"The Old Testament clearly preached the Father, and not with such clarity of the Son; the New revealed the Son and gave an indication of the Divinity of the Spirit; now the Spirit abides with us, giving us the clearest knowledge of Him ... says David, ascending from glory to glory"; "It was natural for primitive mankind to fear God; in the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament, childhood came; the Gospel brought with it signs of youth, adolescence of the church. Now the Comforter marks the maturity of the Church. Now He has inherited Christ, and mankind will no longer know another teacher" ( Dev. 1).

The Holy Fathers speak here about the dynamics of Divine Revelation, when the truth is revealed more and more fully, being sent down by God depending not on level of intellectual state of human minds in certain epochs, but in accordance with different stages of divine economy taking place in history. The Orthodox patristic teaching on the successive revelation of the Divine Mysteries leaves absolutely no room for any "genesis" of ideas about the Holy Spirit; this disclosure cannot be understood as the development of some ideas from others, later from earlier ones, comprehended as the fruit of the reflection of the authors of subsequent writings on more ancient texts, explained by borrowings or influences from simultaneous pagan cultures. The patristic teaching does not consist in the fact that over time and in conformity with it, all new authors “think out” to ever more perfect ideas, but in the fact that the same eternal truth, one and the same, is revealed to different authors in different volumes in time. same spiritual reality.

The writings of Orthodox researchers on this topic often sin with an uncritical perception of the conclusions of biblical criticism, which are thoughtlessly perceived as axioms, and the role of an Orthodox researcher in this case is reduced only to the role of a translator and compiler of the conventional wisdom of Western secular scholars. As a result, instead of a conscientious study of the doctrine of the Spirit contained in real texts, we receive classes fables and genealogies endless(1 Tim 1:4) about how "Yahvist" influenced "Elogist", and "Second Isaiah" on "Third Isaiah", etc., which ultimately results in a secular-atheistic perception of the biblical text.

From the point of view of the Holy Fathers, the Old Testament corresponded to one and the same stage in the history of the Divine economy, and the degree of revelation about the Spirit to the authors of the writings that compose it was generally the same. Although it has its own history and was compiled by different people in different eras, the Old Testament is a single monument, and it is precisely as a single work that it is productive to study it, including for ideas about the Spirit of God.

The word ruah has the basic meanings of "breath, wind, spirit"; while in Aramaic it is exclusively feminine, in Hebrew it can sometimes be masculine. However, of the 84 times the word "spirit" is used in the Old Testament, in contexts traditionally understood to refer to the Holy Spirit, 75 times it is either overtly feminine or indefinite (for lack of a verb or adjective). Only nine times is this word used as a masculine noun. In the text of the Bible, it occurs about 394 times, but only approximately 25% of them are references to the Spirit of God, on which the foundations of the Old Testament pneumatology are formed.

In the Scriptures of the Old Testament, the following names are predominantly assigned to the Spirit:

• Spirit of God ruah elohim (Gen 1:3 etc.)
• Spirit of the Lord ruah yahve (Judg 3:10 etc.)
• Holy Spirit ruah kadosh (Ps 50:13, Isaiah 63:10, Wis 1:5, Ezr 14:22)
• good spirit ruah tov (Ps. 143:10, Neh. 9:20)

Let's pay special attention to the third naming. Holiness in the Old Testament is the exclusive attribute of God: there is no saint like the Lord(1 Samuel 2:2); people or sacred objects can be called saints only by virtue of their correlation, dedication to God. Originally the word kadosh (holy, sacred) meant "separated"; the use of this word as a characteristic of God was intended to emphasize His extra-worldliness, transcendence. The same property is transferred to the idea of ​​the Spirit of God. As well as some other Divine properties, for example: omnipresence and omniscience: Where can I go from Your Spirit, and where can I flee from Your presence?(Ps 139:7); The Spirit of the Lord fills the universe and, as He who comprehends everything, knows every word(Wis 1:7); incomprehensibility: Who enlightened the Spirit of the Lord, and was his counselor?(Isaiah 40:13), but more attention is paid to His uncreatedness and participation in the creation of the world, as we will see below.

We see the mention of the Spirit of God starting from the very first lines of the Bible: but the earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God hovered over the waters(Gen 1:3, paraphrase of 3 Ezra 6:39). By participating in the creation of the Spirit separates from all creation. The Spirit is revealed as the One whose existence preceded creation, is revealed as acting, as an accomplice in creation, in which He has a special role to play. "How does he floated over the water? I will not say my opinion, but the opinion of one Syrian ... he said that the Syrian language is more expressive and, by affinity with Hebrew, comes somewhat closer to the meaning of Scripture. The understanding of this saying is this: the word worn, as he says, in the translation it is used instead of the word warmed and revived aquatic nature, in the likeness of a bird that incubates eggs and communicates some kind of life-giving force to the heated one. Such a thought, they say, is signified by this word and in the present place "- interprets St. Basil the Great. Indeed, the participle meraphehet has such a meaning. Davis notes that it means, in essence," hovering over ". The last part of the verse, such thus describes the Spirit as soaring, protecting, and participating in creation.The same verb in Deuteronomy 32:11 is used for an eagle soaring over its young.

The theme of creation in relation to the Spirit occurs elsewhere in Scripture, with a more specific connotation: The Spirit of God created me and the Spirit of the Almighty gave me life(Job 33:4); By the word of the Lord the heavens were created, and by the Spirit of his mouth all their host(Ps. 32:6). The Spirit of God acts as a co-creator (or as an instrument of creation) of the heavenly host (which is immediately removed from the circle of created spirits) and of each person. The first indication that man was created by the Spirit of God in Job 33:4 is completed by the continuation that the Spirit of God is necessary for people to be alive; these two places show an emphasis on two activities of the Spirit of God in the world, namely Creation and Providence. According to Orthodox dogmatic teaching, each of the three Persons of the Godhead participates in the Creation of the world, Providence and Salvation of man, but in a different way.

The action of the Spirit of God to preserve the created order in the first verses of the Book of Genesis is continued in other Books: let every creature of yours work for you: for you said, and it was done; You sent Your Spirit, and it was arranged(Ith. 16:14), and elsewhere: send forth Your Spirit, they are created, and You renew the face of the earth(Ps. 103:30). Context refers to the order created, naming the animals in particular and their needs to be kept and maintained. Spirit is thought of as that which sustains the life force in creation. Starting from the very beginning of the world, the Spirit of God preserves it, has a providential effect on the created.

In addition, the above lines about the mission are clear evidence of the distinction in the Old Testament between God and the Spirit of God. The sent Spirit is not identical with the sending God and is not an aspect of His manifestation in the world, at least in this sending itself. Walvoord thinks that these verses, where the Spirit is spoken of as sent by God, may be an allusion to the eternal procession of the Spirit of God. He also suggests that the very phrase "Spirit of God" points to the idea of ​​exodus. However, as regards the first example, it speaks of the dispensational mission of the Spirit to the world, and not of the eternal relationships within the Triune Deity. In the second case, the wording "Spirit of God" does not automatically mean God the Father as the source of the Spirit.

Another aspect of the activity of the Spirit, in addition to the general providence for the world, is its action in communication with individual human personalities and through this active participation in the common history and destiny of Israel.

Already starting from the Book of Genesis, we see the definition of Joseph as a person in whom the Spirit of God(Gen. 41:38). In the Book of Exodus, the gift of the Spirit of God to certain people occurs in order to enable them to complete the Tabernacle, sanctify their minds and feelings, and direct their previously acquired art and skill in accordance with the Divine plan (Ex. 31:3, 35:31, etc.). ). In the book of Numbers the descent of the Spirit upon man is conceived as the basis for prophetic ministry, the same understanding we find in the books of later prophets: I am filled with the power of the Spirit of the Lord(Mic. 3:8), The Spirit of the Lord came upon me and said to me...(Ezekiel 11:5), Today the Lord God and His Spirit has sent me(Isaiah 48:16). The Spirit of God sends a prophet, speaks to him the words of God, gives him strength for his ministry. In the Book of Judges, the Spirit of God acts as the inspirer of the rulers of Israel, whom He chooses for this ministry, and at certain moments directs their actions in accordance with the Divine plan, and also gives them strength and determination. In the Book of Kings, the Spirit does the same thing in the lives of the first kings of Israel.

Spirit abides on the man (Judg. 3:10) and in man (Num. 27:18), in his heart(Isaiah 63:11), Spirit fills man (Ex. 31:3) and hugs his (Judg. 6:34), Spirit finds per person (1 Sam. 10:6, Ezek. 11:5), speaks in German (2 Sam. 23:2), the Spirit can bodily carry away man (2 Kings 2:16).

An analysis of word usage shows that the descents of the Spirit on people are different both in their duration and in their nature: short and superficial, like those of judges, or long and deep, like those of prophets. But oh life in the Spirit, which we know from the New Testament, is out of the question. Block rightly draws a distinction: if in the Old Testament the Spirit found on the chosen people so that they would be the executors of some special divine will, then in the New Testament the Spirit constantly dwells in believers. The God-seer Moses, in response to the zeal of Joshua, generated by an unusual increase in prophesying, desires that God would place His Spirit in all people so that they could prophesy (Numbers 11:29). From this exclamation it is clear that in those days the fulfillment of the Spirit of God was a rare lot of the few, even among the righteous. But even on those who were worthy to receive Him, He does not remain permanently: the Spirit finds on individuals and leaves them, sometimes because of their sin: Cast me not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me(Ps. 50:13), so, according to the interpretation of St. Athanasius, King David "prays that the Spirit of prophecy will descend on him, for He left him because of sin", For the Holy Spirit of Wisdom will turn away from wickedness and turn away from foolish philosophies, and will be ashamed of approaching unrighteousness.(Wis 1:5). The third book of Ezra contains a whole prayer for the sending of the Spirit: If I have gained mercy from You, send the Holy Spirit on me so that I write everything that has been done in the world from the beginning, which has been written in Your law(3 Ezra 14:22). Thus, the Holy Spirit, who transmitted the words of God to the prophets, is understood as the Divine author of the sacred writings.

The actions of the Spirit on a person's personality are manifold: the Spirit teaches (Ex. 31:3), gives strength (Mic. 3:8), establishes good deeds (Ps. 50:14) and leads in the way of the Lord (Ps. 142:10) . Kaiser notes that "one of the most important yet most difficult aspects of the Old Testament is the attempt to accurately describe the operation of the Holy Spirit in the personal experience of renewal and sanctification in this Testament." Kaiser himself answers in the negative to the question whether there was a rebirth of the person under the influence of the Spirit in the Old Testament, while pointing out that the message of the birth from the Spirit in Jn. 3:6 sounded like news to the Old Testament scribe Nicodemus. But this is contradicted by the saying of Samuel: and the Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and you will prophesy with them and become a different person (1 Samuel 10:6). Thus, the Spirit not only governs a person, but by His presence influences the whole being of a person, changing it.

With the exception of the craftsmen involved in the creation of the Tabernacle and the Ark of the Covenant, we see that the Spirit in the Old Testament descends on two types of people: rulers (judges and kings) and prophets. This indicates that these private actions of the Spirit were for the general guidance of the people along the path to the fulfillment of the Divine plan: The Spirit guides and instructs Israel: and You gave them Your good Spirit to instruct them, and You did not take Your manna from their mouth(Nehemiah 9:20), like a flock descending into the valley, the Spirit of the Lord led them to rest(Isaiah 63:14). The actions of the Spirit in the prophets are comprehended as one general action aimed at admonishing the whole people: You lingered for many years and reminded them by Your Spirit through Your prophets, but they did not listen(Nehemiah 9:30), and they turned their hearts to stone, so as not to hear the law and the words that the Lord of Hosts sent by His Spirit through the former prophets; therefore the great wrath of the Lord came upon them(Zech. 7:12).

In addition to the disclosure of providential and historical actions, there are two eschatological moments in the Old Testament relating to the Holy Spirit.

The first one is found in the very messianic prophet of the Old Testament - the prophet Isaiah, who repeats three times the saying about the future descent of the Spirit on the Messiah:

• on behalf of God: behold, my servant, whom I hold by the hand, my chosen one, in whom my soul delights. I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim judgment to the nations(Isaiah 42:1)
• on behalf of the Messiah: The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, for the Lord has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor...(Isaiah 61:1)
• from a third person, the person of a witness: and the Spirit of the Lord rests on him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding...(Isaiah 11:2)

This descent and repose is obviously understood to be something fundamentally different in comparison with the already past and well-known descents of the Spirit on the prophets and rulers; a unique image of the descent and action of the Spirit as something that can serve as a distinguishing mark.

The second eschatological moment is connected with an amazing prophecy about the coming event of the universal filling with the Spirit, which is contained in a number of prophets: for I will pour water on the thirsty, and floods on the dry ground; I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring and my blessing on your descendants(Isaiah 44:3); and I will no longer hide my face from them, for I will pour out my spirit on the house of Israel, says the Lord God(Ezekiel 39:29); And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; your old men will dream, and your young men will see visions. And also on the servants and on the handmaids in those days I will pour out my Spirit(Il 2:28-29); And on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem I will pour out the Spirit of grace and compunction(Zech 12:10). The prophets Ezekiel, Joel and Zechariah even use the same verb shafat (flow, flow, pour out), the prophet Isaiah uses the verb "atcak" in the same meaning. Note that here water acts as an image of the Spirit, which is especially clearly seen in the words The promise of a full outpouring of the Spirit on all (as opposed to His temporary descent on a few prophets and rulers) marks the onset of a completely different era - the era of the Holy Spirit as the era of a special relationship between man and God, the era of the New Testament (Jer 31:31).

The Spirit of God is opposed to the power of the earth as the direct action of God: not by host or by force, but by my Spirit, says the Lord of hosts(Zech. 4:6).

One cannot ignore the question of whether there is an understanding of the personality of the Spirit in the Old Testament. Wood finds only three places in the Old Testament that can point to her. A similar study by Walvoord shows the same lack of relevant evidence from the Old Testament, although he tries to quote more examples. Some allusions to the personality of the Spirit in the Old Testament are certainly present, the most striking of them is in the prophet Isaiah, where he says that that the Jews with their sins grieved the Holy Spirit(Isaiah 63:10), but these and similar places are few in number.

The Old Testament about the Personality of the Holy Spirit, basically, speaks in secret, since the Jewish people in that era were not yet ripe for the revelation of the Holy Trinity. In the New Testament, the doctrine of God pays more attention to the unity of the Three Persons.

St. Gregory the Theologian. Word 31. PG, t. 36, coll. 161-164.
St. Basil the Great. Conversations on the Six Days. M., 1999. - S. 43.
Davis J.J. Paradise to Prison. Grand Rapids, 1975. - R. 47.
Walvoord J.F. The Holy Spirit. Wheaton, 1954. - P. 14.
An evil spirit is also mentioned: and an evil spirit from God attacked Saul, and he sat in his house, and his spear was in his hand, and David played with his hand on the strings(1 Samuel 19:9). Stallard proposes to understand in this place under the spirit of the mood. about. Georgy Zavershinskiy apparently believes that this refers to a ministering spirit sent to anger Saul and compares this with the sending of the good Spirit. However, most likely, an evil spirit is really meant here, and the clarification "from God" is an emphasis against paganism, emphasizing the idea that all spirits are subordinate to God and there are no "autonomous" spirits.
Block D. Empowered by the Spirit of God: The Holy Spirit in the Histographic Writings of the Old Testament // Southern Baptist Journal of Theology No. 1 1997. - P. 45.
St. Athanasius the Great. Interpretation on Psalms / Creations. T. IV. M., 1994. - S. 177.
Kaiser W.J. The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament // Pentecostalism in Context: Essays in Honor of W. Menzies. Sheffield, 1997. - R. 38.
Theological discussion of the personhood of the Holy Spirit usually assumes the Greek concept of person as that which has mind, will, and feeling.
Wood L.J. The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, 1976. - P. 15.
Walvoord J.F. Op. Cit. - P. 6.

First day of creation

Genesis 1:1. At the beginning

Both in the Holy Fathers and in all subsequent interpretative literature, there are two main typical interpretations of this word. According to the prevailing opinion of some, this is a simple chronological indication “of the beginning of the creation of visible things” (Ephraim the Sirin), that is, of all that, the history of the gradual formation of which is set forth immediately below. According to the allegorical interpretation of others (Theoph. Ant., Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, etc.), the word "in the beginning" here has an individual meaning, containing a hidden indication of the eternal birth from the Father of the second Hypostasis of the Holy Trinity - the Son of God, in By whom and through whom all creation was completed (John 1:3; Col. 1:16). The biblical parallels related here give the right to combine both of these interpretations, that is, how to find here an indication of the idea of ​​the birth of the Son or Logos co-eternal with the Father and of the ideal creation of the world in Him (John 1:1-3, 10, 8:25; Ps. 83:3; 1 Pet. 1:20; Col. 1:16; Rev. 3:14), and with even more right to see here a direct indication of the external implementation of the eternal plans of the divine Universe at the beginning of time, or, more precisely, together with this very time (Ps. 101:26, 83:12-13, 135:5-6, 145:6; Heb. 1:10; Proverbs 8:22-23; Is. 64:4; Is. 41 :4; Sir. 18:1; etc.).

God created

- the word is used here bar, which, according to the common belief of both Jews and Christians, as well as in all subsequent biblical usage, mainly serves as an expression of the idea of ​​divine work (Gen. 1:1, 2:3-4; Is. 40:28, 43:1; Ps. 149:5; Ex. 34:10; Num. 16:30; Jer. 31:22; Mal. 2, etc.), has the meaning of creative activity or creation from nothing (Num. 16:30; Is. 45 :7; Ps. 101:26; Heb. 3:4, 11:3; 2 Mac 7 etc.). This, therefore, refutes all materialistic hypotheses about the world as an original essence, and pantheistic hypotheses about it as an emanation or outflow of a deity, and establishes a view of it as the work of the Creator, who called the whole world from non-existence to being by the will and power of His divine omnipotence. .

heaven and earth.

Heaven and earth, as two specific opposite poles of the entire World Globe, are usually used in the Bible to designate "the whole universe" (Ps. 101:26; Is. 65:17; Jer. 23:24; Zech. 5:9). In addition, many find here a separate indication of the creation of the visible and invisible world, or Angels (Theoph. Ant., Basil the Great, Theodoret, Origen, John of Damascus, and others). The basis of the latter interpretation is, firstly, the biblical use of the word "heaven" as a synonym for celestials, i.e. angels (1 Kings 22:19; Matt. 18, etc.), and secondly, the context of this narrative, in which the subsequent chaotic disorder is attributed to only one earth, i.e., to the visible world (verse 2), by which “heaven” is separated from “earth” and even, as it were, opposed to it as a comfortable, invisible mountain world. Evidence of this can be found both in the Old (Job 38:4-7) and especially in the New Testament (Col. 1:16).

Genesis 1:2. The earth was formless and empty,

The concept of "earth" in the language of the Bible often embraces the entire globe, including here the visible sky as its outer atmospheric shell (Gen. 14:19, 22; Ps. 68:35). It is in this sense that it is used here, as is evident from the context, according to which the chaotic mass of this "earth" subsequently separated from itself firmament and water (Genesis 1:7).

The words "formless and empty", which characterize the primitive mass, embody the idea of ​​"darkness, confusion and destruction" (Is. 40:17, 45:18; Jer. 4:23-26), i.e. give the idea about a state of complete chaos, in which the elements of the future light, air, earth, water, and also all the germs of plant and animal life, did not yet succumb to any distinction and were, as it were, mixed with each other. The best parallel to these words is the passage from the book of the Wisdom of Solomon, which says that God created the world from "an unshaped substance" (Wis. 11:18) and (2 Pet. 3:5).

and darkness over the abyss,

This darkness was a natural consequence of the absence of light, which did not yet exist as a separate independent element, being separated from the primitive chaos only later, on the first day of the week of creative activity. "Above the abyss" and "over the water". In the original text, there are two related Hebrew words (tehom and maim), meaning a mass of water, forming a whole "abyss"; thus, an indication is made of the molten liquid-like state of primordial, chaotic matter.

and the Spirit of God hovered over the waters.

In explaining these words, the interpreters differ quite strongly among themselves: some see here a simple indication of an ordinary wind sent down by God to drain the earth (Tertullian, Ephraim the Syrian, Theodoret, Aben-Ezra, Rosenmuller), others see an Angel, or a special intelligent power, appointed for the same purpose (Chrysostom, Kaizetan, etc.), the third, and finally - to the Hypostatic Spirit of God (Basil the Great, Athanasius, Jerome and most other exegetes). The last interpretation is preferable to others: it indicates the participation in the work of creation of the third person of the Holy Trinity, the Spirit of God, who is that creative and providential force that, according to the general biblical view, determines the origin and existence of the whole world, not excluding man (Gen. 2:7; Ps. 32:6; Job 27:3; Isaiah 34:16; Acts 17, etc.). The very action of the Holy Spirit on chaos is likened here to the action of a bird sitting in a nest on eggs and warming them with its warmth to awaken life in them (Deut. 32:11).

This, on the one hand, makes it possible to see in chaos some action of natural forces, similar to the process of gradual formation of an embryo in an egg, on the other hand, both these very forces and their results are directly dependent on God.

Genesis 1:3. And God said: let there be light. And there was light.

For the almighty Creator of the universe, a thought or a word and the realization of this thought or deed are completely identical with each other, since for Him there are no obstacles that could prevent the fulfillment of a born desire. Hence, His word is the law for being: “For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it appeared” (Ps. 32:9). Following many Church Fathers, Met. Filaret believes that in the word “said”, not without reason, one can find the mystery of the Hypostatic Word, which here, just as the Holy Spirit used to be, is secretly supplied by the Creator of the world: “David and Solomon explain this divination, who, obviously, adapt their expressions to Moses” (Ps. 32:6; Proverbs 8:22-29).

let there be light.

The Apostle Paul gives a clear indication of this when he speaks of God as “who commanded light to shine out of darkness” (2 Corinthians 4:6). The creation of light was the first creative and educational act of the divine universe. This primordial light was not ordinary light in the perfect sense of the word, since before the fourth day of creation, on which the night lights appeared, there were no sources of our light yet, but was that luminiferous ether, which, being in an oscillatory state, dispersed the primordial darkness and thereby creating the necessary conditions for the future emergence of any organic life on earth.

Genesis 1:4. And God saw the light, that it was good,

Thus, according to the Psalmist, “the Lord rejoices in his works”! (Ps. 103:31) Light is said to be "good" because it is the source of joy and happiness for all living things.

and God separated the light from the darkness.

By this, God did not completely destroy the original darkness, but only established the correct periodic change of it with light, which is necessary to maintain life and preserve the strength not only of man and animals, but also of all other creatures (Ps. 104:20-24; Jer. 33: 20, 25, 31:35).

Genesis 1:5. And God called the light day, and the darkness night.

Having separated the light from the darkness and having established the correct alternation of them among themselves, the Creator gives them the corresponding names, calling the period of the dominance of light the day, and the time of the dominance of darkness - the night. Holy Scripture gives us a number of indications of the origin of this divine institution (Ps. 103:20-24, 148:5; Job. 38:11; Jer. 33:20). Of the nature and duration of these primitive days, we are unable to judge positively: we can only say that at least in the first three days before the creation of the sun, they, in all probability, were not identical with our present days.

And there was evening, and there was morning:

Many of the interpreters, on the grounds that “evening” is placed first, and then morning, want to see in the first nothing but that chaotic darkness that preceded the appearance of light and thus anticipated the first day. But this will be an obvious stretch of the text, since before the creation of light there could be neither such a distinction between days, nor the very name of their two main components. Another misconception rests on this misconception, that the counting of the astronomical day should supposedly begin in the evening, as, for example, Ephraim the Sirin thinks. But St. John Chrysostom more correctly believes that the calculation of the day should go from morning to morning, since, we repeat, the very possibility of distinguishing in the days of day and night began not earlier than from the moment of the creation of light or from the time of the onset of day, i.e., saying modern language, from the morning of the first day of creation.

day one.

In the Hebrew original, there is not an ordinal, but a quantitative numeral “day one”, because in fact the first day of the week of creation was still the only one in it.

Finishing our speech about the first day of the creative week, we consider it appropriate to speak here, in general, about these days. The question of them is one of the most difficult exegetical problems. Its main difficulty lies, firstly, in a certain understanding of the biblical days of creation, and secondly, and even more so, in the agreement of these days with modern data from astronomy and geology. We have already seen above that it is quite difficult to apply our usual astronomical measure with its 24-hour duration to the first days of creation, preceding the appearance of the sun, depending, as you know, on the movement of the earth around its axis and on turning it first one, then the other. side to the sun. But if we assume that this relatively insignificant obstacle was somehow removed by the power of divine omnipotence, then all the rest, the actual biblical data, and the division of these days into morning and evening, and a certain number, and their strict sequence, and the historical nature of the narrative itself, - all this speaks for the strictly literal meaning of the biblical text and for the astronomical duration of these biblical days. Much more serious is another objection coming from science, which, based on the analysis of the so-called geological layers, has a number of geological epochs required for the gradual formation of the earth's crust and several millennia for the successive emergence of various forms of plant and animal life on it.

Even the fathers and teachers of the Church, among whom were representatives of the Alexandrian school - Origen, Saints Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius of Alexandria, and others - even stood for the allegorical interpretation of biblical days in the sense of more or less long periods. Following them, a number of subsequent exegetes tried in one way or another to modify the direct, literal meaning of the biblical text and adapt it to the conclusions of science (the so-called periodical and restitutive theories). But the direct, literal meaning of the biblical text, the ancient Christian tradition and Orthodox interpretation generally do not allow such free treatment of the biblical text and, therefore, require a literal understanding of the term “day” contained in it.

So, the Bible speaks of ordinary days, and science of whole periods or epochs. The best way out of this contradiction is, in our opinion, the so-called "visionary" theory. According to the meaning of this theory, the biblical narrative of the creation of the world is not a strictly scientific and in fact detailed reproduction of the entire history of the actual process of world formation, but only its main moments, revealed by God to the first man in a special vision (visio). Here the whole history of the origin of the world, which developed in a time unknown to us, passed before the spiritual gaze of man in the form of a whole series of pictures, each of which represented certain groups of phenomena, and both the general character and the sequence of these pictures were a true, albeit instantaneous, reflection of the actual stories. Each of these visionary pictures formed a special group of phenomena that actually developed during one and the same period, which in the vision received the name of this or that day.

The question of why the geological epochs of creation received the name of the usual “day” in the biblical cosmogonic vision is relatively easy to answer: because the “day” was the most convenient, simplest and most easily accessible chronological measure for the consciousness of primitive man. Consequently, in order to introduce into the consciousness of the first man the idea of ​​the sequential order of the creation of the world and the separation of its processes, it was most expedient to use the already familiar image of the day as an integral and complete period of time.

So, on the question of the days of creation, the Bible and science do not clash with each other at all: the Bible, meaning ordinary days, thereby marks only the various moments of the cosmogonic vision, in which God deigned to reveal to man the history of the universe; science, pointing to geological epochs and long periods, has in mind to investigate the actual process of the origin and gradual structure of the world; and such an assumption of scientific hypotheses does not in the least shake the divine omnipotence, for which it was completely indifferent whether to create the whole world in the twinkling of an eye, whether to use it for a whole week, or, having put into the world known expedient laws, to give them a more or less natural course, leading to a permanent transformation. The latter, in our opinion, is even more in line with the idea of ​​the divine wisdom and goodness of the Creator. The visionary history we have indicated here, finding its defenders among the fathers and teachers of the Church (St. John Chrysostom, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Theodoret, Junilius Africanus), is shared by many of the latest exegetes (see more about this in A. Pokrovsky’s dissertation “The Biblical Teaching on Primitive religion").

Second day of creation

Genesis 1:6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters,

The firmament is literally from the original “stretching out”, “tire”, for the Jews imagined such a heavenly atmosphere surrounding the globe, as is especially clearly expressed in the well-known words of the Psalmist: “you stretch out the heavens like a tent” (Ps. 103: 2, 148 :4; compare Isaiah 40:22). This firmament or atmospheric shell of the earth, according to the general biblical view, is considered the birthplace of all winds and storms, as well as all kinds of atmospheric precipitation and weather changes (Ps. 149:4-8, 134:7; Job. 28:25-26, 38 :24-26; Isaiah 55:10; Matt. 5:45; Acts 14:17; Heb. 6 etc.).

Genesis 1:7. and separated the water that was under the firmament from the water that was above the firmament.

By the last waters here, obviously, are meant water vapor, with which the celestial atmosphere is usually saturated and which, thickening from time to time, pours out on the earth in various forms, for example, in the form of rain, hail, hoarfrost, fog or snow. Under the first, of course, we mean ordinary water, which penetrated all earthly chaos and on the next, third day of creation, collected in special natural reservoirs - oceans, seas and rivers. The Apostle Peter also speaks about the role of water in the process of world formation (2 Pet. 3:5). To the naive mind of the primitive Jew, the celestial atmosphere was drawn in the form of some kind of solid tire, separating atmospheric waters from earthly waters; at times this hard shell would burst open in one place or another, and then heavenly waters would pour down to the earth through this opening. And the Bible, which, according to the Holy Fathers, speaks the language of the sons of men and adapts itself to the weakness of our mind and hearing, does not consider it necessary to make any scientific corrections to this naive worldview (St. John Chrysostom, Theodoret, etc.).

Genesis 1:8. And God called the firmament sky.

In the language of the Jews, there were three different terms for expressing this concept, according to their opinion about the existence of three different celestial spheres. The sky that is called here was considered the lowest and closest habitat of birds, accessible to direct vision (Ps. 8:4; Lev. 26:19; Deut. 28:23).

Third day of creation

Genesis 1:9. And God said, Let the waters that are under the sky be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear.

By virtue of this divine command, the two main components of the primitive chaos, earth and water, separated from each other: the waters united into various water basins - seas and oceans (Ps. 32:7, 103:5-9, 135:6; Proverbs. 8:29), and the dry land formed islands and continents, covered with various mountains, hills and valleys (Ps. 64:6; Is. 40:12).

Genesis 1:10. And God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of waters he called the seas.

About how and for how long this process of separation of water from land and self-formation of the earth's crust took place, the Bible does not tell us anything, thereby opening up full scope for scientific research. In the cosmogonic vision with which the Bible deals, only the general character and final result of this third period of world formation or, in the language of the biblical vision, the third day of creation is noted.

Genesis 1:11-12. And God said, Let the earth bring forth vegetation, grass yielding seed [after its kind and likeness: her and] a fruitful tree, bearing fruit after its kind, in which is its seed, on the earth. And it became so.

And the earth brought forth vegetation, grass yielding seed after its kind [and after its likeness], and a tree [fruitful] bearing fruit, in which is its seed after its kind [on the earth].

In these few words of cosmogonic vision, a whole grandiose picture of the gradual emergence on earth of various types of plant, organic life is displayed, produced by the earth not due to spontaneous generation, but according to special forces and laws given to it by the Creator.

However, an indication that the covering of the earth with plants and trees was not an instant miraculous act, but was directed by creative power along a natural channel, apparently lies in the very nature of the biblical text under consideration, as in God’s address to the earth with a command to produce various types of plants according to its inherent laws, and in the sequence in which the list of various types of this vegetation is maintained, which is fully consistent with the data of modern geology: first, greenery or grass in general (geological ferns), then flowering vegetation (giant lilies and, finally, trees (primitive bushes and trees), (1 Kings 4:33).Omnipotence of the Creator, of course, did not suffer from this in the least, since the primary source of the life energy of the earth was none other than God himself, and His highest wisdom in such an expedient arrangement of the world was revealed in in all its power and obvious clarity, which the Apostle Paul expressively points out in a well-known place from the Epistle to the Romans (Rom. 1:20).

Fourth day of creation

Genesis 1:14. And God said: let there be lights in the firmament of heaven [to illuminate the earth and] to separate the day from the night,

Here is a cosmogonic vision of a new peace-making period, in which the earth separated itself from the solar system. The biblical story itself about this is again being adapted to the infantile worldview of primitive man: thus, the luminaries seem to be established in the outer firmament, as they are, indeed, drawn in our ordinary, unscientific representation. Here, for the first time, the effective reason for the distinction between day and night, which consists in the influence of the luminaries, is indicated. This, as it were, indirectly confirms the idea that the three previous days of creation could not, therefore, be ordinary astronomical days, but that they received such a character in the biblical narrative later, as well-known certain moments of cosmogonic vision.

The Bible shows us the threefold purpose of the heavenly bodies: firstly, they should separate the day from the night, and the sun was supposed to shine during the day, while the moon and stars should shine at night; secondly, they should serve as time regulators, that is, the various phases of the sun and moon should have shown the periodic change of months and seasons of the year; finally, their immediate purpose in relation to the earth is to illuminate it. The first and last purpose of the heavenly bodies is perfectly clear and understandable in itself, while the middle one requires some explanation.

and for signs

By these signs one should by no means understand any superstitious reverence for the heavenly bodies or similar astrological fortune-telling, which was widespread among the peoples of the ancient East and severely condemned in the chosen people of God (Deut. 4:19, 18:10). But this, according to the interpretation of the blessed Theodoret, means that the phases of the moon, as well as the times of the rising and setting of various stars and comets, served as useful guidelines for farmers, shepherds, travelers and sailors (Gen. 15:5, 37:9; Job 38:32-33; Ps. 103:14-23; Matt. 2:12; Luke 21:25). Very early, the phases of the moon and the position of the sun began to serve as signs of the division of the year into months and the unification of the latter into seasons - spring, summer, autumn and winter (Ps. 73:16-17). Finally, later on, the phases of the moon, especially the new moon, began to play a very prominent role in the cycle of sacred biblical times or Hebrew holidays.

Genesis 1:16. And God created two great luminaries: the greater luminary to rule the day, and the lesser luminary to rule the night,

Although these great luminaries are not named here, but from the whole context of the story, as well as from the corresponding biblical parallels (Ps. 103:19, 73:16, 135:7-9, 148:3-5; Jer. 31:35), it is quite clear that the sun and moon are meant here. But if such a name is fully justified by science in relation to the sun, as the astronomical center of the entire world system, then it does not stand up to scientific criticism in relation to the moon, which, according to the exact data of astronomy, is one of the relatively small planets, far inferior in this respect even to earth. Here we have new proof that the Bible does not expound the principles of science, but speaks in the language of the sons of men, i.e., in the language of ordinary thinking, based on direct sensory perceptions, from the point of view of which the sun and moon really appear to be the largest quantities on the celestial horizon.

and stars.

By the common name of stars we mean here all those millions of other worlds, which, being removed from our earth to vast expanses, are drawn to our naked eye only in the form of small luminous points scattered throughout the sky. No wonder the contemplation of the majestic vault of heaven touched and inspired many Old Testament biblical writers to glorify the wisdom and goodness of the Creator (Ps. 8:3-4, 18:1-6; Job. 38:31-33; Is. 40:21-22, 25 -26, 51:13, 66:1-2; Jeremiah 33:22; Rev. 5, etc.).

Genesis 1:17-18. and God set them in the firmament of heaven to shine upon the earth, and rule day and night,

The Creator, as the Psalmist says, the moon and stars - to control the night (Ps. 135: 9), but the sunrise determined to be the beginning of the working day for man (Ps. 103: 22-23). The prophet Jeremiah expresses this idea even more clearly, glorifying the Lord Almighty, who “gave the sun for illumination by day, the rules for the moon and stars for illumination at night” (Jer. 31:35).

Fifth day of creation

Genesis 1:20. And God said: let the water bring forth

The term "water", as is obvious from the context, is used here in a more general and broader sense - it means not only ordinary water, but also the air atmosphere, which, as it is already known, is also called "water" in the language of the Bible (Gen. 1:6-7). Here, just as before (Gen. 1:11), in the very image of the biblical expression - “let water bring forth” (or, “let them multiply in the waters”), there is again a hint of the participation of natural agents in the creative process, in in this case, water and air as the environment in which the Creator determined to live and multiply for the corresponding kinds of animal life.

reptiles, the living soul; and let the birds fly over the earth, in the firmament of heaven.

The appearance of plants on the third day was the beginning of organic life on earth, but still in its most imperfect, primary form. Now, in full agreement with the data of science, the Bible notes the further course of development of this life on earth, namely, it points to the appearance of two vast, related animal classes: the inhabitants of the water element and the kingdom of birds that fill the air space.

The first of these classes in the Hebrew text is called sherets, which does not mean only "reptiles or water creatures", as our Russian and Slavic texts translate, but also includes fish, and all water animals in general (Lev. 11:10). In the same way, “feathered bird” means not “only birds, but also insects, and in general all living creatures equipped with wings, although at the same time they were not deprived of the ability to walk and even on four legs” (Lev. 11 :20-21).

If, as we noted above, in the preceding verse there is some indication of the operation of natural forces in the process of the generation of new species of animal life, then this verse leaves no doubt that all these so-called natural acts ultimately have their supernatural source in God. Who alone is the Creator of everything, in the strict sense of the word.

Genesis 1:21. And God created great fish

The Slavic text calls them "whales" great, closer to the Hebrew text, which contains the word: tanninim, which generally means huge water animals (Job 7:12; Ps. 73:13; Ezek. 29:4), large fish, including whales (Ps. 103:25; Jon. 2:11), a large serpent (Jer. 51:34; Is. 27:1) and a crocodile (Ezek. 29:3), in a word, the whole class of large amphibians or amphibians (Job. 40:20). This gives an expressive indication that the original species of amphibians and birds differed in gigantic sizes, which is also confirmed by the data of paleontology, which reveals a whole vast class of extinct antediluvian animals that amaze with their colossal sizes (ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, gigantic lizards, etc.).

Genesis 1:22. And God blessed them, saying:

The appearance of the first real life (animal as opposed to vegetable) is marked by a special extraordinary act of the Creator – His blessing. By virtue of this creative blessing, all the creatures newly created by Him receive the ability to reproduce “according to their kind”, that is, each of the animal species to reproduce their own kind.

be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas,

In the Hebrew text, both of these words have the same meaning, and the very combination of them, by the nature of the Hebrew language, indicates a special strengthening of the idea contained in them about the natural reproduction of living beings by birth.

and let the birds multiply on the earth.

A subtle new feature: earlier, air was named as the element of birds, as the area in which they fly (Gen. 1:20), now the earth is also added, on which they build their nests and live.

The sixth day of creation

Genesis 1:24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind.

Here again, as in the two previous cases (Gen. 1:11, 20), some influence of the natural forces of nature, in this case directly the earth, is indicated.

Genesis 1:25. And God created the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing on the earth after its kind.

The general concept of “animal soul” is here divided into three main types: the first of them is “animals of the earth” - these are wild animals or animals of fields and forests, such as, for example, wild cats, lynxes, bears and all other animals of the desert (Ps. 79 :14, 103:20-21, 49:10, 78:2; Isaiah 43:20). The second type of these animals embraces a fairly significant class of domestic animals, i.e., tamed by man, which include: horses, oxen, camels, goats, and in general all both large and small livestock (Gen. 34:23, 36:6, 47:18; Num. 32:26); in the wider sense, the larger wild animals are sometimes included, such as the elephant and the rhino (Job 40:15). Finally, the third class of these animals consists of all those that crawl on the ground, crawl on it, or have legs so short that, walking on the ground, they seem to creep along it; this includes all snakes, worms (Lev. 11:42), lizards, foxes, mice, and moles (Lev. 11:29-31). Sometimes, in a shorter and less strict speech, all three of the above classes of terrestrial animals are combined in one first of them, namely in the concept of "beasts of the earth" (Gen. 7:14). All these animals were divided into two sexes, which is evident both from their ability to reproduce each according to his kind, and from the fact that the example of their life opened the eyes of the first man to his sad loneliness and, thus, served as an occasion for the creation of a helper similar to him. -wives (Gen. 2:20).

Creation of man

Genesis 1:26. And God said: Let us make man

From these words it is clear that before creating man, this new and amazing creation, God had a consultation with someone. The question of who God can consult with was still before the Old Testament prophet: “Who has understood the spirit of the Lord, and was his counselor and taught him? With whom does he consult? (Is. 40:13-14; Rom. 11:34) and the best answer to it is given in the Gospel of John, which speaks of the Word, who was with God from the beginning and in union with Him created everything (John 1:2-3) . This, - he said, - points to the Word, the Logos, - the eternal Son of God, is also called the "wonderful Counselor" by the prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 9:6). In another place of Scripture, He, under the guise of Wisdom, is directly depicted as the closest participant in God the Creator in all places of His creation, including in the creation of the “sons of men” (Prov. 8:27-31). This idea is further clarified by those interpreters who attribute this advice to the mystery of the incarnate Word, who deigned to accept the bodily nature of man in unity with His divine nature (Philippians 2:6-7). According to the majority opinion of the Holy Fathers, the divine council considered here took place with the participation of the Holy Spirit, that is, between all the persons of the Most Holy Trinity (Ephraim the Syrian, Irenaeus, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria, Theodoret, Augustine, etc.).

As for the content of this very council, according to Metropolitan Filaret’s explanation, by its name and by the action of advice, God’s foreknowledge and predestination are depicted in Holy Scripture (Acts 2:23), that is, in this case, the realization of the idea of ​​creating man , which existed from the ages in the divine plan of the Universe (Acts 15:18). Thus, here we find one of the most ancient traces of the existence in the antediluvian world of the mystery of the trinity, but then, according to the best interpreters, it was darkened in the minds of the first people due to the fall, and then, after the Babylonian pandemonium, completely disappeared from the consciousness of the Old Testament for a long time. humanity, from which it was even deliberately hidden for pedagogical purposes, precisely in order not to give the Jews, who are always prone to polytheism, an unnecessary temptation in this regard.

human

The Hebrew text contains the word Adam. When this word is used without an article, it does not express the first husband's own name, but serves only as a common noun for "man" in general; in this sense it applies equally to both male and female (Gen. 5:2). As it can be seen from the following context, this word is used in this very sense here too - denoting the entire primordial couple, which are given divine blessings for reproduction and dominion over nature (Gen. 1:27). Using the singular of the common term "man", the writer of everyday life thereby more clearly emphasizes the truth of the unity of the human race, about which the writer of the book. Acts says, “From one blood He (God) made the whole human race” (Acts 17:26).

in Our image [and] in Our likeness

Two words related in meaning are used here, although they contain some shades of thought: one means an ideal, a model of perfection; the other is the realization of this ideal, a copy from the specified sample. “The first (κατ´ εἰκόνα – in the image), – says St. Gregory of Nyssa, – we have by creation, and the last (κατ´ ὁμοίωσιν – in the likeness) we do by will.” Consequently, the image of God in a person is an inalienable and indelible property of his nature, while godlikeness is a matter of free personal efforts of a person, which can reach rather high degrees of its development in a person (Matt. 5:48; Eph. 5:1-2), but may sometimes be completely absent (Gen. 6:3; Rom. 1:23, 2:24).

As for the very image of God in man, it is displayed in the many different powers and properties of his complex nature: in the immortality of the human spirit (Wis. 2:23), in original innocence (Eph. 4:24), and in purity (Eccl. 7:29), and in those abilities and properties that the primordial man was endowed with to know his Creator and love for Him, and in those royal powers that the first man had in relation to all lower creatures (Gen. 27:29) and even in relation to his own wife (1 Cor. 11:3), and, in particular, in the trinity of his main spiritual forces: mind, heart and will, which served as a kind of reflection of the divine trinity (Col. 3:10). The Scripture calls only the Son of God as a complete and all-perfect reflection of the divine image (Heb. 1:3; Col. 1:15); man was comparatively very weak, pale and imperfect copy of this incomparable model, but nevertheless he stood in undoubted kinship with Him and from here received the right to the name of His kind (Acts 17:28), the son or child of God (Lk. 3: 38), as well as directly - "the image and glory of God" (1 Cor. 11:7).

Genesis 1:27. And God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him;

In the very repetition of parallel concepts – “in His own image”, “in the image of God” one cannot but see some allusion to the participation of various Persons of the Holy Trinity in the act of creation of man, mainly to God the Son, who was His direct performer (in His own image). But, due to the fact that the Son is the radiance of the glory of God and the image of His Hypostasis, the creation in His image was together with Him and the creation in the image of God the Father (in the image of God). It is also noteworthy here that man was created only “in the image” of God, and not added “in the likeness”, which finally confirms the correctness of the above opinion that only the image of God constitutes an innate property of his nature, while godlikeness is something different from this and consists in one degree or another of the free, personal development of the properties of this divine image along the path of their approach to the Archetype.

man...man and woman he created them.

Mistakenly interpreting this passage, some (especially rabbis) want to see in it grounds for the theory of androgyny of the first person (ie, the combination of male and female in one person). But this misconception is best refuted by the pronoun “them” standing here, which, if it were a question of one person, would have to have the singular form - “his”, and not “them” - the plural.

Genesis 1:28. And God blessed them, and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea [and over the beasts] and over the birds of the air [and over every livestock and over all the earth] and over every living thing that moves on the earth.

The power of the creative blessing, once already bestowed upon the lower animals, applied only to their reproduction; man is granted not only the ability to reproduce on earth, but also the right to possess it. The latter is a consequence of the high position that man, being the image of God on earth, had to occupy in the world.

The Creator, in the words of the Psalmist, which the apostle repeats, “has crowned him with glory and honor; made him dominion over the works of your hands; He put everything under his feet: all sheep and oxen, and also the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, everything that passes through the paths of the sea.” (Ps. 8:6-9; Heb. 2:7-9). This is one of the best expressions of the idea of ​​the greatness and beauty of the primordial Adam (i.e., man), restored in his primordial dignity, lost through the fall, by the second Adam - your Lord Jesus Christ (Heb. 2:9-10).

The very domination of man over nature must be understood both in the sense of the use by man for his own benefit of the various natural forces of nature and its riches, and in the sense of direct service to him by various species of animals, which are calculated here only in the order of their successive origin and according to their most common groups.

This idea is beautifully expressed in the following inspired lines by I. Chrysostom: “How great is the dignity of souls! Through its forces cities are built, seas are crossed, fields are cultivated, countless arts are discovered, wild animals are tamed! But most importantly, the soul knows God, who created it and distinguishes good from evil. Only one person from the entire visible world sends up prayers to God, receives revelations, studies the nature of heavenly things and penetrates even into divine mysteries! The whole earth exists for him, the sun and the stars, the heavens are opened for him, the apostles and prophets, and even the angels themselves, were sent for him; for his salvation, finally, the Father sent down his Only Begotten Son!

Genesis 1:29-30. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed that is in all the earth, and every tree bearing fruit of a tree yielding seed; - to you: this will be for food;

but to all the beasts of the earth, and to all the birds of the air, and to every creeping thing on the earth, in which there is a living soul: gave I eat all herbal greens.

Here is the most ancient news about the primitive food of man and animals: for man it was various herbs with their roots and trees with their fruits, for animals it was herbal greens. Based on the silence of the writer of everyday life about meat as a food item, most commentators believe that at first, before the flood, or at least the fall, it was not in use not only among people, but even among animals, among which, therefore, not there were birds of prey and beasts. The first news about the introduction of meat and wine into human food dates back to the era after the flood (Gen. 9:3). It is also impossible not to see in this a special divine thought about all newly created beings, expressed in concern for their preservation and maintenance of their lives (Job. 39:6; Ps. 103:14-15, 27, 135:25, 144:15- 16; Acts 14, etc.).

Genesis 1:31. And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good.

The final formula of the divine approval of the whole work of creation differs significantly in the degree of its power from all the others that preceded it: if earlier, after the creation of various types of plants and animals, the Creator found that their creation satisfied him and was “good” (Gen. 1:4 , 8, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25); now, glancing with one general glance at the whole picture of the already completed creation and seeing its complete harmony and purposefulness, the Creator, as the Psalmist says, rejoiced over his creation (Ps. 103:31) and found that it, considered as a whole, “is very good ”, that is, it fully corresponds to the eternal plans of the divine economy for the creation of the world and man.

And there was evening and there was morning: the sixth day.

This day was the last act of cosmogonic vision, the conclusion of the entire creative six-day period. The profound historical antiquity of biblical cosmogony is confirmed by fairly consistent traces of it preserved in the language of antiquity (argumentum ex consensu gentium).

Among them, the ancient traditions of the Chaldeans, the inhabitants of Ur of the Chaldees, from which Abraham himself, the founder of the Jewish people, later came out, are of particular importance and value. We have these traditions of the Chaldeans in fragmentary records of the Chaldean priest Berosus (in the 3rd century BC) and, which is even more valuable, in the recently discovered cuneiform tablets of the so-called. "Chaldean genesis" (in 1870 by the English scientist George Smith). In the latter, we have a striking (albeit polytheistic) parallel to the biblical history of creation: here, as in the Bible, the division into six successive acts, of which a special table is dedicated to each, approximately the same content of each of these tables, as in the history of each of the biblical days, the same general sequence and - which is especially curious - the same characteristic devices, expressions and even individual terms. In view of all this, the comparison of biblical cosmogony with the data of the Chaldean genesis is of great interest and great apologetic importance (for more details, see A. Pokrovsky's dissertation: “The Biblical Teaching on Primitive Religion”, pp. 86–90).

Found a mistake in the text? Select it and press: Ctrl + Enter

Conversation with Hieromonk Job (Gumerov) about Pastoral Service

Hieromonk Job Gumerov. Photo by A. Pospelov. Pravoslavie.Ru

Father Job, please tell us how you became a priest?

I became a priest out of obedience. At first I was an ordinary parishioner. Our whole family became church on April 17, 1984. I remember well: it was Maundy Tuesday. Then I became a spiritual child of Priest Sergei Romanov (now he is an archpriest). He entrusted me with the obedience of the priesthood.

When I was baptized and became an Orthodox Christian, a special world opened before me, into which I entered with great joy and hope. The fulfillment of what my spiritual father told me was an axiom for me. Five years after I began my life in the Church, Father Sergiy once said to me: “You need to teach at the Theological Academy.” It was completely unexpected for me. Teaching at the Theological Academy seemed so different from my then scientific studies that even the thought of it never crossed my mind. Now I have no doubt that this was in accordance with the will of God, His plan for me.

That is why everything worked out without any obstacles. I met with the Vice-Rector of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary, Professor Mikhail Stepanovich Ivanov, who offered me a course called "Christianity and Culture". He asked me to write a program. On the appointed day, together with him, we came to Bishop Alexander (Timofeev), the then rector of the academy. Apparently, he had already made a decision, so the conversation was short-lived. After a few introductory phrases, he looked at the sheets that were in my hands and asked: “What do you have?” I said, "This is the program of the course." He took the sheets, put his finger on some line and asked how I understood this question. I answered right away, and that satisfied him. He didn't have any more questions. Turning to Mikhail Stepanovich, with his characteristic vigor, Vladyka said: "Prepare for the Council." So I became a teacher at the Theological Academy, never striving for it.

Under Bishop Alexander, there was a mandatory requirement: teachers who came from secular institutions and did not have a spiritual education had to graduate from the Seminary and then the Academy externally. I graduated from the seminary in May 1990, and passed the exams for the Academy in the next academic year. In the fall of 1991 he defended his thesis for the degree of Candidate of Theology. Since September 1990, I began to teach the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament at the Academy, and Basic Theology at the Seminary.

At the end of May 1990, Father Sergiy Romanov said that I needed to apply for ordination to the deacon. Again, without any hesitation or hesitation, I answered, “Good.” Soon after that, I met Archbishop Alexander in the corridor and asked to be received. He asked, "For what reason?" - "About ordination." He appointed a day. When I arrived, he immediately said without introductory words: "On the day of the Holy Trinity." Then he added: “Come three days in advance. Live in Lavra. Pray."

In September, the second year of my teaching at the Academy began. Father Sergius says that it is time to file a petition against the priest. And I readily agreed. Some time has passed. And then one day (it was on Saturday around noon) I got a call from the Vice-Rector for Educational Affairs, Archimandrite Venedikt (Knyazev). He said: “Come to the all-night vigil today, tomorrow you will be ordained.” I immediately got up and left. On Sunday, the week before the Exaltation, between two great feasts (the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos and the Exaltation of the Holy Cross) - September 23, I was ordained. So, out of obedience, I became a priest. I see the will of God in this. I didn't include mine.

How did it happen that you came to the Church from a non-Orthodox family? After all, this was also of great importance for your subsequent pastoral ministry.

I think that my mother, who was baptized in her old age, had the greatest influence on me, but in terms of the disposition of her soul (abundance of love, desire to live with everyone in the world, responsiveness to everyone) she was always very close to Christianity internally. She did not miss a single opportunity to say a kind word to us. This was her need. She never scolded us. Already in her old age, she told me that her mother, my grandmother, forbade her to do this. We had to leave, because dad was often transferred to different cities. When the grandmother saw her daughter for the last time, she said: “I ask you one thing - do not beat the children and do not scold them. If you hit even once on the hand, my motherly blessing will depart from you. But my mother would never have done so: she was simply incapable of it.

My mother was born in 1915 in Urda, Astrakhan province. She said that when she was a girl, she had to regularly take an old woman to church. It was probably a neighbor.

My mother's parents were not the typical Muslims we know from life and books. Grandmother Zainab and grandfather Hasan even (albeit in a peculiar way) took part in the Easter holiday. My grandmother had a box with a piece of land. In it, she sowed grass in advance and laid colored eggs there. On Easter day they went to congratulate their Orthodox acquaintances. After all, the city where they lived was with a mixed population.

Mom was seven years old when she was sent a special test. And she was capable of sacrificial love. Her father Hassan fell ill. I think it was typhoid. When they discovered signs of a fatal illness in him, they built a hut in the garden for him to lie there. It was a harsh but necessary measure to keep the rest of the family from illness (he had six children). Since he needed care, it was decided that my mother would live in a hut, feed him and take care of him. They brought and put food in a certain place. Mom took and fed father, washed clothes, changed clothes. She was old enough to understand the mortal danger of the disease and to realize what awaited her. However, she did not refuse this and did not run away, but showed that sacrifice that has always distinguished her. Her father died, and the Lord God preserved her, although they lived in the same hut and communicated closely.

Since that time, a special bond has been established between her and her late father, thanks to which she escaped death several times. During the war, when my brother and I (he is two years older than me) were still very young, a typhus epidemic broke out in Chelkar, where we lived. Barracks were set up for the sick. Unfortunately, at this time, my mother developed some kind of illness. The temperature has risen. The district doctor demanded that she move to the barracks for the sick. Mom refused. She said that there she would become infected and die, and her young children would not survive. Since my mother resolutely refused, the district doctor warned several times that she would bring a policeman. But she still did not agree, and she made the last warning: "If you do not lie down today, then tomorrow morning I will come with a policeman." Mom couldn't sleep at night. She expected the inevitable to happen in the morning. And so, when she was in the most anxious state, her father appeared and said: “Go to the experimental station. The professor will help you…” Surname, to my great chagrin, I did not remember. The phenomenon was so significant that my mother, despite the night (and we had to walk several kilometers), went. It was the Aralsk experimental station of the All-Union Institute of Plant Growing, which was organized by Academician Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov. She was in the sands of Big Badgers in the Chelkar region. Many exiled specialists worked there. Mom found the house of a professor whom everyone in Chelkar knew. He could not work as a doctor, because he was an exile. However, unofficially, people, of course, turned to him. Mom woke him up. He showed kindness and consideration. I immediately assessed the situation and made a diagnosis at my own peril and risk. He did not find typhus in his mother. The conclusion he wrote did not have the power of reference, but the Lord arranged everything in such a way that it protected my mother. When a doctor and a policeman came in the morning, my mother handed me a paper from the professor. The district doctor looked and said: "Okay, stay."

My mother repeatedly told me this amazing story, in which the action of Divine Providence was so clearly manifested. She said that her father appeared to her several times and suggested this or that decision when there was a threat of death over her.

The story I have told will seem incredible to some, and it can be treated with distrust. But after all, “incredible” must also be recognized that out of all six of Hasan’s children, one of my mothers became a Christian - she took communion, took unction. She lived to be ordained a deacon by her eldest grandson Pavel (now he is already a priest). I sent her a photo where he was photographed with us on the day of his consecration in the courtyard of the Lavra. Then, when I talked to her on the phone, she said: “Solid!” Now the two grandsons of the priest and the son of the priest constantly commemorate her at the Liturgy.

Someone can say that she came to Christianity because her son became an Orthodox priest. This is a superficial explanation. Its main drawback is that cause and effect are rearranged.

Undoubtedly, I myself came to Christianity solely because of the education she gave me. Her moral influence on me was decisive.

- And what else contributed to your coming to Christianity, which happened back in the Soviet years?

Russian and European culture. Since childhood, my education and upbringing took place in a culture that is genetically linked to Christianity: Russian and Western European literary classics, painting, history. Therefore, in the years of the birth of my religiosity, I did not face the problem of choice. No religion was possible for me except Christianity. I remember back in the late 60s I wore a pectoral cross. I can't remember how I got it. It was an ordinary church cross made of light metal with the image of the crucified Savior and the inscription "Save and save." I wore it for so long that the image was partially erased and became barely noticeable.

When I think about my path to Christianity, I come to a thought that is obvious to me: the Lord God led me to faith. He not only acted through my mother, whom he also prepared for Christianity from childhood, but also kept me.

I was at times uncontrollably active. For this reason, several times found himself in the clutches of death. But the Lord kept me. I remember this incident for the rest of my life. Not far from us was the Green Building trust. It was possible to enter its territory through huge metal lattice gates. There was a deep puddle in front of the entrance. At some point, for some reason, the gates were taken off their hinges and leaned against metal poles. I was in summer shoes. I couldn't get through the puddle. Then I decided to use one of the gate leaves. I put the legs between the vertical rods and put them, as if on steps, on the transverse beam with which the rods were fastened. I moved my legs and moved sideways - from one edge of the sash to the other. Since I was hanging on it, it began to fall under the weight of my body. I fell backwards into a deep puddle. And heavy gates fell on me. They would have nailed me if it weren't for the layer of goo that I was immersed in. I did not choke because I was able to stick my face between the metal bars. I couldn't lift the gate and get out. They were very heavy. Then I began, holding on to the bars, to crawl on my back to the upper edge of the gate. I succeeded until my head hit the upper transverse beam, which connected, like the lower one, metal rods. For some reason at that time no one was close to help me. Then a miracle happened, I think. With my small hands I was able to lift the heavy gate leaf and climb out. All my clothes, down to the last thread, were soaked with mud. My mother didn't scold me then. But she was surprised: “Where could you get so dirty?” In order not to frighten her with what happened, I did not tell this story.

Another incident caused even more anxiety. We lived on the territory of the radio center (dad worked as the head of the radio communications of the airport). Another mast had to be put up. At that time, long pieces of rails were used to bury them and fix the guys of the mast. I was in the yard and saw a cart coming through the gate. She carried the rails. I ran to meet them and quickly jumped on the cart, sitting on top of the rails. The horse was carrying the load with difficulty. It was necessary to drive along the path between the beds to the place where the mast was to be installed. Suddenly one wheel slid off the hard ground and ended up on the dug up ground. The weight pressed him into loose earth. The horse did not have enough strength to pull the cart further. The driver, who, unlike me, was walking beside her, began to whip her with a whip. The poor animal made a dash, but the cart did not budge. Then the horse began to go sideways and turned the shafts at right angles to the cart. The driver did not have time to think and whipped the horse. She jerked forward. Everyone who has ridden carts knows that if the shafts turn at a right angle while riding, the cart will tip over. And so it happened. I fell first, then the rails fell to the ground. I got under them. I don't remember how the rails were removed. I was lying in a narrow but rather deep hollow between the beds, and the rails lay across the top without causing me any harm.

There were other cases when I was clearly in danger, but I remained alive and did not even get injured. Now I know it was a miracle. God kept me. Then I thought, of course, in other categories. However, every time I had a vague consciousness that something unusual had happened, that someone had saved me. I am sure that these incidents and their successful outcome quietly prepared me for the conscious faith that I gained after several decades.

- To what extent does a priest need knowledge of culture?

If a person is cultured, then it is easier for him to understand and communicate with everyone - both simple and educated people. For the priest, this opens up more opportunities for missionary work. We are talking about an internal mission, since our society is a society of mass unbelief. Culture makes it possible to understand deeper and more fully the greatness of Christianity. It opens the vision of Christianity in history, its spiritual and moral uniqueness. Based on historical material, one can see the differences between the life of Christians and representatives of non-Christian societies (for example, pagans).

- What qualities are necessary for a clergyman in the first place, without which he is completely unthinkable?

Obviously, the most important spiritual qualities, both for a priest and for any Christian, are faith and love. However, it is known that no virtue is autonomous. St. Macarius the Great says: “All the virtues are interconnected like links in a spiritual chain, one depends on the other: prayer is from love, love is from joy, joy is from meekness, meekness is from humility, humility is from service, service is from hope, hope comes from faith, faith comes from obedience, obedience comes from simplicity” (“Spiritual Conversations”, 40.1).

Since we nevertheless decided to analytically single out the most important spiritual and moral qualities, I will name one more virtue - spiritual courage. The fact is that faith and love are constantly tested in life. And courage does not give up. The holy Apostle Paul calls: "Watch, stand in the faith, be courageous, strong" (1 Cor. 16:13).

A priest is a co-worker with God, and when a person accepts the priesthood, he makes a direct challenge to demonic forces. At the same time, he can clearly not think about it. A person has to overcome both external obstacles and internal ones. Sometimes the enemy tempts and seduces to leave this path, sometimes human weaknesses are revealed, and sometimes you need to have courage to act according to your conscience in the face of difficulties and dangers.

And I will add one more thing: a priest must be absolutely free from greed. If there is even a small grain, it can imperceptibly begin to grow and manifest itself destructively.

- If we talk about the current situation, what worries you the most about young priests?

Most disturbing is the isolation from the church-priestly tradition. It feels very painful. Until the end of the 1980s, there were few churches. After ordination, the young priest came to serve in the temple, where there were not only middle-aged ministers, but elderly and even very old ones. They were the keepers of the experience of previous generations. Joint ministry with such fathers is priceless. When I was ordained in 1990, I found two archpriests, Dimitry Akinfiev and Mikhail Klochkov, in the church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker. Both were born in 1928. They had great priesthood experience. Father Dimitri served 54 years. He perfectly knew the liturgical Rule. I learned a lot from him.

You can successfully study at the Seminary and even at the Academy, but the lack of experience of generations cannot be filled with any knowledge. Over the past twenty years, the number of churches in the country has increased several times. For example, in the Moscow region - 10 times. This means that almost 90 percent of the priests began serving alone - in the newly opened temples. They turned out to be really divorced from the experience of previous generations and from tradition, they do not have the opportunity to perceive the living experience of many generations.

I can see how seriously this affects the ministry. The point is not only the lack of liturgical experience, but also pastoral and ethical.

Another reason for many painful phenomena in modern church life is that the clergy are part of modern society. Young men do not come to spiritual schools from any particular tribe. They are supplied by our morally sick society. At the age of 18, a person already has a fully formed spiritual appearance. For five years of study, it is not easy to re-educate him. Many grew up in non-church families, some of whose parents are still not churched. Many came to faith at school. Some lack the usual upbringing. All this leads to the fact that some seminarians very easily fall under the influence of the spirit of the times. This also affects their ministry. Most often this is manifested in the desire to combine high service to God and people with service to oneself, not missing the opportunity to acquire something, make friends among wealthy people. Here in this I see serious consequences of the destruction of traditions.

- Father, what would you like to wish the graduates of the seminary?

You have to constantly and intensely work on yourself. I advise you to study well the life and pastoral deeds of such blessed priests as Saints John of Kronstadt, Alexy Mechev, Archpriest Valentin Amfiteatrov, and others. It is necessary to take their service as a model and work hard throughout your life in order to approach perfect service. Not for a moment should one forget about one's chosen one: "A great person is a worthy priest, he is a friend of God, appointed to do His will" (Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt).

Hieromonk

By origin - Tatar. In 1966 he graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, then graduate school. He defended his Ph.D. thesis at the Institute of Philosophy on the topic "System Analysis of the Mechanism of Changing Social Organization". For 15 years he worked as a senior researcher at the All-Union Research Institute for System Research of the Academy of Sciences.

He graduated from the Moscow Theological Seminary, and then the Moscow Theological Academy. He defended his thesis for the degree of candidate of theology.

He taught basic theology at the Moscow Theological Seminary and the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament at the Theological Academy.

In 1990 he was ordained a deacon, and in the same year a priest. Served in the church of St. Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir in Old Gardens, St. Nicholas the Wonderworker in Khamovniki, Ivanovsky Monastery.

Since 2003 he has been a resident of the Sretensky Monastery.

Conversation with Hieromonk Job (Gumerov) about Pastoral Service

— Father Job, please tell us how you became a priest?

“I became a priest out of obedience. At first I was an ordinary parishioner. Our whole family became church on April 17, 1984. I remember well: it was Maundy Tuesday. Then I became a spiritual child of Priest Sergei Romanov (now he is an archpriest). He entrusted me with the obedience of the priesthood.

When I was baptized and became an Orthodox Christian, a special world opened before me, into which I entered with great joy and hope. The fulfillment of what my spiritual father told me was an axiom for me. Five years after I began my life in the Church, Father Sergiy once said to me: “You need to teach at the Theological Academy.” It was completely unexpected for me. Teaching at the Theological Academy seemed so different from my then scientific studies that even the thought of it never crossed my mind. Now I have no doubt that this was in accordance with the will of God, His plan for me.

That is why everything worked out without any obstacles. I met with the vice-rector of the Moscow Theological Academy and Seminary, Professor Mikhail Stepanovich Ivanov, who offered me a course called "Christianity and Culture." He asked me to write a program. On the appointed day, together with him, we came to Bishop Alexander (Timofeev), the then rector of the academy. Apparently, he had already made a decision, so the conversation was short-lived. After a few introductory phrases, he looked at the sheets that were in my hands and asked: “What do you have?” I said, "This is the program of the course." He took the sheets, put his finger on some line and asked how I understood this question. I answered right away, and that satisfied him. He didn't have any more questions. Turning to Mikhail Stepanovich, with his characteristic vigor, Vladyka said: "Prepare for the Council." So I became a teacher at the Theological Academy, never striving for it.

Under Bishop Alexander, there was a mandatory requirement: teachers who came from secular institutions and did not have a spiritual education had to graduate from the Seminary and then the Academy externally. I graduated from the seminary in May 1990, and passed the exams for the Academy in the next academic year. In the fall of 1991 he defended his thesis for the degree of Candidate of Theology. Since September 1990, I began to teach the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament at the Academy, and Basic Theology at the Seminary.

At the end of May 1990, Father Sergiy Romanov said that I needed to apply for ordination to the deacon. Again, without any hesitation or hesitation, I answered, “Good.” Soon after that, I met Archbishop Alexander in the corridor and asked to be received. He asked, "For what reason?" - "About ordination." He appointed a day. When I arrived, he immediately said without introductory words: "On the day of the Holy Trinity." Then he added: “Come three days in advance. Live in Lavra. Pray."

In September, the second year of my teaching at the Academy began. Father Sergius says that it is time to file a petition against the priest. And I readily agreed. Some time has passed. And then one day (it was on Saturday around noon) I got a call from the Vice-Rector for Educational Affairs, Archimandrite Venedikt (Knyazev). He said: “Come to the all-night vigil today, tomorrow you will be ordained.” I immediately got up and left. On Sunday, the week before the Exaltation, between two great feasts (the Nativity of the Most Holy Theotokos and the Exaltation of the Holy Cross) - September 23, I was ordained. So, out of obedience, I became a priest. I see the will of God in this. I didn't include mine.

How did it happen that you came to the Church from a non-Orthodox family? After all, this was also of great importance for your subsequent pastoral ministry.

- I think that my mother had the greatest influence on me, who was baptized in her old age, but in terms of the disposition of her soul (lovefulness, desire to live with everyone in the world, responsiveness to everyone) she was always very close to Christianity internally. She did not miss a single opportunity to say a kind word to us. This was her need. She never scolded us. Already in her old age, she told me that her mother, my grandmother, forbade her to do this. We had to leave, because dad was often transferred to different cities. When the grandmother saw her daughter for the last time, she said: “I ask you one thing - do not beat the children and do not scold them. If you hit even once on the hand, my motherly blessing will depart from you. But my mother would never have done so: she was simply incapable of it.

My mother was born in 1915 in Urda, Astrakhan province. She said that when she was a girl, she had to regularly take an old woman to church. It was probably a neighbor.

My mother's parents were not the typical Muslims we know from life and books. Grandmother Zainab and grandfather Hasan even (albeit in a peculiar way) took part in the Easter holiday. My grandmother had a box with a piece of land. In it, she sowed grass in advance and laid colored eggs there. On Easter day they went to congratulate their Orthodox acquaintances. After all, the city where they lived was with a mixed population.

Mom was seven years old when she was sent a special test. And she was capable of sacrificial love. Her father Hassan fell ill. I think it was typhoid. When they discovered signs of a fatal illness in him, they built a hut in the garden for him to lie there. It was a harsh but necessary measure to keep the rest of the family from illness (he had six children). Since he needed care, it was decided that my mother would live in a hut, feed him and take care of him. They brought and put food in a certain place. Mom took and fed father, washed clothes, changed clothes. She was old enough to understand the mortal danger of the disease and to realize what awaited her. However, she did not refuse this and did not run away, but showed that sacrifice that has always distinguished her. Her father died, and the Lord God preserved her, although they lived in the same hut and communicated closely.

Since that time, a special bond has been established between her and her late father, thanks to which she escaped death several times. During the war, when my brother and I (he is two years older than me) were still very young, a typhus epidemic broke out in Chelkar, where we lived. Barracks were set up for the sick. Unfortunately, at this time, my mother developed some kind of illness. The temperature has risen. The district doctor demanded that she move to the barracks for the sick. Mom refused. She said that there she would become infected and die, and her young children would not survive. Since my mother resolutely refused, the district doctor warned several times that she would bring a policeman. But she still did not agree, and she made the last warning: "If you do not lie down today, then tomorrow morning I will come with a policeman." Mom couldn't sleep at night. She expected the inevitable to happen in the morning. And so, when she was in the most anxious state, her father appeared and said: “Go to the experimental station. The professor will help you…” Surname, to my great chagrin, I did not remember. The phenomenon was so significant that my mother, despite the night (and we had to walk several kilometers), went. It was the Aralsk experimental station of the All-Union Institute of Plant Growing, which was organized by Academician Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov. She was in the sands of Big Badgers in the Chelkar region. Many exiled specialists worked there. Mom found the house of a professor whom everyone in Chelkar knew. He could not work as a doctor, because he was an exile. However, unofficially, people, of course, turned to him. Mom woke him up. He showed kindness and consideration. I immediately assessed the situation and made a diagnosis at my own peril and risk. He did not find typhus in his mother. The conclusion he wrote did not have the power of reference, but the Lord arranged everything in such a way that it protected my mother. When a doctor and a policeman came in the morning, my mother handed me a paper from the professor. The district doctor looked and said: "Okay, stay."

My mother repeatedly told me this amazing story, in which the action of Divine Providence was so clearly manifested. She said that her father appeared to her several times and suggested this or that decision when there was a threat of death over her.

The story I have told will seem incredible to some, and it can be treated with distrust. But after all, “incredible” must also be recognized that of all six children of Hassan, one of my mothers became a Christian - she took communion, took unction. She lived to be ordained a deacon by her eldest grandson Pavel (now he is already a priest). I sent her a photo where he was photographed with us on the day of his consecration in the courtyard of the Lavra. Then, when I talked to her on the phone, she said: “Solid!” Now the two grandsons of the priest and the son of the priest constantly commemorate her at the Liturgy.

Someone can say that she came to Christianity because her son became an Orthodox priest. This is a superficial explanation. Its main drawback is that cause and effect are rearranged.

Undoubtedly, I myself came to Christianity solely because of the education she gave me. Her moral influence on me was decisive.

- And what else contributed to your coming to Christianity, which happened back in the Soviet years?

— Russian and European culture. Since childhood, my education and upbringing took place in a culture that is genetically linked to Christianity: Russian and Western European literary classics, painting, history. Therefore, in the years of the birth of my religiosity, I did not face the problem of choice. No religion was possible for me except Christianity. I remember back in the late 60s I wore a pectoral cross. I can't remember how I got it. It was an ordinary church cross made of light metal with the image of the crucified Savior and the inscription "Save and save." I wore it for so long that the image was partially erased and became barely noticeable.

When I think about my path to Christianity, I come to a thought that is obvious to me: the Lord God led me to faith. He not only acted through my mother, whom he also prepared for Christianity from childhood, but also kept me.

I was at times uncontrollably active. For this reason, several times found himself in the clutches of death. But the Lord kept me. I remember this incident for the rest of my life. Not far from us was the Green Building trust. It was possible to enter its territory through huge metal lattice gates. There was a deep puddle in front of the entrance. At some point, for some reason, the gates were taken off their hinges and leaned against metal poles. I was in summer shoes. I couldn't get through the puddle. Then I decided to use one of the gate leaves. I put the legs between the vertical rods and put them, as if on steps, on the transverse beam with which the rods were fastened. I moved my legs and moved sideways - from one edge of the sash to the other. Since I was hanging on it, it began to fall under the weight of my body. I fell backwards into a deep puddle. And heavy gates fell on me. They would have nailed me if it weren't for the layer of goo that I was immersed in. I did not choke because I was able to stick my face between the metal bars. I couldn't lift the gate and get out. They were very heavy. Then I began, holding on to the bars, to crawl on my back to the upper edge of the gate. I succeeded until my head hit the upper transverse beam, which connected, like the lower one, metal rods. For some reason at that time no one was close to help me. Then a miracle happened, I think. With my small hands I was able to lift the heavy gate leaf and climb out. All my clothes, down to the last thread, were soaked with mud. My mother didn't scold me then. But she was surprised: “Where could you get so dirty?” In order not to frighten her with what happened, I did not tell this story.

Another incident caused even more anxiety. We lived on the territory of the radio center (dad worked as the head of the radio communications of the airport). Another mast had to be put up. At that time, long pieces of rails were used to bury them and fix the guys of the mast. I was in the yard and saw a cart coming through the gate. She carried the rails. I ran to meet them and quickly jumped on the cart, sitting on top of the rails. The horse was carrying the load with difficulty. It was necessary to drive along the path between the beds to the place where the mast was to be installed. Suddenly one wheel slid off the hard ground and ended up on the dug up ground. The weight pressed him into loose earth. The horse did not have enough strength to pull the cart further. The driver, who, unlike me, was walking beside her, began to whip her with a whip. The poor animal made a dash, but the cart did not budge. Then the horse began to go sideways and turned the shafts at right angles to the cart. The driver did not have time to think and whipped the horse. She jerked forward. Everyone who has ridden carts knows that if the shafts turn at a right angle while riding, the cart will tip over. And so it happened. I fell first, then the rails fell to the ground. I got under them. I don't remember how the rails were removed. I was lying in a narrow but rather deep hollow between the beds, and the rails lay across the top without causing me any harm.

There were other cases when I was clearly in danger, but I remained alive and did not even get injured. Now I know it was a miracle. God kept me. Then I thought, of course, in other categories. However, every time I had a vague consciousness that something unusual had happened, that someone had saved me. I am sure that these incidents and their successful outcome quietly prepared me for the conscious faith that I gained after several decades.

— How much does a priest need knowledge of culture?

- If a person is cultured, then it is easier for him to understand and communicate with everyone - both ordinary and educated people. For the priest, this opens up more opportunities for missionary work. We are talking about an internal mission, since our society is a society of mass unbelief. Culture makes it possible to understand deeper and more fully the greatness of Christianity. It opens the vision of Christianity in history, its spiritual and moral uniqueness. Based on historical material, one can see the differences between the life of Christians and representatives of non-Christian societies (for example, pagans).

- What qualities are necessary for a clergyman in the first place, without which he is completely unthinkable?

– It is obvious that the most important spiritual qualities, both for a priest and for any Christian, are faith and love. However, it is known that no virtue is autonomous. Saint Macarius the Great says: “All the virtues are interconnected like links in a spiritual chain, one depends on the other: prayer is from love, love is from joy, joy is from meekness, meekness is from humility, humility is from service, service is from hope, hope comes from faith, faith comes from obedience, obedience comes from simplicity” (“Spiritual Conversations”, 40.1).

Since we nevertheless decided to analytically single out the most important spiritual and moral qualities, I will name one more virtue - spiritual courage. The fact is that faith and love are constantly tested in life. And courage does not give up. The holy Apostle Paul calls: "Watch, stand in the faith, be courageous, strong" (1 Cor. 16:13).

A priest is a co-worker with God, and when a person accepts the priesthood, he makes a direct challenge to demonic forces. At the same time, he can clearly not think about it. A person has to overcome both external obstacles and internal ones. Sometimes the enemy tempts and seduces to leave this path, sometimes human weaknesses are revealed, and sometimes you need to have courage to act according to your conscience in the face of difficulties and dangers.

And I will add one more thing: a priest must be absolutely free from greed. If there is even a small grain, it can imperceptibly begin to grow and manifest itself destructively.

- If we talk about the current situation, what worries you the most about young priests?

- What worries me the most is the isolation from the church-priest tradition. It feels very painful. Until the end of the 80s of the last century, there were few temples. After ordination, the young priest came to serve in the temple, where there were not only middle-aged ministers, but elderly and even very old ones. They were the keepers of the experience of previous generations. Joint ministry with such fathers is priceless. When I was ordained in 1990, I found two archpriests, Dimitry Akinfiev and Mikhail Klochkov, in the church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker. Both were born in 1928. They had great priesthood experience. Father Dimitri served 54 years. He perfectly knew the liturgical Rule. I learned a lot from him.

You can successfully study at the Seminary and even at the Academy, but the lack of experience of generations cannot be filled with any knowledge. Over the past twenty years, the number of churches in the country has increased several times. For example, in the Moscow region - 10 times. This means that almost 90 percent of the priests began serving alone, in newly opened churches. They turned out to be really divorced from the experience of previous generations and from tradition, they do not have the opportunity to perceive the living experience of many generations.

I can see how seriously this affects the ministry. The point is not only the lack of liturgical experience, but also pastoral and ethical.

Another reason for many painful phenomena in modern church life is that the clergy are part of modern society. Young men do not come to spiritual schools from any particular tribe. They are supplied by our morally sick society. At the age of 18, a person already has a fully formed spiritual appearance. For five years of study, it is not easy to re-educate him. Many grew up in non-church families, some of whose parents are still not churched. Many came to faith at school. Some lack the usual upbringing. All this leads to the fact that some seminarians very easily fall under the influence of the spirit of the times. This also affects their ministry. Most often this is manifested in the desire to combine high service to God and people with service to oneself, not missing the opportunity to acquire something, make friends among wealthy people. Here in this I see serious consequences of the destruction of traditions.

— Father, what would you like to wish the graduates of the seminary?

“You have to constantly and intensely work on yourself. I advise you to study well the life and pastoral deeds of such blessed priests as Saints John of Kronstadt, Alexy Mechev, Archpriest Valentin Amfiteatrov, and others. It is necessary to take their service as a model and work hard throughout your life in order to approach perfect service. Not for a moment should we forget about our chosen one: “A great person is a worthy priest, he is a friend of God, appointed to do His will” (Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt).

Academic degree	PhD in Philosophy
Name at birth	Shamil Abilkhairovich Gumerov
Birth	The 25th of January(1942-01-25 ) (77 years old) Chelkar, Kazakhstan, USSR
Taking Holy Orders	June 3, 1990
Acceptance of monasticism	April 5, 2005
Archimandrite Job at Wikimedia Commons

Biography

Born on January 25, 1942 in the village of Chelkar, Aktobe region, Kazakh SSR, in a Tatar family. In 1948, the Gumerov family moved to Ufa, where Shamil spent his childhood and adolescence. In 1959 he graduated from high school.

In 1959 he entered the Faculty of History of the Bashkir State University. He completed four courses and transferred in 1963 to the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1966.

“I was led to theology by philosophy, which in the Middle Ages was called the “handmaid of theology” (“philosophia est ministra theologiae”). Philosophy began to interest me at school. We lived on the outskirts of Ufa. In our regional library, I found the classic works of R. Descartes, G. W. Leibniz, G. Hegel and other philosophers and became very interested in them. After graduating from high school, I wanted to enter the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University, but they were accepted there only with a work experience of at least two years. Mom persuaded me to enter the history department of the Bashkir State University. There I completed four courses, moved on to the fifth. But my desire remained unsatisfied, because it was impossible to get a second higher education in the Soviet Union. Unexpectedly for me, the rector of the university, who knew about my passion for philosophy, offered to try to transfer to the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University. Everything went smoothly, and I was accepted into the third year. A very busy life began, during the academic year I had to pass exams and tests for three courses.

In 1969 he entered graduate school, which he graduated in 1972. In December 1973 he defended his dissertation for the degree of candidate of philosophical sciences on the topic "System analysis of the mechanism of change in social organization" (specialty 09.00.01 - dialectical and historical materialism).

After graduating from graduate school in July 1972, he worked at the Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences (INION) of the Academy of Sciences. From June 1976 to December 1990 he worked as a senior researcher at the All-Union Research Institute for System Research (VNIISI) of the Academy of Sciences. During these years, he met the Russian sociologist Valentina Chesnokova, in whose circle of friends his professional vision was formed.

On April 17, 1984, with his whole family (wife and three children), he received holy baptism with the name Athanasius (in honor of St. Athanasius the Great).

From September 1989 to 1997 he taught basic theology at the Moscow Theological Seminary and the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament at the Moscow Theological Academy. In May 1990, he graduated from the Moscow Theological Seminary as an external student, and in 1991, also as an external student, from the Moscow Theological Academy. In 1991 he defended his thesis for the degree of Candidate of Theology.

On April 5, 2005, he was tonsured a monk by the abbot of the monastery, Archimandrite Tikhon (Shevkunov), with the name Job in honor of the righteous Job the Long-suffering.

In 2003-2011, he led the “Questions to a Priest” column on the Pravoslavie.Ru website.

On April 10, 2017, at the Liturgy in the Small Cathedral of the Donskoy Monastery, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia was elevated to the rank of archimandrite.

A family

Work on the canonization of saints

In 1997-2002, on behalf of the hierarchy, he prepared materials for the canonization of saints. Among them are canonized as saints: Righteous Matrona of Moscow, Metropolitan Macarius (Nevsky), Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich) of Uglich, Bishop Grigory (Lebedev), Archpriest John Vostorgov, Martyr Nikolai Varzhansky, Bishop Nikita (Pribytkov) of Belevsky, Archpriest Neofit Lyubimov, Archpriest Sergiy Goloshchapov, Archimandrite Ignatius (Lebedev), Hieroschemamonk Aristoklei (Amvrosiev), Mikhail Novoselov, Anna Zertsalova, schema nun Augusta (Zashchuk) and others.

He also collected materials for the canonization of Archpriest Valentin Amfiteatrov, the ascetic of piety of the Moscow Ioannovsky Monastery, nun Dosifei, the elder of the Novospassky Monastery, Hieroschemamonk Filaret (Pulyashkin), Grand Duke Sergius Alexandrovich, spiritual writer Yevgeny Poselyanin. However, the Synodal Commission for Canonization did not decide on their glorification.

Publications

Books

1. Blessed Shepherd. Archpriest Valentin Amfiteatrov. M., publishing house of the Moscow Patriarchate, 1998, 63 p.
2. Judgment on Jesus Christ. Theological and legal view. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2002, 112 p.; 2nd ed. M., 2003, 160 p.; 3rd ed., M., 2007, 192 p.
3. Questions to the priest. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2004, 255 p.
4. Questions to the priest. Book 2. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2005, 207 p.
5. Questions to the priest. Book 3. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2005, 238 p.
6. Questions to the priest. Book 4. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2006, 256 p.
7. Questions to the priest. Book 5. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2007, 272 p.
8. Questions to the priest. Book 6. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2008, 272 p.
9. A thousand questions to the priest. M.: Publishing House of the Sretensky Monastery, 2009, 896 p.
10. Sacrament of Unction (unction). M.: Publishing House of the Sretensky Monastery, 2009, 32 p.
11. Holy baptism. - M., 2011. - 32 p. (Series "Sacraments and rituals").
12. What is marriage? - M., 2011. - 64 p. - (Series "Sacraments and rituals").
13. Cross power. - M., 2011. - 48 p. - (Series "Sacraments and rituals").
14. Mystery of repentance. - M., 2011. - 64 p. - (Series "Sacraments and rituals").
15. Spiritual life of a modern Christian in questions and answers. Volume 1., M., Sretensky Monastery, 2011, 496 p. Volume 2 .. M., Sretensky Monastery, 2011, 640 p.
16. Law of God, M., Sretensky Monastery, 2014, 584 p. (co-authored with priests Pavel and Alexander Gumerov)

Articles

1. The truth of faith and life. The Life and Works of Hieromartyr John Vostorgov. M., edition of the Sretensky Monastery, 2004, 366 p.
2. “If we want to be the salt of the earth…”. John of Kronstadt. - Siberian Lights, 1991 No. 5, p. 272-278
3. Three Quarters of Academic Theology (The Spiritual Heritage of the Additions to the Works of the Holy Fathers and The Theological Bulletin). - The Theological Bulletin. M., 1993. [T.] 1. No. 1-2, pp. 21 - 39. .
4. Right and Truth [Judgement on Jesus Christ]. - Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. M., 1993. No. 5. p. 57 - 74.
5. Good sowing. Russian writer Alexandra Nikolaevna Bakhmeteva. - In the book: A. N. Bakhmeteva. Stories for children about the earthly life of the Savior and Lord our God Jesus Christ, M., 2010.
6. Guardian of the Church Tradition. - In the collection: “The Lord is my strength. In memory of Archbishop Alexander (Timofeev), Saratov: Publishing House of the Saratov Metropolis, 2013, p. 88 - 93.
7. The image of the Heavenly Father. - "Orthodoxy and Modernity", 2014, No. 27 (43).
8. Table book of the clergyman. M., 1994. (Articles in the Dictionary of Preachers section):
   1. Archbishop Ambrose (Klyucharev)
   2. Archpriest Valentin Nikolaevich Amfiteatrov
   3. Metropolitan Anthony (Vadkovsky)
   4. Archpriest Alexy Vasilyevich Belotsvetov
   5. Professor Archpriest Alexander Andreevich Vetelev
   6. Bishop Vissarion (Nechaev)
   7. Archpriest Peter Viktorovich Gnedich
   8. Metropolitan Grigory (Chukov)
   9. Archbishop Demetrius (Muretov)
   10. Bishop John (Sokolov)
   11. Archpriest John Vasilievich Levanda
   12. Metropolitan Macarius (Bulgakov)
   13. Metropolitan Macarius (Nevsky)
   14. Archbishop Nikanor (Brovkovich)
   15. Archbishop Nicholas (Ziorov)
   16. Metropolitan Nicholas (Yarushevich)
   17. Archpriest Vasily Ioannovich Nordov
   18. Metropolitan Platon (Levshin)
   19. Archpriest
   20. Belyankin L. E.
   21. Bludova A. D.
   22. Boborykin N. N.
   23. Bulgakov M. P. (Metropolitan Macarius)
   24. Bukharev A. M.
   25. Valuev D. A.
   26. Vasilchikov A.I.
   27. Vekstern A. A.
   28. Gavrilov F. T. (author's under. - A. A. Ufimsky)
   29. Glinka G. A.
   30. Glukharev M. Ya. (Archimandrite Macarius)
   31. Govorov G. V. (Bishop Theophan the Recluse)
   32. Gorbunov I. F. Gorbunov O. F.
   33. Danilevsky N. Ya.
   34. Delvig A.I.
   35. Elagin V. N. (jointly with A. L. Varminsky)
   36. Ignatius (Bryanchaninov)
   37. Innokenty (Borisov)
   38. Iriney (Falkovsky) (jointly with M.P. Lepekhin)
   39. Ismailov F. F. Karsavin L. P. Kashkarov I. D.
   40. Kotzebue O. E.
   41. Koyalovich M. I.
   42. Kurch E.M
   43. Leonid, archimandrite (Kavelin)
   44. Menshikov M. O. (with the participation of M. B. Pospelov)
   45. Nicodemus, Bishop (Kazantsev N.I.)
   46. Passek V.V.
   47. Pobedonostsev K. P. (jointly with Sergeev)
   48. Poletika P.I.
   49. Radozhitsky I. T. (jointly with M. K. Evseeva)
   50. Rikord L.I.
   51. Romanov V.V.
9. Orthodox encyclopedia:
   1. Avarim
   2. Obadiah
   3. Haggai
   4. Absalom
   5. Aviafar
   6. Adonisedek
   7. Akila and Priscila
   8. Amfiteatrov V. N.
   9. Theological messenger

In collaboration with priest Pavel Gumerov

1. Everlasting memory. Orthodox rite of burial and commemoration of the dead. M., Publishing House of the Russian Orthodox Church, 2009, 160 p. - 2nd revised edition, M.. 2011.
2. Christian home. Traditions and shrines. M.: Publishing House of the Sretensky Monastery, 2010, 63 p.

Scientific publications

1. System-semiotic invariants of culture. - In the book: System Research. - M., 1982, pp. 383-395.
2. Methodological problems of system analysis of the organization. In the collection: "Philosophical and methodological foundations of system research. System analysis and system modeling. M .: Nauka, 1983. P. 97-113.
3. Development and organization. In the collection: "System concepts of development", M., 1985. Issue 4., pp. 70-75.
4. Global tasks and problems of "universal ethics". - In the collection: The concept of global problems of our time. - M., 1985.
5. Ecological values ​​in the system of culture. In the collection: System Research. Methodological problems. Yearbook, 1988. - M.: Nauka, 1989. - P. 210 - 224.
6. Philosophical and anthropological problems of ecology. - In the collection: Ecology, culture, education. M., 1989. S. 96-100.