conditions of salvation are uniform from the day of Pentecost to the Second Coming, as we discussed last time. Therefore, of course, both they and we are saved equally by the Word of God preserved in the Church. This Word of God is either an oral sermonor texts of Holy Scripture, but correctly understood. And in ancient times there were heretics who misunderstood the Scriptures, and in our time there are people who misunderstand it, which you, of course, agree with. We have given such examples.

Baptist Pastor: Are you saying that the eighth verse is a hyperbolic expression, an exaggeration?

Orthodox priest: I totally agree. Hyperbole to the limit. It's as ifGod will turn away.

Baptist Pastor: Is it the same as if I speak in the languages of men and angels, and people do not have the languages of angels, meaning that they do not exist as such? So this is hyperbole.

Orthodox priest: Yes, that's right.

Baptist report (Pastor Alexander Finogenov)

Baptist Pastor: The Church is based on the Word of God, probably no one will have a question here, we all need to understand that the foundation of the Church is based on the Word of God. Christ himself is the incarnate Word of God. I think that there is also no point in giving any texts to confirm this, because there are quite a lot of them. The Word of God came to the Church through the written word, through the Holy Scriptures, through the oral preaching of the apostles. During the formation of the Church, people turned to what word? Do you remember when the apostles came to Berea to preach the gospel, what word did the believers turn to? They turned to the Scriptures, the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Why and for what purpose? To check if it's exactly what they said it was. What does this mean? That the apostles ' sermon was very interesting for them, but they checked it out. The authority of this sermon was tested on the basis of what? Based on the previous texts, the previous prophetic revelation, that is, the Old Testament revelations.

What does this mean? That people turned to the Old Testament to verify the words of the apostles. Yes, and the apostles themselves often useThe Old Testament in order to preach the Gospel. There are a lot of quotations in the apostolic epistles, in the Gospel there are a lot of quotations from the Old Testament, that is, there is a special continuity here (such an interesting word that you can understand), and the Church, in turn, is born exclusively through apostolic preaching. The truth is-and this is the truth that we understand and understand, and I will now argue-that it is not Tradition that precedes the New Testament, but apostolic preaching that precedes the New Testament. I will now explain. Ephesians 2: 20: "Being established on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, having Jesus Christ Himself as the cornerstone." Look, in this Epistle to the Ephesians, the Church is presented as a structure, and as a proper structure, in which the cornerstone is Who? This is Christ. It lies, It defines all the dimensions of the building, clear dimensions. It lies at the base. Further, what we are talking about: the cornerstone is Christ, the next layer is the teaching. The teaching of whom? Transmitted by the prophets of the Old Testament and the teaching transmitted by the apostles of the New Testament. It is clear that we are talking about the apostolic teaching and the teaching of the prophets of the Old Testament. The next verse is 1 Corinthians 11: 2. The Apostle Paul addresses the Corinthians: "I praise you, brethren, that you remember all my things and keep my traditions as I have handed them down to you." The Greek word "tradition" ("paradosis") in this case, if translated into a more understandable language, is"transmitted teaching". Further 2 Thess. 2: 15, as already cited: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and keep the traditions which you have been taught either by our word or by our epistle." This text clearly tells us what Paul refers to as tradition: 1) the word you heard in person (as you said, and we are not arguing here) and 2) it is a recorded word. That is, what was heard and recorded. And, of course, these words do not contradict each other, they are in harmony, in absolute harmony.

Let's move on. The written Divine Revelation (as we understand it and base our understanding on the texts of the Holy Scriptures) is a complete version, there are no other prophets, no other apostles, there is no other teaching or revelation yet. What is the problem, what is the human problem? You have raised the question of where various kinds of teachings come from. The problem is that the transmitted teaching may not be Divine, but human in nature. There is an interesting text in Colossians 2: 8: "Take heed, brethren, that no one leads you astray by philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ." In other words, the apostle warned that even the Church (he also calls "brothers", he says to believers) can be carried away by human teachings and depart from the teaching of the Gospel, the Divine teaching. So this is possible? Maybe. And such things are happening everywhere in practice right now. This is evidenced by the 7 churches of Asia, for example, to which John addresses (or rather, the Lord Christ addresses through John in the Book of Revelation), and which, for the most part, needed serious reformation in many matters.

But now a little history. The first three centuries of the Christian Church, in fact, did not undergo major changes; obviously, this was due to the fact that the Church lived underground, in the catacombs, all services there were secret, but the 4th century came when freedom comes. This freedom brings with it not only the blessing of being able to freely preach the gospel and celebrate the Christian liturgy, but also problems. What are these problems? When Christianity is declared the state religion, a huge mass of people come to the Church, a colossal mass of people. Here are the numbers for information. If at the beginning of the fourth century only 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire was Christian, by the end of the fourth century 90 percent of the population formally belonged to the Christian Church.

You can imagine the difference – the number of Christians increased by 9 times, and not at the expense of sincere believers, for the most part, but at the expense of those who were afraid of persecution, since paganism was outlawed very soon after. This whole mass of people comes to the Church and brings a pagan worldview. The pagan worldview was associated with pagan rituals, where, following the rules of ritual, a person somehow pleased the gods by fulfilling their part of the contract, and therefore the gods had to fulfill their part of the contract and send a blessing. Such people perceive everything that happened in Christianity precisely from the mystical point of view, and the church service gradually becomes a way of manipulating God, as they used to manipulate.

They are not regenerated people, there is no faith there, there is only ritualism, nothing more. Therefore, the fourth century is characterized by the appearance of many holidays and rituals. And even from archaeological data, it is known that the fourth century is characterized by the appearance of more than a hundred varieties of liturgy. This is understandable, demand creates supply; what is more in demand, is offered; thus, the Church is slowly, imperceptibly, overgrown with this ritual, which very much affects many things – on the ministry, on theology, on the perception of Christian doctrines, and these rites often have nothing in common with the Word of God. Over time, this is growing more and more into a big snowball, and, of course, the Church needs to be reformed at some point, and this has happened. In Europe, the Reformation began at the beginning of the 16th century, and later this reformation passed to Russia.

I will say very briefly, all this information is available on the Internet, you can read how it all happened. Since the second half of the 19th century, the synodal translation of the Bible has greatly contributed to the revival of the Russian population. Remember, Prince Golitsyn, the Russian Bible Society. Various kinds of awakenings began to appear en masse.

I will give you some examples so that you can understand where our brotherhood came from, because someone thinks that someone there baptized himself. Yes, I understand that all this is in history, but I will tell you now the story that shaped our church, the real story. Stundists began to appear en masse. Who are the stundists? You understand perfectly well that these people come from Orthodox Christianity with a bias (there was such a theological trend as pietism).

Orthodox priest: No, the early Pietists-they're not Orthodox, of course, they're Lutherans and Mennonites. By geography, see where it was: Zaporozhye, Volga region, Crimea-places of local settlement of Germans.

Baptist Pastor: Of course, the Germans influenced people, but these people, the Stundists, first gathered in Orthodox churches, celebrated liturgies, first participated in the service, these are historical facts.

Orthodox: I would like links to specific facts. During the synodal period, everything was very structured. It was impossible to go into the church and say: "Father, move over, we have a community, now we will pray."

Baptist Pastor: No, you don't understand. They did not serve their own liturgy. They participated in the Orthodox liturgy. They were Orthodox, but they already gathered separately from home and read the Bible.

Orthodox priest: We were sitting on two chairs, it turns out. But over time, they found out what to do with the Church Orthodox and Christ are not on the path, and have left it. "They went out from us, but they were not of us "(1 John 2: 19), right?

Baptist Pastor: I do not know how you look at it, this is the second question.

Orthodox priest: It's not us watching, it's the Gospel watching.

Baptist Pastor: The Molokans who had appeared a century earlier also became more and more numerous; and almost all of the Molokans eventually accepted the Baptist teaching, practically all of them, many of them. The Baptists are directly influenced by German immigrants, this is understandable. Mennonites, fraternal Mennonites - a separate movement, and Evangelical Christians (St. Petersburg, higher nobility), which emerged as a result of the ministry of the Calvinist Lord Redstock. He left the Church of England, then when he met the Plymouth brethren, he accepted their creed, and the Plymouth brethren preached the Calvinist doctrine. As a result of numerous congresses, all these movements united in one common union "Evangelical Christians-Baptists".

Orthodox priest: Under Stalin.

Baptist Pastor: No, there were a lot of conventions. Under Stalin, the final congress was held in 1944.

Orthodox priest: Under Stalin. Before that, they tried, tried, but united under Stalin.

Baptist Pastor: Our fraternity was formed as a result of the merger of these very trends, and for this reason it is also rich in traditions, and, perhaps, different views on secondary issues related to the church liturgy and other things, but nevertheless the whole brotherhood is based on the Baptist faith, formed and changed somewhere, but accepted by absolutely everyone, at conventions. Traditionally, we adhere to the following principles:: The church can make mistakes, that is, we have such a principle of reformation: The Church may make mistakes, but God's Word is unchangeable; it is for this reason that we are open to reformation, we recognize the autonomy of local churches, but within the framework of a common faith. It is for this reason that we have a variety of views on secondary issues.

For more than two centuries of our history, we have formed a liturgy of service and collected thousands of collections of Christian hymns. By the way, we can sing if you want, next time, on our territory. We have a pious chant, so you don't have to worry. We conduct training, provide theological education based on the Word of God, and have formed a Christian discipline in the church. In our churches, the sin of fornication, drunkenness, drug addiction, and other vices that are directly condemned by God's Word is unacceptable.

Conclusion of the Baptist report and start of the discussion

Baptist Pastor: By the way, I just want to tell you a story, very short, as an illustration. I once went to the board of directors in Samara, where people from all over Russia, directors of many poultry farms, farms, and we were taught how to do business there. I tried to somehow talk to people about God, to bear witness to them. A lot of them were Orthodox people who went to church, who were baptized. I will tell you one case. We were invited to the bathhouse, we come, at first I thought that there would be separate men, separate women. I went to the bathhouse, sat down on the kutnik, there is a director of a well-known St. Petersburg large poultry farm, and here comes a woman. I say: "How so, what are you doing, this is wrong!" He says: "For us it is normal, in Russia it always was." The situation was such that I say: "Either I will leave, or they must leave." He said, " Come on, everyone leave." Then we talked to him, and he says: "This is the first time I've met such a person, I know a lot of people, I know a lot of Orthodox Believers who go to church and so on, but this is the first time I've seen a person who doesn't cheat on his wife. I know thousands of people I know who cheat on their wives and think it's normal and proud of it." And here he is telling me this, and he is absolutely calm, as if he is satisfied with his answer. I say, " How can this be?"

Orthodox priest: How does this relate to our topic?

Baptist Pastor: I will now explain how this applies to the topic. God forbids such things. There are specific passages about fornication, drunkenness, and other things. Look, here is an indisputable fact – my spiritual life depends entirely on my theology. My spiritual life, my orthopraxia depends on my orthodoxy, I think that you will not argue with this. It does not just come from the fact that lust comes. Whatever my theology is, that's how I live. See how your congregation lives, just look. We do not allow the sin of drunkenness, we excommunicate for it. We do not allow fornication, we excommunicate for it. This is a tradition that was formed on the basis of the Holy Scriptures. I'm just giving you a simple example.

Orthodox priest: Should I answer, or do you continue your report?

Baptist Pastor: No, I'll go on a bit now. Perhaps the time has come for the reformation of theology, which bears such a heavy burden of the sinful life of parishioners, and even not only parishioners, so that we can become Christians not by tradition, but, perhaps, by vocation.

Orthodox priest: Do I understand correctly that you say that our theology justifies fornication?

Baptist Pastor: No, no, no, you're exaggerating.

Orthodox priest: You say we need to reform theology. Does it justify fornication or not?

Baptist Pastor: You don't understand me.

Orthodox priest: No, I don't understand.

Baptist Pastor: I'll explain in a moment.

Orthodox priest: Please specify.

Baptist Pastor: I would like to make it clear that theology, which does not bring a spiritual, pious life in the Church, is overgrown with traditions, where traditions come first and God's Word comes second.

Orthodox priest: So does it justify fornication or not?

Baptist Pastor: Did I say that it does?

Orthodox priest: I don't understand. Are you saying that this is a consequence of our theology? And all of us, Orthodox Christians sitting here before you, are all fornicators and justify fornication? We justify fornication, and theology helps us in this? Did I understand correctly?

Baptist Pastor: No, no, no.

Orthodox priest: So you don't blame us for fornication?

Baptist Pastor: No, absolutely not.

Orthodox: Thank you. Thank God, at least one less claim.

Baptist Pastor: You are welcome.

Orthodox priest: That's very good.

Baptist Pastor: But you must agree that this is a fact.

Orthodox: How? It's a secret thing, intimate, I do not know. Do I have to follow every believer with a lantern? Have you been fornicating just now? Look into your eyes, look into your eyes!

Baptist Pastor: No, what does a secret thing mean? People talk about it, they don't hesitate to talk about it.

Orthodox: Bad. They have a lot of letters in their mouths, that's why they talk.

Baptist Pastor: That's what I'm saying, it's bad.

Orthodox: At least we found common ground here.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, yes, yes, let us better reform the principle so that Tradition is secondary and the Word of God is primary. For this reason, all these spiritual problems appear in the Church.

Orthodox: But all the same, you have come to the conclusion that the Tradition contributes to the development of spiritual decline in people...

Baptist Pastor: Tradition, when it comes first, contributes to this. When it comes first. When it's out of place, when you're doing a shuffle.

Orthodox: So there are elements in the Tradition that approve of fornication?

Baptist Pastor: I didn't say that. Tradition does not give spiritual life, it confuses a person.

Orthodox: And then how was the Scripture born?

Baptist Pastor: Scripture is primary. Scripture gives spiritual life, Scripture gives new life. It transforms life, only through the Scriptures, only through God's word.

Orthodox priest: Can I ask you one question? I want to understand. Here is take any element of the Legend. For example, "Fundamentals of the social concept of the Russian Orthodox Church". A regulatory document, you probably know about it. This document states that fornication is unacceptable for a Christian. This is an element of our Tradition, and a normative One at that. This is not a separate opinion, but a guide to action. Do I understand correctly that this place needs to be reformed if it says that fornication is unacceptable?

Baptist Pastor: No, you totally misunderstand. I will explain: I am not saying that you have something there where it is written in your Tradition that fornication is permissible. It's right, it's according to the Word of God. Invalid. But there are many things that don't fit God's word.

Orthodox priest: That's good, that's what they would say. We have, it turns out, in the part of fornication everything is in order. We condemn fornication. We are struggling with this.

Baptist Pastor: But to condemn fornication and not to commit fornication are two different things.

Orthodox: That is, we still condemn fornication, but just a little...

Baptist Pastor: I'm not talking about you, I'm telling you again. I don't get personal.

Orthodox priest: And we are part of the Church. You say all Orthodox Christians...

Baptist Pastor: I didn't say everything. Don't exaggerate, please. Don't exaggerate, don't distort my words, please.

Orthodox: Then don't generalize.

Baptist Pastor: I don't generalize, I've never generalized. You may have noticed that I didn't say "all". I didn't use the word "all" and I didn't say...

Orthodox: We just registered that this is a controversial issue. Your wording, it causes rejection.

Baptist Pastor: I gave you my own example from life.

Orthodox priest: I didn't understand you. Although I sincerely tried, but did not understand everything, we will not continue.

Baptist Pastor: At the previous meeting, that is why I suggested that you should meet separately somewhere and talk about the Holy Tradition, about the Holy Scripture, and both of you should talk it out. Then there will be fewer such sharp corners in general meetings.

I would like (as I suggested last time) for everyone to participate if possible. Not just the ones who did the reports, right? Well, so that all questions are asked and clarified. Maybe they didn't really accuse you of having the wrong faith, so you have the wrong life. And if it sounded like that on our part, then we apologize to you. Because we don't gather to blame or change each other's minds. We just share our beliefs and want to know more precisely. I want to know what your beliefs are. I hope you also want to know. Therefore, we will try to adhere to this goal, which we have stated for all meetings.

Orthodox priest: Yes, yes, good.

Baptist Pastor: So now, questions to whom? Probably to the first speaker, right? Or already there, as it goes.

Orthodox priest: You can ask questions about the report if you have any questions. And I would like to clarify a few things. No dispute, just to clarify.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, I also want to clarify a lot of things. Because, as you have heard, I am very weak in the sacred traditions, and in general I do not know much about history. I know the Bible story better than the history of Russia or Ukraine. I'm a Ukrainian myself, from there. But I know the Bible story better. Sometimes, to be honest, I'm not even interested in listening to some moments. Well, just because they are not relevant to life. And what concerns us today and the building up of our churches, the repentance of the sinner, the awakening of Russia, is what interests me most. So, if you'll excuse me, I'll clarify.

Orthodox: Yes, let's do it this way: one question from you, then one from us.

Baptist Pastor: Good. So I read on the Internet about what I already understood from your report, and you said earlier that the Holy Scriptures are part of the Holy Tradition.

Orthodox: Definitely.

Baptist Pastor: Is this exactly the case?

Orthodox: Exactly, I can explain what I was talking about.

Baptist Pastor: This is part of a Sacred Tradition. And today we have heard that the Holy Tradition is primary, the Holy Scripture is secondary.

Orthodox priest: Historically, chronologically.

Baptist Pastor: Do you accept that the Holy Scriptures are inspired by God?

Orthodox: The scripture?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, it is the Scripture.

Orthodox: Sure.

Baptist Pastor: Do you admit that the Sacred Tradition is inspired by God?

Orthodox: Of course, absolutely. This is part of the Divine Revelation.

Baptist Pastor: That is, the entire Sacred Tradition is also inspired by God?

Orthodox: It is Sacred. Not a human Tradition, but a Sacred One.

Baptist Pastor: As inspired as the Holy Scriptures?

Orthodox: The same Spirit That gave utterance through the holy men who wrote down the Holy Scriptures, the same Spirit, It works in the Church as well.

Baptist Pastor: You know, I read that it seems that the Orthodox do not recognize the Sacred Tradition as inspired by God.

Orthodox: No, that's not right.

Baptist Pastor: So you admit it to the same extent?

Orthodox priest: Here you can see what's going on. I'll quote it. Paul refers to the Tradition of the spoken and written word, which do not contradict each other. Based on 2 Thess.2:15. That is, indeed, I completely agree with him. For the apostle, the concept of Tradition, that is, what he transmits to his disciples, is partly oral, partly written. Isn't that right?

Baptist Pastor: Well, naturally.

Orthodox priest: That is why this attitude is apostolic and has been preserved in the Orthodox Church. For us, what the Holy Spirit gave the apostles to say was partly in the texts that have come down to this day, and partly in the way of life, for example, the way of worship. It is, accordingly, not in the Scriptures, but it was. This is a very important part of the life of the first Church. Or some moments of personal relationships. There are general outlines, but the details are missing again. And so on. That is, questions of practice, they were solved through the succession of Tradition, first of all. Questions of faith are mostly recorded in texts, but at the same time there are many elements that were transmitted live.

For example, Basil the Great in the fourth century speaks, based on the practice of the Ante-Nicene, about the one from whom we accepted three times immersion in the font. I'll even read this passage, which is very vivid and famous, if you'll excuse me, because he insists that these are all elements of the Apostolic Tradition.

He says: "Of the dogmas and sermons observed in the Church, we have some in the teaching set forth in the Scriptures, and others that have come down to us from the Apostolic Tradition, we have received in secret, but both are equally valid for piety." And then he goes on to say that "if we were to reject the customs that are not set forth in Scripture, as having no great force, we would imperceptibly distort the most important thing in the Gospel, or rather, we would turn the sermon into an empty name. For example, who among those who put their trust in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ taught us in writing to make the sign of the cross? What Scripture taught us to turn to the east in prayer? Which of the saints left us on the letter the words of invocation to the transfiguration of the Bread of Thanksgiving and the Cup of Blessing? According to what Scripture also do we bless both the water of Baptism and the Anointing oil? What are the proper rules of Scripture? Is it not according to the mysterious Tradition observed by default? What Scripture taught us to invoke the name of the Holy Trinity at Baptism?" And so on.

That is, he says that these are the oldest elements of Christian worship and practice, which were not recorded, but were transmitted orally, well, in practice, until the time of the 4th century.

You said that the faith is pre-Nicene, it is solid and good, if I understand your point correctly.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, of course.

Orthodox priest: Yes. So it turns out that these elements of explicit traditions, preserved to this day in the Orthodox Church, which you rejected, are good for Basil the Great, and for his spiritual ancestors of the 2nd and 1st centuries they are good again.

Baptist Pastor: No, we have nothing against any moments in the liturgy that are connected with Baptism, we also have a lot of nuances...

Orthodox priest: Well, what about it? We have a triple dive, and you have a single dive. This is a significant difference.

Baptist Pastor: No, this is secondary, absolutely secondary.

Orthodox priest: It's secondary to you. And for us, this is so important that a person who has taken a single immersion, coming to the Orthodox Church, is baptized correctly.

Baptist Pastor: So that's the problem, that we think the important issues are the issues of saving the human soul.

Orthodox priest: You see? What did the Christians of the first centuries think? Did they think this was important?

Baptist Pastor: So they thought (as wedid). This is what was considered important. He doesn't call it more important than salvation, the most important issue. And where did you quote that this question is more important than the question of saving the human soul? Here, give me an example.

Orthodox priest: He says that this is important and that is important. And "if we decided (again) to reject the customs that are not set forth in Scripture, as not having great power, we would imperceptibly distort the most important thing in the Gospel. Rather, they would have turned the sermon into an empty name." That is, he believes that this is also important.

Baptist Pastor: Let's move on, because I wanted you to answer me quickly.

Orthodox: Let's continue.

Baptist Pastor: I understood and heard that you consider the Holy Scriptures to be inspired by God. It turns out that the Holy Scripture is inspired by God, and the Holy Tradition. Is sacred Tradition a progressive revelation?

Orthodox priest: No, it is transmitted by God, but it is not progressive.

Baptist Pastor: That is, it turns out that during the first century, while the apostles lived, Jesus Christ did not reveal all the truth to them, and then the disciples of the apostles lived, then the disciples of the disciples, and so on, and over the centuries the Lord revealed many things that the apostles did not know in the first century?

Orthodox priest: I heard it, can I answer it?

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: You are now expounding the Roman Catholic doctrine. There is no such doctrine in the Orthodox Church.

Baptist Pastor: I just want to clarify.

Orthodox priest: Yes, I understand you, so, you see, I calmly answer without emotion.

Baptist Pastor: Thank you.

Orthodox priest: Catholic doctrine, still quite late, 19th century. This has never happened in the Orthodox Church, and it doesn't happen now. We believe that the Holy Spirit originally conveyed the fullness of truth to the Church. And some of the truth was written down in the texts, and some of it was not written down, but was transmitted in practice and verbally, as I have already said.

Baptist Pastor: That is, since the first century, all the truth has been passed down?

Orthodox priest: fullness, yes. All of our customs are derived from the first century, all of our elements of the creed, the texts of the creed, all derive from the first century. The wording changed; that is, the essence of faith remained unchanged, the essence of orthopraxia remained unchanged, and the wording historically changed, primarily as a response to the challenges of its time, especially heretical ones. Satisfied with the answer?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, thanks. I understood.

Orthodox priest: All right.

Orthodox: Let me ask the first question, and then you will ask your second question. Here the speaker said that one of your postulates: The Church can make mistakes. The whole Church, on a universal scale?

Baptist Pastor: If we talk about the Universal Church, then probably not; if we talk about councils, then perhaps.

Orthodox priest: You don't have cathedrals, we are talking about your practice.

Orthodox: So the Ecumenical Church can't be wrong?

Orthodox priest: Your church, to which you belong, your communities here in Kostroma, in other places, throughout Russia, in the world Baptist communities - is it possible to assume that your church can be mistaken? The entirety of communities?

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox: Can you confirm from the Holy Scriptures where this is stated?

Baptist Pastor: I told you..."

Orthodox priest: We were told about the churches of Asia, if I remember correctly, and about Colossians 2: 8. Can we say two words about these texts? So, look-these are definitely two inaccurate quotes. The churches of Asia are firm in their faith. The Lord does not reproach them for their faith. For practice, yes. For fellowship with the world, yes. But he doesn't blame you for your faith. The faith was betrayed on the day of Pentecost, and remained unchanged. Also, even if some churches are not firm in practice, others are firm in practice. Moreover, the entire Ecumenical Church cannotbe mistaken.

Colossians 2: 8-this is, remember, when the Apostle Paul spoke to the elders of Ephesus, when he said that some of them and their parishioners would also be carried away by false teachings. But the point here is that "take heed," he says, "brethren, that no one leads you astray with philosophy,"and so on. It doesn't say that everyone will get carried away. Just like it didn't say [that everyone will get carried away], but that some will fall away. The whole Church cannot fall away. Why? Because the Church is "the pillar and foundation of truth."

Baptist Pastor: I didn't mention the whole Church. Do you consider yourself the whole Church?

Orthodox priest: Orthodox? Yes, of course.

Baptist Pastor: That is, in general, absolutely all...

Orthodox: The Church has boundaries. We clearly distinguish them.

Baptist Pastor: You're talking about seven Cathedrals, aren't you?

Orthodox: Yes.

Baptist Pastor: But then what cathedrals did you have? Here in the future. The first seven are Ecumenical Councils. That is, there, yes, you could say that this is the whole Church. And then what cathedrals?

Orthodox priest: You must understand that we have different ways of revealing the faith of the Church. One of the ways, as you rightly said, is Ecumenical Councils. And it's true. The second method is, for example, such a principle as" consensus patrum", that is,"consent of the fathers". When all the holy fathers, or the overwhelming majority who spoke about it, speak uniformly. Well, let's say the creation of the world, is it from the substance of the pre-existing or from nothing? Fathers say insistently that out of nothing. This is for us, in principle, the consent of the fathers. And so we believe that this is a dogma of our faith. Although no Ecumenical Council said this. In addition, even in a later period, there was a secondary method of identification, which is slightly similar, but not identical. This is when a certain document was signed by the fullness of all Churches (and each separately) the one, the other, the third, the fourth, the fifth, how many of them were there at that moment. And the teachings of the Holy Fathers do not contradict this.

For example, they adopted the Orthodox confession in this wayPeter the Grave in the 17th century. And we must also say that since this teaching is agreed upon by the Universal Church, it is again a dogma of faith. And so on.

Baptist Pastor: You say that the Ecumenical Council determines your faith, and then there is an additional way to reveal it.

Orthodox priest: Yes. After all, Vera was before The First Ecumenical Council.

Baptist Pastor: How can they be called the whole Church? These fathers gathered, decided something, the bishops gathered, decided. How can they be called the whole Church, if after the 7th Ecumenical Council the Church was not complete, it was already divided into two parts? And most of them went there, to the Western Church.

Orthodox priest: No, unfortunately, you were not present at our conversation on ecclesiology, and if you were, you would know that we do not consider Catholics to be part of the Church. They broke away from the Church. "They came out from us, but they were not ours." More precisely, they were ours, but they left. Yes, that is why the fullness of the Church has been preserved.

Baptist Pastor: Everything is clear.

Orthodox priest: Yes. We don't believe in branch theory. Not at all. We believe that our Church is identical with the Church of the Day of Pentecost-the Orthodox Church.

Orthodox: As it is said, the Church is "the pillar and foundation of truth,"and the Lord, in Matthew 16, said that " I will build the Church Mine, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it "(Matthew 16: 18). That is, if the Church could be wrong in its entirety, then it turns out that the Lord incorrectly conveyed the truth to us, and the Church was still able to overcome the gates of hell, and it needs to be reformed. Therefore, it is necessary to see from the text, if I understand you correctly, that the Church can fall away in its entirety. On the basis of what do you draw this conclusion?

Baptist Pastor: I did not say, in the first place, that the entire Ecumenical Church...

Orthodox: In other words, some of it may disappear?

Baptist Pastor: Some of it may be missing.

Orthodox: We believe the same way.

Baptist Pastor: So, why do you think this part isn't you?

Orthodox Priest: Because we know that our faith is identical to that of the first Church. The grace that abides with us, it is identical with the grace of the first Church.

Baptist Pastor: This is not an argument. On the basis of God's Word, confirm to me that this part is you.

Orthodox: Our dogmas have not changed in any way. You can take lists of all the first centuries and compare them with those that exist today.

Baptist Pastor: We do not fully agree with you on the issues of soteriology, which is based onThe Holy Scriptures.

Orthodox: Do you disagree with the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures?

Baptist Pastor: Again, and with interpretation.

Orthodox priest: I suggest that we not step aside now, because this was already discussed in the last conversation. Can I ask you two questions? Of these, one is not very large, and the second is larger.

Baptist Pastor: Let's.

Orthodox priest: A question about your report. The first. You said that the preaching of the apostles had to be checked according to the Old Testament. You gave an example from the book of Acts about the Jews who were tested. And I would like to give another example from the book of Acts, namely the following. It is known that a certain number of Old Testament believers (Pharisees who believed) insisted on the basis of the Old Testament, quoting it extensively, that circumcision is necessary. And others, apparently small but still existing Christians, believed that circumcision was not necessary for Christians. And there was a conflict, as you understand. And so, it turns out that the first group, that is, the Pharisees who believed, they interpreted the Scriptures, and the second group, they were no longer based on Scripture, but on personal faith.

And when they gathered at the Apostolic Council, after this first group quoted the Old Testament in detail, the Scripture says, first the Apostle Peter stands up, then the Apostle James, and instead of confirming one side or the other with quotations from the Holy Scriptures, they say: "How can you put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"15:10). And so they have reduced the argument for solving a very important dogmatic question not to an interpretation of Scripture, as you have just told us, but to something completely different, namely, direct revelation.

Baptist Pastor: This is a misconception.

Orthodox priest: No. I will add another quotation, namely, that the apostle says that "the letter kills, but the spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians 3: 6). That's the same thing. That is, at the moment of faith, they checked the sermon about Christ with the Scriptures of this Testament, and said, yes, it matches. But when they came to believe, it would be strange if, instead of trusting their pastors, trusting their sacred disciples, they began to test each time according to the Scriptures.

Baptist Pastor: You have just stated that there is no reference to the Old Testament here, there at the council, when they decided the issues.

Orthodox priest: I didn't say that it was decisive. There was a request.

Baptist Pastor: Yes. And here I disagree. Why? Because, first of all, the Apostle Paul has formed a teaching on this subject. And he expresses this teaching in relation to circumcision in the Epistle to the Galatians, referring very much to the Old Testament, explaining it by the Old Testament. In his Epistle to the Romans, he also confirms this teaching in the Old Testament and refers to it. That is, what was in Acts is a very brief description of the reasoning that was there.

Orthodox priest: Well, of course.

Baptist Pastor: Yes. And we see that Paul has a very clear theology about circumcision, based on the Old Testament, namely the Old Testament. And he conducts this logical chain of historical and grammatical analysis consistently. He doesn't have this, " Oh, I've had a revelation." He quotes Scripture and explains. Quotes Scripture and explains.

Orthodox priest: Look, please, starting with the 7th verse. Here is the Apostle Peter in his little speech, beginning with verse 7...

Baptist Pastor: No, I'm not talking about Deeds.

Orthodox priest: I'm talking about the Apostolic Council, about the practice of the Council.

Baptist Pastor: No, the point is that you are now quoting a text that is narrative. Narrative texts, they do not reveal all the information to us. We must take dogmatic texts. Dogmatic texts are found in the Epistle to the Galatians and to the Romans.

Orthodox priest: Here the deep writer summarizes the meaning of the words of Peter and James. And so they do not use quotations from Scripture as an argument, but what do they use? The Apostle Peter does not speak at all about the Old Testament. James says he is quoting the Old Testament in fact. But at the same time, its conclusion is not based on such and such a text, such and such a decision... But still, after the words of Paul and Barnabas, again dogmatic, about signs and wonders, they conclude that circumcision is not necessary.

Baptist Pastor: Well, first of all, this does not mean that there was no dogmatic reasoning, here at that time. This narrative text does not say that... there was still dogmatics.

Orthodox priest: Of course I did, but this decision is dogmatic.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, yes, this decision is dogmatic. And it was founded... Here is Paul, describing all his reasoning in the Epistles to the Galatians and Romans.

Orthodox: Yes, we know that, yes.

Baptist Pastor: Yeah, great. I can't figure out what the problem is. Why do you narrow down based only on these texts, because this is not a hermeneutical approach. You narrow down the information based on the narrative text and dismiss dogmatic messages. This is not clear.

Orthodox priest: Because at the Apostolic Council, judging by what was written, the decisive arguments were not dogmatic, but practical, and God's revelations.

Baptist Pastor: Because, always, in any case, first there is dogmatics, and then there is practice. And they already finish the practice and draw a conclusion. That's all, it's natural here.

Orthodox priest: That's it, I heard you. I would like to talk about the canon. Unfortunately, I didn't hear a very important thing from your report. If I understand correctly, you are guided by the principle: "Only Scripture."

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: But what is Scripture? This is not obvious to me from your report. I'll explain what you're talking about.

Baptist Pastor: I understand.

Orthodox priest: Because the Scripture itself does not say what the boundaries of Scripture are. The report briefly describes this. Just the Scripture. And what kind of Gospel, say? Thomas, Philip (these are the disciples of Christ), for example, or Peter, maybe? The Apocalypse of Peter is also a good book. And so on. Acts of Andrew... Isn't he an apostle?" Do we accept them? No, we don't accept it. Although dear people. And, let's say, Mark and Luke are still students of the disciples. And we accept them for some reason. In other words, on what basis do you accept texts that we consider Sacred Scripture?

If you say that on the basis of the canon of the Church, I will say that this is a good confidence in the Orthodox Church, and, moreover, after the 4th century, which is typical when it has already mixed with paganism for you. But nevertheless, it should be understood that there are four versions of the canon, namely: Coptic, Malabar, Ethiopian and Athanasian. They differ from each other. Which one is true? Why do you think it's true? On what grounds? I beg.

Baptist Pastor: Good. Look, you just referred to the canon. I totally understand. This question is very important. By the way, I just wanted to talk about it. You said that the canon was determined at the Council. Yes? I take it?"

Orthodox: Approved. Officially approved. It doesn't matter how we approved it. Question, how are you. What do you consider canon? For us, this issue is solved differently. A question for you.

Baptist Pastor: We trust the canon that you have approved. I'll explain why.

Orthodox priest: Which one exactly? There are four of them, I have designated: Coptic, Malabar, Ethiopian, Athanasian.

Baptist Pastor: I don't even know, to be honest.

Orthodox priest: This is Metzger, the Canon of the New Testament. Here he says that there are four versions of the canon, and he speaks correctly, and calls them as it should be.

Baptist Pastor: I haven't studied this question yet, which versions of the canon are available. I know what criteria people used when determining canonicity.

Orthodox priest: We have already found out that there are four versions of the canon. Coptic, Malabar, Ethiopian, Athanasian. We accept Afanasievsky. And you, after us, all too. And why? This is trust in a man, Athanasius the Great, who in the thirty-ninth Paschal epistle...

Baptist Pastor: You will then explain what you mean by this question. So, what do you want to say? That some texts of the Holy Scriptures were rejected by other canons? Or what? Something added?

Orthodox priest: I want to say that there are different versions of the canons. And the Orthodox Church accepts the Athanasian version from those books that you know.

Baptist Pastor: Well, list them. Synodal text?

Orthodox priest: Yes, what is in the Synodal translation. Moreover, canonical books. Non-canonical books are more difficult there. The issue was resolved later.

Baptist Pastor: Other canons.

Orthodox priest: We are now talking about the canonical ones. You say we trust the Orthodox Church. That is, it turns out that... Do you agree with us that this is a matter of Tradition?

Baptist Pastor: No.

Orthodox priest: What is this question about? An authoritative solution?

Baptist Pastor: The fact is that when the decision was made to approve the canon, not only traditions were used as a guide, but many factors were also used. For example, such as historical items or historical moments. How historically accurate is this? Because many non-canonical messages do not have historically reliable information. Then the historical and grammatical approach was also used. It was used quite clearly. And many other points. Not just legends.

Orthodox priest: I heard it. Judging by your words, you did not enter into the consideration of the issue in detail. Let me say a few words about this. This is not about reducing the number of books. We are talking about increasing the number of books. For example, according to the texts of the 2nd century, we see: the 4 Gospels-of course, originally a church text. Of course, we see the 4 Gospels. We see the Book of Acts. Most of Paul's epistles. But some are not included in the canon, such as the Epistle to the Hebrews. Most do not include the Apocalypse in the canon. Many minor Conciliar epistles are not included in the canon. That is, 2, 3 John the Theologian, Jude, James, 2 Peter. That is, only 2 of the conciliar epistles remain. The 3rd century gives a more complete picture, and there are already more conciliar epistles. By the end of the 3rd-beginning of the 4th century, virtually the entire canon of 26 books of the New Testament without the Apocalypse. And in this form it is approved by the Council of Laodicea in 340. And a little later, 27 years later.Athanasius the Great (which is why the Canon of Athanasius) in the Paschal epistle (this is not a normative document, this is just his Paschal epistle as a bishop) voices the list of books of the New Testament, naming 27 books. No conciliar decision, just this is its text. And because of the authority of this person, the whole Church says: yes, indeed, this is the canon of the New Testament. And after that, no one ever argues about it again. And what is said in the report about the 5th century, it is precisely the Cathedral in the West that fixes what was already generally accepted in the East. That is, we are not talking about reducing the number of books, but historically we were talking about increasing the number of books that passed the reception of the Church and were accepted as accurately inspired by God, without error. Different traditions are people's opinions. And you agree with them, and that's a good thing.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, we agree with this opinion, but again we add that here, of course, we understand that the Lord is the Guardian of His Word. He not only keeps His Church, He keeps His Word.

Orthodox: We agree with this.

Baptist Pastor:And in terms of keeping His Word, he gave people the wisdom to adopt the right canon. Based not only on traditions, but also on other factors.

Orthodox Priest: In any case, we can see here that you trust the Church, through which God has acted unmistakably, in the matter that is crucial for youБог. Although you have already said that by the 4th century, by the time the canon was adopted, the Church had mixed with paganism, and pagans were pouring in. With their pagan practices, they confused the Church, introduced some inappropriate dogmas and customs, and the Church actually ceased to be a " pillar and foundation of the truth."

Baptist Pastor: But these people did not participate in the adoption of the canon you are talking about.

Orthodox priest: Athanasius...

Baptist Pastor: Athanasius, who is he? He's not a pagan, right, who came?

Orthodox priest: But he's not Jewish, anyway. He's Greek. And if he's a Greek, then he's a pagan.

Baptist Pastor: No, I mean, it's a bishop, aka a bishop, first of all. Secondly, this is not just a person who came there, it is not clear who, that is, he has certain knowledge. And those people who accepted the canon before, who agreed with it, they are also guided by this knowledge.

Orthodox priest: So, for the fourth century, for the time of St. Athanasius, you accept [his] authority as a bishop, a teaching authority, and you trust him, don't you?

Baptist Pastor: In terms of the canon, yes.

Orthodox priest: In terms of the canon, yes. But since the canon is the decisive thing (for you, everything is based on the canon), so is everything else, since the canon depends on it.

Baptist Pastor: Well, naturally.

Orthodox priest: That's great.

Baptist Pastor: Anything that doesn't contradict the canon, God's Word.

Orthodox priest: And that's great.

Baptist Pastor: But where you contradict God's Word, that's where I can't agree.

Orthodox priest: Well, here's the moment. If you accept the canon from us as the foundation for your theology, then...

Baptist Pastor: This is Alexander's opinion that we agree with you (with the Orthodox Church). But my understanding is that historically the Orthodox Church did not exist until the eleventh century. The Great Schism, 1054, and before that there were just the holy Fathers. Some of them were sinners, some were saints, some were born again, some were not born again. Here we understand that the Church of Christ is only regenerated people. Throughout all the centuries existing, starting with the apostles, then their disciples, and so on. And at that council, when they voted and approved the canon, perhaps there were even non-regenerated people among them.

Orthodox priest: You didn't catch it, Athanasius the Great is personally the author of the canon, which is why it is called the "Athanasian Canon".

Baptist Pastor: But he didn't claim it himself.

Orthodox priest: Namely, that he did not approve it, but that he wrote it, that the canon contains so many books.

Baptist Pastor: Athanasius the Great, moreover, was not an Orthodox man. The Orthodox appeared after the Great Schism. Before that, Baptists, Pentecostals, Catholics, and Orthodox were all in the loins of our fathers. And these fathers, that's how you say they're your fathers, or maybe they're our fathers.

Orthodox priest: Excellent. So you are hosting seven Ecumenical Councils. Do I understand correctly?

Baptist Pastor: I do not know what's going on with the Cathedrals. I used to read all about them, but now I've forgotten. The Bible doesn't say anything about these canons, so I don't really care what was or wasn't accepted there. But look, we are grateful to the Orthodox Church and the Russian government, tsarist Russia and the tsar who was there at the time, for making the decision and translating the entire Bible and eventually printing it. This edition was published with the blessing of the Holy Synod, and Orthodox people did it, and they did a great job. We can say that it was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is one of the few that I recognize that God blessed this work at that time, and the Holy Scriptures translated into Russian (both the Old and New Testaments) and printed and distributed to the masses (although later the priests tried to close all this again so that ordinary people would not read) – this is a great thing business. We agree with this Scripture. We believe that it is all inspired by God. And so we are glad that we can use this book.

Orthodox priest: That's all good, yes.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, thank God.

Baptist: There is little left to do. Now let's all explore, explore the Word of God.

Orthodox priest: Do I understand correctly that by following the canon of the New Testament, you are following the canon of the Church?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, but this is not the canon of the Orthodox Church, but of the Church that existed at that time.

Orthodox priest: That's great. Now you are hosting 6 Local Councils, did I hear you correctly?

Baptist Pastor: Well, the canon was approved at the First Council, right?

Orthodox priest: It was the Cathedral of Carthage.

Baptist Pastor: But the Council at which the canon was approved, they did it under God's guidance. Other Cathedrals don't.

Orthodox priest: That's good. So God worked in the Orthodox Church.

Baptist Pastor: There was no Orthodox Church then. Did not have. It appeared in the 11th century, in 1054. There was no Catholic church. There were no Baptists. There was no one there. I will now explain what I mean. There were just Christians.

Orthodox: You just put me in a stupor...

Baptist Pastor: We mean that there was no Orthodox Church in any way... There was no such creed, which was already formed in fact. We understand that the word "Orthodoxy" was used... And it was Orthodoxy itself, we understand that...

Orthodox Priest: Since the 2nd century, the term "Orthodoxy"...

Baptist Pastor: And there were Catholics... This is also an Ecumenical Church...

Orthodox priest: We called ourselves simply the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church. Well, in Latin "Catholic", in Greek - "Catholic".

Baptist Pastor: There was no organized Orthodox Church as a structure, it did not exist. After the split, it just started to be created.

Orthodox: But what about Patriarchates? This means that Cathedrals would not be able to meet. If there is no structure, how can we gather Church members?

Baptist Pastor: Even before the schism, there was also a part of Catholics, they were already there, and there were Baptists, and who wanted to call themselves that.

Orthodox: There was no part, there was a Universal Church. You are confusing the historical question. Let's get back to the topic, right? Can I ask a general question about the wording, perhaps? Do I understand correctly that we are similar in that we understand Tradition as the oral transmission of some information?

Baptist Pastor: Not only that, but also in writing.

Orthodox: And what else? We said that this is a canon, that this is Holy Scripture.

Baptist Pastor: Well, this is the Tradition, the Holy Scripture is the Tradition.

Orthodox: You're confused. And then how to call learning a word? Here's the apostle, says that...

Baptist Pastor: The word is the oral transmission of truth...

Orthodox: What is it called? Oral transmission of the truth?

Baptist Pastor: Teaching or Tradition, yes.

Orthodox: That's what we're talking about. That is, we understand that a Sacred Tradition is an oral transmission. I have a question for you, since you often refer to the foundation of the Old Testament, did God say in the Old Testament that Tradition should be used to convey the truth within the Church?

Baptist Pastor: In the Old Testament?

Orthodox: Yes, God gave such a commandment – to use the Tradition?

Baptist Pastor: "to command your children..."

Orthodox: Absolutely true. You know these texts, so you don't reject God's own established transmission mechanism within the Church. Note: inside the Church, not outside. Inside the Church – " pass on the truth to your children."

Baptist Pastor: But it was for the Israeli people...

Orthodox: Now for the second question. How do you understand the community of people to whom God gave this important information? Are they crafty people? Are these people who want to ruin everything? Are these people who treat God's Word superficially? Or are they people who are still burning with the mission that God has assigned them?

Baptist Pastor: These are the people who laid down their bones in the desert because they murmured against God, because...

Orthodox: They just didn't save the ones that went down...

Baptist Pastor: Two people only entered the promised land.

Orthodox: That's what I'm talking about.

Baptist Pastor: But do you now feel the difference in the ratios?

Orthodox: Absolutely true. If we now take what you said about people who commit fornication, but who, in your opinion, still belong to the Church, this is not true. Those who commit fornication and do not repent, they fall away from the Church. And they are accepted into the Church only through repentance. That's just the way it is. But this is the teaching of our Church. Do you understand?

Baptist Pastor: But they go to church.

Orthodox priest: The fact that they go around hiding (fornication) does not mean that they are doing the right thing. They sin both by walking and by not repenting. The fact is that in our Sacrament of Penance (in prayer) it is said: "Unite him to Your Holy Church." That is, through metanoia, a change of mind, he is restored to the rank of a Christian – through repentance.

Baptist Pastor: Naturally, it's the same for us.

Orthodox priest: And why do you accuse us of what is right? And why was such a vivid example given from your life? And we all felt as if we were also sitting on this shelf and, therefore, they come in, and we are here, as it were... we don't know where to go or what to do...

Baptist Pastor: No, please understand that this example was given for statistics.

Orthodox priest: There were very many fornicators in the Apostolic Church, as the Scriptures say. And it is forbidden to associate with such a brother who is a fornicator.

Baptist Pastor: But you are actually communicating...

Orthodox: So, can I finish this logic that I want to do? We believe, and so it is, that the holy fathers in the Church all 2000 years preserved the truth, led by the Holy Spirit through, among other things, the oral transmission from bishop to bishop of those ecclesiastical mysteries that could not be, as he saidBasil the Great, in writing, so as not to be recognized by outsiders. Therefore, for a long time, the secrets of the Church were transmitted orally. Before it could be printed. Now they are being transmitted in print. This is the first one. And the second. To be honest, when I thought about this question, it became clear to me why you reject the Sacred Tradition. Because the Sacred Tradition is passed down from fathers to sons and so on. In other words, it can only be transmitted within one community. You have left the community, you have no fathers, you cannot follow and recognize the Sacred Tradition. I understand the question.

Baptist Pastor: On the contrary, I understand the question in what way. Look, you say what is passed down by word of mouth. Do you admit that man is sinful by nature?

Orthodox: Sure.

Baptist Pastor: And when he transmits information by word of mouth, where is the guarantee that he will transmit this information reliably?

Orthodox priest: Where is the guarantee? The first guarantee is the one you quoted, and we can continue like this: these are texts that say that the Apostolic Tradition is from God, and it is preserved by the Holy Spirit. The Lord, Who did not give the commandment to write the Scriptures (you know this), gave the apostles the Holy Spirit, Who should remind everything, according to Him. Remember this?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, of course.

Orthodox priest: It turns out that both Jesus Christand the apostles are active in the work of preaching, mainly not through the scriptures, but through the word, which is "alive and effective sharper than any two-edged sword" (Hebrews 4:12).

Baptist Pastor: Well, that's a relative question.

Orthodox priest: What did Christ write?

Baptist Pastor: No, Christ-yes, but the apostles-they are mainly...

Orthodox priest: Let's do the math. We have 12 apostles, including Matthew. Are most of them "written" or "non-written"?

Baptist Pastor: Well, most are "unwritten".

Orthodox priest: So much for "mostly". Which of these 12 wrote the Gospel? Just two of them. Although they were all witnesses, Matthew was also with them all the time. Most where? And I have the question that I was leading to... Now, you've quoted passages about Tradition, it's Divine, and it's from the Holy Spirit. I totally agree with you. This is true. But what interests me is this. You are now rejecting the Apostolic Tradition, which is not written down, do I understand this correctly?

Baptist Pastor: Not apostolic, but transmitted by people.

Orthodox priest: What is in the transmission of people – do you reject it?

Baptist Pastor: I believe that what contradicts the written message, if it contradicts, yes...

Orthodox priest: In short, you reject it because, in your opinion, it contradicts what was written.

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: That's great. Show me the commandment of Holy Scripture, which says that the apostolic tradition, which is transmitted in succession, must be rejected. That is, under the apostles it was necessary to accept it, you quoted these passages. And after the death of the apostles, it is said: "Reject him." Find me a place like this. Because I see the standard requirements of the apostle to follow the oral tradition, and you say it is impossible.

Baptist Pastor: The fact is that we do not understand this particular text that I quoted to you as hyperbole. "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach to you a gospel other than that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8).

Orthodox priest: So an Angel can carry a false gospel, am I right?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, of course.

Orthodox priest: Lord, have mercy! You're taller than an Angel, right?

Baptist Pastor: No, we are not above the Angel.

Orthodox priest: If you rate an Angel...

Baptist Pastor: Satan takes the form of an Angel of Light, he can come to the church.

Orthodox priest: So this is a false angel.

Baptist Pastor: How do you know that he is an Angel from heaven? A person can't tell.

Orthodox priest: The Apostle says " An angel from heaven." Not a false angel, but an " Angel from heaven."

Baptist Pastor: Did the Lord not send Angels when he deceived a whole crowd of prophets? Do you remember what it says in the Upper Testament?

Orthodox: It's quite literal here: "An angel from heaven." This does not mean that it is a false angel.

Baptist Pastor: And it is written that the Lord sent an Angel to become a false spirit of prophecy. Micah. Do you remember? This is the text in the Old Testament.

Orthodox: What is the connection between the New Testament Church and this incident?

Baptist Pastor: Well, there's an angel from heaven, as you say, and the Lord sends Angels.

Orthodox priest: Can I quote from the book of Micah, see the context? I remember it all, but I don't remember what happened to the Angels.

Comment. This is an erroneous Baptist statement. Here is the correct quote: "And he said, Hear the word of the LORD: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him, on his right hand and on his left; and the Lord said: Who would have persuaded Ahab to go and fall in Ramoth-Gilead? And one spake thus, and the other spake otherwise; and a spirit came forth, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will incline him. And the Lord said to him, " With what?" He said, " I will go out and become a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets." The Lord said: you will bow him down and do it; go and do it. And now, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets: but the Lord hath spoken evil of thee" (3 Samuel 22: 19-23).

As you can see, it is not the angel who preaches literally false gospel, but the spirit. Because the spirit can also be evil, but the Angel of God can only be good).

Baptist: We used to play this game when we were kids. You speak in your ear, and they pass it around in a circle. "Damaged phone". And in the end, what came out?

Orthodox priest: In the end, of course, it was very funny, but there is such a nuance. Children's play is not a church Tradition transmitted by the Holy Spirit. Despite the fact that a person is a carrier of sin, of course, and each of us is not free from mistakes greater or lesser, but the Holy Spirit Working in the Church, He works in such a way that the Church cannot but be a "pillar and foundation of the truth." Do you understand? Do you believe that?

Baptist: A church?

Orthodox priest: The Church is "the pillar and foundation of truth,"as it is written. Do you believe in it? If the Church is the "pillar and foundation of the truth,"should it bear witness to this truth or not? If it is "the pillar and foundation of the truth,"of course it should; it is obvious - " woe to you if you do not preach the gospel..."

Baptist: No, but the person is wrong too.

Orthodox priest: Wait, we're just talking about the Church. The Church, then, is for the most part "a candle standing on a candlestick" (Mt 5: 15; Mk 4: 21; Lk.8:16; 11:33).

Baptist: Yes.

An Orthodox priest: "A city on the top of a mountain" (Mt 5: 14), right?

Baptist: Well, it should be, yes.

Orthodox priest: It shouldn't be, but the Church is like that.

Baptist: Isn't everyone a Church?

Orthodox Priest: We are all part of the Church, but every person is not the Church in its entirety.

Baptist: Aren't we supposed to shine like the candle on this candlestick?

Orthodox priest: It's about the Church.

Baptist: Well, should we?

Orthodox priest: I do not know what you should do. I'm still talking about the Ecumenical Church. And this Church shines with the light of its teaching and high moral life. Evidence that it is possible. Including not just not fornicating. This is not a great thing; many Gentiles do not commit fornication. Or many atheists do not commit fornication. It's about something else. About high holiness. About knowing God personally. Not from the letters of holy Scripture, but about personal knowledge of God. And God bears witness to this in the spirit of man. And he testifies with various miracles and miracles. As it was in the New Apostolic era, and in later epochs. You don't have it. You don't have the teaching function of the Infallible Church that it should have. You don't have a close knowledge of God as He is. You have words about God, which is very good, but not enough.

Baptist: How do you know God better than we do? What is it?

Orthodox priest: Here we must understand that there is a faith of ascent to God. From strength to strength. And the fullness of the ascent, it is not for me. And I'm afraid to make a mistake, but I don't think it's the same for our fellow human beings here. The saints have it. The ones you laugh at and reject. They knew God like Moses, face to face. Was Moses ' knowledge of God greater than yours, or less than yours?

Baptist: I have less.

Orthodox priest: And I think less. This is a saint, and then other people.

Baptist: Moses spoke directly to God. Do you mean to say that your saints communicate with God in the same way as Moses did?

Orthodox priest: If they are saints, fully saints, then yes, of course, they communicate with God.

Baptist: "If" means not a statement.

Orthodox priest: God knows His saints.

Baptist: There is one more question to clarify the Tradition and the Holy Scripture, about what is transmitted orally by Tradition. Is it absolutely identical with the Holy Scripture? That is, there is no difference between oral Tradition and Scripture, as it was transmitted?

Orthodox: In fact, it is complementary. Tradition is the cause of Scripture. That is, while there was a Tradition and the apostles, they did not have a sacred text. Let's take the Gospel of Matthew as a concrete example. They would come to the congregation and quote the Sermon on the Mount.

Baptist: I realized that Tradition, as it were, gave birth to Scripture.

Orthodox: Yes.

Baptist: I asked you a question – can it not contradict the Scriptures? Right?

Orthodox: Can not. It was written by a certain Spirit. It's the same.

Baptist: Have you checked it against the Holy Scriptures?

Orthodox: I tell you again. If we are gathered here, people who value the Word of God very much, then we will not try to convey the distorted Word of God to others. We will try to transmit it very carefully along the chain. This is the foundation. And it is a historical fact that the Holy Spirit, who exists in the Church, helps this. The Holy Spirit cannot contradict Itself. Here's a short one.

Baptist: That's what I understand, too. Why (my opinion) I look on the basis of the Holy Scriptures, because it is inspired by God, and it is one hundred percent the Holy Spirit, so I check everything else with him. It's the Holy Spirit. And if the Tradition does not fit this, then it is human, as already mentioned.

Orthodox: If there is a contradiction, it is certainly a human tradition.

Baptist: What if some points from the Holy Tradition and from the Holy Scripture do not agree?

Orthodox: Give us an example.

Baptist: For example, some kind of cliche, for example, icons? Icon veneration. Why does it exist, if the Holy Scripture does not mention it, but the Holy Tradition does. Why? After all, then it should be mentioned both there and there. Maybe to a lesser or greater extent, let's say, but one and the other should speak. That is, if for some reason the Holy Scripture does not pay attention to this, but the Holy Tradition does, then what is the standard? What should be taken as the truth?

Orthodox: This should be discussed separately.

Baptist: I'm not talking about icons, I'm talking about general principles.

Orthodox: Sacred icons are not suitable as an example, because they are shown in the Holy Scriptures (the Ark of the Covenant, etc.). Let's give a more appropriate example.

Baptist Pastor: For example, about the epistle to Timothy: "There is one God."Godis One and the Mediator...", it is indicated that a person cannot be an intermediary... The Holy Tradition says that the holy Fathers can act as intermediaries.

Orthodox: The holy Father never mediates anywhere. The Holy Father is the same brother in Christ. In plain Baptist, Protestant terms, the holy Father is the same brother in Christ to whom we turn in prayer to intercede for us. Don't you have a prayer group in Viber?

Baptist: Yes.

Orthodox: It seems that you can say, why do I need someone to pray for me, if I can personally turn to Christ? But you are asking to borrow from your brothers. Write: "Brothers, pray, I am taking the exam now. Or I'm driving, it's a very slippery road, " and so on. That is, you are asking for petitions. For us, holy people are also living people. For it is written that " God is not the God of the dead, but of the living "(Matthew 22: 32). If they prayed for us here, spent a lot of time, wasted their time, and loved Christ, then they don't have any domestic worries there. What do they do all day? They simply communicate with God and pray for us. The fact that holy dead people pray and hear people, it is said in Revelation, I can give you quotes. That is, we simply ask these people, for example, St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, relatively speaking: "You are much closer to God, intercede for me."

Baptist Pastor: So you ask these saints to pray for you?

Orthodox: Sure.

Baptist Pastor: Do you turn to the Mother of God: "Holy Virgin, save us!" How can She save us?

Orthodox: Can a human save you?

Baptist Pastor: No.

Orthodox: What does the Bible say?

Baptist Pastor: No one can save you.

Orthodox: "Delve into yourself and the teaching...", and then?

Baptist Pastor: "if you do this, you will save yourself and those who listen to you." (1 Timothy 4: 16).

Orthodox: Is it possible to say in this way that I (a person) saving you? No. Here we are talking about whether a person can save (by prayer) another person, based on this text. Right?

Baptist Pastor: Right. But we see this man, and you didn't even know Nikolai, and you didn't see him in person.

Orthodox: Is God the God of the dead?

Baptist: What does this have to do with it? Here I personally do not know the spiritual state of each person. I don't have that knowledge. But when we are together, "by the fruits... you will know them,"I can somehow indirectly see something, right? But one hundred percent not. Moreover, one hundred percent to say that someone is there, and someone is there, you know what we are talking about...

Orthodox: This Is The Tradition Of The Church.

Baptist: Some in hell, some in Heaven. I can't possibly know. Accordingly, I cannot even think that, for example, I apologize, my great-grandfather left, found out that he was very holy there, and pray to my great-grandfather, ask that he intercede for me before God, if my Intercessor as a Savior is One – Jesus Christ.

Orthodox: Explain in the Holy Scriptures that you need to see the person in order to ask them to pray for you.

Baptist: And that's what Paul did. "Pray for one another." "Confess to each other."

Comment. Baptist is wrong. He quotes ap. James, but there are other examples. Ap. Paul writes to the Colossians, whom he did not know personally (cf. Colossians 1: 7, 2:1): "Pray also for us, that God may open the door for us to speak, to proclaim the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds" (Colossians 4:3).

Orthodox: We don't pray to all people in a row. Relatively speaking, I have, as you say, my grandfather died, and I will pray to him now? No. We have, again, based on the Sacred Tradition in the Church, and the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth."

Baptist: Yes, but it's not in the Scriptures. If the Scripture does not contain this practice, but it does exist in the Tradition, what should we do?

Orthodox: Does the Scripture say, "Jesus commanded us to pray to Him"? In the Scriptures, show me which of the apostles said, " Pray to Christ?" That's where it's written directly? Tell me, where is it written that you should pray to Jesus Christ? You say, if it's not written in the Scripture, then don't pretend to be converted. Why do you ask your brothers to pray for you on Viber? Why do you pray for your pastor? For your brothers? They are already directly involved.

Baptist: "The earnest prayer of the righteous can do much" (James 5: 16).

Orthodox: Oh, I think so too. Prayer of the righteous.

Baptist: If you will pray together without turning to your great-grandfather...

Orthodox: I wanted to ask you something. Is my great-grandfather still alive? Here's the saint. Eg,Seraphim of Sarov. Is he alive?"

Baptist: I don't know. I do not know his spiritual state.

Orthodox: And we believe in the Church, which is "the pillar and foundation of the truth." This is also part of the Divine Revelation. It's not just that I wanted to, I'll start praying. These are people canonized by the Church.

Baptist: You do not pray with each other, because you think that those are holier, and you are not so holy?

Orthodox: Why? We pray together.

Baptist: But you're right here. Why do you go there instead of praying together?

Orthodox: We pray together, and we pray with each other. And for each other, and we further strengthen our prayer by asking for prayer to the saints. It is good that you have just touched on this topic...

Orthodox priest: I remember that at one of our meetings, one of the previous ones, a very interesting idea was expressed, which frankly struck me. One of you mentioned the rules of hermeneutics. That there are rules that interpret the sacred text, and according to these rules it is necessary to understand so-and-so, and not so. I don't remember the details, but that was the idea. Right? Remember? But if there are certain rules for understanding the sacred text, then this is a certain tool that is not spelled out in the text. So, no longer according to the Scriptures, the first. And secondly, these rules are more important than the text. Because this is the tool that allows you to deduce the correct understanding from the text. And if you don't use it, I'll get the wrong understanding. This means that if I own the tool, I have a correct understanding of the text, but if I don't, I have a wrong understanding. So, question one. How are the rules of hermeneutics consistent with the Sola Scriptura principle?

Baptist Pastor: "Sola scriptura" is consistent as follows. The rules of hermeneutics are based on linguistic rules. When we study physics, mathematics, and natural sciences at school, we don't say that if we let go of an object, it falls up. It falls according to the laws of physics.

Orthodox priest: And the astronauts?

Baptist Pastor: The same thing happens... These are also the laws of physics. By the way, also the laws of physics-the absence of gravity. And what's the point? The fact that these rules of hermeneutics were created not only for the analysis of the text, the Biblical texts. These rules are generally accepted rules.

Orthodox priest: Accepted. But this is not Scripture.

Baptist Pastor: No, these rules, like mathematics, like the Russian language, are language principles, because this is the principle of communication through language. God gave us a language, God gave us a beautiful language. And this language has its own rules.

Orthodox priest: I have a simple question for you. These are the rules of hermeneutics that you have learned for yourself in some way, are they written down in the Scriptures?

Baptist Pastor: Well, in a certain way the apostles use these rules when quoting Old Testament texts.

Orthodox priest: So there is a list of these rules? Show me, please.

Baptist Pastor: There is no list as such, but there are principles that are very similar.

Orthodox priest: So, there is no list of rules. Great. So these rules are not biblical.

Baptist Pastor: They're not biblical, of course.

Orthodox priest: That's great. So you are using unbiblical rules in your understanding of the Bible. Do I understand you correctly?"

Baptist Pastor: But when you read the holy Fathers, you also use unbiblical rules.

Orthodox priest: But I do not insist on the principle of "Sola Scriptura" as you do. So I say, yes, of course I do, and I think it's the right thing to do. But you, from the principle of" Sola Scriptura " derive the foundation of its non-biblical, namely, certain rules of hermeneutics, which you consider this way for yourself, but for other people they are different. For example, do you believe in dispensationalism?

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: That's great. And do you believe that there will be a Jewish millennial kingdom?

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: That's great. And there will be a temple, and circumcision, and blood sacrifices, and a by-law priesthood.

Baptist Pastor: Well, yes, yes.

Orthodox: Great. But we don't see this anywhere in Scripture. And you deduce it from solely from this principle. This will never happen. There will be no temples, no circumcisions, nothing.

Baptist Pastor: Do you practice covenant theology?

Orthodox priest: Come on, don't confuse our listeners. They don't necessarily know what they're talking about. And so. It turns out that you believe in the inviolability of the literal understanding of the Old Testament prophets. And the apostles and their disciples of the persecuted era insisted that all the Old Testament promises to the chosen people, spiritual ones, were fulfilled in the Church. I don't mean that you're right or wrong, but I certainly don't agree with you.

Baptist Pastor: Confirm this with the Scriptures.

Orthodox priest: That we are the new Israel? You haven't heard of it?

Baptist Pastor: No, I haven't. Tell me, please."

Orthodox priest: "Peace be upon them... and to the Israel of God" (Galatians 6: 16). I don't want to argue about it now, we'll go far away. If you're interested, I've written a lot of work on this topic. I can even give you my book as a gift.

Baptist Pastor: Yes I understand. You see, I am a progressive dispensationalist.

Orthodox priest: I am a retrograde. I am not worthy, I am far from you. You are a modern person, and I am some kind of archaic. So here we have a clear example that the Scriptures are not self-evident to you. You have begun to argue that you belong to different theological schools. Covenantal or dispensationalist, respectively. These are theological schools.

Baptist Pastor: No, no, it's not arguments, it's just communication.

Orthodox priest: Yes, I understand that this is communion. But this is school theology. Where there is school theology, there is no "Sola Scriptura". There are schools that interpret the Scriptures. One way or another. So, you yourself show by your example, and even so energetically, I was surprised, you show that, of course, "Sola Scriptura" is a principle that objectively does not exist. This is a phantom that is used by any of its supporters in order to prove their point of view. After all, we understand that you will prove this point of view, and, say, some amillennialist there will prove, based on the same theological principle, his own point of view.

Baptist Pastor: I got it, I got it. Look, you're talking about things that...

Orthodox Priest: On the hermeneutics of Scripture, neither to the right nor to the left.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, listen to me. You're talking about a bunch of certain doctrines that don't really matter, I'd say. Here, let's say, are promiletarians, some other, let's say, covenantal theology, dispensationalists. All these things, they have no saving significance for the human soul.

Orthodox priest: We were just talking not about the significance of doctrines, but about hermeneutics.

Baptist Pastor: Yes, that's what I'm talking about. The fact is that, yes, you can insist that the Holy Scriptures do not represent many things in a specific way. There are different interpretations. But there are things that are reflected in a concrete way, and it is here that our firm position is that this is a "Solo Script", and that we adhere to this teaching firmly from the Bible. Here, in terms of questions of salvation, questions of soteriology, we are holding firm. And these things, they are spelled out specifically. They are not spelled out there, as you say that they can be interpreted in some other way.

Orthodox priest: I heard it. So, let me clarify your point. Do you think that there are things in the Scriptures that are essential and unimportant for salvation?

Baptist Pastor: Naturally.

Orthodox priest: That's great. Is it possible to find a list of these places in the Scriptures?

Baptist Pastor: What's the list...

Orthodox priest: In the Scripture, give a quote on the line. Well, let's say such and such a message, such and such a chapter – it is not essential for salvation, we interpret it as we want. Such and such a message, such and such a chapter is essential, we interpret only in this way.

Baptist Pastor: We do not interpret as we wish, but we interpret according to the rules of hermeneutics.

Orthodox priest: But it is not essential for salvation...

Baptist Pastor: But if we have different views on this text, it will not affect our salvation.

Orthodox priest: I already understand. Irrelevant to salvation. Is it possible to deduce from the Scriptures a list of places that are unimportant for salvation?

Baptist Pastor: Well, you probably can.

Orthodox priest: Show me, please. I would really like. It is very important to me for my salvation that I should not be tormented by the conscience that I may sin against God in some matter and perish because of it. It's easy for you, you're saved, but I'm not saved yet.

Baptist Pastor: You mean, what do you need to withdraw?

Orthodox priest: I need you to show me the list of places that are not important for salvation right now on the line. The whole nameplate.

Baptist: No, well, let's do it this way. Not unimportant, but secondary. Because "unimportant" is also a little bit...

Orthodox priest: Ahh, so they're all important after all? I'll clarify...

Baptist: In general, all Scripture is inspired by God...

Orthodox priest: Yes, but we were told that not everything, because many things can be understood one way or another, and so to speak, they are unimportant.

Baptist Pastor: This is a balancing act with questions... Secondary and primary. So let's build on these two words. And we won't talk about the unimportant ones.

Orthodox priest: Yes. But everything is essential, everything is important?

Baptist: We've probably already sinned before God. The word was " never mind."

Orthodox priest: I asked, I didn't insist.

Baptist: I do not accuse you of sin. I say, we can all make mistakes if we say the word "unimportant".

Orthodox priest: Excellent. So, everything is important for salvation. Do I understand correctly?

Baptist Pastor: Not for the rescue.

Orthodox priest: Everything is important for salvation, but something more, something less?

Baptist Pastor: It is important for affirmation, important for practical Christian life, but not for salvation.

Orthodox priest: You see, I repeated what was said. That is, some of you believe that everything is important for salvation, but something more, something less. And others of you believe that something is important, and something is not important at all for salvation. Take it any way you want. Is this a possible thing?

Baptist: I understand that salvation is through Jesus Christ and through faith.

Orthodox priest: Well, that's good.

Baptist: And here is the Word of God, it is given, first of all, to be established in faith, in Whom? In Jesus Christ.

Orthodox priest: I understand. So much for Sola Scriptura.

Baptist Pastor: The whole Old Testament, it is not given to us for salvation.

Orthodox priest: What are you doing?!

Baptist Pastor: But he is given to us for instruction, for teaching, for reproof, as it is written in the epistle to Timothy.

Orthodox: But not for salvation? Why make this Covenant?

Baptist Pastor: The prophecies about Christ are there, they were fulfilled in Christ, and if I did not know the Old Testament at all, but read only the New Testament, this would be enough for me to save myself.

Orthodox priest: Baptist friends, do I understand you all agree with this view that the Old Testament is not important for salvation?

Baptist Pastor: Let's first dot the I's.

Orthodox priest: No, it was your brother who said that, your presbyter. This is a rejection of the Old Testament. Do you agree? No, yes, no? Well, not to abolish it, but to fulfill it.

Baptist Pastor: No, we are not fulfilling the Old Testament. There is just no word "for execution".

Orthodox priest: Seriously? So here are three Baptists and four opinions. So, something is important for salvation, something is not important for salvation, something is unimportant, something is more important and radical – the Old Testament is not important for salvation at all. That's how harsh it is. Don't you find it strange that all three of you agree with the Sola Scriptura principle, coming to such radically different conclusions? Well, you yourself show by your example that this principle refutes itself.

We have a Tradition that you don't like, but we have it. And this Tradition says that Scripture is inspired by God and important for salvation. Both Old and New. And New – every word is important for salvation. But it is applied differently. A different doctrinal position, a different moral one. But we can die because of moral issues.

Baptist Pastor: Good. Tell me then, please answer this question. How important is your reasoning now in fact for the salvation of my soul? How important are they? Is it because we said these words to you that something has changed in our lives? Has Christ's sacrifice ceased to mean anything to him? Has it stopped working in our lives?

Orthodox priest: Because the saving meaning of the Old Testament is rejected?

Baptist Pastor: Well yeah That's what one of us said. He didn't say that he was rejecting the salutary meaning. You start balancing words again!

Orthodox priest: It is literally said that the Old Testament is not important for salvation.

Baptist Pastor: If I had only had the Old Testament, if I had tried to do everything that God said through Moses to the Israelites, I would not have entered Paradise.

Orthodox priest: I heard it. But you now have both the Old and New Testaments...

Baptist Pastor: Because there are prophecies about Christ, but the fulfillment of the law will not lead me to salvation. And when Paul wrote to Timothy, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for instruction, for teaching, for reproof, for correction" (2 Timothy 3: 16), he did not write, "for fulfillment." He was referring to the Old Testament.

The New Testament is given to us for fulfillment. We do not live according to the commandments of the Old Testament. Not according to any of these commandments. But nine out of ten were confirmed by Christ, according to the Decalogue. He confirmed nine and canceled one. And why do I keep these commandments? Not because Moses said it, but because Christ confirmed it.

Orthodox: What commandment did Christ abrogate?

Baptist Pastor: The Sabbath Commandment.

Orthodox priest: Where did He cancel it?

Baptist Pastor: Because He did not confirm it, and the apostles did not confirm it.

Orthodox priest: Not confirmed, but not canceled.

Baptist Pastor: That's another question, but I don't do it. And absolutely calm in my conscience.

Orthodox priest: By the way, this is a very good argument against Sola Scriptura. The Sabbath commandment is given, but it is not abrogated. Why not execute it?

Baptist Pastor: It is not given by Christ. He never commanded that it should be done.

Orthodox priest: So God gave it, wrote it with His finger!

Baptist Pastor: No, we live according to the commandments of Christ. We live according to the commandments of Christ, not the commandments of the Israelites. God gave it to the Israelites... So if I only knew one book, the New Testament... Sometimes we distribute the New Testaments separately from the Bible. And now the New Testament falls into my hands, and this book is quite enough for me to be saved. For faith in Christ and for the fulfillment of His commandments. To go down this narrow path, as we have already discussed with you.

Orthodox priest: It's about something else. You said radically that the Old Testament is not necessary for salvation.

Baptist Pastor: No, not Dan. He is given for instruction, for teaching, for reproof, for correction.

Orthodox priest: So you agree with your point of view. You didn't just say that by accident, but you believe it. But this is radically different from the views of your colleagues, who believe otherwise.

Orthodox: All three of you think differently. It simply shows you that there is no truth criterion, that everyone thinks differently.

I would like to add, in continuation of the topic, that during these several meetings, indeed, we have heard complete discrepancies, different worldviews between you. One said one thing, the other said another. One said that the goal of the Christian life is deification, and it's just like "twice two". I was just at a loss, asked again, and got a quote from 2Pet.1:4: "We must all become partakers of the divine nature." I said, "Partakers of His glory?" And He said, " No, of His Nature, of His Essence." That is, it is generally a super-divinity, substantial, which even the Orthodox do not have.

In our last meeting, another of your leaders (a presbyter) said that deification has nothing to do with the Bible, and those who speak differently are poorly taught by us. Although both teach, relatively speaking, are leaders of the same community and lead the same flock. Another person said that he had never been interested in Tradition and that it was not needed in the Church. At our last meeting, we heard that Tradition – I quote directly-is "necessary for church life." And now everyone has said that the rules of hermeneutics are necessary. It turns out that there are four of you and four different opinions and one congregation. Fun at your place.

This is said not to drive you "into a corner", but to show you that Baptists, like other Protestants, have no criterion of truth. Everyone thinks that they are right and that they are being guided by the Holy Spirit. But it turns out that there is only one truth. It turns out that someone is not led by the Holy Spirit, but by another spirit, since he believes this way and leads his flock in this way. Therefore, this is very important, and we are trying to show that without Tradition, a person cannot be a criterion of truth.

Baptist Pastor: We have fraternal meetings every Monday. In winter, twenty brothers gather every Monday. Ten in the summer, because many people are on vacation, working, and so on. At these fraternal meetings, we study the Scriptures. And we are there as we are here with you, do not argue. We have different views, different understandings, and we all talk very calmly, and pray together, and seek the truth together. We have no disagreements. And we come to one conclusion based on the Word of God. We will still have the same result.

If you think that we understand differently, and especially for the salvation of this truth, then you are mistaken, we understand equally. Salvation by grace does not deny a life of sanctification. This is the deification that you are talking about, it begins from the moment of being born again. Before being born again, this is all the merit of Christ. We rely entirely on Christ's sacrifice and believe wholeheartedly in His Holy Shed Blood. And when we come to Him in faith, repent and accept the gift of salvation, and we are already saved from this moment, now our deification begins. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is participation in the Divine Nature. Up to this point, none of us were involved. From the moment of salvation, we are partakers of the Divine Nature.

Orthodox: That is, a person is called to deification?

Baptist Pastor: And now this deification, that is, the transformation into the image of Jesus Christ, must be carried out more and more in our lives.

Orthodox: That is, we can become partakers of the Divine Nature, of His Nature?

Baptist Pastor: Yes, and this communion is not given with baptism, nor is it given with baptism, but is given by a personal encounter with Christ. At the moment of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the human heart.

Orthodox: I partially agree with you (with this expression), but here, for example, one of you says that whoever teaches about deification, we taught him poorly, that it has nothing to do with the Bible.

Baptist Pastor: There is no such word. But whoever teaches that we should be transformed into the image of Christ, this is it, and it is written.

Orthodox: That is, we become partakers of the Divine Nature...

Baptist Pastor: Yes, from the moment of being born again.

Orthodox: Again, we see that the two pastors have different opinions... one says that this teaching has nothing to do with the Holy Scriptures, the other that it does.

Baptist: Now I'm going to go out on the street, go up to three people, ask: "Orthodox?", ask one question, and I will hear three different answers. What do you think of that?"

Orthodox: We are talking about leaders of the same community.

Baptist: Well, I'll also ask the leaders of different congregations questions... Will they all respond the same way?

Orthodox: Go to the priests, to any priest, ask the same question, a doctrinal question, and everyone will answer it exactly the same way.

Baptist: If I ask him from the Scriptures how he understands...

Orthodox: I will repeat that we are talking about three leaders of the same community who have completely different doctrinal worldviews. And they lead their own flock naturally, based on their understanding of Christianity. One says so, the other says something else.

Baptist: This has already been answered. We may misunderstand something, but we will still come to the same point.

Orthodox: But in fact, there is no one opinion...

Baptist: Why? At some points...

Baptist: This is the Tradition, you said, the importance of Tradition. This is an example. What the ministers say may contradict each other. Really just different views. Here, for example, is the importance of Tradition. One minister understands that Tradition is like taking as a basis, teaching; and the other understands that Tradition is not necessary, that it is necessary to understand as the Church teaches. The other person understands how to pass it on to, say, children, teach them. What is a legend, after all? After all, we see miracles in our lives and say to our children: God helped me personally. My grandmother says God saved me from being shot. And he says how God led. "Remember all the way that the Lord has led you, and pass it on to your children." That is, for some, we contradict each other. But in fact, the two pastors reveal different points of view. One says how the Church teaches, and the other says how God led him.

Orthodox: In this case, of course, they contradict, I understand what you are talking about. In some cases, this may be the case. I'm not saying that they have a completely different understanding in all respects.

Baptist: The question is, how does this affect our salvation...

Orthodox: But in this case... Galatians 6 says that heresies, as well as other sins, are works of the flesh, and those who profess heresies will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. An important question? What is heresy? This is a distorted religion. Heresy, just like fornication, is a grave sin, and one who professes heresy cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, in order to be saved, it is necessary not only to recognize Jesus Christ as our Lord, not only to repent, but also to profess the right faith and reject the false one. Well, I hope I was able to answer your question.

Baptist Pastor: Can I sum it up?

Orthodox priest: Of course, of course.

Baptist Pastor: Well, maybe two minutes, me and maybe from your side?

Orthodox priest: Come on, two minutes at a time.

Baptist Pastor: I heard such a story, I don't think it was real, but I really liked it, as an example, as an image. Now Christmas is approaching, we celebrate both in the new style and in the old style. From the twenty-fifth of December to the seventh of January.

In general, the story is like this. So, in one family, a baby was born, a baby, maybe a couple of weeks old, and he was lying in a crib. They invited all their relatives to this child's birthday party to celebrate together. And then the guests came, he was lying in his crib, and somehow right away the owners did not show where to put the clothes, in general, there were no hangers in their sight. And someone alone took and threw the clothes on the crib. And after him and another thought that this is a normal place, threw a second, third, fourth, fifth. In general, we threw on a lot of clothes and went to celebrate. We sat and celebrated, and the child sleeps and sleeps. And then someone says, well, let's see your child, bring it, we're here for him. The parents went to look, and the child suffocated under these clothes.

Orthodox Priest: The real story?

Baptist Pastor: Well, I heard, I don't know, maybe someone made up such a story.

Orthodox priest: I think it's more of an invention.

Baptist Pastor: But as an image, it fits very well with our discussion of Tradition today. I think that the Orthodox Church has put a lot of clothes on Jesus Christ, the born Baby, and God our Savior. And all these clothes are a Tradition. So much so that you probably can hardly see It for yourself. But it seems to us from the outside that you have a lot of traditions, and you are distracted by different moments. And Paul says: "Christ is my life" (Philippians 1: 21). And how nice it would be if during these meetings we threw off these clothes one by one and approached what really unites us-Jesus Christ. If only we could talk about Him, about His Divinity, about His redemptive sacrifice, about His Holy Blood, about the holy love that is above all things. If this were discussed, we would have no contradictions. So I have already said (I think I said it here during these meetings) that I said to one person: "Baptists are the most naked Christians. Because the Adventists have Christ plus the Sabbath, the Pentecostals have Christ plus the baptism of the Spirit and tongues, the Orthodox have Christ plus Tradition, and the Baptists have Christ and no other plus."

And how I would like all these advantages to fall away, so that only Christ remains in your life, so that you can look at Him, believe in Him, follow Him, serve Him, and be sure of your salvation. That would be great.

Orthodox Priest: Continuing with your words, and concluding our conversation today, I would like to thank you for being able to come today. It was a very hot meeting. But at the same time, it was quite unexpected for me, because unlike in the past such calm meetings, today we were surprised to find out how diametrically different views you have, and how much you think it is unimportant.

It seems to me that this is a contradiction, but you think that it is not here. No, I understand your point of view, I can't accept it, but I understand it. And at the same time, you encourage us to think about Christ more often, I would even say, to look at Christ with our mental eyes, right?

Baptist Pastor: Yes.

Orthodox priest: And I think that in this regard, it would be very good, as we said before, to talk about icon veneration next time. What are the icons installed in the Church for? Here is the icon. Look at her. I see an icon, and I see a picture of Christ. The icon makes me think of Christ more often, burn with love for Christ more often, and pray to Christ more often. The icon supports the memory of Christ in me. You will say: "you can do it without icons." I will say :" You can do without icons, but if I see an icon before my eyes, then I have more reasons to remember Christ, " and I think this is good. Therefore, I think that in practical terms, the question of worship of God, of Christ-centricity, is impossible without solving the question of icons. Because for you, I take it (if I'm wrong, correct me), this is idolatry for you?

Baptist Pastor: No.

Orthodox priest: No? I'm very glad that's not the case. For many Baptists, this is true, reproaching us for idolatry. For us, it is a way of expressing our faith in God and our love for Him. First of all, it is faith in the incarnation of the Son of God for our sake and for our salvation. The testimony of our faith. So, if you don't mind, it would be good to talk about this topic and find out your views.

Baptist: The question about icons, what you said and how you said it – is that how everyone in your flock understands it?

Orthodox priest: Of course, many people are mistaken. But we have found out that we are not talking about the mistakes of individuals, but about the faith of the Church, which is a "pillar and affirmation of the truth." Therefore, it is pointless to reproach private people.

Orthodox: I wanted to thank you for the words you have just said about Christ. We cannot remain silent. These are very kind, in fact, wonderful words. But for us, fortunately, they have a place. It's in our lives. If we didn't have a thought about Christ, if we didn't feel His reality in the Sacraments that we have, we wouldn't be sitting at this table. We wouldn't be looking into each other's eyes right now. Because we are looking for this unity. We crave it. We connect with Him. We want to share this with you. That is why we open the doors of our Church and see your hearts in the open doors. It's a joy, actually. This conversation is wonderful today. And we feel it, and we have it. And it's good that we can share what we feel, what we believe in each other. It's wonderful.

Orthodox priest: What about the topic of icon worship? What do you say?

Baptist Pastor: I wanted to make such a suggestion a couple of days ago. It's already looming like this. We meet once at our place, once at yours. We used to bring cookies with us. There's too much left. We have already decided so, we have agreed today: when we go to you, you treat us, we don't carry anything with us. And the next time you come to us, don't carry anything either, we cook everything ourselves. And I wanted to suggest that it should be the same about themes. You invited us to your place and suggested a topic about Sacred Tradition. We agreed, although this topic is not very interesting to me.

Maybe let's agree like this, when you come to us, we propose a topic, we consider it, and then, the next time you propose icon worship again, we will have to agree. Only every other time.

Orthodox priest: Well, we see that every time we run into this topic. I think this is essential for both sides.

The Baptist: No, we're just afraid, if we talk about icon worship, then you won't be interested in us anymore, and you won't want to meet anymore.

Orthodox priest: We will not refuse... I ask that we discuss the topic now.

Baptist Pastor: You have heard that we referred to the principle: "Only the Scriptures." But I will not suggest this topic, but there is another principle: "Only Christ", let's talk about this topic.

Orthodox priest: Well, it's not an obvious topic for us.

Baptist Pastor: The topic of Tradition was not obvious to me, but I agreed.

Orthodox: We don't understand what it's about. Christology? The person of Christ in history? Who is Christ?

Baptist Pastor: Who is Christ, and what He did, and how to believe in Him, and how to follow Him.

Orthodox: Well, then we must consider heresies and Tradition...

Baptist Pastor: Maybe if you narrow it down... Pretty much narrow it down, right?

Orthodox: Yes.

Baptist Pastor: Next topic: "Personal relationship with Christ." Your personal and our personal relationship. As you said, "We have a relationship with Christ. We love Him." What is your personal relationship with Christ, apart from the Communion of the Holy Sacraments? We've already figured that out.

Orthodox: Well, we pray... Then we must touch on the topic of deification...

Baptist Pastor: That is, the Communion of the Holy Sacraments rarely happens in your country?

Orthodox: Every day.

Baptist Pastor: Do you take communion of Bread and Wine every day?

Orthodox: We have some ascetics, of course. In general, they join once a week. By the way, this is a good topic, yes.

Baptist Pastor: How often do you communicate with Christ through the Sacraments? Besides the Sacraments, do you have a personal relationship with Christ? How is this happening with you? Through prayer? Do you communicate with Christ through the Scriptures? Because it is almost impossible to communicate with Christ through Tradition, I am sure.

Orthodox: We have a pious tradition of reading the Scriptures every day. The chapter of the Gospel, the chapter from the Apostle (Apostolic Epistles).

Orthodox: Let's take this topic: "Spiritual life in Orthodoxy and Baptism."

Baptist Pastor: No, no. This is a very broad topic. "Personal relationship with Christ of an Orthodox man and a Baptist"

Orthodox: These are synonyms, the same thing – spiritual life and communion with Christ, there can be no spiritual life without communion with Christ.

Baptist Pastor: I would really like to know your experience, and then I would tell you about my experience...

Orthodox: We are talking about the experience of the Church, not about personal experience...

Baptist Pastor: No, I want to talk about your personal experience, and you about my experience... Or are we only going to discuss doctrines?

Orthodox: No, this will turn into a discussion of personal stories.

Baptist Pastor: I don't want to judge after hearing information from you. Maybe I want to share my experience and help you to communicate better with Christ. Why not?

Orthodox: I think it will be a very useful conversation and experience. I am for.

Baptist Pastor: If we separate theology from spiritual experience, it seems to me that everything will work out better for us...

Orthodox: You have another suggestion...

Baptist Pastor: As far as I understand, the last time I was away, you were talking about salvation. Dogmatic issues were also raised on this topic. And this is a very big, extensive topic. It consists of many sections. I have a question about how you were able to keep up with one conversation, because the topic had to be fully disclosed. And I would like us to go through this topic to the end. It would be very good.

Orthodox priest: In my opinion, this is a very good idea. You can even combine your two sentences. Let's just say it's not just salvation, but how it realizes itself in our Christian life.

Baptist Pastor: We can return to salvation once again, this is also a very important topic.

Orthodox: Spiritual life, it seems to me, is a good topic, and it is possible to reveal it.

Orthodox priest: Yes, yes. So, what is the spiritual life in what aspect?

Baptist Pastor: In the aspect of personal relationship with Christ.

Orthodox priest: That is, personal spiritual life...

The Baptist Pastor: The personal relationship with Christ of an Orthodox man and a Baptist. Living with Christ, a spiritual life. Paul says: "for me, life is Christ." Is life Christ for you? Or is Christ not your life? For me, life is Christ. I want to share this...

Orthodox priest: The quotes are good, but I'm very afraid that I won't be able to say it briefly.

Orthodox: Have you read "My Life in Christ" John of Kronstadt? Two volumes about communion with Christ. You read it. Many questions arise in the life of every Christian, just like his own, and are solved in the same way as he solved them. That is, this is the decision of the Orthodox Church, this is how the Church lives Orthodox.

Baptist Pastor: That's why I suggest this topic, because you can have a doctorate in theology and know all the doctrines of the Orthodox Church by faith itself, and at the same time these doctrines are not applied in any way in life. We're talking about orthopraxia.

Orthodox: We agree with that, absolutely agree.

Baptist Pastor: And if it does not come to life in any way, then there is zero from such faith.

Orthodox: Look, if we are talking about some other issue, for example, sports, then, of course, we will discuss the achievements of some Olympic champions, and not the novice people who just got on the treadmill, right?

Baptist Pastor: But if you and I got on this treadmill, then I would prefer to discuss not how the Olympic champions acted, but how you and I, what achievements we have with you. Do you manage to run as well as they do? Or is it not working? It's more interesting to me.

Orthodox: It turns out that you want to know the personal experience of each person? Or the teaching of the Church?

Baptist Pastor: How are Christ and His teachings reflected in your life? I am very interested to learn this from you.

Orthodox: Then you need to explain the teaching of the Church, and then tell how it is refracted.

Orthodox priest: Dear friends, it seems to me that we had a great conversation today. In the spirit of love and mutual understanding in many ways. And there is a suggestion that next time, in the same spirit of love and mutual understanding, everything will be the same.

And now let's thank God in our own way for helping us. Since we will be your guests, if possible, we will have a fast. It starts as early as next week. If it is not difficult for you to offer us something lean, we will be grateful. If it's difficult, what will happen. Without animal products – meat and dairy. Or better yet, we'll bring it ourselves. By the way, to the question of practice. Here is an element of practice.