| Recently I read an article on 1 Peter 3:1-7, which passage contained advice to Christian women married to non-Christians. In this passage the apostolic author counselled the women to “be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the Word they may be won without a word by the behaviour of their wives as they observe your chaste and respectful behaviour…For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him ‘lord’, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear” (NASB translation). The author of the article observed that “many interpreters stumble over these passages and reject the teaching on submission. One especially striking reaction was written by Kathleen Corley: ‘Of all the Christian testament texts, the message of 1 Peter is the most harmful in the context of women’s lives. Its particular message of the suffering Christ as a model for Christian living leads to precisely the kind of abuses that feminists fear…The basic message of 1 Peter does not reflect God’s liberating word’”. I note that Ms. Corley’s problem is not confined to the offending verses which open chapter 3 of the epistle, but includes the notion that the suffering Christ should be a model for Christian living itself, and that therefore for her 1 Peter “does not reflect God’s liberating word”. Presumably both men and women should reject the notion that the suffering Christ offers us a model for Christian living, especially in the midst of a hostile, non-Christian world. It is, of course, not simply 1 Peter 3 that offends the likes of Ms. Corley. The New Testament is replete with such exhortations to wives. St. Paul, for example, taught that the husband is the head of the wife (1 Corinthians 11:2-16), that wives should submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22-33; Colossians 3:18), and that older women should encourage younger women to be subject to their husbands (Titus 2:3-5). Presumably these passages also lead to precisely the kind of abuses feminists fear. The feminists’ Bible begins to remind me of Marcion’s Bible: after the offending passages have been removed, the volume is somewhat slimmer. One supposes Marcion also felt that the Old Testament passages did not reflect God’s liberating word. |
| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf CHRISTOLOGY CHRISTOLOGY. Literally, this term means the doctrine of the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. The question that Jesus directed to his disciples in all three of the Synoptic Gospels, “Who do you say I am?” drew the response from Peter, “You are the Messiah, the Son of God.” The full implications of Peter’s reply remained to be worked out. “Messiah,” “Son of God,” and so on, were all different appellations that could mean much less than a divine and preexistent being. Other New Testament texts, however, the earliest being Philp 2:5–11 and a later one the prologue from Jn (1:1–18), taught the preexistence of the divine Son. Just how, though, humanity and divinity coexist in Christ, and the meaning of each in relation both to the Father and to the rest of humankind, were the subjects of fierce debate throughout most of the first Christian millennium. Orthodox Christology, as it emerges in Joh n of Damascus (q.v.) in the 8th c., is the product of that long debate. The key refrain or leitmotiv throughout the centuries of argument in Eastern Christendom is the notion of deification, theosis (q.v.). Christology is always linked to and expressive of an understanding of salvation that is articulated as early as 2Pet 1:4 , that in Christ human beings become “partakers of the divine nature”-which the Orthodox see as at least implicit in other New Testament documents. (For example, the “glory” shared by the Son and the Father is from eternity, and is given by Christ to his followers, Jn 17:5, 22–24 .) With this reading of the Christian Scriptures (q.v.), the struggle over Christology may be viewed as an attempt to keep in balance Christ’s humanity and divinity in such a way as to preserve both the paradox of their union in his person (so toward the “hypostatic union” of Chalcedon [q.v.]) and the possibility of human communion in the divine life. The battle had obviously been joined by the time of the earliest Christian writings: Paul struggles in his letters to the Corinthians against what appears to be a nascent Christian gnosticism (q.v.). |
| Compared to the contemporary worship of most Protestant churches and post-Vatican II Roman Catholic churches, the worship of the Orthodox Church seems overly-formal, complicated, and rigid in its rubrics. Why are there so many rituals in the Orthodox Church? Why isn’t there more spontaneity, creativity, and freedom of expression? Why is the Orthodox Sunday worship service—the Divine Liturgy—essentially the same week after week, every year, for more than fifteen-hundred years? Most Orthodox believers would respond, “Because it is our Tradition.” However, do you know why it is our Tradition and why rituals are so important to our Christian Faith? The Need For Peace And Order Actually, the Bible and the Church Fathers rarely use the word “ritual” or “rite” when describing Judaic or Christian religious ceremonial practices. The words more often used are “ordinances” and “observances.” These words are more descriptive of what should be going on. For many, “rites” are just a series of behaviors people customarily do without knowing its meaning—perhaps there was once a reason for the behavior, but now people just “go through the motions.” An “ordinance” is a decree that an activity be regulated (Hebrews 9:1)—kept to a particular sequence or boundary. In regards to worship services, the Apostle Paul stated, “all things should be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). The reason for this is given in a previous verse: “for God is a God not of disorder but of peace” (v.33). In fact, St. Paul praises the church at Colosse for how orderly (τξιν) they are (Colossians 2:5). Being that our present day Liturgy of St. Chystostom is based on the first century Liturgy of St. James, the first Bishop of Jerusalem, the Orthodox Church has always practiced a formal, orderly pattern to its worship. However, the formality of worship really goes back to Judaic practices starting 13 centuries before Christ with the exodus of Israel from Egypt. God, through Moses, gave explicit details about a very orderly and elaborate form of worship centered around the Tabernacle or Temple. Why? Because God knows how easy it is for mankind to argue about worship practice differences to the point of confusion (Acts 19:32), prejudice (John 4:20), and violence (Genesis 4:3-8). It is not hard to look through the history of mankind and find wars which were in part justified over disputed religious beliefs and practices. Though inter-faith conflict will likely continue (John 17:14), God wants to prevent intra-faith conflict within His Church (John 17:22-23). Therefore, it is necessary the Church be unified in Her worship practices. The Orthodox Church has kept the unity of the Faith in part by preserving a precise formula in Her worship. In doing so, the Orthodox Church has avoided a lot of dissension that has plagued other branches of Christianity. |
| The Journal of Theological Studies. — Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005 (April). — Vol. 56 (New Series): 1 8 июля 2005 г. 16:03 Содержание номера Статьи Campbell D. A. Possible Inscriptional Attestation to Sergius Paul[L]US (Acts 13:6–12), and the Implications for Pauline Chronology. Mosser C. The Earliest Patristic Interpretations of PSALM 82, Jewish Antecedents, and the Origin of Christian Deification. Zachhuber J. Once Again: Gregory of Nyssa on Universals. Заметки и публикации McDonough S. M. Competent to Judge: The Old Testament Connection Between 1 Corinthians 5 and 6. Van Nuffelen P. Two Fragments from the Apology for Origen in the Church History of Socrates Scholasticus. Edwards M. J. Constantine " s Donation to the Bishop and Pope of the City of Rome’. Рецензии на книги Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible. Theodicy in the World of the Bible. Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology. Glimpses of a Strange Land: Studies in Old Testament Ethics Knowing the End from the Beginning: The Prophetic, the Apocalyptic and their Relationships. Stockmen from Tekoa, Sycomores from Sheba: A Study of Amos’ Occupations. Reading for History in the Damascus Document: A Methodological Study. Christianity in the Making, volume 1: Jesus Remembered. Not the Righteous but Sinners: M. M. Bakhtin " s Theory of Aesthetics and the Problem of Reader-Character Interaction in Matthew " s Gospel. The Gospel of Matthew " s Dependence on the Didache. Jesus " Defeat of Death: Persuading Mark " s Early Readers. An Introduction to the Gospel of John. Creation-Covenant Scheme and Justification by Faith: A Canonical Study of the God–Human Drama in the Pentateuch and the Letter to the Romans. Das Gesetz im Römerbrief und andere Studien zum Neuen Testament. Where to Live? The Hermeneutical Significance of Paul " s Citations from Scripture in Galatians 3:1–14. Paul, Luke and the Graeco-Roman World: Essays in Honour of Alexander J. M. Wedderburn. The Genre, Composition and Hermeneutics of James. |
| Материал из Православной Энциклопедии под редакцией Патриарха Московского и всея Руси Кирилла ЕВЛОГИЯ [греч. ελοϒα - благословение], в христ. традиции одно из возможных наименований получивших благословение хлеба , воды , елея , а в нек-рых случаях - сосудов, их содержащих ( ампул и проч.), или иных святынь (небольших икон и проч.), раздаваемых в память о посещении мон-рей или совершении паломничеств. В НЗ греч. слово ελοϒα помимо своего основного значения использовано в отношении евхаристической Чаши (1 Кор 10. 16: τ ποτριον τς ελοϒας - семитизм, о происхождении, связи с иудейской практикой и точном значении к-рого существуют разные т. зр.; см. обзор в кн.: Thiselton A. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids e. a., 2000. P. 752-768), а также в отношении материальной помощи, посылаемой в Иерусалим поместными общинами (2 Кор 9. 5). В христ. лексиконе II-IV вв. термин ελοϒα встречается как обозначение Евхаристии - или таинства в целом, или непосредственно Св. Даров (см.: Iust. Martyr. I Apol. 67. 5; Acta Thomae 26; 29; Orig. In Ier. hom. 19. 13; Euseb. Hist. eccl. V 24. 15; Basil. Magn. De Spirit. Sanct. 66; возможно, в этом же значении слово употреблено в 14-м и 32-м Лаодик.). В нек-рых памятниках IV-V вв. словом ελοϒα названы хлеб и вино, принесенные верными для совершения Евхаристии (Const. Ap. VIII 31. 2; Aug. Contr. litt. Petil. 3. 16. 19; Idem. Ep. 36. 8. 19), или приготовленные, но еще не освященные Дары (Areop. EH. 3. 2; 3. 3. 8) (см.: Stuiber. 1965. Sp. 914-916). В последующую эпоху Е. стали называть не евхаристический, а получивший отдельное благословение хлеб, раздаваемый больным ( Greg. Turon. Hist. Franc. 5. 14; Idem. Glor. Conf. 30), нуждающимся ( Ioan. Mosch. Prat. spirit. 85) или всем верным (в т. ч. в визант. традиции - хлеб, благословляемый за всенощным бдением, см. Благословение хлебов и др.) (см.: Franz. 1909). Подобный хлеб мог формироваться, аналогично просфорам , с использованием особой печати с тем или иным рисунком, так что верхняя корка выпеченного хлеба-Е. могла иметь определенное изображение; сохранился ряд печатей визант. времени, предназначенных для изготовления хлеба-Е. (см.: Galavaris. 1970). |
| 1 Adv. haer. n. 3. 2 Касательно коринфского возмущения послужившего поводом к написанию Климентова послания, замечательна гипотеза Шенкеля. Шенкель (de ecclosia corinthia primaeva) предполагает что в Коринфе возобновилась та партия, которая в горделивом притязании на непосредственное духовное общение со Христом восстала против авторитета апостолов еще при жизни их (1 Кор. 1:12); и теперь она восстала против апостольского учреждения церковной иерархии и против церковного порядка вообще как стесняющего христианскую свободу. Но не касаясь мнения Шенкеля об этой партии, как оно идет к 1 посланию ап. Павла к коринфянам, заметим в отношении к Климентову посланию, что в нем и намека нет, чтобы виновники коринфского восстания, в противоположность авторитету апостольскому, имели притязание на особенное отношение ко Христу. Слова Климента, что Христос принадлежит смиренным, а не тем, которые возносятся над Его стадом, что Он дал нам высочайший пример смирения (гл. 16), Указывают только на то, что корнем коринфского разделения были гордость и самопревозношение. Автор послания предполагает общее основание виры — Единого Христа (гл. 46) и представляет несообразным ниспровергать его на деле, в жизни, как это сделали некоторые члены коринфской Церкви. Притом не видно, чтобы авторитет апостолов был ими отрицаем или подвергаем сомнению, напротив писатель послания пользуется им для убеждения к восстановлению мира и порядка церковного, и потому указывает не только на первоначальное происхождение церковной иерархии, во и на постановление апостолов о последующем непрерывном продолжении чина церковных предстоятелей. 3 Что другие христианские писатели из язычников употребляют такой образ выражения, см. Земиша . Iustin der Martyr I. 121. 4 Ириней. Adv. haeres., III, 3 5 Клим. Алекс. Strom. IV, 17. 6 Гефеле. Patrum Apost. Opp. XXVI. Ed. IV. 7 Ориген, De princip. II, 3, 6. In Exech. c. 8. 8 Евс. «Ц. Ист.», III, 16. 9 Епиф. Adv. haer., XXX, 15. 10 Иерон. Catal. Scr. eccles. 15. 11 Швеглера Nachapost. Zeitalter. |
| Caesar and Conscience Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon Rev. Patrick H. Reardon Long accustomed to the thesis that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, it is not easy for Americans to think that governments may also speak with a higher authority. Indeed, the “consent of the governed” is so commonly withheld these days that it may pass as part of our birthright. For the same reason, it is difficult for Americans to believe that the art of government has any necessary relationship to a higher order at all, such as the order of the moral law. So clearly have we come to distinguish legal concerns from moral concerns that a real separation of the two is pretty much taken for granted. Anyone today who says that “you can’t legislate morality” is understood to be voicing a truism. We may seem terribly bold, therefore, when we say that we politely disagree with this perspective. We do so, nonetheless, and we do so for the sake of what the Bible tells us. The Christian submits to civil authority, St. Paul says, not only because civil authority has the power to exact that submission, but also “for the sake of conscience” (Romans 13:5). In view of Paul’s high respect for conscience, his assertion that submission to civil authority is a conscientious concern is truly remarkable. Conscience ( syneidesis ), a word that Paul uses seventeen times in his epistles, refers to man’s inner light, the faculty by which he discerns moral differences and directs his ethical decisions. Paul’s use of this word contains, in addition, the sense of “consciousness” and pertains to the reflecting self-possession of the moral person (Romans 2:15; 2 Corinthians 1:12). It designates the critical moral discourse that man conducts within his mind ( synoida ). It refers to his human intentionality, his transcendent capacity as a conscious moral agent. The Christian’s conscience, therefore, is the necessary and inseparable companion of his faith. It is to man’s conscience, his reflective faculty of cognitive intention, that the gospel itself is addressed (2 Corinthians 4:4; 5:11), and it is conscience that receives the witness of the Holy Spirit (Romans 9:1). |
| Holy Synod of OCA issues Affirmation of the Mystery of Marriage On Tuesday, July 2, 2013, the members of the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America released the following “Affirmation of the Mystery of Marriage”: At the Tenth All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America, held in Miami, Florida in July 1992, the Holy Synod of Bishops issued a document titled, “ Synodal Affirmations on Marriage, Family, Sexuality, and the Sanctity of Life .” The Affirmations were issued after a lengthy process of study and discernment with the intention of addressing issues that, even in our time, continue to be a source of debate and division within American society. The first section of the Affirmations, titled, “The Mystery of Marriage,” reads as follows. “God creates human beings in His own image and likeness, male and female. He declares human life, with all that He makes, to be ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:27-31). “God wills that men and women marry, becoming husbands and wives. He commands them to increase and multiply in the procreation of children, being joined into ‘one flesh’ by His divine grace and love. He wills that human beings live within families (Genesis 1:27; 2:21-24; Orthodox Marriage Service). “The Lord Jesus blessed marriage in which the ‘two become one flesh’ when, by His presence with His mother Mary and His disciples at the marriage in Cana of Galilee, He revealed His messianic glory in His first public miracle, evoking for the first time the faith of His disciples (Genesis 2:24; John 2:1-11)…. “Christ’s apostles repeat the teachings of their Master, likening the unique marriage between one man and one woman to the union between Christ and His Church which they experience as the Lord’s very body and His bride (Ephesians 5:21-33; 2 Corinthians 11:2). “While condemning those who forbid marriage as an unholy institution, along with those who defile marriage through unchastity (1 Timothy 4:3, Hebrews 13:4), the apostles commend as ‘the will of God’ that Christians, as examples for all human beings, abstain from unchastity [porneia] and know how to marry ‘in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like heathen who do not know God.’ They insist that ‘whoever disregards this [teaching] disregards not man but God, who gives His Holy Spirit’ to those who believe (1 Thessalonians 4:3-8). |
| Saint Philothei: 16th Century Martyr, 21st Century Role Model SOURCE: The Huffington Post " Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ, " St. Paul wrote in his First Epistle to the Corinthians (11:1). The most excellent way to follow the Apostle's prescription is to practice Christ's own words recorded in the Gospel of John: " If you love Me, keep My commandments " (14:15). Those who most excellently follow His commandments after the Birth-giver of God, the Most-holy Theotokos , are His saints, known and unknown. Saints are an integral part of the Orthodox Church: St. Clement of Rome writes, " Cleave to the saints, for they who cleave to them shall be made holy, " while St. Ephraim the Syrian adds, " Blessed is he who plants in his soul good plants, that is, the virtues and the lives of saints. " Reverence for saints (not worship, which belongs to God alone) is closely connected with the veneration of their holy relics and icons. It is the saint, through their glorification by God who continues the Christian Truth and who helps the faithful by their intercessions to Him. On February 19th the Church celebrates the memory of Saint Philothei the Righteous Martyr of Athens . Born into an aristocratic family in early 16th century Athens, St. Philothei's birth was itself a miracle: her mother, a barren woman named Syrigi, had her fervent prayers for a child answered by God after many years. Her birth embodies what St. James the Just wrote in his Epistle: " The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much " (5:16). From childhood, the Saint showed a devout disposition, even in the face of a short-lived marriage to a tyrannical husband who died shortly thereafter. St. Philothei's life was one of ascesis (disciplined spiritual exercises/struggle), in contrast to today's passion for indulgence. St. Philothei's life was one of prayer and contemplation, in contrast to today's impulsive consumption and self-glorification - selfie was the Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year 2013. |
| Tweet Нравится Genetics Confirms the Historicity of Genesis Claims New Documentary July 27, 2015 In a newly-released documentary entitled The Genetics of Adam & Eve doctor of molecular genetics Georgia Purdom argues that up-to-date findings in the field of genetics confirm the Biblical teaching that all human beings can trace their ancestry to one original couple created by God. Published in numerous scientific journals such as the Journal of Neuroscience and the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research , Purdom now works as a researcher and speaker for the well-known Christians apologetics group Answers in Genesis (AiG). Purdom’s work is inspired by her belief that the historical existence of Adam and Eve is essential to a proper understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Christian News Network reports. Whereas those who believe in evolution “argue that the science of genetics proves we cannot be descended from only two people,” and that the historicity of Adam and Eve is irrelevant to their faith, Purdom conversely believes that “An historical Adam and Eve and original sin are the foundation of the gospel” as the curse of sin and death and thus our need for salvation from them begins in Genesis 3 with Adam and Eve. For Dr. Purdom the main point is not scientific but is rather a matter of faith: “We need the good news, grace and life, which is found in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ,” she said. “Jesus is the solution to the problem of evil that began in Genesis 3. Paul made this connection very clear in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15.” Dr. Georgia Purdom In the documentary Purdom points to research on mitochondrial DNA, particularly that conducted by geneticist Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, which she argues conclusively demonstrates that the human race’s female ancestor lived but a few thousand years ago, in harmony with the Biblical timeline. She also argues that, in contradiction to the prevailing scientific narrative, human and chimp DNA is in reailty too divergent to indicate a common ancestor living a few million years ago. |
|
|
