Where is the truth of God kept?
The truth of God is kept in the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic (Orthodox) Church of Christ, which is "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).
Why is it precisely the church of the living God that is called the pillar and ground of the truth?
Because Christ the Savior entrusted His truth to the Church.
How did the Lord do this?
For this, the Savior did not write any books and never commanded others to do so. To transmit the truth of God to the Church, the Lord raised up His Apostles, transmitted to them His Divine teaching, and from them constituted His initial Church. Thus the Savior said to the Heavenly Father: "I have given them Your word" (John 17:14).
How did we learn about the truth of God?
We learned about it through the spread of the Church of Christ among us. The Lord commanded the Apostles and their successors in the Church of God thus: "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15) – "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations" (Matt. 28:19). Those who believed the Gospel were joined to the community of Christ through baptism. Thus the Church spread throughout the world.
By what kind of preaching did the Church of Christ spread?
At first, the faith of Christ was established only through oral preaching. So says the Apostle: "Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him" (Heb. 2:1-3).
After the descent of the Holy Spirit, Christianity spread only by the oral preaching of the Apostles, and more than one year passed from the time the Church of Christ began on earth, and the Apostles still wrote nothing.
Where, then, do Christians have the Holy Scriptures?
They came to the Church of Christ first of all from the Old Testament, and then some Apostles also left their writings.
Did Christ require that those who believe in Him recognize the Old Testament Scriptures?
The Lord, when proving to people that He was the promised Redeemer, always pointed to the Old Testament books. "For if you believed Moses," the Savior said to the Pharisees, "you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" (John 5:46-47). And to the Apostles the Lord says: "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures" (Luke 24:44-45).
Did the Church of Christ, indeed, from its first days use the Old Testament Scriptures?
The Apostles constantly praise the first Christians for searching the Old Testament Scriptures (Acts 17:11) and advise Christians to be comforted by reading the Old Testament Scriptures. The Apostle Paul writes to the Romans thus: "For whatever things were written before (i.e., in the Old Testament) were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope" (Rom. 15:4). In the epistle to Timothy, he expresses himself about the Old Testament books thus: "from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:15-17).
Can we think, along with some sectarians, for example with the Stundo-Baptists, Pashkovites, and Tolstoyans, that the Apostle Paul advises Timothy to read not the Old Testament, but the New Testament Scriptures?
No, we cannot think so, because when the Apostle Timothy was a boy and read the Scriptures, the New Testament Scriptures did not yet exist, since at that time the Savior had only just begun His preaching. Therefore, "from childhood" Timothy could only have read the Old Testament books. It is these that the Apostle approves.
Why is it necessary for us to be assured that the Savior approved the Old Testament, and that all Christians, beginning with the Apostles, considered it necessary?
Because the Tolstoyan sectarians do not want to recognize the Old Testament. If they were even a little like Christians, they would try to imitate the Savior and the Apostles and listen to them; but they do not listen to them and reject the Old Testament.
Where did the New Testament Holy Scriptures appear in the Church of Christ, if the Lord Himself wrote nothing?
The New Testament Holy Scriptures appeared later than the earthly life of Christ the Savior and later than the foundation of the Orthodox "church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:15). These Scriptures were composed of occasional letters and writings of the holy Apostles. The holy Orthodox Church recognized these letters and preserved them.
Why can it be said that the New Testament writings were occasional letters of some Apostles?
It can be said because the Lord did not give a command to write books, although He did not forbid it. Writing down the teaching of Christ was not obligatory, so that far from all, but only a few Apostles left their writings. For example, the Apostles Andrew, Philip, Nathanael, and others wrote nothing at all.
Why then did some Apostles write?
Some Apostles wrote because they personally could not be with those to whom they wrote their letters. For example, the Apostle John the Theologian writes: "Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face, that our joy may be full" (2 John 1:12; cf. 3 John 1:13-14).
Sometimes the Apostles wrote, compelled by circumstances:
a) – the appearance of false teachings, – for example: concerning the second coming of Christ (see 2 Thess. 2:2);
b) – the appearance of false teachers, denying the resurrection of the dead (see 1 Cor. 15);
c) – they wrote due to the appearance among Christians of a new disturbing gospel (Gal. 1:6-7);
d) – due to church disorder and discord (1 Cor. 1:11);
e) – due to the appearance of lawlessness (1 Cor. 5:1);
f) – some books were written by the Apostles for private individuals, e.g., the Gospel of Luke (for Theophilus); the epistles of the Apostle Paul for Timothy, Titus, and Philemon.
Have all the books written by the holy Apostles been preserved in the Church of Christ?
No, not all have been preserved. The epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Laodiceans has perished, which the Apostle mentions in his epistle to the Colossians, saying (Col. 4:16): "Now when this epistle is read among you (the Colossians), see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea."
Were false writings also composed?
Yes, and quite often. The Apostle Luke writes at the beginning of his Gospel: "Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account" (Luke 1:1-3).
Therefore, there were many writings. There were also forgeries, passed off as Apostolic, composed and issued to confuse Christians; about this the Apostle Paul writes: "not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come" (2 Thess. 2:2). It is clear that in Apostolic times, forged epistles also appeared. Therefore, the Apostle Paul not only warns Christians about this, but at the same time indicates a sign by which his epistles could be distinguished from forgeries: "The salutation of my own hand, Paul's, which is a sign in every epistle; so I write: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen" (2 Thess. 3:17-18).
Who, in the end, sorted out which of the numerous writings that appeared in the time of the Apostles were truly apostolic and which were false?
The One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic (Orthodox) Church of Christ sorted this out at its Local and Ecumenical Councils: it recognized some books and decreed them to be considered true, divinely inspired, and others to be simple, not divinely inspired, or forged.
Where can one find references to these church decrees?
In the "Book of Canons of the Holy Apostles, of the Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils, and of the Holy Fathers."
Do sectarians recognize these decrees?
No, they do not recognize them.
On what basis, then, do they accept the books of Holy Scripture?
They accept them without any basis, because the sectarians never asked anyone about the truth of the Scriptures, and no one could have told them about it without the conciliar decrees of the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church distinguished true apostolic writings from false ones and preserved the true Word of God, while the sectarians simply stole the Scriptures from the Orthodox Church and use them with the aim of corrupting simple-minded Christians (2 Cor. 11:3).
For what purpose did the sectarians steal the Holy Scripture from the Church of Christ—the Orthodox Church?
They stole the Holy Scripture in order to build a new church from it, instead of the rejected true Church of Christ—the Orthodox Church.
Can Holy Scripture be a textbook according to which one could build the Church of Christ?
No, a new church cannot be built on the basis of Scripture. Sectarians of all persuasions equally say that they read Holy Scripture and on its basis establish their churches and their communities. The Scripture stolen by the sectarians from the Church is one, but there are many sects; it is clear from this that it is not Scripture that teaches how to build a church. Holy Scripture cannot be the foundation on which one could build the Church of Christ. The foundation must exist before the building itself, and the New Testament writings appeared later than the Church. From the table [of the dates of writing of the New Testament books], it is evident that the books of the New Testament were written from 50 to 98 years after the birth of Christ, and the Church began its existence in the year 33. Therefore, the Church existed without the New Testament Scriptures for about 17 years, and without the Gospels for about 27 years. Consequently, the Holy Church of Christ, the Orthodox Church, is older than the New Testament Scriptures and is therefore their guardian.
So, cannot the New Testament Holy Scripture be the foundation for building the Church?
No, it cannot be such a foundation. Scripture is only a document belonging to the Church. The Church is founded on Christ Himself, not on Scripture. According to Scripture, one can only verify the structure of the Church, but it is impossible to establish everything in the Church by Holy Scripture alone.
Why is it impossible?
Because the New Testament Holy Scripture does not contain all the teaching that the Lord Christ gave to His Church.
In what, then, does the teaching of Christ and the Church consist?
It consists in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. Thus the Apostle Paul teaches us, saying: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle" (2 Thess. 2:15), that is, orally and in writing.
Do we need Holy Tradition now that we already have the New Testament Holy Scripture?
Of course, we do. Otherwise, the Apostle would not have commanded to keep that which was delivered orally (2 Thess. 2:15).
The Apostles taught Christians the Faith of God predominantly orally. The Apostle Paul said to the Ephesian presbyters: "for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears" (Acts 20:31). The Apostles demand that this orally transmitted teaching be held: "Hold fast," says the Apostle Paul, "the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 1:13). "O Timothy!" the Apostle entreats, "Guard what was committed to your trust" (1 Tim. 6:20).
Do the Apostles praise Christians for keeping tradition?
Yes. Here are the words of the Apostle Paul: "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2).
So, what should be considered Holy Tradition?
All those truths of God which are not written down in Scripture, but were preserved by the Church from Christ and the Apostles and, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 16:13-14), are set forth in the definitions and indicated in the canons by the Holy Fathers at the Holy Councils of the Church of God.
Where can we find Holy Tradition now?
In the Christian Orthodox divine service (church sacred rites), which continues uninterruptedly from the Apostles, and in the "Book of Canons of the Holy Apostles, of the Holy Ecumenical and Local Councils, and of the Holy Fathers."
Did the Holy Apostles transmit their teaching through their canons?
They did. They left 85 of their canons, which were included in the "Book of Canons," but the sectarians were unable to steal this from the Church along with the Bible.
Did the Holy Apostles set an example of resolving church life orders and clarifying the teaching of Christ through councils?
The Apostles showed such an example at their council in Jerusalem, which took place in the year 52 and is described in the book of Acts, in the 15th chapter.
Did the holy Apostles give oral Tradition of the Christian sacred rites (Sacraments)?
They did. And in the Holy Scriptures, they only hint at this, but do not fully describe the sacred rites, just as they do not describe many other things there, well-known from oral Church Tradition. "Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ," writes the Apostle Paul to the Hebrews, "let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment" (Heb. 6:1-2). In general, the Apostles mainly taught Christians orally, not in writing, how to conduct divine services and what orders to keep. Thus, the Apostle Paul, reproving the Corinthians for disorders during divine service and the celebration of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord, does not describe in detail how to arrange things, but writes to them (1 Cor. 11:34): "the rest I will set in order when I come." The remaining Apostles, preaching throughout the world, teach Christians everything only orally. This oral teaching is preserved by the Church of Christ to this day in Sacred Tradition.
Did the Apostles themselves use Tradition in the Old Testament, when they had the complete Old Testament Holy Scripture?
They did. This is evident from the fact that the Apostle Paul names by name the opponents of Moses, although from the Old Testament Scriptures it is unknown what they were called. Predicting about our sectarians, who distance themselves from Orthodox spiritual guides, the Apostle says: "Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was" (2 Tim. 3:8-9).
How do the Apostles command us to relate to such people as our sectarians, who reject Holy Tradition?
The Apostles require us to turn away from such people. "But we command you, brethren," we read in Holy Scripture, "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow us" (2 Thess. 3:6-7), and the Apostles also received Traditions, as was indicated in the previous answer.
Do sectarians recognize Holy Tradition?
Not only do they not recognize it, but they also mock it, completely unwilling to understand that without Holy Tradition one can know nothing about Christ, nor about His teaching, and one cannot even know which Scripture is truly sacred.
It is necessary to note that, having rejected the Sacred Tradition of the Church, the sectarians replaced it with their own human tradition: only this tradition is not from the Holy Spirit, but from the invention of their human mind. Having rejected the Church of Christ, having fallen away from Her, they have lost the grace-filled guidance of the Holy Spirit and remain in delusion, trying to copy something from biblical stories, but opposing the Church, they become rooted in their obstinacy and error. (Ed.)
Do the sectarians really not see that in the Holy Scripture they accept, not only is it nowhere forbidden to have Holy Tradition, but it is even commanded to have it, as has just been proven from the Word of God?
The sectarians know perfectly well from Scripture that it is necessary to have Holy Tradition, but they reject it out of their demonic pride. Just as the devil knows perfectly well that Christ God is the actual Savior of the world, but does not want to believe in Him and submit to Him, so the sectarians, imitating the devil, consciously resist the Truth.
Why are sectarians imitators of the devil?
Because people learned sectarianism itself through diabolical seduction.
Can it really be admitted that sectarians, who know Holy Scripture well, are still seduced by the devil?
The devil knows Holy Scripture incomparably better than the sectarians, but he rejects the salvation of Christ in the Orthodox Church, which consists of the earthly and the heavenly, of good angels and people (Heb. 12:22-25), and he even tried to tempt the Savior in the wilderness, confirming his cunning desires with words from the Old Testament Holy Scripture.
Are the sectarians sanctified by the fact that they possess the stolen Holy Scripture?
The great hierarch John Chrysostom says this: "What then, tell me, when the devil spoke from Scripture, were his lips sanctified? This cannot be said; he remained what he was, the devil. And the demons? They also preached and said: 'These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to us the way of salvation' (Acts 16:17): shall we therefore place them among the Apostles? By no means; on the contrary, we shun them just as before... For this very reason I especially hate the sectarian gatherings, because there Holy Scripture is shown, and 'this serves as a strong bait and a great stumbling block for simple souls...'"²
Do the sectarians, like the devil, try to justify from Scripture their insane rejection of Holy Tradition?
Just as once the devil, tempting Christ, quoted texts from Holy Scripture, so the sectarians, rejecting Holy Tradition, try to justify themselves with words from Holy Scripture.
Are there really texts, or words, in Holy Scripture that speak against Holy Tradition?
There is not a single such text, but the sectarians, like the devil, have always perverted and pervert the texts of Scripture, with the aim of proving their pernicious error. Such madmen existed already in the days of the Apostles, and the Apostle Peter speaks thus of sectarians: "as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you (i.e., Christians), as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware," the Apostle warns, "lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked" (2 Pet. 3:15-17).
Why do sectarians reject Holy Tradition and pervert Holy Scripture for their justification?
They do this in order to confuse the Orthodox and draw them into their error. But the Apostle Paul is very surprised at those who listen to all sorts of false teachers: "I marvel," he says, "that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ" (Gal. 1:6-7).
How should we relate to these troublemakers who distract Christians from the faith preached by the Apostles and preserved continuously from the Apostles to our days in the Orthodox Church?
The Apostle speaks of sectarians thus: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9).
What proofs do sectarians offer to confirm that they need only Holy Scripture, and that Holy Tradition is superfluous?
The sectarians read out from Holy Scripture those passages where the necessity of reading Holy Scripture is mentioned. For example, they read: Acts 17:11; John 5:39; 2 Tim. 3:15; 2 Pet. 1:19.
What is told in Acts 17:11?
Here it is said that the inhabitants of Berea were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians; having received the oral word of the Apostle, they examined it against the Old Testament Scriptures and were convinced (Acts 17:12) that Christ was indeed the Promised Messiah. And that the Bereans read precisely the Old Testament Scripture, not the New Testament, is evident from the fact that the Apostle Paul, having arrived in Berea, preached in the Jewish synagogue (Acts 17:10), where the Old Testament Scripture was read; and then one must keep in mind that the Old Testament Scriptures would have had the same significance for the Thessalonica Jews as the word of the Apostle Paul himself; if the Thessalonica Jews examined the Apostolic words with Holy Scripture, then the latter could only be the Old Testament sacred books.
What words of the Savior are transmitted in John 5:39?
From all the Jews who refused to acknowledge the Messianic dignity of Christ the Savior, the Lord Jesus required that they read the Old Testament Scriptures, because these Scriptures testify of Christ; but the Savior nowhere tells people to deny His teaching, preserved from the Apostles in Holy Tradition.
What are Christians taught in 2 Peter 1:19?
The Apostle Peter approves of Christians who examine how the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in the Savior, but not a single word is said anywhere against the Lord's teaching, which the Apostles transmitted orally, not in writing.
In 2 Tim. 3:15, does the Apostle Paul teach the Apostle Timothy to reject Holy Tradition?
No, he does not teach that, but approves of the Apostle Timothy for reading the Old Testament Scriptures, for Timothy "from childhood [he] has known the Holy Scriptures," i.e., when not a single line of the New Testament Scripture yet existed.
What other texts do sectarians cite to justify their lack of Holy Tradition?
The sectarians cite the Savior's reproof to the Pharisees that they replaced the commandments of God with human tradition. These passages are in Matt. 15:6, 9 and Mark 7:8.
Are these excuses of the sectarians for denying Christian Holy Tradition well-founded?
No, they are not well-founded, because the Savior, as the Apostles Matthew and Mark transmit, reproved the Pharisees for breaking the commandments of God because of the "human" tradition of the elders; but the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church did not exist then, because the Orthodox Church began only after the Ascension of the Lord, on the day of the Descent of the Holy Spirit.
And the Evangelists themselves explain what the tradition of the elders was. According to the Gospel of Matt. 15:3-6, it is evident that the Pharisees had a lawless tradition, according to which they could offend their parents; but in the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church, everything is in accordance with the Lord's teaching, and there is nothing contradictory to the Holy Scriptures, which will be proven by the further explanation of the entire Christian teaching.
Concerning Mark 7, it is directly clarified what the Savior meant by the Jewish human tradition. "For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received and hold, like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches" (Mark 7:3-4). This was the "tradition of the elders," or "human tradition," and because of these external rules, the commandments of God were violated, but in the Holy Tradition of Christ, which is preserved in the Orthodox Church, there is nothing of the kind, and when the sectarians deny it, they have no basis for doing so.
What other passages of Holy Scripture do sectarians refer to in their justification for lacking the Holy Tradition of the Church of Christ?
The sectarians also refer to 1 Tim. 1:3; 6:3.
Do these passages of Holy Scripture justify the sectarians?
No, they do not justify them, but accuse them. Here the Apostle Paul rebukes sectarians, "that they teach no other doctrine, but follow the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the doctrine which accords with godliness." In the days of the Apostles, sectarians appeared, saying that "the resurrection is already past" (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:17-18). Such are our sectarians, e.g.: Tolstoyans, the "Immortalists," Khlysts, Skoptsy, Bratniki (Besedniki), and others, who say that the resurrection has already occurred. All sectarians who have rejected the Holy Tradition of the Church delivered by the Apostles are like them. Who allowed them to do this? The Apostle Paul, in his epistles to Timothy, commands to hold fast to Holy Tradition (1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 1:13).
Will the warning to Christians, "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" (Col. 2:8), serve as a justification for the sectarians?
The sectarians quite in vain cite this passage of Holy Scripture about those who deceive with philosophy. If the Church's Sacred Tradition contained Tolstoyan philosophy, or Khlyst philosophy, then let them make excuses, but in Holy Tradition, everything is "according to Christ."
Why do sectarians justify themselves with this text from Colossians?
Because the entire epistle to the Colossians was written against all kinds of sectarians. The Apostle Paul warns Christians: "Now this I say lest anyone should deceive you with persuasive words" (Col. 2:4). And the sectarians do nothing but "by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple" (Rom. 16:18).
Do the words of the Apostle Paul in 1 Cor. 4:6, "Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written," justify the sectarians?
No, the sectarians cannot be justified by this text either. The Apostle himself explains his words, only the sectarians do not want to see this.
The Apostle says here that he "transferred" "these things" to the Christians. What are "these things"? That "Christians not be puffed up one against another" (1 Cor. 4:6, paraphrased). It was explained above that some of the Corinthians argued about teachers, as if teachers save, and not Christ. "They are only ministers," explains the Apostle Paul, "through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one" (1 Cor. 3:5, paraphrased). In 1 Corinthians, there cannot be a prohibition against Holy Tradition, because the same Apostle Paul said: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle" (2 Thess. 2:15).
Against whom, then, does 1 Cor. 4:6 speak?
Against sectarians, because the Apostle speaks of them: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables" (2 Tim. 4:3-4). The sectarians have turned away from the Church and the God-established teachers; they do not accept "sound" (Orthodox) doctrine, but according to their own desires, they choose teachers for themselves: some choose the Baptist Müntzer instead of Christ; some choose Tolstoy; some choose the Bratniki; and some even proclaim themselves teachers. These are the ones who are puffed up one against another—the unfortunate sectarians!
Do the words of the Apostle Paul to Bishop Timothy justify the sectarians: "As I urged you when I went into Macedonia—remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith" (1 Tim. 1:3-4)?
The sectarians feel that these words of the Apostle were spoken against them. Wishing to justify themselves, the sectarians say that Holy Tradition is supposedly forbidden here.
But here the speech is not about Holy Tradition, but about myths—"fables," that is, about pagan tales concerning pagan gods, whom they represented as people with all sorts of strange, even amorous adventures. In the time of the Apostles, heretics—Gnostics—appeared, who mixed paganism with Christianity and introduced into Christianity their pagan myths—fables about their gods (aeons) with endless genealogies of these gods. "Fables"—myths—tell about things that do not exist at all, while Holy Tradition speaks either of the Lord's teaching or of the lives of Christian "teachers."
How, then, can the Apostle Paul's reproof, written against the ancient sectarians—the Gnostics—apply to our sectarians?
Our sectarians, like the ancient ones, have fallen away from the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic (Orthodox) Church of Christ, from "a good conscience and from sincere faith, from which some, having strayed, have turned aside to idle talk, desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm" (1 Tim. 1:5-7).
What, for example, do sectarians, not understanding, deny?
They do not understand the Holy Tradition which they oppose, calling it an unnecessary "law"; in reality, this is incorrect, because the Apostle Paul says: "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust" (1 Tim. 1:8-11).
This is why sectarians do not like lawful Holy Tradition! It exposes their ungodliness!
What other objections do sectarians make against Holy Tradition?
Sectarians ask: "Can one be saved if one does all that is written in Holy Scripture?"—and when an Orthodox person answers that one can, then the sectarians say: "Then the Gospel alone is enough for us, and we do not need Holy Tradition."
Is such a judgment of the sectarians correct?
No, it is not correct. If the Orthodox say that one can be saved by doing all that is written in Holy Scripture, they understand that in Holy Scripture there is a direct command to hold fast to Holy Tradition (2 Thess. 2:15). This is first. And secondly, the Orthodox know that without Holy Tradition, one cannot do what is commanded us in Holy Scripture.
What clear example can be given to prove this?
In Hebrews (Heb. 13:7), the Apostle Paul commands: "Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct."
But in Holy Scripture, almost nothing is said about the Apostles, nor about other teachers, how they spoke the word of God. Not a word is said about the Apostles: Andrew, Thomas, Nathanael, and others. In Holy Scripture, the death of only two teachers is told: the first martyr Archdeacon Stephen (Acts 8) and the Apostle James, the brother of John (Acts 12), but about the other Apostles and teachers, not a word is said.
From where, then, according to the command of Holy Scripture, must we learn about the life of the teachers of our faith?
From Holy Tradition, which in the worship and teaching of the Church preserves the description of the life of the Holy Apostles and all the great Christian teachers.
Can all of Holy Scripture be understood on the basis of itself, without other help?
No, it cannot, because even the Apostles understood the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament only when the Lord "opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures" (Luke 24:45). And the eunuch of Queen Candace did not understand the book of the prophet Isaiah until the Apostle Philip explained it to him (Acts 8:27-35).
Who, then, can explain Holy Scripture?
The One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic (Orthodox) Church of Christ, which has Holy Tradition, and can explain it through wise, grace-filled men.
How then do sectarians say that they themselves can interpret everything, because the Lord "has hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to babes" (Luke 10:21)?
The sectarians speak thus, "understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm" (1 Tim. 1:7). By "babes," the Lord means not the ignorant, but people pure in heart, like infants. The Apostle Paul explains it thus: "Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature" (1 Cor. 14:20).
How do sectarians justify their proud idea that they themselves, without the teaching of the Church, without Holy Tradition, can know everything well?
They say that they have an anointing from Christ and know all things (1 John 2:27). By "anointing," the sectarians mean Holy Scripture.
Is this explanation of the sectarians correct?
No, it is not correct, because, firstly, Christ gave His Scripture to no one, as He personally wrote not a single word; secondly, by the word "anointing," one cannot mean Holy Scripture, because this word is never mentioned in such a sense in the Word of God.
What, then, should be understood by the word "anointing"?
"Anointing," in Greek "chrisma," means anointing with something oily, chrismation. By this word, in Holy Scripture, the bestowing of grace from the Holy Spirit is indicated. All Orthodox Christians are called anointed in the sense that in the Church of Christ they receive abundant grace of God, helping them to know all things. But for this, one must abide in this grace-filled state, that is, in the Church of Christ, because in it the Head is Christ, and because in it abides the Holy Spirit; but the sectarians have left the Church, and they have no and cannot have any grace of God that makes wise.
From where is it evident that Christian teachers must be filled with grace and wise?
The Savior Himself spoke of this: "Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes" (Matt. 23:34).
How can it be proven that the sectarians are deluded, and that they have no grace to make them wise?
This is evident from the fact that the Holy Scripture, which they stole from the Church, is one, but there are many different sects, and each one teaches according to his own pattern: every day brings new confusion in sectarian concepts.
It is clear that they all think according to demonic pride and are deluded.
No comments:
Post a Comment