As a result, we can do whatever we want with the Holy Scriptures. But the result is catastrophic: the result of the study of the Holy Scriptures with the help of the methods of biblical criticism is similar to the result of surgeons' search for the soul in a person – something cut and already soulless. It is the same here: thus, with the help of various linguistic analyses, numerical methods, and so on, the mysteries of God are not revealed. "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Matt. 5:8) – so it is said in the Scriptures.

"That is why there have been so many differences and errors among the interpreters themselves, that when they begin to interpret the Holy Scriptures. Do not care about the purification of the spirit: because of the impurity of the heart, they not only do not see the light of truth, but also invent many things contrary to the faith" [31, p. 69].

Thus, we are witnessing a break with the evangelical, apostolic and patristic traditions. But perhaps there is some benefit from Bible criticism? After all, how much work is put into it? The famous theologian of the 19th century, Bishop Michael (Gribanovsky), wrote that biblical criticism can be useful only if it is used for apologetic purposes. A great deal of effort has been expended in the world to study the Scriptures in the spirit described, but it has done little to strengthen faith and godliness. "The transformation of divinely inspired records, handed over to the believing spirit of the Church, into simple historical written monuments, subject to criticism by any person, even a completely unbeliever, is a direct sign of the Church's dying. This shows the break with the heavenly Church, from which the Scriptures come, with the Holy Scriptures. The Spirit who speaks in them and reproduces in our faith the living, once past events. It means to relate to the Church and its words completely – in the strict sense of the word – from the outside, that is, consequently, to be outside the Church, to leave it" [50, p. 63].

"But how? Is it not possible, is there not a need for historical criticism in the Church? Is it not obvious that the truth is not afraid of investigation and will triumph in the end?.. Yes, historical criticism is needed in the form of protection, just as guns are needed against the guns of enemies. But one must know that this is a method hostile to the Church, alien to her. It is needed when it is attacked, but not for the offensive and not for the inner uplift of life. It can only kill the enemy and repel him, and therefore must be applied only to enemies who attack us. Just as it is impossible to direct cannons, even if recaptured from the enemy, at one's own people, because they can only kill, wherever they are directed, so it is impossible to turn external criticism of the Scriptures inside the Church, to introduce it into its midst" [50, p. 65].

The last thing to add here is that, although modern biblical studies look very scientific, they are not quite scientific. What is the matter? The fact is that, as the priest Pavel Florensky rightly wrote in his work "The Pillar and Ground of Truth," "the scientific methods on which biblical criticism is based are probabilistic in nature" [88, pp. 544-551]. The fact is that the origin of certain features of the text of Holy Scripture can be explained by various reasons. And each of them could well take place. Thus, a serious researcher who claims scientific objectivity can and should, speaking about a particular phenomenon, list its possible causes, preferably with an indication of mathematical probability. And the existence of one, more probable, does not exclude the possibility of the existence of all the others. But that's not all. In addition to probability, which is a certain quantity lying in the interval between zero and one, there is also mathematical expectation. In our case, it may be called moral expectation. The probability of winning the lottery is low. But still winning is possible. And the desire to win makes you neglect the risk and prefer to bet on this small probability. This is where the question of faith arises. If one of the possibilities coincides with the Church's tradition, shall we not give preference to it? And will not the unbelieving scientist who wishes to justify his unbelief brush it aside for the sake of the one that is preferable to him? Hence the endless disputes between scientists, each of whom defends his point of view, refuting others. By the way, this is another argument not in favor of biblical criticism – using the same methods, scholars, relying on the same text, sometimes come to completely opposite conclusions.

Section I. THE PENTATEUCH OF MOSES

The Pentateuch is the name given to the first five books of Holy Scripture. It occupies the most important place among other books of Holy Scripture, because it contains the fundamental truths of biblical Revelation. Firstly, these books give the most general teaching about the fact that God is the Creator of the world, about the origin of the world and about the place of man in this world. And, secondly, both the original place of man in this created world and the history of the Fall, the history of the damage of this world, are given. Then there is the history of God's blessings to the human race and the beginning of the history of the salvation of mankind, the history of God's activity, so to speak, in bringing man to his original dignity and the promise that this will be done. It is on the pages of the Pentateuch that we see the reason why there is a significant narrowing of the geographical horizons of the biblical books from all mankind to the narrow framework of one of the peoples inhabiting the earth.

The term "Pentateuch" appears for the first time in Origen and Tertullian, that is, in Christian authors. In the text of the Old Testament itself, these books are called the "Law" or "the Law of Moses" or "the books of the Law of God." The traditional Hebrew name is also "Law" – "Torah".

In the Jewish tradition, each of the books is usually named after its first words (by analogy, in modern poetry, a poem that is not inscribed by the author is named after its first words). In the tradition of the Septuagint, that is, the Greek translation of the Holy Scriptures, each of these books was titled by translators in accordance with its main content: the first book was Genesis (from the Greek genesis – origin or becoming), the second – Exodus, the third – Leviticus, the fourth book – Numbers, and the fifth – Deuteronomy. As it was said earlier, the importance of this or that book of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament for us is determined, among other things, by the frequency of mentions and references to this book in the New Testament. Of these five books, three are among the five most frequently quoted: Genesis, Exodus, and Deuteronomy, along with books such as Psalms and the Book of Isaiah.

What events does the Pentateuch cover? Starting from the creation of the world and the history of the original mankind, the era of the patriarchs, the time of Abraham, the migration of the descendants of Abraham to Egypt, their departure from there and the journey to the borders of the land that God promised to give to the descendants of Abraham.

It must be said that until the seventeenth century, the authorship of Moses was never particularly disputed by anyone. Since the XVII century, such attempts have been made, but no convincing results have yet been obtained. The most serious arguments in favor of the fact that all these books were written very late, up to the post-exilic era, were put forward in the nineteenth century. However, the discoveries, both historical, paleographic, and archaeological, made in the twentieth century, in many respects devalued these achievements of nineteenth-century science and returned scientists to what the Church knew from the very beginning – these books were written by Moses. This, however, does not exclude some later editions that may be found in the text of these books. For example, there was nothing to prevent a later scribe from adding when describing a place that now, that is, at the time of this copyist, the name of this place is such-and-such, and this insertion should not at all mean that the whole fragment was written at the time when such a toponym was actually used.