In 1956 an American game show debuted called “To Tell the Truth”. Each round of the game introduced three people all claiming to be the same person, and a team of panelists would ask them questions. Those pretending to be the real (usually famous) person would make up answers, while the real person would answer truthfully. The inquiring panelists would then guess which was the real person. The host of the show would conclude by saying, “Will the real (name) please stand up?” and he or she would then stand up thereby revealing their identity and the accuracy of the panelists’ guesses.

The story of Cain and Abel is the story of the human race. It is tragically timeless, for it is tirelessly enacted over and over again in every generation. As Larry Norman once queried (as aged historians may remember from his song “Nothing Really Changes”), “Will Cain kill Abel—with a bayonet?” Regardless of the choice of weapon, somewhere and some place that murder is happening even now as you are reading this.

G. K. Chesterton wrote that he once left fairy tales lying on the floor of the nursery and hadn’t found any books so sensible since (from his Orthodoxy, “The Ethics of Elfland”). I suggest that Christianity is one such fairy tale, and also that it is a myth. But it is a fairy tale come true, and a myth that became a fact.

We continue our series examining St. Matthew’s citations of the Old Testament. Today we look at his citation of Micah 5:2. “In the Masoretic Hebrew it reads, “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you will come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.” The LXX reads similarly: “And you, Bethlehem, house of Ephrathah, you are very small to be in the thousands of Judah, from which for me will come out to be for a ruler of Israel, and his goings out are from the beginning, from the days of eternity.” It is all the more surprising therefore that St. Matthew’s version reads a little differently from either the Hebrew or the Greek. It reads, “And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you will come a ruler who will govern my people Israel.”

We continue our series examining St. Matthew’s citations of the Old Testament. Today we look at his citation of Jeremiah 31:15. It reads, “A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are not.” The LXX renders it more or less the same way, though the order of the chapters is different. In the LXX the text is found in Jeremiah chapter 38, not chapter 31. But the meaning of the text is the same.

We conclude our series examining St. Matthew’s citations of the Old Testament. Today we look at his citation of Isaiah 40:3, which reads, “A voice cries, ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of Yahweh! Make straight in the desert a highway for our God!”

A wise man once said "what we believe always remains intellectually possible, and never becomes intellectually compulsive. I have an idea," he said, "that when this ceases to be so, the world will be ending."

I forget, in the course of my long life as a Christian, how many times I have heard people assure me that “God will never give you more than you can handle”. By this they seemed to mean that God knows my emotional limits and capabilities, and will make sure that no disaster befalls me that will tax me emotionally beyond my present strength. Sometimes they affix a Bible verse from 1 Corinthians 10:13 to it to make their case: “No temptation has overtaken you but such is common to man, and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, that you may be able to endure it”. I must report however, on the basis of my long life as a Christian, that the assuring notion that God will never give anyone more than they can handle is nonsense.

I have just read two fascinating pieces about Pope Francis’ recent and controversial document Fiducia Supplicans, which officially allows Roman Catholic priests to bless persons in same-sex relationships, one by an Orthodox and the other by a Roman Catholic.

I remember once when a friend was sharing with me his distress at the liberalism afflicting his Protestant denomination, and the fact that many of their clergy were denying such things as the virgin birth and the divinity of Christ. While murmuring sympathetically, I mentioned that such denials were not the same problem in the Orthodox Church. He then asked me what sort of things we did argue about. When I replied, “Well, things like whether or not a woman can receive Holy Communion while she is menstruating,” he looked at me funny. He didn’t ask, “What planet are you guys on?” but I could tell he was thinking it. Loudly.

When we are reading the literature of the ancient Hebrews (i.e. the Old Testament) it is important to be aware of the kind of glasses we are wearing—that is, we should be aware of the unspoken conceptual presuppositions that we bring to our reading. If we are not aware of our ingrained conceptual presuppositions, we can make mistakes in understanding ancient literature.

Protestant critics of Orthodoxy fault us for many things, but one of the foremost of their objections is our devotion to Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Hostility to Roman Catholicism is built into Protestant DNA, so anything in Orthodoxy that resembles something in Roman Catholicism will be subject to criticism, including such more or less innocuous things like clergy wearing cassocks and calling themselves “Father”. Our Orthodox devotion to Mary (whom we call “the Theotokos”) often heads the list of Protestant objections, since it features so prominently in Roman Catholicism.

In his book Reflections on the Psalms, C. S. Lewis wrote a chapter on praising which began with him saying that “It is possible (and it is to be hoped) that this chapter will be unnecessary for most people”. In the same spirit, I hope that this and subsequent episodes on the topic of predestination will be unnecessary for most people.

In my last episode, I examined Paul’s words in Romans 9 and their bearing upon the classic Reformed teaching about predestination—i.e. the notion that before the creation of the world God had already chosen some to be saved and some to be damned, and that these choices were based solely upon His sovereign will, and that furthermore, our human choices to accept or reject Christ were simply the outworking of God’s primordial decisions. Those whom He chose to be saved He would draw to Himself so that they would accept Christ, and those whom He had chosen for damnation He would harden so that they would reject Christ. Those teaching this often refer to Paul’s words in Ephesians 1 in support of their views, so we will examine that passage here.

A story is told of the final temptation of Christ. Satan had been trying to tempt Jesus to sin, to compromise, to abandon His divine mission (see Matthew 4:1-11 and Luke 4:1-13), and according to this story, Satan tried one last time to deflect Jesus from His goal. Jesus had been arrested, interrogated, condemned by the Sanhedrin, brought before Pilate, again condemned, mocked and flogged. He carried His cross along the way from the Roman praetorium to the place of execution and was nailed to the cross. His adversaries continued to mock Him, even unto the end: “He saved others, He cannot save Himself! He is the King of Israel; let Him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in Him!” (Matthew 27:42). And it was then, the story goes, that Satan whispered into His ear the words of the final temptation, intended to convince Jesus to give it all up and indeed come down from the cross. Satan said to Him, “They’re not worth it, Lord”.

Fr. Apostolos talks about financial pressures, contentment, and priorities. "As we grow in contentment, and learn to resist the allure of the never-ending parade of consumer goods that we didn't know existed a moment ago, but somehow cannot now possibly live without, a new world of possibilities will emerge for us in the freedom that only Jesus Christ can give."

On Labor Day weekend, Fr. Apostolos shares about the tyranny of being BUSY (Being Under Satan's Yoke) and entering into God's rest.

Fr. Apostolos shares about suffering on the Feast of the Universal Exaltation of the Holy Cross. He quotes an abbot, "The one who has suffered nothing in this life has been abandoned by God."

Fr. Apostolos shares from 2 Corinthians 6 about the importance of finding the right context for our life in Christ. "Come out and be separate...."

Fr. Apostolos speaks about accepting and rejecting Christ.

Fr. Apostolos encourages us that it is possible to change. May we approach the Feast of the Transfiguration "with a sense of humility and anticipation that we too might be radically changed into that same image from glory to glory."

Fr. Apostolos talks about feeding ourselves spiritually, not only physically."Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled."

In view of the national media's drumbeat of fear-mongering, Fr. Apostolos reminds us of angelic salutation "Fear not, for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy!"

Fr. Apostolos talks about the history and importance of fasting.

Fr. Apostolos shares some of the history of Holy Councils through the years, and some reflections about the upcoming council in Crete.

Fr. Apostolos shares encouragement for the start of Great Lent.

Fr. Apostolos introduces the Lenten Prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian, "O Lord and Master of my life..."

This is lesson three in Fr. Apostolos' series on Divine Worship; this installment addressing the historical development of the Small Entrance and the significance of the Readings in view of the centrality of Holy Scripture in the lives of Christian believers.

Fr. Apostolos addresses the inner meaning of the Feast of the Incarnation, through the perspective of the latest Star Wars film.

Fr. Apostolos Hill addresses the difference between the view of the Church as a building and the view of the Church as souls.

After the recent news of Robin Williams' untimely death, Fr. Apostolos talks about depression and suicide, and the hope offered by Christ and His Church.

Fr. Apostolos Hill's homily is taken from the Gospel of Zaccheus, where he focuses on the meaning of the Greek word for "lost" in verse 10 ("apololos") which is used to describe those who are perishing and who are being destroyed.

Fr. Apostolos Hill offers a Lord of the Rings based depiction of the centrality of the Kingdom of Heaven as the context for our lives in Christ, and a clean break from the various "kingdoms" which vie for our loyalties here below.

Fr. Apostolos Hill delivers a homily about the 1st Ecumenical Council and how only the God-man Jesus Christ is the Bridge that unites Heaven and Earth.

Fr. Apostolos Hill provides a straightforward expository of the peace that Jesus provides.

Fr. Apostolos Hill shares a homily from the service for the Indiction regarding the Orthodox view of of time and how it is consecrated through the prayer of the Church.

Fr. Apostolos Hill shares a scriptural survey of the demonic horde and what our response to their influence ought to be in this season.

During the annual parish festival, Fr. Apostolos Hill addresses the difference between the Church building which patrons toured, and the Church which--or rather, who--were serving them on the festival grounds.

Fr. Apostolos Hill speaks about the Parable of the Good Samaritan and the image of the man beset by robbers on the road down to Jericho. This is about the lethal reality of sin as the Prophet Ezekiel stated "the soul that sinneth, it shall die," and the totally effective cure available in the blood of the Christ.

Fr. Apostolos Hill shares a homily on the Sunday of the Blind Man about the Causes and Cures of Spiritual Blindness.

Fr. Apostolos Hill speaks on the difference between Independence and Freedom with a brief history lesson about Independence Day.

Fr. Apostolos Hill speaks on the theme of the Sunday before the Exaltation of the Cross with a challenge to consider that we have been viewing the Cross incorrectly; e.g. as an impediment to our happiness and not as the cause of joy in the life of the redeemed.