| 328 См. Hunzinger Clans-Hunno. Neues Licht auf Lc. 2.14. – Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, xliv, 1952–3, pp. 85–90. 332 Jeremias Joachim. Die Abendsmahlworte Jesu, 3te Aufl. Gottingen, I960, pp. 174 и далее; англ, перевод The Eucharistic Words of Jesus. London, 1966, p. 183. 333 Black Matthew. An Aramaic Approach to the Gospel and Acts, 2nd ed. Oxford, 1954, pp. 214 и далее; 3rd ed., 1967, pp. 279 и далее. 334 См., например, Abbot Ezra. On the Reading “Church of God”, Acts xx. 28. – Bibliotheca Sacra, xxxiii, 1876, pp. 313–352 (переиздано в книге “The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essey”. Boston, 1988, pp. 294–331), De Vine Charles F. The “Blood of God” in Acts 20:28. – Catholic Biblical Quarterly, ix, 1947, pp. 381–408, а также критические комментарии к отрывку и обсуждение вопроса в Hart. The New Testament in the Original Greek, Appendix, pp. 98–100. 336 Moulton James Hope. A Grammar of New Testament Greek, i, Prolegomena, 3rd ed, Edinburg, 1908, pp. 90. 337 Чтение qeou предпочли Весткот и Хорт, Вайс, Фогельс, Мерк, Бовер, Гар-нак (Beitrage, iv, p. 330), Джексон и Лейк (в Beginnings of Christianity), Мак-Грегор (в Interpreter’s Bible), Φ. Φ. Брюс (Acts) и де Винь (op. cit.). Чтение kuriou предпочли Тишендорф, Аббот, фон Зоден, Роупс, Revised Standard Version и New English Bible. 338 Осторожность этого заключения отличается от мнения Ф. У. Бира (F. W. Beare) в Interpreter’s Bible, ad. loc, полагающего, что сложность выражения tou qeou Cristou слишком велика для автора Писания, и что самая примитивная ошибка должна лежать в основе самого древнего дошедшего до нас текста. 339 Другое рассуждение об этом фрагменте см. в замечаниях Генриха Гривена в New Testament Studies, vi, I960, pp. 295 и далее, где он приходит к такому же выводу, как и сделанный здесь. 340 См. Molitor Joseph. Der Paulustext des hi. Ephrem aus seinem armenisch erhaltenen Paulinenkommentar... Rome, 1938, p. 112. 341 Weiss В . Textkritik der paulinische Briefe ( Texte und Untersuchungen, xiv (3); Leipzig, 1896), pp. 13 и далее. Примечательно, что Весткот и Хорт не считают нужным в этом случае следовать знаменитой рукописи. |
| R. 1972. Vol. 48. P. 115–141. Одно из наиболее скрупулезных исследований см.: Meier J . P. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. N. Y., 1994. (Anchor Bible Reference Library; 2). См.: Puech É . 11QPsApa – Un rituel d’exorcismes: Essai de reconstruction//Revue de Qumran. P., 1990. Vol. 14. (3). P. 377–408. Naveh J., Shaked Sh . Magic Spells and Formulae: Aramaic Incarnations of Late Antiquity. Jerusalem, 1993; Nutton V . From Medical Certainty to Medical Amulets: Three Aspects of Ancient Therapeutics//Clio Medica. L., 1991. Vol. 22. P. 13–22. Dudley M., Rowell G . The Oil of Gladness: Anointing in the Christian Tradition. L.; Collegeville (MN), 1993. О последующей истории развития таинства Елеосвящения см.: Архангельский М.Ф. , прот. О тайне св. Елея. СПб., 1895. М., 20012; Венедикт (Алентов), иером . К истории православного богослужения: Историко-литургическое и археологическое исследование о чине таинства Елеосвящения. Сергиев Посад, 1917. К., 20042; Gusmer Ch. W . «And You Visited Me»: Sacramental Ministry to the Sick and the Dying. N.Y., 1984; Anointing the Sick/Ed. P. E. Fink. Collegeville (MN), 1987; Cuschieri A.J . Anointing of the Sick: A Theological and Canonical Study. Lanham (MD), 1993; Pastoral Care of the Sick: Rites of Anointing and Viaticum. Collegeville (MN), 1983; Temple of the Holy Spirit: Sickness and Death of the Christian in the Liturgy: The 21st Liturgical Conference Saint-Serge. N. Y., 1983; Ziegler J.J . Let Them Anoint the Sick. Collegeville (MN), 1987. Алмазов А. И . Врачевальные молитвы: К материалам и исследованиям по истории рукописного русского Требника. Одесса, 1900; Петканова Д . Фолклорът в апокрифните молитви//Български фолклор. София, 1976. 2. С. 28–40; она же . Апокрифните лечебни молитви//Старобългаристика. София, 2001. 25/3. С. 61–85. Подробнее об освящении воды см.: Желтов М., диак . Водоосвящение//Православная энциклопедия. М., 2005. Т. 9. С. 140–148. Источник: Вестник ПСТГУ I: Богословие. Философия 2005. Вып. 14. С. 100–121 Обращаем ваше внимание, что информация, представленная на сайте, носит ознакомительный и просветительский характер и не предназначена для самодиагностики и самолечения. Выбор и назначение лекарственных препаратов, методов лечения, а также контроль за их применением может осуществлять только лечащий врач. Обязательно проконсультируйтесь со специалистом. Ещё статьи о здоровье Самое популярное Сейчас в разделе 167 чел. Всего просмотров 58 млн. Всего записей 1519 Подписка на рассылку ©2024 Азбука здоровья к содержанию Входим... Куки не обнаружены, не ЛК Размер шрифта: A- 15 A+ Тёмная тема: Цвета Цвет фона: Цвет текста: Цвет ссылок: Цвет акцентов Цвет полей Фон подложек Заголовки: Текст: Выравнивание: Сбросить настройки |
| 7 Ср. «Исходным пунктом евангельской проповеди был Иерусалим с Иудеей и первыми членами новозаветного царства были сыны Израиля; – священно-писательская деятельность начинается также в этом пункте и направляется верным сынам Авраама.» Глубоковский Н. Н. Лекции по Свящ. Писанию Н. З. 1898/9 г., стр. 189. 8 Lessing G Е Neue Hypothese über die Evangelisten als bloß menschliche Geschichtsschreiber betrachtet. 1778. 9 . . 1936; Grintz J. Hebrew as the spoken and written language in the last days of the Second Temple.//JBL 29, 1960. 10 Необходимо отметить, что в целом проблема реконструкции семитского (ивр. и арам.) background’a влечёт за собой, по крайней мере, три очень важных вопроса: (а) Вопрос о природе семитского пласта – в каких случаях (критерии оценки(?)) он представлен в виде письменного текста, устного предания, обусловлен стереотипами семитского мышления или влиянием языка LXX? (б) Вопрос о характере иврита – классический иврит, мишнаитский? (в) Вопрос о характере арамейского – библейский, галилейский, арам. Таргумов (Онкелоса или Иерушальми), сирийский? 11 Ср., например, изречение середины второго века: «сказал рабби Меир: всякий живущий на земле Израиля и читающий молитву шема утром и вечером и говорящий на святом языке, обещано ему, что он сын будущего века» (Иер. Шкалим 3, 3), а также соображения Франца Делича: «крайне невероятно, чтобы Мф писал по-арамейски, ибо арам. диалект Палестины был языком вульгарным, а βρας διλεκτος был языком священным, языком храмового богослужения, синагогальных и домашних молитв, всех формул благословения и традиционного закона, равно как притчи, сказки о животных, причитания над умершими излагаются в Талмуде и мидрашах – в громадном большинстве – по-еврейски. Священный язык продолжал быть языком высшей формы речи, и даже народные пословицы лишь частично составлялись по-арамейски». Delitsch F. The Hebrew New Testament of the British and Foreign Bible Society. 1883. См. также Rabin C. Hebrew and Aramaic in the first century.//Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum... 1976. |
| The Amplified Bible (1954) is a literal translation with multiple expression using associated words to convey the original thought. This version is intended to supplement other translations. The Jerusalem Bible (1966) is a translation form the Hebrew Masoretic text, the Greek Septuagint, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and accepted Greek and Aramaic New Testament texts. In making the New American Bible (1970), a Catholic translation, all the basic texts were consulted, and the work was 26 years in the making. The Living Bible (1971) is a popular paraphrase edition and is the work of a single translator, Kenneth L. Taylor. The New American Standard Bible (1971) was translated by an editorial board of 54 Greek and Hebrew scholars and required nearly 11 years to complete. The New King James Bible (1979–82) is a version in conformity with the thought flow of the 1611 King James Bible. It is based on the Greek text used by Greek speaking churches for many centuries, known presently as the Textus Receptus or Received Text. There are more than a dozen English Bible translations available today, each with its merits and its weaknesses. Some of them are more literal and, consequently, more difficult to understand; while others are much more readable and understandable, but less accurate. A serious Bible student might want to compare several of these translations in order to get a better understanding of the original text. The great variability among modern Bible versions testifies to the fact that translating is essentially interpreting . In other words, to do a good job, the translator must know both the original and the language being translated into quite well. The translator must understand the subject, and, what is extremely important, grasp the idea the author intended to convey and the sense in which he intended it to be conveyed. And since the ultimate author of Sacred Scripture is the Holy Spirit, the translator needs His illumination and inspiration to correctly convey His message. St. Peter pointed to this requirement when he wrote: “No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” ( 2Pet 1:20–21 ). And here lies the main problem with of some of the modern Bible translations. The scientists who did them, with all their knowledge of ancient languages and sincere efforts to do the best job, were often far from the Church and hence never understood its teaching. So at the present time, the King James Bible and its more contemporary version, the New King James Bible, although neither is perfect, seem to convey most accurately the original meaning of the Bible as it was always understood by the Church. Time of Writing |
| Is There Really an Aramean Nation? Source: Breaking Israel News One of the last things Israel’s Interior Minister Gideon Saar did before resigning from the Knesset was to recognize the Israeli Christians as members of the Aramean nation. The decision caused a media uproar, especially in the Arab sector, with most critics saying that there is no Aramaic nation and that the real reason for this step was an attempt to cause a split in the Arab population of Israel so as to “divide and conquer” and gain control of the Arab sector. This calls for an investigation and an investigation into the veracity of an Aramean nation’s existence must be conducted on two planes: the historic-lingual-religious one and the civilian one. The Historic-Lingual-Religious Sphere: Middle Eastern history talks about an Aramean nation from the second half of the second millennium B.C.E., a Semitic people living in the Fertile Crescent of the western and northern Levant in an area that today includes the Land of Israel, northwest Jordan, Lebanon, north and west Syria, northern Iraq and lands along the Euphrates River. In the Bible and later Jewish sources there is mention of Aramean kingdoms, with geographic references: Aram Naharayim, Padan Aram, Aram Tzova, Aram Damascus and more. The Aramaic language became the lingua franca in these areas, also spoken by other nations such as the Hebrews – even some of the books of the Tanach are written in that language. During the first century B.C. E., the Assyrian people came onto the world stage, but their physical conquest of the area did not affect a change in language, and Aramaic continued to be the language prevalent in the Fertile Crescent for hundred of years. For example, the Babylonian Talmud that was formulated over the first five hundred years C.E., is replete with Aramaic, as is Jewish writing of the Gaonic period beginning in the ninth century. Jews, a defined religious and ethnic group, continued to use Aramaic as a language for study and prayer and still do. |
| In this respect, the Samaritan targum is very important. It was compiled in the 10–11 th centuries, but takes as its basis for interpretation not the Massorite, but the Pre-Massorite Hebrew text, coinciding with the text of Septuagint in many respects. In our, Russian Church, we have at hand first-class translations of both variants of the Holy Scripture: the Church Slavonic translation from the Septuagint, and the Russian Synodal one – from the Hebrew text. The original translation into the Church Slavonic of the Holy Scripture was done by the Equal-to-the-Apostles brothers Cyril and Methodius, but only those parts of the Old Testament text which are included in the church services’ readings, the so-called paremias, have survived to this day. In the 16 th century, at the start of the Church’s battle with the Judaizing heresy, it was discovered that there was no complete Bible in all of Russia. Therefore, Archbishop Gennady of Novgorod ordered the translation of the holy books from the Greek anew. This translation, with many corrections and adaptations, reached us as the contemporary Church-Slavonic Bible. The Russian translation of the Bible was done from the Hebrew in the 19 th century. However, in the good Synodal editions, the more important divergences from the Septuagint are marked, and the translations from Greek are given in brackets. The Biblical Society editions are done exclusively from the Hebrew text without any variations from the Greek. Almost simultaneously with the Church Slavonic translation (even later than that), the Holy Scripture was translated into Arabic by Saadia ben Joseph al Fayumi (Saadia Gaon) (in the beginning of the 10 th century). This translation was done from the Peshitta. Such a late translation of the Holy Scripture into Arabic is explained by the fact that Aramaic, which received its most recent and final form in Palmyra among the northern Arabic tribes, was, before the onslaught of the Mohammedans, the literary language of all northern Arabs and Syrians, understandable even to the simple people. The Muslim conquest brought the language of the Southern Arabs to the North, from which the modern Arabic language descended. But, Arabs and Christian Syrians continued to use Aramaic in their church life for a long time, precious for the reason that Christ Himself spoke it. The Creation of the First Man |
| 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 Are You a True Christian? Navigation What’s Become of Syria’s Christian Sites? Magda Abu-Fadil 30 July 2013 July 29, 2013 Aramaic, Jesus’ language, still spoken in Maaloula (Abu-Fadil) As politicians debate the fate of Syria’s Christian minority, reportedly targeted by Muslim fundamentalists for supporting Bashar Al Assad’s regime, the country’s Christian sites seem to have been forgotten in the two-plus-year civil war. “They cut off the head of the statue of Mary (Lady of the Two Worlds) in Syria’s Jisr El Shaghour region,” wrote Rev. Georges Massouh , a Lebanese Greek Orthodox priest, adding that it was still more acceptable than slaughtering human beings. If the attack aimed to terrorize Christians, they will remain in Syria, whose every grain of soil is a witness to its Christianity, and will be martyrs of love, peace, and Christ’s eternal presence in them, he said this week in the daily Annahar . Earlier this year, Tarek Al Abed wrote in Assafir , another Lebanese newspaper, that Christians and Muslims had coexisted in the Qalamoun region, noted for its Christian villages. But the ongoing conflict has definitely taken a toll on Christians, their sites, and the language of Christ. The Bible may have been translated into every language, but the tongue in which Jesus Christ would have preached is almost extinct, spoken by a few thousand people in Syria, mostly in the village of Maaloula. Nobody can read or write Aramaic since there’s no alphabet and no visual record of it, I was told on a visit in 1991. Today it would be hard to quantify how many speakers remain, or how many have survived the fighting. Linguistic scholars have disputed that contention, arguing that several hundred thousand people converse daily in Aramaic. They agree that the “Western” dialect spoken in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine before the Muslim conquest, and thought to be the language Jesus used in spreading the gospel, is fast disappearing. |
| Penned in Greek, probably to Diaspora audiences, the canonical gospels reflect Greco-Roman rather than strictly Palestinian Jewish literary conventions. 230 That is, they share more external characteristics with Diaspora or aristocratic Palestinian Jewish biographies in Greek than they do with many of the Palestinian works composed in Hebrew or Aramaic. Such a statement does not, however, detract from the Jewishness of the Gospels, since Jewish historical writing in Greek generally adopted Greek historiographic conventions, as suggested below for Josephus. 231 In contrast to other Greco-Roman biographies, however, the Gospels, like Diaspora Jewish historical texts, show considerable stylistic and theological influence from the LXX. Further, the Gospels vary among themselves in the degree of their Palestinian character: Matthew and John, whose readers apparently have closer continuing ties with Palestinian Judaism, probably reflect more Palestinian literary influences than Mark and Luke. 232 The methodology of Hebrew and Aramaic Palestinian Jewish texts concerning historical figures diverges at significant points from that of Greco-Roman historical writing. Since the Palestinian Jewish roots of the Jesus movement affected Diaspora Christianity, a brief consideration of Jewish biographical conventions may be useful in discussing the traditions behind the Gospels. Failing this, yet more importantly for our purposes, they may be useful in understanding literary techniques particularly adapted by Matthew and John. Although many individuals feature prominently in the Hebrew Bible and in early Jewish literature, only rarely is a document devoted to a person in such a way that it would be called biography in the sense discussed above; usually the treatment of an individual is part of a larger narrative. Job, Ruth, Judith, Jonah, Esther, Daniel, and Tobit all have books about them in the Greek Bible, but the events rather than the characters dominate the accounts. 233 The various reports of events in the lives of pious rabbis are too piecemeal to supply parallels to biographies like the Gospels, 234 but it is possible that some of these stories were collected and told together like some of the brief philosophical lives in Diogenes Laertius. Since no such early collections are extant, however, 235 rabbinic sources can add little to our discussion of Jewish «biography.» In contrast to Josephus or Tacitus, rabbinic texts are primarily legal, and incidental biographical information tends to serve more purely homiletical than historical purposes. 236 |
| The Mystical Supper is short, the repetition of It in the Divine liturgy is short as well, but the Christian consciousness understands that one should not approach this act, which is the most important in the universe, without worthy, appropriate preparation, for the Lord says in the Scripture: «Cursed be he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully.» And «For he that eateth and drinketh (the Communion) unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord " s body» ( 1Cor. 11:29 ). Worthy preparation for the acceptance of the Son of God in the historical process was mainly the Holy Scripture. It, i.e. the careful reverent reading of It, can be equivalent to the preparation for the acceptance of the Son of God in the process of the Divine service. That is why, from the very beginning of Christian history, the Holy Scripture occupied such an important place in the matter of the preparation of Christians to the Sacrament of the Eucharist and Communion of the Holy Gifts, i.e. in the Divine service, and not only as an imitation of the synagogue, as it is often interpreted. In the early church, in the very first years of Its existence, in Jerusalem, when the Church consisted primarily of Judeo-Christians, the reading and chanting of the Holy Scripture was performed in the holy language of the Old-Testament church, in ancient Hebrew, though the people, which at that time already spoke Aramaic, almost did not understand this language. In order to explain the Holy Scripture, Its text was interpreted in Aramaic. These interpretations were called targums. In Christianity, targums mean interpretations of the Old Testament in the sense of its fulfillment and making the New Testament whole. These interpretations of the Old Testament were done by the Holy Apostles themselves, and in the early Church were used in place of the Holy Scripture of the New Testament, which, as such, did not exist yet. This way, in spite of the absence of New Testament books in the early Church, essentially the Christian Divine service from the very beginning consisted of listening to and learning from the Divine words of both Testaments. And the interpretations of the Old Testament Scriptures by the very Apostles – the Law, Prophets and Psalms, were the most important part of the preparatory for the Holy Eucharist Divine Service. |
| In addition, archeology reveals that soon, the culture, which had been universally identical, changing only by epochs, begins to separate into individual local cultures. In this phenomenon, the division of mankind into different races soon after the Flood is revealed. We shall not go into the very unclear and questionable topic of the origin of human races. This question is clarified neither scientifically, nor Biblically. From the Bible one can clearly see only what the Bible Itself wants to establish, that the God’s chosen nation originates from Noah’s eldest son – Seth (from which the word «Semites» is derived). Ancient tradition assigns the origin of the Slavs and co-tribal nations to Noah’s youngest son – Japheth, and our holy Chronicler writes: «The generation of Japheth are Varyags, Murmans (Normans), Goths, Ruses, Angles, Galls, Lyachs (Poles), Volski, Romans, Germans, Venedizi (Venetians), Fryazi (Italian merchants) and others.» Who the descendants of Ham are, we cannot say even approximately. The Bible speaks of this very indistinctly: first Babylon and Assur are called the descendants of Ham, then Assur and Aram (the Aramaic) are called the descendants of Seth, as ethnography considers them to be. From the other descendants of Ham we shall note Nimrod, about whom the Holy Bible says that he was «a mighty hunter before the Lord.» On this basis we can guess that wild, hunting tribes belonged to the descendants of Ham, who long remained wild before our time. Of course, no nation, no tribe, that is familiar with the Biblical narration, would lay claim to being the descendants of Ham. The 10 th chapter of the Bible, which is devoted to the question, touched upon here, of the origin of human races, ends with the words: «These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these the nations were divided upon the earth after the flood.» The Discovery of the Stella With the Name of Pontius Pilate In Russian circles, an interesting discovery, made in 1961 by Italian archeologists in Palestine, went completely unnoticed. While excavating the staircase of an ancient theatre of Palestinian Caesarea, archeologists, led by Professor Anthony Frova, found a stone with chiseled letters on it. Carefully removing the dirt and dust from this stone, the archeologists read: |
|
|
