| At the same time, they ironically draw legitimate implications from Jesus» words: if Abraham and the prophets died physically (cf. 6:49) but Jesus grants eternal life, he must claim to be greater than Abraham and the prophets (8:53). Grammatically, their question expects the answer, «No»; Jesus is assumed not to be greater than Abraham and the prophets. Ironically, however, the informed reader recognizes that Jesus is in fact greater than the prophets. 6921 Historically, Jesus probably made claims to be greater than earlier prophets (Qmaterial in Matt 12:41–42; Luke 11:31–32); 6922 John " s audience may have known of such traditions, but the irony would be sufficient even without them. In contrast to the Samaritan woman who at first assumes that Jesus cannot be greater than Jacob (4:12) but ultimately embraces him as the promised one (4:25–26, 29), Jesus» dialogue partners here become increasingly hostile. Their suggestion that he «makes himself» something (8:53) fits a pattern of accusation throughout the Gospel: he makes himself out to be equal with God (5:18); God (10:33); God " s Son (19:7); or king (19:12). The irony is that Jesus has not made himself anything but, sent by the Father, became flesh (1:14; 3:17). 6923 5B. Witnesses to Jesus» Superiority (8:54–56) Because most people viewed self-boasting negatively, even much lesser claims often demanded adequate justification; 6924 Jesus thus announces that he is not glorifying himself (8:54). Jesus here cites two other authorities who will testify that he is greater than Abraham: God (8:54–55) and Abraham himself (8:56). In contrast to his interlocutors, who appeal to Abraham and God about whom they have studied and from whom they claim descent, Jesus knows Abraham and God personally. If Jesus» interlocutors claim to obey God " s word, the Torah (cf. 5:38), the reader knows that Jesus is the Word (1:1–18); within the story world, Jesus claims to obey his Father " s word (8:55), which likewise summons them to obey his (8:31, 37,43, 51). |
| Bratcher, «Glory» Bratcher, Robert G. «What Does «Glory» Mean in Relation to Jesus? Translating doxa and doxazo in John.» Bible Translator 42 (1991): 401–8. Bratcher, «Jews» Bratcher, Robert G. «»The Jews " in the Gospel of John.» Bible Translator 26 (1975): 401–9. Braun, «Arrière-fond» Braun, François-M. «L " arrière-fond judaïque du quatrième évangile et la communauté de l " alliance.» RB 62 (1955): 5–44. Braun, «Beobachtungen» Braun, Herbert. «Beobachtungen zur Tora-Vershärfung im häretischen Spätjudentum.» Theologische Literaturzeitung 79 (1954): 347–52. Braun, «Hermétisme» Braun, François-M. «Hermétisme et johannisme.» Revue thomiste 55 (1955): 259–99. Braun, Jean Braun, François-M. Jean le théologien et son évangile dans l " église ancienne. Études bibliques. Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1959. Braun, «Prophet» Braun, M. «The Prophet Who Became a Historian.» Listener 56 (1956): 53–57. Braun, «Sacrifice» Braun, François-M. «Le sacrifice d " Isaac dans le quatrième Évangile d " après le Targum.» Nouvelle revue théologique 101 (1979): 481–97. Braun, «Vie» Braun, François-M. «La vie d " en haut.» Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 40 (1956): 3–24. Brawley, Jews Brawley, Robert L. Luke-Acts and the Jews: Conflict, Apology, and Conciliation. SBLMS 33. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987. Brayer, «Psychosomatics» Brayer, Menahem M. «Psychosomatics, Hermetic Medicine, and Dream Interpretation in the Qumran Literature (Psychological and Exegetical Considerations).» JQR 60 (1969–1970): 112–27,213–30. Breck, «Conclusion» Breck, John. « John 21 : Appendix, Epilogue, or Conclusion?» St. Vladimir " s Theological Quarterly 36 (1992): 27–49. Bremmer, «Prophets» Bremmer, Jan N. «Prophets, Seers, and Politics in Greece, Israel, and Early Modern Europe.» Numen 40 (1993): 150–83. Bretherton, «Lazarus» Bretherton, Donald J. «Lazarus of Bethany: Resurrection or Resuscitation?» ExpTim 104 (1992–1993): 169–73. Bricker, «Ways» Bricker, Daniel P. «The Doctrine of the " Two Ways» in Proverbs.» JETS 38 (1995): 501–17. |
| The black man and the Jew, are my brothers Reuters The un-Christian rhetoric and violent actions demonstrated in Charlottesville, Virginia, have demonstrated clearly the tragic climate of moral decay that has overtaken our country. The ultra left and the ultra right committed horrendous violence against one another, a scene that is being replayed throughout the land. The Church, in all her God given authority, stands firmly in opposition to the racial hatred that is at the core of the “white supremacy and white nationalism” that has spewed out hatred of blacks and Jews. As Orthodox Christians, we believe that every human being is a child of God, created in His image and likeness, and therefore we are all brothers and sisters whatever our race, nationality or creed. Jesus Christ rebuked his disciples when they suggested that he violently retaliate against his enemies. “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” (Luke 9:55-56). The Church offers to all, without exception or condemnation, the path to forgiveness and peace in Christ. All the while rejecting the hatred and violence that has appeared on all sides of the political spectrum. The Orthodox Church is committed to a ministry of reconciliation, insisting that all her clergy and faithful hold fast to the Christian message of healing, salvation and love offered by Christ, who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. She exhorts our clergy and faithful to reject any attempts by individuals or groups to claim for themselves the name of “Orthodox Christian” in order to promote racism, hatred, white supremacy, white nationalism or neo-Nazism. This is in keeping with the Holy Gospels, the decisions of the Holy Councils and the experience of the Saints. There is also the subtle and corrosive behavior of the ultra left that is also destroying the moral and governmental foundations of western civilization (abortion, unabashed disrespect and violation of the rule of law, coercion of those who disagree through the vehicle of the social media, etc.) |
| For the heirmoi, the classical chants in syllabic style are collected in a book called the Heirmologion, which may contain as many as 2,000 model stanzas. Like the Western Tonary, the Heirmologion is divided into one section per mode. The nine canticles are: 1 The song of Moses (Exodus 15.1–19) 2 The song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32.1–43) 3 The prayer of Hannah (I Kings 2.1–10) 4 The prayer of Habbakuk (Habbakuk 3.1–19) 5 The prayer of Isaiah (Isaiah 26.9–20) 6 The prayer of Jonah (Jonah 2.3–10) The prayer of the Three Children (the Benedicite, Apoc. Daniel 3.26–56 ) 7 The prayer of the Three Children (Apoc. Daniel 3.57–88 ) 8 The Magnificat and the Benedictus (Luke 1.46–55 and 68–79) Whatever the object of a canon may be (the celebration of a feast of the Lord or of the Virgin, or the commemoration of a saint or martyr), the hymn writer had to allude in each of the nine odes to its scriptural model. Church traditions (wrongly) attribute the invention of the canon to St. Andrew of Crete (ca. 660–740) and his famous Great Kanon of mid-Lent contains the exceptional number of 250 stanzas. But canon composition reached its peak in the 8th and 9th centuries, first in Palestine with examples by St. John Damascene (ca. 675-ca. 749) and St. Kosmas of Jerusalem (also known as St. Kosmas the Melodist or Kosmas of Maiuma; first half of the 8th century), then in Constantinople with St. Theodore, abbot of the Studion Monastery (759–826), and his brother Joseph (d. 833), the two Sicilians Methodios (d. 846) and Joseph the Hymnographer (d. 883), and the nun Cassia (ca. 810–65). SEE ALSO: Kontakion; Liturgical Books; Music (Sacred); Orthros (Matins) REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS Grosdidier de Matons, J. (1980–1) “Liturgie et hymnographie: Kontakion et Canon,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 34–5: 31–43. Hannick, C. (1990) “The Performance of the Kanon in Thessaloniki in the 14th Century,” in D. Conomos (ed.) Studies in Eastern Chant, vol. 5. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, pp. 137–52. |
| 48 . Brenner 1983: Naomi and Ruth/Athalya Brenner//VT. – 1983. – Vol. 33, 4. – p. 385–397. 49 . Brenner 1999: Ruth and Esther/Ed. by A. Brenner. – Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. – 271 p. – (A feminist companion to the Bible; ser. 2:3). 50 . Brenner 1999a: Ruth as a Foreign Worker and the Politics of Exogamy/Athalya Brenner//Ruth and Esther/Ed. by A. Brenner. – Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. – p. 158–162. – (A feminist companion to the Bible; ser. 2:3). 51 . Briggs 1971: A dictionary of British folk-tales in the English language: incorporating the F.J. Norton collection/Katharine M. Briggs. – London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1971. – Part B: Folk legends. – 2 vol. 52 . Britt 2003: Unexpected Attachments: A Literary Approach to the Term ds;x» in the Hebrew Bible/Brian Britt//JSOT. – 2003. – Vol. 27, 3. – p. 289–307. 53 . Brown 1977: The birth of the Messiah: a commentary on the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke/Raymond E. Brown. – Garden City, NY; Image Books, 1977. – 594 p. 54 . Bruner 1990: Matthew, a commentary/By Frederick Dale Bruner. – Dallas: Word Publishing, 1990. – Vol. 2: Matthew 13–28, the Churchbook. – P. XX, 447–1127. 55 . Bruppacher 1966: Bruppacher, H. Die Bedeutung des Namens Ruth//Theologische Zeitschrift. – 1966. – Bd. 22. – S. 12–18. 56 . Burchard 1985: Joseph and Aseneth: a New Translation and Introduction/Christoph Burchard//The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha/Ed. by James H. Charleworth. – Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985. – Vol. 2: Expansions of the «Old Testament» and legends, wisdom and philosophical literature, prayers, psalms, and odes, fragments of lost Judeo-Hellenistic works. – p. 177–247. 57 . Burchard 1996: Burchard, Christoph. Gesammelte Studien zu Joseph und Aseneth/von Christoph Burchard; berichtigt und ergänzt herausgegeben mit Unterstützung von Carsten Burfeind. – Leiden New York, Koln: Brill, 1996. – XXIII, 463 p. – (Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha; 13). 58 . Burchard; Fink 2003: Josephund Aseneth/Kritisch herausgegeben von Christoph Burchard, mit Unterstützung von Carsten Burfeind und Uta Barbara Fink. – Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003. – 384 p. |
| Holy Synod of Bishops of OCA issues statement on recent tragic events in Charlottesville, VA Source: OCA A statement on the recent tragic events in Charlottesville, VA was issued and signed by His Beatitude, Metropolitan Tikhon and the members of the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America on August 16, 2017. The complete text of the statement appears below and in PDF format Statement of the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America August 16, 2017 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. — Colossians 1:16-18 August 16, 2017 To the Clergy, Monastics and Faithful of the Orthodox Church in America, Recent tragic events in Charlottesville, Virginia, have highlighted the presence of un-Christian rhetoric and violent actions within our communities. At the same time, the response to these events by our civil leadership has unleashed a nationwide debate which has created a certain moral ambiguity, which in turn is fostering further division. Such a climate requires a clear response from the Church. The Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America joins people of faith and good will across the United States, Canada and Mexico in unequivocally, unreservedly and unambiguously rejecting words and actions which perpetrate, support or encourage hatred, violence, racism, white supremacy, white nationalism or neo-Nazism. As Orthodox Christians, we believe that every human being is a child of God, created in His image and likeness, and therefore we are all brothers and sisters whatever our race, nationality or creed. At the same time, we also reject the climate of condemnation of the individuals carrying out these heinous activities. Indeed, Jesus rebuked his disciples when they suggested that he violently retaliate against his enemies. “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” (Luke 9:55-56). The Church offers to all—without exception—not condemnation but a path to forgiveness and peace in Christ. |
| But Elijah also cannot become the vessel of the Divine incarnation due to the spontaneous unrestrained character of his anger, his all-embracing fiery zeal for the Lord God. This rage, this zeal, differ in spirit in comparison with the Spirit of the One, Who is meek and subdued in His heart. That is why, when the Disciples of Christ, James and John, want to «command fire to come down from heaven, even as Elias did,» Christ prohibits them, saying: «Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men " s lives, but to save them» (Luke 9:55,56). The Lord speaks of this with love and delicacy to the Prophet Elijah as well, when He appears to him on the Mount Horeb: «What doest thou here, Elijah? And he said, I have been very jealous for the LORD God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant, thrown down Thine altars, and slain Thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away. And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice» (3 Kings 19:9–12). Elijah was «a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD,» but not a still small voice. The Lord waited for this still small voice, which was not in Elijah, or in mankind, for many more centuries. The Lord, carrying out the salvation of those created by Him in His image, after His likeness, and, consequently, spiritually autocratic creatures, could not come down to men without this still small voice, without their participation, for He is not in the wind or fire, but in the breath of a calm breeze. This breath of quiet wind appeared in mankind, when «in the sixth month the Angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth… To a Virgin… and the Virgin " s name was Mary» (Luke 1:26–27), and when in answer to the Annunciation, which was more amazing than the one to Abraham, more crucial than the one to Moses, and infinitely much more blissful than the one to Elijah, a quiet voice sounded: «Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to Thy word» (Luke 1:38). This was the moment when the Son of God’s descent to man could occur, and it occurred at that same moment, for the Omnipotent Lord, long-sufferingly awaiting many centuries for this moment, did not wait an iota longer, but immediately joined with the human nature created by Him, torn away from Him by sin, but not forgotten by His love, recreating it in the womb of the Ever-Virgin. |
| he will see his offspring and prolong his days (verse 10). (1) that he appeared to Peter, (2) and then tot he Twelve. (3) After that he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. (4) Then he appeared to James, (5) then to all the apostles. (1Corinthians 15:3–7.) In addition to the above appearances, Jesus showed himself (6) to Mary Magdalene ( John 20:10–18 ); (7) to one of the other women along with Mary (Matthew 28:8–10); (8) to 2 disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 20:24–29); (9) to Thomas one week after the resurection ( John 20:24–29 ); and sometime after this, (10) to seven of his disciples who went fishing (John Chapter 21). This makes a total of ten recorded appearances of Jesus to more than 500 different people over a period of 40 days (Acts 1:3). 1 Language in Thought and Action New York, Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc. 1964, pp. 55–56 2 The root is also used once for «refuge» and twice for «cabinet minister», meanings which are outside of this study. 3 The dates and English names for the Suras are those suggested by Yusuf Ali in his English translation, The Holy Qur " an The American International Printing Co., Washington, D.C., 1946. 17 Since Moses there is only one prophet who fulfills these two requirements. Jesus of Nazareth did about fifty individually recorded miracles of healing and prophecy. In addition, Mark 1:32–34, 3:10 , and 7:53–56; Luke 10:1,17 and Matthew 15:29–31 say that he healed many or all of those who came to him. As for knowing God «face to face», John 1:1,18 , speaking of Jesus as the «Word» of God, says that the «Word» was «in the beginning with God», and after ascending he «is in the bosom of the Father» 18 La Bible, Le Coran, et la science, by Dr. Maurice Bucaille. Edition Seghers, Paris, 1976. Page numbers are from the English translation, The BIBLE, The QUR " AN, And SCIENCE, American Trust Publications, Indianapolis, 1979. p. VIII 20 Old Testament Critics, Thomas Whitelaw, Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner, & Co., Ltd., London, 1903, p. 172 |
| 15 см. о сем T h. V о g el, Zur Charakteristik .., Leipzig 1897; 2 te ftufl. ibid. 1889. Rev. A. Plummer, p. XLVIII- LXVII. Prof. Fr. Blass в «Fieue Kirchliche Zeitschrift» IX (1893), 7, S. 513–527. 16 см. Prof. Eduare Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa 11 (Leipzig 1898), S. 485 ff. Cp. и Fr. Blas s, ftcta apostolorum (Gottingen 1895), p. 14 sqq. 17 Prof.Filbert Thumb, Die griechische Sprache im Zeitalter des Hellenismus (Strassburg 1901), S. 184. 18 См. Prof. С. F. G. Nцsgen в «Studien und Kritiken» 1877, S. 468 ff., но точнее эти соотношения раскрываются у Т h. V o g е l’я (по второму изданию) в таком виде: общих с греческим Ветхим Заветом (и неканоническими книгами) – до 450 слов, а с писателями от Гомера до II-III в. по Р. Хр. – до 230 (из коих большинство раньше Филона и Иосифа Флавия: S. 12–13, 56–57),– при близком соприкосновении с прозаиками (ср. S. 19) в роде Поливия, Диоскорида, Иосифа Флавия, хотя прямое знакомство с ними не доказано (S. 13); наряду с этим имеется до 50-ти слов, совсем. неизвестных ранее (в других памятниках) и встречающихся уже у позднейших авторов (S. 12, 55). Отсюда и богатство и классический колорит вокабуляра Луки. 20 См. и у Prof. Ad. Harnack, Lukas der Arzt der Verfasser des dritten Evangeliums und der Aposte geschichte (Leipzig 1906), S. 10, 80, 102, 146 («feiner Stilist Lukas»). 21 Ср. и Prof. F r. G о d e t, Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Lucas, zw. Aufl., Hannover 1890, S. 2. 25 The Medical Language of Sf. Luka и Proof from Internal Evidence, that the Gospel according to St. Luke and the Ackts of the Apostles were written by the same Person, and that the Wrighter was a Medical Man, Dublin 1882. 26 Prof. T h. Z a h n, Einleitung in das N. Т., ll 1 , S. 427– 428; ll 3 (Leipzig 1907), S. 433–434, 442–444. Rev. A. Plummer в „The Critical Review» XII, 6 (November, 1902), p. 490–492, и в A Commentary, p. LXIII sqq. Prof. Ad. Harnack, Lukas der Arzt, S. 122 – 137. Prof. James Mof- fatt, An Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament (Oxford 1927), p. 298–300. |
| 2274 Commentarii in Lucam (in catenis) 72. 628. 4; 72. 625. 49–50; Commentarii in Matthaeum (in catenis). Fragment 168. 6 и др. 2275 Epistulae paschales sive Homiliae paschales (epist. 1–6). Homily 1. 1. 59–60; Commentarii in Matthaeum (in catenis). Fragment 314. 7–8. 2279 «ς μρη το κσμου, κα καθπερ νς μλη σματος», Expositio… in Ioannis Evangelium I. PG 73. 145 С. 2280 Единственный пример такого употребления термина от лица самого автора содержится в сочинении Lectanea (Собрание чтений из Ветхого Завета), но оно считается неаутентичным, S. Cyrillus Alexandrinus. Collectio Dictorum veteris Testamenti. PG 77. 1281 В. 2282 PG 70. 89 В С; 417 В; 660 D; 676 С; 844 D; 992 А, 993 D; PG 71. 325 А; 477 В; 496 В С; 1048 А В. 2301 «Δεδημιοργηται μν γρ ν ρχ τ ζον πλαστουργοντος ατ το Θεο, κα τετιμηκτος οονε κα ατοχειρ», De Sancta Trinitate dialogi I–VII. 638. 30–31. 2303 Fragmenta in sancti Pauli epistulam i ad Corinthios 315. 17–18; «Ποα δ σαρκς δναμις, τς οτως σθενος κα ποκειμνης τ φθορ», Commentarius in Isaiam prophetam 70. 696. 55–56. 2305 S. Cyrillus Alexandrinus. A Commentary Upon the Gospel according to s. Luke, by S. Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria. Translated into English from an ancient Syriac Version By r. Payne Smith, Part II. Oxford: M. DCCC. LIX, P. 666. 2308 Glaphyra in Genesim. PG 69. 20 В; также. см.: Exspositio… in Ioannis Evangelium. PG 73. 160 B. 2314 «Σνθετν τι ζον», Commentarii in Joannem 2. 64. 12; 1. 138. 19; 1. 219. 15; Expositio sive commentarius in Ioannis Evangelium. PG 73. 160 А. 2316 Кирилл Александрийский , свт. Толкование на Евангелие от Иоанна//Он же. Творения. Т. 2. С. 564; Англоязычный перевод точнее передает текст оригинала через термин «His formation». См.: Cyril of Alexandria. Commentary on John. LFC 43, 48 (1874/1885). Book 2. P. 130–284/Translated by P. E. Pusey. URL: (дата обращения 28. 03. 2014). 2323 Ibidem. I. 10 («О том, что человеческая душа ни предсуществует телу, ни воплощается (в теле) вследствие раннейших грехов, как думают некоторые»), PG 73. 124 C –– 176 C. |
|
|
