| 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 The Heart of the Scriptures Source: Frederica.com Frederica Matthewes-Green 02 March 2021 Photo: mitropolia-simbirsk.ru What does the Bible have to say about the heart? “Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart” Luke 2:51 “The word of God…[pierces] to…the thoughts and intentions of the heart” Hebrews 4:12) “Out of the heart come evil thoughts” (Matthew 15:19) Surprisingly, the Bible treats the heart as the place where we do our thinking —we think in our hearts, not our heads. And, as Matthew 15:19 shows, those thoughts are not always noble. In our culture we regard our ability to reason as one of the highest aspects of human personhood, but forget how often we employ that faculty in less-than-noble pursuits. The biblical Greek word for thinking actively, like when you’re thinking something through, is dianoia , and it includes selfish fantasies, plotting, and scheming: “The imagination [ dianoia ] of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen 8:21) “He has scattered the proud in the imagination [ dianoia ] of their hearts” (Lk 1:51) So if the heart is where humans do their thinking, where do they feel emotions? The strongest emotions, as well as the deepest thoughts, are said to arise from “the inward parts,” the bowels and kidneys, as we might refer to “gut feelings.” That sounds coarse in our culture, though; so modern English translations usually substitute something more polite, located higher up in the body. Psalm 16:7 in Hebrew: “I will bless the Lord who has given me understanding; in the night also my kidneys instruct me” King James Version, 1611: “My reins also instruct me” ( reins being an archaic term for “kidneys,” as in “renal function”) Revised Standard Version, 1952: “In the night also my heart instructs me” New American Standard Version, 1971: “My mind instructs me in the night” |
| At the same time there is some evidence that after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 the Jewish Christian apostolate gained considerable influence among the Jews and thus became a greater threat to Pharisaic leaders; this was especially the case because Christians saw the destruction of Jerusalem as a judgment Jesus had foretold ( Mark 13 ; Matt 24; Luke 21). 1631 This makes sense as a setting for the Fourth Gospe1. The Judeans, who are much less positive toward Jesus in this Gospel than are the Galileans, 1632 may represent the heirs of the Jerusalem leaders in Yavneh, which was in Judea. The impression one gets from the Fourth Gospel is that the Johannine community or its allies in Galilee felt repressed by the Judean Pharisees or their allies in Asia (7:13; 9:22; 20:19). After all, the Pharisees represent only part of the opposition in Mark, much more in Matthew, but have become identical with the opposition in John. The Sadducees do not appear in John (the «scribes» appear only in the interpolation of 7:53–8:11, in 8:3). Such a situation of conflict fits what we know of the churches» struggles in at least Smyrna and Philadelphia in Asia Minor (Rev 2:9–10; 3:7–9). 1633 Hostility between Jewish Christians and other Jews apparently had early roots in Ephesus (Acts 19:8–9, 33–34; 21:27–29; for the many Jewish Christians there, 19:9–10, 17), but events in Smyrna and Philadelphia were more recent. Rabbinic sources on the minim, «schismatics,» are not the ideal source for reconstructing the intra-Jewish conflict in this period, but they do resemble the picture we have from some of the Christian sources, and it is important to make use of all the relevant data. 1634 It is extremely doubtful that official dialogue occurred between Jewish Christians and the rabbis at Yavneh. 1635 Although it is not clear that any rabbis became Christians, 1636 rabbinic fear of contamination from heretical ideas intensified. 1637 Nevertheless, both Tannaim and Amoraim appear to have engaged in some serious discussions with the minim, or «heretics.» 1638 Although minuth, «heresy,» was dangerous, some may have suspected value in dialogue, as R. |
| The evidence for Elijah " s eschatological role in post-OT sources is hardly limited to later rabbinic texts, however. 3845 Aune finds reference to him as forerunner in 1 En. 90:31; 3846 4 Ezra 6assumes him among historic figures with special roles at the end of the age (among those who never died); 3847 and Matthew (17:10) unhesitatingly follows Mark (9) in presupposing that this role was widely known in Jewish circles. Sirachs portrayal of Elijah as a restorer and forerunner of the end time (if not explicitly of the messiah) is very close to this. 3848 2B. Not the Prophet (1:21b) Some of these texts may coalesce the image of Elijah with that of the Mosaic eschatological prophet many Jewish people saw in Deut 18:18 . 3849 A Tannaitic midrash on Deut 18 declares that this prophet could even temporarily suspend a commandment of Moses, as Elijah did. 3850 Expectations of this prophet were not solely linked with Elijah, however; that represented only one conceptual option among severa1. 3851 The expectation may appear in 1Maccabees (4:46; 14), 3852 although these texts more likely focus on the restoration of prophecy in general and not a Mosaic prophet in particular. 3853 Some other texts are clearer, although not attesting that all segments of Judaism expected a Mosaic prophet distinct from Elijah. 3854 A Qumran text links an eschatological prophet with the messiahs of Aaron and Israel while distinguishing all three figures; 3855 the historic Teacher of Righteousness apparently reflected some functions of the «prophet like Moses,» but after his passing the complete fulfillment seems to have awaited the eschatological generation. 3856 Samaritan expectation, with its emphasis on the Pentateuch, naturally emphasizes this prophet more than most Jewish texts do, although Qumran expectation is similar. 3857 In our text, Johns interlocutors are careful to question whether he is Elijah or the Prophet if he is not the Christ. «The Prophet» here refers to Deut 18:15–18 , 3858 and early Christian tradition found this text " s fulfillment in Jesus 3859 (e.g., Acts 3:22; 7:37; 3860 cf. Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7 ; Luke 9:35). «Hear him» in the transfiguration story probably alludes in this context to Deut 18:15 ; 3861 likewise the mountain; cloud; allusion to tabernacles; transfiguration (cf. Exod 34:29); presence of Moses and Elijah on the mount (Exod 34:2; 1 Kgs 19:8); and the timing («six days,» cf. Exod 24:16) all suggest allusions to Moses. 3862 The present text, however, distinguishes various roles, suggesting that more than mainstream Christian theology stands behind it. It is possible that the segment of Judaism from which much of John " s community and/or its opponents sprang laid heavy emphasis on the eschatological prophet (1:25; 6:14; 7:40; 9:17); while a prophet Christology would be inadequate (4:19, 25–29; 6:14–15; 7:40–41), Jesus is clearly a prophet (4:44; 9:17), 3863 hence foreshadows the prophetic ministry of the Johannine community (16:7–15). 3864 |
| We should remember that whereas John strongly emphasizes realized eschatology, he does not thereby abandon all future eschatology (e.g., 5:28–29; 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 12:48; 21:22–23). That Jesus was no longer physically present with the Johannine community was obvious, and the Lukan tradition of an ascension was the most obvious spatial solution to the current fact (Luke 24:50; Acts 1:9–11; cf. Mark 16:19 ; Rom 8:34 ; Eph 1:20 ; Col 3:1–2; Heb 1:3). Matthew, Mark, and John close before the point where the event would be described (Mark even before resurrection appearances), but the ascension is presupposed by Jesus» Parousia from heaven, a teaching found in Paul " s earliest letters (e.g., Phil 3:20; 1 Thess 4:16; 2 Thess 1:7). 10627 It appears multiply attested outside the Gospels, at least on a theological level ( Eph 4:8–10 ; 1Tim 3:16 ; Heb 4:14; 7:26; 8:1; 9:24; 1Pet 3:22 ). That the Spirit came as another advocate, standing in for Jesus, suggests that John also understood that Jesus would be absent from the community, while not «in spirit,» yet in body (cf. 1 John 2:1 ). 10628 Jesus would not only go to the Father and return to give them the Spirit; though it is not John " s emphasis, he also implies that Jesus would remain with the Father until the «last day,» when those in the tombs would arise. It is also clear that ancient writers could predict events never recounted in their narratives but that the reader would understand to be fulfilled in the story world; the Greek East " s favorite work, the Iliad, could predict, without recounting, the fall of Troy, which was already known to the Iliad " s tradition and which it reinforced through both subtle allusions and explicit statements in the story. 10629 The book ends with Hector " s burial, but because the book emphasized that Hector was Troy " s last adequate defender, 10630 this conclusion certainly implies the tragic demise of Troy. The Odyssey predicts but does not narrate Odysseus " s final trial, 10631 but in view of the other fulfillments in the story, the reader or hearer is not left with discomfort. The Argonautica will not directly address Medeás unpleasant slaying of Pelias yet hints at that tradition. 10632 Likewise, that Mark probably ends without resurrection appearances ( Mark 16:8 ) hardly means that Mark wanted his readers to doubt that they occurred (cf. Mark 14:28 )! John probably assumes the tradition of the ascension more widely held by his audience, just as he has probably assumed their knowledge of a more widely circulated passion tradition in earlier narratives. |
| Suggesting that the Fourth Gospel is not directly dependent on the Synoptics need not imply that John did not know of the existence of the Synoptics; even if (as is unlikely) Johannine Christianity were as isolated from other circles of Christianity as some have proposed, other gospels must have been known if travelers afforded any contact at all among Christian communities. 381 That travelers did so may be regarded as virtually certain. 382 Urban Christians traveled ( 1Cor 16:10,12,17 ; Phil 2:30; 4:18 ), carried letters ( Rom 16:1–2 ; Phil 2:25 ), 383 relocated to other places ( Rom 16:3,5 ; perhaps 16:6–15), and sent greetings to other churches ( Rom 16:21–23 ; 1Cor 16:19 ; Phil 4:22 ; Col 4:10–15). In the first century many churches knew what was happening with churches in other cities ( Rom 1:8 ; 1Cor 11:16; 14:33; 1 Thess 1:7–9), and even shared letters (Col 4:16). Missionaries could speak of some churches to others ( Rom 15:26 ; 2Cor 8:1–5; 9:2–4 ; Phil 4:16; 1 Thess 2:14–16; cf. 3 John 5–12 ) and send personal news by other workers ( Eph 6:21–22 ; Col 4:7–9). Although we need not suppose connections among churches as pervasive as Ignatiuse letters suggest perhaps two decades later, neither need we imagine that such connections emerged ex nihilo in the altogether brief silence between Johns Gospel and the «postapostolic» period. No one familiar with the urban society of the eastern empire will be impressed with the isolation Gospel scholars often attribute to the Gospel «communities.» John could have known one, two, or more other published gospels and yet have chosen not to follow their model or employ them as sources in writing his own. 384 (Xenophon, for example, knows of an earlier work recounting the retreat of Greek mercenaries from Persia, mentioned in Hel1. 3.1.2, but later composes his own eyewitness account.) If, as is likely, Mark circulated widely (and hence could provide a primary framework for both Matthew and Luke), John might even safely assume his readers» knowledge of it. 385 Certainly a few decades earlier the tradition was widely known; given its circulation in Jerusalem and Antioch, «it is historically quite unlikely that Paul would have no knowledge of the Jesus-tradition» that circulated in Jerusalem, Antioch, and Damascus, locations he had frequented. 386 By John " s day, such tradition would be even more pervasive. In other words, independence need not mean anything so dramatic as that Mark and John «developed the gospel form independently.» 387 John " s very divergence from the Synoptics probably led to its relatively slower reception in the broader church until it could be explained in relation to them. 388 |
| John Anthony McGuckin Gospel THEODORE G. STYLIANOPOULOS “Gospel” (from the Anglo-Saxon “god-spell”) or “evangel” (from the Greek euangelion) defines the central message of Christianity: the “good news” of God’s gift of salvation ( John 3.16 ). The essence of the gospel is God’s gracious liberation of humanity from the powers of sin and death, and its restoration and communion with God in Christ and the Spirit. The centrality of Christ and his saving work, prophesied in the Old Testament and revealed in the New, means that the gospel message is proclaimed not only in the scriptures, but also, properly speaking, in all aspects of the church’s life which are intrinsically evangelical – her identity, worship, sacraments, mission, creed, theology, and practice. Although the term “gospel” (euangelion) occurs most frequently in Paul, the primary sources of the gospel are the four canonical gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – each of which as a book is also called “gospel.” The same term also designates in the Orthodox Church the separately printed gospel lectionary (the annual cycle of selected readings from the four gospels, distinct from the parallel lectionary called Apostle – apostolos). The term “gospel” is also customarily applied to the specific lesson from the gospel lectionary recited in worship and often to the sermon itself. The first allusion to the gospel, traditionally called “first gospel” (proto-euangelion), is found in Genesis 3.15 announcing God’s promise that Eve’s offspring, the Messiah, will crush the serpent’s head while the serpent will strike the Messiah’s heel. A focal and explicit reference to the good news is Isaiah 7.15 concerning Emmanuel, “God-with-us,” born of a virgin (parthenos, LXX), fulfilled in the virginal conception and birth of Jesus by Mary (Matt. 1.23). The Old Testament generally looks forward to a great future era when God’s good news will be proclaimed (euangelizesthai, Isa. 61.1 and Ps. 95.1–3, LXX ), a day when God would decisively defeat evil and establish his rule over all the nations, ushering in an age of universal justice and peace. However, it is the New Testament that provides the theological angle from which innumerable references to Old Testament texts are freely and variously cited as messianic, that is, texts that prefigure the good news of God’s promised salvation, fulfilled in the ministry of Jesus and the life of the early church, including the preaching of the gospel itself ( Rom. 10.8 / Deut. 30.14, LXX ). |
| We also demonstrated that the distortions of this Tradition of salvation in Western Christendom go well beyond theological nuances or purely academic historical interest – but are, in fact, evidence that “a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit” (Matthew 7:17), and have manifested themselves in a wide range of phenomena having direct implications on one’s salvation: from virtually purging the believers’ spiritual life of any practical meaning to presenting them with a blasphemous image of God, from distorting the Scripture to fit the new doctrines to accepting the practices promoting mystical delusion. We pray for our non-Orthodox brothers and sisters to our Lord Jesus Christ – “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4) – that He will guide them to the paths of true salvation. “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God” (Luke 18:27). Glory to God for all things! BIBLIOGRAPHY Alfeyev, Bishop (now Metropolitan) Hilarion. Tainstvo very: Vvedenie v pravoslavnoe dogmaticheskoe bogoslovie (The Mystery of Faith: Introduction to Orthodox Dogmatic Theology). http://bishop.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/1_3_3_1. Archimandrite George. Theosis: The True Purpose of Human Life. Mount Athos, Greece: Holy Monastery of St. Gregorios, 2006. Calvin, John. Commentary on Corinthians. “ The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent.” Elder Cleopa of Romania. The Truth of Our Faith. Thessalonica, Greece & London, Ontario: Uncut Mountain Press, 2000. Florovsky, Fr. Georges. “Revelation and interpretation.” _____. “The Lost Scriptural Mind.” Fragapane, Carmen. “Salvation by Christ: A Response to the Credenda/Agenda.” . Hermas. The Shepherd. (accessed April 8, 2010). Interlinear Study Bible. http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/. Jacobson, Paul. “Orthodox Teaching on Salvation as Compared to That of Protestants.” Khrapovitsky, Metropolitan Anthony. “Way Apart: the Difference between Orthodoxy and Western Confessions.” Kucharek, Casimir A. The Sacramental Mysteries: A Byzantine Approach. Alleluia Press, 1976. Kuraev, Deacon Andrei. Public lecture on Catholicism. “Martin Luther.” McGuckin, John Anthony. The Westminster Handbook to Patristic Theology. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004. Mileant, Bishop Alexander. “End of the World.” |
| 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 St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov): “The Activity of Prayer Is the Highest Activity of the Human Mind” St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) 04 January 2016 The one who seeks corruptible earthly blessings in his prayer rouses the indignation of Heaven’s King against himself. The angels and archangels-His courtiers-behold you during your prayer, they see what you are requesting from God. They are surprised and rejoice when they see an earthly creature leave the earth behind and make a request to receive something heavenly, but they mourn for the one who ignores the heavenly and asks for earth and decay. We are commanded to be children in malice, but not in understanding (1 Corinthians 14:20). During prayer, the reason of this world, which is verbose and conceited, is cast off; this does not mean that feeblemindedness is applied or required. Perfected reason is required, spiritual reason, filled with humility and simplicity, which is often expressed in prayer not through words, but by prayerful silence which surpasses words. Prayerful silence then envelops the mind, when suddenly new, spiritual understanding appears to it which is inexpressible in the words of this world and age, when an especially vivid feeling of God being present arises. Before the inscrutable greatness of the Divine Being, His feeble creature, man, falls silent. Vain repetitions (Matthew 6, 7-8), condemned by the Lord in the prayers of pagans, consist in multiple requests for temporal blessings, which fill the prayers of pagans, as well as the eloquent manner in which they are made, as if rhetorical flourishes, material sonority and the power of the word can act on God in the same way that they act on the hearing and nerves of people of flesh. In condemning this verbosity the Lord did not at all condemn prolonged prayers, as it seemed to some heretics: for He Himself blessed prolonged prayer by being in prayer at length. And continued all night in prayer to God (Luke 6:12) as the Gospel recounts of the Lord. |
| But John is not the only Gospel it knows. The opening scene of the book’s narrative relates an incident said to have occurred 550 days after the resurrection, when the disciples were gathered and Jesus appeared to therrf: ‘... the twelve disciples [were] all sitting together and recalling what the Saviour had said to each one of them, whether secretly or openly, and [putting it] in books. [But I] was writing that which was in [my book]... ’ (ApocJas 2.7 – 16). This is most interesting for its tacit admission that Jesus’ disciples wrote books which contained his teaching. And the mention of the disciples ‘recalling what the Saviour had said’ and putting these recollections or remembrances in books reflects the same understanding which lies behind Justin’s favourite characterization of the Gospels as ‘apostolic memoirs’. It parallels how Papias of Hierapolis had earlier spoken of the Gospel of Mark as the apostle Peter’s recollections of Jesus. The author of ApocJas, of course, is not so interested in those existing Gospels 226 but in the new revelations which James is about to receive from the risen Jesus. The passage is nonetheless important for showing how commonplace was the notion that there were Gospels which went back to Jesus’ own disciples. Further indication of this author’s awareness of the previously existing Gospels comes when Jesus mentions by title certain parables which the author presumes the reader already knows from the canonical Gospels: ‘it was enough for some to the teaching and understand “The Shepherds” and “The Seed” and “The Building” and “The Lamps of the Virgins” and “The Wage of the Workmen” and “the Didrachmae” and “The Woman”’ (ApocJas. 8.5 – 10). Koester identifies these known parables as those contained in Matthew, Mark, and Luke: 227 The Shepherds Luke 15.4 – 6 The Seed Mark 4.3 – 9 or 4.26 – 9 or 4.30 – 2 The Building Matthew 7.24 – 7; Luke 6.47 – 9 The Lamps of the Virgins Matthew 25.1 – 12 The Wage of the Workmen Matthew 20.1 – 15 The Didrachmae Luke 15.8 – 9 The Woman Luke 18.2 – 8 The author’s intent is clear: it was enough for some people to understand these well-known parables from the well-known Gospels, but not for others. |
| Who was St. Mary Magdalene? St. Mary Magdalene, called by the Orthodox Church both Myrrh-bearer and Equal-to-the-Apostle, is commemorated on July 22/August 4, as well as with the other Myrrh-bearers on the second Sunday after Easter. Born in the seaport town of Magdala on the Sea of Galilee, she played an important role during Christ’s ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection. The Gospels provide the little that we know about St. Mary Magdalene, from whom Christ cast out seven demons. St. Mary and other wealthy women followed Christ and “provided for them out of their means” (Luke 8.1-3). According to the Gospel accounts (Matthew 27:55056; Mark 15.40; Luke 23.49; John 19.25), she and other women followers were present at the crucifixion. They watched where Christ was laid, and maid plans to come to the tomb on the following day to perform the ritual for anointing the dead and preparing the body for burial. In the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, St. Mary and the women with her are instructed by the angel at the tomb to go and proclaim the good news of the resurrection to the male disciples. St. Mark, in his Gospel, recounts that St. Mark, in his Gospel, recounts that St. Mary was the first to see and speak with the risen Christ. In the Gospel of John, Jesus Himself tells her to go to the apostles with the gospel; (thus, many call her the “Apostle to the Apostles”). Her meeting with the risen Christ outside His tomb is one of the most touching scenes in the Gospel of St. John: Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom do you seek?” Supposing Him to be the gardener, she said to Him, “Sir, if you have carried Him away, tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to him in Hebrew, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). (John 20.15-16) St. Gregory the Dialogist (Pope Gregory the Great) is believed to have begun the tradition in the Western Church, not accepted in the Eastern Church, which identified St. Mary with the “sinful woman” in the seventh chapter of Luke. There are two possible reasons for this misidentification: (1) St. Mary was from Magdala, a port city that had a reputation for unsavory goings-on, and the reputation of the city may have been transferred to St. Mary; or (2) St. Mary is first mentioned in the Gospel of Luke directly following the account of the sinful woman (Luke 7.36-50) and so was associated with her. Further parallels can be drawn from the fact that the sinful woman is sometimes called a myrrh-bearer, because she anointed Christ’s feet with ointment and wiped them with her hair. St. Gregory also supposed that Mary of Bethany was the same person as St. Mary Magdalene. |
|
|
