| 10:34 - Üç günden so — käbir golýazmalarda üçülenji gün 11:25 - Käbir golýazmalarda 26-njy aýat du gelýär: Eger bagylamasayz, gökdäki Atayz hem sizi günäleriizi bagylamaz. 12:36 - Reb — Zeburda bu söz reb bolup, patya ýüzlenilende ulanyldy, bu ýerde bolsa Reb Mesihe degili. 13:33 - Käbir golýazmalarda doga-dileg edi diýen sözler hem bar. 14:5 - Bir ýyllyk gazanç pulundan — grekçe üç ýüz dinardan. Bir dinar bir günlük i hakyna dedir. 14:24 - Äht — käbir golýazmalarda täze Äht. 14:36 - Abba — arameýçe bu söz Atam diýmegi aladýar. 15:27 - Käbir golýazmalarda 28-nji aýat du gelýär: eýlelik bilen «Ol ýazyklylar bilen bir saýyldy» diýen Mukaddes Ýazgy berjaý boldy. 16:2 - Hepdäni birinji güni — bu ýewreýleri senenamasy boýunça ýekenbe günüdir. Lukany beýan eden ho habar Giri Bu kitap Luka atly lukman tarapyndan ýazyldy. Ol Isa iman eden ilkinji adamlary biridi. Luka Isany durmuyny, görkezen gudratlaryny, wagyzlaryny aýady bolan adamlary gürrülerini yhlas bilen ýygnap, iki kitap: Lukany Ho Habary we Resullary ileri atly kitaplary ýazdy. Luka Ho Habar kitabyny Isa Mesihi Halasgärdigi baradaky habary hemmelere mälim etmek maksady bilen ýazýar. Bu Halasgär gadymýetdäki pygamberler arkaly Hudaý tarapyndan wada berlipdi. Luka bu Ho Habary die bir urug ýa-da halk üçin däl-de, tutu adamzat üçindigini gaýta-gaýta nygtaýar. Ol garyplar we aýallar ýaly köp kemsidilmelere we zuluma duçar bolýanlar barada Isa Mesihi hossarlyk bilen alada edendigini beýan edýär. Luka Isa Mesihi Özi barada aýdanlaryny mysal getirip, uny ýazýar: «Rebbi ruhy üstümdedir. Garyplara Ho Habary bildirmegim üçin, Ol Meni seçip saýlady… zulum astyndakylary azatlyga çykarmaga, Rebbi merhemet ýylyny jar etmäge Meni iberdi». (Luk 4:18.) Luka Hudaýy söýgüsi, Mukaddes Ruh, doga-dilegi güýji barada köp ýazýar. Ol öz kitabynda Isany köp tymsallaryny aýdyp berýär. Bu tymsallar adaty durmua esaslanyp, Hudaýy alygy barada, bu alygy raýaty bolmak üçin näme etmelidigini okyja sada dilde düündirýär. |
| 1904. T. 23. P. 11-14; Duchesne L. Le provincial romain au XIIe siècle//Mélanges d " archéologie et d " histoire. R., 1904. T. 24. P. 104-106; Buli Fr., Bervaldi J. Kronotaksa solinskih biskupa uz dodatak: Kronotaksa spljetskih nadbiskupa: (Od razorenja Solina do polovice XI. v.). Zagreb, 1913. P. 116-131; Š egvi Ch. Chronologie des évêques de Salone suivi de la chronologie des archevêques de Spalato//AnBoll. 1914. Vol. 33. P. 270; Hauptmann Lj. Dolazak Hrvata//Zbornik kralja Tomislava. Zagreb, 1925. S. 88-120; Караман Саркофаг Ивана у Сплиту и плетерна орнаметика у Дaлмaцuju//Старинар. Сер. 3. Београд, 1925. 3. С. 1-59; idem (Karaman Lj.). O poecima srednjevjekovnog Splita do g. 800//Vjesnik Hrvatskoga arheološkoga društva. N. S. Zagreb, 1940. Knj. 18/21. S. 419-436; idem. O spomenicima VII i VIII stoljea u Dalmaciji i o pokrštenju Hrvata//Ibid. 1942. Knj. 22/23. S. 73-113; Saka S. K. Apostol Hrvata Ivan Ravenjanin, prvi nadbiskup splitski (g. 640-?)//ivot. Zagreb, 1938. Knj. 19. S. 401-421; Grafenauer B. Prilog kritici izvještaja Konstantina Porfirogeneta o doseljenju Hrvata//Historijski zbornik. Zagreb, 1952. God. 5. Sv. 1/2. S. 1-56; Mandi D. Rasprave i prilozi iz stare hrvatske povijesti. R., 1963; idem. Papa Ivan IV. Solinjanin i pokrštenje Hrvata//Croatica Christiana periodica. Zagreb, 1992. Knj. 16. S. 1-22; Klai N. Ivan Ravenjanin i osnutak splitske metropolije//Vjesnik za arheologiju i historiju dalmatinsku. Split, 1963/1965. Sv. 65/67. S. 209-249; eadem. Još o splitskim sarkofazima X. i XI. stoljea//Ibid. 1986. Sv. 79. S. 265-277; Ivandija A. Pokrštenje Hrvata prema najnovijim znanstvenim rezultatima: Prikaz pitanja//Bogoslovska smotra. Zagreb, 1968. Sv. 37. S. 440-444; Vlasto A. P. The Entry of the Slavs into Christendom: An Introd. to the Medieval History of the Slavs. Camb., 1970. P. 187-191; Gunja a S. Dva arheološka objekta u pogrešnoj primjeni na historijsku problematiku - sarkofag nadbiskupa Ivana i luk crkvene pregrade iz Kaštel-Suurca// Idem. |
| 263 Prof. Joh. Ev. Belser навывает 61–62 г. для Евангелия и 63 г. для книги Деяний (Einleitung in das N. Т., S. 2 J26–127. 266 О новых опытах отрицания принадлежности третьего Евангелия Луке см. и yRev. A. Plummer в „The Critical Review» XII,6 (November,1902), p. 485 sq., 489 sq. 267 Новейшие авторитеты в пользу сего см. у Rev. А. PIummer в „The Critical Review» XII, 6 (November, 1902), p. 494 sq. 268 О новейших суждениях в этом смысле см. у Rev. А. Plummer в „The Critical Review» XII, 6 (November, 1902), p. 489–490, 498–499. 269 См. подробнее у Prof. Friedrich Bleek, Einleitung in das Neue Testamenti; vierte Auflage besorgt von Prof. WiIhelm Mangold (Berlin 1886), S. 148–163. 270 Prof. Ad. v. Harnack, Das Magnificat der Elisabet u. s. w., S. 10–15 (547–552) против P. Corssen’a. См. еще подробнее у Lie. Dr. Hellmuth Zimmerman n. Evangelium des Lukas Кар. 1 und 2: ein Versuch der Vermittlung zwischen Hilgenfeld und Harnack в “Stud en und Kritiken» 1903, II, S. 250 263 („Ansdruck und Sprache in Luk 1 u. 2 ganz lukanisch sind“). Ограничения у Prof. F r. S p i I t a, Das Magnificat, S. 78–83. 271 См. в „Zeitscrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde des CJrchristentums» 11 (1901), 1, S. 53 – 57. Cp. еще у Prof. F r. S p i 11 a, Das Magnificat, S. 66, 1 . Prof. James Μoffamm, An Introduction, p. 268–270. 273 В виду сего и Н. Zimmermann признает (в „Studien und Kritiken» 1903, II, S. 374), что идея сверхъестественного рождения и бессеменного зачатия Иисуса внесена самим Лукою в утилизируемый им иудейско-христианский источник. 274 Так, напр., и в 1 Афонской Лавры (Gregory Evang· 1074) XII -XIII в.: см. у Prof. Kirsop Lake, Texts from Mount Laura в Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica V, 2 (Oxford 1902), p. 175. 275 Probleme im Texte der Leidensgeschichte Jesu. Sonderabdruck aus „Sibzungsberichten der K. Pr. Akademie der Wissenschaflen» zu Berlin; Philos.histor. Classe XI (1901), S. 1–5=251–255. 278 Das Magnificyt der Elisabet (Luc. 1, 46–55) nebsteinigen Bemerkungen zu Luc. 1 und 2; “Sonderabdruck aus ,Sit.zungsberichten» u. s. w. XXVII (1900), S. 1 ff.=538 ff. |
| 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 Why Morality is Not Christian Source: Glory to God for All Things Archpriest Stephen Freeman 27 February 2020 I recall my first classes in Moral Theology some 35 or so years ago. The subject is an essential part of Western thought (particularly in the Catholic and Anglican traditions). In many ways the topic was like a journey into Law School. We learned various methods and principles on whose basis moral questions – questions of right and wrong – could be discussed and decided. These classes were also the introduction of certain strains of doubt for me. The great problem with most moral thinking – is found in its fundamental questions: Such questions have classically had some form of law to undergird them: Of course, all of these questions (right and wrong, moral and immoral) require not only a standard of conduct, but someone to enforce the conduct. Right is thus better than wrong, because God will punish the wrong and reward the right – otherwise (in this understanding) everything would be merely academic. I will grant at the outset that many Christians are completely comfortable with the understanding that God rewards and punishes. I will grant as well that there is ample Scriptural evidence to which persons can point to support such a contention. However, this approach is far from a unanimous interpretation within the Tradition of the faith – and has little support within historic Eastern Orthodoxy. That Scripture says such things (God is the punisher and rewarder) is undeniable – but there is also another strain of witness: When James and John approached Christ after He had been turned away by a village of Samaritans, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?” But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “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 .” And they went to another village. (Luk 9:54-56) |
| Arhiva Mitropolitul Nifont de Luk i episcopul Pantelimon de Smolensk au svârit o Liturghie pentru invalizi 24 octombrie 2011 17:05 24 октября 2011 года в храме Всех святых, в земле Волынской просиявших, в Луцке митрополит Луцкий и Волынский Нифонт и председатель Синодального отдела по церковной благотворительности и социальному служению епископ Смоленский и Вяземский Пантелеимон совершили Божественную литургию, за которой молились глухие, слепые и инвалиды-колясочники. «Сегодняшнее богослужение особенное и в жизни Волыни, и в жизни нашей епархии, сказал, обращаясь к епископу Пантелеимону по окончании богослужения, митрополит Нифонт. Мы благодарим Вас, дорогой владыка, что Вы прибыли из Смоленска к нам, чтобы укрепить нас в социальном служении нуждающимся людям». За Литургией молились более 200 инвалидов. Обращаясь к ним в своей проповеди, епископ Смоленский Пантелеимон отметил: «Вы избранники Божии. Вы лишены многих соблазнов, которые есть в этом мире, у вас есть возможность молиться Богу непрестанно, не обращая внимания на внешнюю, подчас ложную красоту этого мира. Молитесь и благодарите Бога, что у вас есть возможность приобщиться к невидимой красоте Божиего Царства, услышать сердцем пение ангелов, и идти в Царство Небесное часто намного быстрее, чем люди, отягощенные здоровой плотью». На Литургии пел хор слепых и слабовидящих людей, которым уже семь лет руководит клирик Волынской епархии протоиерей Александр Мазурак. Богослужение проходило с сурдопереводом. Подобные Литургии планируется отныне совершать в Луцке ежемесячно. В ходе своей поездки в Луцкую и Волынскую епархию епископ Пантелеимон также встретился со студентами Волынской духовной семинарии, молодежными организациями Волынской области и принял участие в праздновании Собора всех Волынских святых. Диакония. ru /Патриархия.ru Календарь ← 6 martie 2022 19 aprilie 2020 |
| But just witnessing the Resurrection is not enough, and is not the goal, what comes after is equally important. O Jerusalem, be exultant, dan ce and leap for joy, for you have witnessed Christ the King coming forth as a Bridegroom from the sepulcher (Stichera of Pascha) It is magnificent to participate in the Church services on Pascha night, to be part of the joyful festival of light that the Resurrection of Christ brings on earth. The only sad part is that we start with many and end up with a few. Many people come, they receive the light, listen to the Gospel and hasten to go home thinking they have fulfilled their duty as Christians. But just witnessing the Resurrection is not enough, and is not the goal, what comes after is equally important. The miracle of Christ’s Resurrection is, or better said, should be, a life changing event; should be the sparkle that would ignite your whole being in fire, should be the ferment that will initiate your complete refashioning, should be the impulse that will keep you going until the very end on the right path to salvation. But who believes in miracles today anyway? The Words of Abraham, addressing the unmerciful rich man from the parable of poor Lazarus, make more sense now than ever: “If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded, even though one rose from the dead.” (Luk 16:31). It is true: even after Christ, God Himself, has risen from the dead, we still want more proof. We still want God to prove, personally, to us, that He exists and all about Him is true. However, no matter how much proof we get, as stubborn children, we don’t want to understand and we keep fabricating explanation after explanation to every piece of evidence God puts in front of us. Starting with the prophets of old and the history of the people of Israel, the Mother of God and the Apostles, continuing with the victorious Martyrs, the Fathers of the Church and all the saints, the miracle working icons, the uncorrupted relics of the saints, and we can go on and on, God surrounded us by “ a cloud of witnesses” (Heb 12:1). We cannot continue to ignore all this testimonials that point unmistakably to the existence of a most powerful God Who loves mankind. We just have to open the synaxaries, read the lives of the saints and will see God at work: healing the sick, changing sinners into saints, doing justice to the wronged, giving hope to the hopeless and joy to the mourning. We have to be blind to overlook what should in fact overwhelm us. |
| But this had been prophesied from the beginning: Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel…that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed (Luk 2:34-35). But the righteous are revealed as well. The steadfast love of the Mother of God never wavered before the Cross. Her faithfulness is revealed. The kindness of Joseph of Arimathea is forever marked by an empty tomb. The tears of a harlot reveal the nature of love, even hidden beneath the deeds of her life. In the judgment of God, all things are simply shown to be what they truly are. Sin is seen to be sin. Love is seen to be love. There is clarity. And in the judgment of God, His own love is shown to be what it truly is – self-sacrificing, forgiving, relentless in its mercy. It is not a love that pronounces forgiveness from the Cross only to pronounce destruction on another occasion. The crucified Christ is not a revelation that is succeeded by another. For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. (1Co 2:2) The Bridegroom comes. Judgment arrives. All things are revealed for what they truly are. Thy bridal chamber I see adorned, O my Savior, and I have no wedding garment that I may enter. O Giver of Light, enlighten the vesture of my soul, and save me. + Exaposteilarion of Bridegroom Matins скрыть способы оплаты Смотри также Комментарии Anthony 11 апреля 2017, 22:00 I think that there " s another judgement which someone, preferably a cradle Orthodox should educate S. Freeman about. Christ Himself speaks of that judgement and tells us it were better we were not born than to endure the punishment following that judgement. Read Geronda Efraim Philotheitis " The Art of Salvation " to understand better how we ought to amend our lives because what awaits us after death is no joke. Read the Gerontikon to see how the Abba " s of old begged and pleaded for more time to repent, and yet they had no great sins or had sincerely and deeply repented for years. And now we have an Amerikan konvertsie insinuating that there will be no wrath, no judgement to come - that Christ " s judgement was His own crucifixion. Christ " s sacrifice was not a judgement then. It will become a Judgement - at the second judgement. It will be a judgement of the rejection of God " s love and sacrifice. And based on Christ " s own words, I think we can pretty much expect that judgement to be horrifying. If S Freemen wants to argue, let him do so with Holy Scripture. |
| Consider the Sower in the parable. (Luk 8:5-8) Christ implied that much of His own investment, the sowing of Himself as the Word of God, would be lost. In fact, perhaps most of that investment would be lost. How much seed was taken by birds? How much died before the harvest, either for lack of good root or being choked by the cares of the world? How many people believed in Christ then, and how many today? How many simply refuse His complete investment in them, and never bear fruit for themselves, for God, or anyone else? Most of what Christ invested, his teaching, his works of power and healing, his love for the disciples and for everyone with whom He came into contact in this world, was ultimately lost. And for all His investment, He was rejected and killed. In the parable of the Sower in the Gospel, Christ foretells this. He foresees that the seeds He is sowing as the Word of God Himself, will not take root or will die before they produce anything. And yet, on the flip side, Christ changed the entire world, didn’t He? And the Church continues to experience that change, as the Body of Christ, to live it. For in Christ we are all created anew, we are all changed in Christ. And the Church in turn invests itself for the life of the world. And so we come to another difference in the economics of the Kingdom of God and that of the world: In the Kingdom of God, you can lose most of your investment, and still get a big return. On this point, we could also reflect on God’s investment in the people of Israel, via the prophets. God invested over and over again, only to be confounded by a stubborn and rebellious people, over and over again. But, even after all that seed was apparently lost, some of it fell into good soil, and produced fruit. The best example of this, of course, was Mary, the Theotokos, whose obedience and righteousness produced the fruit of the Incarnation and the whole Church. She was the good soil of the nation of Israel, and God’s Word fell into her, and produced fruit. |
| For me, it is the seemingly “gratuitous” material that points to veneration of Mary. St. Luke’s account has the Magnificat hymn in which Mary declares, All generations will call me blessed . It is a phrase that can only be compared to God’s promise to Abraham: I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed (Gen 12:2-3). In Mary’s encounter with her kinswoman Elizabeth (and with the child in her womb, John), the focus is on Mary herself rather than the child in her womb. But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy (Luke 1:43-44). Later in Luke, when the child Jesus is presented in the Temple, the elder Simeon prophesies: Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against (yes, a sword will pierce through your own soul also), that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed (Luk 2:34-35). Here, Mary is linked to the Cross of Christ in the piercing of her soul. I describe these stories as “gratuitous” in that they go well beyond the simple point of the Virgin Birth. Mark and John have no mention of the conception or birth of Christ (though they both include Mary in their narrative). The abundance of Marian material in Luke can only point to her veneration in the primitive Church. She is not just the Virgin who gives birth to Christ—she is also blessed by all; she is the cause of joy to the Prophet John even in his mother’s womb; she is a unique participant in the sufferings of Christ, destined herself for a mystical sword that will pierce her very soul. This is information that points to the unique place of Mary in the first century Christian community . How can the Church not venerate one whom John the Baptist greeted with a leap of joy when he was in the womb? How can the Christian community be rightly centered on the Crucified Christ and ignore the soul-pierced Mother? The material in Luke is prima facie evidence of the primitive veneration of the Mother of God. That veneration never ceases in the Church, but matures over time as the Church considers the meaning and depth of Christ’s Incarnation, Crucifixion and Resurrection. |
| How to Live an Ecological Life in Christ Aware or not, our acts greatly influence the people around us. Take a priest: if he does not behave properly in the parish, will his parishioner be willing to advance on the path to Christ he only preaches but does not follow? Take a parent: would a child listen to come home early while his parents party all night every weekend? Take a manager: would everyone perform to their best abilities under his command if he has bad work ethics? Source: St. Luke Orthodox Church Raising awareness of our spiritual footprint. There is a lot of talk these days about the environment and the impact our civilization will have on the planet for generations to come. A lot of damage has already been done and we are here now desperately trying to clean up the mess and stop the damage go further. The more we come aware about his problem the more we become aware of the footprint we leave behind us as we live in the world. The concept of “carbon footprint” has been around for a while and is a measure of the impact our activities have on the environment, and in particular climate change. For spiritual purposes, if we borrow this ecological model and take it through the filter of biblical theology we arrive at another idea that can help us understand more the relationships between ourselves and the society at large: as every one of us leaves behind a carbon footprint in the same way we also leave a spiritual footprint that can greatly impact the spiritual “climate” we live in. The basis for the understanding of the spiritual footprint is a verse from the Gospel of Luke.”It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! “(Luk 17:1). This King James Version does no justice to the passage because the translation of the Greek original word skandalon as offence does not capture the whole meaning of the word and its connotations. The word skandalon would rather correspond to the modern English word scandal, or as the Thayer’s Bible Dictionary suggests “occasion for stumbling”. |
|
|
