Why Orthodoxy?

There are many different religions apart from christianity. There are also different religious doctrines in Christianity. One may wonder, why Orthodoxy? Why should I be Orthodox christian and not a Catholic or a Protestant or a supporter of another religion? Which is the truth and which religious doctrine should someone actually follow? I am writing this article to let people know why I believe in Orthodoxy and I believe that the truth is found there.

To begin with, I happen to be very close to someone who was a Protestant and converted to Orthodoxy. Thus, I also plan to explain some reasons why he thinks that Protestantism is not the truth. Apart from that, I will also elaborate reasons why I think that Orthodoxy is the truth in comparison to other religious doctrines.

Some reasons why Protestantism is probably wrong

I am not an expert on this topic, but I am probably able to mention briefly a few reasons why Protestantism is probably not the truth. To begin with, Protestant churches are different in many things from Orthodox churches. The convert from Protestantism that I know told me that in Protestant churches people often seem less serious. I had made this observation too in a university's christian union, which many Protestants attended. They are less serious about the importance of their faith, but in parallel they talk a lot about how great Christianity is and about the importance of spreading it. In general, one can find some contradictions in the ways they behave.

Furthermore, some views of Protestantism often change as time passes. A belief that did not originally exist is, for instance, the belief that women can become pastors. This was not originally permitted, but as society changed, some views of Protestantism changed as well. Sometimes, views of protestantism may even be altered quickly. For instance, between the time that my friend was a child and then an adult there were already changes. If a religious doctrine is true, why does it need to change its teachings? There is one truth and it does not change. Also, if the doctrine is truth, why are its teachings altered when the views of society change?

Finally, there are certain inconsistences in dogmatic views of Protestants. I am not very familiar with the Protestant dogma, so I will not get in much detail in this, but I can say one example that my friend told me. Protestants generally have the view that if you ask from God to save you, He will save you regardless of what happens next. If you decide to commit murders after you ask this, He will still save you.

If this is true, what is the point of following commands that God gives or attending church services? If one has no other reason to obey a command (e.g. does not mind about comminting an immoral action, such as murder), then he can just ask to be saved and then has no motive to exhibit good behaviour.

I am not very familiar with the teachings of Protestantism, but this does not seem to make much logical sense to me. Certain Protestants have made attempts to find explanations for this, but one may not necessarily consider them satisfactory. My opinion is that one should read about Protestantism in more detail to make more accurate judgements, but this belief is certainly a “red flag” for me.

Arguments in favour of orthodoxy

Consistent and original faith

As I have more knowledge about Orthodoxy, I will attempt to elaborate in more detail on reasons why I believe that Orthodoxy is the truth. One of them, is the fact that as Orthodox Christians, our dogmatic beliefs are the original beliefs that the Church had since its first years. In particular, the teachings of the Orthodox Church have never changed. It is the original belief that people had since the time of Christ. Later, through the centuries, modifications to the dogmatic teachings of Christianity were made by people. This is how Catholism, and later Protestantism arose. However, Orthodoxy has kept the same teachings all these centuries. There is no modification that has been made and could be made by a human to the teachings that God taught. This, in my opinion, is an important argument in favour of Orthodoxy. Humans can make changes to teachings if they want, but I believe that this reduces the validity of a dogma and shows that a specific dogma may have actually been created by humans and not be the word of God.

No inconsistences in dogmatic teachings and between religion and science

An important observation about Orthodoxy is the fact that there are no inconsistences in the dogmatic teachings that it has. In fact there are some inconsistences that have been suggested by atheists, but these can be debunked very easily.

When I was a teenager, there was a period in my life when I questioned my faith. I read a lot of arguments of atheists against Orthodoxy. I even became obsessed with reading such information for a period of my life. I read so many arguments of atheists and I have to admit that I initially did not understand well if they were wrong and why. I decided through the years to actually ask priests or other people with theological knowledge about these arguments. It turned out that the arguments were invalid and based on inadequate theological knowledge.

For example, someone once told me that there is a potential explanation for a miracle that happened somewhere. However, the Church does not only define as miracles things that cannot be explained. Life is considered to be a miracle and this can definitely be explained. If you pray to God to be treated from a disease quickly and you get treated very fast, this is considered a miracle too, but there is no theological reason to think that it does not have a scientific explanation. It may or may not have. There are certain miracles that are believed to probably not have a scientific explanation, but there are also other things that may or definitely have an explanation and the Church has no problem with that.

The Orthodox Church also does not have contradictions to science. At least, I have not found any. I actually plan to talk about the lack of inconsistences of Orthodoxy (contradictions in relation to science or inconsistences in general) in another article, but I will give an example now.

Most people know the famous example of evolution and the story with Adam and Eve. The bible teaches that Adam and Eve were the first humans. Many Christians do not believe in evolution, but they believe in the story taught in the Genesis. The truth is, however, that the Orthodox Church has not really been against evolution, not even in the past. This can be understood if someone reads the works of the Three Hierarchs (Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom). These people were fathers of the church, who were also scientists. They lived in the 4th century A.D and believed in evolution. Scientists then believed that there may have been evolution; they had different views regarding how it may have happened from the view that science has today. In works of the Three Hierarchs, their views about how evolution may have happened are explained.

Therefore, it is evident that they were not against evolution and they actually even had hypothesis of how life may have evolved to be as it is today. They believed that the story of Adam and Eve was symbolic and they believed this at a time when science had definitely not progressed enough to be a real threat to religion in the field of evolution. They could have kept the story of Adam and Eve and have said nothing different. There was no reason for them to propose something different. Thus, in the example of evolution, one cannot even accuse religion of changing its views when science makes new discoveries.

Finally, I have to admit that the fact that that orthodoxy does not present inconsistences to science and also “plot holes” to teachings that it has (e.g. like Protestantism and the belief that someone can be saved simply because he asked it) is my conclusion from reading many arguments of atheists and asking people with theological knowledge to see if there is any answer to what the atheists said. Someone else may disagree, but I also know someone who has a lot of theological knowledge and has investigated arguments of atheists and he has drawn the same conclusion independently from me. My ex protestant friend has also concluded that there are no inconsistences in orthodoxy independently. I personally believe that we are right, but I wanted to let the reader know that this is a conclusion from an investigation of the writer and not a generally accepted truth. I believe that it is worth for people to investigate themselves, if they wish to draw their own conclusions.

I think that the fact that Orthodoxy does not present inconsistences to science and also “plot holes” to teachings that it has (e.g. like Protestantism and the belief that someone can be saved simply because he asked it) is a sign of genuinity of this faith. Think about it. When something is human made, by definition it will never be completely perfect. You cannot create a doll or a machine without having any imperfect parts. Humans are imperfect, so something that they will do during a creation process will be inevitably imperfect. It is impossible that this will not happen at any point during the creation process. Therefore, even if I had no other argument in favour of orthodoxy, the fact that I have concluded that it has no inconsistences to science or to its teachings is definitely enough for me to conclude that this faith was not made by a human. It is the perfect teaching of God Himself.

Perfection in the way of life that orthodoxy teaches

Another important argument in favour of Orthodoxy is the perfection of the way of life that it teaches. Orthodoxy, similarly to other religions, has many commands of how people should behave. Studies have been carried out for some of these commands and found how good they actually are from people.

A common belief taught to Orthodox people is that one of the reasons why we have to obey God’s commands is the fact that this is the best thing for us. He made us and He knows what behaviours are best for us e.g. to be happy. Scientists have investigated some ways of life proposed by Orthodoxy and they have corroborated this.

For example, a religious rule says that people should only have serious relationships, which if they work out, will lead to marriage. They should not have relationships where they do not truly care about someone and they simply enjoy what the other person offers for a short period of time. The truth is that most people would probably be happier, if they obeyed this rule (Fessler, 2016).

Another rule that has been judged a lot from society is that people should not have premarital sex. This rule sounds very silly and obsolete. I did not grow in a religious family and I actually laughed the first time that I heard about someone who said he was not having premarital sex. Did you know however, that research has shown that people who have no premarital sex are 22% happier than people who do (Watson, 2015)?

I am not going to judge someone for not wanting to wait until marriage to have sex. I just wanted to say one thing because I staunchly believe this and it impresses me. Can you just stop for a second and think about the number 22%? This means having almost ¼ more of the total happiness that you already have! This is actually big. We are not talking about something that will make a small contribution to your happiness, as many things often do. I am personally impressed by this number and I wanted to say this.

In addition, both having premarital sex and cohabilitating with more sexual partners than only one’s spouse have been found to lead to 33% higher chance of divorce (Alvare, 2004). Higher divorce rates for couples who have cohabilitated before marriage have also been observed in other studies (Lillard et al., 1995; Dush et al., 2003). It is not certain whether cohabilitation itself causes a higher divorce rate or it this is attributed to other factors that are correlated with cohabilitation. Nevertheless, I find this finding interesting and I would personally try to avoid cohabilitation, unless we have a clear reason to know what causes higher divorces and we are able to avoid it.

Another example is fasting. Fasting means that people are told by religion to not eat certain foods (it is similar to being a vegan, but not exactly the same. For instance, someone who fasts can eat honey, but vegans cannot) for certain days or for a period of time. Did you know that doing that has been found to have health benefits? In particular, Orthodox fasting has been found to lead to 12.5% lower end-total cholesterol, 15.9% lower end-LDL cholesterol, as well as 1.5% lower end-BMI (Sarri et al., 2003); a potential impact on obesity has also been found.

I am not saying these to push anyone. It actually took me a long time to accept some rules and I wanted to hear good arguments to be sure whether I want to make such big changes in my life. I am just saying this because I believe that having rules that are actually good for people to follow is potentially also a sign of the genuity of Orthodoxy. I feel as if God who is perfect and always knows which is the truth told us these rules. Other religions have rules or philosophies that are good for people too, but not all rules they have are necessarily good for people. For Ramadan, for example, there is a disagreement between studies regarding its effects on health (Trepanowski and Bloomer, 2010).

Anthropomorphic elements often observed in other religions and other elements that would suggest that there might be something inaccurate in a religion

This argument might refer to Christianity versus other religions in general. I am not sure if it is observed only in orthodoxy or other Christian doctrines as well. It has to do with anthropomorphic elements that are often observed in religions. For example, ancient greek Gods looked like humans. Another example of a goddess who has human form is the Hindu goddess “Kali”. This goddess has human form and is believed to be black in colour. She has four hands; in one she holds a sword, in another one the head of a giant and with the last two hands she encourages people who believe in her. Her eyes are also red and her face and chest are covered with blood.

Anthropomorphism is not observed in orthodoxy, in contrast. It is may be said that the fact that humans were made according to the image and according to the likeness of God is anthropomorphic. However, such an argument would again be based in inaccurate theological knowledge. Many people think that “according to the image of God” means that God looks like a human. This is not what this phrase actually means, however. It means that humans have reasonable soul and free will, similarly to God. The phrase “according to the likeness” means that we can have a relationship with God and reach theosis. It has nothing to do e.g. with the way that God looks. There are misconceptions regarding the meanings of these phrases. Actually, God is believed to be a spirit, so He is definitely not believed to look like a human.

Another argument may be God’s gender. Someone may wonder why God is a “He” and not a “She”. Could this not have been created by a society where patriarchy ruled and men were believed to be superior to women? However, there is a theological truth that very few people are aware of. This is the fact that the God to whom we believe as Christians has no gender!

I will not pretend that I was not a bit shocked when I first heard of this. I was surprised. However, this is the truth theologically. People with a lot of theological knowledge know this, but most people often do not know this. It is probably true that people started calling God with a “He” because there was patriarchy and they wanted Him to be a man. Thus, it was spread and passed through generations to use “He” for God and think that He actually has a gender and is a man. The theology, however, does say that He has no gender. The fact that we refer to Him with a gender may reflect the patriarchy and what people wanted, but it is not the truth about God, based on what Christianity says.

Another example that I will give is this of the Holy Spirit. Many people see in icons a pigeon, which represents the Holy Spirit. What they may not know, however, is the fact that the Holy spirit is SYMBOLISED as a pigeon and is not actually believed to look like a pigeon!

The fact that there are no anthropomorphisms in orthodoxy is a big sign of genuinity again to me. I do believe that if God exists, He has no reason to look like a human or a pigeon or be a man. If He did, I would not consider it a PROOF that He doesn’t exist, but it would definitely be an indication that something may be wrong here and that this may not be true. This is not who God is supposed to be, however…

The hatred for Christ that does not end

This is a short argument, but this is something that I heard and impressed me. I wanted to say it to people. Someone that I know told to a priest that he is not sure if God exists and the priest replied that Christ is the true God because 2000 years later people can’t stop arguing about Him and things that He did or said or they cannot stop hating Him. I actually believe that this is a good argument. Buddha and Allah etc are believed by believers of other religions. However, there are not so many arguments about them as there are about Jesus. You do not often see so many people screaming about what Buddha said and fighting about whether he was good or awful and shouting about whether things that he did were good or he was wrong. Christ has always been more controversial than other founders of religions. I believe that this makes Him more genuine. Usually the people who have been more good to the world had the most friends, but also the most enemies…

For Christ we see many people hating Him or trying to humiliate Christianity and bring it down. It is true that more people choose to be atheists today, but there is a big hatred surrounding Christianity in particular. There is an ongoing hatred around Christ and Christianity that is still HOT, even 2000 years later. This is actually something that makes me feel that Christ is the true God.

Imagine that someone is angry with something that you did or said. He will be angry for some time and then talk to you again. He may also never talk to you, but this will only last for a lifetime. He may humiliate you or treat you badly, but this has limits. If they were still alive, they would not still be angry with you 2000 years later. Even if they were, the argument would not be still HOT and they would not be keeping and keeping to want to destroy you all the time. This does not make sense.

What the priest said was that the impact of Christ to the world was so big that nobody can stop talking about it 2000 years later. This is a sign of the fact that Christ is actually perfect (i.e. a God) and people cannot stop talking about Him. They cannot get bored of Him and everything that He does or talks about has an unlimited importance. There is no limit in the impact of something that He can do or say because He is perfect and He has no limits. He is everything and there is no end in how much you can talk about Him and who He is.

The orthodox experience of God

I left the best and most important argument in favour of Orthodoxy for the end. This is actually something that someone needs to experience to understand it, but I often feel that it is something very important that people should know. It is an important reason why Orthodox people and people who teach about the faith say that Orthodoxy is true. This is something hard to understand, but I want to give you an idea and then, I have suggestions regarding how you can check yourselves what I told you really means and if you consider it important. What I am going to describe may happen to some extent to other religions too, but in Orthodoxy it is deeper.

People often feel that they have a relationship with God. They listen to Him and they feel that they sense His presence and actions that He does in their lives. There is something deeper in Orthodoxy, however. People who have felt God as well as His presence, during Church sacraments or during other times in their lives, feel that they somehow know Him. They know that they are interacting with a person, they feel that what they are living is genuine and they feel strongly that this is the truth. They strongly feel that what they experience is truly genuine.

This is not something that can be easily explained by words, but there are ways in which people can experience it and judge themselves what they believe about this. In the Bible, it appears in a great number of passages or verses that God reveals Himself to us, and reveals Himself to anyone who truly and genuinely seeks To Know Him. Examples of passages or verses where this can be found include Jeremiah 33:2-3, Jοhn 1:4, 3:2-3, 8:12, 8:32, Romans 1:20 etc.

When I decided to become more religious, I saw that there were many things that I did not know about how I should develop as a Christian and about the faith in general. I prayed to God to guide me in this. He actually answered to my prayer very strongly! Many things happened that really made me what I should become and brought me closer to Him. He really did answer that prayer.

As far as I am aware, it is a general pattern that God usually replies to prayers that bring you closer to Him. Also, the Bible says that if someone genuinely seeks God, He will reveal Himself to him. Theologically, it is impossible that someone will genuinely care to seek God and not receive a revelation from Him. It is important that there is a genuine desire to learn the truth and seek God. People often may not have that. If someone is genuine, however, God will reveal Himself to him.

My suggestion is that the reader genuinely seeks God and prays to Him to reveal Himself to him, if he exists, and reveal to him that orthodoxy is the truth.

Conclusion

All in all, there are certain arguments against Protestantism e.g. inconsistencies in religious teachings, while there are several arguments in favour of Orthodoxy. In particular, Orthodoxy is the original Christian faith and it does not seem to have inconsistencies in its teachings or in relation to science. There is also a claim that the way of life that it teaches has a perfection and investigations in certain Church commands have corroborated this. Moreover, there are no anthropomorphic elements and a never ending hatred against Christ is observed. Last but not least, the orthodox way of life is an experience during which people strongly feel that this faith is genuine, increasing the chances of this faith actually being the truth.

References

Alvare, H. (2004). Saying "Yes" before Saying "I Do": Premarital Sex and Cohabitation as a Piece of the Divorce Puzzle. Notre Dame JL Ethics & Pub. Pol'y, 18, p.7-88.

Dush, C., Cohan, C. and Amato, P. (2003). The Relationship Between Cohabitation and Marital Quality and Stability: Change Across Cohorts?. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(3), p.539-549.

Fessler, L. (2016). A lot of women don’t enjoy hookup culture—so why do we force ourselves to participate?. [online] Quartz. Available at: https://qz.com/685852/hookup-culture/ [Accessed 26 January 2022].

Lillard, L., Brien, M. and Waite, L. (1995). Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Dissolution: A Matter of Self-Selection?. Demography, 32(3), p.437-457.

Sarri, K., Tzanakis, N., Linardakis, M., Mamalakis, G. and Kafatos, A. (2003). Effects of Greek orthodox christian church fasting on serum lipids and obesity. BMC Public Health, 3(1).

Trepanowski, J. and Bloomer, R. (2010). The impact of religious fasting on human health. Nutrition Journal, 9(57).

Watson, P. (2015). Why Are Men Frightened of Marriage?. [video] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afu1Rwlggf8 [Accessed 26 January 2022].