**Не ВЕРЮ! Разговор с атеистом. СВЯЩЕННИК ВЯЧЕСЛАВ ПЕРЕВЕЗЕНЦЕВ И ДОЦЕНТ ВЛАДИМИР КРЖЕВОВ. — Transcript & Summary | SozAI**
Source: https://sozai.app/transcript/conversation-atheist-priest-vyacheslav-vladimir-krzhevov/

A deep dialogue between a priest and a philosopher on atheism, faith, freedom, and the necessity of God in worldview explanations.

## Key Takeaways

- Atheism is a broad concept, often including indifference rather than active disbelief.
- Religious faith provides a necessary framework for some to explain the world and find meaning.
- The paradox of divine providence and human freedom is central and unresolved in Christian theology.
- Faith is not imposed necessity but a personal, free choice that opens spiritual understanding.
- Philosophical and scientific developments have challenged traditional religious hypotheses but have not eliminated faith's personal significance.

## What the video covers

- The video features a conversation between Father Vyacheslav and philosopher Vladimir Krzhevov on atheism and religious faith.
- They explore the diversity within atheism, distinguishing between true non-believers and those indifferent to religion.
- Discussion on how people explain the world with or without the hypothesis of God, referencing Laplace and Occam's razor.
- Father Vyacheslav emphasizes the personal necessity of God and the connection between divine mystery and human freedom.
- They address the paradox of God's providence and human freedom, a core tension in Christian faith.
- The conversation touches on the psychological and philosophical challenges young people face after formal education ends.
- They discuss the role of faith, hope, and love as essential elements of religious tradition beyond logical necessity.
- The dialogue includes reflections on the Gospel, self-denial, and the nature of salvation within the Church.
- They consider historical and theological perspectives on the relationship between God, humanity, and the Church.
- The video concludes with thoughts on the incarnation of God and the equality it brings among people.

## Chapters

1. 00:00 Introduction: What if you don't believe in God?
2. 03:18 Youth, Education, and the Question of Faith
3. 06:02 The Necessity of God and Personal Belief
4. 08:41 Reconciling God's Providence and Human Freedom
5. 11:22 Faith, Hope, and Love in Religious Tradition
6. 14:50 The Gospel, Salvation, and Self-Denial
7. 18:41 Social and Spiritual Dimensions of Salvation
8. 23:29 God's Incarnation and Human Equality

Answers

## Questions about this video

What is the main difference between atheists discussed in the video?

The video distinguishes between atheists who actively reject belief in God and those who are indifferent or uninterested in religion, emphasizing the diversity within atheism.

How do the speakers view the relationship between God and human freedom?

They describe it as a paradox central to Christian faith, where God's providence and human freedom coexist despite being logically irreconcilable.

Why do some people find the hypothesis of God necessary while others do not?

Some find God necessary to explain the world and provide meaning, while others, influenced by scientific and philosophical developments, see no need for that hypothesis.

## Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown

00:20

Speaker A

What should you do if you think there is no God? How do you find Him, and what if you don't even want to look?

00:27

Speaker A

Hello, you're watching the program "I Don't Believe." Hello, dear friends. Thank you for being with us in the studio today. Let’s begin our conversation. Our program has this subtitle: "A Conversation with an Atheist." The longer we record, work,

00:44

Speaker A

and talk with people, the more I sometimes come to the thought that atheism is, in general, a very broad and diverse concept. And among those we call atheists, it seems to me there are many who would perhaps be more

01:00

Speaker A

accurately called people indifferent to religion, who haven't really thought about it, aren't thinking about it, and simply don't need it. But that’s why I’m always very glad when we have a philosopher in the studio, because a philosopher is a person who, even if

01:16

Speaker A

they are in the seat of a non-believer, is still someone who, having read a vast number of philosophical texts, has surely thought through the question of faith in one way or another. At least, I want to believe that. Is that the

01:27

Speaker A

case, Vladimir Sergeyevich? Yes, absolutely. So, as a non-believer, how do you react to thoughts on religious faith when you encounter them in the texts of great thinkers or any philosophical works? How do you relate yourself to them? You

01:46

Speaker A

know, that is quite difficult to answer unambiguously, but the fact is that I have a, well, a fairly well-formed perspective. For me, words about God are words about worldviews and explanations of the world. And I always — forgive me, this is a well-known

02:06

Speaker A

story — I always recall Napoleon's famous response to the question. I have no need of that hypothesis. Father Vyacheslav, what about what I said in the beginning regarding people who might be more accurately called not atheists, but simply indifferent — without any judgment, without any, I

02:25

Speaker A

don't know, disparagement — just based on the fact of their lack of interest? You nodded, you see it too. What do you think about this? Well, of course, generally speaking, such people are probably just the majority; the majority of people, by and large, are

02:43

Speaker A

not only indifferent to questions of faith but don't really think about many things in their lives, because thinking is a kind of labor, an effort. Yes. And it is a free effort. That is, we are not forced by anyone. But you know, of

03:02

Speaker A

course, when we first start our lives, we are taught many things, then school, university, but in the end, everything comes to an end. And there is a question, I think, a very important philosophical or maybe psychological one. Is there life after the Unified

03:18

Speaker A

State Exam? Exactly. Because before the exam, everything is clear, the goals are clear, and it’s understood what a young person should do. They are pushed from all sides, but at some point, it all ends, and they are left one-on-one

03:33

Speaker A

with their freedom. It is not a given that such a person will choose to think, to reflect on life, on why they are in this world, and what they should strive for. Thank God there are such people,

03:48

Speaker A

and not just philosophers. Well then, let us return to your words once again. Vladimir Sergeyevich, it seems important and profound to me that, well, religious faith is often tied to how we explain the world. How do you think

04:05

Speaker A

someone who explains the world without God, well, to whom? Like Laplace, for you, as it was for Laplace, you don't need the hypothesis of God. And he explains things now more logically, more simply. Why do some need this

04:21

Speaker A

hypothesis while others do not? Well, you see, from the very beginning of, seemingly, their conscious existence, humans have been interested in the nature of their thought. And since, well, at first, as is known, there was universal animism, universal

04:41

Speaker A

spirituality, but later, when man began to realize his isolation and his very distinct differences from the world, he naturally wondered what thought was, what he was, and why it is so. And naturally, the idea emerged of a spiritual substance distinct from

05:01

Speaker A

physical, material processes, which is, in fact, the source of thought. And for a long time, this was a very strong argument. Meaning this hypothesis was necessary because there was no other way. Then, as a number of sciences developed, mostly in recent times, the

05:21

Speaker A

20th century, with the discovery of neurophysiological processes, with an understanding, well, you could start with the work of Ivan Pavlov, Sechenov.

05:34

Speaker A

Actually, that is when this revolution began. Well, it became clear that here, too, this hypothesis becomes redundant.

05:40

Speaker A

Well, there is a famous rule by the great religious thinker Ockham. Do not multiply entities without necessity.

05:47

Speaker A

We are not multiplying entities. Vyacheslav, but believers, it seems, do multiply entities without necessity. I am emphasizing that. We very often quote the first part of Ockham. One should not multiply entities. But it says: without necessity. Maybe there is

06:02

Speaker A

a necessity. You know, I suppose different believers would answer your question in different ways. Because when we talk about a person in general, and talk about what is necessary for them and what is not, it is all very personal, very

06:16

Speaker A

individual. But I would like here, in the development of this conversation, to say that it seems to me that it is very, what would be the more precise word to find here. It makes me very happy that God is necessary to me. So,

06:34

Speaker A

well, because and that is exactly how it is. At the very least, the God in whom I believe, who revealed Himself to me in the Gospel, He is necessary. Not necessary. He, He does not impose Himself on us. There. Because any

06:51

Speaker A

necessity is already some kind of, uh, some kind of pressure, some kind of constraint, it is already a limitation of my freedom. And I am convinced that, uh, our God is not like that, His nature is not like that, and the

07:06

Speaker A

mystery of man is very closely connected to the mystery of God. And at the depth of this mystery lies freedom.

07:14

Speaker A

And this, in general, may be the greatest sanctity that exists. And in a sense, the image of God in man, it is most closely connected precisely with this mystery, with freedom. And the fact that God is not necessary is what

07:33

Speaker A

actually allows, uh, our faith to open up, to be born, because what kind of faith is there if there is necessity, our hope and our love, that which constitutes the essence, in fact, of our tradition.

07:54

Speaker A

This is the program "I Don't Believe." We will return after a short break. This is the program "I Don't Believe." We are continuing our conversation.

08:02

Speaker A

I think that here, if you'll forgive me, there is a kind of professional pedantry. There is a certain substitution of the thesis here. The necessity I am talking about is logical or physical necessity. That is, I explain certain effects, phenomena, and

08:16

Speaker A

processes based on their own internal essence. I do not have to assume a moving principle for them, some force that directs, so to speak, the course of events and determines their outcome.

08:29

Speaker A

And that is exactly how people thought about God for a long time, as the Creator, as the Almighty. Without the will of God, not a hair shall fall from a person's head. It is quite difficult to talk about freedom here, Father. It

08:41

Speaker A

is not just difficult, it is a completely unthinkable conversation. It is unthinkable in the categories of rationality, yes, how to reconcile, uh, uh, God's providence and human freedom.

08:55

Speaker A

But it is absolutely obvious that both the one and the other are present, both in human life and in the Christian faith. These are two theses that cannot be reconciled because one contradicts the other. It is a paradox. But in

09:12

Speaker A

general, the Christian faith lives entirely by this paradox. God himself is a paradox, because, in general, we will not find Him in this world.

09:23

Speaker A

I am very strongly impressed by the fact that such conversations almost always return to this famous statement by Tertullian.

09:31

Speaker A

Only, you know, this is an inaccurate translation that distorts the meaning of Tertullian’s great thought.

09:38

Speaker A

Let’s figure out the actual meaning. He was responding

09:57

Speaker A

Well, I won't retell the Gospel, the evangelical tradition." He said: "Yes, it is absurd, but it is worthy of belief." And that is a great answer in its own way. But at the same time, he started a very dangerous tradition,

10:12

Speaker A

because it led to the claim, perhaps even beyond Tertullian’s intentions, that faith is above reason. And I really dislike it when reason and its possibilities are belittled. Above reason. Faith is not above reason.

10:28

Speaker A

Faith and reason have different tasks. That’s all there is to it. Faith is connected to our personal choice. It is what we choose. And faith is always not just some knowledge about something or someone. That's it. Although at the

10:46

Speaker A

depth of faith, of course, lies some kind of experience of recognition, of meeting, right? But faith does not end there; it only begins there. Because faith is not knowledge about someone, but a relationship with someone. A relationship, and the essence of faith

11:05

Speaker A

is in these relationships, at least the way Holy Scripture, the Bible, speaks about faith, and where we meet an example of faith—it is our forefather Abraham, right? And the Lord calls him the father of all believers; we find

11:22

Speaker A

these words in the Gospel. That's it. And Abraham believed God. That's it. That is, it is not a coincidence that it is repeated more than once, again, it is such a recurring theme throughout the entire Scripture, that we believe

11:37

Speaker A

in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob . Why is that? Is it to say again that this is about some sum of knowledge? No , because they had those relationships, relationships of trust and faithfulness , right? Faith is about that, while

11:55

Speaker A

knowledge and thought certainly occupy their own place. And I don't think that in the Christian tradition, perhaps Tertullian, yes, due to some of his own traits and his temperament, he was in many ways a very fiery person. He spoke

12:18

Speaker A

so vividly, yes, and and I fully understand that he could have and did have followers who were, so to speak, irrationalists, where thought was pushed, relegated somewhere into the background. But we also know a great deal else. Starting from medieval

12:42

Speaker A

scholasticism, and we recalled those thinkers today, and ending with the philosophers of the modern era and so on, who were devout Christians and for whom knowledge and thought were not just respected, but were actually the foundation of their faith.

13:04

Speaker A

Well, that is, of course, a massive philosophical topic. On the other hand, perhaps it is logical since we have a philosopher in the studio, but I still cannot help but ask. For you, are faith and knowledge or faith and reason

13:17

Speaker A

antagonists? Must they necessarily exclude each other, or can they coexist within a person? Well, the fact that they can coexist in a person, in society, and in culture is simply a historical fact. Well, yes, I mean that it is a contradictory

13:37

Speaker A

coexistence, of course, because we are talking about the most complex, subtle subject matter, about the ultimate foundational principles. And here it is either-or: either there is a God, a Creator and Sustainer, or the world exists just as Heraclitus said—it was

13:57

Speaker A

not created or made by any god or man. If even Heraclitus in those times could conceive of this, then, in general, this tradition has persisted. But here is what I would like to say. It is not just about Tertullian's temperament

14:12

Speaker A

here. This is clearly about something else. Do you understand? This is a shift in the topic. It is about spiritual authority. When people say faith is above reason, this thesis is most often championed by the Church, which insists that it is beyond the

14:30

Speaker A

criticism of reason. Its edicts—well, I think you won't dispute facts of this kind, there are many of them. Yes, the Church wants to be the final judge, the final authority. And one of the strongest confirmations of this position, in my view, is the famous

14:50

Speaker A

assertion that there is no salvation outside the Church. And that is a completely different turn. This is a social turn, if you will, political, rather than just or primarily spiritual .

15:01

Speaker A

What do you think about this? That is a huge and very serious topic, isn't it? Because, for example, regarding the thesis about the Church and salvation, we must first deeply examine what the Church actually is.

15:17

Speaker A

There is an entire science for this, ecclesiology. And I must say that, actually, in the historical church, there are no dogmas that concern the church itself. There are dogmas about God, and Christological dogmas, yes, but there are no ecclesiological dogmas

15:35

Speaker A

. In other words, this actually means that the range of opinions and the breadth of views among believers on this issue can be very, very wide. We don't have these here; what is a dogma?

15:53

Speaker A

It is, well, in Greek, "horos," right? Meaning a certain demarcation, so to speak, these boundaries do not exist.

16:00

Speaker A

And, um, I am just recalling what immediately comes to mind. For example, from the Apostle Paul's Epistle to the Romans, where he says that those who do not have the law will be judged by the law of their own conscience. Those who

16:25

Speaker A

follow the law of their own conscience can be saved; they have hope for salvation according to the Apostle Paul , and therefore, according to church teaching, they undoubtedly do. That is why it is easy to see some formal signs

16:42

Speaker A

here, right? Outside the church, there is no salvation. But what does it mean to be in the church? There isn't— however much we might want, I mean, perhaps believers might want everything to be strict and clear here, yes—if

16:55

Speaker A

you have gone through a certain procedure, say, received baptism and entered the religious tradition, that you are somehow saved or something else . No, we don't know.

17:06

Speaker A

Well, it is a sine qua non condition, after all, from the perspective of a certain understanding.

17:11

Speaker A

No, here Why then did Luther protest so persistently against this principle? Why did he say that salvation is given by faith alone?

17:19

Speaker A

Salvation is given by faith alone. For him, it was a direct opposition to these external and formal things, so to speak, right?

17:27

Speaker A

That is, well, let's start with the fact that Christ opposed external and formal things.

17:31

Speaker A

Of course, of course, because this is not just "sola fide," it's not just a Lutheran principle, it is an evangelical principle, yes. And the same Apostle Paul speaks about this. It is not even the law that saves us, not

17:48

Speaker A

just some customs or rituals, he said, not even the law. The law does not save ; it is faith acting through love that saves. And Luther, in this sense, was simply a good student.

18:02

Speaker A

This is what it's about. After all, human reason in this context was still considered something weak and imperfect . Nevertheless, we need hope, we need certainty. Faith and certainty share the same root by chance, or rather, not by chance. And so faith provides what

18:22

Speaker A

reason cannot, because reason wavers, reason doubts. Reason lacks a solid foundation. But I would like to return to one of Osvay Vcheslav's points, if I may. These words of the Apostle Paul.

18:37

Speaker A

Those who do not know the law live by the law, and you say it is the law of one's conscience. Paul speaks apostolically. Well, yes. Um, but the thing is, this is also a very ambiguous statement, of course. And look at how the Apostle

18:52

Speaker A

Paul puts it. He doesn't say that conscience saves. He says there will be judgment by conscience. Yes, judgment.

19:01

Speaker A

A person, precisely because they are human, and that is their uniqueness—a free individual—is accountable and responsible. Yes, responsibility is a kind of authorship of one's life; we are the authors of our own lives. That is why we are morally accountable,

19:21

Speaker A

precisely because we are free and therefore responsible. There. And the Apostle Paul says that if a person has accepted the law, then the law is what helps them live rightly, right? And they answer for how much their life

19:40

Speaker A

corresponded to that law. But if they don't know the law, it doesn't mean they cannot be judged, because they have a conscience, and they will be judged according to that conscience.

19:54

Speaker A

This is the program "I Don't Believe." We will return after a short break. This is the program "I Don't Believe." We are continuing our conversation. Is there anything in the world I live in that I can relate my conscience to? Yes

20:08

Speaker A

, what is "conscience" anyway? It's a certain correlation with some kind of " tidings." With what, exactly? Is it what my parents told me, or what they tell me at school, in the courtyard, or somewhere else? And for me, when I

20:27

Speaker A

spent half my life in your shoes, so to speak—I was an atheist—I wasn't born with faith. I came to it, and that journey was, in general, neither fast nor simple. But a very important moment was precisely that, when I heard

20:47

Speaker A

something against which I could compare my own conscience, yes, then, essentially, the Gospel became for me that word of God, which, uh, serves as a certain criterion, a test, so to speak, not just for my actions in life,

21:02

Speaker A

but also for my inner convictions. Well , that is a very important thesis. With that, I, of course, agree. I can tell you, forgive me, perhaps it will sound immodest, but for me, there is also such a frame of reference. It is the

21:18

Speaker A

famous Kantian maxim. Never treat a person as a means, but always only as an end. For me, this is the ultimate limit.

21:26

Speaker A

A perfect Gospel principle. How should I put it? I think that, forgive me, I do not wish to offend your feelings, but in this case, it is broader than the Gospel.

21:40

Speaker A

Look, in the Gospel, uh, there are the words of the Savior in the Sermon on the Mount, which, naturally, Kant was perfectly familiar with. I think that he was, after all, a man who, in many ways, connected his life and his

21:55

Speaker A

thought with the Christian tradition. Of course, he was a deeply religious man. Yes. And when the Lord says to His disciples, treat others as you would have them treat you. That is, in fact, the principle of the categorical

22:11

Speaker A

imperative of Immanuel Kant. The idea of man only as an end, that is the greatest ideal. But the tragedy is that human history has never known this ideal, because even those considered righteous or faithful servants of society treated people precisely as

22:31

Speaker A

means. Well, take any military commander, for instance. Any number of commanders, but I know one such person for whom every other human being was strictly an end, and he treated no one as a means. That is Jesus Christ. Mhm. Well, yes.

22:47

Speaker A

And for me, in general, by and large, when we talk about a human being, you see, for me, well, I think just like for you as a philosopher, maybe not only in that sense, uh, this is not something that is, well, finished, yes.

23:04

Speaker A

Man is rather by his nature, let's say, a dynamic, developing being. We are born, we are not yet human, and in fact , life is given to us so that we may become human. Yes, Mamardashvili has this wonderful thought. He repeats it

23:20

Speaker A

constantly. That, in essence, our humanity consists precisely in the fact that we exert a certain effort to become human. In this man is the effort to be man, right? To be human is an effort to be human. And in this sense, there is only

23:35

Speaker A

one person—again, from my point of view, I can only speak for myself here, of course—who throughout human history has been human, who has truly fulfilled being human. It is no coincidence that even in the Gospel there is an indirect, but nonetheless,

23:52

Speaker A

a certain indication of this. When, you remember, Pilate brings Christ out, already beaten, onto the Lithostrotos platform, wearing the crown of thorns, before that frenzied crowd, he says: " Ecce homo," behold the man.

24:08

Speaker A

Ecce homo, behold the man. Now look, there is one topic in our conversation that I found very interesting in what we are discussing right now. What if we return to this thesis, "outside the Church there is no salvation," and look at it precisely

24:22

Speaker A

from a certain spiritual or religious-philosophical plane? What is interesting here? Lev Karsavin had a thought that religious tolerance at the level of doctrine, at the level of conviction, is religious indifference.

24:38

Speaker A

That is, if it makes no difference to a person where the truth lies—here, there, or elsewhere—then they are not really anywhere; they are religiously indifferent. Religious faith implies this belief, evidently, that it is specifically in the Church that

24:48

Speaker A

salvation is found; otherwise, we would have left the Church. I would like us to discuss this. What do you think about it?

24:54

Speaker A

Actually, you just raised a very important question in your last words, which I think we Christians need to ask ourselves as often as possible, don't we? Why are you in the Church? I am convinced that the majority, the

25:10

Speaker A

overwhelming majority of church-going people, cannot answer this question very clearly. And yet it is the most important question. I think this question: "Why, in general, is a person in the Church?" Very often, people answer it in a completely utilitarian

25:23

Speaker A

way. They are looking for some kind of benefit from it. Well, it is not bad if it is a spiritual benefit, tranquility, consolation.

25:31

Speaker A

Well, that is wonderful. But look, one can present a very simple analogy here. If someone asks you: "Why are you in a family, why do you maintain your family , your marital relations?" And you could also come up with a bunch of very

25:44

Speaker A

, so to speak, probably quite weighty arguments. It's convenient, it's cozy, you can walk through life together happily, manage a household, well, you can find a lot of things. But if, if besides that, there is not the most

25:57

Speaker A

important thing, well, that's not just bad, that's actually terrible. That is frightening. It’s scary, because if it’s not based on love, then, let’s say, by and large, it’s a substitution. It’s the same in the church. If you are in church not out of

26:11

Speaker A

love, but for any other reason— tradition, because you were born where you were, because, I don't know, your grandmother told you that if you're not in church, then such and such will happen, or for some other reason. All

26:22

Speaker A

of this is sad and dismal. We can be there for only one reason: because we cannot help but be there, because if you love, you cannot help but seek to be close to the one you love.

26:35

Speaker A

Denis Sergeyevich, now I would like to turn to you. Perhaps you could respond to much of what we've heard, but I would still like us to hear your reflection on the words of Karsavin that I cited, about how, at the level

26:51

Speaker A

of doctrine, religious tolerance is indifference. I understand that. So, if a person is a Christian, they shouldn't fight over faith or behave aggressively toward a person of another faith or a non-believer. But at the level of conversation, debate, and conviction,

27:07

Speaker A

we cannot. tolerate such indifference. Of course, in this interpretation, you are absolutely right. The point is that Karsavin, as a believer and an Orthodox person, simply held the conviction that his faith was the truth. And naturally, he felt it was necessary to defend this

27:31

Speaker A

truth. So, indifference in this case, in his understanding, was sinful. That is understandable, but I want to steer the conversation in a slightly different direction. You see, if we say that the church provides salvation, then salvation is the very goal, the

27:50

Speaker A

final desire, the ultimate aspiration for which a person exerts all their efforts. And this is linked, of course, to the fear of death, to the fear of that country from which no one has returned, and so on and so forth. What

28:06

Speaker A

Vladimir Sergeyevich just said is undoubtedly a reality of such a religious worldview. But, by and large, for me, the Gospel is about something else. Christ doesn't say, doesn't come and tell his disciples: "Yes, fast and follow me, and then you will be saved."

28:25

Speaker A

I mean, you could read it that way. Well that is exactly how he says it, right? No, he doesn't say that. Well, um, By and large, everything he says, his entire discourse, is connected to the fact that he is revealing himself

28:44

Speaker A

to them; yes, the entire Gospel, well, at its center, in the focus of the Gospel, there is actually only one thing. It is his personhood. "Who do you say that I am?" Everything he does and everything he says, one way or

29:01

Speaker A

another, reveals exactly this. Why? What is the meaning here? The meaning is only that we must see him. We, those who will follow him—and one can follow him, I repeat, guided by thousands of other motives—but he wants us to follow him for only one

29:21

Speaker A

reason: because we have seen him, so to speak, and this love has been born in us. Everything else will be, one way or another, not just some kind of incorrect Christianity, but, I would even say quite sharply, anti-Christianity. The brilliant legend

29:39

Speaker A

of the Grand Inquisitor is about this. It is exactly about that, yes, it is exactly about what, strictly speaking, compels one to follow him. Those diabolical temptations that the Lord overcame in the Judean desert before starting his ministry were, again,

29:58

Speaker A

precisely about this: turn stones into bread, throw yourself from the pinnacle of the temple, bow down to me. That is, the very things by which it would have been so easy to entice people to follow him. But the Lord rejects this. And, in

30:15

Speaker A

fact, the entire history of the church is, in many ways, two histories. It is the history of those who follow Christ, and those who follow his antipode, even though they think they are following Christ.

30:33

Speaker A

Following his antipode in his guise, yes. Of course. You see, here I am already stepping onto the ground of history and sociology, because that is primarily what I deal with. And then explain to me, please, why it is that in the

30:49

Speaker A

history of the church, it is not this Christian element that prevails, or, yes, but rather that very, well, one has to call it that, the satanic element, of course, anti-Christianity, yes, satanic. And that is also understandable, because, yes, the human

31:05

Speaker A

being is frail, weak, and it is all the same thing. After all, the Lord warned that to follow him means to deny oneself and take up one's cross.

31:18

Speaker A

Whoever wants to follow me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. Few people want that. Few people even understand what self-denial and carrying the cross mean. There. Ah, we want, we want to receive. In the

31:35

Speaker A

grand scheme of things—Christ offers us a completely different way of life, one we aren’t used to. Because what we are used to is using this world and everything in it, yes, for our own benefit. From a piece of bread to God

31:58

Speaker A

Himself. Actually, the principle is the same; nothing changes here, so to speak . But the Lord says something entirely different. He wants, and one can only follow Him as a true disciple by rejecting this principle. "It is more

32:14

Speaker A

blessed to give than to receive." These words of Christ are quoted by the Apostle Paul in Acts: "Only by giving can we truly follow Him." There. And, only by building our lives and relationships with God and people this

32:31

Speaker A

way—and it’s quite amazing what the Gospel says here, because going to God, going to Christ, and going to people are not different paths. From the perspective of the Gospel, when you take a step toward God, you are simultaneously—it’s not a second

32:50

Speaker A

step, but the same one—taking a step toward man, right? If you want to do something for God, you can only do it by doing something for a person in this Gospel. And it is difficult. And we want, of course, we want—actually,

33:10

Speaker A

that is what sin is. Look, the word sin is also very interesting, right? I won’t go into the etymology right now . Well, you probably know it. It is a mistake, a miss. It is an error. There.

33:26

Speaker A

And in a sense, the main mistake of humanity was formulated by Blessed Augustine, who said: "We strive for that which we should use, and use that for which we should strive." This world is given to us to use so that we may

33:50

Speaker A

attain eternity, to attain something much greater. But we use God to make ourselves more comfortable in this world. We, I mean believers, Christians . But I would shift the conversation a little. You see, what I find unsatisfactory in this perfectly

34:08

Speaker A

wonderful reasoning of my opponent. I anticipate the word "interlocutor." Interlocutor. Wonderful, I agree. I am not talking about people wanting to receive. I am talking about people wanting to live. And it is about the conditions of survival. That biblical

34:26

Speaker A

phrase: "By the sweat of your face you shall eat your bread." It later found a very curious continuation in Marx, who said that man is primarily a creature that produces the means of subsistence.

34:41

Speaker A

And this activity of his, this way of his existence, places him in certain conditions, including certain relationships with other people. And the most important thought here is that these relationships do not depend on human caprice. They have a necessary

34:54

Speaker A

character, the very necessity that you are so unhappy with, but it exists. And a person cannot do anything about necessity. They can. And look, this is very important. It is precisely what a person does out of necessity that makes a person a human

35:08

Speaker A

being. I will explain what I wanted to say. Uh, well, there is no doubt, so to speak, that we live in a world of necessity. This world is structured this way, and yes, everything is determined. In what sense? Again,

35:26

Speaker A

Immanuel Kant will help us understand it, if you remember, when he dismantled all five proofs of the existence of God . Having brilliantly done this, he then , so to speak, wrote his sixth he fathered a sixth proof, as Mikhail

35:41

Speaker A

Epstein later commented, yes, and it was precisely connected to this, uh, to the fact that it is located within necessity, yes. God exists because a person is morally accountable. And they are morally accountable precisely because they are free. But we do not

35:58

Speaker A

find freedom in the world in which a person lives. This means it is given to a person from somewhere in another world. Yes, it is indisputable that a person is determined, yes, uh, so to speak, by very many things, starting

36:11

Speaker A

from birth, so to speak, we depend on, I don't know, on heredity, on some genetic history of our own. We depend on the environment we were born into, social, cultural, how we were raised or not raised there. There is an amazing

36:28

Speaker A

example, I like it very much. It says that, this is Frankl saying that a person is, of course, free despite necessity, right? That is, there is again this paradox, there is both one and the other. And it is like, for

36:43

Speaker A

example, a person in a boat needs to cross, well, reach some goal, say, the other shore or how should I put it? If they simply sit in this boat, which is lowered into the water, then they won't go anywhere, so to speak, they will be

36:59

Speaker A

subject only to those necessities, yes, that surround them, where the wind blows, where the current flows, there, so to speak. Well, in general, yes, but the point is that this boat, uh, in this metaphor, has a sail. You just

37:12

Speaker A

have to learn how to use it. Not everyone knows how to do that. Uh, and if you have learned to use the sail, right, then even though the wind might blow in your face, you can even sail against the wind. If you know where you

37:25

Speaker A

want to sail to—though it’s also not at all a fact that everyone who gets into this boat has an understanding of where they need to go.

37:32

Speaker A

But if you have this goal and this sail , and you have mastered it, then, despite all these necessities, you can reach the set goal. This thought is very close to me, that if we don't know how to use the sail, then we aren't

37:48

Speaker A

quite human yet, or maybe not human at all. We become humans precisely when we have an understanding of, let's say, why we live, right, and the ability to apply skills and effort. We must learn this throughout our whole life. In

38:01

Speaker A

order to reach this goal. This right here, this mastery of the sail, is the realization of our own freedom. There.

38:11

Speaker A

And if you say, right, if you treat life as if, in general, uh, nothing depends on us, then we will end up somewhere and surely not in the best place.

38:22

Speaker A

This is the program "I Don't Believe." We will return after a short break. This is the program "I Don't Believe." We are continuing our conversation.

38:29

Speaker A

In our understanding, uh, knowledge makes a person free. And if we accept your metaphor, then this very sail, for me, is knowledge.

38:38

Speaker A

But this is knowledge of the world in its immanent conditioning, in its internal forces, in its internal interactions. And this applies to the human world as well. Because to liberate man is a noble goal. But there is nothing worse than attempts to take

38:54

Speaker A

on this task without knowing where you are sailing and how to get there. Because these attempts have cost us, people, humanity, very dearly. There have been more than one, not one, not two of them. The most tragic, perhaps,

39:06

Speaker A

is the history of the 20th century. It is the story of an attempt at liberation that took place in our unhappy fatherland. And it ended in enormous bloodshed because people did not know necessity. Or rather, they thought they knew.

39:24

Speaker A

They thought so, yes. Well, in the same way, they can think that they know God as well. Errors within an error.

39:29

Speaker A

And this is an important thesis, that someone thinks he knows God. And, uh, well, let's perhaps even now not so much about the fact that, given that, I don't know, there were periods in history when the Church took on the

39:44

Speaker A

functions of governing nations and the Church always took them on. It is an institution of power. Ah, but even a person within the scope of their life or within the life of their family, for example, leading their children and

39:58

Speaker A

family somewhere, assuming that if they are a believer, they know God and know where they are going. But how can a person actually know? Can they be sure if they truly know God?

40:11

Speaker A

I just want to respond to something else a little bit right now. You said the Church is an instrument of power.

40:19

Speaker A

Right. But again, it is very important here to understand this very word, " power." And in the Gospel, power is understood not just differently, but in a completely opposite way, one might say, to the common understanding. The Lord says that among people, princes

40:42

Speaker A

dominate, right? And power means submission, it means control. But it shall not be so among you. And whoever among you wants to be the greatest, considers being the least, and then he washed the disciples 'feet, and so on.

40:54

Speaker A

He is talking about a completely different kind of power. Yes, in the history of the Church, such power has almost never existed, with the exception of some isolated fragments, perhaps. But that does not mean that this is what Christ actually taught.

41:08

Speaker A

And the Apostolic Church, as far as I understand and know, was exactly like that, but very quickly, let's say, well , these guidelines were lost. That is the tragedy of the Church. For me, there is simply hope that we are only

41:24

Speaker A

at the beginning. I think, and I truly hope, that another kind of Christianity is historically possible, where there won't be this, so to speak, pagan— that is, worldly—understanding of power and relationships, but it will be truly Christian. Christian means

41:45

Speaker A

service. It is where I give of myself; if I have power, it is given to me for only one thing: to serve the one with whom I am connected by this power. To serve. To give of oneself.

41:57

Speaker A

I am forced to remain on the ground of facts. The Church did indeed exercise power as a social institution, in exact accordance with the classical definition. Power is the appropriation of another's will. The Church gave orders, the Church punished. It is no

42:13

Speaker A

coincidence, after all, that the Apostle Paul is depicted with a sword. This is also, probably, iconography.

42:17

Speaker A

To me, this is a sin in the Church, right? This is our, you see, a paradox arises. A paradox arises that in the name of the teacher, yes, and his teaching, deeds are justified that are diametrically opposed, to those associated with him.

42:31

Speaker A

It is not a paradox, but rather a phenomenon that is very common in the history of human culture.

42:36

Speaker A

Right? But then this church of yours, which you cherish, is only possible under certain social conditions. And I will name the most important one. It is the very condition that the communists, in principle, strived for. That is equality, the eradication of human

42:55

Speaker A

inequality. But the thing is, you cannot destroy it through violence, you cannot destroy it through forced redistribution, including the redistribution of wealth. Do you understand? People must be equal, first and foremost, in their human dignity.

43:11

Speaker A

Before whom must they be equal? Before themselves. They do not need an external authority.

43:17

Speaker A

Well, look, for me, a human is a self-sufficient being; that, in fact, is the source of my atheism.

43:26

Speaker A

Yes, he doesn't look very good in his own history, but he has hope. And here, I think, you and I agree. Only the object of this hope is different.

43:35

Speaker A

When I asked you before whom this equality should exist, it was very important and fundamental to me; Dostoevsky once said that if we want to build a brotherhood, we must first become brothers. And to him, it was obvious that we can only be brothers in

43:50

Speaker A

one case, if we all have one father. Because you cannot become brothers otherwise, right? Brothers are those, so to speak, who have one father. And in the face of this one father, we are all brothers, we are all equal, because

44:04

Speaker A

we have the one before whom we are equal and who is himself our brother, right? Because Christ says exactly that : "You are not my slaves, you are my brothers." Those are his words. Again, in historical Christianity they are

44:16

Speaker A

rarely recalled, but they haven't gone anywhere. The Gospel is precisely about this, about God becoming one of us. And that is precisely why we can be equal.

44:27

Speaker A

And there are no other paths to this equality, as history, unfortunately, has shown us through very painful lessons. Well, there you go. And the fact that here, too, we see, in a sense , a failure of Christianity, yes,

44:44

Speaker A

because we don't see that... well, we don't see success yet, yes, I would say that we see a failure, and this is a major topic for me, so to speak, for reflection, a big question.

45:00

Speaker A

On one hand, the Gospel, and in the Gospels the Lord says that you are a little flock, but in this little flock, already here and now, this salvation— which is what we were talking about— is not some authority that will be

45:13

Speaker A

somewhere else later. Like we don't have it right now, but after death, yes , we can attain it. No, the Lord says something completely different.

45:24

Speaker A

Salvation means when God is with us, when we are close to God. When we, being created beings, have, so to speak , a connection with the uncreated, with the eternal. Being temporary, we have a connection with the eternal. And this

45:36

Speaker A

happens here during our lifetime. Moreover, so to speak, it cannot be any other way. And, actually, this is what makes the Gospel a joyful thing, that he brings this possibility into our lives today, here and now. Right. And

45:52

Speaker A

he says that where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among you. Right. This salvation is already happening. And this already, and this is, in fact, the church.

46:03

Speaker A

Thank you so much for this conversation , and separately for its composure, respectfulness, tact, and depth. This was the program "I Don't Believe."

Topics: atheism faith religion philosophy God freedom Christianity theology belief spirituality

Study this video

- [Flashcards from this video](https://sozai.app/tools/ai-flashcard-generator/?from=transcript&id=74637)
- [Quiz on this video](https://sozai.app/tools/quiz-generator/?from=transcript&id=74637)

Free, made by AI from this transcript. No signup.


---
This is the markdown twin of https://sozai.app/transcript/conversation-atheist-priest-vyacheslav-vladimir-krzhevov/ — the same content, without the markup.
Published by SozAI (https://sozai.app). Reuse and quotation are allowed with attribution and a link back.
Machine-readable index: https://sozai.app/llms.txt · data API: https://sozai.app/api/