| 123 См. цит. на с. 89. 124 Рассуждения Ли о сексуальной революции см.: Philip J. Lee, Against the Protestant Gnostics, p. 197–205, особенно цитату Тома Вулфа «Мое десятилетие и третье великое пробуждение» (The Me Decade and the Third Great Awakening): Mauve Gloves and Madmen, Clutter and Vine (New York: Bantam Books, 1977), p. 111–47. См. также о современной «спиритуализации сексуальности»: Philip J. Lee, Against the Protestant Gnostics, p. 277. 125 Цит. по: Е. Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, p. 149. 126 Романы этой серии были написаны Тимом Ла Хэем и Джерри Дженкинсом. Первая книга серии под названием «Исчезновения» вышла в 1996 году. 127 О неогностицизме правого крыла см.: Philip J. Lee, Against the Protestant Gnostics, p. 168–172, 244, 268. 128 Ibid, p. 277, где он говорит о «спиритуализации сексуальности». 129 Н. Krosney, The Lost Gospel: The Quest for the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, p. 300. 130 См.: Еф. 1:10 ; Откр. 21:2 . 131 О корнях этого явления см.: Philip J. Lee, Against the Protestant Gnostics, ch. 6. 132 Докеты (от греч. бокт – призрак) – гностики, заявлявшие о призрачности тела Христова; по их мнению, Христос лишь казался человеком. 133 См. перевод А.Л.Хосроева в книге: А.Л.Хосроев, «Из истории раннего христианства»/На материале коптской библиотеки из Наг–Хаммади. М, 1997. С. 315–340. 134 См. перевод М.К.Трофимовой в книге: Апокрифы древних христиан. М., 1989. С. 197–218. 135 См.: А.Л.Хосроев, Александрийское христианство. М., 1991. С. 223–232. Перевод А. Л. Хосроева. 136 А. Л. Хосроев, Александрийское христианство. С. 44. 137 Не вполне ясное хронологическое указание. 138 Гностики часто называли детьми себя, относя при этом к себе слова Иисуса о «малых сих» ( Мф. 18:6 и параллельные места). 139 Ср. «Апокалипсис Петра» (81.17–19) и «Второй трактат великого Сифа» (59.22–30). 140 Иисус очень ясно говорит о том, что Бог апостолов – не Его отец, что вполне соответствует обычным гностическим представлениям, но выражено, пожалуй, здесь яснее, чем где–либо в других текстах. Имя Бога апостолов – Саклас (см. далее). |
| Daniel: It belongs to the understanding to discern the distinctions and the drift of questions; and it is a main part of knowledge to understand how ignorant you are. Wherefore it is said that if a fool asks questions, it will be accounted wisdom, Proverbs 17:28 because, although one who asks questions is ignorant of the answer to the question raised, yet as he wisely asks, and learns what he does not know, this very fact will be counted as wisdom in him, because he wisely discovers what he was ignorant of. According then to this division of yours, it seems that in this passage the Apostle mentions three things, the lust of the flesh against the spirit, and of the spirit against the flesh, the mutual struggle of which against each other appears to have this as its cause and reason; viz., that, says he, we should not do what we would. There remains then a fourth case, which you have overlooked; viz., that we should do what we would not. Now then, we must first discover the meaning of those two desires, i.e., of the flesh and spirit, and so next learn to discuss our free will, which is placed between the two, and then lastly in the same way we can see what cannot belong to our free will. Chapter 10. That the word flesh is not used with one single meaning only. We find that the word flesh is used in holy Scripture with many different meanings: for sometimes it stands for the whole man, i.e., for that which consists of body and soul, as here And the Word was made flesh, John 1:14 and All flesh shall see the salvation of our God. Luke 3:6 Sometimes it stands for sinful and carnal men, as here My spirit shall not remain in those men, because they are flesh. Genesis 6:3 Sometimes it is used for sins themselves, as here: But you are not in the flesh but in the spirit, Romans 8:9 and again Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God: lastly there follows, Neither shall corruption inherit incorruption. 1Corinthians 15:50 Sometimes it stands for consanguinity and relationship, as here: Behold we are your bone and your flesh, 2 Samuel 5:1 and the Apostle says: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them who are my flesh, and save some of them. Romans 11:14 We must therefore inquire in which of these four meanings we ought to take the word flesh in this place, for it is clear that it cannot possibly stand as in the passage where it is said The Word was made flesh, and All flesh shall see the salvation of God. Neither can it have the same meaning as where it is said My Spirit shall not remain in those men because they are flesh, because the word flesh is not used here as it is there where it stands simply for a sinful man – when he says The flesh lusts against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh. Galatians 5:17 Nor is he speaking of things material, but of realities which in one and the same man struggle either at the same time or separately, with the shifting and changing of time. |
| The MB, bereft now of its short-lived political power and with its leaders in jail, can’t afford a long battle with the military. But, by inciting violence against the defenseless Copts, it is trying to kill two birds with one stone: rid the country of “infidels” and prove the new regime to be grossly inept. Critically important tourism and foreign investment would further decline, sending the economy over the cliff. The MB knows that the half of the Egyptian people who live on less than a day are a ticking bomb, ready to explode if the regime fails to supply their basic needs. In a word, Egypt would be rendered ungovernable. In picking scapegoats, though, why the Copts? For starters, their sizable numbers — about 8 to 10 million in a country whose total population is about 90 million — and their history of nonretaliation make them an easy target. They are also a target that various other sectors are guaranteed to rally against: other Islamist groups, who empower themselves through propaganda equating Christianity with the West and portraying the native Copts as foreigners or separatists who seek Western intervention, a new Crusade; government authorities, for whom violence against the religious other can be a nation-building exercise and who need a safety valve and distraction for the impoverished masses; and socially disadvantaged Muslims, who alleviate their own sense of inferiority by persecuting Copts. Egyptian history is rife with examples of Copts being scapegoated. In modern times, President Sadat placed Pope Shenouda III under house arrest for four years in a bid to gain the support of Islamists. Mubarak’s regime allowed violence against Copts to divert attention from a failing economy. The Military Council that followed Mubarak manipulated the Copts for political gains. After the military drove armored cars into a peaceful Coptic march in Cairo’s Maspero area, killing 27 Christians (photos and wideos of whom were posted on the Internet by witnesses and international media), the generals preposterously assigned blame for the incident to civilian thugs, thus justifying the expansion of martial law. |
| The Babylonian invasion of Judah soon after the battle at Carchemish is also reflected in Jeremiah chapter 35 days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah.” (verse 1 normally dwelt in tents in obedience to the command of their forefather, Jehonadab the son of Rechab, lived in Jerusalem at that time. Why? They explained to Jeremiah: But it came about when Nebuchadrezzar the king ofUabylon came up against the land that we began to say, “Come, and let us enter into Jerusalem because of the military force of the Chaldeans and because of the military force of the Syrians, and let us dwell in Jerusalem.” – Jeremiah 35:11 Thus, some time earlier in the reign of Jehoiakim, the Babylonian army had invaded the territory of Judah, forcing the Rechabites to seek refuge mside the walls of Jerusalem. Either this invasion was the one described in Daniel 1:1 took place in the following year, when, according to the Babylonian chronicle, “all the kings of Hattu” presented their tribute to the Babylonian king as a sign of their vassalage. That Judah became a vassal of Babylon early in the reign of Jehoiakim is clearly stated in 2 Kings 24:1 in the days of Jehoiakim “Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came up, and so Jehoiakim became his servant for three years. However, he turned back and rebelled against him.” (NW) This rebellion caused the king of Babylon “to send against him marauder bands of Chaldeans and marauder bands of Syrians and marauder bands of Moabites and marauder bands of the sons of Ammon [these nations were now obviously under the control of the king of Babylon], and he kept sending them against Judah to destroy it.” (Verse 2 It has been demonstrated above that Jeremiah’s prediction of the seventy years in Jeremiah 25:10 to a period of complete desolation of Jerusalem, but a period of servitude, not for Judah, but for “these nations,” that is, the nations surrounding Judah. It was further shown that the Bible and secular historical sources, such as the Babylonian chronicle and Berossus, all agree that the servitude for these nations began long before the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C.E. The Babylonian chronicle B.M. 21946 shows that Nebuchadnezzar started to conquer these areas immediately after the battle at Carchemish in 605 B.C.E. Daniel 1:1–6 relates that Nebuchadnezzar, in the same year, laid siege to Jerusalem and brought Jewish captives to Babylon. Berossus confirms Daniel 1:16 with respect to this first deportation (which probably was rather small). Jeremiah, chapters 27 surrounding nations were vassals to Babylon as early as in the reign of Jehoiakim, and this is also apparent from 2 Kings 24:1 a number of the surrounding nations, the servitude evidendy began in the same year Jeremiah uttered his prophecy, that is in 605 B.C.E. |
| An alternative explanation is that the Jews were invoking against Paul the edicts of Claudius which guaranteed them the quiet enjoyment of their native customs throughout the Diaspora. This is the uncontroversial part of the texts quoted by Josephus in the Antiquities, however much he may have fudged on behalf of the Jewish claim to citizenship at Alexandria. 365 The decisive words in the edict concerning the Diaspora are: ‘It is proper that the Jews through the world under Roman rule should keep their native customs without let or hindrance.’ The genuine character of the wording of most of these edicts cannot be called in question. They contain the various quirks and oddities of expression that characterize the several genuine decrees and edicts of Claudius. 366 The Jews of Corinth may not themselves have had the power of enforcement, 367 but they might hope to invoke the proconsul’s authority against a fellow Jew who interfered, as Paul certainly was interfering, with the quiet practice of their customs. But the intention of the edict of Claudius was merely to reaffirm the Jewish privilege of toleration, granted in the Triumviral period and confirmed by Augustus, that they should not be prevented by the Greek city governments from assembling for the purposes of their cult. This is made abundantly clear by the long series of documents quoted by Josephus in Antiquities, xiv. 10. Cities of Asia, such as Pergamum, Sardes, and Ephesus, had been interfering with Jewish assemblies. When the Claudian edict in Josephus adds: ‘I think it right that no Hellenic city should be without these privileges’ the reference is clear. It is relevant that the ‘decrees of Caesar’ had been invoked at Thessalonica against Paul by the Jewish commune. 368 This is the most confused of the various descriptions of charges in Acts, though the Acts Commentary does not notice the difficulty. There are three items: ‘these men disturb the world, and act against the decrees of Caesar, and say that there is another king.’ The decrees of Claudius Caesar were very much concerned, as we have seen, with preventing ‘disturbances of the world’. 369 But at Corinth the Jews were exceeding the intentions of Claudius. If the civic magistrates of Corinth had prevented the Jews from celebrating the Sabbath, Gallio must have defended the Jews or risked imperial displeasure. Nothing compelled him to interfere with with the internal quarrels of the Jews. The curious incident following Gallio’s dismissal of the case perhaps confirms this interpretation. The Jews, bidden by Gallio to see to the matter themselves, seized Sosthenes, one of the Elders of the Synagogue, and beat him before the tribunal. 370 This makes sense if one may assume that Sosthenes was a Christian sympathizer of sorts, and that the beating was that of the formal ‘thirty-nine blows’, administered by the authority of the local Sanhedrin, which had taken Gallio at his word. The Acts Commentary makes nothing of this incident. |
| Jesus in v. 24 does not challenge traditional Jewish ethics, but echoes it against the behavior of his critics: early Jewish teachers laid a heavy emphasis on righteous judgment. 6442 Although defending the guilty could be viewed as acceptable practice for lawyers if the defendant were not infamous, 6443 some other ancient teachers also warned against hasty or ill-advised judgment of others. 6444 But Jesus both affirms that his own judgment is righteous (5:22; 7:18; cf. 16:8; Rev 19:11) and implies that the judgment of his interlocutors is not (cf. 7:19; 8:15; cf. 7:51). Other Jesus tradition also suggests that Jesus warned against careless judging of others (Matt 7:1–5) and of God " s revelation (Luke 12:57). In his more dramatic imagery, John is probably already looking ahead to Jesus» trial (18:31). 3. Jesus» True Identity (7:25–31) Jesus» warnings that some wish to kill him (7:19–20) provoke members of the crowd to recognize that Jesus might be the one whom the authorities seek to kill; yet they have found Jesus» teaching so intriguing that they find it questionable that the authorities really wish to kill him (7:25). That the officials were saying nothing to Jesus (7:26) actually suggests only his popularity (as in Mark 11:31–33 ), but may have suggested to the crowds that their rulers had reevaluated Jesus. Later Jewish texts include a similar idiom about not speaking a word to a person, implying quiet approva1. 6445 The real reason the aristocrats fear to act, however, may be Jesus» support among the people, 6446 although that very populist support ultimately forces them to act against him (7:49; 11:48; 12:10–11). That some thought of Jesus as messiah (7:26) may fit the eschatological expectations associated with this and other Jerusalem festivals. 6447 The crowd " s claim to know Jesus» place of origin (7:27) will prove ironic in that they do not recognize his true and ultimate origin, namely, God (7:28–29); but Jesus has encountered this response to his teaching before (6:42). |
| The Bolsheviks gave ready support to the renovationists in their battle against Peter. Thus Savelyev writes: " On November 11, 1925, Yaroslavsky, Skvortsov-Stepanov and Menzhinsky were discussing Tuchkov's report 'On the future policy in connection with the death of Tikhon'. A general order was given to the OGPU to accelerate the implementation of the schism that had been planned amidst the supporters of Tikhon. Concrete measures were indicated with great frankness: 'In order to support the group in opposition to Peter (the patriarchal locum tenens...) it is resolved to publish in Izvestia a series of articles compromising Peter, and to use towards this end materials from the recently ended renovationist council.'.. The censorship and editing of the articles was entrusted to the party philosopher Skvortsov-Stepanov. He was helped by Krasikov (Narkomyust) and Tuchkov (OGPU). This trio was given the task of censuring the declaration against Peter which was being prepared by the anti-Tikhonite group. Simultaneously with the publication in Izvestia of provocative articles against the patriarchal locum tenens, the Anti-Religious commission ordered the OGPU 'to initiate an investigation against Peter'. " Meanwhile, Tuchkov initiated discussions with Peter with regard to " legalizing " the Church. This " legalization " promised to relieve the Church's rightless position, but on the following conditions: 1) the issuing of a declaration of a pre-determined content; 2) the exclusion from the ranks of the bishops of those who were displeasing to the authorities; 3) the condemnation of the emigre bishops; and 4) the participation of the government, in the person of Tuchkov, in the future activities of the Church. However, Metropolitan Peter refused to accept these conditions and also refused to sign the text of the declaration Tuchkov offered him. And he continued to be a rock in the path of the atheists' plans to seize control of the Church. For, as he once said to Tuchkov: |
| Two Books Concerning Repentance. Introduction. These two books were written against the Novatian heresy, which took its name, and to a considerable extent its form, from Novatus, a priest of the Church of Carthage, and Novatian, schismatically consecrated bishop at Rome. It was the outcome of a struggle which had long existed in the Church upon the question of the restitution to Church privileges of those who had fallen into grievous sin, and the possibility of their repentance. The severest ground was taken by the Novatians, who were condemned successively by many councils, which maintained the power of the Church to admit those guilty of any sin whatsoever to repentance, and prescribed various rules and penalties applicable to different cases. The heresy, however, lasted for some time, becoming weaker in the fifth century, and gradually fading away as a separate body with a distinctive name. “Novatianism, in the tests which it used, its efforts after a perfectly pure communion, its crotchetty interpretations of Scripture, and many other features, presents a striking parallel to many modern sects.” [See Dict. Chr. Biog., Blunt, Sects and heresies, Ceillier, II. 427, etc.] St. Ambrose, in writing against the Novatians, seems to have had some recent publication of theirs in his mind, which is now unknown. He begins by commending gentleness, a quality singularly wanting in the sect; speaks of the power committed to the Church of forgiving the greatest sins, and points out how God is more inclined to mercy than to severity, and refutes the arguments of the Novatians based on certain passages of holy Scripture. In the second book, after urging the necessity of careful and speedy repentance, and the necessity of confessing one’s sins, St. Ambrose meets the Novatian arguments based on Heb. vi. 4–6, from which they inferred the impossibility of restoration; and on St. Matt. xii. 31, 32, our Lord’s words concerning sin against the Holy Spirit. As regards the date of this treatise, it must have been somewhat before the exposition of Ps. xxxvii., which refers to it, but there is nothing else which can be taken as a certain guide. Possibly the Benedictine Editors are right in assigning it to about a.d. 384. |
| Cyr.Luc. Patriarch Cyril Lucaris Conf. Eastern Confession of the Christian Faith Ep. Epistles Cyrus.Al. Cyrus of Alexandria Cap. Chapters (Capitula) Ep. Epistles fr. Fragments Dial.Papisc. Dialogue of the Jews Papiscus and Philo with a Certain Monk Didym. Spir Didumus of Alexandria. On the Holy Spirit Dion.Ar. Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite C.h. Celestial Hierarchy D.n. On the Divine Names Ep. Epistles E.h. Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Dion.BarSal. Exp.lit. Dionysis Bar Salibi. Exposition of the Liturgy Dion.CP. Tom.syn. Dionysius of Constantinople. Synodical Tome Doct.Ad. The Doctrine of Addai Doct.Jac. The Doctrine of Jacob, Recently Baptized Doct.patr. The Doctrine of the Fathers on the Incarnation of the Logos (Doctrina patrum de incarnatione Verbi) Dom.Ben. Ep.Petr.Ant. Dominicus of Venice. Epistle to Peter of Antioch Ein. Ann. Einhard. Annals Ep.Oliv. Epistle of Pilgrim Monks on the Mount of Olives to Pope Leo III Epiph. Epiphanius of Salamis fr. Fragments Haer. Against Eighty Heresies Epiph.M.V. Serg. Epiphanius the Monk [Epifanij Mnich]. Life of Sergius of Radonez Episc.CP. Ep. Bishops of Constantinople. Epistle Episc.Ger. Graec. Bishops of Germany. Response at Worms on the Faith of the Holy Trinity, against the Heresy of the Greeks Episc.Or. Ep. Bishops of the Orient. Epistle Eug.IV. Ep. Pope Eugenius IV. Epistles Eus. Eusebius of Caeserea Ep.Const.Aug. Epistle to the Empress Constantia H.e. Ecclesiastical History Eus.Bass. Ep.Thds.Al. Eusebius of Mar Bassi et al. Epistle to Theodosius of Alexandria Euth.Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus Anath. Fourteen Anathemas against the Bogomils Bog. Narrative of the Heresy of the Bogomils Panop. Panoply Ps. Commentary on the Psalter Sar. Disputation on the Faith with a Saracen Philosopher Evagr. H.e. Evagrius Cholasticus. Ecclesiastical History Gel.I. Ep. Pope Gelasius I. Epistles Ps.Geo.Arb. Exp. Pseudo-George of Arbela. Exposition of the Offices of the Church Geo.Kiev. Lat. George of Kiev. Against the Latins Geo.Schol. Sal. George Scholarius. Conserning the Only Way of the Salvation of Men |
| An example of the consequences of this division was the Armenian Church. The Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew were the first evangelizers of Armenia in the I century AD and, according to tradition, were martyred there. The pagan king Tiridates III had imprisoned St. Gregory the Illuminator for about fifteen years in Khor Virab («deep dungeon») in Artashat. Several years later, a group of Christian nuns, led by St. Gayane and fleeing from persecution in Rome, came to Armenia. King Tiridates was attracted to one of the women, St. Hripsime, who resisted his attempts to possess her. After sentenced to death the Roman women Tiridates was struck by an illness. St. Gregory cured him through the power of God of an incurable affliction and then converted the king. Tiridates proclaimed Christianity the official religion, making Armenia the first Christian country (301). With the support of the royal family, Christianity was spread quickly throughout Armenia. Furthermore, Armenian missionaries were sent along the neighbor Georgians and Albans, who also subsequently established their own national churches. Without the Gospel in Armenian Christianity couldn’t penetrate into Armenians everyday life. Thus, the invention of the Armenian alphabet (405) by St. Mesrop Mashtots was a focal point for Armenian Christianity. Mesrop Mashtots with the Catholicos St. Sahak I have translated the Bible, and their disciples interpreted a significant number of theological manuscripts into Armenian. The Armenian Bible became the earliest translation of the Holy Scriptures. The first theological treatises in Armenian was written by Eznik of Kolb, St. Mesrop’s student, and known as «Against the Sects» or «On God». In fact «Against the Sects» was an attempt to defend an orthodox Christian comprehension of God and to fight against various pagan and heretical theories. In the V century the Persian king attempted to impose Zoroastrianism on all of his subjects. The Armenians refused to renounce their Christian faith and prepared to resist. They met the Persian army in Battle at Avarair (451). The Armenian defeat proved a pyrrhic victory for the Persians: Armenia was allowed to remain Christian. The fight against Persians and their Zoroastrianism made the Armenian Church national. Since then the Church became a guardian of the Armenians national identity. |
|
|
