| B. Waltke, The Creation Account In Genesis 1:1–3, 5 vols. D. Wiseman, Creation Revealed in Six Days. D. Young, Christianity and the Age of the Earth. E. Young, Studies In Genesis One. Книга Деяний: историческая достоверность (ACTS, HISTORICITY OF) Дата создания и аутентичность Книги Деяний Апостолов имеют критическое значение для исторической достоверности раннего христианства (см. Новый Завет: историческая достоверность) и, тем самым, для христианской апологетики в целом (см. Апологетика: основные положения; Новый Завет: задачи апологетики). Если Книга Деяний была написана до 70 г. по Р. Х., когда очевидцы событий были ещё живы (см. Новый Завет: рукописи), тогда она имеет большое историческое значение как источник сведений о раннехристианском вероучении. Если Книга Деяний была написана Лукой, спутником апостола Павла, то она переносит нас прямо в апостольское окружение, в круг тех, кто участвовал в описываемых событиях. Если Книга Деяний была создана в 62 г. по Р. X. (традиционная датировка), то написана она была современником Иисуса, умершего в 33 г. по Р. Х. (см. Новый Завет: датировка). Если продемонстрировать историческую точность Книги Деяний, это укрепит доверие к её рассказу о самых фундаментальных основах христианского вероучения: о чудесах ( Деян. 2:22 ; см. чудеса в Библии; чудеса: значение для апологетики), о смерти ( Деян. 2:23 ), воскресении ( Деян. 2:24, 29–32 ) и вознесении ( Деян. 1:9–10 ) Христа. Если Книгу Деяний написал Лука, тогда его «первая книга» ( Деян. 1:1 ), Евангелие от Луки, должна быть отнесена к такой же ранней дате, ко времени жизни апостолов и очевидцев, и к тому же уровню достоверности. Свидетельство специалиста по древнеримской истории . Хотя специалисты по Новому Завету, долгое время находившиеся под влиянием высокой критики (см. Библия: критика), скептически относились к исторической достоверности Евангелий и Книги Деяний, этого нельзя сказать о современных им специалистах по древнеримской истории. Ярким примером здесь служит Шервин-Уайт (см. Sherwin-White). |
| There are different traditions regarding how strictly to follow the Fast. In most Orthodox traditions, the fast is not as severe as that during Great Lent. Fish, wine and oil are permitted on all days except Wednesday and Friday, which are strict fast-days throughout the year except immediately following the Great Feasts of the Lord. In other traditions, fish, wine and oil are permitted on Saturdays and Sundays during the Fast of the Apostles. For faithful Orthodox today, the Fast of the Apostles can be an occasion for reflection upon the lives and example of the Holy Apostles. On the Sunday of All Saints, we remember and celebrate the lives of all those who have gone before us in the faith: our fathers, forefathers, the apostles, preachers, evangelists, teachers, hierarchs and martyrs. The readings which are appointed for that day (Hebrews 11:33-40, 12:1-2, and Matthew 10:32-33, 37-38, 19:27-30) remind us that countless worshippers of God have sacrificed their lives for the faith which we have inherited. Following Jesus’ admonition recorded by St. Matthew, the Apostles left behind their parents, their children, and their possessions in order to bring the Good News of Jesus Christ to people who did not know Him. Christian missionaries around the world are still doing this today. During the Fast of the Apostles we are reminded to pray for them all, and for Orthodox mission everywhere. The Fast is also an occasion to remember that in Christ, we have a unity that goes far beyond our personal opinions, likes or dislikes. The Acts of the Apostles tells us that the Apostles themselves recognized this very early. The occasion was an argument which took place regarding whether the followers of Christ needed to continue to observe the Law of Moses. At first, Peter and Paul took different sides in the discussion. Both Peter and Paul were Jews, but their personalities and backgrounds were very different. Peter, who was formerly a fisherman, was among the first of the disciples to follow Jesus. Presumably he was uneducated and probably spoke only Aramaic in the local Galilean dialect. Paul, on the other hand, was very well educated under Gamaliel, the most famous rabbi (teacher) of his time, and spoke several languages. |
| Although the purification aspect of the Spirit is important here, the other main aspect of the Spirit, as prophetic anointing to declare God " s message, is explicit in this text. 10716 Immediately before Jesus commands them to receive the «Holy Spirit» (the phrase connects the Spirit of purification in 1and the Spirit of prophecy in 14:26), he commissions them to carry on his own mission from the Father (20:21). (This phrase appears only three times in the Gospel, including its first and final uses. Just as the Gospel proper concludes with Thomas " s confession of Jesus» deity, forming a christological inclusio with the prologue, this passage closes a slightly smaller pneumatological inclusio.) These relate to the prophetic mission of his disciples. John 20:19–23 binds together the two main pneumatological motifs in the Fourth Gospel, showing that only those who are purified or regenerated by the Spirit will be empowered by him to experience and proclaim the risen Christ. For John, all those who believe are to «receive» the Spirit after Jesus» glorification (7:39), so the experience depicted here for the disciples functions proleptically for the whole church. The language of «receiving the Spirit» (also 14:17; cf. 1 John 2:27 ) accords with early Christian tradition, normally for the experience of new relationship ( Rom 8:15 ; 1Cor 2:12 ; 2Cor 11:4 ; Gal 3:2, 14 ) or empowerment for mission (Acts 1:8) temporally at (Acts 10:47), or theologically implicit in (Acts 2:33; 19:2), conversion, although in the early church " s experience it may have applied to a postconversion experience in some cases (Acts 8:15, 17). 10717 That John uses λαμβνω rather than δχομαι here (20:22) does not merit more than passing interest, although the former term could sometimes bear stronger force. In the whole Gospel, John employs the latter term only once (4:45, and nowhere in the Epistles; probably interchangeably with λαμβνω; cf. 4:44; 1:11) and the former forty-six times (plus six times in the Epistles). The imperative may, however, connote that although the gift is freely offered to all, it must be embraced by those who would accept the offer. 10718 «Receiving» the Spirit here also refers to the beginning of an indwelling (14:17,23) and hence implies a fuller inspiration than that reported among the biblical prophets. 10719 |
| -. The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine. Translated by G. A. Williamson; revised and edited with a new introduction by Andrew Louth. NY: Penguin Books, 1989. 434 p. (Penguin classics.) Translation of Ecclesiastical history. Includes bibliographical references (p. 334– 336 ). Evagrius, Scholasticus, b. 536? Ecclesiastical History. A History of the Church in six books, from A.D. 431 to A.D. 594. A new translation from the Greek: with an account of the author and his writings. London: S. Bagster, 1846. xvi, 318 p. (The Greek ecclesiastical historians of the first six centuries of the Christian era, vol. 6.) Translated and edited by Edward Walford. Imperial Russia: A Source Book, 1700–1917. Edited by Basil Dmytryshyn. 3d ed. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1990. 558 p. New Eusebius: Documents Illustrating the History of the Church to A.D. 337. Edited by J. Stevenson. Rev. ed. Revised with additional documents by W.H.C. Frend. London: S.P.C.K., 1987. xxii, 404 p. Bibliography: p. 393–394. Nicephorous, Saint, Patriarch of Constantinople. An Eyewitness to History: the Short History of Nikephoros our Holy Father the Patriarch of Constantinople. Historical commentary by Norman Tobias; translation by Norman Tobias and Anthony R. Santoro; introduction by Joh n N. Frary; prologue by Demetrios J. Constantelos. Brookline, MA: Hellenic College Press, 1989. (The Archbishop Iakovos library of ecclesiastical and historical sources; n. 14.) Translation of Breviarium historicum. The Nikonian Chronicle. Edited, introduced, and annotated by Serge A. Zenkovsky; translated by Serge A. and Betty Jean Zenkovsky. Princeton: Kingston Press, 1984–1989. 5 v. Translation of Nikonovskaia letopis. Vol. 5 published by Darwin Press. The Old Rus’ Kievan and Galician-Volhynian Chronicles: The Ostroz’kyj (Xlebnikov) and Cetvertyns’kyj (Pogodin) Codices. With an introduction by Omeljan Pritsak, editor-in-chief. Cambridge, MA: Distributed by Harvard University Press for the Ukrainian Research Institute of Harvard University, 1990. lxxxix, 761 p. (Harvard Library of early Ukrainian literature. Texts; v. 8=Harvardska biblioteka davnoho ukrainskoho pysmenstva. Korpus tekstiv; tom 8.) Includes facsims. texts in Ruthenian (Middle Ukrainian). Introduction and appendix also in Ukrainian. Bibliographical references: p. lxxix-lxxxix. |
| 5094 11is a nontheological use, although John may intend it figuratively and ironically; 12is Jesus» inclination to request deliverance. Four (or six) examples again hardly make the term distinctly Johannine in view of the widespread use in early Christianity; the six constitute roughly 6 percent of NT uses. For σωτηρα in a natural sense, see Aeschines False Embassy 74; Xenophon Anab. 5.2.24; further sources, along with those closer to the common early Christian usage, in Keener, Matthew, 280 n. 53. 5095 By contrast, pagans often feared that the gods would abandon the world because of its wickedness (Wicker, «Defectu,» 142); Jewish people felt that the Shekinah could withdraw for the same reason (see comment on 1:14; cf. 8:59). 5096 Dodd, Interpretation 212. Dodd provides some evidence that might support the basic saying " s authenticity; he suggests that Mark 16is a variant of 3(Tradition, 357). 5099 Rabbis could speak of the nations shrouded in darkness for rejecting Torah, and Israel in light because Israel accepted it (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 7:12, bar.). Philosophers could likewise claim that people needed philosophy to give them «the clear light of truth» (darum veritatis lumen–Seneca Ep. Luci1. 48.8). 5107 E.g., Plutarch Ε at Delphi 6, Mor. 387A; Cicero Tusc. 1.19.43; Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 11–12, 4D (cf. Plato Phaedo 91C); T. Reu. 3:9; Josephus War 2.141. Josephus writes for αλθευαν γαπσιν (i.e., in this instance, historical accuracy–Josephus War 1.30); Essenes vowed to την λθειαν αγαπν ε (Josephus War 2.141). John may presuppose the philosophical tradition authored by Plato, in which many remained in the realm of shadows instead of facing the light (for related ideas, cf., e.g., Plato Rep. 6.484B; Diodorus Siculus 10.7.3; Marcus Aurelius 10.1); some Jews had begun transposing and adapting such ideas (4 Ezra 7:26; 2 Bar. 51:8; T. Ben). 6:2; 2Cor 4:18 ). 5109 Kysar, Maverick Gospel, 61, though claiming that optimism remains from an earlier period of Christian expansion. Carson, Sovereignty, seeks to balance the Gospel " s emphases on God " s sovereignty and human responsibility. |
| ATHANASIUS ALEX, Ad Amunem, 545–60, 26, 1169–76. Ex tricesima nona festali, 559–66, 26, 1175–80. Ad Rufinianum, 565–72, 26, 1179–82. BASILIUS CæS. Ad Amphilochium 1, 571–644, 32, epist. 188; 2, 843–738, 32, epist. 199; 3, 737–808, 32 epist. 217. De ciborum differentia 807–10; 32 epist. 236. Ad Diodorum Tars, de matrimonio, 809–22, 32, epist. 160. Ad Gregorium presbyterum, 821–28, 32, epist. 55. Chorepiscopis, 827–32, 32, epist. 54. Ad episcopos sibi subjectos, 831–38, 32, epist. 53. Ad Amphilochum de Sp. S., 839–52, 32, ex cap, 27 et 29. GREGORIUS NYSSENUS ad Letoium, 851–888, 45, 221–36. TIMOTHEUS ALEX. Responsa, 889–902, 33, 1295–1308. THEOPHILUS ALEX. Edictum, 901–2, 65, 33–4. Commonitorium, 903–12, 65, 35–44. Narratio de Catharis, 911–2, 65, 43–44. Agathoni, 911–14, 65, 43–6. Menæ , 913–4; 65, 45–6. CYR1LLUS ALEX. Epistola in hymnis, 915–22, 77, epist. 78. Epistola ad episcopos Lybiæ, 921–24, 77, epist. 79. GREGORIUS THEOLOGUS. De libris canonicis V. T. et N. Т., , 923–26, 37, 472–74. AMPH1LOCHIUS. Iambi ad Seleucum, , 925–28, 37. 1593–98. GENNADIUS. Epistola encyclica, 929–34, 85, 1613–22. BASILIUS CÆS. Ad Nicopolitanos,933–36, 32, epist., 240. TARASIUS. Epistola ad Adrianum, papam, 935–38, 98, 1441–55. NICOLAUS CP. Interrogationes et Responsiones ad monachos synodicæ, 937–50. B) SYNTAGMATA PHOTIUS. Syntagma canonum, 104, 441–976. Nomocanon, 975–1218. SYMEON METAPHRASTES. Epitome canonum, 114, 235–92. MICHAEL PSELLUS. Oblatio nomocanonis, , 122, 919–24. ALEXIUS ARISTENUS. Synopsis canonum, 133, 63–114. ARSENIUS. Epitome canonum, 188, 9–62. MATTHÆUS BLASTARES. Syntagma alphabeticum canonum, 144, 959–1400 et 145, 9–212. CONSTANTINUS HARMENOPULUS. Epitome canonum, 150, 45–168. Narratiuncula de tribus tomis synodicis, 41–44. C) JUS ECCLES1AST1CUM GRÆGO ROMANUM i. imperatorum novellæ constitutiones de rebus ecclesiasticis: Justinianus, PL., 72, 921–1100. Leo VI imperator, 107, 419–66. Constantinus VII, 113, 549–604. Delectus legum, 113, 453–550. Romanus senior, Bulla аигеа, 113, 1059–68. |
| 6931 Commentators frequently recognize an allusion to such postbiblical Jewish traditions here. 6932 Later rabbinic tradition emphasized the future vision of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: 6933 thus, for example, Abraham foresaw the temples and all the kingdoms to come; 6934 Jacob foresaw the templés destruction and restoration, and all the rabbinic academies, 6935 as well as some other revelations, 6936 although tradition was more ambivalent about Jacob s visions. 6937 In one source, Jacob prophesied to each tribe what it would experience until the days of the Messiah. 6938 Such traditions are late, but develop an early nucleus that God revealed the future history of Israel to Jacob (Jub. 32:21). Although later Jewish teachers could speak of the «days of the Messiah,» 6939 the biblical tradition that God " s people longed for the «day of the Lord» may be more significant here. Jesus may imply a divine identity as he makes a more explicit assertion in 8:58. Abraham foresaw Christ " s glory just as did Isaiah ( John 12:41 ). 6940 5C. Eternal Existence before Abraham (8:57–59) That Abraham foresaw Jesus» day probably implies Jesus» deity, but Jesus» opponents miss this point for the moment and notice only the chronological discrepancy, which demanded little insight: Jesus was born long after Abraham " s death (8:57). 6941 John uses chronological priority as a mark of ontological superiority as early in the Gospel as 1:15, contrasting Jesus with another hero of the writer " s contemporaries, John the Baptist. Jesus» chronological priority to Abraham, however, asserts his preexistence in some form. More strikingly, the language used to describe this preexistence breaks the bounds of merely usual Jewish conceptions of created but preexistent Wisdom; Jesus plainly identifies himself with the God of Scripture (8:58). Finally, his interlocutors understand his claim and respond with still greater hostility (8:59). In 8:57, Jesus» interlocutors again understand him on the purely natural level; one who is less than fifty could not have coexisted with Abraham! 6942 Abraham had died nearly two millennia before the time of Jesus, though some traditions emphasized his biblical longevity as a reward for his virtue. |
| The Russian hierarchy basically supported Metropolitan Clement and Prince Izyaslav in their struggle for ecclesiastical independence from Constantinople, but several bishops headed by Saint Niphon of Novgorod (April 8), did not recognize the autocephaly of the Russian metropolitanate and shunned communion with it, having transformed their dioceses into independent ecclesial districts, pending the resolution of this question. Bishop Manuel of Smolensk also followed this course. Saint Rostislav understood the danger which lay hidden beneath the idea of Russian autocephaly for these times, which threatened the break-up of Rus. The constant fighting over Kiev among the princes might also lead to a similar fight over the Kievan See among numerous contenders, put forth by one princely group or another. The premonitions of Saint Rostislav were fully justified. Yurii Dolgoruky, who remained loyal to Constantinople, occupied Kiev in the year 1154. He immediately banished Metropolitan Clement and petitioned Constantinople for a new Metropolitan. This was to be Saint Constantine (June 5), but he arrived in Rus only in the year 1156, six months before the death of Yurii Dolgoruky (+ May 15, 1157). Six months later, when Saint Rostislav’s nephew Mstislav Izyaslavich entered the city on December 22, 1157, Saint Constanine was obliged to flee Kiev, while the deposed Clement Smolyatich returned as Metropolitan. Then a time of disorder began in Russia, for there were two Metropolitans. All the hierarchy and the clergy came under interdict: the Greek Metropolitan suspended the Russian supporters of Clement, and Clement suspended all the supporters of Constantine. To halt the scandal, Saint Rostislav and Mstislav decided to remove both Metropolitans and petition the Patriarch of Constantinople to appoint a new archpastor for the Russian metropolitan See. But this compromise did not end the matter. Arriving in Kiev in the autumn of 1161, Metropolitan Theodore died in spring of the following year. Following the example of Saint Andrew Bogoliubsky (July 4), who supported his own fellow ascetic Bishop Theodore to be Metropolitan, Saint Rostislav put forth his own candidate, who turned out to be the much-suffering Clement Smolyatich. |
| Dhimmitude: A Climate of Hate and Contempt Bangladesh: A mob of some " 60 extremists " raided a predominantly Christian village. According to the Barnabas Aid group, " they plundered the residents' livestock and other possessions and threatened to return to burn down homes. The attackers then moved on to nearby Bolakipur and targeted a Christian seminary. Battering down the doors, they forced their way into the building and severely beat the rector and a number of students. The previous day, two church leaders from Tumilia were beaten and robbed. " Egypt: " Unknown persons " kidnapped a 7-year-old Christian girl in Dakhaleya Province in northern Egypt. The girl, Jessica Nadi Gabriel, was attending a wedding ceremony with her family when she was seized and torn away. Her father later revealed that the 7-year-old girl's abductors called him demanding a ransom of 650,000 Egyptian Pounds (nearly USD). Two weeks earlier, a 6-year-old Coptic boy who was kidnapped and held for ransom, was still killed and discarded in the sewer—even after his family paid the Muslim kidnapper the demanded ransom. Also, a Coptic Christian man named Milad, living in Tanta, said that " unknown persons " invited him and his family to renounce Christianity and submit to Islam and convert. According to widely-read Egyptian newspaper, Youm7, " They also snatched at the crucifix he was wearing around his neck, and threatened to kidnap his children and wife if he refused to convert to Islam. " As they wore the trademark white robes and long beards, the man identified them as members of the Salafi movement in Egypt. Meanwhile, U.S. ambassador Anne Patterson was urging the Coptic pope to forbid the Copts from protesting against Muslim Brotherhood rule -- even though they, as Christians, would suffer under it most -- while Al Azhar, the world's oldest Islamic university, based in Cairo, called on new Catholic Pope, Francis I, to declare that " Islam is a peaceful religion. " Iran : According to a June 19 Morning Star News report, " Six more Christians were sentenced for practicing their faith last week, while Iran's presidential election of a moderate politician was not expected to soften the regime's persecution of religious minorities. " The same six Christians had been arrested earlier in February 2012, when police raided their house-church meeting. Officials rejected their appeal for release on bail; they are being held in Adel Abad Prison in Shiraz, which houses hardened criminals and often lacks heating or health facilities, and where officials routinely deny medical treatment to prisoners. |
| After the first cabal of Greek merchants from Trebizond offered to the sultan a bribe of 1,000 florins to depose the incumbent Patriarch Mark II (1466–7) and replace him with a candidate of their own choice, the sultan’s eyes were opened to the possibilities. By 1572 the standard “investiture fee” for the patriarch was the substantial “gift” of 2,000 florins, and an annual payment of 4,000 more, gathered from taxation of the Christian “Rum” people who were placed under the patriarch’s supreme charge throughout the Ottoman Empire. There were always more than enough Christian factions lining up to pay the highest premium to ensure the election of their candidate after that point. Accordingly, the tenure of the patriarchs under Turkish rule was usually very short. Sometimes the same candidate acceded to the office, was deposed, and reelected to it five or six times (each time paying the necessary fees). Between the 16th century and the early part of the 20th century, 159 patriarchs held office. Of this number, the Turks drove out of office 105. Several were forced to abdicate and six were judicially assassinated. The cadre ofGreeks who sailed this stormy sea, trying to keep the prestige of the patriarchate intact and effective (sometimes using it for unworthy ambitions), tended to live in what was then the wealthy suburb called the Phanar; and were thus known as Phanariots. Many of the higher offices of the church were subsequently put into their hands when a new patriarch acceded, and this in turn led to the Phanariot Greek clergy becoming a kind of colonial superior race directing churches in distant lands, using the mandate of the sultan and the decree of the patriarch to justify it. They in turn, as local archbishops, levied taxes on their new people. As a result, the Turkish “yoke” cast a long pall over Orthodox relations with the patriarchate. The British historian Kidd acerbically described the situation in the following terms: Thus the Patriarchate, degraded by simony and made the sport of intrigue by its own people, has come to be regarded by many of the Orthodox as an agent of the Turkish government, and identified with its oppression. |
|
|
