P.S.   And   now   we   will   say   something   about   “healers”, “prayer warriors for the whole world” (such dreamers, hearing that the holy fathers prayed for the whole world and even for devils – e.g. St. Isaac the Syrian, St. Silouan of Athos, etc., healed out of love in the Holy Spirit, out of mercy, compassion for the sick – and they themselves start “performing miracles” and “praying” for others with the authority of a helper, a savior!?! What argument? – We pray to God for their salvation, not we ourselves heal, we love, we pity (not clear whom? – themselves)!? – We will expose this madness and blindness, because there have appeared a lot of BLIND guides, SICK healers and INSANE sages!!!). The man and I talked and looked together – “How do you believe?”.    And    it turns out,    that    this    “ascetic”, “love-abundant” man does not even know the elementary truths of Orthodox theology (Only a theologian prays correctly – see above) and is not aware of the most obvious laws of spiritual life. Ignoramus in theology (does not understand and does not know Holy Scripture, where his madness is directly exposed), and does not live the right spiritual life – parochial, but self-willed (where I want, there I stand at all-night services, dream; where I want, there I commune; when I want I go to church, to whichever church I want (not to a community, assembly of people, no) – i.e., a dreamer, who actually, probably, is not in the Church. – assumptions arguments in Part II. Chapter. Parish), because he does not know the simplest in spiritual life, that is, where to start (and, only he who is faithful in little, is put in charge of much!!! And he who competes lawfully – receives the crown of victory!!! See the order, the mode of spiritual life in Part II.). Now we will tell something from this conversation for reflection. Only some arguments expressed from both sides (for those who need deeper, more accessible – in a private conversation, through correspondence – address at the end of the book), and that in a chaotic order with repetitions.
I was told by the father, if you are leading a debate with someone, do not try to immediately convert someone to the Truth – this is impossible. Your main goal is to provoke doubt in a person in their rightness, to help them question their own experience and knowledge. Help them deny themselves: that is, the opponent asserts something, and your task is to help them with auxiliary questions and logical hints (if they do not know the answer) to come to a denial of what they just asserted! That, which they said “yes” to a few minutes says – “no”. I ask: so yes, or no? He must logically say that he was mistaken! For example: having previously agreed on colors – which color is white, and which is black (or not agreeing, but right away giving the word to the “expert”, and then showing him that he is not an expert at all, but a charlatan or just a fool), I propose to the opponent, having led him into a house with many rooms, and having led him into one of the rooms, to say what color the walls in it are. We make a record of his testimony, with his own signature– “yes!”, and continue through the rooms and floors (arguments). And, after a while, again lead this “expert” into the same room, having prepared him with arguments, told him more about colors and optics, and ask him, what color are the walls in it? – “Black!”. Again we record the results of the examination – “no!”. And I show the “expert” that this is the same room, whose walls were somehow white for him! The conclusion I must help him make – he is either color-blind, or, what is worse, blind, or an impostor (deluded) – in a word not normal… and further the process of treatment… My task is to help the opponent deny himself, or to show him that he is not competent in what he is talking about, presenting himself as a teacher of nations! And arguments, in which “foam flies from the mouth”, will not bring any benefit. Because the Truth needs to be reached from the inside – it cannot be imposed. Therefore, my task is not to impose the truth on the opponent – by force drive into Paradise, but first show him that he is deluded (help him see himself without rose-colored glasses), and then propose (not impose on the defeated as a victor) the way to the acquisition of truth in freedom (only in freedom – go and look for yourself! check, judge…). Deeply mistaken are those who impose their “truths” – they have no Truth! This is one way to conduct a debate-announcement. You, perhaps, know a better one – but in all Orthodox methods: not against the neighbor, but for him – with love and for the sake of love…
Thus, my task, by God’s commandment, was to test the spirit whether it is from God! If from God, then I will take the position of a disciple, to listen to him, to learn something. And if not from God – then to help the person come out of delusion and possession. Therefore, I started asking questions and listening to the answers and arguments of the interlocutor. It turned out that he does not know Orthodox theology, Scripture, and elementary laws of spiritual life – a blind man, who does something (does not know what) by groping. Let’s look together at this discussion – at some questions that were asked and the answers and arguments of the opponents (selectively, fragmentarily):