| 4832 Sipre Deut. 45.1.2; " Abot R. Nat. 16A; b. B. Bat. 16a; Ber. 5a; Qidd. 30b, bar.; Sukkah 52b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:6; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2; Lev. Rab. 35:5; Pesiq. Rab. 41:4; cf. 2Macc 2:23; T. Ash. 3:2; Aristotle Po1. 3.11.4, 1287a. 4836 Often noted, e.g., Sylvia Mary, Mysticism, 64; White, Initiation, 70 (though White, p. 252, sees Hellenistic background in John 3:3 ); Watkins, John, 74; Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 82 (citing b. Yebam. 22a; 48b; 62a; 97b; Bek. 47a). Lightfoot, Talmud, 3:265, noted this in regard to John 3in the seventeenth century. 4840 In practice, freed slaves converted to Judaism were forbidden lest they view Judaism as less than holy (Cohen, Law, 148–49). Moreover, the emphasis on embracing proselytes fully (Kern-Ulmer, «Bewertung»; Bamberger, Proselytism, 145–61; McKnight, «Proselytism,» 840–41) may not have always translated into practice (cf., e.g., m. Hor. 3:8; Sipre Deut. 253.2.2; Bamberger, Proselytism, 161–69; McKnight, «Proselytism,» 841–42; Keener, Spirit, 146–47; 4Q279 frg. 1, line 6). 4841 Cf., e.g., Jeremias, Jerusalem, 324. Further on legal status, see Hoenig, «Conversion,» 54–55. 4842 Gaius Inst. 1.59; this remained true even after the adoptive tie was broken. Cf. also blood siblings in Mbiti, Religions, 276. 4843 Gaius Inst. 1.127–128. Cf. the loss of agnatic ties by change of status in 1.161; the invalidation of a will through status change in 2.147. 4846 Sallust Speech of Gaius Cotta 3; cf. Cicero Att. 6.6.4. Accepting citizenship in one place terminated it elsewhere (Cornelius Nepos 25 [Atticus], 3.1). 4849 L.A.B. 20:2; 27:10. For Philo, ascending to the pure realm of spirit as Moses did could produce a «second birth» (QE 2.46). 4850 Jos. Asen. 8:9/8:10–11. Some also think the prayer for the regeneration of catechumens in Apos. Con. 8.6.6 reflects an earlier Jewish prayer, but this is unclear. 4854 n Abraham: Gen. Rab. 44:12; 48:6; Exod. Rab. 38:6; cf. Apoc. Ab. 20:2–5. Abraham " s exaltation appears in earlier sources without reference to this motif (e.g., T. Ab. 9:6–15A; 8:2–12:15B; cf. T. Mos. 10:8–9), which may reflect broader Hellenistic currents about exalted deities (cf. also Eph 1:21–22 ). |
| 3303 In the DSS (Bandstra, «Errorists,» 333–35) and other sources (ibid., 335–37); it may have been opposed in Col 1and 2(cf. Yamauchi, «Colosse,» 147–48). For a fuller collection of sources on angelic mediators in creation, see Fossum, «Gen.» 3304 Burkitt, Gnosis, 55. This view, too, did not originate with the gnostics but in the development of the Platonic contrast between the realm of shadows and realm of ideas (on the corruptibility of all matter, cf. Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 382F; Ε at Delphi 18, Mor. 392; Plotinus Enn. 2.4; on its consequent unreality, cf. Plotinus Enn. 3.6, esp. 3.6.6–7; on the evil (κακν) that arises from it, see Plotinus Enn. 1.8; Epitome of Plutarch " s Gen. of Soul 2, Mor. 1030E). Philo taught that God created people through lesser powers lest he be blamed for human sin (Confusion 179) or associated with human finiteness (Flight 69). Gnostics and Philo both drew from middle Platonism; cf. Pearson, «Philo.» 3305 Some scholars do believe that John counters the gnostic view of creation here (Lohse, Environment, 274), but the text s lack of explicit emphasis on creation " s goodness supports this contention mainly by silence, and this scholarly position functions better on the accepted premise of a gnostic context for the Gospel rather than as a support for that premise. 3308 For traditional Greek theogonies (e.g., Hesiod), see Guthrie, Orpheus, 69–72 (72–147 for Orphic theogony; for the Orphic original world-egg reported, e.g., by neoplatonists, see 93–95); these influenced Gnostics (Hippolytus Haer. 1.23; 5.5). One may compare such ancient Near Eastern cosmogonies and titanomachies as Enuma Elish (on which see Heidel, Genesis). For early Greek arguments on the possibility of void or empty space existing, see Allen, Philosophy, 16,45, 50, 55. 3309 Diogenes Laertius 9.7.44. But the significance of this language should not be pressed as if John " s words are directly derivative; it should be noted that various forms of γνομαι are the most natural Greek language for such origination (e.g., Philo Creation 42; Let. Aris. 16; cf. Jos. Asen. 16:11/6); for «all things that are» in reference to creation (God alone being viewed as uncreated), cf. also an apophthegm of Thaies in Diogenes Laertius 1.35. |
| 661 E.g., Townsend, «Speeches»; Schweizer, «Speeches»; Dibelius, Studies, 138–85; idem, Paul, 11; idem, Tradition, 16–18. 665 Cf. Dodd, Preaching, 17–19; Martin, «Evidence,» 59; Payne, «Semitisms»; Ehrhardt, Acts, 1. Torrey, Composition, first argued for Aramaic sources throughout the first half of the book, especially in the speeches, but he may have underestimated the extent to which Koine, Semitic or «Jewish Greek,» and translation Greek overlap (cf. LXX; Jos. Asen.; «Jewish Greek» in Turner, «Thoughts,» 46; Nock, «Vocabulary,» 138–39; though for Rome contrast Leon, Jews, 92); further, an intentional Septuagintalizing (Hengel, Acts, 62; De Zwaan, «Language») or Semitizing to fit the character of his speakers, and perhaps the character of Acts 1–12 as a whole, is plausible. (Aune, Environment, 117, regards it as equivalent to Lukés contemporaries» Atticizing style; by contrast, Most, «Luke,» protests that this form of translation Greek differs from the LXX and reflects Luke following Hebrew sources.) 668 Hengel, Acts, 61. With regard to Paul " s speeches, an interested traveling companion could have learned from Paul " s recollections the gist of those speeches he missed (Robertson, Luke, 228). 669 Nor do even most conservative biblical apologists today, including in the words of the Johannine Jesus; cf. Wenham, Bible, 92–95; Feinberg, «Meaning,» 299–301 (the exact voice, but not words, of Jesus); Bock, «Words,» 75–77; cf. Edersheim, Life, 203. 671 Bauckham, ««Midrash,»» 68; thus L.A.BI:s careful treatment of the Decalogue may provide a closer analogy than his composition of speeches. 673 Ridderbos, John, 382–83, cites Luke 19as implying that the Synoptics also recognize a fuller ministry outside Galilee, but the verse may refer simply to Galilean pilgrims present for the festiva1. 674 As plain as Mark " s Messianic Secret has been since Wrede, its interpretation is no more obvious today than John " s. Wrede, Secret, 228, explains it as a Markan cover for the fact that Jesus did not claim messiahship before the resurrection. Burkill, Light, 1–38, argues that it is pre-Markan and may go back to Jesus (Ellis, «Composition,» shows that Q also contained the motif). Longenecker, Christology, 70–73, argues that messiahship could be publicly confirmed only at the resurrection. Cullmann, State, 26, thinks Jesus avoided the title because of its political overtones. Theissen, Stories, 64,68–69, 141–42, compares the secrecy commands to prohibitions against revealing formulas in magical texts. Hooker, Message of Mark, 61, explains the secret as hiding Jesus» identity from those who will not believe. Jesus» danger from the authorities (see Rhoads and Michie, Mark, 87) could also explain the secret on a literary leve1. The Johannine version of the theme is addressed in more detail on John 3:4 , below. |
| 3146 P. Meg. 1:5, §4; cf. b. Šabb. 104a: prophets reinstituted Moses» forgotten laws (cf. 4 Ezra 14:44–46), but even a prophet could make no innovations after Moses. Cf. Sipre Deut. 11:17, cited in Bonsirven, Judaism, 219: the law would not be altered. 3151 See 4Q176, frg. 1, 4, 14, 24, 31 and line 14, as assembled in Wise, Scrolls, 237 (it is unlikely that the «second» law book is Exod or Deut here). 3153 Sipre Deut. 345.2.2; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 26:9; Exod. Rab. 29:4; Song Rab. 8:11, §2; Pesiq. Rab. 20:2. For Torah as God " s daughter cf. also b. Sanh. 101a; Exod. Rab. 33:1; Num. Rab. 12:4; Song Rab. 3:10, §2; Pesiq. Rab. 20:1. Hengel regards this personification of Torah as God " s daughter as equivalent to Philós identification of Logos as God " s son (Judaism, 1:171). Although this is the usual image in rabbinic sources, Jewish people used imagery flexibly; in a much rarer variant, Torah is the bride and the ark is the bridegroom (p. Ta c an. 2:1, §6), or (more often) Israel is God " s daughter rather than his son (e.g., b. Pesah. 56a; Song Rab. 8:9, §2); one may also compare the personification of repentance as God " s daughter in Jos. Asen. 15:7. 3155 Song Rab. 8:14, §1, attributing the parable to R. Levi, early-third-century Palestine. For Torah as intercessor, cf. also Exod. Rab. 29:4. 3157 Exod. Rab. 30:3; on the Holy Spirit " s analogous exclamations, cf., e.g., Exod. Rab. 27:9. 3161 Martens, «Prologue,» 179, finds no pre-Christian data for «an independent Torah theology» with personalization or hypostatization. 3164 Kümmel, Theology, 280, unfortunately uses the lack of «personification» of Torah in Palestinian Judaism to indicate that Torah is inadequate background for the prologue. Dodd and Bultmann (especially the latter) both show lack of firsthand familiarity with rabbinic sources relevant to the prologue; see Kysar, «Background,» 254. 3166 Cf., e.g., Epp, «Wisdom»; Schoneveld, «Thora»; idem, «Torah»; Casselli, «Torah»; Keener, «Pneumatology,» 240–54; idem, «Knowledge,» 44–71. |
| 10833 But both kinds of appearances appear early in the tradition; it made little sense to invent Galilean appearances despite Mark " s favoritism toward Galilee, and it is difficult to account for Lukés certitude in Acts without a Judean apostolate, despite his theological use of Jerusalem. Sanders may be right that when Lukés Jerusalem center for Luke-Acts is taken into account, the most plausible scenario is that the disciples «fled to Galilee and then returned to Jerusalem,» 10834 where Galileans often traveled. 2. Pre- or Postresurrection Tradition? Many think that John 21 recycles the same tradition as behind Luke 5:1–11. 10835 One could view John 21 as an allusion to Peter " s first encounter with Jesus, but given the form of that encounter only in Luke, this proposal may expect too much knowledge of Lukan tradition from John " s audience. In any case, a direct literary relationship between Luke 5:1–11 and John 21:5–8 is improbable; the only two significant words shared by both are ιχθς and δκτυον. 10836 Redaction in the chapter need not, of course, deny the possibility of genuine historical tradition here; 10837 one could even argue that the similarities point merely to consistency in the tradition rather than to two distinct events. But as throughout the Gospel, historical tradition is difficult to test in the absence of material parallel with the Synoptics. Fish symbols were common in Diaspora Judaism and contemporary paganism, 10838 but such symbolism is improbable here. Others also think that OT imagery stands behind the Gospel accounts of the calling of fishermen or (more commonly) at least behind Jesus» Markan summons to become «fishers of people» ( Mark 1:17 ; Hab 1:15; Jer 16:16 ; cf. Ezek 47:10 ). 10839 But the OT use is a judgment metaphor (Jos. Asen. 21MSS would be closer), so the image is questionable unless Jesus provocatively pictured those who should «trap» people for the kingdom 10840 or intended the allusion by way of contrast. 10841 Derrett, who thinks Ezek 47 stands behind both the Synoptic fishing calls and John 21:5–6 , appeals to the early Jewish use of fish symbolism to represent individual salvation, 10842 but John 21 , at least, provides no clues that support this interpretation. |
| 9078 Epictetus Diatr. 4.3.9 (LCL 2:310–11). In the Loeb introduction, l:vii, an epigram attributed by Macrobius to Epictetus also calls him God " s friend. 9080 Philo Contempt Life 90, although there is a textual variant for «God " s.» God is a friend to Virtue in Philo Creation 81 and to Wisdom in Sobriety 55. Philo develops some Stoic friendship ideals; on Philós friendship ideals in general, see Sterling, «Bond.» 9081 M. " Abot 6:1. Cf. similarly Justin Dia1. 28: God " s friend is whoever knows and obeys him; Sent. Sext. 86ab: self-discipline produces piety, which seeks friendship with God. 9082 Sipre Deut. 53.1.3; b. Sukkah 55b; this is much less frequent tban Israel as God " s son in such parables. Cf. other, later references, in Deut. Rab. 3:11; Pesiq. Rab. 5:5,11; and Marmorstein, Names, 57; on God as friend to the world, Marmorstein, Names, 72–73, 86. God also befriends proselytes (Num. Rab. 8:4). 9083 Jub. 19:9; 4Q176 frg. 1–2, co1. 1, line 10 (quoting Isa 41:8–9); Philo Abraham 89 (θεοφιλος), 273; Sobriety 55; T. Ab. 1:7; 2:3, 6; 8:2; 9:7; 15:12–14; 16:3A; Apoc. Ab. 10(no earlier than second century C.E.); Apoc. Zeph. 9:4–5 (possibly a second-century Ebionite work); Mek. Pishi 18.8 (literally «beloved); Sir. 10.54–55 ; Gen. Rab. 65:10; Exod. Rab. 27:1; Lev. Rab. 11:7; also Jas 2:23; J Clem. 10.1, 17.2. The title is applied to Jacob in some MSS of Jos. Asen. 23:10; cf. perhaps Gen. Rab. 69(where the Shekinah may be a friend to Jacob, apparently in third-century tradition). The title is only rarely applied to postbiblical characters (R. Ishmael in 3 En. 1:8) or biblical characters other than Abraham or Moses (Levi in Jub. 30:20–21; Cambridge Genizah Text C lines 8–9). 9084 Philo Sobriety 55. In T. Ab. 9:2A, Michael told Abraham «everything which he had heard from the Most High» (επεν ατ πντα σα κουσεν παρ του υψστου) (ed. Stone, 20–21). 9085 CD 3.2. Similarly, Isaac and Jacob kept God " s word and came to be inscribed as friends for God (3.3–4) ( ). |
| This passage combines two of the central aspects of the Spirit " s work that appear elsewhere in John and various early Jewish sources, 10706 both purification or rebirth ( Gen 2:7 ) and empowerment. Most scholars concur that when Jesus breathes on the disciples, John is alluding to the creative, life-imparting act of God in Gen 2:7 ; 10707 Jesus is creating a new humanity, a new creation. 10708 Although the verb for «breathe» here is a rare one, it occurs in Gen 2and Ezek 37as well as quotes of it in Philo and Wis 15:11. 10709 Similar images appear elsewhere in early Jewish texts, but many depend on Genesis (such as Wis 15:11; 4 Ezra 3:5–7) 10710 or simply reflect common language in the milieu (cf. perhaps 2 Kgs 4:34). 10711 In some manuscripts of Joseph and Aseneth, Joseph imparts the spirit of life with a kiss to Aseneth, who is now converting (Jos. Asen. 19:11). 10712 But despite the value of these other images to suggest language that was «in the air,» such sources shared with John, his audience, and early Judaism in general a thorough knowledge of the language of Genesis in Greek. (A specifically Philonic interpretation of Gen 2on the earthly versus the heavenly man is probably too remote to prove particularly helpful here.) 10713 Genesis 2was naturally connected with Ezek 37in later midrash and Jewish artwork, 10714 and Ezek 37was explicitly understood to refer to the resurrection of the dead. 10715 Given John " s earlier treatment of rebirth imagery (3:3–5) and his linking of water (3:6) and wind (3:8) images for the Spirit (cf. Ezek 36–37 ), it is likely that he recalls here the regenerating aspect of the Spirit of purification. Jesus had promised that his return to them alive would bring them new life as well (14:19). Jesus as the giver of the Spirit is a recurrent theme in the Gospel, starting in 1and climaxing here (e.g., 3:5; 7:37–39; 19:30, 34). This emphasis serves an important christological function (cf. 3:34) because, as the giver of God " s Spirit, Jesus himself is divine (especially here, where his action evokes God " s creative work of breathing life into Adam). In biblical imagery, only God would baptize in his Spirit (as in 1:33; 3:5) or pour out his Spirit (Isa 42:1; 44:3; 61:1; 63:11; Ezek 36:27; 37:14; 39:29 ; Joel 2:28–29 ; Hag 2:5 ; Zech 4:6; 12:10). |
| Hymnes, t. 1. P., 1969 (Sources chrétiennes, 156), p. 188). Наконец, и св. Григорий Палама говорит, что высшей точкой христианской жизни является любовь к Богу и, через Бога, любовь к ближнему. Но она труднодостижима для мирского человека, разделяемого и разделяющего свое стремление ( τν φεσιν) между Богом и миром, плотью и духом. Только монах, распрощавшийся с «разделениями этой жизни» ( τας μεριστας τοτης ζως), способен обрести Божественную любовь в ее полноте, возродив и преобразив свой ум (см.: Hatlie P. J. The Answer to Paul Asen of Gregory Palamas: A Fourteenth Century Apology for the One, Grand and Angelic Schema//St. Vladimir " " s Theological Quarterly, 1989, vol. 33, p. 46). 399 В данном случае преп. Максим, применяя свое обычное духовное толкование Св. Писания, проводит различие между «практиком» и «гностиком». Здесь он следует традиции александрийского богословия, прежде всего Клименту Александрийскому , который первый ясно наметил идеал «церковного гносиса», где «созерцание божественного... соединяется с предварительным очищением от страстей и всего чувственного» (Миртов Д. Нравственное учение Климента Александрийского . СПб., 1900, с. 223). Характерно, что Ориген избегал понятия «гностик» (предпочитая ему слово «совершенный»), но Евагрий Понтийский воспринял положительное значение идеала «гностика» от Климента. Однако он придал ему и новое значение: если у Климента «гностиком» мог быть всякий христианин, стремящийся к совершенству, хотя и живущий обычной мирской жизнью, то у Евагрия данный термин прилагается лишь к монаху, пребывающему в безмолвии молитвы. Подобное понимание «гностика» и стало общепринятым в последующей аскетической письменности. См.: Guillaumont A. Le gnostique chez Clement d " Alexandrie et chez Evagre le Pontique//Alexandriana. Hellénisme, judaisme et christianisme à Alexandrie. Mélanges offerts au P. C. Mondesert. P., 1987, p. 195–201. 400 Под διακονα здесь, скорее всего, подразумевается какое-либо из церковных (или более узко: монашеских) послушаний. |
| A second expansion dates back to the mid 19th century, during Bulgaria’s National Revival period, when residents of the then village of Boyana funded further construction. After Bulgaria’s National Liberation from the Ottoman Empire in 1878, local residents wanted to tear down the Boyana Churchin order to build a bigger one in its place but was saved by Bulgaria’s Tsaritsa-Consort Eleonore (1860-1917), the second wife of Bulgarian Tsar Ferdinand (r. 1887-1918). The unique murals of the Boyana Church also date back to different periods. The oldest layer is from the 11th-12th century, while the 240 most valuable mural depictions from the second layer date back to 1259 AD. There are also murals from the 14th century, the 16th-17th century, and 1882. The world famous murals from 1259 AD, which have been described by many scholars as Early Renaissnace or precursors of Renaissance Art, are the work of the unknown Boyana Master and his disciples who are believed to have been representatives of the Tarnovo Art School in the Second Bulgarian Empire(1185-1396 AD). They have sometimes been described as belonging to the tradition of the so called Byzantine Palaiologos (Palaeologus or Palaeologue) Renaissence. In addition to the many biblical scenes, themurals at the Boyana Church feature depictions of Sebastokrator Kaloyan and Sebastokratoritsa Desislava as donors, as well as of Bulgarian Tsar Konstantin Asen Tih (r. 1257-1277 AD) and his wife, Tsaritrsa Irina. Two other small churches preserved in today’s Sofia are also attributed to thedonorship of Sebastokrator Kaloyan. The frescoes of the Boyana Church were restored several times between 1912 and 2006. The Boyana Church was first opened for visitors as a museum in 1977. Archaeology in Bulgaria 13 января 2016 г. Рейтинг: 2 Голосов: 2 Оценка: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Предыдущий Следующий Смотри также Archaeologists Discover Ancient Hebrew Slab Near Town Where Jesus Drove Out Demons Archaeologists Discover Ancient Hebrew Slab Near Town Where Jesus Drove Out Demons Historians have long believed that Kursi was inhabited either by Jews or early Christians, and the discovery, supervised by Prof. Michal Artzi of Haifa University and Dr. Haim Cohen with the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, seems to confirm those ideas. Комментарии Новые материалы Выбор читателей © 1999-2015 Православие.Ru |
| Archaeologists Find Child Funeral, Marble Cross at Early Christian Basilica Near Bulgaria " s Rakitovo/Православие.Ru Archaeologists Find Child Funeral, Marble Cross at Early Christian Basilica Near Bulgaria " s Rakitovo Source: Archaeology in Bulgaria October 14, 2015 A fragment of a large marble cross, which was probably part on an ancient altar, has been found during the excavations of the Early Christian basilica near Bulgaria’s Rakitovo. Photo: Rakitovo Municipality A child grave and number of intriguing archaeological artifacts including a large marble cross fragment have been discovered by archaeologists excavating an Early Christian basilica in an area known as Nikolitsa near the town of Rakitovo, Pazardzhik District, in the Rhodope Mountains in Southern Bulgaria. The Early Christian Basilica in Nikolitsa dates back to the 4th-5th century AD. It was first excavated byarchaeologists in the 1960s but in 2015 its excavations have been resumed, Rakitovo Municipality has announced. However, also in the 1960s, the archaeological site was badly damaged during the construction of thestadium of the town of Rakitovo. Nonetheless, the site continues to harbor the potential to yield lots of interesting archaeological finds,and the Municipality describes the renewed excavations of the Early Christian and Late Roman/Early Byzantine temple as “more than successful”. The digs at the three-nave crossed-dome basilica have been led by archaeologist Asen Salkin from the Pazardzhik Regional Museum of History, with Dimitar Bayraktarov as his deputy. The archaeologists have now discovered a child funeral in a chamber located on the border between the basilica complex and the town stadium. This find has led them to believe that the modern-day stadium may have been built on top of the Early Christian necropolis that existed next to the temple. The child bones have been discovered in a chamber opposite a baptistery chamber of the same size and shape. Inside the chamber with the child funeral, the archaeologists have also found an iron cross which is 8 cm wide and 11 cm long; three Late Antiquity coins, a bronze earring, and a fragment from a marble cross which is believed to have been part of an altar. |
|
|
