| 5503 Some Jewish sages prohibited Samaritans from circumcizing Israelite boys because they expected them to do it «in the name of Mount Gerizim.» 5504 A late tradition allows for the acceptance of Samaritan converts (though none are known) if they embrace the resurrection and also honor Jerusalem instead of Gerizim. 5505 The conflict between Jews and Samaritans over their respective holy sites was intense. 5506 It had led to severe conflicts in the Ptolemaic period (Josephus Ant. 13.74–79). Before the governorship of Pontius Pilate, some Samaritans, as an act of revenge for earlier acts against their temple and nation, secretly defiled the Jerusalem temple with bones (Josephus Ant. 18.30). In a later period, Genesis Rabbah twice tells a story (once about R. Jonathan and the second time about R. Ishmael b. R. Yose, both Tannaim) in which a Jewish teacher passing through Samaria on his way to Jerusalem was provoked into debate by a Samaritan. «Would it not be better to pray at this holy mountain than at that dunghill?» the Samaritan jeered; that mountain alone had not been covered in the Flood. The rabbís ass-driver answered wisely from Scripture, prompting the rabbi to exalt the ass-driver over himself. 5507 In another story, R. Ishmael b. R. Yose provoked the Samaritans to violence by charging that they worshiped idols under their mountain. 5508 Likewise, Luke, writing in the first century C.E. and probably before John, indicates that the Samaritans refused to receive Jesus because he was going to Jerusalem for a Passover feast (Luke 9:51–53). In one apocryphal story Samaritans kept the Romans from allowing the Jews to rebuild the Jerusalem temple in Hadrians reign. 5509 7D. Jerusalem as the Place to Worship (4:20) Jewish teachers regularly regarded Israel as the holiest among lands. 5510 By the Jewish nationalist revival of the mid-second century B.C.E., some Jewish writers were heightening the land polemic already present in Genesis. 5511 Although Josephus does not highlight the land as much as one might expect, 5512 the emphasis on it appears in other early Jewish texts (e.g., 2 Bar. |
| 6727 E.g., Plutarch Superst. 5, Mor. 167B (including Judaism as a superstition in Superst. 8, Mor. 169C). Cf. freedom from fear of death (Cicero Nat. d. 1.20.56; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 80.6; Nat. 3.pref.l6; Epictetus Diatr. 1.17.25; 2.5.12; Heb 2:15). 6728 Seneca Ep. Luci1. 94.19. 6729 E.g., Aristotle Rhet. 1.9.27, 1367a; Plutarch S.S., Anonymous 37, Mor. 234B; Dio Chrysostom Or. 18, On Freedom; Epictetus Diatr. 1.4.19. Aeschylus Prom. 50 opines that none but Zeus is free from all troubles. 6730 Epictetus Diatr. 2.14.13. 6731 Seneca Dia1. 1.5.6. 6732 Brown, John, 1:355. 6733 E.g., Diodorus Siculus 10.34.8; Strabo Geog. 10.4.16. 6734 Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.42.2. For freedom from undue interference in internal Jewish affairs, see 1 Esd 4:49–50; Josephus Ant. 16.2. 6735 Arrian Alex. 4.11.8; Sallust Cati1. 51.31; Jug. 31.11; Speech of Macer 1,9; Letter to Caesar 2A; 10.3; Cornelius Nepos 8 (Thrasybulus), 1.2; Musonius Rufus 9, p. 72.9–10. 6736 Demosthenes 3 Philippic 36; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.23.18–19; 6.7.2; Appian R.H. 4.10.80; Maximus of Tyre Or. 23.4; cf. Philostratus Hrk. 4.1–2. 6737 Lucan C.W. 7.445; Cornelius Nepos 8 (Thrasybulus), 1.5; Cicero Att. 14.14; Phi1. 3.5.12; 3.11.29; 3.13.33; 6.7.19; 14.14.37; Seneca the Elder, Historical Fragments 1; Iamblichus V.P. 32.220; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.15.498; 1.486. 6738 Lysias Or. 2.21, §192; Demosthenes 3 Philippic 36; 4 Philippic 25; Isocrates Peace 105, Or. 8.180 (though employing νδραποδισμς); Sallust Jug. 102.6; Letter of Mithridates 10; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.23.20; Appian R.H. 8.9.56; Herodian 3.2.8; Cornelius Nepos 15 (Epaminondas), 5.3; 1Macc 2:11; Musonius Rufus relates it to freedom to speak out (παρρησα, see comment on 7:4) in 9, p. 72.23, 27–29; 72.31–73.3; 74.10–13) and to reason (16, p. 106.6–8). 6739 Culpepper, Anatomy, 157, thinks Jesus» interlocutors here mean freedom politically but are ironically self-evidently wrong. 6740 E.g., 3Macc 2:6; Josephus Ant. 3.19–20; 6.86. Some later rabbis celebrated this freedom also as ability to rule (Song Rab. 6:12, §1). |
| 16 Ol Hudaýa berilmeli sadakalaryny baryny, üstüne gomaça bäden birini goup, ruhana bersin. Ruhany ýazyk gurbanlygyna berlen goç bilen günälini günäsinden saplasyn we Hudaý onu günäsini geçer. 17 Eger kimde-kim Rebbi beren buýruklaryny birini tötänlikde bozup, günä gazansa, ol ýazyklydyr we öz jezasyny çekmelidir. 18 Rebbe ýazyk gurbanlygy hökmünde sürüden bir ikessiz goç ýa-da onu ýerini tutjak zat getirsin. Ruhany u goç arkaly günälini tötänlikde eden günäsinden saplasyn we Hudaý onu günäsini geçer. 19 Bu seni Rebbe gary eden günä üçin töleg hökmünde berilýän ýazyk gurbanlygydyr». 6-njy bap 1 Reb Musa eýle diýdi: 2 «Eger kimdir biri amanat ýa-da girew goýan kiä biwepalyk etse, ýa-da ogurlyk etse, ýa-da ony aldap, Rebbi tabyryklaryny bozsa, 3-4 ýa ýiten zady tapyp alybam, bu hakda ýalandan ant içip, ynsany edäýjek zatlaryny birini edip günä gazanyp, soam öz eden günäsine düünip, zorluk ýa-da hile bilen alan ýa-da özüne amanat berlen, ýa-da biri tarapyndan ýitirilen we özüni tapan zadyny, 5 ýa-da ýalandan ant içen islendik zadyny bütinligine we onu bäden bir gymmatyny-da üstüne goup, öz ýazygyny bilen badyna, ony eýesine gaýtaryp bersin. 6 Sora ol özüni Rebbe ýazyk gurbanlygy hökmünde ruhana sürüden bir ikessiz goç ýa-da onu ýerini tutjak baga bir zat getirip bersin. 7 Onso ruhany Rebbi huzurynda günälini günäsinden saplasyn we onda onu nähili günä edendigine garamazdan, Hudaý onu günäsini geçer». Ýakma gurbanlygy 8 Reb Musa eýle diýdi: 9 «Haruna we onu ogullaryna tabyr. Ýakma gurbanlygyny berli kadasy eýledir: „Ýakma gurbanlygy uzakly gije gurbanlyk sypasyny üstünde goýulmalydyr. Gurbanlyk sypasyndaky ot bolsa öçürilmeli däldir. 10 Ertesi irden ruhany egnine nepis zygyr matadan tikilen içki geýimini we onu üstünden zygyr matadan tikilen lybaslaryny geýsin. Sora ol gurbanlyk sypasyny üstündäki otda ýanan ýakma gurbanlyk malyny külüni aýryp, ony gurbanlyk sypasyny gapdalynda goýsun. 11 Onso ruhany zygyr matadan tikilen lybaslaryny çykaryp, baga eiklerini geýsin we küli düelgäni dayna çykaryp, halal ýere döksün. |
| Знаменитая перепись, для которой Квириний был послан, происходила 10 лет или более по Р. Хр., когда Иудея, после изгнания Архелая, в 6 году по р. Хр. стала римскою провинцией; все это вызвало восстание Иуды Гавлонита (Голанского), или Галилеянина (Ant. XVII, 13: 5; XVIII, 1:1. Деян. 5:37 ). Но имеется основание полагать, что Квириний и есть имя, не достающее на поврежденной надписи, где описывается какой-то правитель, который дважды правил Сирией в царствование Августа; в таком случае, другая перепись может быть предположена в его другое правление – согласно с Ев. Лукою. Период времени от 9 или 10 года до Р. Хр. – до смерти Ирода В. исчерпывается управлением в Сирии М. Тиция, Сенция Сатурнина и Квинктилия Вара. Вар стал управлять, как непосредственный преемник Сатурнина, – не позднее лета 6 года до Р. Хр. (потому что сохранились его монеты 25-го года эры от битвы при Акциуме: сент. 31 г. до Р. Хр.), т.е. от сентября 7-го года до сентября 6-го года до Р. Хр., – и был в своей должности во время смерти Ирода В. Следов., или Квириний оставил службу за несколько лет до Рождества, или прибыл на службу уже после Рождества Христова (Ant. XVI, 8: 6; 9: 1; XVII, 5: 2; 9: 3; Mommsen, Res Gestae Divi Augusti, по 2-му изд. стр. 69 и сл.) 13 . Нет ничего невероятного и в том предположении, что в Иудее была перепись в 8–5 гг. до Р. Хр. О другом вассальном правителе, Архелае Каппадокийском, Тацит (Ann. VI, 41) упоминает, что он (Архелай) выполнил перепись «по римскому образцу» в царствование Тиверия. И если Ирод В. сам тоже желал доставить сведения своему Повелителю (а собирание сведений об империи, включая и подчиненные государства, было любимым занятием Августа), то можно верить, что он прикрыл свои намерения формою, неоскорбительною для иудеев, и таким образом, избежав беспорядков, случившихся при позднейшей римской переписи, – избежал и замечания о сем истории. В таком случае, свидетельство Ев. Луки дает для хронологии Рождества Хр. лишь то, что оно было одновременно с переписью. |
| Certainly such ideas would discourage Jewish men from intercourse with Samaritan women. Yet given the biblical traditions about Rebekah, Rachel, and Zipporah at wells, shared by Jew and Samaritan alike, 5363 the woman might have supposed that Jesus, noting that she had to come to the well alone hence was probably morally disreputable to begin with, wanted something else. In the eyes of many potential first-century readers, the beginning of the narrative is fraught with sexual ambiguity that is clarified only as the narrative progresses. The narrative subverts a plotline borrowed from biblical romance; the normal plotline would lead to affection between the two parties 5364 –a prospect that would have shocked any Jewish reader even if she were not viewed as specifically immora1. 5365 Jesus» talking with a woman may have been offensive to some (4:27), but the ethnic barrier dominates much of the dialogue, for «Jews avoid dealing with Samaritans» (4:9). 5366 4C. Jews Have No Dealings with Samaritans (4:9) In contrast to common ideals of antiquity, the woman speaks boldly and forthrightly with Jesus; 5367 in view of the expectation generated by the woman-at-the-well-type scene (esp. Gen 24:18 ), her lack of deference would strike much of John " s audience as rude. 5368 Her observation in 4(possibly probing Jesus» motives), however, would not have been controversia1. The text starkly summarizes the less than amicable relationship between Jews and Samaritans; the opposition between the two peoples was proverbia1. A widely circulated book of Jewish wisdom announced that God hated «the foolish people» who lived in Samaria, no less than he hated the Edomites and Philistines ( Sir 50:25–26 ). 5369 Jews even circulated militant atrocity stories–for instance, that a Samaritan caused the notorious slaughter of Jews at Bethar in the Hadrianic revolt. 5370 Later teachers recounted theological-conflict stories where Jewish teachers, naturally, triumphed. 5371 Like many ethnic conflicts in today " s world, these conflicts were deeply rooted in history, although in recent centuries the Jewish side of the conflict had often held the upper hand. Jewish tradition indicated that hostilities had begun immediately after some Jews returned from the Exile; 5372 later Samaritans raided Judea. 5373 The Samaritans were friendly to Herod the Great (e.g., Josephus War 1.229), but Herod " s benevolence with tax revenues earned him allies even among foreign Gentiles. After one bloody conflict in the mid-first century, Samaritans appealed to the Roman governor of Syria to punish the Jews (Josephus War 2.239; Ant. 20.125); the emperor, however, listened to Agrippa and executed the Samaritan leaders (Josephus War 2.245–246; Ant. 20.136). |
| 19 Об этом же свт. Кирилл сообщает еще в двух своих посланиях, современных первому посланию к Суккенсу: Иоанну, епископу Антиохийскому, о мире, и прп. Акакию, епископу Мелитинскому (Ер. 39, 11. ACO I, 1, 4. Р. 20:9–13. CPG 5339. ДВС 180 ( Деяния 1996 . С. 543); Ер. 40, 21. ACO I, 1, 4. Р. 30:9–19. CPG 5340. ДВС 181 ( Деяния 1996 . С. 551)). 20 Речь идет об относящемся к 430 г. сочинении свт. Кирилла «Против богохульств Нестория» в 5-ти книгах и о двух составленных в 431 г. апологиях его «12-ти анафематизмов», или «глав», с опровержением возражений, выдвинутых от лица «восточных» епископов Андреем Самосатским и лично блж. Феодоритом Кирским (Libri V contra Nest. ACO I, 1, 6. P. 13–106. CPG 5217; Apol. XII capit, contra Orient. ACO I, 1, 7. P. 33–65. CPG 5221. ДВС 147 ( Деяния 1996. С. 415–445 ); Apol. XII anath. contra Theod. ACO I, 1, 6. P. 110–146. CPG 5222. ДВС 149 ( Деяния 1996. С. 445–473 )). Можно отметить, что к 433 г. у свт. Кирилла уже складывается своего рода «канон» антинесторианских сочинений. Так, константинопольскому пресвитеру Евлогию вместе с памятной запиской он пересылает для передачи некоему «знаменитейшему начальнику» помимо указанных трактатов свое краткое сочинение «О воплощении Бога Слова», акты Эфесского Собора, «Послание к Эпиктету» свт. Афанасия, а также свои два послания к Несторию, послания к Иоанну Антиохийскому и прп. Акакию Мелитинскому (Ер. 44. ACO I, 1, 4. Р. 37:4–14. CPG 5344. ДВС 182 ( Деяния 1996 . С. 553)). 36 У свт. Ефрема Антиохийского здесь вместо «принадлежат они одному» ( νς ε ναι) дается «одна принадлежит одному» ( μαν νς ε ναι). Это существенно не меняет значения этого места, поскольку общий контекст дает основание видеть за этим «одна» указание не на одну природу, как полагают монофизитствующие оппоненты свт. Ефрема, но на одну ипостась (Ephr. Ant. apud Phot. Bibl. 229, 249b:15–20. CPG 6908). 37 Свт. Ефрем Антиохийский обращает внимание, что свт. Кирилл употребил здесь не выражение «из того и другого» ( ξ μφον), а именно «через то и другое» ( δ μφον). Само по себе это уже указывает на сохранность каждой природы в образованном их соединением «живом существе» (Ephr. Ant. apud Phot. Bibl. 229, 249b:39–43). |
| 10315 Cf. Petronius Sat. 112. Daube, «Gospels,» 342, thinks that Jewish custom also usually withheld anointing from corpses of the executed. Bammel, «Trial,» 444, thinks that requests for the body usually preceded the execution (as in Gos. Pet. 2:3ff). 10316 E.g., Homer I1. 24.22–137; Sophocles Ajax 1326–1369; Ant. 278–279, 450–455, 692–695, 1348–1353; Euripides Supp1. 19; Cicero Verr. 2.1.3.7; Lucan C.W. 7.809–811; Valerius Maximus 5.3.ext.3c; Philostratus Hrk. 33.32. 10317 E.g., Homer I1. 7.79,84,409–410; Virgil Aen. 11.100–107; Livy 38.2.14; Appian R.H. 12.9.60: Cornelius Nepos 18 (Eumenes), 13.4; Silius Italicus 10.518–520; 12.473–478; Valerius Maximus 5.1.11; 5.1.ext.6; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.14, 41; 2Sam 2:5; 21:12–14 ; 2Macc 4:49; Josephus Ant. 4.264–265; cf. Ps.-Phoc. 99–101. 10318 Philo Flaccus 83–84; Taylor, Mark, 600; Gnilka, Jesus, 314; Lane, Mark, 578, cites also Cicero Phi1. 2.7.17; Plutarch Antonius 2. 10319 Brown, Death, 1207–8, shows that Justinian Dig. 48.24 reports Roman law as early as Augustus allowing relatives to bury the corpse but refusing it for maiestas (treason); but he rightly observes that magistrates made these decisions themselves in the provinces (cf. Cicero Verr. 2.5.45, §119; Philo Flaccus 83–84). 10320 Brown, Death, 1208–9; whether a crime was truly against the maiestas of the state was sometimes debatable (e.g., Seneca Controv. 9.2.13; cf. the wordplay in Cicero Fam. 3.11.2). The Jewish officials would surely not object to the burial, however, and without opposition Pilate was free to act as he pleased. He had settled matters adequately for the chief priests. 10322 E.g., Herodian 1.13.4–6; 3.5.6; 4.6.1. Continued ties with a prisoner could be dangerous; this concern reduced Apollonius " s disciples by more than three-quarters (Rapske, Custody, 388, citing Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 4.37). 10323 E.g., Cornelius Nepos 1 (Miltiades), 7.5–6; 2 (Themistocles), 8.1–7; 3 (Aristides), 1.1–5; 7 (Alcibiades), 4.1–2; Babrius 4.6–8; 31.23–24; 64.10–11; Phaedrus 1.21.1–2; 2.7.14–15; 3.5.1; 4.6.11–13. |
| John probably does know the same tradition as Mark. Whatever the traditions behind the Gospels, however, Mark " s and John " s approaches at least imply (perhaps for theological reasons) the Passover on different days, yet derive from it the same theology: Jesus» death is a new passover, a new act of redemption (cf. also 1Cor 5:7 ). 2. Pilate and the Chief Priests (18:29–32) John focuses on the responsibility of the Judean elite; Jewish Christians in his own day felt repressed by a Jewish elite whom they viewed as analogous, and would view this elite as more culpable than the Romans precisely because they claimed to speak for Israel " s God and for Judaism. While this is John " s emphasis, however, he does not deny the Roman involvement; a public crucifixion in a Roman province demanded a Roman sentence. 2A. Pilatés Historical Involvement Few historians would dispute that Jesus in fact appeared before Pilate (outside the Gospels and Acts, e.g., 1Tim 6:13 ; Tacitus Ann. 15.44); 9819 only the governor could order a person crucified. Further, if Pilate wished some semblance of order, he would provide at least a brief hearing. True, Pilate was known for his brutality (e.g., Josephus Ant. 18.85) 9820 and sometimes had reportedly executed Jews without trial (Philo Embassy 299, 302). But that Pilate executed Jesus without some form of hearing is improbable, for this is the very sort of breach of normal procedure the earliest Christian sources would be most likely to report; yet they mention nothing of the kind. 9821 Likewise, Jesus» own countrymen would normally perform the function of delatores, or accusers, to charge him with sedition. 9822 The substance of the events in John " s account match historical expectations: «It begins with a formal delation ... and ends with a formal condemnation pro tribunali " (18:29; 19:13). 9823 (The «governor» in Judea in this period was technically a «prefect,» rather than the later term «procurator» as in Tacitus Ann. 15.44; the Gospels simply use the general title «governor,» which could have covered either.) 9824 That Jesus was crucified by the Romans is likewise inevitably historical; 9825 Christians would hardly have invented execution at all, but certainly not Roman execution, which would have painted them thereafter as subversives in the Roman world. 9826 Pilate often went to great lengths to quell so much as public complaints, including violent suppression of a crowd, leading to many deaths (Josephus War 2.176–177; Ant. 18.60–62). Romans had borrowed an earlier custom of hanging people, 9827 and the victims of the punishment were disproportionately slaves 9828 and the provincial poor. 9829 Roman citizens could not be crucified legally, but slaves and provincials could be. 9830 Although dangerous criminals (Suetonius Julius 4), like slaves, were regularly crucified, crucifixions of free persons in Palestine usually involved the charge of rebellion against Rome. 9831 2B. Provincial Politics and Law (18:29–31a) |
| 7674 «The skeptical question of how Lazarus got out of the tomb if his hands and feet were bound is really rather silly in an account which obviously presupposes the supernatural» (Brown, John, 1:427). 7677 Cf. also Matt 23and comment in Keener, Matthew, 558–59; possibly also Rev 11:11–13 (Keener, Revelation, 296–97). 7678 Theissen, Stories, 72. The skepticism of some that a report directly to Jesus» enemies would injure him (Bernard, John, 2:402, citing 5:15, which further weakens his case) ignores both the indications in the context that it is known that the authorities wish to arrest Jesus (11:8,16,20,28,30; cf. 7:13,25,44; 8:59; 10:31) and the contrast with the more receptive «Jews» of 11:45. 7679 Outside the Gospels, see esp. Acts 4:2–3; 5:16–18; 6:8–11; 14:10–19; 16:18–19; 19:10–12,26–28. 7682 Cf. other corrupt leaders (from Josephus " s perspective) in Josephus Life 216. Greek priesthoods also could engage in plots to deceive people politically (Plutarch Lysander 26.1–3, on some Delphic priests). 7683 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 50, citing Josephus Ant. 18.117–118. Thus, whether or not Caiaphas spoke these words, it was the establishment " s attitude (Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 12). 7684 Brown notes the necessity of the Sanhedrin " s conviction for execution in Josephus Ant. 14.167 (Brown, Death, 339); although this text reflects practice in the time of Herod the Great, Roman governors who had less reason to accommodate the people held less power than Herod and may have accommodated custom (cf. 18:39). Less convincing would be Stauffer " s use of later evidence for the necessity of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin sentencing false prophets (Jesus, 207–8). 7685 E.g., Pliny Ep. 10.97; Herodian 7.3.2; Judge, Pattern, 71; cf. Harvey, History, 16; SherwinWhite, Society, 47. 7687 Pharisees are elsewhere attested alongside high priests (see, e.g., Von Wahlde, «Terms,» 233), and undoubtedly, aristocratic Pharisees participated in the municipal aristocracy; but John consistently heightens their pre-70 role; see their presence with the aristocratic priests in 7:32; 11:57. |
| 111. Ant I,21/Притч 10:3. 112. Ant I,47/Мф 6,25. 113. О различных порочных помыслах. 5 (Добротолюбие. Т. 1. С. 621). 114. Ant I, 50/Деян 2:44 и след. 115. Мессалиане (евхиты, «молящиеся») – ересь, зародившаяся в IV в. в Сирии и Малой Азии в монашеской среде. Учение мессалиан носило гностический и дуалистический характер. Согласно их представлениям, человек рождается во власти злого духа и единственный способ его изгнать – это усердная и продолжительная молитва. Мессалиане проповедовали строго аскетическую мораль, не признавали духовенства и его посредничества между Богом и людьми. Они избегали физического труда как занятия якобы унизительного для духовной жизни. – Примеч. пер. 116. Ant I,61/Флп 4:5 и след. 117. Ant I, 64/2Фес 3:10. 118. Изображение монашеской жизни. 8 (Добротолюбие. Т. 1. С. 595). См. также: 1Фес 2:9; 2Фес 3:12; Еф 4:28. 119. VitaE.F. 120. Ant I, 28/Притч 22: 9. 121. Ant I, 10/4Цар 4:43 и след. 122. Ant I, 49/Лк 3:11. 123. Ant I, 58/2Кор 9:7. 124. Ant I,18/Пс 108:24. – В пер. с греч. П. А. Юнгерова: Колена мои изнемогли от поста, и тело мое изменилось от [лишения] елея. 125. Ср.: Пс 103:15. 126. Ant I, 35/Еккл3:11. 127. Ant I,67/1Тим 5:23. 128. См.: Увещание к девственнице. 10 (Творения... С. 138). 129. Ant I, 27/Притч 20:25. – пер. с греч. П.А. Юнгерова. В церк.-слав. пер.: Сеть мужеви скоро нечто от своих освящати: по обете бо раскаяние бывает. 130. Скитская пустыня, Скит (греч. 2лсу]ту]) – пустыня в северо-западной части Египта, примерно в 30 км к югу от Александрии, к западу от дельты Нила. Отличалась крайне тяжелыми условиями жизни (заболоченность, мошкара, нехватка воды). В эпоху расцвета монашества в Египте (с IV по VII в.) в Скитской пустыне спасалось множество отшельников. – Примеч. пер. 131. Ant I, 37/Еккл 7:16. – Пер. с греч. П. А. Юнгерова. В церк. слав, пер.: Не буди правдив вельми, ни мудрися излишше, да не когда изумишися. 132. См.: Дан 1:12 и след. 133. См.: Пс 61:5. 134. См.: Рим 2, 29. 135. См.: Деян 9:15; 2Кор 11:27. 136. Пс 12: 5. Цит. отрывок из сочинения Евагрия: «О различных порочных помыслах». 25 (Добротолюбие. Т. 1. С. 635: пер. приводится с небольшими изменениями). |
|
|
