| Craig S. Keener The Son from Above. 3:1–36 IN THIS SECTION, JESUS REVEALS to Nicodemus that he is the Son from above (3:13, 16), and John reiterates this point (3:31, 35–36). Jesus likewise continues the theme of true purification (3:5) from 2:6, which again contrasts forcefully with mere Jewish water rituals (3:25), even those of the Baptist (3:22–26; 4:1–2). Nicodemuss partial faith continues the theme of 2:23–25, but contrasts starkly with the fully reliable witness of John (3:21–36) and the responsiveness of the sinful Samaritan woman (4:1–42). Nicodemus and the Heavenly Witness (3:1–21) The warning against untrustworthy believers depending merely on signs (2:23–25) leads directly into the following paragraph: Nicodemus professes a measure of faith in Jesus based on his signs (3:2, repeating the σημεα ποιεον of 2:23), but has not yet crossed the threshold into discipleship; 4742 he is at most a representative of some open-minded dialogue partners in the synagogues (hence perhaps the use of plural verbs, though cf. comment on 3:11). 4743 John invites his audience to contrast Nicodemus " s slow response here to the ready response of the Samaritan woman in 4:7–29, who is able to overcome her misunderstanding in the course of that dialogue. 4744 (Several of Johns narratives involve the pattern of sign, misunderstanding, clarification, and response.) 4745 In the course of the Gospel, however, Nicodemus, who came out of darkness into light (3:2,21), moves from secret discipleship (3:1–2; 7:50–52) 4746 to true, complete discipleship (19:39–42). 4747 John presents several models of a journey to discipleship, of which Nicodemus is one; 4748 Nicodemus will eventually join the Samaritan woman among disciples. 4749 If 3:1–21 is the discourse explicating the sign of 2:1–11, it shows that true relationship with God involves neither waterpots nor the earthly temple (a theme revisited in both cases in 4:10–14, 20–24, 28), but the water of the Spirit (3:5) and the revealer from above (3:11–21). |
| Craig S. Keener The fish sign. 21:1–14 OTHER SOURCES MAY SUGGEST that Jesus revealed himself on a regular basis to the disciples immediately after the resurrection; Luke seems most emphatic about this point (Acts 1:3), though he omits the Galilean appearances and may therefore refer to a state after the disciples had returned to Jerusalem (reading Luke, one would not know that they had left Jerusalem). In any case, John is emphatic that this is the disciples» third revelation (21:14); that Jesus manifested himself to them also frames this sign narrative (21:1, 14), underlining the significance of this appearance. When John counts, it may be primarily to tie events together (compare 2:1,19; 2:11 with 4:54); this event takes the previous resurrection appearances to a fuller level, though Thomas " s christological confession was climactic. What is John " s point? In the light of the rest of the Gospel, Jesus again provides food for his people (6:10–11; cf. Rev 7:16–17; 12:6); the emphasis here will be spiritual food (4:32–34; 6:35; 10:9; see 21:15–17). Given the following dialogue, the point of the narrative seems to be to define more specifically the character of Jesus» call in 20:21, especially for church leaders: loving Jesus requires Jesus» servants to love Jesus» followers. The Setting: Failing at Fishing (21:1–3) These verses provide examples of typical Johannine language in the nontheological vocabulary when one would least expect it from a later hand: for example, «after these things» (21:1; see 3:22; 5:1,14; 6:1; 7:1). Likewise, only this Gospel calls the lake «the sea of Tiberias» (6:1) or mentions Tiberias at all (6:23). In the very incomplete list of Jesus» followers here, 10853 the two named characters besides Peter (who is necessary to the following story) are distinctly Johannine: only in this Gospel does Thomas appear outside lists of names (11:16; 14:5; 20:24–28) and is he called Didymus, meaning «Twin» (11:16; 20:24) ; 10854 and only in this Gospel do Nathanael and Cana appear (1:45–49; 2:1,11; 4:46). 10855 The «sons of Zebedee» admittedly weigh against the thesis that this epilogue stems from the same author or source, since the rest of the Gospel reflects a studied, probably deliberate avoidance of mentioning them; but it is noteworthy that even here they are not individually named. The mention of Thomas (21:2) provides a connection with the previous narrative (20:24–29), 10856 demonstrating that he did persevere. |
| Fulani herdsmen pose for a picture in Zango, Zango-kataf local govt, Kaduna State, Nigeria, in March 22, 2014. Photo: Reuters/Afolabi Sotunde At least 20 Christians, including nine children, were massacred and killed by Fulani herdsmen during an attack on a Nigerian village last week, human rights watchdog organizations are reporting. International Christian Concern, a U.S.-based non-denominational advocacy group, announced in a press release shared with The Christian Post on Monday that 19 members of the Salama Baptist Church in the village of Ancha in the Plateau state were killed by Fulani herdsman in last Thursday’s attack, while one of the deceased was a member of a Methodist church. At least five other Christians were also injured in the assault and were taken to the hospital for treatment. The organization noted that the attack left one entire family with no surviving members. According to Morning Star News , an independent Christian organization dedicated to reporting on human rights abuses around the world, police believe the attack was an act of revenge after a Fulani boy who resided in the village was beheaded in a nearby village. John Bulus, church secretary of Salama Baptist Church in Ancha, told Morning Star News that those killed during last week’s massacre came from three different households in the 50-home village. Among those killed, he said, were children aged from three months old to 17. According to Bulus, the children killed in the attack are 3-month-old Azumi Monday, 3-year-old Lami Monday, 5-year-old Aveh Ishaya, 6-year-old Emmanuel Sunday, 7-year-old Deba John, 8-year-old Ishaya Sunday, 9-year-old Sati Ishaya, 10-year-old Ayo John and 17-year-old Friday John. The adults killed in the attack are 18-year-old Bala Ishaya, 19-year-old Sei Musa, 20-year-old Tona Monday, 21-year-old Musa Ishaya, 40-year-old Ishaya Ahmadu, 40-year-old Lami Ishaya, 45-year-old Laraba Bulus, 48-year-old Kande Ahmadu, 50-year-old Bulus Rohun, 75-year-old Gada Oda and 80-year-old Ahmadu Rohun. |
| Craig S. Keener True Purification. 2:1–25 AT A WEDDING, JESUS sets aside the purificatory purpose of waterpots that embody traditional religious practices (for comment on Johns water motif, see also comment on 1:25–26, 31; 3:5). At the Gospels first Passover festival, Gods lamb then purifies the temple itself, starting the path of conflict with Judean leaders that leads to the passion of the Gospel " s final Passover. Relationship versus Ritual Purification (2:1–11) Signs-faith is less valuable than faith that merely responds to the Spirit " s witness (20:29); it is nevertheless a better place to begin than no faith at all (14:11). In 2:1–11, disciples who have already begun to believe Jesus (in 1:35–51) come to a new level of faith through Jesus» first sign. Outsiders to the establishment again receive deeper insight (2:9) than those closest to the heart of the social order. Perhaps most significantly, Jesus, who acts with divine authority, does not hesitate to suspend ritual law (again symbolized by water; cf. 1:33; 2:6; 3:5) in favor of a friend " s honor. The Jesus of this narrative prefigures the Jesus of the following narrative, who will act in judgment against the social and religious order represented by the temple. The following interpretive dialogue will reinforce the point that it is Jesus» gift of the Spirit, rather than ritual or heritage, that brings life (3:3–6). Thus this narrative also introduces Jesus» «hour» (2:4), beginning the conflict with the Judean religious and political establishment that in John must inevitably lead to the cross. 4354 1. Preliminary Questions Scholars have offered various proposals about this passagés role in the structure of 2:1–4:54, paralleling the two explicit Cana miracles as a deliberate inclusio. Although details vary, the intervening section moves from a Jewish to a non-Jewish (Samaritan) setting, with extensive christological discourse between. 4355 Some fail to identify a historical core to the account, hence doubt its basic historicity. 4356 Without privileging particular presuppositions about miracles, however, and given John " s consistent rewriting, and hence obscuring, of his sources, evidence for the historicity of the event could be argued in either direction. Royal banquets appear frequently in later Jewish parables, 4357 but one could use the observation about abundant banquet stories to argue for historical veracity as well as against it; the stories are frequent because banquets were frequent, and the Synoptic tradition indicates that the historical Jesus frequently attended banquets. 4358 The account is strictly Johannine in style but, though missing in Synoptic tradition, seems characteristic of Jesus 4359 and not objectionable on Christian presuppositions. 4360 John probably applies prior tradition here as in those cases where we can test his dependence on tradition; yet, as with his other narratives, he clearly reworks this one into his own unique framework and idiom as wel1. |
| 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. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Church (Orthodox Ecclesiology) TAMARA GRDZELIDZE THE PURPOSE OF THE CHURCH The purpose of the church is to restore fallen humanity and thereby reconcile the whole creation to God. Its sacramental life is the means to fulfill this purpose. The divine economy of salvation is the foundational principle of the church. The mystery of human salvation leads to the mystery of the salvation of the whole creation which is God’s ultimate goal. In this life the church bears witness to a new existence revealed through the incarnation and the resurrection of Jesus Christ – “The Church has been planted in the world as a Paradise,” says St. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. 5.20.2) – and this new reality already proclaimed is destined finally to attain the status of the new creation. The nature of the church, as Orthodoxy understands it, is deeply experiential and accordingly it is difficult to describe it by any single formula that carries an overwhelming authority. The early church knew no such single doctrinal definition and the reason for this is that, according to Fr. Georges Florovsky (1972: 57), the reality of the church was only made manifest to the “spiritual vision” of the church fathers. The nature of the church can thus be experienced and described, but never fully defined. The closest approximation to a doctrinal definition within orthodoxy is the clause in the creed, which affirms that the church is “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.” The church is the place par excellence of a believer’s participation in the mysteries of God. The faithful participate in the divine mysteries from the very beginning of their life in Christ through the sacrament of baptism and reach the height of that participation in the Eucharistic celebration. The very essence of this participation is experiential, something that can be readily observed in the case of children whose love exceeds their understanding, or orthodox people of little knowledge but great faith. The love of God manifested to human beings and creation is reciprocated in faith by the church’s constant returning the love of God through the praise of the faithful. This human participation in the divine mysteries is nurtured always by the belief and knowledge that “God is love” (1 John 4.8), and this movement of praise that constitutes the church’s inner life is the height of creation – its meaning and fulfillment. |
| 1 Архим. Софроний. Письма в Россию. М., 1997. С. 19. 2 Архим. Софроний. Письма в Россию. М., 1997. С. 22. 3 Он же. Преподобный Силуан Афонский. Эссекс, 1991. С. 20, 59, 89 и т. д. 4 Он же. Письма в Россию. С. 28. 5 Архим. Софроний. Письмо к Д. Бальфуру от 31 октября 1961 г.//Archive of the Gennadeios Library, Athens. G 2 . 6 Архим. Софроний. Письмо 18 к Д. Бальфуру от апреля 1934 г. (G 1 : В-19). 7 См.: Бальфур Д. Письмо к отцу Софронию от 27 сентября (10 октября) 1932 г.//Archive of the Monastery of St. John the Baptist. M BS . 8 О раннем периоде жизни Д. Бальфура и его обращении в Православие упоминает матушка Силуана (Соболева) в книге «Три встречи» (Москва, 1997. С. 76–83). Однако в ее повествовании встречаются некоторые исторические неточности. Так, она, называя отца Давида «лордом», по-видимому, приняла его за известного политического деятеля начала XX в. — лорда Бальфура, тогда как отец Давид имел более скромное социальное происхождение. Кроме того, занимательный рассказ о том, как Давид Бальфур «пожертвовал много денег Римскому папе» и «основал Шевтонский монастырь для борьбы с Православием», не имеет под собой реальных исторических оснований. 9 Из письма отца Софрония епископу Вениамину. Письмо не сохранилось. Некоторые отрывки восстановлены благодаря заметкам, сделанным самим Д. Бальфуром. См.: Бальфур Д. Заметки из письма отца Софрония к митрополиту Вениамину//Archive of the Gennadeios Library, Athens. G 1 : Excursus. 10 Бальфур Д. Письмо к отцу Софронию от 7 апреля 1936 г. (M BS ). См. Приложение II, 1: «Старец — не оракул». 11 Архим. Софроний. Письмо к Д. Бальфуру 23 от 7 (20) апреля 1936 г. (G 1 : С-11). 12 См.: Каллистос Уэр, еп. Obituary: David Balfour//Sobornost (incorporating Eastern Churches Review). T. 12, 1. Лондон, 1990. С. 55. 13 См.: Каллистос Уэр, еп. Obituary: David Balfour//Sobornost (incorporating Eastern Churches Review). T. 12, Лондон, 1990. С. 55. 14 Архим. Софроний. Письмо к Марии Семеновне Калашниковой (сестре отца Софрония) от 24 августа 1973 г.//Archive of the Monastery of St. John the Baptist. |
| Рубрики Коллекции Система пользовательского поиска Упорядочить: Relevance Relevance Библиография. «Фома» – июнь 2018 20 мин., 17.06.2018 1-я страница обложки. На темно-голубом фоне светильник в виде электрической лампочки, внутри которой горит пламя свечи (Lori.ru) и надпись: ВЫХОДЯ, НЕСИТЕ СВЕТ. Почему говорить о смерти не принято и неприятно, но мы все-таки говорим. См. статьи: протоиерей Иоанн Бэр «У вас есть двадцать минут на смерть» (с.8-17); священник Анатолий Першин «Как я побывал на том свете» (с.54-55). Пролог : Варлам Шаламов. «Я забыл погоду детства… ». Стихотворение, 1956//Фома. - – июнь 2018. – С.2. – (рубрика «Пролог» ). Содержание : С.3. Даты месяца : Даты месяца: июнь //Фома. - – июнь 2018. – С.4-5. - (рубрика « Даты месяца »). Представлены: 4 июня. Начало Петрова поста. Ил.: Апостолы Петр и Павел. Икона. – С.4; 6 июня. Пушкинский день России, день рождения поэта /Валентин Непомнящий , из интервью журналу «Фома». Ил.: Болдинская осень. Евгений Демаков. 2015. – С.4; 9 июня. 100 лет назад умерла Анна Достоевская. Фотопортреты Ф.М. Достоевского и А. Г. Достоевской (XIX в.). – С.4; 3 июня. Равноапостольных царя Константина и матери его царицы Елены. Ил.: Обретение Креста. Аньоло Гадди. 1380. – С.5; 11 июня. 160 лет назад, в 1858 году, освящен Исаакиевский собор . Ил.: Освящение Исаакиевского собора 30 мая 1858 года (по ст. ст.). – С.5. Колонка главного редактора: Владимир Легойда . Как стать успешным? Фото//Фома. - – июнь 2018. – С.6-7. – (рубрика « Колонка главного редактора »). этой колонки смотрите на телеканале «Царьград» (tsargrad.ru) Интервью номера: У вас есть 20 минут на смерть. Известный американский богослов – о том, что не дает покоя православному христианину на Западе. [Беседа с протоиереем Иоанном Бэром , профессором патристики Свято-Владимирской духовной семинарии в штате Нью-Йорк, США]. Подготовили Тихон Сысоев и Полина Рудакова . Фото Дмитрия Зверева//Фома. - – июнь 2018. – С.8-17. – (рубрика « Интервью номера »). – Имеется биографическая справка « Протоиерей Иоанн Бэр ( John Behr )» (С.10). |
| Craig S. Keener The close of the Gospel. 21:24–25 MANY SCHOLARS THINK THAT the emphasis on the conditional nature of the questions (21:22–23) suggests that disappointment with the beloved disciplés death existed in the early church. 10963 That is, Jesus apparently said something about some disciples remaining until he returned, which the Synoptics already apply to the transfiguration ( Mark 9:1–2 ; Matt 16:28–17:2; Luke 9:27–29); the death of the last disciple could well provoke some confusion about the meaning of such a saying. In such a case, 21:24–25 would likely constitute a later addition to the text (especially if one accepts the rest of ch. 21 as part of the Gospel), which is the view of most scholars. It can read like a miniature letter of recommendation (cf. Rom 16:2 ; 1Cor 4:17; 16:10 ; Phil 2:19 ; Col 4:7; Phlm 17; 3 John 12 ). 10964 At the same time, the disciple himself could issue the same sort of warning as he was recognizing his age and impending death; the Lord might well not return in his lifetime. If the disciple remains alive at the time of the Gospel " s completion, this could help explain the present tense of μαρτρων in 21:24, 10965 although one could also interpret 21otherwise (e.g., the disciplés witness continues to live even if the disciple does not; see comment on 19:35). The community («we») may second the verdict of the singular voice in 19:35, which commends the truth of the beloved disciplés witness, unless this represents an editorial «we,» 10966 which many argue, on the basis of Johannine style in general, seems less likely. 10967 The concluding verse (21:25) harks back to 20:30, 10968 suggesting that it stems either from the author or from those close enough to the author to understand and articulate his mind. At least the plural in 21:24, however, would seem to represent others, 10969 perhaps the Johannine circle of disciples, 10970 confirming the veracity of the beloved disciplés witness. 10971 Ancient Mediterranean legal documents typically listed witnesses at the end of the document, 10972 just as the book (perhaps of life?) in Revelation is sealed with seven attesting seals. 10973 Nonlegal documents could also follow the legal pattern and cite a past figurés saying as if citing a closing legal testimony (Seneca Nat. 5.18.16). |
| Азбука веры Православная библиотека Orthodox books Contemporary Non-Orthodox Biblical Studies The Gospel of John Пожертвовать Вход Craig S. Keener The Gospel of John Источник 6. Revelatory Motifs: Knowledge, Vision, Signs 1:1-18. The prologue 7. Christology and Other Theology OF ALL THE DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS of Johannine theology in the discourses, the most frequently noted is his Christology. 2413 As scholars regularly observe, Christology is central to this Gospe1. 2414 Prologues normally set the stage for major themes in the works that followed them, and John s prologue does not disappoint, framed by affirmations of Jesus» deity and relationship with the Father (1:1, 18). Most of the prologue addresses Jesus» identity (1:1–5,9,14,16–18) and the responses of various groups (the world, Israel, and the disciples, 1:10–13); it also offers a model for bold witness about Jesus» identity (1:6–8,15). The rest of the Gospel illustrates these responses to Jesus, especially to his signs (e.g., 1:49; 2:11, 23; 3:2; 4:19; 5:16–18; 6:30, 67–69; 7:30; 8:59; 9:16; 10:19–21; 11:45–46; 20:31), which function as the primary summons to recognize his identity (20:30–31; cf. 14:10–11). 2415 That Jesus was rejected by the world just as they were would be relevant for marginalized Johannine Christians, 2416 and the story of divine Wisdom " s rejection provided a fitting backdrop for the experience of Jesus known to the community. 2417 The Gospel " s radical Christology enabled the Johannine Christians «to undertake their radical commitment to God in the face of dire risk.» 2418 As in other biographies, including the other gospels, the Fourth Gospel focuses on one central figure; over half the verbs in John have Jesus as their subject or are uttered by him. 2419 Unlike most biographies, which express the freedom to critique their heroes» shortcomings (e.g., Arrian Alex. 4.7.4; 4.8.1–4.9.6) and mix some measure of praise and blame (e.g., Cornelius Nepos 11 [Iphicrates], 3.2), John will nowhere critique or imply any shortcomings in Jesus. A discussion of the genre and discourses of the Fourth Gospel, undertaken at the beginning of this introduction, invites particular exploration of John " s Christology vis-à-vis that of the earliest Jesus tradition. Granted that John has represented Jesus in Johannine idiom and for his distinctive purposes, does he accurately reflect and interpret some prior tradition here, or does he simply create new material? |
|
|
