They are called Baptists. The name comes from the word baptize, which is translated from Greek as “to dip”, “to baptize by immersing in water.” According to this teaching, one must be baptized not in infancy, but at a conscious age by immersion in consecrated water. In a word, a Baptist is a Christian who consciously accepts his faith. He believes that a person's salvation lies in wholehearted faith in Christ.

History of origin

Baptist communities began to form in the early seventeenth century in Holland, but their founders were not Dutch, but English Congregationalists who were forced to flee to the mainland to avoid persecution by the Church of England. And so, in the second decade of the 17th century, namely in 1611, a new Christian teaching was formulated for the English, who, by the will of fate, lived in the capital of the Netherlands - Amsterdam. A year later, the Baptist Church was founded in England. At the same time, the first community professing this faith arose. Later, in 1639, the first Baptists appeared in North America. This sect became widespread in the New World, especially in the USA. Every year the number of its adherents grew with incredible speed. Over time, evangelical Baptists also spread throughout the world: to the countries of Asia and Europe, Africa and Australia, well, and both Americas. By the way, during the American Civil War, most black slaves accepted this faith and became its ardent followers.

Spread of Baptistism in Russia

Until the 70s of the 19th century, people in Russia practically did not know who Baptists were. What kind of faith unites people who call themselves this way? The first community of adherents of this faith appeared in St. Petersburg, its members called themselves Evangelical Christians. Baptistism came here from Germany along with foreign masters, architects and scientists invited by the Russian Tsars Alexei Mikhailovich and Peter Alekseevich. This movement was most widespread in the Tauride, Kherson, Kyiv, and Ekaterinoslav provinces. Later it reached Kuban and Transcaucasia.

The first Baptist in Russia was Nikita Isaevich Voronin. He was baptized in 1867. Baptistism and evangelicalism are very close to each other, but they are nevertheless considered two separate directions in Protestantism, and in 1905, in the Northern capital, their adherents created the Union of Evangelists and the Union of Baptists. In the first years of Soviet power, attitudes towards any religious movements became prejudiced, and Baptists had to go underground. However, during the Patriotic War, both Baptists and evangelicals again became more active and united, creating the Union of Evangelical Christian Baptists of the USSR. After the war, they were joined by the Pentecostal sect.

Baptist ideas

The main aspiration in life for adherents of this faith is service to Christ. The Baptist Church teaches that one must live in harmony with the world, but be not of this world, that is, obey earthly laws, but honor only Jesus Christ with one’s heart. The basis of Baptistism, which emerged as a radical Protestant bourgeois movement, is the principle of individualism. Baptists believe that a person's salvation depends only on the individual himself, and that the church cannot be a mediator between him and God. The only true source of faith is the Gospel - the Holy Scripture, only in it can you find answers to all questions and, by following all the commandments, all the rules contained in this holy book, you can save your soul. Every Baptist is sure of this. This is an undeniable truth for him. All of them do not recognize church sacraments and holidays, and do not believe in the miraculous power of icons.

Baptism in Baptistism

Adherents of this faith undergo the rite of baptism not in infancy, but in adulthood, since a Baptist is a believer who is fully aware of why he needs baptism and treats it as a spiritual rebirth. In order to become a member of the community and be baptized, candidates must later go through repentance at a prayer meeting. The baptism process includes immersion in water, followed by the ceremony of breaking bread.

These two rituals symbolize faith in spiritual union with the Savior. Unlike the Orthodox and Catholic churches, which consider baptism a sacrament, that is, a means of salvation, for Baptists this step demonstrates conviction in the correctness of their religious views. Only after a person fully understands the depth of faith, only then will he have the right to go through the rite of baptism and become one of the members of the Baptist community. The spiritual leader performs this ritual, helping his ward to plunge into the water, only after he was able to go through all the tests and convince members of the community of the inviolability of his faith.

Baptist attitudes

According to this teaching, the sinfulness of the world outside the community is inevitable. Therefore, they advocate strict adherence to moral standards. The Evangelical Christian Baptist should completely abstain from the use of alcoholic beverages, the use of curses and curses, etc. Mutual support, modesty and responsiveness are encouraged. All members of the community should take care of each other and help those in need. One of the main responsibilities of every Baptist is to convert dissenters to their faith.

Baptist creed

In 1905, the First World Convention of Baptist Christians took place in London. On it, the Symbol of the Apostolic Faith was established as the basis of the doctrine. The following principles were also adopted:

1. Only people who have been baptized can be adherents of the Church, that is, an Evangelical Christian Baptist is a spiritually reborn person.

2. The Bible is the only truth, in it you can find answers to any questions, it is an infallible and unshakable authority both in matters of faith and in practical life.

3. The universal (invisible) church is one for all Protestants.

4. The knowledge of Baptism and the Lord's Vespers are taught only to baptized, that is, regenerated people.

5. Local communities are independent in practical and spiritual matters.

6. All members of the local community have equal rights. This means that even an ordinary Baptist is a member of the community who has the same rights as a preacher or spiritual leader. By the way, the early Baptists were against it, but today they themselves create something like ranks within their church.

7. For everyone - both believers and non-believers - there is freedom of conscience.

8. Church and state must be separated from each other.

Members of evangelical congregations gather several times a week to listen to a sermon on a particular topic. Here are some of them:

• About suffering.
• Heavenly mess.
• What is holiness?
• Life is in victory and abundance.
• Can you listen?
• Evidence of the Resurrection.
• The secret of family happiness.
• The first ever breaking of bread, etc.

Listening to the sermon, adherents of the faith try to find answers to the questions that tormented them. Anyone can read a sermon, but only after special preparation, acquiring sufficient knowledge and skills in order to speak publicly in front of a large group of fellow believers. The main worship service for Baptists is held weekly, on Sunday. The community sometimes meets on weekdays to pray, study, and discuss information found in the Bible. The service takes place in several stages: sermon, singing, instrumental music, reading of poems on spiritual themes, as well as retelling of biblical stories.

Baptist holidays

Followers of this church movement or sect, as it is commonly called in our country, have their own special calendar of holidays. Every Baptist reveres them sacredly. This is a list that consists of both general Christian holidays and solemn days unique to this church. Below is their complete list.

• Any Sunday is the day of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
• The first Sunday of each month according to the calendar is the day of breaking bread.
• Christmas.
• Baptism.
• Meeting of the Lord.
• Annunciation.
• Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem.
• Holy Thursday.
• Resurrection (Easter).
• Ascension.
• Pentecost (the descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles).
• Transfiguration.
• Harvest Festival (exclusively Baptist holiday).
• Unity Day (celebrated since 1945 in memory of the unification of evangelists and Baptists).
• New Year.

World Famous Baptists

The followers of this religious movement, which has spread in more than 100 countries of the world, not only Christian, but also Muslim, and even Buddhist, are also world-famous writers, poets, public figures, etc.

For example, the Baptists were the English writer (Bunyan), who is the author of the book "The Pilgrim's Progress"; the great civil rights activist, John Milton; Daniel Defoe is the author of one of the most famous works of world literature - the adventure novel "Robinson Crusoe"; Martin Luther King, who was an ardent fighter for the rights of black slaves in the United States. In addition, major businessmen the Rockefeller brothers were Baptists.

One of the most widespread religious movements around the world that calls itself “Christian” is BAPTISM.

Baptistism originated in England in two independent communities. The emergence of Baptistism was facilitated by anti-Catholic protests in the 14th-15th centuries, and then by the powerful Reformation movement in the 14th century, which developed simultaneously with the continentals. At the end of the 14th century, a Catholic priest and professor at Oxford began to express similar in spirit to Reformed Baptist ideas John Wycliffe (1320-1384) He advocated a literal interpretation of Scripture, rejected monasticism and the Catholic teaching on the transubstantiation of the Holy Gifts as unbiblical, rebelled against monastic land ownership and the luxury of the clergy and believed that church property should be nationalized, argued that the Holy Scriptures should be translated into the national language and himself took part in its translation into English.

Although Wycliffe's teachings did not go beyond church reform, he was condemned by Pope Gregory XI and in 1428, upon his death, his remains were disinterred and thrown into the fire.

More radical were the speeches of his followers from among the so-called. poor priests or lulatii... This movement was heterogeneous in religious convictions and most of its followers adhered to the teachings of Wycliffe, to which they added the doctrine of a universal priesthood and that the pope exercises excessive power in the church.

Another factor that influenced the development of the English Reformation were Anabaptist ideas brought to England by Anabaptist settlers from continental Europe.

The most numerous settlers were adherents of Melchior Hoffmann, as well as Mennonites - i.e. people who professed opposing views. The Lolardian movement and reform ideas influenced religious life in England, but did not determine it to the same extent as on the continent. Along with the religious, a powerful impulse in the development of the reformation came from secular power. And largely thanks to the measures she took, religious life took shape in England. The English kings, earlier than other rulers of European countries, began to protest against the absolutist claims of Rome.

And as a result of this confrontation, in 1534, the Parliament of England proclaimed the king the only earthly primate and head of the Anglican Church, and the pope was deprived of the right to appoint an archbishop and bishop in England.

Because the Reformation was driven from above, it did not embody the ideas of those who sought a complete overhaul of the Catholic Church. The government's half-measures sparked a movement to further cleanse the church of papism. Supporters of this movement demanded changes in liturgical practices and church structure. Namely, they demanded the abolition of masses, the abolition of the veneration of icons and the cross, a change in rites, and the replacement of the episcopal system of government with a presbyterian one, in which the church would be governed by elders elected in the communities.

Soon the reformers were persecuted by the Anglican Church, they were forced to leave England. In continental Europe, they saw the embodiment of their reform aspirations in the teaching and practice of the Protestant churches of Zurich, Strasburg, Frankfurt am Main and others, as well as in the doctrines of Zwingli, Luther, Calvin and other Protestant theologians. In the 40s of the 16th century, when the reaction in England on the part of the Anglican Church against the radical reformers was weakened, Luther's disciple Melanchthon arrived in England, and the Presbyterian Calvinist community was formed, although the British were forbidden to visit it. In October 1555, in Geneva, with the direct participation of Calvin, the first Anglican Calvinist community was created from among emigrants. English Calvinists began to be called Puritans . This contemptuous nickname was assigned to them for their often repeated demand for the cleansing of the Anglican Church from papist filth.

The Puritan movement was heterogeneous and consisted of Presbyterian - Calvinists and radical wing - Congregationalists or separatists. Presbyterians adhered to Calvinistic views and recognized the right of secular authorities to oversee the life of the church, support and protect it through legislation, financial policy, and also to persecute heretics who opposed the legalized church.

The separatists believed that the true church could only be created outside the state; they put forward demands for complete independence and independence of each community or congregation only in religious matters; in all other respects, the secular government should provide them with support and be responsible for the state of the church.

These two directions in Puritanism differed in their doctrine of the church and their view of church-state relations.

Presbyterians believed that all believers living in a given area and baptized in infancy were members of the local parish church. Separatists also recognized infant baptism, but in their opinion they could become members of the church later when they consciously turned to Christ. For adults, according to separatists, it is possible only after conversion and subsequent baptism. Only after these conditions are met can they (infants and repentant adults) be allowed to break bread.

Further development of the principles of separatism led to the emergence of Baptistism. Baptistism differed from separatism by requiring baptism for everyone of conscious age.

Separatists differed from Presbyterians in their attitude towards the state.

Calvinists are supporters of theocracy, as a result of which they suffered persecution in England.

The history of the emergence of Baptistism is connected with the activities of the Anglican priest John Smith. He graduated from theological college in Cambridge, then was a preacher in Lincoln, but was soon dismissed from this position because he was unrestrained in his statements against the state religion. After doubting the doctrine of the Church of England, he joined the Separatist community in 1606. Government persecution forced Smith and 80 of his supporters to seek refuge in Holland. In 1607 they settled in Amsterdam. Here Smith's religious views were shaped by the teachings of the Armenians and Mennonites.

Armenius criticized Calvin's doctrine of salvation (the doctrine of predestination). Armenius taught that Christ atoned for the sins of all people, and not just the elect, as Calvin taught. According to Armenia, Christ provided the opportunity for every person to be saved, but God knew from the very beginning who would take advantage of this opportunity and who would reject it. Subsequently, supporters of this view in soteriology began to be called general Baptists (general - because they believed that all people would be saved, that Christ accomplished common salvation). Influenced by Mennoniteism, Smith came to believe that the Church is a group of believing people, separated from the world, united to Christ and to each other through baptism and profession of faith. Although baptism is given great importance, it was considered by Smith as an external sign of the forgiveness of sins and only repentant and believing people were allowed to participate in it.

This visible church is a form of the true, spiritual, invisible church, which is formed by the souls of only righteous and perfect people. (Anabaptist influence is noticeable).

Smith believed that apostolic succession is manifested not through hierarchical and historical succession, but only through true faith - succession in faith. Since such continuity was interrupted by Catholicism and Anglicanism, the true church must be created anew, so in 1609 Smith baptized himself through sprinkling, and then his assistant Helwys and the remaining 40 members of his community. Thus, Smith inherited the Mennonite ecclesiology - the view of baptism, and Armenia - the doctrine of salvation, but Smith soon came to the conclusion that self-baptism was wrong, and recognized Mennonite baptism as true and expressed a desire to join the Mennonites. Smith's latest decision created a rift in his community.

His former supporter Helwys and a small group of supporters accused Smith of the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which was expressed in doubting the effectiveness of self-baptism, and in 1611 Helwys with a small group of followers returned to England, and Smith died in Holland in 1612.

Upon arrival in England, Helwys and his followers organized the first Baptist community in which baptism was performed by sprinkling. The new movement that emerged was in opposition to all the confessions that existed in England. General Baptists did not become widespread and did not have a noticeable influence on the development of world Baptists. So, in 1640 in England there were about 200 people. Another direction of Baptistism, called private or particularistic Baptists, became much more influential. Their predecessors were members of the separatist community organized in 1616 in London by Henry Jaytob. They came from the separatists.

There were two splits in this community due to different attitudes towards the issues of who can perform baptism and who can be baptized. Some separatists did not recognize baptism performed in the Anglican Church, while others believed that only adults could be baptized. Subsequently, a collection emerged from this community that adhered to the Calvinist direction in soteriology. The followers of this group began to be called private Baptists, because. they adhered to Calvin's teaching that salvation extends only to a portion of people.

The second distinctive feature of private Baptists was the rite of baptism through complete immersion. This feature distinguished them from the Anglicans, Catholics, Mennonites and the Smith Helwys community. The first “correct” baptism was performed, as Baptists themselves believe, through self-baptism.

The name Baptists did not immediately become established for the new movement, since after the Peasant War in Germany the name Anabaptism became synonymous with rebels and bandits, so representatives of the new movement rejected it in every possible way. Only at the end of the 17th century did this term begin to come into use. In 1644 private Baptists accepted a profession of faith. Baptistism, like all new movements, during its formation was not homogeneous in nature. Depending on its doctrine of salvation, Baptism is divided into Calvinist and Armenian. In turn, general and private Baptists accepted only the very concept of atonement - Calvin or Armenia, but did not follow them literally in everything. Therefore, even within general and particular Baptists, theological views could differ.

Among the general Baptists in the 18th century, Unitarians predominated, teaching that the Trinity is a one-hypostatic Deity. The question of the continuity of Anabaptist ideas by Baptists was resolved by the Baptists themselves at different times in different ways. Until the end of the 17th century, Baptists tried in every possible way to isolate themselves from Anabaptism, and Smith condemned the theory of Thomas Munzer. But the further and the more the horrors of the popular reformation were erased from memory, the more liberal the view of Anabaptism became, they began to distinguish between random and negative phenomena like Thomas Münzer and Jan Mathies and the true religious movement, subsequently perceived by the Dutch Mennonites, who can be considered as the forerunners of Baptistism. This opinion was expressed by the President of the World Council of Baptists, Rushbook.

For Baptists, such statements were supposed to serve as evidence of the continuity of Baptistism. Then Baptist theologians took this path - they began to track in the history of the church those groups that demanded the rebaptism of infants. Baptists believe that their spiritual predecessors were the Novatians, Novatians, and Montanists, where there was the practice of rebaptism. The same ideas were found among representatives of medieval Western sects, and in particular Anabaptism - a continual connection with it could be traced.

The spread of Baptists in England, Europe and the USA *)

The growth of Baptist communities in England and the need to maintain connections between them were the motivation for holding annual meetings and assemblies of representatives of Baptist communities. In 1650 a general assembly of General Baptists was organized, and in 1689 a general assembly of Particular Baptists was organized. Baptistism did not become widespread in Great Britain, and it spread even more slowly on the European continent (the memory of the Anabaptists was still alive). Baptistism is most widespread in the USA and Canada. The American version of Baptistism became widespread in the 18th century in Russia. American Baptists are largely British in origin, and in their doctrine they were both general and particular, but by 1800 Calvinist theology had become predominant.

Baptistism in the USA finally developed its doctrine, administrative structures, and formed missionary societies. Thanks to their efforts and funds, Baptistism began to spread throughout the world.

Baptistism was brought to France from America. The first mention of it dates back to 1810. In 1832, a missionary society was formed there, after which it began to spread in this country.

Baptists in Germany and Russia are also indebted to the activities of American missionaries. In Germany - Gerhard Onkin (1800-1884).

In 1823 he accepted an appointment as a missionary to the Anglican Reformed Church in the city of Hamburg. But independent reading of Scripture convinced him of his desire to convert to Baptistism. And in 1829, he turned to English Baptists with a request for baptism, but he succeeded in realizing his intention only in 1834, when he, his wife and 5 others were baptized in Elba by the American Baptist Sears, who was traveling in Europe.

Thanks to the tireless work of Onkin, who declared that every Baptist is a missionary, Baptistism began to quickly spread in Europe and Russia. Baptists in Germany were persecuted by the Lutheran clergy and secular authorities, their meetings were dispersed, and they were prevented from performing divine services. The police refused them protection, and many Baptists were imprisoned. Children were taken from their mothers and forcibly carried to be baptized into the Lutheran Church. These persecutions continued until the mid-50s of the 19th century.

In 1849, the Baptists of Germany and Denmark united into a union of associated churches, baptized Christians in Germany and Denmark, which began active missionary work in neighboring countries.

*) See Glukhov’s summary - the history of Baptists in Russia, the views of Baptists regarding the Orthodox teaching on the sacraments.

In 1863 there were 11,275 Baptists in Germany. The growth in numbers was facilitated by the opening of a seminary in Hamburg and a publishing house in Kassovo. In 1913 the number of German Baptists increased to 45,583. Missions from Germany were sent to the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland, Holland, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Africa and Russia. The organization of the Baptist World Union contributed to strengthening the missionary activities of Baptists at the international level. In 1905, at the Baptist World Congress in London, the Union united 7 million Baptists, of which 4.5 million were Americans.

In 1960, there were 24 million Baptists in the world, of which over 21 million were Americans. In 1994 - 37,300,000; of these, 28,300,000 are Americans and Canadians. By 1997, according to Baptists, their number was close to 40 million.

Although Baptists exist in all European countries, according to Baptist sources, they play a significant role mainly in England, Sweden, Germany and possibly in Russia (USA).

Baptist historiography on the origins of Baptistism

Depending on the apologetic tasks, Baptist historians successively put forward three theories of the origin of Baptistism. The very first version is called the Jerusalem-Jordanian, Johannite version, according to this hypothesis, Baptists have existed since the time of John the Baptist. This theory, which arose in the second quarter of the 18th century, was intended to emphasize the apostolic succession of Baptist communities in faith.

The second version is the Anabaptist kinship theory. It aims to show a spiritual connection with a number of sects that practiced secondary baptism. These sects include German, Dutch and Swiss Anabaptists, some medieval sectarians (Waldensians), as well as sectarians and heretics from the history of the first three centuries of Christianity, in particular the Novatians and Donatists. Recognizing the difficulty of establishing historical continuity, its proponents insist on continuity in the matter of baptism. This theory arose in the mid-19th century.

The third theory is the theory of the English secessionist heritage. This theory appeared at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Supporters of this version are divided into two parts. Some argue that Baptists originate from private Baptists, excluding general or general Baptists, since the majority of them degenerated into Unitarianism (Socialism) and the Baptists did not maintain contact with them after that.

Others believe that there has been an unbroken succession of Baptist congregations since 1610, i.e. they believe that Baptistism was started by the Smith-Helves group, which was organized in Holland in Amsterdam.

The latter theory has become most widespread and is now the working theory of Baptist historians.

Baptists in Russia

Baptistism penetrated into Russia in the 60-80s of the 19th century in four regions isolated from each other - in the south of Ukraine, the cities of Kherson, Dnepropetrovsk, Kyiv, in the Tauride province - the south of left-bank Ukraine, in Transcaucasia and St. Petersburg.

Baptistism in Ukraine followed the paths paved by Stundism, i.e. in assemblies where Scripture was intensively studied, mission. The spread of Baptistism was also facilitated by the emergence of New Mennonism or fraternal communities of church Mennonites.

The main reasons for the spread of Baptistism in Russia were:

— presence of foreign colonists;

- the presence of free people fleeing financial and economic problems, from conscription into the army, from the harsh treatment of landowners (the increase in free people was facilitated by the abolition of serfdom in 1861);

- the difficult economic situation of Russian peasants forced to hire out to the colonists (according to Catherine’s decree, the colonists were placed in more favorable economic conditions than the local residents); in addition, the south of Russia was the place where sectarians were expelled from the central provinces;

— dissatisfaction with the spiritual state of the Russian Orthodox Church;

— the Baptists themselves say that the spread of Baptistism was largely facilitated by the translation of Scripture into modern Russian.

Baptistism in Russia was represented by two currents and directions: on the one hand, it was represented by American Baptists, which penetrated into Russia from Germany; it was a fairly strong and powerful movement in the south of Ukraine, and a second direction, known as evangelism, developed in the northwest and in St. Petersburg. And these two directions were very close dogmatically, almost identical, but for a long time they could not come to the formation of a single church structure and there was fierce competition between them for human souls.

The first attempts at unification were made in the 80s of the 19th century, but they also failed. Then, after 1905, before the revolution, a number of attempts were made, which ended unsuccessfully. After the Great October Revolution, it was as if they had already agreed on unification, but persecution and repression by the Soviet government buried this idea. It seemed that everything was final, and only in 1944, with the help of the Soviet state, was it possible to achieve the unification of these two movements of Baptistism.

We study the entire period of the history of Russian Baptists from 1860 to 1944 using Glukhov’s notes.

In 1944, with the permission of the Soviet government, a congress of Baptists and Evangelicals was held, at which it was decided to merge these movements into one union of Evangelical Christians and Baptists with a governing body, the All-Union Council of Evangelical Christians and Baptists (ALLECB) - this was the governing body of Baptists in the USSR with the center stay in Moscow.

At this meeting in 1944, the regulations on SECB were developed. To manage the affairs of the Union, a system of authorized representatives of VSEHIB was created; later it was renamed the system of senior elders.

The new leadership system was different from the previous one, developed in 1910-1920. Firstly, the union council received the status of a governing body, whereas previously it was an executive body during the inter-congress period. Secondly, according to the regulations, there was no provision for holding congresses of the union of communities.

Thus, under the supervision of the authorities, a pyramidal system of church government of Baptists was built, at the top of which was the All-Russian Orthodox Church, and in many cases candidates for the positions of elder and above were not elected, but appointed. Baptists strictly adhered to the principle of separation of Church and state; The candidate for the post of presbyter was elected by the community itself - i.e. the community chose a candidate and invited elders from other communities to ordain (confirm) him. After this provision was adopted, the state received a mechanism for internal intervention in the internal affairs of Baptistism, since candidates had to be agreed upon with the secular authorities, and if the authorities were not satisfied with it, they could block the nomination to the eldership. The secular authorities could appoint members to the All-Russian Christian Union, he was not elected, he was appointed by the secular authorities.

Thus, Baptists completely abandoned their fundamental principle - the separation of Church and state.

In 1945, VSEKhB decided to change the name of the Council, and from then on it began to be called VSEKhB - such a dissonant name.

Until 1948, there was rapid growth and registration of the ECB in the USSR, but since 1948, the authorities began to refuse registration to communities that did not want to follow their instructions and coordinate with them candidates for leadership positions in the community. In addition, with the approval of the authorities, authorized and then senior presbyters of the All-Russian Orthodox Christian Church were appointed to managerial positions.

Control over the activities of Baptist communities by secular authorities was comprehensive. From overseeing the election of elders, right down to editing articles in Baptist magazines and coordinating the repertoire of songs at meetings. Being under the influence of state power, the All-Russian Christian Baptist Church could not provide assistance to communities and individual Baptists and protect them from local pressure from secular authorities.

This situation caused indignation among Baptists and created the preconditions for internal decay in the communities. In the mid-50s, there began to be murmurs and dissatisfaction with the actions of elders appointed with the approval of the authorities. Baptists began to be irritated by their lust for power, bossy tone, and administration, which thereby infringed on the rights of believers. The Baptists began to form a hierarchy from the elders to the supreme body of the All-Russian Christian Union, the formation of which was under the supervision of the authorities. Until 1944, the presbyter was elected by the community, and there were no big problems with the presbyter, since it was always possible to complain about the presbyter to a higher authority, and this presbyter could be removed and re-elected by the decision of the community. Now this situation was not possible, since the candidacy of the presbyter was agreed upon with the local authorities, and a statement against the presbyter was a statement against the local authorities. Appeals to higher authorities also did not bring success, since those people were also appointed by secular authorities. Thus, freedom of religion within the community itself was infringed, and this caused internal grumbling.

Baptists always fought against Soviet power and were constantly persecuted. Starting from the 60s of the 19th century, they were constantly resettled, evicted to sparsely populated areas of the Russian Empire. But here it turned out that they voluntarily surrendered to Soviet power. In 1959, the plenum of the AECB adopted provisions on the union of the ECB in the USSR and an instruction letter to the senior presbyters of the AECB. These documents caused a split in the Baptist movement of the USSR. Many provisions of these documents caused outrage locally, but the greatest dissatisfaction was expressed on the following points:

— the composition of the VSEKhB remains unchanged, i.e. not re-elected;

— holding congresses of community representatives was not envisaged;

— senior elders, when visiting communities, should limit themselves to observing compliance with the established order;

— according to the decision of the All-Russian Christian Biological Society, it was proposed to limit as much as possible the baptism of young people aged 18 to 30 years. Only the presbyter and, less often, members of the audit commission were allowed to preach. Elders were instructed to avoid calls to repentance.

Choral performances accompanied by an orchestra, etc. were prohibited. The All-Russian Christian Philharmonic Society was given the rights to publishing activities, opening Bible courses, connections with foreign organizations, opening new communities, and appointing new ministers. This situation actually turned local communities into disenfranchised parishes, and the central governing body of the AECB into a general church Synod with legislative, judicial and executive powers.

Baptists who are in opposition to these documents call the communities that accepted and submitted to these decisions Soviet Baptists or Soviet Baptists.

Having familiarized themselves with these documents locally, the Baptists began to demand the convening of an emergency congress of community representatives. On the initiative from below, an initiative group or organizing committee was created. Since 1961, due to the disagreement of the leadership of the ASCEB to support the initiative group to convene the congress, a movement arose in Russian Baptists to leave the tutelage of the ASCEB. After repeated and persistent petitions from the organizing committee to government bodies for permission to hold the congress and appeals on this issue, the ASCEB received permission to hold an all-Union meeting or congress held in 1963.

In 1963, the charter of the All-Russian Agricultural Society was approved; Three observers from the organizing committee attended the convention, declaring that the charter contained "a more refined network for our brotherhood."

By 1965, after unsuccessful attempts to restore the integrity of the Baptist movement in the USSR, the separated Baptists formed their own center, which was called the Council of Churches of the ECB, with which about 10,000 Baptist communities left the AECB - quite a significant figure.

Under the leadership of the Council of Churches, an illegal publishing house was formed, which regularly published information sheets, spiritual literature, collections of spiritual songs, etc.

SCECB stated that ASCEB does not recognize the principles of Christian Baptist doctrine, in particular the separation of church and state. According to the Council, the observance of this principle determines whether the Church will belong to Christ - as its only leader, or whether it will belong to the state, in connection with which it will cease to be a church and enter into an adulterous union with the world - i.e. with atheism.

Arguing that the Church must obey the state, the AECB repeatedly referred to texts from Scripture, in particular (John 19:11), but representatives of the organizing committee saw in this a desire to show the superiority of secular power in the leadership of the Church.

In illegal conditions of activity, rumors about the end times began to spread among Baptists. There were calls for a final and decisive battle with disbelief.

The next Baptist congress, held in 1966, also did not lead to the desired results. In its address to this congress, the AECHB stated the following: “to cooperate with the AECEB means to cooperate with atheists, therefore, the AECEB considered and will continue to consider all events carried out under the auspices of the AECEB as invalid. Moreover, by rejecting evangelical Baptist principles and adopting new documents, the All-Russian Orthodox Christian Union consolidated its break with both the doctrine and the All-Union Orthodox Christian Church.

Current situation of Baptists

After the collapse of the USSR in 1992, the Euro-Asian Federation of the Union of Christian Baptists was formed, which united over 3,000 communities with more than half a million believers. The Union of ECB of the Russian Federation was also included in the federation with autonomy rights. The Russian SECB includes 45 regional associations, headed by senior elders, who represent 1,200 communities with 85,000 believers.

If you estimate how many communities there are and how many believers, it turns out that each community has about 80 people. On average, urban communities have about 200 people, and rural communities - 50.

The highest body of the Russian SECB is the Congress. The last 30th Congress was held in the spring of 1998. He proclaimed a priority program for the evangelization of Russia. He paid special attention to working with young people, and appropriate structures were formed for missions among young people. In Russia, in addition to the ECB, there is currently the ECB Council of Churches, which unites more than 230 communities. And at the same time, there is the Union of ECB Churches, which represents more than 1000 communities - these are newly created organizations at the expense of unregistered communities. In addition, there is a union of independent Churches - more than 300 communities. Thus, we have about 2,730 Baptist communities in Russia.

ECB creed

One of the arguments in favor of their doctrine of salvation, Baptists refer to the sinfulness of human nature, as a result of which the human mind is limited and subject to error, from this they conclude that a person needs an infallible and accurate source of theological truth, which, in order to meet these requirements, must have supernatural origin. Baptists call any teaching that is not based on Holy Scripture false.

They reject everything that cannot be said, “Thus saith the Lord.” Apart from the Holy Scriptures, Baptists say, God has not given the Church any other source of revelation. Not a single Baptist textbook in the section on the knowledge of God mentions a word about tradition; no attempt is made to explain the words of the Apostle John the Theologian about the impossibility of describing all the deeds of Christ (John 21:25) and the statements of the Apostle Paul about the importance of observing Tradition.

Thus, Scripture, according to the teachings of Baptists, contains all the teachings of Christ and the apostles necessary for salvation.

To support their opinion, they refer to the following verses (John 20:31), (2 Tim. 3:15-16), (Acts 1:1). Moreover, for salvation they claim that Scripture itself prohibits adding anything to it and following Tradition (Gal. 1:8-9), (Col. 2:8), (Matt. 15:2-3.9 ); (Mark 7.5).

Despite the abundant citation of biblical texts, the Baptist doctrine of Scripture as the only source of theology is not consistent with the history of the formation of the New Testament canon and does not stand up to criticism within the framework of biblical theology.

Historical proof of the failure of the Baptist doctrine of Scripture as the only source of truth necessary for salvation

If we accept the Baptist point of view about the written source of knowledge of God, then we will have to admit that from the apostolic time until the end of the 4th century in the west and until the end of the 4th century or 7th century in the east, most Christians could not be saved, for the canon of Scripture was formed in a certain Baptist composition not earlier than the specified time limits. According to biblical studies, the first recorded text of revelation was the Gospel of Matthew, compiled between 42 and 50 AD. Next comes the letter to the Galatians, which appeared in 54-55, and the last canonical texts date from the late 90s of the first or early second century. However, this does not mean at all that all Christians of this time had the complete canon of Scripture. By the end of the 1st century, the vast majority of Christians were not familiar with not only all, but most of the New Testament texts, since the canon as such had not yet been established. According to modern science, including Protestant science, the Gospel of Mark, the third in chronological order, probably compiled in Rome in 62-63, could have become available to Christians no earlier than the 70-80s of the first century.

Thus, about 40 years after the Resurrection of Christ, the Church was not yet able to fully read all three gospels. Until the first half of the second century, only a few local churches possessed most of the texts of the Apostle Paul and probably not all of the gospels. And only towards the end of the second century, according to the evidence of the monuments of church writing, attempts were made to compile a New Testament canon.

Let us cite some of them, especially those that date back to the beginning of the declaration of Christianity as the state religion, for from that time, according to Baptists, the retreat of the Church began, culminating in the distortion of its doctrine.

From the first letter to the Corinthians, St. Clement of Rome, written in 95-96, it follows that he knew certain words of St. Paul, he also refers to the words of Christ, but does not call them the gospel.

Hieromartyr Ignatius of Antioch (†110) wrote to the churches of Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralia, Rome, Philadelphia, Smyrna and St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. As follows from these letters, he knew most of the letters of the Apostle Paul, namely 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Romans, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians. It is possible that he knew the gospels of Matthew, John and Luke. However, there is not sufficient evidence for him to consider any gospel or epistle as Holy Scripture in the modern sense of the concept.

IN Didache , the origin of which scientists tend to date to the first half of the 1st century and which reflects the life of the Christian community of Syria and Egypt, the author cites the words of the Gospel of Matthew, but he does not consider the Gospel itself a reliable source of statements about Christ, but only a convenient collection of his sayings.

Also important is the testimony of Papias of Hierapolis, who lived in Phrygia in 70-140. He wrote the book "Interpretation of the Words of the Lord." According to this text, he recognized two sources of Christianity. One was oral tradition and the other was written testimony, but he preferred the former. He has evidence of how the gospels of Matthew and Mark were composed.

In another monument - the letter of Barnabas (the first half of the 1st century) scientists find a hint of familiarity with the Gospel of Matthew, as follows from the letter of Polycarp of Smyrna to the Philippians (135). He had 8 epistles of the Apostle Paul, and knew about the existence of other epistles, including conciliar epistles. He quotes the words of the Lord, which can be identified with the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

The book of Hermas, The Shepherd, rarely quotes New Testament sources, although it has much in common with the letter of James. The “shepherd” itself testifies to how unevenly the process of formation of the New Testament canon took place in the 2nd century.

In the second letter of Clement of Rome, the New Testament texts are called Scripture for the first time, along with the Old Testament. There are different opinions about the dating of this message, but in this case they place it in the first half of the first century. This is the opinion of Protestant scholars, who always underestimate the dates. But it is clear that Clement is not familiar with the gospels of Luke and John, as well as with his message. Thus, by the middle of the 2nd century there was no canon of books of Holy Scripture, and they were not distributed in the church. Some local churches, mainly those in Asia Minor, had more epistles than others. It is also important to note that not all Christians were familiar with all four gospels.

The motivation for compiling the canon of Scripture was the activity of heretics, who compiled their canons to substantiate their own false teachings. The Gnostics Valentinus and Marcion (second half of the 2nd century), as well as the Montanist movement that arose in Phrygia in Asia Minor in the period from 156-172.

Montanists considered the recorded revelations of their soothsayers along with the words of the Savior and thereby expanded the New Testament revelation.

Towards the end of the 2nd century, lists of books began to be compiled, which began to be perceived as Christian Holy Scripture.

Among the more complete lists, the most ancient Muratorian canon is from the end of the 2nd century and is believed to be of Western origin. It attempts to divide famous books into two categories. The first are books recognized by the church. Among the canonical books it lacks: the 1st and 2nd Epistles of Peter, the Epistle of James and the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Hebrews. Another similar code can be cited as the classification of the New Testament books by Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340) in his work “Ecclesiastical History” (first quarter of the 4th century). He did not include the Epistles of James, Jude, the 2nd Epistle of Peter, as well as the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of John among the books accepted unanimously by the entire church.

Thus, in the east, even at the beginning of the 4th century, they doubted the authority of all the conciliar messages and the book of the Apocalypse of John the Theologian.

During the 4th century, a number of fathers and writers - Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nazianzus, Amphilochius of Iconium, Epiphanius of Cyprus, Didymus the Blind - compiled their lists of books.

Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386) in his catechumens (c. 350) lists a list of books included in the canon, which do not include the Apocalypse.

In 367, Saint Athanasius of Alexandria gives the composition of the Old Testament and New Testament canons in his 39th Easter message. His list of books completely coincides with the current canon, but St. Gregory of Nyssa († 389) omits the Apocalypse in his catalog.

The list of books of St. Amphilochius of Iconium († after 394) does not include the 2nd Epistle of Peter, the 2nd and 3rd Epistle of John, the Epistle of Jude and the Apocalypse.

In the works of St. John Chrysostom (347-407) there are no references to the Epistles of Peter, the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of John, the Epistle of Jude and the Apocalypse.

In the 85th rule of the Council of Trull (691), the composition of the canon was determined, in which, as in the resolution of the Council of Laodicea, there are no epistles of John and the Apocalypse, but two epistles of Clement of Rome were included, which most of their predecessors did not accept.

Protestant scholars, trying to explain this blatant inconsistency in the conciliar decision, believe that the participants of the cathedral did not read the texts that they affirmed, i.e. in the 4th century we meet the established NT canon, 300 years later another canon is compiled, according to the opinion in the east in the 10th century there were at least 6 different lists of the NT canon. Different local churches had different compositions of the canon.

In the West, the canon was finally formed under Blessed Augustine in his book on Christian teaching in 396-397. he provides a list of texts consistent with the modern canon. This list was approved at councils in 393 in Hyponia, in 397 and 419 in Carthage, but the decisions of these councils were not immediately included in all existing manuscripts, and over the following centuries incomplete book codes were still found in the West.

Thus, the final composition in the west was formed by the end of the 4th century and in the east in the period from the 4th to the 10th centuries - formally, by dates, in fact, not in all.

According to scientists, there is every reason to think that for quite a long time, before the final formation of the canon, only one gospel was used in some churches - for example, in Palestine only the Gospel of Matthew was widely known, in Asia Minor - from John, this gives grounds to consider the Baptist the teaching of Scripture as the only written authoritative source of salvation is erroneous and without foundation.

The Baptist view of the source of theology raises a number of questions regarding the feasibility of the Church's mission in the world. If the Church did not have the New Testament books until the end of the 4th century, then how could it fulfill Christ’s commandment to preach the gospel to all creation (Mark 16:15). Is it possible that the Lord, having accomplished our redemption, did not take care of the proper number of copies of the Bible, but left our salvation to a random coincidence of circumstances? We do not find evidence of the work of guilds of Bible copyists either in the acts of the apostles or in the literature of post-apostolic times, but the Church, although it did not possess a sufficient amount of written Revelation, had and has all the means to carry out its saving mission in the world.

Discussion around the meaning of recorded revelation began in the 2nd century. Saint Irenaeus of Lyons († 202), who lived at that time, asks his opponents - what if the apostles had not left us their writings? Shouldn't we follow the order of the tradition handed down to those to whom the apostles entrusted the Church? And in support of his opinion about tradition as the source of Revelation, he refers to the fact, apparently known to his contemporaries, that many tribes of barbarians who believe in Christ have their salvation without charter or ink, written in their hearts by the Spirit, and carefully observe Tradition.(5 books denunciation of false knowledge book 3 paragraph 4 paragraph 2).

Other aspects of the groundlessness of the Baptist teaching about Scripture as the only source of theology.

Since Baptists claim that Scripture is the main source of theology, they have the right to investigate whether everything that Christ and the apostles taught and whether these texts have reached us in full?

The Apostle John the Theologian gives a negative answer to this question - not everything created by Christ is written down in books (John 21:25).

Acts says that Paul taught the Ephesians everything useful for the kingdom of God (Acts 20:20,25), but at the same time we do not know the text of his sermon, where, according to Luke, he declared the whole will of God to the Ephesians (Acts 20, 27).

Paul's letter to Laodicea (Col. 4:16), which the apostle ordered to be read among the Colossians, has not reached us. Thus, we do not have a complete record of all the words and deeds of Jesus Christ and the apostles.

Some Baptists admit that the apostle wrote a number of letters that were not included in the New Testament, since not everything Paul wrote was inspired. But such an explanation is unconvincing for the following reasons - at present, the fact of discrepancies in the texts of the surviving manuscripts of the New Testament is well known to everyone, then the question arises - which manuscript should be considered canonical?

In addition, it has been established that the last 12 verses of Mark's gospel are missing in the oldest Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic and Armenian manuscripts. On what basis is the current text of the Gospel of Mark recognized as canonical?

A similar question can be raised regarding the texts of the translation of Scripture into national languages. The text from which the translation is carried out cannot serve as a guarantor of reliable transmission into national languages, since the original records of the apostles have not been preserved and there is a problem of the reliability or canonicity of the manuscripts.

In addition, the possibility of unintentional distortion of the text during translation work cannot be ruled out. Thus, the canonicity of the text does not depend on its authorship or the professionalism of the translator; the canonicity of the text does not depend on the inspiration of Scripture, but only on reception, on the correspondence of the contents of the book to the faith of the Church, only on the acceptance of this or that book by the Church, therefore, it does not serve as a source of theology. Biblical texts can speak, but only the tradition and faith of the Church.

Baptist Teaching on the Canon of Scripture

As a criterion for canonicity, all Baptists consider the principle of inspiration, only for conservatives the canonicity of the biblical text is canonical, and for liberals - the inspiration of each Baptist, or the subjective opinion of each Baptist. Thus, Baptism, as it were, transfers the properties and functions of the Church to every believer.

This liberal view is based on the Baptist view of the nature of the Church. They believe that the believer in the act of repentance and conversion receives the Holy Spirit, i.e. regardless of the Church, and even then the believer participates in the rite of baptism, i.e. The rite of baptism has nothing to do with salvation.

According to Orthodox teaching, the Holy Spirit dwells in the Church and is communicated through the Church. You must first become a member of the Church and then receive the Holy Spirit. The ecclesiology of Baptistism has, as it were, a mirror, opposite perspective in relation to the Orthodox one.

They teach about the saving action of the Holy Spirit outside the Church. The majority of Baptist pastors and members of Baptist congregations are supporters of a conservative view. A smaller group includes graduates of Baptist seminaries from the 1990s. “Ecumenist-oriented”, when meeting you, they will talk about points of agreement, about common views on the source of salvation, but will not talk about disagreements. Whereas conservatives are the opposite.

There are quite a few Orthodox priests among Baptists.

Orthodox view on the criterion of canonicity of Scripture

This doctrine was formulated by church writers back in the 2nd century. This was largely facilitated by the activity of heretics, who flooded the Church with their books and created their own lists of New Testament texts to prove the truth of their false teachings.

The first to compile his own list of biblical texts was the Gnostic Valentine. The second heretic Marcion, who appeared in the second half of the 2nd century, selected 10 epistles of the Apostle Paul from the New Testament books known to him, subjected them to revision, removed everything related to the Old Testament, and compiled his own canon from them. In 156 or 172 Montanism appeared in Phrygia in Asia Minor. Montanism placed the recorded prophecies of its prophets alongside Old Testament texts and the sayings of the Savior. The collection of Montanist texts was constantly replenished with new revelations.

The main criterion opposing heresies, allowing one or another book to be ranked among the Holy Scriptures, was its compliance with the Rule of Faith or the Rule of Truth (Irenaeus of Lyons, Hippolytus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Tertulian). Another similar expression was the rule of the Church - it was used only by the fathers of the Eastern churches.

We find evidence of this in the muratorium canon, where only books read in the Church and those read during services were considered canonical. Eusebius of Caesarea classifies as canonical books those books that were unanimously accepted by the entire church, i.e. The criterion for canonicity was the principle of reception - the acceptance of a text consistent with the faith of the Church.

Blessed Augustine and Blessed Jerome shared the same opinion - “it doesn’t matter who wrote the epistle to the Jews, for in any case it is a work that is read in churches.”

As can be seen, the divine inspiration of Scripture, which, according to Baptists, should have guaranteed the immutability of the teachings set forth in it, is not a criterion of canonicity. Divine inspiration is not a criterion for canonicity - the Orthodox position.

Scripture is inspired by God because a specific text is recognized by the Church. The criterion of truth and canonicity is agreement with tradition, and not the inspiration of the text.

Therefore, in the works of church writers we do not find reference to the inspiration of biblical texts as a criterion for canonicity. That. only the Church can bear witness to the New Testament, since the propagation of the New Testament took place within itself. The consciousness of the church is the only criterion of faith, and not the decisions of the Councils, which in themselves are not always and in every way an expression of tradition. Indicative in this regard is the decision of the Trulle Council regarding the canon of Scripture, when the 1st and 2nd epistles of Clement were included in the canonical books and the Revelation of John the Theologian was not included.

The inviolability of the canons of Scripture is based not on the canons, but on the testimony of tradition. The misconception of Baptists regarding the role of councils in the formation of the canon is that they view their activities as institutions claiming to be the ultimate truth. Thus, the canon of Scripture was established by the Church, it was preserved by it, and therefore only the Church has the right to authoritative interpretation of Scripture; it can make a judgment that this or that interpretation of Scripture corresponds to its dogmatic consciousness.

By the 16th century, the Catholic Church had developed the doctrine of the pope as the highest authority in matters of faith. Thomas Aquinas proclaimed the principle of papal infallibility, according to which the Roman Pontiff is the source of the infallible judgments of the Church. The Reformers considered this teaching to be a distortion of the saving gospel. However, they overthrew the pope, replacing his authority with the infallibility of biblical texts. Figuratively speaking, to the question: “who to believe?” The Catholic answers to the Pope, and the Protestant answers to Scripture.

Baptists have two views in understanding the authority of Christianity - conservative and liberal. If conservatives believe that the origin of Scripture gives Scripture infallibility, infallibility, and for this reason Scripture is the absolute authority for all Christians and the only source of authority in the Church. But Baptists understand that such a statement is in clear contradiction with Scripture, where the Church is called the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15), therefore, recognizing the importance of the opinion of the church people, they attribute this statement of the Apostle Paul to the invisible Church, the invisible Body Christ's. In their opinion, the Holy Spirit imparts to every believer the ability to understand Scripture (1 John 2:20-27) “You have the anointing of the Holy One...”. Thus they maintain that the Scriptures, together with the inner revelation that accords with them, are the true guide to man's salvation.

But this recognition of the importance of internal revelation makes the text of Scripture dependent on subjective opinion. Thus, Baptists seem to admit that they preach their own understanding of Scripture. But in this case, there can be no talk about the absolute authority of Scripture, but one should talk about the authority or importance of the personal subjective opinion of the Baptist. They are inconsistent, and they do not have a consensus on this matter.

And then the question arises about the criterion of the truth and or authenticity of this revelation, for the Scripture says that Satan can also take the form of an angel of light.

Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the Baptist teaching about Scripture as an absolute authority is untenable due to the internal inconsistency of this teaching.

The opinion of Baptists on the issue of authority in the Church is similar to that of the Catholics. The dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council noted that “The determinations of the Pope are immutable in themselves, but not from the consent of the Church.” Baptists endowed themselves with the properties of the pope. Ernst Troeltsch, at the beginning of the 20th century, called Protestantism a modification of Catholicism, in which the problems of Catholicism remained, but other solutions to these problems were proposed. He repeated the statement of the Pietists 70-80 years after Luther's death.

Liberal Baptist view of the authority of the Church

Baptist liberals believe that the attitude to Scripture in the ancient Church was significantly different from the modern one. The ancient creeds clearly reflect the basic principles of the Christian faith, but none of these creeds contain a statement of the authority of Scripture in the form in which it is common among modern Protestants. And liberals recognize that legend, tradition preceded Scripture.

From this they conclude that no guaranteed institutions - neither the Church nor the Bible itself have the absolute authority of the Church, since Christ created both, therefore only God Himself has absolute authority.

Orthodox view

According to Orthodox teaching, the authority of Scripture is based not on the inerrancy of Scripture, but on the testimony of the Church about it. Scripture is the faithful record of Divine truth. The message is Divine because it comes from God, but the Church receives the word of God and testifies to its truth, and only she imparts the infallibility and authority of Scripture. The Church says that Scripture is sacred because what it contains is identical with its faith.

From the history of the Church it is known that the desire to confirm any provisions of faith exclusively with Holy Scripture is a favorite method of heretics; in this regard, Vikenty Levitsky wrote: “when we see that some cite apostolic or prophetic sayings about the advancement of the universal faith, we should not doubt that , that the devil speaks through their lips, and in order to sneak up more unnoticed on the simple-minded sheep, they hide their wolfish appearance, without abandoning the wolf’s ferocity, as if they were wrapped in a fleece with the sayings of the Divine Scripture, so that, feeling the softness of the wool, no one would be afraid of their sharp teeth.”

Therefore, in relation to Scripture, the Church adheres to the principle that can be expressed in the words of St. Hilary of Pictavia: “the essence of Scripture is not in reading Scripture, but in understanding it.”

Evidence from the Bible of the Baptist Doctrine of Scripture as the Only Source of the Doctrine of Salvation

Baptists, in support of their teaching that Scripture contains everything necessary for salvation, refers to a number of New Testament texts (Acts 20:20). Addressing the Ephesians, the Apostle Paul says that for three years he taught everyone without ceasing, day and night, with tears, did not miss anything useful, and proclaimed the will of God. Hence Baptists conclude that Scripture contains everything necessary for salvation. But as follows from the text of the Acts, the apostle taught them orally and did not leave this teaching written down; in any case, we do not know it. If we take this expression literally, then the Baptists should have accepted the tradition that the apostle bequeathed to his disciples to keep.

The next text is (John 20:31) “These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and by believing you may have life in His name.” However, as follows from the context (v. 30), the apostle speaks only about his book, and not about the whole scripture. If we take this passage literally, we will have to reject not only tradition, but all Scripture except the Gospel of John.

This approach to the analysis of texts by Baptists is purely formal, but the Baptists themselves do the same - they take New Testament texts, open them to us, and point to a quote taken out of context.

Sectarians also refer to (2 Tim. 3:15-16) “From childhood you know the Scripture, which can make you wise; all Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness.” The Apostle Timothy, born around the year 30, could only know the Old Testament Scripture as a child, which he was taught by his grandmother and mother. Because his first meeting with the Apostle Paul took place during the first missionary journey - around the year 45, and the first gospel was written between 45 and 50 years. Therefore, there is no reason to either deny or assert that the Apostle Timothy was familiar with the New Testament scriptures. But we can say with complete certainty that we are talking about Old Testament scripture here.

Having reminded Timothy of the enlightenment of faith, Paul indicates the source from which Timothy drew knowledge about the Messiah and prepared for his coming. Knowledge of the Old Testament could be beneficial, for it prefigured the economy of Christ. Thus, turning to the Old Testament writings, the Apostle Paul wanted to show Timothy that his faith was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, and they could strengthen him in saving faith from the temptation of heretics (Tim. 3:1-2,8-9). From the context it follows that the letter to Timothy is a reference to the Old Testament Scripture made by Paul in connection with the intensification of the activities of heretics. Paul points here to the basis of faith.

If you follow the logic of the Baptists, you will have to admit that the Old Testament Scripture is sufficient for salvation, as for the 16th verse, it implies all Scripture. Paul wrote Timothy in 64-65, before his martyrdom in 67. This message already feels like a farewell speech. The apostle seems to be saying that up to this point he had taught him, but in the future he should be guided by the faith that he was taught by the Apostle Paul and seek instruction in Scripture himself. Examine Scripture from the perspective of tradition. In addition, by that time the New Testament canon had not yet been formed, so there is no reason to take the words of the Apostle Paul literally, otherwise all the writings written after 64-65 would have to be rejected. Those. can be divided into 3 groups of objections - verse 15 - an indication of the Old Testament, the second - an instruction to study Scripture, the third - acceptance of the Baptist premise leads to the rejection of all scriptures written after 64-65.

Next, Baptists cite a passage from Acts 1:1 where the Apostle Luke tells Theophilus that in the first book he wrote, he collected everything “that Jesus did and taught from the beginning,” but the first book of Luke is the Gospel. If it exhausts everything necessary for salvation, then why are other books needed? In addition, the Apostle Luke was not an eyewitness to the deeds of Jesus Christ and could not describe all His words and deeds, since this is not even possible in principle.

Further, Baptists claim that Scripture itself prohibits adding anything to it (Gal. 1:8-9) “even if we or an angel from heaven preached to you a gospel other than what we preached to you, let him be accursed.” The tradition of the Church, according to Baptists, is another gospel, which they anathematize, but the content of the message does not provide grounds for such an interpretation. This letter was written against the Judaizers, who taught that Gentiles needed to be circumcised. The Apostle Paul writes to them that the doctrine that he preached is not a human doctrine, for he did not receive it from men, but through revelation through Christ (Gal. 1:11-12).

The next text is Rev. 22:18: “If anyone adds anything to them (words), God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book.” Baptists consider the tradition of the Church as these additions. But the Apostle John is not talking here about the whole Bible, but about a specific book that he wrote. Otherwise, one would have to reject the Gospel and the epistles of John himself, which are not included in this book.

Baptists often refer to the prophet Isaiah, who threatened the Jews with punishment for introducing their commandments and traditions (Is. 28:9,11,13). As can be seen from the context, the prophet denounces the Jews not for introducing commandments and traditions, but for mocking his instructions. Driven out of patience by the prophet’s constant reminders of the need to fulfill God’s commandments and his instructions to deviate from the law, the Jews said: whom does he want to teach? Diverted from the mother's nipple? - after all, we have our prophets, our teachers, scriptures, but he takes us for babies, ignorant of the law. They believed that the prophet was addressing them as little children, but for this the prophet threatened that they would speak to them in a foreign language, and then they would have to listen and carry out all orders, which was fulfilled when the Israelites were captured by the Assyrians.

Reference is made to 1 Cor. 4:6: “so that you may learn from us not to philosophize beyond what is written and not to become arrogant to one another.” But the words of the Apostle Paul in this case have nothing to do with the Bible. They were written about the division in the Corinthian community into parties that exalted one another. For the Lord has made all things grow; some have planted, others have watered.

Baptistism and Tradition

Baptists, having proclaimed Scripture as the rule of faith and behavior, rejected the Tradition of the Church. Depending on the level of reading and education, there are different opinions among them about what this Tradition is.

Baptists, who hold the most extreme views, reject anything useful in Tradition and argue that the essence of Tradition lies in the oral transmission of some undivinely inspired information from the life of the Church and Christians, unenlightened by Divine light. To such uninspired teachings they include the definitions of councils, the works of the fathers, liturgical texts and everything that Baptists do not have. Baptists call the Tradition of the Church dry rot.

Others recognize the existence of Tradition in certain periods of the New Testament era in oral form, but now this Tradition is available in printed form, it includes texts of scripture, definitions of councils, canons, liturgical texts. Of this entire volume, only the oral apostolic tradition did not contradict Scripture (2 Thess. 2:15). Regarding the traditions that appeared after the apostolic time, Baptists write that they are difficult to combine with the spirit and letter of the gospel and “erect around the commandments of God a fence of human commandments and rules,” about which the prophet Isaiah spoke (Is. 28:10). As an example of such human commandments, they point to the introduction of liturgical regulations under Constantine the Great, which, as it were, replaced evangelical freedom with uniform service. In theology, this concerns the use of philosophical language. All this led, in their opinion, to the complication of the early form of Christian teaching. The introduction of new traditions, Baptists believe, turned Christianity from life with Christ to life according to the law, according to the letter, which does not correspond to the basic principle of worship of God, based on the words of Christ himself that God is Spirit and He must be worshiped in the Spirit of Truth.

Reasons for the sectarian attitude towards the tradition of the Church

The attitude of the Baptists to Tradition was inherited by them from the Anabaptists and Puritans, who sought to cleanse the Catholic Church from papism. Since Tradition was considered by the reformers to be a source of error in Catholicism, it was rejected from the very beginning of the controversy with the Catholic Church. This understanding of Tradition, along with a set of polemical arguments, was brought to Russia, but recently, with the development of biblical theology, the Baptist view of Tradition has been adjusted; nevertheless, Tradition continues to be perceived by Baptists at best as a fact of church history, a historical archive in which definitions, canons, works of the fathers and other texts that have nothing to do with human salvation. This understanding proceeds from the fact that Tradition is built on a natural foundation, subject to change and inconstancy, and to prove this opinion, Baptists use the relevant facts mentioned above.

In polemics with Baptists, it is necessary to focus attention, firstly, on the Divine nature of the Tradition of the Church, secondly, it is necessary to show how the catholic consciousness of the Church correlates with church definitions, canons and other forms of revealing the truth that the church possesses, and thirdly , it is necessary to indicate what in the Tradition of the Church is eternal and unchangeable, and what is temporary and permissible for change.

Orthodox teaching on Tradition

According to the Orthodox understanding, Tradition is the implementation and real expression of the Divine economy, in which the will of the Holy Trinity is manifested. Just as the Son is sent by the Father and accomplishes His work by the Holy Spirit, so the Holy Spirit comes into the world, sent by the Son to testify about Him. This teaching is based on the teaching of Christ Himself (John 14:26, John 15:26). On the eve of the suffering on the cross, Christ promised his disciples that the Father would send in His name the Comforter, who would teach them everything and remind them of everything that He told them (John 14:26) and at Pentecost, according to the promise, the Holy Spirit comes into the world so that according to the word of Christ Himself to testify about Him (John 15:26). This is what Christ says: “The Comforter whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me...” The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth, He will testify to the Truth. The coming of the Holy Spirit into the world on the day of Pentecost does not mean expanding the scope of Christ’s teaching; His task is to remind and teach the apostles and all those who believed everything that Christ taught. That. Since Pentecost, the Church has possessed what was orally transmitted to it by Christ Himself and the Holy Spirit, i.e. a power capable of perceiving the teachings of Christ, a power accompanying everything that is transmitted.

Parallel to the verbal expression of truth, the grace of God, the Holy Spirit, was communicated with words. And in tradition it is necessary to distinguish between what is transmitted and the only way in which this transmission is perceived. These two points are inseparable from each other. The term "Tradition" has two aspects - how the Church relates to the truth and how this truth is communicated.

Therefore, any transmission of the truths of faith presupposes the grace-filled communication of the Holy Spirit. If we try to free the concept of Tradition from everything that can serve as external and figurative expressions of truth, then we can say that Sacred Tradition is a way of perceiving the truth, it is not the content of revelation, but the light that penetrates it, it is not the truth, but the message of the Spirit of Truth, without which the truth cannot be known. “No one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:3).

Thus, Tradition is the transmission of the message of the Holy Spirit, which is the only criterion of truth perceived and expressed in various forms. Tradition is of Divine origin, therefore it is unchangeable and infallible, based on the foundation of the Holy Spirit. Thanks to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Church from the day of Pentecost until the end of the age (John 14:16), she has the ability to recognize the revealed truth and distinguish true from false in the light of the Holy Spirit. Thanks to this, at each specific moment in history, the Church gives its members the ability to know the truth, teaches them everything and reminds them of everything that Christ taught the apostles (John 14:26).

Tradition, therefore, does not depend, according to the word of the Apostle Paul (Col. 2:8), on any philosophy, or on everything that lives according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ. And in contrast to a single way of perceiving truth, there are numerous forms of its expression and transmission. Initially, the transmission of truth was carried out in the form of oral preaching. Part of the apostolic oral tradition was then written down and constitutes Holy Scripture. An important form of expression of truth that the Church possesses are the definitions of Ecumenical Councils and decisions of local Councils, the works of the Fathers, iconography and liturgics.

Basil the Great speaks about the sign of the cross, rituals related to the sacraments of the consecration of oil, the Eucharistic epiclesis, the custom of turning to the east when praying, etc. These traditions do not need and cannot be written down, for in relation to them the words of John the Theologian can be applied: “it is impossible to describe everything.” Tradition, therefore, is not a different source of expression of truth in comparison with other ways of its manifestation (Scripture, iconography, liturgics). Their presence presupposes the existence of Tradition for their rational perception, so Scripture is the word of God about the salvation of the human race in Jesus Christ. And to comprehend this mystery (Col. 1:26), hidden from centuries and generations, is possible only in the Church through the sacrament, as initiation into this mystery, through which the Holy Spirit is given, thanks to which only knowledge of the mysteries of Scripture is possible (2 Peter 1, 20-21).

“No prophecy can be resolved by oneself, for prophecies were never uttered by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke them, being moved by the Holy Spirit.” So, Tradition and Scripture are not two different realities, but different forms of knowledge and expression of truth.

The resolutions of the Councils, iconography, and liturgy are related to tradition in the same way as the Holy Scriptures. But here it is necessary to clarify - in this case nothing is said about hierarchy. Scripture is the most authoritative source. Since apostolic times, the Church has been aware of the Divine origin of tradition and considered it the basis of its faith. John says that Christ conveyed the word of his Father to the disciples (John 17:14). “I have given them Your word,” therefore the Apostle Paul calls on Christians to be attentive to what they hear, so as not to fall from salvation (Heb. 2:1-3) Because what he heard at first was preached by the Lord, “then it was established in us heard from Him” and was considered by the apostles on a par with Scripture (2 Sol. 2:15). “Brethren, stand and hold to the Tradition which you were taught, either by word or by our message.” Neglect of Tradition was an obstacle to church communion. The Apostle admonished us to avoid such brothers (2 Sol. 3:6). “We command you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to keep away from every brother who acts disorderly and not according to tradition.” At the same time, the apostle praised those who followed his instructions (1 Cor. 11:2). “I praise you, brothers, that you remember everything I have and keep the traditions as I passed them on to you.”

The knowledge of the truth in Tradition grows in a Christian as he improves in holiness (Col. 1:10). “We do not cease to pray that you will act worthy of God, pleasing Him in everything, bearing fruit in every good work and bearing fruit in the knowledge of Him,” i.e. for the apostle, progress in holiness and piety was correlated with the knowledge of God. Therefore, Tradition is not some kind of external guarantee of the truths of faith, their infallibility, but reveals their internal reliability.

Referring to the elements of tradition, Baptists say that the Orthodox view tradition as a kind of guarantor of the truths of faith, which are a product of the intellect without regard to inner life; it is based on the human factor, which in itself cannot be a guarantor of the immutability of transmitted information.

The doctrine of God and his relationship to the world

This is one of the most important differences with Orthodoxy and Protestantism in general.

Baptists, in general, accept the Christian teaching about God, but deny the possibility of the natural in energies or by grace of the union of man with his Creator, they deny the possibility of energetic communication between the creature and the Creator.

The misconceptions of Baptists are due to their understanding of God's relationship to the world. According to sectarians, God is present with His essence everywhere and in everything, and they are correct in distinguishing this presence from pantheism, referring to the biblical teaching about the difference in the nature of the Creator and creation, but their mistake is that they absolutize this statement. On the other hand, Baptists say that the essence of God cannot in any way be communicated to creation, and in no way can a creature participate in the Divine nature.

Thus, the Baptist teaching about the relationship between God and the world is dualism or represents ontological Nestorianism, God dwells in the world as in prophets, in saints, i.e. penetrates into humanity, but in no way does humanity participate in this Divinity.

This is confirmed by the teaching of Baptists about the so-called “properties of God,” in which they distinguish categories of moral and general qualities of the Divine nature. Baptists include holiness, love, wisdom as moral qualities and note that these attributes are exclusively the moral qualities of God, which He possesses as a kind of lord, sovereign, moral ruler. Thus, for example, the holiness of God lies in the fact that He is completely free from sin in thoughts, words and deeds. Baptists hold a similar opinion in their view of the so-called “common properties of God,” such as the goodness, grace and glory of God. Grace, according to Baptists, is a gratuitous act that does not imply any reward or payment. Grace is a semblance of human goodness, synonymous with compassion, pity, and loving tenderness. The Baptists’ ideas about the glory and greatness of God are reduced exclusively to the description of aesthetic experiences, when sectarians reason about these properties of God.

The God of Baptists, by his nature, cannot in any way be accessible to creatures; he is transcendental. Hence dualism and the abstract understanding of the Divine as some kind of abstract concept, hence the transformation of dogmatics into an abstract philosophical system dependent on personal initiative. The doctrine of God influenced Baptist doctrine of the sacraments.

Baptist rites only point to the ideas designated by this rite, but do not impart grace to the participants in the rite. For example, the breaking of bread is only a symbol of the Last Supper, reflection on which can strengthen Baptism, but nothing more; participation in the Last Supper has nothing to do with salvation. It can be useful to a Baptist only to the extent that he goes deeper into the ideas that are expressed by this rite.

According to Orthodox teaching, in the sacraments the uncreated nature of the Divine is communicated by grace or energy to the corruptible creature, transforming and adoring it. Baptists have no need for this, since their teaching about salvation comes down to the teaching about deliverance from the punishments of God.

Baptist soteriology also determines the purpose of their theology. For Baptists, to know God means to have theoretical knowledge, to possess a certain amount of knowledge about God. By their own admission, the study of theology has the task of establishing a system of Divine values, in accordance with which life will be assessed and with which one must coordinate one’s thoughts and actions.

Knowledge of God is dictated by the need to build correct legal and moral relations with God; it is dictated by the need for moral likeness to the Creator.

This issue is considered in a completely different context in Orthodox theology - to know God means to enter into perfect unity with Him, to achieve the deification of one’s being, i.e. to enter into the Divine life and become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4) to become gods by grace. This is the highest meaning of theology.

Therefore, in anticipation of possible objections from Baptists, we need to base our teaching on the evidence of Scripture. We find confirmation of the doctrine of the difference between essence and energy in the biblical testimony of the real vision or vision of the invisible nature of the Deity in its manifestations. This vision is twofold - one vision is the comprehension of the manifestation of God's power, wisdom and providence hidden in natural things, through which we comprehend God as the creator of the world. (Rom.1:19). His text about the invisible God, His eternal power and Divinity, which became visible from the creation of the world, is interpreted in the sense of energies as the actions of God manifested in creation, interpreted in the sense of what can be known about God from observing the icon of God, i.e. behind the world. From these words we can conclude that the invisible Divinity, the unknowable essence, is opposed to His visible and real manifestation in energies. The comprehension of these energies in natural things is available to everyone, i.e. this is a providential manifestation of energies, the invisible, unknowable being of God in order to attract people to Himself.

Another manifestation is the comprehension of the glory of the Divine nature, there is the comprehension of grace, this is the mystical vision that the Lord gave only to his disciples, and through them to all who believed in Him (John 17:24,5). “I want them to be with Me, that they may see My glory...” “Glorify Me with the glory that I had before the world was.” It follows from this that the Lord gave human nature the glory of His Divinity, but did not communicate His Divine nature, therefore, the Divine nature is one thing, and its glory is another, although they are inseparable from each other. Secondly, although glory is different from the Divine nature, it cannot be counted among things existing in time, because it was before the existence of the world. Thus, the essence of God and His glory are inseparable from each other. God gave this glory not only to humanity co-hypostatic with Him, but also to the disciples (John 17:22). “The glory that You gave Me, I gave to them, that they may be one as We are one.”

This glory is whereby we actually have union with God. The acquisition of the glory of God, according to the words of Christ, is comparable to the ontological unity of the Son with the Father. “We are called to become partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4). But this unity of the saints with God must be distinguished from the unity by nature of the Divine hypostases, otherwise God from the Trinity will turn into a multi-hypostatic God. Nor is this unity a hypostatic unity for the human nature of Christ, since it is inherent only in God who became Man and remains God. Here it is also necessary to exclude from the interpretation of this unity the presence of God in the saints by virtue of His omnipresence, since He, by virtue of the quality of omnipresence, is present in everything and everywhere.

Therefore, only the doctrine of the difference between essence and energy can explain the true meaning of the texts of Scripture. If we reject this teaching, then we will have to admit that the whole world is coeternal and consubstantial with God, with all the conclusions arising from this teaching. But to avoid this charge, Baptists resort to primitive exegesis in trying to explain the nature of their communication with God.

Accepting Christ as a personal savior - a person must believe that Christ died in his place on Calvary; according to this faith, the sinner’s sins are forgiven.

1 John 1.9: if we confess our sins, then God will forgive us...;

Acts 10:43: Of Him all the prophets testify that whoever believes in Him will receive salvation.

They cite as evidence the miracles of Christ over those who believe in Him, and the words of Paul (Heb. 11:6): without faith it is impossible to please God. Thus, the faith of Baptists replaces the functions of the Church as a mediator of salvation. Since Baptists have no reliable evidence of the salvation of their teachings, other than Scripture, the place of this evidence is taken by faith in the truth of their teachings. In Orthodoxy, this place is occupied by saints as a visible confirmation of the implementation of the saving mission of the Church. Therefore, in Baptistism, saving faith presupposes faith in the effectiveness of saving faith, just as the Orthodox believe in the teachings of the Church. In other words, they have, as it were, faith in faith, faith that through faith his sins will be forgiven and he will be delivered from sin.

Baptist understanding of justification

Justification is a legal process in which God acts as judge for those who believe in Jesus. In this legal act, the believer is freed from the guilt of posthumous and universal judgment and is considered to have entered the kingdom of God. From this moment on, God declares the sinner righteous, absolutely pure, as if he had never committed a sin. The essence of justification comes down to a change in God's attitude towards a repentant person. Before repentance, this person was the object of God’s wrath, after which, with the same nature damaged by sin, he is declared innocent and as sinless as Christ Himself. Thus, justification has nothing to do with the fallen, but only changes the very attitude of God towards man. Baptists emphasize that justification is accomplished only by a person's faith, by grace. Neither the sacraments of the Church, nor fasting, nor prayer, nor the fulfillment of commandments contribute to salvation. They refer to Scripture, which says that no one can be justified by the law of Moses:

Gaul. 2:16 By the works of the law no flesh will be justified;

Rome. 3:28 A person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. In this view, deeds are only the result of being revived from sin. However, judging by other, but less common statements, they are justified through the merits of Christ through faith demonstrated in works. Or the evidence of following Christ is not only faith in his teaching, but also complete surrender to Him. That is, works are considered by Baptists almost on a par with faith in Jesus. This once again emphasizes the contradictory nature of Baptist soteriology.

Analysis of biblical texts cited by Baptists as evidence

in favor of their doctrine of salvation by faith and justification of sins

In the texts Acts 10.43; Acts 26:18, we are not talking about the forgiveness of sins, but about the conditions for the forgiveness of sins. Christ said that the remission of sins is accomplished by the Holy Spirit through the apostles, who received special powers from them for this (John 20:21-23). The apostles passed on this power to their successors (1 John 1:7). Most of the references given are taken from Romans and Galatians, written for the Gentiles. The Jews believed that salvation was possible only through the fulfillment of the law, while the pagans were proud of their knowledge through philosophy and believed that the salvation accomplished by Christ was their property. To put an end to these disputes, Paul shows that both are breaking the law, that the pagans have perverted all their laws based on conscience and reason (Rom. 2:14-15) and as a result began to worship the creature instead of the Creator. The Jews did not keep the law (Rom. 3:20; Rom. 7:17). The Old Testament prepared for the coming of the Messiah, it says that both Jews and pagans followed their own laws. The Apostle says that one cannot be saved by works, for all are under sin and there is none righteous, not one (Rom. 3:10-12). Therefore, no one will be justified by the works of any law, but only by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal. 2:16; Gal. 5:6). Because without good works, faith is nothing (1 Cor. 13:20). So, according to the Apostle Paul, the essence of faith does not consist only in recognizing Christ as your personal savior (Matthew 7:21). Not everyone who says Lord, Lord... Faith is not limited to keeping the commandments. Faith and good deeds in themselves do not save a person, but are considered as conditions for acquiring grace that cleanses us from sins, for nothing unclean will enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Rev. 21:27).

Baptists cite many texts; it is impossible to analyze them all.

Teaching about the importance of good deeds and synergy in human salvation

Baptists reject synergy, i.e. cooperation, and replace it with the doctrine of the Divine and human side of salvation. The divine side is that God accomplished salvation, and human participation is limited to accepting the atoning sacrifice of Christ. In this context, works are the fruit of faith, but nothing more, i.e. They reject the active participation of man in the matter of salvation. Salvation is accomplished by God alone, while man is assigned the role of a passive being who can only accept this gift.

Baptist criticism of the Orthodox teaching on the meaning of works is based on fundamentally incorrect premises. Sectarians believe that the Orthodox, like Catholics, teach to earn salvation by good works, while Scripture speaks of two sides to justification. Baptists chose only those texts that speak only of salvation by faith. The one-sidedness of the approach is evident in the Epistle of James (2:4), which says that we are not justified by works, but by faith alone. Baptists arbitrarily interpret this passage to mean that the apostle is trying to view salvation from a human point of view. Works are not the basis of salvation, but the outward expression of faith. According to Orthodox teaching, salvation is achieved through the synergy of grace and human efforts, realized in following the commandments. Throughout the path leading to salvation, the grace of God helps us overcome sin and achieve deification. On the other hand, one can achieve unity with God only through love for the Divine commandments:

In. 14:23: He who loves Me will keep My word.

Fulfilling the commandments is not only a condition for receiving grace, but a necessary, free contribution of a person to salvation. The grace received in baptism is the forgiveness of sins, adoption, the beginning of the rebirth and deification of a person. In order to serve us for salvation and be effective, it must be realized in our actions, and only a person’s good will can make a person such. Through good deeds, a person’s responsibility for his salvation is manifested, i.e. good works are a means to salvation, and not the result of salvation or a way of expressing gratitude to God for one’s salvation. Man takes responsibility for his own salvation, and this responsibility lies with man, i.e. In Orthodoxy, man is given an active role in his salvation.

Doctrine of the Possibility of Losing Salvation

Many Baptists believe that once they are saved by faith, they will be fully saved. Since faith, according to James, does not allow for hesitation, sectarians must always remain in constant confidence and not doubt (Rom. 8:24; Eph. 2:8). We are saved by hope, We are saved by faith... But the sectarians themselves admit that such a statement is not consistent with real life, and a huge number of Baptists do not have firm confidence in salvation and do not know what comes first in their soul - love or fear. For apologetic purposes, sectarians claim that the Bible indicates only the ideal state of faith to which one must strive. However, such an explanation raises doubts about salvation. It is solved in different ways: Baptist-Calvinists, within the framework of the doctrine of predestination, developed a theory of eternal security, according to which those who believe in their election will in any case achieve salvation, no matter what a person does, no matter how he acts.

There are two opinions among Armenian Baptists: some admit the possibility of a one-time, and others - multiple loss of salvation and its subsequent acquisition. The last point of view is not seriously considered by anyone, although it is biblically justified, and it agrees with Orthodoxy - salvation is not some kind of static state, but a dynamic one. In Russia, since the early 40s, Armenian literature prevailed, but in the early 90s of the 20th century, when a wave of imported literature surged, Calvinist views began to spread.

Armenians, admitting the possibility of losing salvation, argue that salvation cannot be lost through one fall, even the most severe, but it should not remain in sin for a long time. A contradiction is revealed here - Baptists deny the significance of works, but by works they judge the possibility of salvation. If works are the criterion of salvation, then they, at the very least, must be a condition of salvation, for the effect cannot be less than the causes, otherwise logic must be abandoned altogether.

Baptists consider the presence of works as evidence of salvation only in relation to their denomination. They believe that only Baptists can do good deeds. Orthodox and other Christians, although they retained external piety, did not experience spiritual rebirth, therefore their good deeds cannot be considered saving, it is only external piety.

Doctrine of Priesthood and Apostolic Succession

According to the Baptists themselves, this question is the most dangerous weapon of their opponents. This doctrine is based on their doctrine of justification. Each Baptist, in an act of repentance, is forgiven of his sins, and from that moment all constitute a renewed race, all are priests and have equal status, but for organizational purposes the exercise of this universal right is left to individuals through election and installation as an elder or deacon. Baptists understand apostolic succession as the succession of apostolic written instruction in faith, through which they receive the Holy Spirit. Sectarians claim that the gifts of the Holy Spirit have been communicated to them continuously since the day of Pentecost directly from God the Father without any human intermediaries.

Baptists do not distinguish between the degrees of church service - deacon, elder, bishop. For them, these are different names for the same pastoral ministry. They come to this opinion by comparing texts that speak of different degrees of church service (Acts 1:17; Tit. 1:7; 1 Pet. 5:1,2). The duties of the presbyter include performing water baptism, the Lord's Supper, preaching, caring for the spiritual well-being of the members of the community, and the deacons have the responsibility of caring for the material needs of the members of the sect.

Some even ask what is the difference between Baptists and Christians. Unfortunately, the atheistic propaganda of the Soviet Union left its mark on the hearts and minds of people, and very little attention is paid to issues of faith. That is why such questions arise. Who are Baptists, and how do they differ from Christians... It’s funny for any knowledgeable person to hear such questions. Because Baptists are Christians. Because a Christian is a person who believes in Christ, recognizes Him as God and the Son of God, and also believes in God the Father and the Holy Spirit. Baptists have all this and, moreover, they share a common apostolic creed with the Orthodox, and the Baptist Bible is no different from the Orthodox Bible, because the same synodal translation is used. But there really are differences, otherwise they would not be called Baptists.

The first difference between Baptists and Orthodox Christians lies in the very name of this branch of Christianity.

Baptist - comes from the Greek baptizo, which means to baptize, to immerse. And Baptists, based on the Holy Scriptures, perform baptism only at a conscious age. Infant baptism is not performed. Baptists take the basis for this from the following texts of the Bible:

“So now we also have a baptism similar to this image, not the washing of carnal uncleanness,
but the promise of a good conscience to God saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” - 1
Pet. 3:21.

“Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. Who will believe and
be baptized, he will be saved” - Mr. 16:15-16; Acts 2:38, 41, 22:16.

Water baptism according to the Word of God is performed on those who believe in Jesus
as his personal Savior and experienced being born again. You can read what being born again is in the Gospel of John in the third chapter. But the point is that a person must believe in God and then be baptized. And not the other way around, as is done in Orthodoxy. Because Baptism, according to Baptists, is not only a sacrament, but also a promise, which is also written about in the Bible Pet. 3:21. .

“Behold, water: what prevents me from being baptized?.. If you believe with all your heart, you can. He answered and said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he ordered
stop the chariot: and both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water; and baptized him” - Acts. 8:36-38, 2:41, 8:12, 10:47, 18:8, 19:5.
Baptism is performed by ministers through immersion in water in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
“Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” - Matt. 28:19.
The believer's baptism symbolizes his death, burial and resurrection with Christ.
“Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, so that, like Christ,
raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also walk in newness of life. For if we are united with Him in the likeness of His death, then we must also be united
likeness of the resurrection” - Rom. 6:3-5; Gal. 3:26-27; Col. 2:11-12. When performing baptism, the minister asks questions to the person being baptized: “Do you believe,
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God? Do you promise to serve God in a good conscience?” - Acts 8:37; 1 Pet. 3:21. After an affirmative answer from the person being baptized, he
says: “According to your faith, I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The person being baptized pronounces the word “Amen” together with the minister.

The second difference between Baptists and Orthodox. Icons and saints.

If you have been to Baptist Houses of Prayer, you have probably noticed that there are no icons there. The walls may be decorated with gospel paintings, but no one prays to them. Why?

Theological debates in this area have been going on for centuries. But the most reasonable argument of the Baptists is that the icons depict saints. Saints are not God, but people. People cannot be omnipresent like God, who fills the entire Earth with the Holy Spirit. And when a person turns to another righteous person who has lived a righteous life and even performed miracles and may be in heaven, then how does the prayer get to the saint? God, who is Omnipresent, will hand it over to a saint, so that this saint, for example, Nicholas the saint, will then hand it over to God again!? Not logical. But few people think about how prayer gets to the saint. Also, few people think about whether prayer to a saint is communication with the deceased, which is prohibited in the Bible. The Orthodox respond to this by saying that everyone is alive with the Lord. Well, yes, they are alive. and those who are alive in hell, and those who are alive in heaven. Why did the Lord give the ban then?! It turns out that the Orthodox are violating God’s prohibition. This is the difference. Therefore, Baptists do not pray to the saints who are depicted on icons. Baptists pray only to one God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and there is no sin in this, even from the point of view of the Orthodox.

The third difference between the Orthodox and the Baptists.

Baptists do not drink alcohol. There is no direct prohibition on this in their teaching. But such a tradition has developed, in order to differ from the sinful world and not allow the possibility of sin, Baptists preach abstinence from alcoholic beverages, smoking, drugs and other addictions. “Everything is permissible for me, but nothing should possess me,” said the Apostle Paul. And the Baptists are great in this regard.

The fourth difference.

Baptists do not perform funeral services for the dead. And they believe that if a person died and did not repent, then only God decides his future fate. In Orthodoxy, in this regard, the mentality of the Russian people is very well reflected, where God can send even a sinful person to heaven if the priest prays. Baptists are inclined to personal responsibility in their worldview and, again, based on the Holy Scriptures, the story of the thief on the cross and the story of the rich man and Lazarus, they conclude that God instantly decides the fate of the human soul and no funeral service will help if the person himself has not repented , then no amount of nepotism will work.

The fifth difference between Baptists and Orthodox Christians.

Community.

Baptists are more inclined than Orthodox to establish close church ties and communication. Brothers communicate in brotherly communication, sisters in sisterly communication, youth in youth communication, children in children's communication, and so on. Staying in fellowship is one of the characteristics of Baptists, which helps them learn about each other’s needs and help them solve everyday and spiritual problems that arise. A Baptist church is somewhat similar to an Orthodox monastery. Any believer in Christ who joins the Baptist church can join and become part of the community, find friends, serve God and support from brothers and sisters.

The sixth difference is Divine service.

For Baptists, worship, meaning Sunday worship, is held differently than for Orthodox Christians.

Of course there is also prayer, singing and preaching. Only now the prayer to God is made in understandable Russian, and not in Old Church Slavonic. The singing is almost the same, maybe choral, maybe universal. But it can be solo or trio. And maybe during the service a poem is recited or a testimony from life is told about how God works. Special attention is paid to the sermon so that a person does not leave the church empty. Baptists do not make the sign of the cross, although they have nothing against it.

The seventh difference between the Orthodox and the Baptists is the veneration of relics.

Baptists respect the dead righteous, but do not make their remains objects of worship, because they do not find examples of such worship in the Bible. Yes, they say, there is a case in the Bible when, during the death of Christ, a young man who died was resurrected from contact with the bones of the prophet. But Christ resurrected 2000 years ago. And nowhere is there a commandment to worship the bones of dead people. But it is written that only God should be worshiped and served. Therefore, Baptists refrain from such dubious practices, considering them to be relics of paganism that entered the church from ancestors who were forcibly baptized.

These are the main differences that immediately catch the eye; there are others, but they are less interesting for the common person. And if anyone is interested, you can look at the Baptist or Orthodox website.

Who are Baptists

Who are Baptists? Baptists are Protestant Christians. The name comes from the Greek word words“βάπτισμα”, which is baptism from βαπτίζω - “I immerse in water,” that is, “I baptize.” Literally, Baptists are baptized people.

Christianity has many faces, just like the many faces of the people living on earth. Only in the time of Jesus Christ was there no disagreement between people among his followers. Or rather, they were, but Jesus resolved them with his word. Then the time came for Christ to leave the earthly world and ascend to the Father. But Jesus did not leave Christians alone and sent the Holy Spirit, who lives in the hearts of believers. For the first three centuries, Christianity held on. There were no baptisms of children, there were no icons, there were no statues. Christianity was persecuted and was not up to the splendor of the poor wounded church, which kept the faith and the Word of the Lord. Through the centuries the church has carried the undistorted Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. God kept his word.

How did the Baptists appear?

But people remain people. People are different from people. And Christianity, spreading across the face of the earth, absorbed the customs and traditions of peoples who believed in Christ, but did not completely abandon their former customs and rituals. And they came up with something that was not in the Bible. In the West, indulgences, a kind of pass to heaven, were sold for money. The Pope was mired in debauchery and burdened himself with secular power. In the east, as well as in the west, the Word of God became far from the language of the people to whom it was spoken. Hebrew, Latin and Greek were considered sacred languages; the Russian Orthodox Church won the right to serve in Old Church Slavonic. But he was also incomprehensible to people. People's ignorance and ignorance of God's word allowed the priests to retain the right to read and interpret the scriptures as they pleased, which led to the emergence of something that was not in the Bible. This went on for a long time. Until one monk, having studied the languages ​​in which the Bible was written, decided to resist the desecration of the church. He wrote down as many as 95 outrageous points on which the church departed from the Bible. And he nailed them to the doors of the church, believed to be in Witenberg. He translated the Bible into German. People outraged by the impunity of the official church followed him. Thus began the reformation of the church. Then the Bible was translated into English and French. The state church brutally resisted people's desire to read the Bible in their native language. In each state, churches essentially reminiscent of Baptists arose. in France, they were called Huguenots. Have you heard about St. Bartholomew's Night? 30,000 Protestants were killed for their faith. In England, persecution of Protestants also began.

Baptists in Russia

But everything comes to Russia late. Peter was the first to try to translate the Bible into Russian. But the Pastor who translated the Bible died under mysterious circumstances. And the translation matter was frozen. Alexander the first resumed translation. Several books of the New Testament and several books of the Old Testament were translated. The translation became popular among the people and was banned for fear of shaking the political atmosphere in the country, since the translation of the Bible could lead to people moving away from Orthodoxy, which was the connecting element of Russian statehood. Translation in other countries occurred several centuries ago. For example, Luther, in Germany, translated the Bible in 1521. In 1611 in England it was translated into English by King James. In Russia, translation was not allowed to develop. Alexander II resumed the translation. And only in 1876 the people received the Bible in Russian!!! Friends, please think about these numbers!!! 1876!! It's almost the 20th century!! The people did not know what they believed in! The people did not read the Bible. Keeping people ignorant for so long was stupid and sinful. When people began to read the Bible, Russian Protestants naturally arose. They were not brought from abroad and were first called “Orthodox living according to the gospel,” but they were excommunicated from the church. But they organized themselves into communities and began to be called Evangelical Christians. The evangelical movement grew, people turned to God. And as in other countries, the official church was outraged that someone was pointing out its shortcomings and, with the support of the state, began persecuting Russian Protestants. They were drowned, sent into exile, and imprisoned. It is sad. People who believe in God, no matter what their denomination, should not persecute other Christians who believe in the same God, even if they differ in some ways. In the south of Russia, the evangelical movement is gaining momentum among ordinary people. In the North of Russia - among the intelligentsia. In England, Protestants received the name “Baptists”, from the Greek and English word “baptizo”, “bapize” - which means to baptize. Because one of the differences between Baptists and Orthodox Christians is that Baptists are baptized at a conscious age.

About the Baptists.

Baptists do not baptize infants. Evangelical Christians did not baptize them either. Then these two churches merged and became known as Evangelical Christian Baptists. The emergence of this church was predetermined by the emergence of a translation of the Bible into Russian. What did the Baptists find in the Bible that prevented the translation of the Bible for so long and kept the people in the dark? But the Russian people were not established in their faith, were not a thinking people, and the revolution, with its promises of freedom, equality and brotherhood, quickly changed the attitude of the Orthodox towards their faith. But it did not change the faith of Baptists and Evangelical Christians, who passed through the Soviet Union and carried their faith despite stupid accusations of debauchery and sacrifices. Of course, the Baptists did nothing of the kind. Baptists are Christians who preach a chaste life according to God's word. It is the Bible, as God’s word, that is the authority and foundation of their faith for Baptists. Baptists believe that just as Jesus Christ answered questions with his word, the Bible has answers to questions that arise in the life of a believer. Baptists reject what came into the church after the Scriptures were written.

And that’s why our Russian Protestants try to imitate Christ in everything. Christ did not strive for wealth and pomp, and Baptist worship does not require gold and expensive attributes. Christ did not wear luxurious clothes and Baptists do not strive for luxury. But they do not strive for poverty, they work with their own hands, run their own business if they can, as the Apostle Paul taught. Baptists have large and strong families. Secular education is encouraged, and musical education is also encouraged. Therefore, Baptist services are full of music and sermons. At a worship service, a choir can sing, music can be played, performed solo or by a musical group of believers. Baptists are not conservative when it comes to serving God and can bring in a variety of creative elements. Baptists have a positive attitude towards the state. They serve in the army. They pay taxes. Because the Bible says that all authority is established by God and must be respected. Among all Protestants, Baptists are theologically closest to Orthodoxy, and believe in Christ as the Son of God and God. They believe in God the Father and the Holy Spirit. They believe in the resurrection of the dead and the forgiveness of sins thanks to the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Therefore, the differences lie in some moments of the service, external attributes and what came to the church after the Bible was written, the differences are in what is not in the Bible. You can read it at the link below.

Social life of Baptists

What else can you tell about Baptists? As people, they are kind and sympathetic people. Hardworking. Baptists call a priest a pastor or elder; usually, in addition to serving in the church, he also works at work. Therefore, Baptists cannot be accused of doing nothing for society. Baptists, like many believers of other denominations, feed the hungry and are engaged in healing society, working with alcoholics and drug addicts, with God's help returning them to work and normal social life. In general, the attitude towards Baptists among those who have encountered them is positive, and their teaching evokes respect and surprises with its logic and simplicity. You can attend their services by going to the House of Prayer at the appointed time and sitting in an empty seat to get to know them better.

The emergence in our time of a large number of sects and heretical teachings encourages us to give the Orthodox Christian the opportunity to become acquainted with the teaching of the Holy Orthodox Church regarding some of these errors.

We present to the attention of pious Christians this small brochure, published at one time by the Optina elders. We hope that it will help to establish ourselves in the Holy Orthodox Faith and arm ourselves against false teachers, especially those who are intensifying their activities now - during the period of spiritual transformation of society.

May our Lord strengthen us all in all piety and purity.

Their origin

Their original name was Anabaptists, that is, re-baptists, since the baptism received in childhood was considered invalid by the sect and baptized again. This sect, one of the violent ones, is a product of the Western Reformation of the 16th century. Pastor Thomas Munzer (1523) considered Catholicism and Protestantism not only useless, but even dangerous, because they distorted the commandments of God. Therefore, he called a new generation, enlightened by His Spirit. Muntzer's sermons flattered human passions, the people sought to listen to them, and Muntzer's followers were all rebaptized. Soon the farmers in Franconia, numbering more than forty thousand, rebelled against the owners, but the rebels were defeated. Münzer was captured and executed. In 1533, the Anabaptists caused a new turmoil in Westphalia in the city of Munster, where, having overthrown the city government and taken possession of the city, they proclaimed the apprentice tailor John of Leiden king of the new Zion. The army of the Bishop of Munster besieged the city, John of Leiden and his associates were captured and given a painful death. Among the remarkable false prophets of the Anabaptists in the half of the 16th century was Melchior Hoffmann, who gave his name to a special sect; he spread many nonsense about the thousand-year kingdom and died in Strasbourg, where he was imprisoned for his teachings. But the strongest and most lasting influence on his fellow believers was Simonides Mennon, a Friesland Catholic priest who accepted the teachings of Luther; he united the Anabaptists into a community and replaced their shaky beliefs with positive teaching.

In addition to the Dutch and German Anabaptist sects, there is a Baptist sect in England, Scotland and North America. From the beginning of the 17th century they could already unite into communities; their main imaginary ones: baptism of adults only and faith in the Redeemer Christ without works. Then they reject the Apostolic Council, the Sacraments, the Hierarchy, Sacred Tradition, fasting, monasticism and the entire church system in general; also veneration of the Most Holy Theotokos, invocation of saints, veneration of relics, icons and prayers for the dead.

The teachings of Baptists originated from the Western Reformation, the era of the struggle of human passions. They appeared on the world stage as self-proclaimed preachers and teachers, thereby violating the divine order established by the Founder of Christianity, the Lord Jesus Christ; for He said to the Apostles, and through their successors: As the Father sent Me, so I send you(), and as the Apostle Paul says: No one accepts this honor of his own accord, but he who is called by God, like Aaron ().

So, the Baptist sect is a phenomenon of recent times; They appeared with their preaching on their own, without divine testimony, which justified the words of the Savior: He who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs elsewhere, is a thief and a robber. ().

Here is the unfoundedness of their teaching:

About baptism for adults only

Baptists, by not baptizing infants, forget that in the Old Testament Church circumcision was established by God on the eighth day after birth with the naming of a name (). It was a sign of entering into a covenant with God, union with Him in spirit and inheritance of His promises. It, as a great, necessary matter, was protected by a threat: “On the eighth day the life of the uncircumcised man will be cut off from his people.”(). It served as a prototype of baptism, which is rebirth into a spiritual, holy life, about the omission of which it is strictly said: “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.”(). Therefore, a baby who dies before reaching adulthood, that is, is not baptized, remains outside the promises. There is no prohibition in the Holy Scriptures from baptizing infants; on the contrary, there are clear indications of examples of child baptism: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins; and receive the gift of St. Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children."(). Sectarians say that children are clean from original sin even without baptism, their sins are forgiven for the sake of the Name of Jesus (), they are holy (); but the world has also been redeemed by the blood of Christ (), but can it be saved without baptism? No, as stated above ().

About faith and works

Faith is a person’s heartfelt attraction to God: “Have faith in God, therefore I say to you: whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you receive it, and it will be done for you.” ().

Faith is also knowledge about God: “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.”(). Gentiles can also have heartfelt faith, such as the centurion () and the Canaanite wife (); pagans can also have good deeds, like the centurion Cornelius (). Consequently, whoever has heartfelt faith and good deeds, but does not have the true doctrine, is like a good pagan, but is not a true Christian, and therefore sectarians who do not have the true doctrine cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, for it is said: “That we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, by the craftiness of men, by the cunning craft of deceit.”(). And elsewhere the Apostle Paul clearly says: “If we, or an angel from heaven, brings you more good news than good news, let him be anathema.”(). And so, Baptists self-confidently teach that the justification of a person lies in faith alone without works, referring to the fact that Christ made a sacrifice for the sins of people for all time, and thus they pass over in silence the teaching about the good works of the Savior and the Apostles. Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, teaching the people good deeds, charged them with the duty to achieve perfection in them: “Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect”(), - and at the Last Judgment, according to the teachings of the Savior, only works will justify believers (). Apostle James says: “Faith, if you have nothing to do, is dead about yourself”(). The Apostle Paul, teaching the Corinthians good works, shows them the Apostolic works as an example: “In everything we show ourselves as servants of God, in great patience, in adversity, in need, in difficult circumstances. Under blows in prisons, in exiles, in labors, in vigils, in fasts.”. The Apostle lists the same similar cases in his Epistle to the Hebrews (). But Baptists put forward a lie against such clear and obvious truths, in truth: "Lie to yourself"(), that is, according to St. Athanasius: “untruth has become exhausted.”

About the Church

“Where two or three are gathered in My name, there I am in the midst of them.”(). With this saying the Baptists cover up their unauthorized gathering, but the composition of the Church is completely different: "And he(Christ) He appointed some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, and others as shepherds and teachers. For the equipping of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.”(). Eternity of the Church: “And I say to you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build mine, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” (); “I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”(). Unity of the Church: “And so you are no longer strangers and aliens, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of God. Being built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.” (). “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”(). Holiness of the Church: holy because it was sanctified by Jesus Christ through His teaching, prayer, suffering and through the sacraments: “Sanctify them by Thy truth; Your word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, so I sent them into the world. And for them I consecrate Myself, so that they too may be sanctified by the truth. I pray not only for them, but also for those who believe in Me, according to their word; that they may all be one: as You, the Father are in Me, and I in You, so may they also be one in Us.”(). But there may also be sinners in the Church of Christ, as can be seen from the Apocalypse; for the Church of Ephesus is reproached for having abandoned its former love (), - the Church of Pergamon for the fact that there are Nicolaitans there (). Sacraments of the Church: John Chrysostom says: “As the Son of God is our nature, so we are His essence; and just as He has us in Himself, so we have Him in us.” This is accomplished in Baptism and is supported by repentance and communion. Blessed Theodoret also says: “Just as Eve was created from Adam, so we are from the Lord Christ. We are buried with Him and rise in baptism, we eat His body and drink His blood: “Eat My flesh and drink My blood, you will have an eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day” (). There is no salvation outside the Church, as Christ said: “If he does not listen to the Church, then let him be to you as a pagan and a tax collector.”(). After this, what about the meeting of Baptists? These are those who say that they are true Christians, but are not such, but lie; this is a syndicate of Satan ().

About the Hierarchy

Sectarians call themselves saints, referring to the saying: “And he made us kings and priests to his God and Father”(); but this is said in the Old Testament conditionally: “If you keep my covenant, you will be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”(). The hierarchy has a historical origin, its beginning was laid by God Himself, who called Aaron and his sons to officiate in the Tabernacle (); her dignity is protected by a terrible punishment: “If any stranger approaches, he will be put to death.”(). But the Old Testament priesthood, as imperfect, was replaced by the most perfect priesthood of Christ, which is irrevocable, eternal, for it is strengthened by the oath of God; “The Lord has sworn and will not repent: You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.”(). By establishing the Hierarchy, Christ granted only the Apostles, and through their successors, the right to teach people the faith, perform the sacraments for them and guide them to salvation. Appearing to the disciples after the Resurrection, Christ said: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth; Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”(). In the Church of Christ, three degrees of priesthood have been established: episcopal (), presbyteral (), deacon (). The Apostles call self-proclaimed teachers false teachers, false apostles, and deceitful workers. The Apostle Peter says: “There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and, denying the Lord who bought them, bring upon themselves swift destruction.”(), also the Apostle Paul says: “False apostles, deceitful workers, disguise themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, because Satan himself takes the form of an angel of light."(). So, the Word of God finally deposes the Baptist teachers, also the 6th rule of the Gangra Council reads: “Whoever, apart from the Church, forms special meetings and, despising, wants to do church work, without having a presbyter with him by the will of the Bishop, let him be under oath.” Unfortunately, sectarians have ears and do not hear.

About Sacred Tradition

Before receiving the law, Moses fasted for forty days, did not eat bread or drink water ( ). Christ, teaching about the expulsion of evil spirits, said: “This generation is driven out only by prayer and fasting”(). The Savior showed the example of the great faster and hermit as follows: “Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has never risen greater than John the Baptist.”(). The benefit of fasting is that it curbs carnality and promotes exercise in prayer, while Baptists stand for the opposite, which promotes only bodily life. Monasticism is the highest spiritual life, likening the angelic life; Jesus Christ showed her as an example, as it is said: “And He was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan, and was with the beasts, and angels ministered to Him.”(; ). This is what monastic ascetics have done throughout all times of Christian history. “Those of whom the whole world was not worthy wandered through the deserts and mountains and defiles of the earth.”(). Truly these were men of high spirit; their exploits consisted in glorifying God, in spiritual help and consolation of their neighbors; besides this, they were seers and prayer books about the salvation of people, they were "light of the world, salt of the earth", their deeds are kept by history on its tablets.

Baptists say that for salvation one Holy Scripture is sufficient, which everyone has the right to understand and explain according to their own conviction; but under such a condition, is general agreement and unity possible? Doesn't the Scripture say: “Try to maintain unity of spirit in the bond of peace. One Lord, one faith, one baptism"(), that is, the path to unity is opened by faith, which is the same for everyone, as if monotonous. This concept also follows from the words of the Savior: “Let them all be one, just as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, so let these also be one in Us.”(). Can this be in a society where everyone has their own point of view, where the ability to understand is endlessly varied? And such absurdity is called teaching! However, the entire teaching of the Baptists is daring absurdity. “I am saved,” they say furiously, inspired by a flattering spirit, satisfied with their blasphemy.

Their prayer meetings are limited to singing, reading and preaching; at the end of everything there is a ritual of breaking bread: the bread and wine in this ritual are nothing more than a sign of the Body and Blood of Christ: crumbled bread and wine poured into glasses are placed on the table, and the eldest of the brethren invites everyone to eat. Thus, the sacrament of the Eucharist, established by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper and commanded to the Apostles and through their successors with these words: “Do this in remembrance of Me”(), Baptists blasphemously portray at their meeting and sacrilegiously assume the appearance of builders of the Mysteries of God.

So, Baptists are not from a distant time. They are not sent by God, but came on their own, as self-proclaimed teachers. Their difference is obvious: they did not enter by the door, that is, not by succession from the Apostles, but as thieves (thieves) and robbers () to kidnap and destroy the simple-minded and ignorant from the flock of Christ. The whole work of their false teaching is this. to deceive the listener that the path to heaven is close and calm: “Just believe that you have been redeemed by Christ, and you are saved.” Keeping silent what the Savior said: “Strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life”(); but due to their insolence, having a seared conscience, the sectarians do not subordinate themselves to the Gospel, but subordinate the Gospel to their false interpretation and instead of the true teaching they bring outrageous lies and evil words, with which they pretend to justify their evil thoughts. Comparing the Orthodox Church and the Baptist community, we see that the history of the Apostolic Church, in all times to this day, has a host of holy men and women who, like stars in the sky, shine with heavenly glory and miraculous power; whereas the past and present of the Baptists have no divine testimony; these are people living according to the elements of the world, calling themselves wise, but they have gone mad (); for through their pride they have fallen into an evil heresy and, except for fanaticism, cannot imagine anything worthy of life of a higher order. Therefore, brethren, know the danger of listening to heretical teachings, when the councils of the Holy Fathers prohibit, even under the threat of church prohibition, praying with Jews in synagogues, or with heretics in their meetings . Sectarians cannot understand that contradiction to clear and proven truth, like the rejection of the Apostolic Church, that is, the Orthodox faith, is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and is not excusable in this and the next century. The Prophet David () prayed for deliverance from such people; and the Apostle Paul gave us a commandment as a warning: “Even if we, or an angel from heaven, were to preach to you a gospel other than what we preached to you, let him be accursed.”(). Knowing that “The Apostolic Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth”(), we are running away from people living and acting under an oath.

Over the two thousand years of its existence, Christianity has split into a large number of denominations, each of which calls itself a “church.” But in relation to competitors, different names are used. The attitude towards Baptists in Orthodoxy is clear: this is not a church, but one of the Protestant sects. However, the number of believers - more than forty million - casts doubt on whether this is really the case. How do Baptists differ from Orthodox Christians, and to what extent did these differences cause such an attitude towards them?

Where did Baptists come from?

The powerful Reformation movement in the 16th century marked the beginning of such a phenomenon as Protestantism. Catholicism, which had previously almost completely dominated the minds of Europeans, was forced to make room. Almost simultaneously the following Protestant movements arose:

• Lutheranism;
• Calvinism;
• Zwinglianism;
• some smaller currents.

The first Baptists appeared a little later, at the very beginning of the 17th century. In 1609, a Baptist community was created in England, which included local Puritans (English Calvinists), who adopted from the Mennonites (a branch of Protestantism that arose in 1543) the idea of ​​baptism only for adults, and not for infants, like Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics and Orthodox. For their belief that the church should be separated from the state (a thing unthinkable at that time), they were persecuted and emigrated en masse to the New World. America became the true promised land for Baptists.

The religious tolerance of the United States provided the breeding ground in which Baptistism flourished. Ideas of social justice attracted new adherents to the community. Their numbers gradually increased, and today there are almost 25 million adherents of this religion living in North America. It is interesting that in second place is not Europe, as one would expect, but Africa - more than 10 million (probably due to the active missionary activity of the Americans). And closing the “top three” are Asia and Oceania – almost 5.5 million Baptists.

Theological and religious features of Baptistism

Baptistism, being a branch of the general Christian tree, recognizes the following provisions of faith:

• the virgin birth of Christ;
• unity of God;
• the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ;
• Trinity (God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit);
• the need for salvation;
• divine grace;
• Kingdom of God.

The difference between Baptists and Orthodox (and Catholics too) is that Catholicism and Orthodoxy use the so-called Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, and Baptists use the Apostolic Creed.

In theology, the symbol of faith is usually called a strict dogmatic formula, which is the basis of the doctrine. The texts of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan and Apostolic Creeds differ quite greatly. True, to a person far from religion, they will seem the same, although written in different words.

For example, in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed: “I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.” And in the Apostles' Creed: “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.” Further in the text the differences are approximately the same. However, they seem insignificant only to the laity, and priests, based on discrepancies, build theological concepts about the truth of only their religion.

Much more important than theological nuances are the differences in rituals and behavioral norms that regulate everyday life. Thanks to them, religious contradictions become visible, as they say, to the naked eye. For example, as mentioned above, Baptists believe that a person should be baptized at a conscious age, when he can independently make a decision regarding his religious beliefs. And there is a rational thought in this. However, someone who grew up in a Baptist family, in which parents regularly perform religious rites and the whole life is brought into line with the requirements of religious doctrine, is unlikely to make a different choice. By the way, it is interesting that Baptists perform baptism by immersion in water - a river or lake, unlike the Orthodox, where instead of immersion in a font, sprinkling is allowed.

Baptists in Russia

Baptistism, with its ideas of social justice and non-interference of the state in the affairs of the church, also found a response among the population of the Russian Empire. The spread of this type of Christianity in the second half of the 19th century began mainly from the numerous German colonies in southern Ukraine. Gradually the number of Baptist communities grew, they began to appear even in Siberia. However, the number of believers was small, since the patriarchal and 80 percent peasant country was wary of the new faith. However, before the revolution, Baptists existed calmly, without persecution.

After the Civil War, when the Soviet Union set a course for the secularization of society, everyone got it - Orthodox Christians, Baptists, and representatives of other religions. However, even in such difficult conditions, there were people who kept the faith and carried it through all the years of Soviet power. The revival began in the late 80s of the last century, and now the Baptists of Russia are united in an organization that bears the long name “Euro-Asian Federation of Unions of Evangelical Christian Baptists.” According to its statistics, a little more than 270 thousand Baptists live in the post-Soviet space.

The difference between Baptists and Orthodox Christians (and from Catholics too) is that they do not have a strict hierarchy. Elders (elders) are elected within communities, and there is no single center uniting all Baptists. The Baptist World Alliance represents more than half of the congregation, but the large Southern Baptist Convention of the Southern United States is not a member of this organization and is not counted in its statistics above, nor are children who have not been baptized. So the real number of Baptists in the world is unknown, one can only guess how many there are.

Baptists say about themselves that there is nothing special in their doctrine. They are only trying to get as close as possible to the life and faith of the original, Apostolic Church. And bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all people.