| J./Ed. J. A. Watt, e. a. Dublin, 1961. P. 19-28; Ryan J. The Mass in the Early Irish Church//Irish Quarterly Review. 1961. Vol. 50. P. 371-384; Henry F., Marsh-Micheli G. L. A Century of Irish Illumination (1070-1170)//Proc. of the Royal Irish Academy. Sect. C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature. 1962. Vol. 62C. P. 101-165; Gamber K. Die irischen Meßlibelli als Zeugnis für die frühe römische Liturgie//RQS. 1967. Bd. 62. S. 214-221 (repr.: idem. Missa Romensis: Beitr. z. frühen römischen Liturgie und zu den Anfängen des Missale Romanum. Regensburg, 1970. S. 22-30); Kottje R. Oratio periculosa - eine frühmittelalterliche Bezeichnung des Kanons?//AfLW. 1967. Bd. 10. S. 165-168; idem. Studien zum Einfluss des Alten Testamentes auf Recht und Liturgie des früheren Mittelalters (6.-8. Jh.). Bonn, 1970; McLoughlin E. OE Exodus and the Antiphonary of Bangor//Neuphilologische Mitteilungen. 1969. Bd. 70. S. 658-667; Griffin J. L. Studies in Medieval Irish Religious Imagination: Navi Sancti Brendani and the Irish Liturgy: Diss./Harvard Univ. [Camb. (Mass.)], 1975; Hohler C. E. Some Service-Books of the Later Saxon Church//Tenth-Century Studies: Essays in Commemoration of the Millenium of the Council of Winchester and Regularis Concordia/Ed. D. Parsons. L., 1975. P. 60-83, 217-227; O " Dwyer P. Céli Dé: Spiritual Reform in Ireland, 750-900. Dublin, 19812; Talley Th. J. The Origins of the Liturgical Year. N. Y., 1986, 19912; McNamara M. The Inverted Eucharistic Formula «Conversio corporis Christi in panem et sanguinis in vinum»: The Exegetical and Liturgical Background in Irish Usage//Proc. of the Royal Irish Academy. Sect. C: Archaeology, Celtic Studies, History, Linguistics, Literature. 1987. Vol. 87C. P. 573-593; idem. The Psalms in the Early Irish Church. Sheffield, 2000; idem. «Navigatio Sancti Brendani»: Some Possible Connections with Liturgical, Apocryphal and Irish Tradition//The Brendan Legend: Texts and Versions/Ed. G. S. Burgess, C. Strijbosch. |
| 303 P. Britton, J. A. Henderson, O. Neugebauer, and A. J. Sachs, “Saros Cycle Dates and Related Babylonian Astronomical Texts,” in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 81:6 (1991), pp. 175. The Saros cycle texts published are those designated LBAT 1422, 1423, 1424, 1425, and 1428 in Sachs catalogue. As these texts belong to a separate small group of theoretical texts, none of them are used in the present study. (See J. M. Steele in H. Hunger, ADT V, (2001), p. 390.) 304 of LBAT 1418 is not included here, as this is one of the theoretical texts “referred to in note 41 above. It contains no royal names, just year’ numbers. (Royal names are usually mentioned only with a ruler’s first year.) Still, as pointed out by Professor Hermann Hunger, “the records of lunar eclipses are detailed enough that they can be dated.” The preserved part of the text gives years and months of lunar eclipse possibilities at 18year intervals from 647 to 574 B.C.E. The eclipses dated in the text at 18year intervals to years “2”, “20”, “16”, and “13”, for example, correspond to eclipses in years “2” and “20” of Kandalanu (646/45 and 628/27 B.C.E.), year “16” of Nabopolassar (610/09), and year “13” of Nebuchadnezzar (592/91). Thus LBAT 1418 strongly supports the chronology established for the reigns of these kings. –A transliteration and translation of this tablet is published by Hunger, ADT V (2001), pp. 88, 89. 305 Assyrian king Sennacherib also, for two periods, was the actual ruler of Babylonia, the first time for two years (dated to 704703 B.C.E.), and the second time for eight years (dated to 688681 B.C.E.). Our text evidently refers to the second period. 306 note 15 above.) In a later letter (dated June 26, 1990) Hunger adds: “The technical expression if the observer waits for an eclipse and finds that it does not occur is “not seen when watched for’.” 308 B.C.AD. 3000 (Richmond, Virginia: WillmanBell, Inc., 1992), p. 66, No. 2010. As demonstrated in Dr. J. M. Steele’s detailed study of the Babylonian lunar eclipses, the accuracy of Babylonian timings of observed eclipses was within about half an hour as compared to modem calculations, while the accuracy of the timings of predicted eclipses usually was about an hour and half. It should be noted that before about 570 B.C.E. the Babylonians also rounded off their timings to the nearest 510 USH (2040 minutes). Although rough, these timings are close enough for the eclipses to be identified. (See John M. Steele, Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers, Dordrecht, etc: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000, pp. 57 75, 231235.) For further comments on the identification of ancient lunar eclipses, see the Appendix for chapter four: “Some comments on ancient lunar eclipses”. |
| Trad. allemandë Neues Licht auf die Kirche. – Jean le Théologien et son Evangile dans l’Eglise ancienne, Paris 1959. BULTMANN R. Theologie des Neuen Testaments, Tübingen 1948. 2 Lief., 1951. CABROL F. «Fermentum et sancta», dans Dict. d’Archeologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, t. V, 1371–74. CADBURY H.J. «The Hellinist», In «The Beginnings of Christianity», vol. V, London 1933. CAMELOT P.-Th. Foi et Gnosë Introduction a l’étude de la connaissance mystique chez Clement d’Alexaridrie, Paris 1945. – Ignace d’Antlochie. Lettres (SCH 10), Paris 1951. – Sur la Théologie de la Confirmation, dans «Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Théologiques», 38 (1954), 637–57. CAMPENHAUSEN H. v. Kirchliehes Amt und geistliche Vollmacht in den ersten dril Jahrhunderten, Tubingen 1953. CASPAR E. Die älteste römische Bischofsliste, in «Schriften der Königsberger Gelehrter Gesellschaft» geisteswissensch. Klasse, 24, Berlin 1926. – Geschichte des Papstums, B. I, Tubingen 1930. CERFAUX L. La théologie de l’Eglise selon Saint Paul, Paris 1948. – Le Christ dans la Théologie de Saint Paul, Paris 1951. – Pour l’histoire du Titre «Apostolos» dans le N.T. R.Sc.R. 48 (1960) 1–2. CHIRAT H. L’assemblée chrétienne a l’âge apostolique (Lex Orandi 10), Paris 1949. CUILMANN O. Christ et le Temps, Neuchâtel-Paris 1947. – Le Baptême des enfants et in doctrine biblique du Baptême, Neuchâtel-Paris 1948. – Konigsherrschaft Christi und Kirche im Neuen Testament, Zurich 1950. – Saint Pierre, disciple, apotre, martyr. Neuchâtel-Paris 1952. DABIN P. Le sacerdoce royal des fidèles dans les Livres Saints, Paris 1941. – Le sacerdoce royal des fidèles dans la tradition ancienne et moderne, Bruxelles-Parls 1950. DANIELOU J. Origène, Paris 1948. DAVIES W.D. Paul and rabbinic judaism, London 1948. DENZINGER H. Ritus orientalium, Würzburg 1862. DINKLER E. Jesu Worte vom Kreutztragen. Neutest. Studien für R. Bultmann. Berlin 1954. DIX Gregory. The ministry in the early church, In « The Apostolic Ministry» Essays on the History and the Doctrine of Episcopacy. |
| 1990j ’Foreword’ in John Saward, The Mysteries of March: Hans Urs Von Balthasar on the Incarnation and Easter , London: HarperCollins Book Reviews 1990k Review of Hubertus R Drobner, Person-Exegese und Christologie bei Augustinus: Zur Herkunft der Formel Una Persona , Philosophia Patrum 8, Leiden: E J Brill, 1986, Journal of Theological Studies ns 41.1 (April), pp.264-266 1991 Books 1991a Teresa of Avila , Outstanding Christian thinkers, London: Geoffrey Chapman/Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse; re-issued London/New York: Continuum, 2000 Books (edited and translated) 1991b (tr. with Brian McNeil, Andrew Louth, John Saward and Oliver Davies) Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Glory of the Lord: A Theological Aesthetics , vol.5: The Realm of Metaphysics in the Modern Age , Edinburgh: T&T Clark/San Francisco: Ignatius Articles and Lectures 1991c ’The Filioque and the Immanent Trinity: Some Notes’, paper presented at the International Commission of the Anglican/Orthodox Theological Dialogue, Oxford 1991 1991d ’Imagining the Kingdom: Some Questions for Anglican Worship Today’, in Kenneth Stevenson and Bryan Spinks (eds) The Identity of Anglican Worship , Harrisburg, Penn: Morehouse Pub, pp.1-13 1991e ’“Know Thyself”: What Kind of an Injunction?’, paper delivered at Royal Institute of Philosophy Conference, Liverpool; printed in Michael McGhee (ed.) Philosophy, Religion and the Spiritual Life , Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 32, Cambridge: CUP, 1992, pp.211-227 1991f ’Teaching the Truth’, presented at Affirming Theology conference; reprinted in Jeffrey John (ed.) Living Tradition: Affirming Catholicism in the Anglican Church , London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1992, pp.29-43 1991g ’Theological Integrity’, New Blackfriars 72 (March), pp.140-51; adapted in Cross Currents 45.3 (Fall 1995), pp.312-325; reprinted in On Christian Theology , pp.3-15 1991h Review article on Peter Winch, Simone Weil: The Just Balance , Cambridge: CUP, 1989, Philosophical Investigations 14.2 (April), pp.155-171 Dictionary and Encyclopedia Entries |
| Эти постройки были раскопаны в 1927-1934 гг., тогда их обозначили как конюшни. В наст. время это утверждение подвергнуто сомнению (Дж. Б. Притчард, З. Херцог и др.), в качестве возможных вариантов предложены хранилища, рыночные площади или казармы (Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. N. Y., 1992. Vol. 1. P. 476-478). Несколько в стороне от Тель-Мегиддо, недалеко от перекрестка путей, в 2005 г. археологами была раскрыта т. н. тюремная церковь (руководитель Й. Теппер, Тель-Авивский ун-т). Построена она была уже на территории древнего г. Легио. Здесь обнаружена обширная мозаика на христ. сюжеты. На основе стилистических и эпиграфических особенностей она отнесена к III в. по Р. Х.: мозаика включала надпись по-гречески («Боголюбивый Акептус воздвиг престол в память Господа Иисуса Христа»), в силу чего может считаться древнейшей христ. мозаикой, а сама церковь - первой известной «домус экклесия» со столь статусной декорацией (среди надписей донаторов есть, напр., текст рим. офицера Гаиана). Но в опубликованных материалах нет сведений о том, что здание было церковным уже в момент его постройки. Делать выводы о существовании столь ранних памятников христ. живописи только на основе стиля рискованно, следует дождаться итоговой публикации материалов с градуировкой строительных периодов, при к-рой, возможно, обнаружится постройка рим. времени, использовавшаяся после 314 г. как церковная. Лит.: Kempinski A. Megiddo: A City-State and Royal Centre in North Israel. Münch., 1989; Ussishkin D. Jezreel, Samaria and Megiddo: Royal Centres of Omri and Ahab//Congress Volume: Cambridge, 1995. Leiden, 1997. P. 351-364; idem. The Destruction of Megiddo at the End of the Late Bronze Age and its Historical Significance//Mediterranean Peoples in Transition: 13th to Early 10th Cent. BCE/Ed. S. Gitin, A. Mazar, E. Stern. Jerus., 1998. P. 197-219; idem. The Sacred Area of Early Bronze Megiddo: History and Interpretation//BASOR. 2015. Vol. 373. P. 69-104; Мерперт Н. Я. Очерки археологии библейских стран. |
| In examining this point, we have nothing to do with profane chronology, or the chronology of the historians. The Bible must settle the question, and if profane chronology does not tally with it, we have a right to conclude such chronology is false, and not to be trusted. 332 Storrs, like some other expositors before and after him, tried to cut off nearly 100 years from the Persian period, holding that a number of the Persian kings mentioned in “Ptolemy’s canon” (the Royal Canon) and other historical sources never existed! George Storrs surely was an honest and sincere Christian Bible student, but his (and others’) rejection of historical sources proved to be a grave mistake. 333 That the Persian kings mentioned in the Royal Canon really did exist has been proved beyond all doubt by archeological discoveries in modern times. 334 illustration of the necessity of considering the historical evidence in relation to biblical time prophecies. Although this special application of the seventy weeks seemed very biblical and very convincing, it has been refuted by historical facts and therefore cannot be correct. The same is also true of the application of the seventyyear prophecy made by the Watch Tower Society. Although on the surface it may seem to be supported by some passages in the Bible, it should be abandoned because it is incompatible with historical facts established by a multitude of modern discoveries. Is it possible, then, to find an application of the seventy years that accords with the historical evidence? It is, and a close examination of biblical texts dealing with the seventy years will demonstrate that there is no real conflict between the Bible and secular history in this matter. As will be shown below, it is the application made by the Watch Tower Society that conflicts, not only with secular history, but also with the Bible itself. There are seven scriptural texts referring to a period of seventy years which the Watch Tower Society applies to one and the same period: Jeremiah 25:10 be examined one by one in chronological order. 335 A. Jeremiah 25:10 |
| 18:31). This underlines the primary responsibility of the leaders of Jesus,» and John " s audiencés, own people. The greatest irony, however, is the claim that the law demands Jesus» execution for claiming to be God " s Son (19:7) when in fact the rest of the Gospel demonstrates that Jesus provided ample evidence that he was God " s Son (10:34–38) and that the law supported his claims against theirs (e.g., 5:45–47). 3A. «Behold the Man» (19:4–5) Whether or not one accepts a proposed chiastic structure for this section, 9998 these two presentations of Jesus by Pilate to «the Jews» are closely parallel, with Pilate offering titles for Jesus and with «the Jews» responding (19:4–7, 13–16; cf. 18:39). 9999 Some suggest that «man» (19:5) is a messianic title; 10000 the late Samaritan text Memar Marqah applies the title frequently to Moses, the Samaritan messianic prototype. 10001 But the title is too rare for us to infer that it was probably known both to John and to his audience; «man» was also an occasional euphemism for «God,» 10002 but it is unlikely that John alludes to that usage here. Nevertheless, in the context of the soldiers» mockery (19:2–3), «Behold the man!» probably parallels 19and functions as a mock royal acclamation; Jesus stands before them in royal apparel (not explicitly removed as in Mark 15:20 ), and Pilate mocks the ceremony of acclamation (acclamatio). 10003 S Some sources use «That is he!» as an acclamation; 10004 here John may well expect the more biblically literate members of his audience to recall Samuel " s acclamation of Israel " s first king with identical words: «ιδο νθρωπος» (1Sam 9LXX). 10005 In the final analysis, however, John is less interested in the mocking significance of Pilatés title in his tradition than in Jesus» opponents speaking unwitting and ironic truth. Thus, in the context of the Fourth Gospel, the title «man» epitomizes Jesus» enfleshment: 10006 Jesus revealed God " s glory in his mortality, especially in the ultimate expression of that mortality, his death (see comment on 1:14). |
| The “Chalkites” as epithet appeared in the 13 th –14 th centuries – namely mosaics, frescoes, coins and lead seals. This material evidence supports the conclusions drawn from the written sources. The image of Christ “Chalkites” from the Chora Monastery in Constantinople (early 14 th century) was not mentioned in the written sources. It is displayed in the narthex to the right of the main entrance. Almost identically the image of Christ “Chalkites” is located in the Boyana Monastery in Bulgaria (1258), which confirms the tradition to place the “Chalkites” image quite close to the naos entrance. The meaning of both compositions is the pious prayer to the miraculous image of Christ as the surest way to Salvation. One may notice special royal connotations of this imagery. The coins of the Nicean emperor John III Vatatzes (1222–1254) reveal variations in the iconographic type of Christ “Chalkites”, which never occurred in other monuments. The late Byzantine sources concerning the history of the “Chalkites” icon of Christ suggest that the revered prototype had been substituted by its replicas, which assume thereupon the tradition of both public and church worship of the holy relic. It appears quite possible that the true Chalki icon, then still available, and its replicas merged in a single indistinguishable image, embodying the ancient tradition of the icon restored by the Empress Theodora – a symbol of victory over iconoclasm. We have no idea about the appearance of the icons of Christ “Chalkites”, known from the written sources. So, it is not possible to study their iconography as well as their relation the original type of “Chalkites” Christ in Chalki. The above mentioned example of John Ill’s coins clearly shows that even the images with the same epithet belong to different iconographic variants, changing in every particular case. In this context the visual characteristics look secondary in comparison with the tradition of historical memory, connecting all replicas to the highly worshipped prototype. Morover, the Byzantine religious mentality made, in fact, no difference between the actual prototype and its replicas. The forms of their veneration preserved the symbolic message of the “Chalkites” cult as that of the confessor-image, guarantor and voucher of the royal word as well as the keeper of piety and orthodoxy of the emperors. Jane Garnett and Gervase Rosser |
| The Watch Tower Society’s Bible dictionary Insight on the Scriptures, for instance, states that the figures at Jeremiah 52:2830 certain rank, or to those who were family heads.” 466 Dictionary holds that “the difference in figures is doubtless due to different categories of captives being envisaged.” 467 of those deported, and some commentators also suggest that not all deportations are mentioned in the text. 468 At least the deportation in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar described by Daniel is not mentioned by Jeremiah – which does not prove that it did not take place. The reason why it is not included among the deportations enumerated in Jeremiah 52:28–30 of Jews chosen from among “the royal offspring and of the nobles” with the intention of using them as servants at the royal palace. ( Daniel 1:34 The important thing is that Daniel, independently of Berossus, mentions this deportation in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar. Against the clear statements of both Daniel and Berossus, the Watch Tower Society refers to the Jewish historian Josephus, who claims that, in the year of the batde of Carchemish (during Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year), Nebuchadnezzar conquered all of SyriaPalestine “excepting Judea.” 469 publication argues that this conflicts with the claim that the 70year servitude began in that accession year Josephus wrote this more than 600 years after Daniel and almost 400 years after Berossus. Even if he were right, this would not contradict the conclusion that the servitude of the nations surrounding Judah began in the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar. Jeremiah’s prophecy clearly applies the servitude, not to the Jews, but to “these nations” (Jeremiah 25:11 that is, the nations surrounding Judah. (See Chapter 5 above, section A1.) In fact, Josephus even supports the conclusion that these nations became subservient to Nebuchadnezzar in his accession year, as he states that the king of Babylon at that time “took all Syria, as far as Pelusium, excepting Judea.” Pelusium lay on the border of Egypt. |
| E. The Later Anglo-Saxon Period. However, in one of the most astonishing reversals in Christian history, King Alfred, inspired by a vision from St. Cuthbert, emerged from his hiding place, defeated the Danish «Great Army» and baptised their king. Then, almost single-handedly, he proceeded to resurrect English Orthodox Christianity and statehood, even translating church books from Latin into English and sending them to his bishops. In the tenth century the English recovery continued under Alfred " s successors, until, by the 970s, the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom, uniting Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Danish populations, emerged as probably the most powerful and civilized country in Western Europe. However, in 979 the young King Edward «the Martyr» was killed, marking the beginning of the end of Anglo-Saxon England. The Vikings invaded again, and in 1016 they conquered the whole country while the English Royal Family went into exile in France. However, the Danish King Canute, who ruled Denmark and Norway as well as England, was converted to the faith of his new subjects, and did not hinder the conversion of Scandinavia by English missionaries. Finally, in 1042, the last descendant of the old English royal line, St. Edward «the Confessor», returned from exile and was anointed king. During his reign, in 1052, the English Church was excommunicated by the Pope of Rome, who was then himself excommunicated by the Great Church of Constantinople in 1054. In January, 1066, King Edward died, having prophesied the fall of Orthodox England. Almost immediately, the Viking Duke William of Normandy laid claim to the throne. When the English people rejected his claim and elected King Edward " s brother-in-law Harold instead, William appealed to the Pope, who blessed him to invade «schismatic» England and its unlawful king. On October 14, in a desperate battle that lasted all day, the Normans defeated the English at Hastings and killed King Harold. In January, 1067 William was crowned in London as the first Catholic king of England, and proceeded to destroy English Orthodox civilization to its foundations, killing perhaps twenty percent of the population – the first genocide in European history. Most of the English aristocracy fled to Constantinople, where the Emperor Alexis gave them a basilica in which to worship and enrolled them in his army. Harold " s daughter, Gytha, fled to Kiev, where she married Great Prince Vladimir Monomakh& |
|
|
