| 22 О структуре и характеристиках традиции Второзакония см.: Tarazi. Historical Traditions. P. 84–88. 27 Обсуждение аспекта передачи лидерства от одного пророка к другому через ruach-Yahweh можно также найти в: Weisman. The Personal Spirit. P. 225–231. 30 О библейских пророках как абсолютно уникальном явлении см.: Tarazi. Prophetic Traditions. P. 1. 31 Break. Spirit of Truth. P. 17. Здесь имеется в виду, что слова, которые изрекали пророки, являлись интерпретацией того, что им сообщалось свыше в форме видений или иных образов, воздействовавших на органы чувств. Поскольку эти образы приходили свыше, то пророкам даровалась и интуитивная способность их истолкования для окружающих людей. 40 Так, например, Jacob (Theology. P. 124) полагает, что Дух – это Бог в творении и спасающем действовании, a Kaiser (Isaiah 13–39. P. 331–336) говорит о присутствии Бога в дарах Святого Духа. Фома Аквинский утверждал присутствие Ипостаси Святого Духа в Его Дарах, см.: Summa Theologica, la, qq. 36–38. 41 Лжепророки понимали свою миссию как поддержку «национально-религиозных ожиданий спасения» в смысле традиции Второзакония, где истинными пророками назывались не свободные проводники воли Божией, но члены определенной институции. – Rad. Die falsche Propheten. P. 109–120. 43 Иоанн Брек замечает, что здесь речь идет не об индивидуальном восстании из мертвых, поэтому термин «воскрешение» не используется. Однако Православная церковь признает важность этого пророчества, и оно включается в богослужение утрени Великой Субботы как предзнаменование всеобщего воскрешения. – Там же. С. 38. 45 Некоторые толкователи отмечают, что благословение (LXX: τ ελογα) и означает собственно жизненную силу. – Westermann. Isaiah. P. 135. 47 В этом месте ruach предпочитают переводить как «ум» или «рассудок». -Whybray. The Heavenly Counsellor. P. 12, что соответствует и переводу LXX: νος. 48 Отрок в современной экзегезе представляется скорее сотериологической, мессианской, чем политической личностью. – North. The Suffering Servant. P. 217. |
| Согласно 7:25–26, Премудрость — дыхание силы Божией и чистое излияние славы Вседержителя и образ благости Его , Она — активная сила Божия в мироздании и в жизни человека. Для автора Премудрости Соломона Дух — это Дар Божий, данный Премудрости и всему человечеству 52 ; при этом атрибуты Премудрости происходят от Самого Духа. Другая тема, свойственная исключительно данной книге — это переход Премудрости из рода в род в святые души (Прем 7:27), то есть обновление пророческого дара в Израиле. И хотя Премудрость и персонифицирована, Она настолько ассимилируется с Личностью и действием Святого Духа, что становится Духом Премудрости (Прем 7:7). В переводе LXX для именования Духа Премудрости иногда используется классический греческий термин рпеата paide…aj (Прем 1:5), однако существенно измененный в иудейском контексте и имеющий отношение скорее к этическому аспекту учения, нежели к интеллектуальному. Дух Премудрости научает Божественным заповедям, которые являются центром его учительства. Содержание учения Премудрости, однако, не исчерпывается лишь Божественными заповедями, а включает также откровение воли Божией, синонимом которого является откровение истины ( » qeia ) 53 . Премудрость наставляет праведности, научая созерцать святые вещи в святости. Подобно Духу, Премудрость вселяется и обитает в душе человека как освящающая сила, которая ведет праведного по пути истины (см. Прем 6:14; 7:28; 8:9,16; 9:9). Следует отметить жизненно важную роль Премудрости для истории спасения народа Израилева, — роль, которая приписывалась ruach-Yahweh в более древних еврейских писаниях. Являясь защитником и путеводителем избранного народа, Премудрость живет среди этого народа, направляя его судьбу и поддерживая его завет с Богом. В последние два столетия перед Рождеством Христовым, как пишет отец Иоанн Брек, заметно развитие двух параллельных тенденций в учительной традиции 54 . Первая, представленная книгой Сирах , в основном соотносит Премудрость с Торой и служит основой для раввинистического учения. |
| First of all, however, my thanks go to the God of the Bible, who in the Old Testament from the time of Moses onwards carries the personal name Yahweh or Jehovah, but whom we in the New Testament meet and can approach as our heavenly Father, as this research has been done under constant prayer for his help and understanding. All honor goes to Him, since it is his Word of truth that has been the basis of this study. Although certain religious theories and interpretations were found to be untenable and had to be rejected, his prophetic Word was confirmed, over and over again, during the biblical and historical research connected with the subject under discussion. This faithstrengthening experience has been a real and lasting blessing to me. My hope is that the reader will be blessed in a similar way. Carl Olof Jonsson Goteborg, Sweden, 1982 Revised in 1998 and 2004 11 movement, Schroeder could have had in mind two nonWitness publications which attack the Society’s chronology: The Jehovah’s Witnesses and Prophetic Speculation, by Edmund C. Gross (Nutley, N. J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1972), and 1914 and Christ’s Second Coming by William MacCarty (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1975). 12 abandoning those interpretations founded upon it such as the idea that God’s kingdom was established in 1914 and that Christ’s “invisible presence” began in that year. Of Jehovah’s Witnesses who cannot embrace such views, The Watchtower of July 15, 1979, stated on page 13: “Lawless persons have even tried to penetrate the true Christian congregation, arguing that the ‘promised presence’ of our Lord is not in this day . . . Persons of this kind are included in Jesus’ warning recorded at Matthew 7:1523 sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. ... In that day I will confess to them: I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness.” Further, The Watchtower of August 1,1980, page 19, said: “Peter was also speaking of the danger of being led away’ by some within the Christian congregation who would become ‘ridiculers, ’ making light of the fulfillment of prophecies concerning Christ’s ‘presence’ and adopting a lawdefying attitude toward “the faithful and discreet slave,’ the Governing Body of the Christian congregation and the appointed elders” [Italics mine] See also paragraph 11 on the same page and paragraph 14 on page 20 of the same issue. |
| Удалось определить, когда фраза «тот день» соответствует концепту «День Яхве», а когда выражает иное понятие и событие. В тексте найдено 12 случаев применения выражения «тот день», из них 10 можно соотнести с рассматриваемым понятием (см.: ), а 2 обозначают аллюзию на составление Богом Завета с израильским народом после исхода его из Египетского рабства (см.: Иер.7:22, 31:32 ). Фраза «день отмщения», использованная Иеремией в пассаже 46:10, также может быть соотнесена с исследуемым понятием. Исследовав отрывки из пророка Иеремии, в которых употребляются близкие по значению к концепту Дня Господня выражения, следует отметить, что все они соответствуют характерным чертам темы пророчества о Дне Яхве и имеют параллельные места не только с допленными письменными пророками, но и даже с послепленными. Можно подметить большой диапазон значений изучаемого понятия. Во-первых, суд над богоизбранным народом. Во-вторых, судебный процесс над народами, совершившими приговор над Израилем. В-третьих, День Господень – это вмешательство Бога в ход истории, что провоцирует глобальные катастрофы со сверхъестественными природными катаклизмами, которые выражают апокалиптику, и суд над всем человечеством, открывающий эсхатологическую перспективу. Поэтому, возможно, восприятие понятия «День Господень» зависит от его использования и развития. Следовательно, можно предположить, что искать решение проблематики данного понятия через его генезис не уместно, так как пророки применяли исследуемый концепт в роли риторического приёма для решения конкретных ситуаций и, может быть, даже с использованием эсхатологических категорий. Список литературы 1 . Толкование Ветхозаветных книг: В 3 т. Т 3/Пер. с англ. И. Череватой. Коннектикут: Ашфорд, 1996. 2 . LaRocca-Pitts, М. A. The Day of Yahweh as Rhetorical Strategy among the Hebrew Prophets. Saarbrucken: VDM verlag, 2009. 364 s. Priest Igor Sysuev, postgraduate student Day of YHWH In The Book Of The Prophet Jeremiah Abstract: This article explores the subject of prophecy about the Day of Yhwh in the book of the prophet Jeremiah. |
| The firm stand on Christ " " s individuality as a man again raised the issue of the hypostatic union, for in Chalcedonian Christology the unique hypo-stasis or person of Christ is that of the Logos. Obviously, then, the notion of hypostasis cannot be identified with either the divine or the human characteristics; neither can it be identical with the idea of human consciousness. The hypostasis is the ultimate source of individual, personal existence, which, in Christ, is both divine and human. For Theodore, an image can be the image only of an hypostasis, for the image of a nature is inconceivable. 53 On the icons of Christ, the only proper inscription is that of the personal God «He who is,» the Greek equivalent of the sacred tetragrammaton YHWH (Yahweh) of the Old Testament, never such impersonal terms as «divinity» or «kingship» which belong to the Trinity as such and thus cannot be represented. 54 This principle, rigidly followed in classical Byzantine iconography, shows that the icon of Christ is for Theodore not only an image of «the man Jesus,» but also of the incarnate Logos. The meaning of the Christian Gospel lies precisely in the fact that the Logos assumed all the characteristics of a man, including describability, and His icon is a permanent witness of this fact. The humanity of Christ, which makes the icons possible, is a «new humanity,» having been fully restored to communion with God, deified in virtue of the communication of idioms, bearing fully again the image of God. This fact is m be reflected in iconography as a form of art: the artist thus receives a quasi-sacramental function. Theodore compares the Christian artist to God Himself, making man in His own image: «The fact that God made man in His image and likeness shows that iconography is a divine action.» 55 In the beginning God created man in His image. By making an icon of Christ the iconographer also makes an «image of God,» for this is what the deified humanity of Jesus truly is. By position, temperament, and style, Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (806–815), was the opposite of Theodore. He belongs to the series of Byzantine patriarchs, between Tarasius and Photius, who were elevated to the supreme ecclesiastical position after a successful civil career. As patriarch he followed a policy of oikonomia and suspended the canonical penalties previously imposed upon the priest Joseph who had performed the «adulterous» marriage of Constantine VI. This action brought him into violent conflict with Theodore and the monastic zealots. Later deposed by Leo V (in 815) for his defense of icons, he died in 828 after having composed a Refutation of the iconoclastic council of 815, three Antirrhetics, one Long Apology, and an interesting treatise Against Eusebius and Epiphanius, the main patristic references of the iconoclasts. |
| Byzantine theologians themselves were hesitant about the exact status of penance among the mysteria of the Church, and often listed it with either monastic tonsure or anointing of the sick. By the fifteenth century, however, private confession to a priest, followed by a prayer of remission, was a generally accepted practice among laymen, with confession to lay monks existing as an alternative in monasteries. This lack of clarity in both theology and practice has a positive implication: confession and penance were interpreted primarily as a form of spiritual healing. For sin itself in Eastern Christian anthropology is primarily a disease, «passion.» Without denying the Petrine privilege of the keys transmitted to all the bishops, or the apostolic power to remit sins, of which the Church is bearer, Byzantine theologians never succumbed to the temptation of reducing sin to the notion of a legal crime, which is to be sentenced, punished, or forgiven; yet they were aware that the sinner is primarily a prisoner of Satan and, as such, mortally sick. For this reason, confession and penance, at least ideally, preserved the character of liberation and healing rather than that of judgment; hence, the great variety of forms and practices, and the impossibility of confining them within static theological categories. 4. Marriage The Byzantine theological, liturgical, and canonical tradition unanimously stresses the absolute uniqueness of Christian marriage, and bases this emphasis upon the teaching of Ephesians 5. As a sacrament, or mysterion, marriage reflects the union between Christ and the Church, between Yahweh and Israel, and as such can be only onean eternal bond, which death itself does not destroy. In its sacramental nature, marriage transfigures and transcends both fleshly union and contractual legal association: human love is being projected into the eternal Kingdom of God. Only this basic understanding of Christian marriage can explain the fact that until the tenth century no second marriage, whether of those widowed or of those divorced, was blessed in church. Referring to the custom of «crowning» the bridal paira feature of the Byzantine rite of marriagea canon attributed to Nicephorus the Confessor (806–815) specifies: «Those who enter a second marriage are not crowned and are not admitted to receive the most pure mysteries for two years; those who enter a third marriage are excommunicated for five years.» 393 This text, which merely repeats the earlier prescriptions of the canons of Basil, 394 presupposes that second and third marriages of those widowed or divorced can be concluded as civil contracts only. Actually, since the marriage blessing was normally given at a Eucharist, where the bridal pair received communion, the required temporary excommunication excluded the Church " " s participation or blessing in cases when marriage was repeated. |
| 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 Despair of Elijah Source: No Other Foundation Archpriest Lawrence Farley 02 August 2022 The prophet Elijah (whose feast day is July 20/August 2) is perhaps best known for his final ascent to heaven in a chariot of fire. He is also famous for being fed by a raven, and also for the dramatic contest on Mount Carmel. This last event was arguably the pinnacle of his prophetic career. Elijah served God in very dark days. Israel had always carried on a foolish and fatal dalliance with pagan gods such as Baal (the Canaanite god of storm, rain, and fertility) ever since first arriving in the Promised Land, and the prophets had always rebuked this idolatry and called the people back to pure fidelity to Yahweh alone. But in the days of Elijah, this idolatrous attachment to Baal was not simply a widespread popular sin; it became established government policy. King Ahab, aided (and perhaps driven) by his queen Jezebel, a Sidonian who of course worshipped gods other than Yahweh, was determined to pursue of a policy of religious syncretism. Part of his motivation for this was political, for by enshrining Baal as the national god of Israel, he was thereby bringing his country into the international religious mainstream, which had economic benefits for all concerned. Ahab did not want to outlaw the worship of Yahweh. Yahweh could still be worshipped along with the other gods, though He would no longer be the dominant deity. What Ahab did outlaw was the pure Yahwism and the exclusive worship of Yahweh espoused and promoted by men such as Elijah, for Elijah was telling everyone that the King’s policy of syncretism and Baal worship was evil and should be resisted. Elijah roundly declared that worshipping any god other than Yahweh was sinful idolatry, a sin which would bring divine wrath upon the people—wrath promised by Yahweh in the Law should the people break His covenant and worship idols. One part of this wrath consisted of drought (Deuteronomy 28:23-24), and it was just this judgment that Elijah brought upon Israel in God’s name: “As Yahweh God of Israel lives, before whom I stand, there shall be neither dew nor rain these years, except by my word” (1 Kings 17:1). And so the drought began, and the people began to suffer and die. As far as King Ahab was concerned, Elijah was a traitor and a criminal, a troubler of Israel who afflicted the people and who deserved death (1 Kings 18:17). |
| The Baal worshippers didn’t give up. They worked themselves into a bloody frenzy (literally), cutting themselves with knives. They raved on with their prophetic invocations (the Hebrew word for “rave” and “prophesy” is the same word) until late afternoon, until they finally collapsed in exhaustion. Then it was Elijah’s turn. His demeanour was calm and confident, a studied contrast to the frenzy of the worshippers of Baal. He bid the people draw near, and took twelve stones to repair the altar of Yahweh, thereby calling the twelve tribes back to their ancestral allegiance. Then he dug a trench around the altar and asked the people to soak the offering with water, making it harder to ignite. They soaked the offering, and then (at Elijah’s word) soaked it again. And then again a third time. Then Elijah the prophet prayed a simple prayer, asking Yahweh to send fire from heaven and turn the people’s hearts back to Him. Immediately the fire of God fell from heaven, and consumed the offering and the wood under it and the stones and the dust and licked up the water filling and overflowing the trench. The people fell on their faces, crying “Yahweh! He is God! Yahweh! He is God!” Elijah commanded them to seize the idolatrous prophets of Baal and execute them for their apostasy even as the Law demanded. This contest should have decided the future policy and turned the tide back to the exclusive worship of Yahweh. Instead, it merely intensified royal fury, and Jezebel swore that she would have Elijah dead within twenty-four hours. Elijah, alone, friendless, and forsaken, fled for his life, departing from Mount Carmel in the north to Beer-sheba in the extreme south of the country. There he stopped and prayed that he might die. He had utterly failed: failed in his mission to turn Israel back to God, failed to stop the juggernaut of royal power, and more importantly, he had failed Yahweh Himself. He determined to head further south to Mount Horeb, the historic origin of Yahwism, and there to confess to Him his failure, and ask that he might die. |
| For faith to grow and become stronger, it must be used. Each person should live according to the measure of faith which he has, however small, weak and imperfect it might be. By acting according to one’s faith, trust in God and the certitude of God’s presence is given, and with the help of God many things which were never before imagined become possible. God ... One God, the Father Almighty… The fundamental faith of the Christian Church is in the one true and living God. “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one God; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might. And these words which I command you this day shall be placed upon your heart, and you shall teach them to your children, and you shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down and when you rise .?.?.” ( Deut 6.4–8 ). These words from the Law of Moses are quoted by Christ as the first and greatest commandment ( Mk 12.29 ). They follow upon the listing of the Ten Commandments which begin, “I am the Lord your God .?.?. you shall have no other gods besides me” ( Deut 5.6–7 ). The one Lord and God of Israel revealed to man the mystery of his name. And Moses said “.?.?. if they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And he said, “Say to the people of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” God also said to Moses, “Say to the people of Israel, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob has sent me to you: this is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations’” ( Ex 3.13–15 ). God’s name is Yahweh which means I AM WHO I AM; or I AM WHAT I AM; or I AM WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE; or simply I AM. He is the true and living God, the only God. He is faithful and true to his people. He reveals to them His divine and holy Word. He gives to them his divine and holy Spirit. He is called Adonai: the Lord; and his holy name of Yahweh is never mentioned by the people because of its awesome sacredness. Only the high priest, and only once a year, and only in the holy of holies of the Jerusalem Temple dared to utter the divine name of Yahweh. On all other occasions Yahweh is addressed as the Almighty Lord, as the Most High God, as the Lord God of Hosts. |
| First Timothy 2:12–14 is one of the texts most commonly cited in debates over women’s ordination: “I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, then Eve. And not Adam was deceived, but the woman being deceived fell into transgression.” Some inside and outside the Church regard this text as prime evidence that Christianity is inherently misogynistic. Even for Christians who take the text at face value, it seems a thin reed. What hath Adam to do with the pastoral ministry? Paul knows what he’s about. In Genesis 2, the human race starts out in God’s house, the garden-sanctuary of Eden. Nearly every feature indicates that the garden is a temple. Like other biblical sanctuaries, it’s oriented to the east. It’s a well-watered spot, a place of life-giving food, a sacred place where Yahweh is present to his creatures. After the fall, cherubim are stationed at the gate, anticipating the cherubic guardians of the tabernacle and temple. Later sanctuaries are reconstituted gardens; the garden is a proto-sanctuary. Adam is created first and commanded to “cultivate and keep” the garden—or, better, to “serve and guard” it. Both terms describe priestly ministry. Priests are guardians of holy places and household servants of the Great King of Israel, and Adam is the first of the line. Yahweh’s “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make a helper suitable for him” should be understood in this context. What Adam needs is not a friend, but a liturgical partner—a hearer and speaker to converse about the word of Yahweh, a singer to harmonize his praise, a respondent to his versicles, a table companion to break bread with him in the presence of God. Once Yahweh forms Eve, Adam is to guard and serve her too. He speaks Yahweh’s word to her and shares fruit from the tree of life. Paul says elsewhere that the woman is the glory of the man, and, in guarding Eve, Adam guards a bright radiance of glory. |
|
|
