On the Holy Trinity

 Fr. Daniil Sysoev. Dogmatic Theology. On the Holy Trinity.

 

Fr. Daniil:

So, today our topic, one of the key ones for us, is the doctrine of the Trinity. Because one of the most difficult topics when talking with people is actually explaining how to correctly understand the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.

 

When we speak about the mystery of the Trinity, we must first be able to formulate it accurately. So, how would you formulate the doctrine of the Holy Trinity for an ordinary person? Not an image, we are now talking about the description itself. Here is a very important point: when we talk about any dogma, we must first give a description of the doctrine itself, and then illustrate it. Understand? Because let's say you gave this formula—one Being in three Persons. As soon as you give this formula to an ordinary person, what will he understand? "Being," what does that mean to us? In our modern Russian language, the word "существо" (sushchestvo) means a separately existing subject. What in Greek is called "hypostasis." And about three "Лица" (Litsa, Persons/Faces), as you say, the person will immediately understand that it is a certain specific being—a hypostasis, which has three faces/physical faces. Precisely, a completely ordinary person will understand it exactly that way, guaranteed, you understand? I specifically wanted to raise this question because we speak in theological language—seminary language. But the language of modern people has moved away from seminary language. The word "лицо" (litso) in the sense of "personality" is now a secondary meaning of this word for us. For us, it's either "face" in the sense of a physical face, right? Or "face" in the sense of a legal entity, right? But not in the sense of personality, self-consciousness. In ordinary Russian, the word "лицо" in this sense is rarely used. It is used, of course, but it is not the mainstream meaning of the word. Therefore, as soon as you say "one Being and three Persons," you will guaranteed be misunderstood. And they will shove in your face that horrific picture that is given in all Jehovah's Witnesses booklets. You may have seen that horrific 18th-century picture where some monster is depicted sitting on a throne, with four eyes and three noses. That's a very famous thing from the 18th century, because words began to change their meaning, you understand, right? This image was prohibited by a Synodal decree, naturally, because this image is a complete lie, you understand, right? So. Therefore, when we talk about the Trinity, we must speak like this: God is a single Essence, right? It can be described as one kingdom, one might, one power, one strength, right? One majesty, one dominion, existing in three Personalities, in three "I's," in three self-consciousnesses. Therefore, when asked—"What is a Person?"—it's a personality. This is equivalent to the question—"That is, Who is He? He is Who?"

 

"What is essence?"—is equivalent to the question "What is it?" Understand? The question "what is?" is a description of essence. The question "who is?" is a description of personality. For example, here we have Alena. What is Alena? It's an animal, well, in the sense, unlike inanimate things, right? Mortal, unlike immortal animals, like angels. Rational, unlike mortal but irrational animals—from a cat. Social, that is, a public animal, as Aristotle said. This is precisely a description of a human. What is it? These are properties, for example, of Alena, me, Anthony, Evgeny, Alexey. That is, of everyone. We all, what are we, we are described the same way. What is a human? These are the properties of all beings. Understand, right? People of one essence. In this regard, we can say, what is the difference, for example, between Anthony or Alena and a mobile phone? The difference is that Anthony and Alena are animals, and a mobile phone is not an animal, but a dead being. Understand, right? So, we say, what is the difference, for example, between Alexey and a cat? Understand, right? That a cat is an animal, like Alexey, mortal, like Alexey, but does not possess the gift of speech, words, and reason, unlike Alexey. Understand, right? Now, when we talk about God, we say, what is God? Can we ask this? Yes, we can. But then we describe His essence. Understand? That is, eternally Existing, Immortal, Incorruptible, Unchanging, Good, Righteous, Holy, Merciful. That is, all these definitions, all this multitude of God's names, of which there are 80 names of God in the Bible alone, you know, right? All of them describe God's essence. That is, they answer the question, what is God.

 

Listener:

Does nature also get described?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The words "nature" and "essence" in this situation are synonyms. We can say that Christ is one Person in two natures or in two essences. This would be equally correct. What is the subtle difference between essence and nature? Essence answers the question "what is it?" And nature answers the question "what is it and how does it act?" Understand, right, what's the difference? So, we can say "what is a human?" We described his essence, right? That is, what is a human, how does he manifest himself? So, some are very talkative, or not very talkative. That is, here we come to the question, when we talk about an acting essence, we talk about nature. Therefore, it's a synonym, understand, right? Because no essence can be inactive. For example, this bottle with apple juice or whatever, I don't know. It possesses some natural action. What? Well, it has weight. Understand? What other action does it possess? It has liquid inside, right? It's solid on the outside and liquid inside. Right? That is, there is a certain chemical composition to it, right? So, we can check it, roughly speaking, send it for analysis, and a certain chemical formula will be given. Right? All these are actions, understand? They manifest accordingly. Understand, right? So. They are inseparably linked to nature. That is, similarly, an inactive nature does not exist at all. Well, that's clear, right? Why? If they didn't exist, we would never recognize them. Understand, right? Well, because the process of recognition itself also leads to interaction. Understand, right? That is, I see you, why? Because we have mutually natural communication. My visual ability encounters what? It encounters your materiality, substance, a certain colorfulness, a certain form. That is, this is the interaction of two actions, understand? That is, for me to be able to see you, you must simply be opaque to begin with. Because if you were transparent, I wouldn't see you. And this precisely touches on the question of the difference between nature and essence. But let's return to what we have regarding essence, that is, when we describe God, answering the question—"what is God?" or "who is God?" Understand, right? Not "who is God?" but "who is God?" The emphasis, understand, on what? Again, the emphasis is on essence. That is, what is the nature. Then we describe His quality. But "Who is He?" We are already saying that this is "whoness," to put it more simply. This is a description of personality. And here we must come to a very important thing. The fact is that Holy Scripture and Church Tradition, and our personal experience say that God is three Personalities. Three "I's," three Self-consciousnesses. Unfortunately, many modern people, reading Scripture inattentively, say that God has one personality. That is not so. This is the heresy of Sabellius, condemned back in the 3rd century. Sabellius of Libya asserted that God is one person, one monad, which puts on three different masks—in the Old Testament He pretended to be the Father, then pretended to be the Son, then pretends to be the Holy Spirit. And this is false teaching, it contradicts Holy Scripture. How does it contradict Holy Scripture? Well? How to refute Sabellius's teaching? Theophany, right? Tabor, right? When the Father says: "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; listen to Him." (Matt. 17:5).

 

Listener:

The baptismal formula.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, the baptismal formula does not contradict. Sabellius explained the baptismal formula like this: "Baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, that is, God, who was, is, and will be." Understand, right? Therefore, formally the baptismal formula, you can fit it in here. But Tabor you can't fit in, when the Father proclaims His Son: "This is my beloved Son." Or, remember, before the baptism, well, the brightest example, which is easiest to mention, right? The Father proclaims: "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove descends on the Son" (cf. Matt. 3:16-17), right? Why am I saying this? Because you will meet Sabellians now. There is a sect called the Local Church of Witness Lee. The Local Church of Witness Lee. They call themselves local churchgoers. Koreans. A very widespread sect. I've met with them dozens of times. They engage in street preaching, including in Moscow. There are several tens of thousands of them in Moscow. And they are pure Sabellians. They adhere precisely to the teachings of Sabellius Levitsky, but in a more radical form. They assert that God not only puts on different masks, but He also merges with a person at the moment of baptism. So that the person ceases to be a human. Or rather, when a person enters their "church," their local "church," he ceases to be a human, loses his human essence and becomes a mask of God, another mask of God.

 

That is exactly what can be easily refuted using the Lord's baptism. There is also another very good argument. Which one? That Christ prayed. Prayed to the Father. Christ prayed to the Father repeatedly. We have dozens of examples in Holy Scripture where Christ prayed. Prayer is communication with God. Some say: "why, how can Christ, being God, pray?" And very simply. Different Persons. Understand? To pray in the sense of supplicating the Father for something, right? He can do so as a human, but simply to communicate He can as God. Understand, right, what's the difference?

 

Listener:

Someone might say that the man in His person prayed to God.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Possible, provided we say that Jesus is not the Son and not God.

 

Listener:

How to refute that?

 

Fr. Daniil:

That's a separate conversation. When we talk about Christology, we will refute the false teaching of Nestorius. That is already a Christological error, called Nestorianism. Also a very popular doctrine now. But we will analyze it when we talk about the Incarnation (https://vkvideo.ru/video35221172_456239491). Now we are talking about the Trinity. So, we always say—three Persons, three "I's." But at the same time, it is necessary to understand that these three Persons are not three separate Gods. Because God is a description of essence. Therefore we say God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, however not three Gods, but one God. That's how it is said according to the Athanasian Creed. Or there Lord Father, Lord

  

Son, Lord Holy Spirit, however not three Lords, but one Lord. Therefore...

 

Listener:

So, first we bow to the Father, then to the Son, then to the Holy Spirit?

 

Another Listener:

And what about at the bishop's service if they sing "Alleluia" three times?

 

Fr. Daniil:

That's the performers' problem, forgive me. In the bishop's service book, "Alleluia" is written specifically once! Precisely in order not to confess the heresy of Sabellius.

 

Generally, what are we facing here? With the fact that any distortion...

 

Well, let's learn at missionary courses not to speak incorrectly. If you use the word "Person" (Litso) here now, then you will also say "Person" on the street. Understand, right? Get used to expressing yourself correctly here.

 

Because if you speak in a theological way—in seminary language—on the street, I've already told you how you will be understood.

So, what is the difference between different persons? Or hypostases.

What does the word "hypostasis" mean? Personality. Well, literally. Hypodeacon, what does it mean?

 

Listener:

Stand, support.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Stand, support, yes. Hypo - under. Stasis - to stand. Support. Therefore, the first mention of the word "hypostasis" in the book of the prophet Jeremiah means foundation. Well, chapter 23, I think, in the Septuagint. Well, not important, it talks about a foundation. But the word "hypostasis" in a theological sense is mentioned in the Epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 1, verse 3. The image of His hypostasis.

(cf. "1. God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2. has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3. who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4. having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they." (Heb. 1:1-4))

 

But so, in the language of philosophy, ordinary Greek language, it is concrete existence, as opposed to a general, generic concept. Logic clear? A concretely existing human—this is a hypostasis, as opposed to humans in general. Understand, right? A specific Roman—that's one hypostasis, right? As opposed to humans in general. So, for example, you cannot derive a genus of Romans. Understand, right? Or a genus of Alenas, or a genus of Evgenys. Because Evgeny—that's a description of a hypostasis. And Alena—that's a description of a hypostasis. Roman—that's a description of a hypostasis. A name signifies personality, designation of personality. Understand, right? In contrast to what one can say—humans, cats, money, mobile phones—a generic concept. That is, this is a hypostasis of mobile phones, from the genus of mobile phones. Understand, right? So.

 

But genus and quantity are different things. I'll show you. I have three...

 

Listener:

In general, there are cutlery, utensils.

 

Fr. Daniil:

That would be like a complex of natures. Understand, right?

 

Listener:

What about metallicness?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Metallicness—that's all a quality, understand?

 

Cutlery—is a certain characteristic of a group of nature, understand? Similarly, we cannot talk about the existence of a general group of "metallic metallicities." Metal is a certain general concept. We cannot introduce a separate group of metallicness.

 

We can say that this quality is inherent with these and those properties. What we now called metallicness or cutlery-ness, what is that? That's a description of some essential qualities. More precisely, cutlery-ness is an accident (note: accident—a philosophical term meaning a random, transient, non-essential property, state of an object (as opposed to substantial, essential))—a random quality. Because, for example, a spoon may or may not relate to cutlery. A spoon can simply be a spoon without any set. And a napkin can simply exist for blowing your nose, not as a utensil. But metallicness—that's already a natural quality. What's the difference? Very simple. That is, a quality that cannot be lost relates to natural qualities. And a quality that can be lost relates to a random quality.

 

Listener:

And metallicness cannot change.

 

Fr. Daniil:

That's precisely why it's a natural quality. Unlike a functional one...

 

Listener:

We boiled soup in a kettle. (Laughter in the group).

 

Fr. Daniil:

We also used blade boilers. We made them from razor blades. True, it used to trip the whole seminary building's circuit breaker. But we had a master electrician living in our room. He put some device there, and, you know, it stopped tripping. (Laughs) So, we got a little sidetracked.

 

These things are very important. This, actually, is not philosophy. It's simply an attempt to understand the mystery of God itself. Understand? Because if we speak about God inaccurately, we will understand nothing. Very often people run off into the unknowable. They say: "Oh, God is so great that it's impossible to know Him." But in God there is something knowable and something unknowable. Understand, right? By the way, this concerns not only God, but generally anything at all. That is, the same fork is knowable in something, and unknowable in something. Understand, right? So, for example, you cannot fully explain the shine of a fork. We know that it's the result of the electron gas inside the metal. That is, there is a free electron state there, so reflection occurs. But we are unable to fully describe the electrons, understand, by the uncertainty principle. That is, this is a property of any thing in the universe, and even more so it concerns God, Who is beyond the universe. But there are things that God has revealed about Himself. Therefore we know them. I also emphasize this because we are often told on the streets and during speeches—"how dare you speak about God, He is God, completely unknowable, it's Something higher..." remember, we already talked about this. Such ideas are false. About God we know something, but not because we possess super-logic, but because we have received something from God Himself. God has revealed something about Himself to us. That's all we know. Precisely the mystery of the Trinity primarily relates to this sphere. The sphere of what the Lord God Himself has revealed to us about Himself. Understand, right? So. Now a question arises. How do the hypostases differ from One Another? Personalities, how do they differ from One Another?

 

Listener:

God the Father is unbegotten. Christ is eternally begotten. And the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the Father.

  

Fr. Daniil:

These are called hypostatic properties. What are hypostatic properties? Again, for a simple person—here are two mobile phones lying, how do we distinguish one from the other? Different brands, different scratches, different numbers on the SIM card. All this is hypostatic properties, distinguishing one mobile phone from another. Of course, I can change the SIM, I can change the body. But if I change the very board of this mobile phone, then it will be a different mobile phone. That is, its nature will change. But God, Who is unchangeable, naturally cannot change His natural qualities and His hypostatic properties. And now a very important moment arises. Look, they often ask: "Can we describe the differences between God the Father and God the Son by some other qualities? Can we say that, for example, the Son appeared in time, but the Father did not?"

 

There is a very popular picture called "The New Testament Trinity." Have you seen it, yes? There God the Father is depicted as an old man, and the Son as a middle-aged young man. What's the mistake? (Note: New Testament Trinity—a non-canonical type of Trinity: depicting God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. Appears in Russian iconography from the mid-16th century, under Catholic influence.) That it suggests that the Father is older than the Son. Understand, right? So. And this is an important point. This is a false premise. Because older-younger, what are those practically? Temporal. We already said last time that God is outside of time. A timeless Being. Precisely because of this, He cannot be described by this characteristic. Understand, right? Therefore, one cannot say that the Father is older than the Son. No. He is prior to the Son in terms of being. Because the Son is from Him. Right? But not older. So. Look. Imagine this moment. I turn on a lamp. What is older? The lamp filament heating up or the Light? If we neglect the heating time, they coexist. But at the same time, the lamp is prior to the light coming from it.

  

Understand, right? Therefore, the Father is always the beginning, the Son is always from the Father, but at the same time They coexist in eternity.

 

Listener:

In the nature of the Godhead there is no time. So, the very concept of "older" doesn't exist.

 

Fr. Daniil:

But I just talked about that. Yes, that's exactly what I said. We cannot speak of older-younger, but we can speak of cause-effect. Understand, right? Causality does not imply temporality. It's very important to separate these concepts. When you speak about the Trinity, cause and time are things that do not necessarily coexist. For example, I can say that I step onto sand, and the fact of stepping is simultaneously the cause of the footprint forming on the sand, right? But the stepping and the formation of the footprint are indistinguishable in time, right? But the stepping of the foot is the cause of the imprint of the foot on the sand. Here's an example. Time has nothing to do with it here. Understand, right? It's very important to understand this because there are different forms of causation. That is, there is causation in time, right? When, for example, parents are the cause of children's existence, right? Or, for example, milk with green cucumbers is the cause of intestinal distress, right? These causes are related to time, right? But there is causation even here on Earth, which I just gave the sand example, which is not related to time. Another example, which is current now. The appearance of light and the incandescent lamp at a given moment, they are coexisting. They are not related to time. But the lamp bulb is the cause, light is the effect. Understand, right? And I explained this in detail precisely because Orthodox teaching speaks of the monarchy of the Father. What does monarchy mean? Sole origin. Mono - one. Arche - beginning. We say that God is one, because there is one Source of the Godhead. This is an old formula, which was used by the Cappadocians, Athanasius the Great, right? And by virtue of this, the Divine nature is one. Understand, right? Or not? One Source of the Godhead ensures unity with the Divine essence, right? The logic is clear? Or unclear, Gennady?

 

Listener:

Not entirely.

 

Fr. Daniil:

So, what? Here is one Source.

 

Another Listener:

It's hard to detach cause from time and dependency.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Why? I say, I repeat, you just need to understand that these are even logically different categories, understand? Lyulka will give you this logic lesson next time, at my request. This is very important because the problem is that nowadays we don't study logic in schools, very unfortunately. Because of this, people think in a completely terrible way, right?

 

Listener (female):

In Soviet times, there was no logic subject.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Never, that is, only in the gymnasium was there logic.

Have they already restored logic? Well, excellent, because in our time there was no logic in seminaries. This is very good because, of course, without logic it's very difficult. If you speak with ordinary people, you will notice that their logic usually lasts 2-3 steps, and then a break occurs, understand, right?

 

When they say: "The Son is not of the same nature as the Father." What argument? The simplest, we'll give from logic. Very simple.

A Jehovah's Witness or someone, an ordinary person, comes to you and says: "The Son of God, since He is the Son, He is not the Father."

You must say: "Yes, of course. Do you have children?"

 

· "Yes, of course."

· "Yes, well, of course, are your children badgers? Or hamsters? Or maybe chairs?"

  Well, logical, right? Since different natures, right? Well, understand, right? Precisely the relationship of begetting presupposes consubstantiality, right? Well, it's clear, this concerns chipmunks, hamsters, humans, God, anyone. Begetting in all beings presupposes consubstantiality.

 

Listener:

You can't say that about all citizens.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Any birth presupposes one being, except cases of adoption. Yes, adoption can be different. But we were talking about the eternal begetting from the Father.

Then there's a very good example, when they tell you: "we cannot believe that three can be one." Here's the candle example. Remember, those who attended catechetical courses know this example? Three candles, one is lit from another. Vitya, bring three candles. Does anyone have a lighter? Now we'll show this example, or you can show it using, for example, a napkin or anything. This example visualizes the doctrine of the Trinity very well, in that sense it's very convenient. So.

 

Now, concerning these hypostatic properties of the Trinity, that is, the personal properties that distinguish the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

Now let's first show this visually. You have candles, sticks, whatever. First light one candle. Then simultaneously from it light two others. And let them burn together. Understand, right? See? How many fires? One. How many burning candles? Three. Understand, right? Therefore, this is a very vivid example of why the Trinity is one God. Only illustrative, showing.

 

Because, look, begetting does not imply separation of the Son from the Father. Why? Because God is immaterial, therefore begetting is also immaterial. The procession of the Spirit is naturally immaterial by definition, the Spirit is immaterial. And since God is omnipresent, so the Father is omnipresent, the Son is omnipresent, the Spirit is omnipresent, so They are in One Another. Understand? That is, one cannot say that here is the sphere of the Father, here of the Son, here of the Holy Spirit. Origen taught that the Father governs everything, the Son governs rational beings, and the Spirit governs only saints. This is, of course, false teaching long condemned, and it's actually absurd.

 

Listener:

And are they in each other as hypostases?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, yes.

 

Listener:

And nature is one too, let me say that. Well, but...

 

Fr. Daniil:

Hypostasis without nature does not exist.

 

Listener:

It exists.

 

Fr. Daniil:

But how can a hypostasis exist without nature? How can concrete existence be without? Simply. What? What exists concretely? Unclear. Understand, right? It's very important to understand that all these philosophical words are simply a description of such completely concrete, tangible realities. Understand? Ordinary realities. When we speak with you about these terms, nature, hypostasis, essence, personality, it's precisely about description, not about us playing with some philosophical terms. Precisely because heresy kills because it describes a false reality. Well, did Lyulka tell you the example about the red-haired giant last time? The red-haired giant with a cigar, right? That's about me. That's precisely to the question of description. (Note: in a private conversation, Alexander Vyacheslavovich Lyulka said something like this: "I tell listeners, well, you all know Father Daniil? Everyone agrees. And I continue: he's such a giant, very tall, fiery red, walks with a cane and continuously smokes cigars. Actually, you can take the image of any person and describe him exactly the opposite. Clearly, people start to wonder.

Moral: if I say I know God, but describe Him somehow differently, then do I know the right one? Maybe it's some other god, some other being? If speaking specifically about another being, then that's about the image of Allah."

For more on what Allah is, Daniil Sysoev talked in his other lectures - https://pravoslavnyi-otvet-musulmanam.blogspot.com/2015/05/blog-post_27.html )

 

Now, what do we move on to? When we talk about the eternal properties of the Trinity: The Father from eternity is Father, the Son from eternity is Son, the Spirit from eternity is Spirit. The question arises, how does this relate to us? What's it to us, who God is? Well, besides pure curiosity. "Why did God reveal this to us?"—the question arises.

 

Listener: To know the Father and the Son.

Fr. Daniil: One. More.

Another Listener: Three Persons.

Fr. Daniil: Yes. But why did God reveal Himself exactly like this?

Another Listener: Accessible for our perception.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Clear that it's accessible, but why do we need to know this? Anthony said, for our salvation, right? How is this connected to our salvation?

 

Listener: To understand correctly.

Fr. Daniil: 

Correct, finally. So, why is it important for us to know that God is Father? Because He becomes our Father in baptism. Understand? Why do we need to know that Jesus is the Son of God? Because we become sons of God and unite with Christ. Understand? Uniting with the Son, we become sons. Understand? Understand? That is, we participate in the Divine begetting of the Son. Right? Why do we need to know that the Holy Spirit proceeds? We receive anointing during baptism and become people of whom? Exodus. Therefore the main Christian feast is called Pascha, that is, exodus. "From death to life, and from earth to Heaven, Christ God has led us, singing a victory song." (Note: verse from the Paschal Canon) The Holy Spirit, the proceeding Spirit. Precisely why He is holy, by the way. What does holy mean? The main meaning, the first meaning of the word holy is other, transcendent, right? Therefore the Spirit is transcendent, He proceeds from the Father, therefore He is other, and He makes us other. Therefore the Church sings—"To the Holy Spirit belongs the cause of all salvation, because whomever He breathes upon worthily, quickly rises from the earth, soars, becomes winged and ascends to heaven." This is connected to His hypostatic properties. That is, that we become holy is a manifestation in us that the Spirit of eternity proceeds from the Father and leads us to the Father. Understand? Leads us out of this world. By the way, therefore one of... Nicholas of Cusa said well that the Holy Spirit is the principle of the universe's motion. In that sense it's actually true. He proceeds. And He precisely animates the universe. Gives life to the universe. Understand, right? That is, this knowledge concerns us directly. Understand, this is not just theoretical knowledge given for curiosity. Not by chance our main prayer is addressed to Whom? To God the Father. "Our Father" is addressed to whom? So, because we become children of God. Precisely why, by the way, the Lord's Prayer cannot be read by whom? The unbaptized. Because they are not God's children. Also clear, right, why? Or unclear?

 

Listener:

If I, unbaptized, read it, then it's a lie.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, it's a lie, it's false witness. Therefore, by the way, in the ancient Church there was a custom of handing over the Lord's Prayer. The handing over was a symbol, and then the Lord's Prayer was handed over. Understand, right? That is, after baptism, the bishop for the first time permitted the baptized to read the "Our Father." Before that, reading the Lord's Prayer was forbidden.

 

Listener:

How could one pray then?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Prayers of the Psalms, for example. To this day, an unbaptized person can pray with the words of the Psalms. David was unbaptized. Understand, right? Therefore, the words of the Psalms are suitable for an unbaptized person, right? Unlike Christian prayers addressed to God as Father.

 

Listener:

So, either as a friend of God, or as a servant, right?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, but here's an interesting moment, if you notice, with what words does the singing of "Our Father" at the Liturgy begin—"And make us worthy, O Master, that with boldness and without condemnation we may dare to call upon Thee, the heavenly God as Father, and to say..." However our Slavonic translation is not exact the original says: "And make us worthy, O Master, that with boldness and without condemnation we may dare to call upon Thee, the Supercelestial God as Father, and to say Our Father...". Understand, right? That is, it's bold on our part, but we ask You by Your mercy to make us worthy of this amazing gift.

 

So, now briefly what we convey about the Trinity.

 

Now, concerning the actions of the Trinity, I'll also describe this a little now, and then we'll go to a detailed biblical basis for each of the points.

 

When we say that God is Triune, we must understand that since He is Triune in eternity, then He must have always acted as Trinity. Understand, right? Now the question arises: did God act as Trinity in creation? Biblical bases?

 

Listener:

Bereishit bara Elohim

(Note: "In the beginning God created" in Hebrew. Elohim is plural.)

 

That is...

 

Fr. Daniil:

Correct. Elohim is plural. Literally it should be translated: "In the beginning Gods created heaven and earth." (Gen. 1:1) Created—singular, Gods—plural.

 

The ability to create belongs to the Divine nature, and it is realized, of course, in a hypostasis. Therefore, when we talk about this world, God is always the cause. God the Father is the conceiving, God the Son is the creating, building, God the Holy Spirit is the perfecting. Remember, right? It's always so. This concerns creation. The Father conceived, the Son created, the Spirit

 

Holy perfects. This concerns the giving of the Law, the Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Incarnation. Who sent the Son into the world?—The Father. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) God gives His Son as a sacrifice for people. By the way, why? Why doesn't the Father Himself incarnate? Alena, your suggestion? Why doesn't the Father incarnate, but the Son?

 

Listener Alena:

Because the Son is begotten from the Father, but the Father is begotten from no one.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, because if the Father were born on earth, He would change His hypostatic properties. All correct. Understand, right? And if the Holy Spirit incarnated, then He would cease to be Spirit. That is precisely why the Son incarnates, understand, right? So that the hypostatic properties do not change. Which, by the way, speaks about what? That human birth is akin to Divine begetting. This is one of the imprints of the image of God in man. Even in the birth of animals there is a distant echo of Divine intra-Trinitarian relations. Understand, right? That is, the whole world, as Dionysius the Areopagite says, is permeated with the echo of Divine life. Therefore, by the way, when preaching about the Trinity, all saints use examples from the material world. For example, the sun. Remember, right? The solar disk, the sun ray, and the warmth. The example of St. Patrick's shamrock—one leaf with three petals. The example of a river by Athanasius the Great: source, river, and mouth—Father, Son, Holy Spirit. And here the action of God in this world is already mentioned. Understand, right? All these examples are taken from the world. The main example we should use, especially when working with Muslims, is the example of a human: mind, word, soul which animates the body. Or breath, which animates the word. Understand, right?

  

Breath is connected with life, right? You live—you breathe, right? Synonym. But breath at the same time gives our word the possibility to manifest itself. Also our mind always has within itself a verbal ability, right? Has its own life, right? But at the same time life and mind are somewhat different things, right? There is life, for example, of irrational beings. But mind cannot exist without life. There is word, inherent to mind. In the sense, not a specific word, but the verbal ability residing in a human's mind. Right? Understand? Can there be mind without the ability to speak? No, cannot. Mind cannot not possess the ability to speak, to self-expression. This is not about what's in the head. If we cannot think, then we do not exist. That is, our mind doesn't work. When we sleep, our mind doesn't work, and therefore there is no word.

 

Listener:

So, verbal thinking, right?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes. In Pavlovian terms, the second signal system: that which distinguishes humans from the animal world is precisely a manifestation of the image of God in man. (Note: but this, of course, is not all that distinguishes humans from the animal world. Humans have an immortal soul, which according to the assertion of the Holy Fathers of the Church (Macarius the Great (†391), Gregory the Theologian (†390), Gregory of Nyssa (†335)) appears at the moment of conception, since not only bodies but also souls participate in conception, and animals have a mortal soul. That is the main distinction of humans from animals. The human soul is the likeness of the Spirituality of the Son, the Spirituality of the Father, the Spirituality of the Holy Spirit.)

 

Listener:

So, an animal unlike a human does not think?

  

Fr. Daniil:

An animal does not think.

 

The expression of reason through speech is a peculiarity of humans, which reflects an imprint of the Divine nature (Note: also like the human soul). God the Father is the Mind, God Mind, therefore called the World-bearing Mind. And very often in our church hymns He is called that—Mind. Mind, which self-expresses through His Word. And the Spirit, which transmits this Word to people. Breath. Understand, right? Or not? I see a seal of non-understanding on your foreheads.

 

Listener:

Can't it be explained differently? That a smart person thinks. With his own words he feels reality. That is, he conveys his thoughts, gives orders.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Creative ability, right?

 

Listener:

Mind can create good and evil. Mind already possesses energy. That is, physical force can also be used through mind.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Haven't you noticed that it's the same thing? Look. Thoughts manifested outwardly are words, which were from creative ability. Energy—is life. We returned to the same thing.

 

Listener:

Can that also be used?

  

Fr. Daniil:

Of course, it can. It's the same thing, just in other words. The essence is the same, understand, right?

 

Precisely John of Damascus mentions this example I gave: Mind, Word, and Spirit—exactly in this sense. By the way, we are now going exactly according to the scheme of John of Damascus, whose memory we celebrate today. He first gives arguments from reason, and then moves to biblical arguments. Well, that's understandable, because we will often speak with people who do not accept biblical revelation. But at the same time they have heard about the Trinity, so they will try to persuade you that you believe in three gods there and so on... But we answer like this: we believe in one God, His Word and His Spirit. Understand?

 

Listener:

Mind must necessarily manifest itself in word. Necessarily, if there is a Father, there must be a Son.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Of course. The Father cannot be without the Son, otherwise He wouldn't be Father. Well, for example: Alena, are you a mother now?

 

Listener Alena:

Me???

 

Fr. Daniil:

Since you have no child, therefore you cannot be a mother, right? So, because of this, clear, right? That is, just as when we say there is a father, then guaranteed he must have a child, understand, right? Better mention the word child, so you don't delve into empty talk during conversation. I know from myself, you say there: "son." And he says:

  

"What if it's a daughter..." and empty talk begins, understand, right? No, that's known empty talk, which simply doesn't need a reason, understand? So for yourselves, note, a very important point, right? If there is a father, then there is a child. Understand, right? And that is the Son of God.

 

Listener:

Why masculine gender?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, very simply, actually. Generally, what is a man? First, man is prior to woman. Well, isn't that so? Second, the masculine principle is a more active principle, understand? The feminine is always passive. Precisely why even about a woman who is active, they say: she's a manly person. They don't say womanly, because a womanly person means something completely different—not activity and not courage, but opposite qualities. Because masculinity and femininity are not sexual qualities, but precisely active and passive. A man can be feminine, and a woman can be masculine. This in no way interferes with a person's normal life. It's simply about activity and passivity. But God cannot be passive. In God there can be nothing passive, understand? God is the source of strength, God is an actor, not an inactor. And in Him there is nothing feminine. He is beyond sexual distinction, so here we come again to what? Because just as the relationship Father and Son does not imply temporal differences, so also the male characteristics of God do not mean attaching any sex to Him. Understand, right?

 

Listener:

Can the feminine gender be used, since the Lord created her in His likeness and image?

  

Fr. Daniil: No.

Listener: Why?

 

Fr. Daniil:

It's very simple. Actually, if you take the book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 27, it says: "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." If you translate the original text literally, it says: "male and female He created them."

 

And so, sexual distinctions, both male and female, equally relate to the sphere of animals, but not to the sphere of God.

 

And in this sexual sense—it is what connects us with the world...

 

And sexual distinctions were introduced into human nature because...

 

Listener:

Did Adam's nature change after the creation of Eve?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No. Human remained human.

 

Listener:

Well, belonging to a sex?

 

Fr. Daniil:

That's a characteristic, not nature. That also did not change.

 

Listener:

And after the Fall?

 

Fr. Daniil:

That's a mode. There's a concept "mode"—a way of existence. The way of human existence changed, but not the human himself.

 

Listener:

So, reproduction principles appeared precisely after the Fall?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Those principles that were laid down began to work.

 

Another Listener:

If there was no Fall, would there be reproduction?

 

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, but differently. We are now talking about created things, let's return to uncreated reality.

 

So, now let's return to Sacred History. When we talk about the Bible, we must understand that the Bible speaks about the action of the whole Trinity throughout the history of the world's life. I already mentioned, verse 1 of Genesis, the very first verse of the Bible, where it speaks of plurality—"In the beginning Gods created heaven and earth" (Gen. 1:1). The second verse of Genesis speaks of the action of the Holy Spirit—"The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters" (Gen. 1:2). Remember, right? What does Spirit of God mean? Clearly, that is the Holy Spirit. Why was hovering? What does hovering mean? "Was warming strongly"—is indicated in Greek. That is, was warming—giving life to the waters. Precisely we come again to that the Holy Spirit perfects.

 

Further:

"3. Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light.

 

1. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.

2. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." (Gen. 1:3-5)

   So, God said—the Father. Right? Created light—the Son. Divided day from darkness—the Holy Spirit. Understand, right? Clear?

 

Further:

"6. Then God said, 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.'

 

1. Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.

2. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day." (Gen. 1:6-8)

   Understand? The same, right? One, two, three. Said, made, divided, called, that is, affirmed His dominion, right? The same on the third day, and fourth day, right? God said, let there be lights. God made the lights, set them in the firmament of heaven. Understand, right? That is, one action, see? One action! Not three actions, but executed by three Persons. Precisely the example of that fire from three candles. One action in three Persons.

 

And further, when we talk about the creation of man—the same. And here already a direct mention of plurality in God—the very first, most direct mention of the Trinity, this is Genesis chapter 1, verse 26:

"Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;'" (Gen. 1:26) So, plural, right? That is, this verse directly speaks of a certain plurality in God.

 

Listener:

We talked with a Krishnaite, he asked us such a question: "does God have eyes and ears?"

 

Fr. Daniil:

In a physical sense no, but visual ability and auditory ability exist. Understand, right? He has perfect sight and perfect hearing. But again, this sight and hearing are not connected to our perception systems. God has simple perception—He sees everything as it really is. Without process. Understand, right? The process of recognition is absent in Him. He simply sees how it is. Understand, right?

 

Listener:

This process is not needed for Him.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Process not needed, why? He is a timeless Being. And so, and therefore here it says "in Our image" and "according to Our likeness."

 

And we come precisely to a very important moment. The fact is that the image of the Father is the Son. Let's immediately here just move to hypostatic properties and to the description of Divine reality in Holy Scripture.

 

About God the Father.

 

Antitrinitarians repeatedly say that God is the only one... (Note: heretical antitrinitarians, speaking that God is only one in numerical unity often refer to the fragmentary text of the Gospel of John: "that they may know You, the only true God." But firstly, nowhere here is it said about the numerical unity of God. And secondly, it's necessary to read this verse in context: "And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." (John 17:3) Here's how St. Gregory the Theologian (†389) explains this verse: "the words: 'the only true God,' are said in distinction from non-existent gods, but called gods. For it would not have been added: 'and Jesus Christ whom You have sent,' if the expression: 'the true God,' were opposed to Christ, and not generally speaking about the Godhead.")

 

So look, for example, where is it said about the property of God the Father "unbegottenness"? This is the first epistle of John the Apostle, chapter 2, verse 14: "I have written to you, fathers, because you have known Him who is from the beginning." "Him who is from the beginning" can be referred to the Son and Holy Spirit in the sense of time, but "Him who is from the beginning" in the sense of origin does not exist. Understand, right, why? Now, concerning the Godhead, when we talk about God the Father, we must remember that according to biblical usage, as the usage of early Church fathers, when God is mentioned not in the sense of nature, but in the sense of Person, without any special predicate—description, most likely the Father is meant. Understand, right? "And this is eternal life, that they may know

  

You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent" (John 17:3). That is, the word "God" in Holy Scripture is mentioned primarily about the Father.

 

Listener (female):

So, if we say "Lord God," then we mean the Father, right?

 

Fr. Daniil:

If we don't mention, specially indicate, and don't say "God Trinity" for example. And when simply "God" is said, then in Scripture it most often refers to the Father. Here I can give an example: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, ..." not said with the Father—"... and the Word was God." (John 1:1), that is, God (Note: i.e., here it speaks of the Divine essence of the Word of God—Jesus Christ). "was with God"—specifically about the Father. Therefore He is called, by the way, by Dionysius the Areopagite "Self-God," i.e., the source of Divinity. And since the Father is the source of the Godhead, that is precisely why He is implied first of all by the word "God," if it is used without any special predicate—description.

 

About God the Son.

 

Now, concerning the Son. First, the main, of course, description about the Son's name—is that His main name is Son, distinguishing Him from other Persons. For example, we cannot call the Holy Spirit Son. Although we can call the Son Spirit. Understand, right, why? Is the Son Spiritual?

 

Listener:

Yes.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Is the Son Holy?

 

Listener: Yes.

 

Fr. Daniil:

 

Understand, right? The personal property of the Spirit is not that He is spiritual, not that He is Holy, but that He proceeds. Understand, right? Therefore it was long noted (Thomas Aquinas noted, and even before him) that the name "Holy Spirit" does not mean the mode of existence of the hypostasis. Understand, right, why? Because the Father can be called Holy Spirit, the Son can be called Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit can be called Holy Spirit. Understand, right, why? Because the Father is spiritual, the Son is spiritual, the Holy Spirit is spiritual, right? The Father is Holy, the Son is Holy, the Spirit is Holy. The Holy Spirit—the third Person of the Trinity, is called Holy Spirit precisely because He spiritualizes people and gives them holiness. He is called by His actions in the created world. His personal property is mentioned in the Gospel of John, chapter 15, verse 26.

 

Listener:

An angel, who is born, is that the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

I'll just talk about that now.

 

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me;" (John 15:26)

 

So, concerning the Son, His begetting is also spoken of in the Old Testament. Precisely as the begetting of the Son. This is said in Psalm 109 in the Greek version. Our Russian translation of Psalm 109 is simply disgraceful.

 

But even in the Russian translation, pay attention to what is written. Psalm 109, verse 3. I read in context:

 

"1. The Lord said to my Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool.'

 

1. The Lord shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion. Rule in the midst of Your enemies!

2. Your people shall be volunteers in the day of Your power; in the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning, You have the dew of Your youth." (Ps. 110:1-3 in KJV numbering, 109 in Septuagint numbering).

 

In the Greek text it says: "from the womb before the morning star I begot You." Before the morning star, that is before the creation of the morning star—before the creation of Lucifer. From the womb He is begotten, that is from the essence of the Father the Son is begotten.

 

Listener:

So, here an indication that the morning star—he is created.

 

Fr. Daniil:

And here primarily an indication of when the Son appeared.

 

Listener:

Father, is the morning star Lucifer?

 

Fr. Daniil:

It can be understood both ways. The fact is that in Scripture stars and angels are very often mentioned together. The heavenly host refers to both angels and stars, because, I think, the reason is very simple—"stars and those who live on them."

 

Listener:

So, angels live on stars?

  

Fr. Daniil:

Well, where else? Angels are heavenly. An angel consists on the sun. Remember, Revelation directly speaks about that? (Note: "Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, 'Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,'" (Rev. 19:17))

 

Listener:

Well, we talk about demons.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, those are also angels.

 

So, another place speaking about the Son of God is Psalm 2, verses 7-12. Let's read in context:

 

"1. Why do the nations rage, and the people plot a vain thing?

 

1. The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His Anointed."—Anointed, that is Christ.

   "3. 'Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us.'

2. He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision.

3. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, and distress them in His deep displeasure:

4. 'Yet I have set My King on My holy hill of Zion.'

5. 'I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You.

6. Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession.

7. You shall break them with a rod of iron; You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.''

8. Now therefore, be wise, O kings; be instructed, you judges of the earth.

 

 

1. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

2. Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish in the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him." (Ps. 2:1-12) The Father directly said: "Kiss the Son." It is also said: "today I have begotten You." We remember, God lives when? Eternally, in the present, right? Therefore Scripture says that the Son is begotten and is begotten.

 

Listener:

And not was begotten.

 

Fr. Daniil:

One can say was begotten, but also is begotten, continues to be begotten now. Like light from light, right?

 

Listener:

How to understand the words from the Bible: "I said, 'You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High.'" (Ps. 82:6)

 

Fr. Daniil:

Children of the Most High, that is, it talks about the Israeli people, who received adoption, remember?

 

Listener:

By promise.

 

Fr. Daniil:

By promise, but not like in baptism. Adoption was in the Old Testament still through the same Son. If in the Old Testament they were adopted as a people, or individual rulers were adopted, as bearers of God's kingliness, then we all become kings and priests, as in ancient times only the leaders of the Jewish people.

 

But most often, of course, in the Old Testament the Son of God is called the Word.

 

Another third place, where it directly speaks about the Son. There are also places where not directly, the Son is also mentioned. But I'll now say about a direct place speaking about the Son. This is Isaiah chapter 9, verse 6:

 

"6. For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (Note: peace—from the word reconciliation.)

 

1. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this." (Is. 9:6)

 

This is a direct mention in the Old Testament about the Son of God. See what names He has? Mighty God, Wonderful, Counselor. What does Counselor mean? With whom did He counsel? The Father counseled with the Son. That is the Council of the Holy Trinity. Everlasting Father, that is, He who introduces eternity into this world. Prince of Peace—in what sense Prince of Peace? Yulia? You'll be asked, and you'll have to answer. So the prince of this world—that is the devil, and the Prince of Peace Christ, in what sense are they...?

 

Listener Yulia:

About the devil I understand...

 

Fr. Daniil:

Here's the problem of the Russian language. In Greek it will be archon of the cosmos—devil, and Archon of eirene—Christ. Clear difference, right? Eirene—peace in the sense of absence of war. Therefore, and in the exclamation at matins it says: "For You are the King of peace and the Savior of our souls, and to You we send up glory, to the Father and the Son,

and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages." King of reconciliation. Understand? Not king of the cosmos, but King of reconciliation. Understand? And the prince of the cosmos is called the devil. Because he rules over those who bow to the cosmos. Understand, right? "i" with a dot—is that cosmos? And our ordinary "И"—is peace. Understand, right?

 

Listener:

Reconciliation with God?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The Son, Who gives peace with God, reconciles angels and people, reconciles Jews and Gentiles.

 

Listener:

But how about the Lord says, I appoint these kings as rulers?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, the devil does not rule over rulers and kings as such. He rules over people living according to passions, by virtue of passions. Understand? So you now got angry, if, for example, then the devil reigns over you. Because you began to live as a servant of the cosmos. Understand, right? And very simply. Why does a person get angry? Think about it. It's logical. How does it manifest? That I wasn't given what I wanted, right? I found myself attached to something, right? Attachment to the cosmos in general, to the created, generates in a person anger, fornication, drunkenness and everything else, understand, right? And here the devil rules. Precisely why he is the prince of the cosmos. Not because he created the cosmos, but because he rules over those enslaved by the cosmos.

 

Listener:

 But during the temptations, he says, I will make you king of the world.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, and therefore he lied, and therefore he was told: Get behind me. Remember?

 

There are also, of course, places that speak about the Son of God in the Old Testament. Which places? For example, the book of Proverbs speaks about this—chapter 30, verse 4:

 

"4. Who has ascended into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, if you know?" (Prov. 30:4)

 

So. Or also, for example, the Son of God is also mentioned in the book of the Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirach, chapter 51, verse 14: "I called upon the Lord, the Father of my Lord, that He would not leave me in the days of trouble, in the time of the proud, when there was no help." (Sirach 51:14)

 

Again we see the same here, right? God the Father and God the Son.

 

Concerning the New Testament, I won't bring all places about the Son of God, because open any chapter and you'll hit it. The name Son of God is mentioned in Holy Scripture of the New Testament 83 times.

 

Listener:

When did the word Son of God appear for the first time?

 

Fr. Daniil:

In King David's book. We just gave places, right?

 

Listener:

And how did God explain to them that there is a Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

 And God told them so, He answered them so. That's all. The prophets heard and knew that in God there is a certain plurality. But most often they called the Son the Word. This is the most frequently used mention in Holy Scripture. For example, Psalm 33, verse 6: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth." (Ps. 33:6) By the way, "breath" here is printed with a small letter in vain, it should actually be a capital "B." By the breath of God's mouth, that is, by the Holy Spirit all the heavenly host was created.

 

Again, I won't talk about all places about the Word of God in the Old Testament, because the Word of God is mentioned there about 2,500 times. The brightest example: "Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying:" (Jer. 1:4)

 

What does it mean, "the word of the Lord came to me"?

 

Listener:

Christ spoke.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Christ spoke, of course.

 

Now, concerning His eternal begetting and its properties. From the New Testament we'll now bring such words. Of course, we always, beginning to describe Divine begetting, mention first of all the Gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was 'with God'" (John 1:1). "with God"—incorrect translation, simply incorrect. "To God," that is, directed towards God. This speaks about the Word and the Father eternally communicating, understand? "With God"—it's presumed, simply the Word exists nearby, and that's all, right? But "to God"—means the Son's striving towards the Father. Understand, the Son eternally strives towards the Father, and the Father eternally gives Himself to the Son. Here at the beginning of the Gospel of John is indicated the eternal love between the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit, understand?

  

By the way, in church hymns all Three Persons are often mentioned. For example: "In Your light we shall see light"—Your (God the Father), Your Light (Holy Spirit) and in it we see another Light (Light of the Son).

 

So, "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was to God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1) God, understand, right?

 

"2. He was in the beginning with God.

 

1. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

2. In Him was life..." (John 1:2-4)

 

Who was in the Son? The eternal life of God.

 

Listener:

Holy Spirit.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Holy Spirit, of course.

 

"4. ... and the life was the light of men.

 

1. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

2. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

3. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe.

4. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

5. That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world." (John 1:4-9)

 

You hear these words every time at the All-Night Vigil, if you don't run away after the anointing.

 

The true Light, enlightening every man coming into the world—that is the Son of God.

 

Listener:

 

But in the Gospel it says: "I will send you the Holy Spirit"—the new Comforter.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes.

 

Listener:

Why does Jesus say "I will send"?

 

Fr. Daniil:

He sends, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father, but is sent by the Son. Understand, right? So:

 

"10. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

 

1. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.

2. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name:

3. who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

4. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

5. John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, 'This was He of whom I said, "He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me."'

6. And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace.

7. For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

8. No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (John 1:10-18)

 

So, here we see that the Son is called only begotten. What does only begotten mean? Well, explain it to me.

 

Listener:

One.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No.

 

Another Listener:

The only one begotten.

 

Fr. Daniil:

The only one begotten, unlike the adopted. Understand? Angels are called children of God, children of God are called... Remember, we just gave the example of Old Testament members of God's people—Israel, right? We Christians are called children of God, but the only one begotten from the essence of the Father is the Son. Who abides where? In the bosom of the Father. Therefore the Gospel of John, chapter 1, verse 18, says that the Divine Persons abide One in Another.

 

And remember, from the womb the Lord begot the Son (Psalm 110/109). By the way, Athanasius the Great, for example, referred to the begetting of the Son also what words? "My heart overflows with a good theme;" (Ps. 45:1). The heart of the Father overflows, that is, from Him proceeds a good Word. (Note: Athanasius the Great, St. (†373) says so: "The Father says this about the Son. For God is born from God." In confirmation, it is said by Christ in Scripture: "No one is good but One, that is, God." (Mark 10:18).)

 

Listener:

So, when a woman gives birth from the womb, she is as if an image of the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well yes. But such a depiction of God the Father is non-canonical, just like any other depiction of God the Father, because it is said: "No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (John 1:18)

 

(Note: Anthony the Great, Venerable (†356) explains these words thus: "The Son said about the Father, that no one has seen God at any time. He did not say, that no one has ever seen the Son of God—the Word—the man. For God was seen by the prophets and apostles, and every righteous one. But no one could see Him as He is, really. For the reality of our being cannot contain His form. And if to anyone He is visible from among the worthy, then not without a certain veil, serving according to the measure of purification. For Job saw, but through cloud and mist. And before him Abraham saw an Angel who spoke. Jacob—as a man wrestling with him. Moses—surrounded by darkness. So others saw the God-pleasing Face in dreams and guesses (veils). And the apostles saw God the Word incarnate in the flesh: the Son of God and Man—each according to the measure of his doing good and health of soul. So, he whose bodily gaze is healthy can quite look at the sun, but he whose is damaged barely endures the radiance of a lamp or the glance at a ray. If we see the sea from a mountain or from some hill, then we report that we saw a manifestation of only the breadth, and we saw the sea only partly, because from this shore the mountain or land on the opposite shore cannot be seen with eyes, for air stands in the way. Also the mind cannot know what is in the depth of the sea and on its very bottom [its]. For always something else, external, interferes with the understanding of this by the mind, so that we cannot guess or see what is on the bottom, and our thought truly falls into perplexity. We all see the sky, but not all equally, but each according to the health of the eyes. And the thought cannot see it to the end, and reach the supreme image, which only mentally can be, for, as known, we see the servile, [and that which is in the heavens] is not such. But if we

could see, then before us would be the visible and invisible, and not only partly, but completely all. So the Divinity is visible and invisible to people: it is not only covered by a dense veil, but also really unknowable (unthinkable) So hay and straw do not endure bringing near fire, but flare up and smolder into ash. When Christ bared a little of His Divinity on the Mount of Transfiguration, He struck with terror the pillars of the Church. They immediately fell: Peter, James, and John,—seized by fear, almost burning from the Divine fire. To the same degree the holy apostle exclaims clearly about this. From the great establishment of goodness the Creator appears without delay, but the heavens, earth, and seas cannot look upon the Perfect, for: how shall we really contain by vision the Creator of reality?")

 

So, Anthony the Great says that if to anyone the Divinity is visible from among the worthy, then not without a certain veil, serving according to the measure of purification. Hence Abraham also saw God in the form of three angels:

 

("1. Then the Lord appeared to him by the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day.

 

1. So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground,

2. and said, 'My Lord, if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your servant.'" (Gen. 18:1-3)),

 

and not in the fullness of His Divinity, i.e., through a certain veil, as Anthony the Great says. This also explains the canonicity of depicting God in the form of angels—the icon "Trinity" by Andrei Rublev. (In 1551 the Stoglavy Council decreed that all subsequent icons of the Holy Trinity must canonically correspond to the image "Trinity" by Andrei Rublev.). And attempts to depict the Divinity in all fullness and glory cannot be successful, and therefore are absurd and non-canonical.)

 

Listener:

And what about the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

But the Son, yes, it is possible. We have in Revelation, for example, a depiction of the Son of God as the Ancient of Days.

 

Listener:

So if Christ is depicted as a grey-haired Ancient of Days, then that's a normal depiction?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, that's a normal depiction of Christ.

 

Listener:

And do we recognize Christ precisely by the presence of the name?

 

Fr. Daniil:

By the name Jesus Christ we recognize Him, all very simple.

 

Listener:

Did Apostle John the Theologian not see God the Father, Who is on the throne?

 

Fr. Daniil:

He saw the One sitting, gleaming with precious stones.

(Note: "2. Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne set in heaven, and One sat on the throne.

 

1. And He who sat there was like a jasper and a sardius stone in appearance; and there was a rainbow around the throne, in appearance like an emerald." (Rev. 4:2-3))

There is no description there. His appearance like jasper, surrounded by a rainbow, that's all. Try to depict the One sitting, Who shines like precious stones and surrounded by a rainbow. So, in full description. Write, depict, please...

 

Listener:

But Isaiah also saw God.

 

Fr. Daniil:

And whom did he see? Chapter 12 of the Gospel of John says, whom did he see? It says directly there that he saw Christ. Chapter 12 of the Gospel of John says such words:

 

"37. But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him,

 

1. that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: 'Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?'

2. Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:

3. 'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, lest they should see with their eyes, lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, so that I should heal them.'

4. These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him." (John 12:37-41)

 

About Jesus. These are verses 37 to 41. Therefore you can calmly take chapter 6 of the book of the prophet Isaiah and say: "See? Yahweh Sabaoth. Who is That? Yes, yes. Jehovah. Only Jehovah Sabaoth—the Lord of heavenly hosts—is Jesus Christ. Him Isaiah saw. Chapter 12, verses 37 to 41, says that the vision described in chapter 6 of the book of the prophet Isaiah—is the vision of Jesus Christ.

 

Chapter 6 of the book of the prophet Isaiah is quoted in chapter 12 of the Gospel of John verses 37 to 41. Understand? There's a reference to the whole chapter 6 of the prophet Isaiah, it describes how Isaiah saw God, sitting on a throne, around Whom stood Seraphim, "and one cried to another and said: 'Holy,

Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory!'" (Is. 6:3). And the Lord of Isaiah said these words indicated in chapter 12 of the Gospel of John.

 

So, now concerning the question about Christ, about His Divine life. A peculiarity of the Son is that He possesses full knowledge of the Father. As it says in the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 11, verse 27: "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." (Matt. 11:27). That is, the Son is described as possessing full knowledge of the Father. We heard that the Son is the fullness. And therefore, by the way, one must understand that the Son is not a "demigod," but the fullness of God. "And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace" (John 1:16). Of His fullness. What fullness of His? This is spoken of in the epistle to the Colossians, chapter 2, verse 9. I read the context:

 

"8. Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

 

1. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;

2. and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power." (Col. 2:8-9)

 

In Him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily.

 

So, Christ, God the Son, possesses the same authority as the Father. This is spoken of in the Gospel of John, chapter 5, verses 17 to 24:

 

"17. But Jesus answered them, 'My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.'

 

1. Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

2. Then Jesus answered and said to them, 'Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.

 

1. For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel.

2. For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will.

3. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son,

4. that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

5. 'Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

6. Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live.

7. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself,

8. and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.'" (John 5:17-27)

 

That is, the Son does all that the Father does. The Son has life in Himself, that is, the words Yahweh or Jehovah mean that, right? Understand, right? That is, eternally Existing. Existing from Himself. And He creates everything from the Father. Why does the Son say that He can do nothing of Himself? Because the Father is the initial cause, the Son is the creating, the Spirit is the perfecting. Understand? In what sense does the Father show the Son? What do you think? "Here He sits like this and tells. Son, look, you need to do like this. No, that's not right. You need to do like this."—does He show like that?

 

Audience:

No, no.

 

Fr. Daniil:

 The Son is the Word of the Father. The Father's mind is fully reflected in the Son. Understand? Therefore the Son knows everything. This is spoken of in the Gospel of John, chapter 21, verse 17: "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." (John 21:17). Peter says, remember the conversation of Peter?...

 

The Son precisely reveals the Father to us. This is spoken of, first, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 1, almost all of it. Let's read carefully, you can rely on it when talking about the Divinity of the Son of God. The whole chapter:

 

"1. God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,

 

1. has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

2. who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

3. having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

4. For to which of the angels did He ever say: 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You'? And again: 'I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son'?

5. But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: 'Let all the angels of God worship Him.'

6. And of the angels He says: 'Who makes His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of fire.'

7. But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

8. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions.'

9. And: 'You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands;

10. they will perish, but You remain; and they will all grow old like a garment,

 

1. like a cloak You will fold them up, and they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not fail.'

2. But to which of the angels has He ever said: 'Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool'?

3. Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?" (Heb. 1:1-14)

 

See, right? Scripture specially emphasizes that the Son is not an angel by nature. Understand? Precisely when you hear Jehovah's Witnesses, who say that He is the Archangel Michael, read chapter 1 of the "Epistle to the Hebrews," where it is specially emphasized that all angels will worship the Son—their Creator, when God the Father brought the firstborn into the world. By the way, why firstborn? He is begotten before all creation, right? And begotten He is the first among many brethren.

 

Listener:

What does "brought into the world" mean?

 

Fr. Daniil:

When did the Incarnation happen? Don't you remember? What happened there? Don't remember, when Christ incarnated?

 

Listener:

Christ's body didn't exist before, did it?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, of course. And the soul did not always exist. The soul and body of Christ arise at the moment of the Incarnation at the Annunciation.

 

Listener:

So, it's an incorrect expression, that Jesus appeared in the Old Testament?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Why? There's a concept, communication of properties. And precisely by virtue of this communication of properties we can call Jesus by the name of God the Son, and vice versa the name of God the Son can be called Jesus.

 

Listener:

And did Christ preserve His Body now?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Preserved.

 

Listener:

And the Soul? Soul and body preserved?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes.

 

And how do you fold your fingers for the sign of the cross? Show me, please. Two fingers pressed together? Two fingers down, what does it mean? Christ's Divine nature and human.

(Note: let's bring another priest's answer to a similar question. Question: "Does God have a soul or is that inherent only to God's creations?" Answer of Priest Roman Posypkin:

"Dear in the Lord Larisa!

I'll answer you with a brief quote from the book of Psalms of David: 'The Lord tests the righteous, but the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates.' (Ps. 11:5). Of course, in this verse [prophetically] it speaks about the God-man, about Jesus Christ. But God is Spirit (John 4:24). The human soul, as you understand, has a beginning, but has no end. God's Spirit however is beyond time and all-encompassing. Therefore, by human nature in the Lord there is a soul, which, together with His resurrected body, ascended and is 'at the right hand of the Father.'

 

By Divine nature—God is Spirit, Who Himself creates living souls (Gen 2:7).

How in Christ two natures combined—is a Mystery, inaccessible to human understanding. About this it is said in the definition of the IV Ecumenical Council. Human and Divine nature combined in Christ:

• unconfusedly (two natures preserve their distinction even after union);

• unchangeably (in Christ neither the Divine turned into human, nor human into divine);

• indivisibly (neither of the two natures exists by itself, but only in one hypostasis of God the Word Incarnate);

• inseparably (this union of two natures from the moment of the Annunciation will never cease).")

 

Listener:

Where is it written that He preserved the Body?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Very simply. Revelation, chapter 1: "Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen." (Rev. 1:7)

 

So, now let's analyze in detail chapter 1 of the Epistle to the Hebrews, because it's key in our conversations with antitrinitarians. God, well understood, means the Father, we already talked about that, right? He earlier spoke in many parts and in many ways. Spoke to the fathers by the prophets. In these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds. That is, He gives the highest revelation of God—through the Son, by whom the Father created the worlds, that is, all times. Understand, right?

 

Listener:

"In these last days," what does that mean?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Now. The last days begin from the moment of the Incarnation, because we live in the last days. Understand, right? The last days began from the moment of the Annunciation. Therefore, when they ask: "When will the last days come?"—they have long come.

 

Listener:

And the very last days, when will they come?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Why are they called the last days? Because the last days are when a personal meeting with God became possible. Understand? When any person can go beyond time. That is possible now.

 

So, He, that is the Son, being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person. What does brightness of glory mean? That same "light from light." That is, as glory cannot be without brightness, as a lamp cannot not shine, as the sun cannot be without a ray, so the Father cannot be without the Son.

 

That is, if "Jehovah's Witnesses" are right, then God was once without glory and dark. Understand, right? That is, as Athanasius the Great also said, then God received an addition for the better. He was imperfect and gradually reached more perfection...

 

Listener:

Can one say that the Son is the glory of the Father according to humanity? By humanity glorified Him?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No. No. No. It's about eternal glory.

And He is the express image of His person. That is, He is the image of His personality. Therefore also

Christ says: "He who has seen Me has seen the Father;" (John 14:9). This is spoken of in chapter 14 of the Gospel of John, verse 9. By the way,

generally there the Lord says much about Himself:

"6. Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

 

1. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.'

2. Philip said to Him, 'Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.'

3. Jesus said to him, 'Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, "Show us the Father"?

4. Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.

5. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.'" (John 14:6-11)

   That is, see, right? In the Gospel of John directly in detail the Lord

   describes His Divine nature. He is the Way, because he who imitates

   Him, will go to the Father. He is the Truth, because He is the measure of all in this

   world. He is Life, because He gives all kinds of life. And therefore he who has seen

   Him, has seen also the Father.

   By the way, here's an interesting question. Can we say that life is a property only of the Holy Spirit? No. The property of the Holy Spirit is procession, remember, right? That life—the Father, He is the living God, right? Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16), remember? (Note: Cyril of Alexandria, St. (†444) on the words "Simon Peter answered and said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.'" (Matt. 16:16) gives the following explanation: "Peter did not say: 'You are the Christ or the Son of God,' but Christ, the Son of the living God. For many are anointed ones by grace and having the dignity of sonship, but only One is the Son of God by nature. Therefore he said with the article [Greek article ὁ, which stands before the Greek word υἱὸς (Son) indicates a unique object]: Christ, the Son of God (ὁ Χριστός ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ). And calling Him Son of the living God, he shows that He is life and death has no power over Him. For if His flesh was weak for some time, since it was to die, yet it resurrected, because the Word abiding in it could not be held by the bonds of death.") Life—the Son, we just read about that, right? Life—the Holy Spirit. And therefore precisely we say that the property "to give life"—is a property of all three Persons. Original Life—the Father, Life creating—is the Son, Life animating, Life perfecting—the Holy Spirit.

 

And further it is said about the Son, that He upholds all things by the word of His power. What does "upholding all things by the word of His power" (Heb. 1:3) mean? First, the word "upholding"—is not an exact translation. The original says that He rotates everything with one finger, by the word of His power. The whole universe is upheld by one little finger of God the Son. Imagine, right? That is, the whole universe, the whole enormity of creation is upheld by one finger of God the Son.

 

Listener:

Why precisely God the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, because it's written so. Yes, He is the ruler of the universe. By the way, precisely why to the question "who rules the world?" we say: "God the Son. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit." "He upholds all things by the word of His power" (Heb. 1:3)

 

Listener:

I don't know, but why then is Lucifer called the prince of the world?

 

Fr. Daniil:

he is a prince, not the ruler of the world. (Note: i.e., he as a limited feudal lord can only manipulate people through passions and even then, often is put to shame even by children and youths. Power over the whole world belongs to God.)

 

So, further said:

 

"4. having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

 

1. For to which of the angels did He ever say: 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You'? And again: 'I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son'?

2. But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: 'Let all the angels of God worship Him.'" (Heb. 1:4-6)

 

That is, the Son is the Almighty, Ruler, Redeemer. All angels worship Him. He eternally exists with the Father. He is the exact description of the Father, the exact image of the Father. Right? And further about the Son it is said: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever" (Heb. 1:8). He is God, God from God, right? How long does the throne stand? Forever and ever. Eternally. The Son sits with the Father until time. When we say that "the Son sat down at the right hand of the Father after the Ascension" it speaks about what? About Him as a man. Because as God, He abides with the Father always. Therefore it is said, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. Understand, right? Or not, Alena?

 

Alena:

Not very.

 

Fr. Daniil:

The Son rules together with the Father from eternity. He in the human nature of Christ is glorified and He as a man began to rule together with the Father, when He ascended after His resurrection. As a man. But as God He rules always. He is both God and man. In Him are two natures, but one Person, one self-consciousness.

 

Listener:

 So, that which is sung at the Paschal service: "In the grave bodily, in Hades with Thy soul as God, in Paradise with the thief, and on the throne with the Father and the Spirit wast Thou, O Christ, filling all things, Thyself uncircumscribed."—speaks about the two natures of Christ.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, yes, yes...

 

Listener (female):

But tell me, please, if He is God-man, then it turns out that God—is the Father, and it turns out there is another God, Who is also God-man? Somehow like that.

 

Fr. Daniil:

We said God from God, light from light.

 

Listener (female):

Because the Son of God, that's clear, but that He is God and Man, it turns out. You say that He is God too, but so is that the same God the Father or not?

 

Fr. Daniil:

In what sense? In the sense "what is" or "who is"?

 

Listener (female):

We talk about God-man, in Whom there is both God and man.

 

Fr. Daniil:

We cannot say that there is an essence God-man. There are two essences. There is the essence of God and there is the essence of man, which united in one concrete being, in one I, in one Person.

 

Listener (female):

Well, in Christ. In Christ it turns out, how is that, God the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, look, let me emphasize. The Father abides in the Son always. Before incarnation, during incarnation, and forever remains the Father in the Son. Remember, Christ said: "the Father who dwells in Me does the works." (John 14:10) Right? The Father is always in the Son, as also the Spirit is always in the Son. Therefore He is anointed with the Spirit from eternity, as the Son. As a man He is anointed from the moment of incarnation. But only the Person of the Son incarnated. Only the Person of the Son became man.

 

Listener:

The Son and the Father are the same.

 

Fr. Daniil:

In essence the same, in Persons different. The "I" is different. Self-consciousness different. Well, look, you or, for example, Anya, different persons, right? But essence you have one—human. That's all.

 

Listener (female):

No. Still, that God and man, that divine that...

 

Listener (male):

Listener, interrupting her says: "She asks, by humanity did He also become God?"

 

 

Fr. Daniil:

No. God remained God, man remained man.

 

Listener (male), addressing the woman: Need to ask correctly.

 

Listener (female):

Here we press fingers. God and man. God-man. So, this God-part. Not man, but God-part—is that the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, that is the Son. Son of God, Divine.

 

Listener (female):

He is Son of God and man.

 

Fr. Daniil:

He is the Son of God, who became man, remaining the Son of God. Nature in Him is Divine! What is Divinity in Christ? That Divinity which is proper to the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That Divinity which the Son receives from the Father in the act of begetting from eternity. "What is"—Divine. That, right? Who is? That is the Son of God, who became man. He is twice born. In eternity from the Father, in time from the mother.

 

Listener:

Personality, is it contained in the body empty or can it...?

 

Fr. Daniil:

In what sense? Whose personality?

  

Listener:

The Son's. Is it contained?

 

Fr. Daniil:

In what sense contained? In the sense limited by the Body?

 

Listener:

Yes.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, not limited. He is omnipresent. God cannot be limited. The Person of Christ is omnipresent. Remember, the Lord said: "where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them." (Matt. 18:20). As God, of course, not as a man.

 

Listener:

Why such a condition—two or three?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, it's about love, but that's a completely separate conversation.

 

Or, for example: "I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matt. 28:20), no matter where you are. He is omnipresent, as God. Therefore the Body of Christ does not limit His person. And, by the way, there are no problems when, you know, some say: "well how can you say that He descended into Hades, and simultaneously He led the thief into Paradise? How so? He descended into Hades." His soul descended into Hades, and by Divinity, He was in Paradise. Understand?

 

So:

 

"7. Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.

 

1. You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions." (Ps. 45:6-7)

 

God anointed God with the oil of gladness. God the Father anointed the Son with the oil of gladness. Oil of gladness is Who? The Holy Spirit, right? Why companions? Who are companions?

 

Listener:

Slaves.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, not slaves. These are Christians. That is, participating in the anointing of Christ. Understand? A Christian only participates in the anointing of Christ. Precisely why the un-chrismated cannot be Christians. Understand? These are those companions of Christ, who are mentioned here. Participating in the anointing of Jesus Christ. And, look, a very interesting text from Psalm 102. Usually, when reading Psalm 102, for example, at Great Compline, or generally in home prayers, they don't pay attention that this psalm then speaks about the Son.

 

About the Son it is said:

 

"26. Of old You laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.

 

1. They will perish, but You will endure; yes, they will all grow old like a garment; like a cloak You will change them, and they will be changed.

2. But You are the same, and Your years will have no end." (Ps. 102:25-27)

 

Understand? That is, precisely when we read this carefully let's ponder. By the way, in the Hebrew text it stands: "Of old You, Jehovah, laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands;". Understand, right? Therefore if you find an icon of the Son of God, there is written Jehovah, directly so written. ω Ο Η, right?

You see there? The Existing One—ω Ο Η. The Existing One, that is Yahweh—Jehovah.

Listener (female):

Jehovah, Jesus and Yeshua—do they all mean Savior?

Fr. Daniil:

Yeshua, is Jehovah saving. Jehovah means Existing, eternally existing. Right? And Jesus (Yeshua) means what? That is Jehovah, Who came to save. That's all. That is, the name Jehovah is contained in the name Jesus. Understand, right? Jehovah, who is Savior.

Listener (female):

Well, simply to say that it's Jehovah, can't?

Fr. Daniil:

Why??? We say: "The Existing One, the Son, and blessed Christ our God always, now and ever and unto ages of ages."

  

Listener (female):

Well, let's say, these Jehovah's Witnesses constantly use the name Jehovah.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Well, and we simply in translation also all the time use this Name.

 

Listener:

Jesus Navin (Joshua), also translates the same.

 

Fr. Daniil:

By the way, Jesus Navin prophetically received from Moses precisely this name, because he was to conquer the Holy Land. He was Hoshea originally. Hoshea was. Moses gave him a new name—Jesus, by God's revelation. So that he would conquer the Holy Land.

 

Listener:

And how is that translated?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Jehovah saves. Jehovah savior. The Existing One, Who came to save.

 

Listener:

Tell me, but the word "Church," can one say that it is the house of Jehovah, the house of the Lord?

 

Fr. Daniil:

One can so.

 

So, moreover, if you pay attention to, for example, Revelation, we'll see there such words—Jesus says:

 "17. ... I am the First and the Last,

  

1. and the Living One. I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death." (Rev. 1:17-18)

 

Who is the First and the Last? Alpha and Omega—that is Christ. And where else does God call Himself First and Last?

 

"1. 'Keep silence before Me, O coastlands, and let the people renew their strength! Let them come near, then let them speak; let us come near together for judgment.'

 

1. 'Who raised up one from the east? Who in righteousness called him to His feet? Who gave the nations before him, and made him rule over kings? Who gave them as the dust to his sword, as driven stubble to his bow?

2. He pursued them, and passed safely by the way that he had not gone with his feet.

3. Who has performed and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I, the Lord, am the first; and with the last I am He.''

4. The coastlands saw it and feared, the ends of the earth were afraid; they drew near and came." (Is. 41:1-5)

 

That is, the Same One who says that I am first, I am last, He also says that He is Jesus. Understand? Compare. Let's draw such a line. (Rev. 1:17) and (Is. 41:4), (Is. 44:6), (Is. 48:12).

 

(Note: "Listen to Me, O Jacob, and Israel, My called: I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last." (Is. 48:12);

"Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the First and I am the Last; besides Me there is no God,'" (Is. 44:6) — Blessed Jerome of Stridon (†420), taking into account the context of chapter 44 of the book of Isaiah, as well as the whole book of the Prophet Isaiah with reference to chapter 42, and also the historical context of the Israeli people who worshipped idols, explains that the words "besides Me there is no God" refer to the exclusivity in His properties of the Divine essence of the Godhead of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit ("And He does not say that only He alone exists, but that besides His power and wisdom there is no other God and, condemning faith in many gods and idols, says: who is like Me?"), and not about numerical He said above:"), supporting this with a quote of verse 1, chapter 42 of the Book of the Prophet Isaiah ("'Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.' (ch. 42)") and says the following:

 

"I am the First and I am the Last, I am the alpha and the omega, and besides Me there is no God, for the Servant, whom I have chosen, is God in Me. About Him I said above: 'Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles;' (ch. 42). And He does not say that only He alone exists, but that besides His power and wisdom there is no other God and, condemning faith in many gods and idols, says: who is like Me? Let him call non-existent things as existing (Rom. 4:17) and set forth the order of My creation, in which everything was thoroughly considered by Me, from the time I created man on the earth. And I not only want this, but also demand knowledge about the future. Therefore you, Israel, having Me as your king and Redeemer, do not fear idols, regarding which you learned on Mount Sinai that they are nothing. Or perhaps there is another creator, whom I would not know? Or besides this world is there another world, revealing the might of an unknown God? But not only what is done, but also those who do them will be counted as nothing. And when the time of recompense comes, they will not be able to save them, the works of their hands, by which, blind and deprived of feeling, their craftsmen will be put to shame.

 

For who can believe that by means of an axe, and a saw, and a drill and a hammer a God is formed? Or that by means of coals, idols are cast, or else by means of a cord, a plane, and squares and a compass suddenly gods are made, especially when the hunger and thirst of the craftsman indicate the worthlessness of the art? For a wooden statue is made, representing the image of a man, and the more beautiful it is, the more sacred the god is considered. It is placed in a temple and shut in an eternal prison, having grown for a long time in forests and, according to the difference of trees, having been cedar, and ash, and oak or pine. And amazingly the chips and shavings from it are thrown into the fire, to heat the one who made the god, and to cook various kinds of food, and from another part a god is made, so that, upon finishing the work, he who made it worships it, and asks help from his work,—and does not understand or consider or rather does not see with bodily, nor spiritual eyes, that cannot be God that of which a part is burned, and that divine majesty is not created by human hand. In prophetic speech idols are mocked in great detail, but this is easily misunderstood, and it does not require lengthy or rather excessive explanation. About this also Flaccus writes in a satire (Horat. Sat. 1, 8, 1-4), mocking the idols of pagans:

 

'Once I was a useless log, a trunk of a fig-tree; Long the craftsman pondered, what to make me, a bench, or a Priapus! 'I'll make a god!' he said; so I am a god! Since then I scare birds and thieves...'

 

But all said about idols can be referred also to heresiarchs, who by the art of their own heart form idols of their teachings and deception and worship that regarding which they know that it is fabricated by them. And they are not satisfied with their own delusion if they do not draw all the simple-minded to bow before them. They think that godliness is a means of gain (1Tim. 6), and they devour widows' houses, and abusing the ignorance of the people, thus make their god with the help of dialectical art, as if by means of an axe and a drill, a saw and a plane, and they forge with a hammer and gild with the beauty of rhetorical speech: whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame (Phil. 3:19).")

  

Jesus also calls Himself how? In Revelation the Lord Jesus Christ calls Himself thus: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,' says the Lord, 'who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.'" (Rev. 1:8). Now the question arises, can a created being call itself thus—the Almighty, Who was, and is, and is to come, First and Last? If Christ is created, then He is already second.

 

Listener:

Here's a question. The Son is in the Father, right? And the Son's Body is also in the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

In the heavens. And also in the Father. Well because God is omnipresent. What, have you forgotten?

 

Another Listener:

And if the Body—it is outside of time, outside of space, what are its characteristics?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Describable, limited with the marks of wounds.

 

Another Listener:

And how can It be outside of time, outside of space?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The Body as it is preserved with the marks of wounds from crucifixion, because It is outside of time and space.

 

Another Listener:

How—can this be described?

  

Fr. Daniil:

Go into a church, there on the right side there's an icon of the Apocalypse.

 

Third Listener:

No, just interesting, how does it look?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Why wait long? Go into the church. One minute walk.

 

Listener:

And the throne, about which you said, where is it located?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The throne in the heavens.

 

Listener:

So, Paradise is somewhere there...

  

Fr. Daniil:

Paradise—is a created reality, another.

 

Listener:

So, if after death we go to Paradise, we go to a created place?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes. Temporarily. Until the day when Christ comes and takes us to Himself.

 

So, there is a very important place which you must always use. This is the first epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 1, verse 24. We read in context:

 

"21. For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

 

1. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom;

2. but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness,

3. but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." (1 Cor. 1:21-24)

 

Jesus Christ—He is God's power and God's wisdom. Therefore, when we say that there God's power acted. Who acted? Jesus Christ. He is God's power. He is God's wisdom. Understand? Precisely why, when in the Old Testament Wisdom is mentioned, who is mentioned? Jesus Christ. About this, for example, it is spoken in the book "Proverbs of King Solomon," very many in detail. Chapter 8 of the book "Proverbs of King Solomon," beginning from verse 22 to chapter 9, verse 6. I read to you a passage:

 

"22. The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way, before His works of old."—What does the Lord possessed me mean? That is, Wisdom eternally abides, is had in the Father. And is had as the beginning of the Father's way. That is, the whole way of the world, the way along which the world moves, is in Whom? In the Wisdom of the Father. Therefore he who wants to come to the Father, must go through Whom? Through the Son. Therefore also said the Lord: "No one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6). And "before His works of old;"—that is, always.

 

"23. I have been established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth."—By whom, anointed from the beginning, before there was an earth? By the Holy Spirit, yes—Oil of Gladness. The Holy Spirit from eternity abides in Christ—in the Son of God. When we say that Christ, He is anointed as a man by the Holy Spirit, it speaks about the Incarnation, but from eternity the Holy Spirit abides in the Son. About this it is spoken directly, see, this place: "from the beginning, before there was an earth."

 

"24. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no fountains abounding with water.

 

1. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I was brought forth;

2. while as yet He had not made the earth or the fields, or the primal dust of the world."—Atoms were not yet.

 

"27. When He prepared the heavens, I was there, when He drew a circle on the face of the deep,

 

1. when He established the clouds above, when He strengthened the fountains of the deep,

2. when He assigned to the sea its limit, ..." (Prov. 8:22-29)—clouds above—these are not these clouds, but clouds in space. Nebula. Galaxies. When galaxies God the Father strengthened above, together with Him was the Son. Imagine, God Christ was spinning a nebula by the will of His Father. Together with Him.

 

Listener:

So, essentially by His own will.

 

Fr. Daniil:

But the will They have is common.

  

"29. when He assigned ..."—that is, the Father assigned—"to the sea its limit, so that the waters would not transgress His command, when He marked out the foundations of the earth:

 

1. Then I was beside Him as a master craftsman;"—that is, Wisdom was beside the Father as a master craftsman—"and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him," (Prov. 8:29-30)

 

What does this speak about? That the Father always rejoiced about the Son. See, we precisely get into the depths of God? Where are the roots of joy? See? In that joy which the Son has in the Father, and the Father has in the Son. So the eternal joy of communication of three Persons—that is the root of true joy.

 

"31. Rejoicing in His inhabited world, and my delight was with the sons of men.

 

1. 'Now therefore, listen to me, my children, for blessed are those who keep my ways.

2. Hear instruction and be wise, and do not disdain it.

3. Blessed is the man who listens to me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors.

4. For whoever finds me finds life, ..." (Prov. 8:31-35)

 

Again we come to what? What does Wisdom say here? "To find Me—means to find life." When Wisdom became man, what did She say? Gospel of John, chapter 11, verses 25-26:

 

"25. Jesus said to her, 'I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.

 

1. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. ..." (John 11:25-26)

 

Remember, right?

 

Listener:

Life—that turns out to be the Father? Found the Son—found the Father.

  

Fr. Daniil:

Yes. Life—is the Father. Life—is the Son. Life—is the Holy Spirit.

 

Listener:

But the source of life—is the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The source of life—is the Son. The source of life—is the Holy Spirit.

 

So:

 

"35. ... finds life, and obtains favor from the Lord;" (Prov. 8:35)—by the way, obtains favor from the Lord, what? Obtains the grace of the Holy Spirit from the Lord. Through Christ. As He also promises: "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me;" (John 15:26). Notice, see, the same. Jesus, having become man, says the same that He said to Solomon a thousand years before this. He spoke with Solomon, right, and said the same that He said in the Gospel. Notice. What a direct connection, see?

 

"36. But he who sins against me wrongs his own soul; all those who hate me love death.'" (Prov. 8:36)

 

(end of chapter 8, then beginning of chapter 9)

 

"1. Wisdom has built her house, she has hewn out her seven pillars;

 

1. She has slaughtered her meat, she has mixed her wine, she has also furnished her table.

2. She has sent out her maidens, she cries out from the highest places of the city,

3. 'Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!' As for him who lacks understanding, she says to him,

4. 'Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed.

5. Forsake foolishness and live, and go in the way of understanding.'" (Prov. 9:1-6)

 

Wisdom built a house—what kind? The Orthodox Church. Hewn out seven pillars—that is the seven sacraments. Slaughtered her meat—His own human nature, because Christ offers Himself as a sacrifice to God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. But as a human He offers Himself in sacrifice, but as God He accepted this sacrifice. Therefore the sacrifice is offered by the Son Himself. And prepared a feast: "has mixed her wine and has prepared her table." The meat—is the Lord's body, and the wine—is His blood. The feast—is the communion. "She has sent out her maidens, she cries out from the highest places of the city." Who are these? That's us with you, whom Wisdom sends. Understand? We are servants of the Holy Wisdom of the eternally existing God, and from the heights we say: "whoever is simple, let him turn to Wisdom."

 

"4. ... As for him who lacks understanding, she says to him,

 

1. 'Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed.

2. Forsake foolishness and live, and go in the way of understanding.'" (Prov. 9:4-6)

 

See, even about us there is prediction here?

 

There is also a place in Holy Scripture, where in detail, already in the deuterocanonical books, where the essence of the Son of God is described "what He is?" So we talked about "who He is?" Now, we will talk about "what He is?"

 

About this speaks the book of the Wisdom of Solomon. I'll start reading from chapter 7 verse 21, and end with verse 1 of chapter 8. So, Solomon speaks.

 

"21. Thus I learned both what is secret and what is manifest, for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me.

 

1. For in her there is a spirit that is intelligent, holy, unique, manifold, ..." (Wis. 7:21-22)—Again, right? The same name. Only begotten Son.

 

"22. ... a spirit that is intelligent, holy, unique, manifold, ..."—i.e., animates many parts of the Universe. "..., subtle, mobile, clear, unpolluted, distinct, invulnerable, ..." that is, not bringing harm. "..., loving the good, keen, ..." also clear, right? Loving good.

 

"22. ..., irresistible, beneficent,

 

1. humane, steadfast, sure, free from anxiety, all-powerful, overseeing all, and penetrating through all spirits that are intelligent, pure, and most subtle." (Wis. 7:22-23)—That is, God the Son, Jesus Christ penetrates all most subtle spirits, all angels are penetrated by Christ. Our spirits are penetrated by whom? Jesus Christ. Therefore also it is said, that "That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world." (John 1:9). Remember, right? We read about that, right, in the first chapter of the Gospel of John? Because Wisdom penetrates all spirits.

 

"24. For wisdom is more mobile than any motion; because of her pureness she pervades and penetrates all things.

 

1. For she is a breath of the power of God, and a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty; therefore nothing defiled gains entrance into her." (Wis. 7:24-25)

 

Again, a breath of power, right? And a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty. Again, light from light—that is emanation—"emanation of glory," which cannot be stopped.

 

"26. For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness." (Wis. 7:26)

 

Understand, right? That is, again, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (John 14:9), therefore also said, Wisdom became man.

 

"27. Although she is but one, she can do all things, and while remaining in herself, she renews all things; in every generation she passes into holy souls and makes them friends of God, and prophets;

 

1. for God loves nothing so much as the person who lives with wisdom." (Wis. 7:27-28)

 

See, how interesting? He who does not love the Son, God does not love him. Understand? "29. For she is more beautiful than the sun, and excels every constellation of the stars. Compared with the light she is found to be superior,

 

1. for it is succeeded by the night, but against wisdom evil does not prevail." (Wis. 7:29-30)

 

Remember? What parallel place do we have? "And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it." (John 1:5) See what connection? Through millennia the same words. Why? Because He who was then, then also spoke, understand? The same Son, who spoke originally, He continued to speak further.

 

(Further quotes from chapter 8 of the Book of Wisdom of Solomon):

 

"1. She reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and she orders all things well." (Wis. 8:1)

 

And further Solomon says:

 

"2. I loved her and sought her from my youth; I desired to take her for my bride, and became enamored of her beauty.

 

1. She glorifies her noble birth by living with God, and the Lord of all loves her.

2. For she is an initiate in the knowledge of God, and an associate in his works." (Wis. 8:2-4)

 

That is, She chooses for Him works. Chooses for Him works. Chooses people, whom She leads to the Father. You know, how interesting?

 

By the way, remember what we sing at the All-Night Vigil? "In wisdom hast Thou made them all" (Note: in the hymn is quoted verse 24 of Psalm 104). About Whom is sung? About the Son it is said, that all in wisdom the Father made, all by the Son was created.

 

Listener:

 And how do Jews teach about Wisdom?

 

Fr. Daniil:

They say that there is a certain "Memra" of God. "Memra," that is, Word.

 

Listener:

So, like the Quran?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, the living Word, by which God created the Universe. They say that this is the Messiah, Who has not yet come.

 

Listener (female):

How do we know that Jesus is Wisdom?

 

Fr. Daniil:

You just heard: "but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God;" (1 Cor. 1:24).

 

Listener:

And then interesting, they proclaimed all these Jewish leaders who rose up. Messiahs, so, these were...

 

Fr. Daniil:

They have several concepts about the Messiah, they are more complex. They have several "missions."

 

Therefore further Solomon says:

 

"5. If riches are a desirable possession in life, what is richer than wisdom, the active cause of all things?

 

1. And if understanding is effective, who more than she is fashioner of what exists?

 

 

1. And if anyone loves righteousness, her labors are virtues; for she teaches self-control and prudence, justice and courage; nothing in life is more profitable for mortals than these." (Wis. 8:5-7)

 

So, and who teaches all this? Jesus Christ, right? See, how interesting? Not by chance the Gospel says so much about justice and wisdom.

 

"8. And if anyone longs for wide experience, she knows the things of old, and infers the things to come; she understands turns of speech and the solutions of riddles; she has foreknowledge of signs and wonders and of the outcome of seasons and times.

 

1. Therefore I determined to take her to live with me, knowing that she would give me good counsel and encouragement in cares and grief.

2. Because of her I shall have glory among the multitudes and honor in the presence of the elders, though I am young.

3. I shall be found keen in judgment, and in the sight of rulers I shall be admired.

4. When I am silent they will wait for me, and when I speak they will give heed; if I speak at greater length, they will put their hands on their mouths.

5. Because of her I shall have immortality, and leave an everlasting remembrance to those who come after me." (Wis. 8:8-13)

 

That is, what does Solomon speak about and what the Lord said, right? "Jesus said to her, 'I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.'" (John 11:25). Through Her, through Wisdom—Solomon says—I shall attain immortality. The same, see? Who is the source of resurrection? The Son—Wisdom of the Father. The same says Solomon, right? The same says Christ. The same says Paul. One thought throughout the whole Testament, understand? Therefore, when they say that the Old Testament—is about one thing, the New—about another, understand that that's a lie? Simply see it with your eyes. It's the same Author.

 

 

"14. I shall govern peoples, and nations will be subject to me;

 

1. dread monarchs will be afraid of me when they hear of me; among the people I shall show myself capable, and courageous in war.

2. When I enter my house, I shall find rest with her; for companionship with her has no bitterness, and life with her has no pain, but gladness and joy.

3. When I considered these things inwardly, and pondered in my heart that in kinship with wisdom there is immortality,

4. and in friendship with her, pure delight, and in the labors of her hands, unfailing wealth, and in the experience of her company, understanding, and renown in sharing her words, I went about seeking how to get her for myself." (Wis. 8:14-18)

 

So Solomon, how interesting, set himself what task, right? How does he do all this? And he then turns with prayer to God, so that the Lord would give this.

 

Now let me tell you how the Son acted in the history of all mankind before His coming into the world.

 

That the Son participated in creation, you understood, right? That the Son created man, also understood—in His own image, that is according to the Son, and according to likeness—according to the Holy Spirit. Image—is the Son. Image of the Father—Son, likeness of the Father—Holy Spirit. Because He makes like the Father. Understand? He makes holy and spiritual, like the Father. So. In the image God created man, that is, according to the Son God created man. Precisely why Who came to earth to save?

 

Listener:

The Son.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Because clear, right, why? The image got spoiled, turned into a caricature. Need to correct. Understand, right? So. Further. When Adam sinned, Who came searching? Listen carefully, chapter 3, verse 8, Genesis:

 

"8. And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.

 

1. Then the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, 'Where are you?'" (Gen. 3:8)

 

(Note: Georgy Konstantinovich Vlastov (†1899) says: "The holy narrative," says Metropolitan Philaret, "does not give a precise concept of the manner of God's appearance; one can affirm only that He who appeared was the Son of God, to Whom it is proper to manifest God, whom no one (especially sinners) has seen (John 1:18)."

 

The voice of God walked in the garden—well, the Word. Clear, right? Obviously. Precisely the Son sought Adam in the garden. And where did He find him afterwards? At the bottom of Hades. He Himself. Understand? The matter of relations between God and man began then and continued by the same God, Who then in the beginning lost Adam, in the end found him. Understand? That is, no difference. That is, the Old and New Testaments—are one line of revelation, understand? Which keeps intensifying, until it reaches the goal, finally.

 

By the way, precisely why also says the Wisdom of Solomon, chapter 10, verses 1 to 2:

 

"1. Wisdom protected the first-formed father of the world, when he alone had been created; she delivered him from his transgression,

 

1. and gave him strength to rule all things." (Wis. 10:1-2)

 

(Note: Lopukhin A.P. says about chapter 10: "Chapter 10 contains a series of separate examples from ancient history, starting from Adam to the exodus of Jews from Egypt, by which the writer proves that Wisdom always gave people good things, and contempt for Her entailed sad consequences. The example of Adam is given, who is called 'the first-formed father of the world.' 'Father of the world' expresses the thought that Adam was the progenitor of all mankind; the adjective 'first-formed' distinguishes him from Noah, who was also called 'second Adam.')

 

So, precisely the Son acted. And further, for example, when the Flood happened, then again the Trinity acted. Genesis chapter 6, verses 1 to 7, about the Flood decision. It says: "Then the Lord said, 'My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh;'" (Gen. 6:3). Here the Lord says, the Spirit is mentioned. And then: "So the Lord said, 'I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.'" (Gen. 6:7). Here "I will destroy"—the Son destroys. "For I am sorry"—the Father is sorry. And the Spirit strives. That is, again the Trinity.

 

Similarly at Babel. Genesis chapter 11, verses 1 to 9:

 

"1. Now the whole earth had one language and one speech.

 

1. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there.

2. Then they said to one another, 'Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.' They had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for mortar.

3. And they said, 'Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.'

4. But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.

5. And the Lord said, 'Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them.

6. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.'

7. So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city.

8. Therefore its name is called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth." (Gen. 11:1-9)

 

Again "come, let Us go down and confuse." Plural again, right? Because again the Trinity acted. The Father commanded, the Son confused languages. The Holy Spirit scattered the people over all the earth.

 

Some now for some reason call this "the blessing of the Tower of Babel." Understand, the text is not very like a blessing, agree. Not very like, more like something else.

 

So, further. When we talk about the relation to Abraham, here in Genesis, chapter 16, verses 7 to 14 there is a very interesting moment. When Sarah began to oppress Hagar, who got pregnant from Abraham, and she ran away from her. Further:

 

"7. Now the Angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur.

 

1. And He said, 'Hagar, Sarai’s maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?' She said, 'I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai.'

2. The Angel of the Lord said to her, 'Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand.'

3. Then the Angel of the Lord said to her, 'I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude.'" (Gen. 16:7-10)  

 

We even see that, right, now? This offspring fills all Moscow now with migrant workers.

 

Listeners:

Are they descendants?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, just usually descendants of Muslims are called Hagarenes.

 

So:

 

"11. And the Angel of the Lord said to her: 'Behold, you are with child, and you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has heard your affliction.'" (Gen. 16:11)

 

Here interesting. The Angel of the Lord, firstly, Himself says that He will multiply descendants, and then says, that the Lord heard your groaning. What kind of Angel is this, Who Himself possesses the power to multiply peoples, but at the same time refers to some other Lord? The Son of God met Hagar in the wilderness, understand? And He Himself will multiply peoples. Actually, see, the huge number of migrant workers and the results of His actions—the Son of God? See, directly said? Because there's no escaping. The Son Himself says.

 

And further about Ishmael it is said:

 

"12. He shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren." (Gen. 16:12)

 

That is, this Ishmael, he will war against all, and all will war against him. Well, we also see that it came true, as the Angel of the Lord predicted. Constant war will be with Muslims against all.

 

So:

"13. Then she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, You-Are-the-God-Who-Sees; for she said, 'Have I also here seen Him who sees me?'

 

1. Therefore the well was called Beer Lahai Roi; ..." (Gen. 16:13-14)—that is, the well of the Living One who sees me. — "observe, it is between Kadesh and Bered."—that is on the border of Egypt and Israel. A very interesting moment. It turns out, with whom did Hagar meet in the wilderness? With the Son, yes. Who continues His work regarding non-Christian peoples. See? Therefore Who sends Muslims against Christians? The Son. The scourge of God is sent, directly said.

 

That is Christ sends, understand?

 

Listener:

Fr. Daniil, now there's a crisis and they started to leave more. Is that because there are fewer sins? (then laughter in the hall about fewer sins...)

 

Fr. Daniil:

I think that actually here simply there is another design of God. Many of those who returned, they thus carry the news about Christ to their peoples.

 

Listener:

So they are ready already?

 

Fr. Daniil:

God sowed seeds, which unnoticeably even without us will develop further. Well and we further will go along their paths.

 

Another Listener fearfully asks:

And will we go after them?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes.

 

The most known example of the triunity of God—is chapter 18 of Genesis. Moreover, actually, one can say in more detail, it's chapters 18 and 19 of Genesis. There generally the mystery of the Trinity is manifested very clearly:

 

"1. Then the Lord appeared to him (Abraham) by the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day.

 

1. So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground,

2. and said, 'My Lord, ...'" (Gen. 18:1-3)

 

Three Men, but Lord. Why so?

 

"3. ... if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your servant.

 

1. Please let a little water be brought, and wash Your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree.

2. And I will bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh your hearts. After that you may pass by, inasmuch as you have come to your servant.' They said, 'Do as you have said.'" (Gen. 18:3-5)

 

We see further.

 

"6. So Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah and said, 'Quickly, make ready three measures of fine meal; knead it and make cakes.'" (Gen. 18:6)

 

By the way, remember, there three measures mentioned also in the Gospel?

 

Listener:

Three measures.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Three measures, yes. (Note: "Another parable He spoke to them: 'The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.'" (Matt. 13:33) This verse Isidore of Pelusium (†440) explains thus: "The kingdom of heaven is likened to leaven in the sinless incarnation of God and our Savior, by Whom the whole world is leavened. And by the composition of the one Body, taken from our essence and from the Theotokos Mary, all humanity from eternity is renewed in regeneration.")

 

This generally in the Greek text stands "three measures"—the same word used in (Gen. 18:6).

 

Remember in the Gospel a woman leavens with leaven, right? "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened." (Matt. 13:33) Here precisely an allusion to this episode from Genesis.

 

Well and further in the text:

 

"7. And Abraham ran to the herd, took a tender and good calf, gave it to a young man, and he hastened to prepare it.

 

1. So he took butter and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree as they ate.

2. Then they said to him, 'Where is Sarah your wife?' So he said, 'Here, in the tent.'

3. And He said, ..." (Gen. 18:7-10), not by chance written in italic. And written in vain. One should leave as it is in the Hebrew and Greek original.

 

"9. Then they said to him, 'Where is Sarah your wife?' So he said, 'Here, in the tent.'

 

1. And He said, 'I will certainly return to you according to the time of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son.'" (Gen. 18:9-10) They said—He said, they said—He said. Understand, 3-1, 3-1? So.

 

Listener:

And with Jews, also all written so, right?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, the same.

 

Listener:

And how do they explain it?

 

Fr. Daniil:

They say that to Abraham came the "Memra" of God.

 

Listener:

"Memra"? What is that?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Word of God. Word of God, came to Abraham.

 

Another Listener:

It is Wisdom.

 

Fr. Daniil:

It is Wisdom. It is the Messiah.

 

Third Listener:

And who then is the Third, according to their explanation?

 

Fourth Listener:

Actually all recognize except the Godhead?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Except the Incarnation.

 

(Note: "In Jewish texts indication where the Word of God ("Memra") speaks and acts can be found in the 'Targums.' 'Targums'—are not simply a general name for translations of the Old Testament into Aramaic—they are also a kind of Jewish commentary. The difference between Christian understanding of 'the Word of God' and Jewish understanding of 'Memra' consists in that the Word of God—is not simply a spoken sound, but a Person, as the context of Holy Scripture testifies.

 

First example:

 

· Synodal translation: "And God spoke all these words, saying:" (Ex. 20:1);

· Torah: "And God spoke all these words, saying:"

· Targum: "And the Word (Memra) of God spoke all these words..."

 

Agree, that if the Word (Memra)—is not a person, then how to understand the phrase "the Word spoke... words"? A word cannot speak word, as it itself is an expression of thought, unless He is a person.

 

Second example:

 

· Synodal translation: "3. Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light.

 

1. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.

2. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day."

 

· Torah: "3. God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was light.

 

1. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.

2. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day."

 

· Targum: "3. And the Memra of the Lord said: 'Let there be light,' and there was light by the decree of His Memra,

 

1. And it appeared before the Lord, that the light was good, and the Memra of the Lord divided the light from the darkness.

2. And the Memra of the Lord called the light Day and the darkness it called Night..."

 

Here also the text "And the Memra of the Lord said" can be logically understood only if the Word of God is a Person, and further from the context it is clear that it is not simply a Person, but the Person of God the Word, who created the world.

 

Third example:

 

· Synodal translation: "and the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart." (Gen. 6:6);

· Torah: "and the Lord regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.";

· Targum: "and the Lord regretted in His Word, that He had made man on the earth, and He judged them with His Word."

 

As we see in the Targum, to justify the Jewish idea of an impersonal "Memra" we have a substantial distortion of Holy Scripture, because of which the words "God regretted" are replaced with "the Lord regretted in His Word," and the words "was grieved in His heart" replaced with words "He judged them with His Word.", which substantially changes the meaning of Scripture. In the original we see the Word of God, Who created this world and possesses personal properties, because a sound cannot regret or grieve. Regret and grieve can only a Person, and in this case—it is the Divine Person of the Creator.

 

Also in Scripture are many more places, in which "Memra" possesses personal properties.

 

Fourth example:

 

· Synodal translation: "He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision." (Ps. 2:4);

· Targum: "He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Memra of the Lord shall mock them."

 

Fifth example:

 

· Synodal translation: "So God created man..." (Gen. 1:27);

· Torah: "So God created man...";

· Targum: "And the Memra of the Lord created man...".

 

Sixth example:

 

· Synodal translation: "So the Lord accepted Job’s prayer." (Job 42:9);

· Masoretic text: "So the Lord accepted Job’s prayer";

· Targum: "And the Word of the Lord accepted...".

 

Have you ever seen that a sound showed favor to a person? Obviously, it speaks about the Person of the Word of God. And such examples are many.

 

About the personal properties of the Holy Spirit Father Daniil Sysoev told in another of his lectures about the Holy Spirit. And in particular in Scripture it is said: "But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; so He turned Himself against them as an enemy, and He fought against them." (Is. 63:10) (For more on this and other places by link: https://pravoslavnyi-otvet-na- eres-i-okultizm.blogspot.com/2025/02/o-Svyatom-Duhe.html )

 

And concerning the appearance of the Holy Trinity to Abraham, there it is said: "8. So he took butter and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree as they ate. (Gen. 18:8)". It is said:

 

"And they ate." Can a sound eat? Or can some impersonal energy or radar eat? Obviously, it speaks about Three Persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, to Whom Abraham addresses: "My Lord!" (Gen. 18:3))

 

And further precisely it is described:

 

"16. Then the men rose from there and looked toward Sodom, and Abraham went with them to send them on the way.

 

1. And the Lord said, ..." (Gen. 18:16-17)

 

Again, right? The men went—the Lord said.

 

"17. And the Lord said, 'Shall I hide from Abraham what I am doing,

 

1. since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

2. For I have known him, in order that he may command his children and his household after him, that they keep the way of the Lord, to do righteousness and justice, that the Lord may bring to Abraham what He has spoken to him.'" (Gen. 18:17-19).

 

Again, the Lord says, that the Lord will bring to Abraham what He has spoken to him. Again, right, the same? As the Angel then said, right? I will multiply—the Lord will do. And here again the Lord speaks. The Lord says: "I have chosen"—the Lord will do. The Son speaks, understand? I chose Abraham, God the Father did what He decided. Understand? Yes, the will is one.

 

"20. And the Lord said, 'Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grave,

 

1. I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know.'" (Gen. 18:20-21)

 

And further it is said, that the Men went to Sodom, and Abraham continued to speak with the Lord. And he calls Him, by the way, the Judge of all the earth (Gen. 18:25). Therefore we understand, that before

 

Abraham stands the Son. Further is described, how these strange "Messengers" came to Sodom.

 

Listener:

Why did two Angels go there? Where is the Third?

 

Fr. Daniil:

He continued to speak with Abraham. One remained, and Two went further.

 

Listener (female):

And how to tell, who is that? God or an angel?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Because they speak. When an Angel comes and says: "I created heaven and earth." And creates something before your eyes. (Note: as, for example, God from God sends fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. Or, as, for example, Christ said to the paralytic: "your sins are forgiven you" (Matt. 9:2), and then took and healed him.) Clear, what kind of Messenger is that?

 

Listener (female):

Why then are these three angels depicted in the form of the Holy Trinity?

 

Daniil Sysoev exclaims in surprise:

That was the appearance of the Trinity. That was the appearance of the Trinity. The Son, the Father, the Spirit.

 

Listener:

But no one has seen the Father...

 

Fr. Daniil:

The true appearance no one has seen. But in images...

 

(Note: I will not tire of repeating the interpretation of Anthony the Great on the words "No one has seen God at any time":

 

Anthony the Great, Venerable (†356) explains these words thus: "The Son said about the Father, that no one has seen God at any time. He did not say, that no one has ever seen the Son of God—the Word—the man. For God was seen by the prophets and apostles, and every righteous one. But no one could see Him as He is, really. For the reality of our being cannot contain His form. And if to anyone He is visible from among the worthy, then not without a certain veil, serving according to the measure of purification. For Job saw, but through cloud and mist. And before him Abraham saw an Angel who spoke. Jacob—as a man wrestling with him. Moses—surrounded by darkness. So others saw the God-pleasing Face in dreams and guesses (veils). And the apostles saw God the Word incarnate in the flesh: the Son of God and Man—each according to the measure of his doing good and health of soul. So, he whose bodily gaze is healthy can quite look at the sun, but he whose is damaged barely endures the radiance of a lamp or the glance at a ray. If we see the sea from a mountain or from some hill, then we report that we saw a manifestation of only the breadth, and we saw the sea only partly, because from this shore the mountain or land on the opposite shore cannot be seen with eyes, for air stands in the way. Also the mind cannot know what is in the depth of the sea and on its very bottom [its]. For always something else, external, interferes with the understanding of this by the mind, so that we cannot guess or see what is on the bottom, and our thought truly falls into perplexity. We all see the sky, but not all equally, but each according to the health of the eyes. And the thought cannot see it to the end, and reach the supreme image, which only mentally can be, for, as known, we see the servile, [and that which is in the heavens] is not such. But if we could see, then before us would be the visible and invisible, and not only partly, but completely all. So the Divinity is visible and invisible to people: it is not only covered by a dense veil, but also really unknowable (unthinkable) So hay and straw do not endure bringing near fire, but flare up and smolder into ash. When Christ bared a little of His Divinity on the Mount of Transfiguration, He struck with terror the pillars of the Church. They immediately fell: Peter, James, and John,—seized by fear, almost burning from the Divine fire. To the same degree the holy apostle exclaims clearly about this. From the great establishment of goodness the Creator appears without delay, but the heavens, earth, and seas cannot look upon the Perfect, for: how shall we really contain by vision the Creator of reality?") And further in chapter 19, when it is written about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah it is said, verse 24: "Then the Lord rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the Lord out of the heavens." (Gen. 19:24). In the Hebrew text it is written: "Then Jehovah rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from Jehovah out of the heavens." That is, Jehovah from Jehovah rains fiery brimstone rain on Sodom and Gomorrah. Understand, right, who is this Jehovah? Why did I want to say this? Often they tell us, that Christ punishes no one, Christ is kind, unlike the God of the Old Testament. Note, that precisely Christ burned Sodom and Gomorrah, personally Himself. Understand? He burned them. And one last episode from the Old Testament, which I'll bring, please, which is very important for us. Such examples, actually, are very many here in the Old Testament. I could specially engage with this, simply we have no time, unfortunately, to engage in detail. Examples of the actions of Christ in the Old Testament, well, a couple thousand for sure—direct mentions of Christ. Completely direct. Just read, only read carefully what is written. When you see by chance, that the Lord says: "thus says the Lord...", "the Lord sent me...". Such places are very many. You guess, who speaks?

I'll bring a very known episode. This is the book "Exodus," chapter 3:

 

"1. Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God.

 

1. And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him..."—who?—"...in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed.

2. Then Moses said, 'I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.'

3. So when the Lord..."—further again suddenly it is said. The Angel of the Lord, Who suddenly turns out to be the Lord. That is, the Angel Yahweh, who turns out to be Yahweh. — "...saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him..."—here it is written Elohim—"...from the midst of the bush and said, 'Moses, Moses!' And he said, 'Here I am.'

4. Then He said, 'Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.'

5. Moreover He said, 'I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God." (Ex. 3:1-6)

 

See, God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, who is this? This is the Angel Yahweh, the Messenger Yahweh, by the way. Listen further:

 

"7. And the Lord said (to Moses): 'I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows.

 

1. So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites.

2. Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel has come to Me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them.

3. Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt.'

4. But Moses said to God, 'Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and that I should bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?'

  

1. So He said, 'I will certainly be with you. And this shall be a sign to you that I have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain.'" (Ex. 3:7-12)

 

A very interesting moment arises. Who brought the Jews out of Egypt? The Son. And what is said about this? That this is the Son, we can have no doubt, because about this speaks, for example, the book "Wisdom of Solomon" very clearly. In chapter 18, verses 14 to 18 it is said:

 

"14. For while gentle silence enveloped all things, and night in its swift course was now half gone,

 

1. your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior

2. carrying the sharp sword of your authentic command, and stood and filled all things with death, and touched heaven while standing on the earth.

3. Then at once apparitions in dreadful dreams greatly troubled them, and unexpected fears assailed them;

4. and one here and another there, hurled down half dead, made known why they were dying;" (Wis. 18:14-18)

 

Who destroyed the Egyptian firstborn?

 

Listener:

The Son.

 

Fr. Daniil:

The Son, Jesus Christ destroyed the Egyptian firstborn.

 

Listener:

Where is it said, that the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

 

"15. your all-powerful word leaped from heaven, from the royal throne, into the midst of the land that was doomed, a stern warrior

 

1. carrying the sharp sword of your authentic command, and stood and filled all things with death, and touched heaven while standing on the earth." (Wis. 18:15-16)

 

Understand?

 

Listener:

Fr. Daniil, and Jacob wrestled there with Someone, is that also the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Of course.

 

So, further by the book of Exodus, verse 13, chapter 3:

 

"13. Then Moses said to God, 'Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, "The God of your fathers has sent me to you," and they say to me, "What is His name?" what shall I say to them?'

 

1. And God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM.'"—Yahweh—"And He said, 'Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, "I AM has sent me to you."'" (Ex. 3:13-14)

 

So. The Angel of the Lord says, that His name is Yahweh. So one can say thus: "when the name Jehovah was revealed—the greatest revelation of God—the name Jehovah or Yahweh was given by whom? The Son of God. Precisely Jesus said, that He is Yahweh: "I AM WHO I AM." "I AM." That is, to Moses appeared who? The Son. He also descended on Mount Sinai. He brought the Jews out of Egypt. Understand? He sent the prophets. Understand? Therefore, when prophets said, the word of the Lord came to me, clear, Who was? See, feel the difference with our usual representation? Otherwise we often think, right? Well, that Christ, He as if only came in Bethlehem, right? Much earlier, see? Much earlier. All Sacred history—is the history of the action of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Understand?

 

Listener:

Can one say "action of Christ," right?

 

Fr. Daniil:

One can say "action of Christ," one can say "action through the Son of the Father," one can say "action of the Holy Spirit."

 

Listener:

And when baptism happens, the Father says: "This is My beloved Son." That is, this is the Son speaking about Himself in a human way.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No.

 

Listener:

But the Word of the Father, that is the Son.

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, here the Father, appearing, speaks about the Son, that He is the Son of the Father.

(Note: Cyril of Jerusalem, St. (†386) explains why the Father at the baptism of the Lord manifested His voice: "He did not say: now has become My Son, but: 'This is My Son,' to show that even before the act of baptism He was the Son.")

 

About how God acted in the Old Testament is also spoken in chapter 63 of the book of the Prophet Isaiah. Remember this place, please. Chapter 63, verses 7 to 14:

 

"7. I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the Lord and the praises of the Lord, according to all that the Lord has bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which He has bestowed on them according to His mercies, according to the multitude of His lovingkindnesses.

 

1. For He said, 'Surely they are My people, children who will not lie.' So He became their Savior.

 

1. In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the Angel of His Presence saved them; in His love and in His pity He redeemed them; and He bore them and carried them all the days of old."—That is, God the Father was Savior, right? The Angel of His Presence was Savior, right? Carried them.—

 

"10. But they rebelled and grieved..."—Whom?—"...His Holy Spirit; so He turned Himself against them as an enemy, and He fought against them." (Is. 63:7-10)

 

Therefore the Holy Spirit became an enemy for Israel, because they rebelled against God.

 

"11. Then he remembered the days of old, Moses and his people, saying: 'Where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of His flock? Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them,

 

1. who led them by the right hand of Moses, with His glorious arm, dividing the water before them to make for Himself an everlasting name,

2. who led them through the deep, as a horse in the wilderness, that they might not stumble?'

3. As a beast goes down into the valley, and the Spirit of the Lord causes him to rest, so You lead Your people, to make Yourself a glorious name." (Is. 63:11-14)

 

See, again action—Father, Son, Holy Spirit everywhere. When it is said, that the Angel of God went in a pillar of fire, that was the Son, right? But when a strong wind appeared and tore the sea, then that was Who? The Holy Spirit.

 

Listener:

And the Holy Spirit and the Son—are they the same?

 

Fr. Daniil:

The same by nature, but not the same by person. So.

 

The last, main argument, which will be the shortest, which you must simply memorize by heart, and remember, when the talk about the Divinity of Christ goes, is what? Very simple. When you are asked, who is Christ, you answer. The first epistle of John the Apostle, chapter 5, verse 20:

 

"20. And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." (1 John 5:20). "This is the true God and eternal life." Understand? So with this verse you can briefly immediately answer the question about the Divinity of Christ or start with the question—"Do you acknowledge that Jesus is the true God?" All, question closed. Two true Gods do not exist. Understand?

 

Well and the shortest moment against "Jehovah's Witnesses," working very well.

 

Listener:

Well, and then already lead to the Holy Trinity?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes.

 

The last, what we'll say today ..., because I'll talk separately about the Divinity of the Holy Spirit. (For more on this by link: https://pravoslavnyi-otvet-na-eres-i-okultizm.blogspot.com/2025/02/o-Svyatom-Duhe.html ) Because, see, how many places about the Son did we have? I see you are overloaded now.

 

I'll say the last argument for "Jehovah's Witnesses," so you can remember it. This is the main verse, in which it speaks about God—chapter 28 of the Gospel of Matthew, verse 19. You know it perfectly by heart:

 

"19. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," (Matt. 28:19)

 

Then you say thus: "Tell me, please, what is the name of God? You don't know?" And a "Jehovah's Witness" says: "Of course, Jehovah." And you answer: "Yes, correct, correct. In the name of Jehovah the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."

 

Listener (female):

They say the same thing.

 

Fr. Daniil:

You say: "Jehovah the Father, Jehovah the Son, Jehovah the Holy Spirit—Trinity..."

 

Listener:

So it's not a personal name, it's the name of God?

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes.

 

All, questions immediately end. That is, the argument is very simple. Since...

 

And examples that the Son is Jehovah, we already saw how many, right? That is, a huge number. And even the greatest revelation of God says that Jehovah—is precisely the Son. Understand, right? As also Jehovah the Father. Next time I'll tell you in more detail, that Jehovah—the Holy Spirit also.

 

(For more on this by link: https://pravoslavnyi-otvet-na-eres-i-okultizm.blogspot.com/2025/02/o-Svyatom-Duhe.html )

 

On this I'll finish telling you today. Well, how? A little clarified the representation about God?

 

Listener (female):

Yes.

 

Fr. Daniil:

Otherwise we sometimes have too strange a representation. Note, the folk representation, with which you'll encounter...

 

Listener:

Marcionist...

 

Fr. Daniil:

Yes, Marcionist, that "with us there God—is there in the Old Testament God the Father acted, and now there the Son came, became man...".

 

Another Listener:

But that God was not seen by anyone...

 

Fr. Daniil:

Was not seen in His Divine essence.

 

Third Listener:

If God the Father speaks, does He always speak the Son? Any His word—is that the Son of God the Father?

 

Fr. Daniil:

 Wait a second. Andrey, look: "The Father said: Let there be light." To whom did He say? To the Son.

 

Listener:

And the very fact of speaking is not the begetting of the Son? Any word, speaking—begetting of the Son?

 

Fr. Daniil:

No, not begetting, but manifestation of the begetting of the Son, but the Father addresses the Son. Here He addresses the Son and says: "You are My beloved Son."

 

Listener (female):

And until the New Year until what date do we study and from when do we begin.

 

Fr. Daniil:

We study all the time, we have no vacations.

 

Listener:

And what about Sunday?

 

Fr. Daniil:

So, now I'll say about that.

 

So, well what? So, our debriefing today, of course, is impossible, because there is no time already.

 

Concerning Sunday. On Sunday we will have a new missionary outing.