| When Jesus asks the man if he wishes to be healed, the man misunderstands. 5769 Misunderstanding appears in some other ancient miracle stories, 5770 but is a critical Johannine motif (see comment on 3:4). Jesus» command to take up the bed and «walk» may reflect a wordplay on John " s theological use of walking (e.g., 8:12; 11:9–10; 12:35; 1 John 1:7; 2 John 4, 6; 3 John 3–4 ; some other texts, like 6:66, may reflect such a wordplay): one physically saved by Jesus, like one he has saved spiritually, must walk accordingly. But whether John intends such a double entendre here is less than clear; in many cases «walking» functions on a purely literal level (probably in 1:36; 6:19; 7:1; 10:23; 11:54; 21:18). 2. Different Views of the Sabbath (5:9b-16) John surprises the reader both here and in ch. 9 by suddenly announcing the Sabbath (and consequent controversy) after the healing story; 5771 perhaps this is meant to produce reader empathy for the healed person to heighten the irrelevance of the opponents» theological criteria. The issue here is not only the Sabbath but the law as a whole. Jewish teachers often regarded dismissing one commandment as tantamount to dismissing the whole of the Torah; 5772 this principle would have been still more true (qal vaomer) for a «heavy» biblical commandment like that of the Sabbath. 5773 Thus for Jesus» opponents in this passage, a violation of the Sabbath can indicate a cavalier attitude toward Torah and Moses in general, whereas Jesus will appeal to Moses and the law in his defense (5:39, 45–47). 5774 But in contrast to those whose primary concern is carrying a mat on the Sabbath (5:10), Jesus knows the man " s former sin and warns against him sinning further (5:14). 2A. Sabbath Practices (5:9–12) As noted above, Jesus commonly provided a physical demonstration of a healing, as did some of his contemporaries. In telling the man to carry his bed mat, however, Jesus contravened the Pharisaic understanding of the Sabbath (5:8–12; cf. 9:14–16). |
| 5595 Because John employs the same term in 2:6–7, we may infer a continuation of the replacement motif highlighted there and frequently in John " s water motif. 5596 Just as Jesus» gift is greater than the waters of ritual purity, it is greater than the gift of Jacob " s wel1. For John " s biblically informed audience, the term used may also allude to Gen 24:14–46 , which accounts for nine of the seventeen uses of υδρα in the LXX. In that passage Rebekah runs home when she learns the identity of the person with whom she was speaking ( Gen 24:28 ; see also Exod 2:20); here the Samaritan woman runs to her people after a revelation of her conversant " s identity. Her claim that he revealed all that she had done (4:27) overstates the case, 5597 but may suggest that she had defined herself, as much of her society would have, in terms of her past history with men; it also fits Jesus» revelation of peoplés character when they encounter him (1:42, 47; 15:22). The Samaritan woman " s words of invitation («Come, see,» 4:29) explicitly echo the witness of Philip in 1(see comment there). 5598 No less than Philip, she becomes a model for witness; in this case, however, she brings virtually an entire town! 5599 (As noted on 1and 1:46, «come and see» was a frequent phrase, including for halakic investigation.) 5600 It is possible that it may also be relevant that her οτς στιν, although phrased as part of a question, fits the Johannine language of confession by the faith it prefigures (1:15, 30, 33, 34; 4:42; 6:14, 50, 58; 7:40–41). 5601 The narrative thus places her on a par with Jesus» other disciples who brought his message to the world (cf. 17:20). 5602 (Maccini doubts the connection with Philip, contrasting the two narratives; 5603 but the differences are dictated by the necessity of the different story lines, and are not substantial enough to reduce the positive comparison between the two characters.) Granted, once they encounter Jesus for themselves, they are no longer dependent on her testimony (4:41–42) as they were at first (4:39); but it was likewise Nathanael " s encounter with Jesus, not solely Philip " s testimony, that led to Nathanael " s confession (1:47–49). |
| Abraham was a model of righteousness, 6832 and among the «deeds of Abraham» (8:39), various strands of Jewish tradition emphasized especially his hospitality, 6833 faith, 6834 the related matter of being the first «convert» to faith in the true God, 6835 and his bringing Gentiles to the true God. 6836 Philo declared that Abraham kept all of God " s law, 6837 and many others agreed with him. 6838 As noted above, we cannot date securely the period when an emphasis on merits became widespread, but if it does have early roots, the correspondence between «works» and «merits» may be significant. If later sources reveal earlier traditions here, Jewish people also thought much about their own «works» before God in the season between the Day of Atonement and the end of the festival of Taberacles. 6839 In any case, their claim to descent from Abraham in any sense other than the genetic one that Jesus grants (8:37) is negated by their behavior: Abraham did righteous deeds (8:39), including hospitably receiving God " s messengers ( Gen 18:3–8 ), 6840 but they wish to kill Jesus for speaking God " s truth (8:39–40). 6841 Their works show an origin that is not from Abraham (8) and certainly not from God (8:41–42); Jesus» point should have been obvious to them (8:43), 6842 but they could not begin to believe because they were not of his sheep (10:26) given by the Father (10:29), hence they could not understand or fully believe (10:38). Therefore now he makes it explicit: they are murderers because they are spiritual children of the devil, the first murderer (8:44). The argument about whether they are children of God (8:41–47) develops the argument about Abraham and is at «the very heart of the author " s polemic.» 6843 Biblically, the line of promise among Abraham s offspring constituted Gods children (e.g., Exod 4:22; see comment on John 1:12 ); but early Christians also debated whether the line of promise necessarily stopped being narrowed down with Isaac and Jacob ( Rom 9:7–13 ). |
| For Jesus» interlocutors to claim that the Lord is «their God» yet not to know him was for them to propagate falsehood (8:54–55), a sin of which Jesus has already accused them for resisting the truth (8:44–46). The biblical covenant motif included the claim that God would be Israel " s God and they would be his people; 6925 in its fullest form, this covenant motif also promised that his people would «know» him, that is, relate to God in covenant (e.g., Jer 31:31–34 ; see introduction, ch. 6; comment on 10:3–4). One could not belong to the covenant while failing to «know» God; and Jesus has already charged that they must not know God, because if they really listened to God they would recognize his agent (8:42–43,47). Jesus did not seek his own glory (8:50); it was his Father who glorified him (8:54). In the total Johannine context, the Father would glorify Jesus through his purpose for him in the cross (12:23–24). Isaiah emphasized that God would not share his glory with any other purported deity (Isa 42:8; 48:11). 6926 If they claim Abraham as their father (8:56)–and Jesus does not deny that Abraham is their father ethnically (8:37) 6927 –then they ought to embrace Jesus» revelation joyfully as their ancestor Abraham did (8:56; cf. 8:39–40). Another witness in advance for Jesus, John the Baptist, in whom Jesus» interlocutors rejoiced for a time (5:35), also rejoiced to see Jesus (3:29). That Abraham had «seen» Jesus» «day» 6928 should not have been surprising–to anyone who believed that Jesus was who he claimed to be (cf. Matt 13:16–17; Luke 2:26). But when did Abraham see Jesus» day? It is unclear if Jesus refers here to a specific Jewish tradition, but if he does, it is interesting that some traditions interpreted Abraham " s laugh ( Gen 17:17 ) as joy in response to God " s revelation. 6929 Others believe that 8alludes to an appearance of the préexistent Logos alongside two angels in Gen 18:2, 13 . 6930 Other suggestions point to more specifically eschatological understandings of Jesus» «day.» Various Jewish traditions emphasized that Abraham saw the future or at least some aspects of it in his vision in Gen 15:12–21 . |
| About Pages Проекты «Правмира» Raising Orthodox Children to Orthodox Adulthood The Daily Website on How to be an Orthodox Christian Today Twitter Telegram Parler RSS Donate Navigation Is It True that Christ Taught to be Just Good and Not Some Religion? – Myth and Its Dispelling Source: Foma (Russian) Sergey Khudiev 07 June 2019 Gabriela23, orthphoto.net Myth: Christ only taught to be good: it is important to be merciful and compassionate, but faith in certain dogmas and observation of some rites were invented by people after Him. As Lyudmila Ulitskaya, a famous writer, words it, when answering the interviewer’s question, “Is mercy more important than tenets of faith? Is compassion above the Commandments?”: “Undoubtedly. It is exactly what Jesus Of Nazareth preached”. What is the Real Story? There is a Latin phrase: Aut Deus Aut Malus Homo. It goes back to Thomas Aquinas, a medieval thinker, and means, “Either God or a bad man”. The fact is that Jesus, whom we meet in the Gospel, says things that can be considered good and ethical only if the religious message of the Gospel is true. For example, “ He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it” (Matthew 10:37-39). It is about martyrdom: Christ’s disciple should be ready to be rejected by their closest people, and the image of carrying the cross for listeners of Jesus was painfully clear: the condemned were forced to carry a horizontal crossbar of the cross, on which they would be crucified. To carry the cross meant to go to fierce death. To lose a soul for Christ meant to die for Him. Crucifixion. Image: ruicon.ru And here Christ not only calls people for martyrdom for Him, but also promises that they will ultimately gain eternal and blessed life. Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life (John 6:47). |
| Peter, hearing these remarks, stood up and addressed the crowd. He preached to the people regarding the Old Testament prophecies about the coming of the Holy Spirit. He spoke about Jesus Christ and His death and glorious Resurrection. Great conviction fell upon the people, and they asked the Apostles, " What shall we do? " Peter said to them, " Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit " (Acts 2:38-39). The Bible records that on that day about three thousand were baptized. Following, the book of Acts states that the newly baptized continued daily to hear the teaching of the Apostles, as the early Christians met together for fellowship, the breaking of bread, and for prayer. Many wonderful signs and miracles were done through the Apostles, and the Lord added to the Church daily those who were being saved (Acts 2:42-47). ICON OF THE FEAST The icon of the Feast of Pentecost is known as " The Descent of the Holy Spirit " . It is an icon of bold colors of red and gold signifying that this is a great event. The movement of the icon is from the top to the bottom. At the top of the icon is a semicircle with rays coming from it (1). The rays are pointing toward the Apostles, and the tongues of fire are seen descending upon each one of them signifying the descent of the Holy Spirit (2). 1. Semicircle of rays pointing to each of the Apostles (detail). 2. A tongue of fire rests above the head of Saint Peter (detail). The building in the background of the icon represents the upper room where the Disciples of Christ gathered after the Ascension. The Apostles are shown seated in a semicircle which shows the unity of the Church (3). Included in the group of the Apostles is Saint Paul (4), who, though not present with the others on the day of Pentecost, became an Apostle of the Church and the greatest missionary. Also included are the four Evangelists—Matthew, Mark (5), Luke (6), and John—holding books of the Gospel, while the other Apostles are holding scrolls that represent the teaching authority given to them by Christ. |
| Roman law declared, “It is not lawful to be a Christian.” Why was this so? (p 23) In what 3 ways did Saint Irenaeus distinguish true Christian Churches from heretical groups? (pp 26–27) What are some features of Christian worship as described by Saint Justin Martyr (155 AD) that continue to be part of our liturgical life today? (p 30) Third century Who were the “lapsed” and how did the Church care for them? (p 32) How did Origen view pagan philosophy? (p 36) In what ways is Hippolytus’ description of baptism similar to present practice? (pp 39–40) Fourth century How did Constantine&rsquos dream or vision influence him to issue the Edict of Milan? (p 44) How did Constantine form what we know as the weekend? (pp 46–47) What was the main teaching of Arius/Arianism? (p 49) Why did Saint Basil emphasize the communal form of monasticism? (p 53) Did monastics reject or turn their backs on the world as evil? (pp 56–57) Fifth century Who was Saint Pulcheria and how did she influence Orthodox worship? (pp 61–62) What was the teaching of the Monophysites? (p 63) How did Saint Augustine’s view of marital relations differ from the traditional view of marriage and sexual relations reflected at the Council of Nicaea? (p 66) Sixth century What is the Code of Justinian? (p 72) Who created the “Monastic Rule” that would guide monasticism in the Roman Catholic Church for the next 500 years? (p 75) Why did the Spanish Church add the words “and the Son” (the phrase known as the filioque) to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed? (pp 76–77) Seventh century How did Saint Maximus the Confessor respond to the popular ideas called Monothelitism and Monoenergism? (p 82) What significant ruling about clergy marriage came at the Trullo/Quinisext Council? (p 84) How does Canon 102 of the Qunisext Council direct the pastor to deal with a penitent? (p 85) How did the Arab Conquest affect efforts by Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians to discuss and resolve their differences? (p 90) Eighth century What was the major objection of the Iconoclasts to the veneration of icons, and how did Saint John of Damascus address it in his treatises called On the Holy Images? (pp 92–93) |
| While he was still speaking, there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them... But Jesus said to him, «Judas, would you betray the Son of man with a kiss?» And one of them struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his right ear. But Jesus said, «No more of this!» and he touched his ear and healed him. –Luke 22:47–48,50–51. Location: Jerusalem Number cured: Number of witnesses who saw the miracle: Disciples and crowd ?=50 Miracle 37 Jesus reveals himself after his resurrection from the dead by a miraculous catch of fish. After this Jesus revealed himself again to his disciples... in this way. Simon Peter said to them (the other six disciples), «I am going fishing.» They said, «We will go with you.» They went out and got into the boat; but that night they caught nothing. Just as day was breaking, Jesus stood on the beach; yet the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to them, «Children, have you any fish?» They answered him, «No». He said to them, «Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.» So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in, for the quantity of fish. The disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, «It is the Lord!» When they finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, «Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?» He said to him, «Yes Lord, you know that I love you.» (Jesus) said to him, «Feed my lambs (the believers).» ...After this he said to him, «Follow me!» – John 21:1,3 –7a,15,19b. Location: Lake of Galilee Number of witnesses who saw the miracle: 7 disciples In the above accounts there are 37 miracles describing in some detail the healing of 39 different people. There are four passages, plus the healings at the feeding of the five thousand, stating that Jesus healed all who came. By rough estimate, it is proposed that at least 1,000 people were healed in these mass healings. In addition there were surely as many as 14,500 to 15,000 people who observed these healings, including the 5,000 on one occasion and the 4,000 on another, who actually ate of the multiplied bread as well as witnessing the miracle. Even if we assume that half of the witnesses saw two miracles, that would still leave 11,000 witnesses to the almost 1,000 miracles. |
| Сведения об антропоморфитском споре, приводимые в греческих и латинских источниках, грешат односторонностью и тенденциозностью. Особенно это относится к Иоанну Кассиану, «благочестивому журналисту», как метко охарактеризовал его Рене Драге. В споре Кассиан занимает оригенистскую позицию. В своих сочинениях он излагает точку зрения Евагрия: «Noi in Cassiano rileggiamo Evagrio» [У Кассианамы перечитываем Евагрия], – справедливо замечает современный исследователь. Картина египетского монашества в «Historia Lausiaca» также представлена с греческих позиций, «в духе Евагрия», по словам Драге. С тех пор учение «антропоморфитов» подается в искаженном виде, а антропоморфитский спор изображается, как столкновение simpliciores [простецов] с людьми учеными. Да, был и такой аспект. Но в целом спор гораздо серьезней и глубже: он является столкновением богословских концепций и духовных традиций. «Житие» Афу раскрывает нам богословскую перспективу спора, и в этом – историческая ценность данного замечательного агиологического документа. Не бойся, малое стадо! ибо Отец ваш благоволил дать вам Царство. Наше же жительство – на небесах, откуда мы ожидаем и Спасителя, Господа нашего Иисуса Христа. ибо не имеем здесь постоянного града, но ищем будущего. ибо он ожидал города, имеющего основание, которого художник и строитель Бог. Chadwick O. John Cassian. A Study in Primitive Monasticism. Cambridge, 1950, p. 16, n. 3; ср. pp. 34—35. Lieske A. Die Theologie der Logosmystik bei Origenes/Munsterische Beitrage zur Theologie. Heft 22, 1938, SS. 45 ff., 133 ff. «Bei aller Liebe zum gekreuzigten Christus und zum Gottmenschen... tritt auf dieser hoheren Stufe der Glaubenserkenntnis doch das Interesse und die Hochschatzung fur das Gottmenschentum Jesu Christi zuruck» (S. 47). Voelker W. Das Vollkommenheitsideal des Origenes. Tubingen, 1931, SS. 109—110. Противоположную точку зрения отстаивает Lubac H. de. Histoire et Esprit. L " intelligence de l " Ecriture d " apres Origene. Paris, 1950; а также Bertrand F. |
| 47, 51). Причащение апостолов. Фрагмент росписи ц. вмч. Димитрия Солунского, Печская Патриархия, Косово и Метохия. Ок. 1345 г. Причащение апостолов. Фрагмент росписи ц. вмч. Димитрия Солунского, Печская Патриархия, Косово и Метохия. Ок. 1345 г. Затем следует смена предмета беседы (Ин 6. 52). От слов о Мессии Господь переходит к обсуждению возможности приобщения вечной жизни через вкушение Его Плоти. Он утверждает: «Истинно, истинно говорю вам: если не будете есть Плоти Сына человеческого и пить Крови Его, то не будете иметь в себе жизни. Ядущий Мою Плоть и пиющий Мою Кровь имеет жизнь вечную, и Я воскрешу его в последний день. Ибо Плоть Моя истинно есть пища, и Кровь Моя истинно есть питие. Ядущий Мою Плоть и пиющий Мою Кровь пребывает во Мне, и Я в нем» (Ин 6. 53-56). Экзегеты указывают на то, что использованное здесь существительное σρξ (плоть, а не σμα - тело, как в др. Евангелиях) подчеркивает реальность воплощения и крестной смерти Спасителя (ср.: Ин 1. 14; Ign. Ep. ad Smyrn. 7. 1; существовала теория, к-рую поддерживал, в частности, И. Иеремиас, что в данном случае за греч. σρξ стоит арам. употреблявшееся Самим Спасителем, это, однако, не может быть доказано). Некоторые исследователи считают, что то же значение имеет использованный здесь глагол τργω (есть, вкушать, букв. - грызть), что спорно, поскольку этот глагол употребляется в Евангелии от Иоанна и как синоним более нейтрального σθω (ср.: Ин 6. 58), в т. ч. в контекстах, не имеющих отношения к Е. (Ин 13. 18). Сторонники теории интерполяций считают, что данный отрывок не принадлежит к оригинальному тексту Евангелия, указывая в качестве главного аргумента на появление в нем темы Крови Христовой, к-рая является христ., и потому ее обсуждение, как они полагают, могло иметь смысл лишь после установления таинства Е. Однако тема Крови здесь совершенно не противоречит контексту, поскольку служит логичным развитием слов Спасителя о Его близкой смерти (Ин 6. 51), к-рые, в свою очередь, связаны с темой нисхождения и восхождения Логоса или Сына человеческого (ср.: Ин 6. 62). При истолковании данного отрывка в сакраментальном смысле раздельное упоминание Плоти и Крови указывает на жертвенный характер Е. Тем не менее нек-рые исследователи вообще отрицают связь беседы о Хлебе жизни с Е., считая главной темой этой части Евангелия от Иоанна христологию ( Dunn J. John VI - A Eucharistic Discourse?//NTS. 1970/1971. Vol. 17. P. 328-338; Stimpfle A. Blinde sehen. B.; N. Y., 1990. (BZNW; 57)). |
|
|
