of the Church, as well as charity and the prayer of the living.
Mr. Osipov considered Tradition of the Church naive and outmoded notions, and put forward their own extravagant theory. It is not known whether he was given a revelation, during which he visited heaven and hell, or he, in the words of Maxim Gorky, he put “under the skull of a hedgehog,” but one way or another, Mr. Osipov announced that in hell there are schools and catechetical church, which teach and perform a religious rite is not theologians and priests who have got for the sins in hell, and the apostles and Christ. We knew that in hell sinners met demons in hell Osipovsky soul meets not Satan, but Christ Himself.
I’m talking about the views of Mr. Osipov, sent on his behalf by Mr. Zaitsev, who serves in my controversy with Mr. Osipov in the role of a second. Did the Fathers was not discovered something that is open to Mr. Osipov? Or shall we say, why the Fathers were openly opposed to the fact that said Osipov, namely, that the soul chooses good and evil in life and after death, loses the ability to choose, and if a person can define themselves after death, then what’s the problem earthly life as a preparation for eternity? Surely only in the performance of certain moral norms, in fact not based on religion? As what the words of Holy Scripture and the teaching of the whole Church that man is saved by faith? Surely, Mr. Osipov crosses the value of earthly life and believes that everything can be corrected in hell? But faith in the future life as a free choice and moral act, will replace the evidence. Who is right? Church tradition or Mr. Osipov? Of the two conflicting with each other revelations one must be false.
A falsehood in religion – a kind of