| 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 Cross and Our Little Worlds For the Orthodox this is the fourth week of Great Lent. The Veneration of the Cross. Three weeks of the fast are already behind us. Protodeacon Andrei Kuraev 20 March 2012 For the Orthodox this is the fourth week of Great Lent. The Veneration of the Cross. Three weeks of the fast are already behind us. Those who fasted to fit in with others have already dropped out and returned to their sausages. Those who have remained “standing fast” have occasion to give themselves a good grade: I am not as other men are [Luke 18:11]. And here, before our deep sense of satisfaction at our personal righteousness, is suddenly placed the Cross. Memory of the inconveniences we have borne on our Lenten journey is annihilated before the memory of the anguish of the Cross. The Cross is a stop-sign, an obstacle. It is above all a sign that your personal path to your chosen destination (salvation, self-perfection, purification) is hopeless. For on the Cross is He Who in Middle-earth is called Iluvatar, in Narnia is called Aslan, and in the Greek text of the Symbol of Faith is called the Poet. That is, the Maker. If such help is being sent from such a source, it means that my ascent has been illusory and that a world of catastrophe has been constructed around me, not without my efforts. Christianity is a severe religion. The Cross is the primary act of the God in Whom Christians believe. And within this act of His there is simultaneously inconceivable help and an inconceivably severe diagnosis for us. When help is provided in such overwhelming measure it is no longer called help, but salvation. People need to be “saved” when the threat has increased to a debilitating measure. Christianity, while exalting man (“you are not dust,” “for us men, and for our salvation,” “God Himself became like you”) simultaneously abases him (“forget about self-perfection and self-salvation, you soteriological sad sack”). Put aside the success of yogis, devotees, and interpreters. Ritual-social “law made nothing perfect,” says the first Christian who was ever a very advanced “interpreter” (Pharisee) [Hebrews 7:19]. Having contemplated the Cross, this same Paul now regards all his past achievements, successes, and advantages as “dung” (Philippians 3:8). |
| 3512 Greeks spoke of gods unrecognized among mortals and Jewish texts speak similarly of angels; 3513 John " s motif of the hidden Messiah and the Markan motif of the Messianic Secret may also be relevant, as is Q tradition about Jesus» rejection (Matt 8:20; Luke 9:58). Most relevantly, however, wisdom tradition specifically remarked on the rejection of Wisdom on the earth. 3514 Jewish Torah tradition likewise stressed that God offered his Torah–his Word– to all nations; but the nations rejected it because they wished to continue in their sins. Finally, however, Israel came and accepted Torah. 3515 Some later rabbis contended that because only Israel received Torah, only Israel was freed from the sin nature infused in Eve through her intercourse with the serpent. 3516 The nations would be judged for not practicing Torah; 3517 lest they protest that they had not received Torah, God gave all humanity seven basic commandments in the time of Noah, and Gentiles would be judged for their disobedience to them. 3518 3. His Own Received Him Not (1) John declares that the Jewish people as a whole did not embrace Jesus any more than the Gentiles did; «his own» could refer in some texts to possessions (16:32; 19:27), but here refers to his people (cf. 10:3–4, 12). 3519 This verse introduces the inadequate response of most of ethnic Israel to Jesus (hostile among the leaders, divided among the people) that became a theological problem for parts of early Christianity ( Rom 3:3; 11:1, 11 ). It also provides the transition to speaking of the remnant of Israel and the Gentiles who would become proselytes to it or, in Pauline language, be grafted into it ( John 1:12–13 ; cf. Rom 11:17, 24 ). Here John " s message conflicts with Jewish tradition, which emphasized that after the seventy nations had rejected Torah, Israel alone embraced it; 3520 Israel alone was suitable to receive it. 3521 Jewish traditions of various dates emphasized the difference between Israel and the nations in the exodus event in other respects as wel1. |
| Естественность хода таковой мысли напрасно будет оспариваться. Перед взором современного сомнения восстают эти факты гипнотических исцелений, которые закрывают навсегда всякие логические погрешности приведенной альтернативы. Св.евангелисты поэтому для нас в высокой степени поучительны. Они – свидетели того, как люди верили чудесам Иисуса Христа, как весь Иерусалим содрогался от этого дивного, неслыханного проявления Всемогущества исключительной силы Божией. Но они – свидетели и того, как те же чудеса, те самые чудеса, которые были лучом света, брошенным тысячам самых разнообразных душевных состояний – веры–неверия, те же самые чудеса возбуждали и чувства жителей земли Гадаринской, просивших Христа «отойти от них» ( Лк.8:37 ), как и возмущенные этими же чудесами враги говорили: «за Ним идет весь мир» ( Ин.12:19 ) – и все же делали заключение: «так пусть лучше один умрет, нежели весь народ погибнет» ( Ин.11:50 ). Вот почему разбираемое здесь замечание евангелиста Иоанна представляется нам замечанием чрезвычайной важности, ибо объясняет, почему евангелисты записали лишь немногое из того, что сотворил Иисус: того во всей полноте не вместил бы и весь мир ( Ин.21:25 ). «Кто не поверит сказанному (небольшому из всего) – тот не поверит и большему» (Ioannes Chrysostomus, ibid., col.474; рус. пер., с.593), – вот что говорит им апостольский опыт. «Из многих тысяч чудес взяты эти, как могущие в достаточной мере полную пользу принести слушателям» (Cyrillus Alexandrinus. In Iohannis Evangelium, lib.XII. Migne. P.s.gr., t.74, col.756; рус. пер., т.15, с.303–304). При такой своей количественной ограниченности евангельские сообщения о чудесах имеют целью дать типические факты всемогущей исключительной силы их Совершителя. 1546 Ср. J.Knabenbauer. Comm. in Evangelium Marcum, p.98. Ср. еще Vocabularium etymologicum linguae latinae. Лат.–русский словарь, с.454; И.Я.Кронеберг, Лат.-русский лексикон, с.353. 1548 Этот термин, обозначая, прежде всего, бичевание физическое, употребляется именно в этом физическом, первоначальном для себя смысле – в Деян.22:25 , у такого новозаветного писателя, как евангелист Лука. Метафорическое значение этого термина есть вторичное (ср. W.Hobart, The Medical Language of St.Luke, p.12). |
| After examining Josephus " s three mentions of «Sanhedrin» and five of βουλ (Josephus War 2.331, 336; 5.142–144, 532; Ant. 20.11, 200–201, 216–217; Life 62), Brown concludes that Josephus " s portrait of the Sanhedrin is quite close to that of the Gospels and Acts. They judge, consist of «chief priests, scribes, and rulers or influential citizens (=elders),» sentence those found guilty of crimes, and constitute the leading Jewish body with which Roman rulers would dea1. Clearly they «played a major administrative and judicial role in Jewish self-governance in Judea.» 9580 Betrayal and Arrest (18:1–11) Although the temple police had earlier refused to arrest Jesus, recognizing that no one had ever spoken like him (7:45–46), one of his own disciples now aids in his arrest. The tradition of the betrayal is certainly historical but, in the context of the whole Gospel, strikes a note of Johannine irony: after building a flat portrait of the Judean elite that is almost entirely negative (excepting the secret believers and sympathizers among them), John now reminds his audience that the most severe betrayals may come from those once considered disciples. The emphatic warnings against apostasy in the Fourth Gospel (e.g., 8:30–32, 59; 15:6) suggest that it was a genuine threat to his audience (cf. 1 John 2:19 ). 1. The Setting and Betrayer (18:1–2) If Jesus and his disciples feasted in upper-city Jerusalem, they may have taken a staircase that descends from the Temple Mount to the Kidron Valley (18:1); 9581 despite some changes in the terrain, the Kidron Valley remains known 9582 and might have been known to older members of John " s audience who had emigrated from Judea or who had made pilgrimage before the templés destruction. The Kidron flowed only in the rainy winter season (hence χειμρρου here) 9583 and so would not have been hard to cross at Passover in Apri1. An allusion to David " s withdrawal from Jerusalem in the time of opposition and betrayal (cf. 2Sam 15:23 ) is also possiblé 9584 though–given the topography around Jerusalem, to begin with–not necessarily clear. 9585 If an allusion is intended, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Jesus himself offered it by choosing the site; the earliest Gospel writers may not have recognized (and hence would not have invented) the allusion to the site ( Mark 14:26 ), but it is possible that Jesus also did not (cf. Luke 22:39; John 18:2 ). |
| Third, Turner argues that the Paraclete is a substitute or replacement for Jesus» presence (14:16–17) yet Jesus continues appearing to the disciples after 20(20:26–29; 21:1). Again, I would respond that this weights the meaning of replacement too heavily; after all, the Spirit also replaces Jesus» presence in Acts (Acts 1:8–11), but this does not preclude a very rare subsequent resurrection appearance (Acts 9:3–4). We might expect overlap even more in John, for whom the cross and exaltation are theologically a single event, than for Luke, whose scheme of salvation history is more chronologica1. Turner adds here that no empowerment of the disciples convinces Thomas. But Thomas, like Nathanael and the Samaritans, «comes and sees» (1:46; 4:29; cf. 1:39)–now, however, in the midst of the community. Fourth, Turner points out that the disciples remain behind locked doors in 20and still do not understand in 21:15–17, and argues that these experiences appear too anti-climactic to fulfill the glorious promises of John 14–16 . In my opinion, this is a stronger argument, pointing at least to a strand of dissonance in John " s narrative, created by the historical experience of a later Pentecost that his narrative must stop before recounting. It does not, however, negate the fact that in this short encounter (20:19–23) nearly every promise associated with the Spirit " s coming appears at least proleptically. 10655 Part of the conflict between views here may be semantic: are we speaking of the historical events behind John " s Gospel or of the theological points he is emphasizing by the arrangement of the elements in his narrative? Some of Turner " s observations may suggest legitimate complexities or incongruities in John " s language. These in turn may suggest that John is aware of a subsequent Pentecost event and lays emphasis on an earlier event that also provided an encounter with the Spirit. 10656 On the level of Johannine theology, however, this event ties together diverse elements of Jesus» promise of the Spirit, fulfilling a function theologically analogous to Pentecost in Acts: the promised Spirit has come, so the church must live in the empowerment provided. (Even in Acts, on the theological level, the gift of the Spirit is of a piece with Jesus» resurrection and exaltation; as in Acts 2:32–33 [even though they are chronologically distinct; Acts 1:3–5].) |
| But third-century miracle narratives are much more complete than early miracle accounts in Herodotus, Livy, or Plutarch, suggesting that later pagan propagandists actually developed their accounts according to the increasingly popular Christian parallels. 2206 Thus parallels between first-century Christian stories of Jesus raising the dead and third-century accounts of first-century Apollonius of Tyana doing the same may tell us more about Christian influence on paganism in late antiquity than about the reverse. 2207 Perhaps more to the point, some pre-Christian Jewish parallels, especially those in the OT, likewise parallel the miracle forms used in the Gospels. 2208 It is intrinsically more likely that even the most hellenized of Gospel writers, Luke, would have looked for his primary model of Jesus» miracles in the LXX, whose contents and style he knew thoroughly, than in inscriptions at a healing shrine or in reports of magicians or polytheistic miracle workers, from whom he would have preferred to dissociate his protagonists (cf. Acts 8:9–24; 13:6–12; 19:13–20). 2C. Jewish Parallels to Gospel Miracles Jewish people recognized that God was ultimately the healer, 2209 and sought his help in prayers. 2210 Opinions differed on the role that physicians played in healing; a popular ancient sage declared that God " s word rather than medicaments heals, 2211 but the school of the second-century R. Ishmael held that God could work through physicians. 2212 Medical help was normally sought only secondarily, 2213 and one who was ill should pray for God " s healing. 2214 Given the mixing of magic with scientific elements in Jewish folk medicine, 2215 this may have been an especially good idea. Jewish magicians became common in the Diaspora, 2216 especially through their supposed access to the secret name of God 2217 (secret names were considered powerful in magic). 2218 Although the rabbis were officially opposed to magic, 2219 magical practices infiltrated even rabbinic circles. 2220 By and large, however, the teachers of the Law who addressed signs emphasized miracles wrought by God for the pious, eschewing what could be considered magic. |
| God, one more time, since the fall of Adam and Eve, foretold about the Mother of God that she will be that “woman”—a virgin who shall through her Son crush the head of the snake (Gen 3:15). Later, it was prophesied about her that it will be the virgin who will be the intercessor for the entry to the world of the Savior Jesus Christ (Jeremiah 31:2-23), and to her the Archangel Gabriel came to honor and called her full of grace and blessed among women and Mother of my Lord (Luke 1:40-45), and blessed are her womb and breasts for they held and fed the Savior of the world, Christ (Luke 11:27-28). The Savior, as her Son, obeyed her and submitted to her (Luke 2:51). The first miracle the Savior performed was at the wedding in Cana of Galilee through her supplication (John 2:3-10), the Savior took care of her even then when He suffered excruciating pain on the Cross, trusting to His most beloved of Apostles the care of His Mother, and she herself through the Holy Spirit prophesied that all generations would call her blessed and sing in glory that God made her worthy due to her humility (Luke 1:48-49). The same name of the Mother of God in the Hebrew language is translated as " Lady Virgin. " This Lady and Virgin Queen will sit to the right of the throne of her Son on the day of the Second Coming (Ps 45:9). She conceived and gave birth by the Holy Spirit to the Son of God (Luke 1:35), having been overshadowed by the power of the Almighty and remained virgin even after giving birth (Ezekiel 44:13). She is more honorable than the Cherubim and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim, having no other children but only Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world. The mother of the so called " brothers " of the Lord is not the Theotokos but Mary Klopa (Matt 27:55-56; Mark 15:40-47; John 19:25) while the " brothers " of the Lord are just relatives and not His natural brothers, for in the early years for Hebrews close relatives were called " brothers " (Gen 13:8). The mother of the brothers of the Lord, Mary Klopa, is called sister of the Mother of the Lord, according to the meaning of close relatives (John 19:25, etc.). |
| Mark also believes Jesus is deity: his reapplication of the «Lord» of Isa 40to Jesus ( Mark 1:3 ) can be understood in no other way. The Fourth Gospel " s independent tradition might even suggest that the Baptist used this verse to describe his own mission as preparing the Lord " s way. Mark does not challenge what had become the standard Christian reading of Ps 110which Jesus cites in Mark 12:36 ; indeed, the proximity of another Scripture exegesis in his narrative may indicate that Mark intends readers to connect this «Lord» with the one Lord of the Shema in Mark 12:29 . 2631 The tradition about Jesus being David " s «Lord» 2632 rather than his «son» 2633 (despite the early Christian conviction that Jesus was David " s descendant), 2634 and his use of Psalm 110 , almost certainly go back to Jesus. 2635 But other aspects of Christology are more critical to Mark " s portrayal of Jesus» mission. The exalted Lord who wrought miracles on earth now can work miraculously through the community (cf. Mark 3:14–15; 4:38–40; 6:4–13; 9:19,28–29 ). The Son of Man who suffered before his exaltation is the forerunner of the community of faith, his readers, now suffering great tribulation at the hands of hostile world rulers (cf. Dan 7:21–22, 25–27 ). Mark probably had other traditions available, and could have used some of those which emphasize Christ " s deity differently, but that was not Mark " s purpose. The closest he comes is the allusion in 6:48–50 to Job 9:8–11 ; the coincidence of rare images in a short space (God treading the waves and passing by) is so close that Mark surely intends an allusion to that passage here, 2636 and hence an allusion to Christ " s deity. 2637 Luke, writing Hellenistic historiography, presents Jesus more as a divine hero than as God in the flesh or an apocalyptic Son of Man. While not obliterating Markan emphases altogether, Luke may emphasize Christ " s deity less. Luke does not deny a view held in other early Christian circles–Peter " s sermon in Acts 2 builds on an identification of Jesus (cf. 2:38) as the Lord of Joel (Acts 2:21), 2638 thus baptism is offered «in Jesus» name.» 2639 Luke does not deny early Christian affirmation of Christ " s deity; he simply emphasizes what is most useful in his apologetic history. Luke thus provides the clearest evidence that different writers could stress different Christologies without opposing earlier Christologies in their sources. |
| Proof of the fact that this woman had just such thoughts when she confessed before the Lord and was healed, are contained in the Lord’s words: “Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace” (Luke 8:48). This was the only woman who was deemed worthy for the Lord to call her “daughter.” To others, the Lord said “O woman, great is thy faith” (Matthew 15:28). In two other instances, the Lord called women daughters, but differently: after healing the woman hunch-backed for eighteen years in the Temple, whom He called “daughter of Abraham” (Luke 13:16), and when He was being led to His crucifixion, He saw the women of Jerusalem weeping over Him, and he addressed them with the words “Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children” (Luke 23:26). This blessed woman earned the name of “daughter” from the Lord. In general, during the Lord’s time on earth, He called people “children” only in those instances when He drew back the curtain of His Divinity. And so, He told the man sick of the palsy “Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee” (Matthew 9:2), and then to the bewilderment of those within earshot, explained that He is the One who has the power to release sin, that is, God; He then called Zacchaeus “also a son of Abraham” after Zacchaeus had confessed his faith and his repentance (Luke 19:8); before His sufferings, speaking to His disciples about His Divinity, the Lord said “Little children! Yet a little while I am with you” (John 13:33). When the Lord, following His Resurrection, appeared to His disciples as God, He directly calls them His children: “Children, have ye any meat?” In this way, the Lord, calling the woman He healed “daughter,” shows that she indeed possessed the saving faith, for, as Holy Evangelist John the Theologian bears witness, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” (John 1:12). |
| IX. Wherefore we must purify ourselves first, and then approach this converse with the Pure; unless we would have the same experience as Israel, Exodus 34:30 who could not endure the glory of the face of Moses, and therefore asked for a veil; 2Corinthians 3:7 or else would feel and say with Manoah We are undone O wife, we have seen God, Judges 13:23 although it was God only in his fancy; or like Peter would send Jesus out of the boat, Luke 5:8 as being ourselves unworthy of such a visit; and when I say Peter, I am speaking of the man who walked upon the waves; Matthew 14:29 or like Paul would be stricken in eyes, Acts 9:3–8 as he was before he was cleansed from the guilt of his persecution, when he conversed with Him Whom he was persecuting– or rather with a short flash of That great Light; or like the Centurion Matthew 8:8 would seek for healing, but would not, through a praiseworthy fear, receive the Healer into his house. Let each one of us also speak so, as long as he is still uncleansed, and is a Centurion still, commanding many in wickedness, and serving in the army of Cæsar, the World-ruler of those who are being dragged down; I am not worthy that you should come under my roof. But when he shall have looked upon Jesus, though he be little of stature like Zaccheus Luke 19:3 of old, and climb up on the top of the sycamore tree by mortifying his members which are upon the earth, Colossians 3:5 and having risen above the body of humiliation, then he shall receive the Word, and it shall be said to him, This day is salvation come to this house. Luke 19:9 Then let him lay hold on the salvation, and bring forth fruit more perfectly, scattering and pouring forth rightly that which as a publican he wrongly gathered. X. For the same Word is on the one hand terrible through its nature to those who are unworthy, and on the other through its loving kindness can be received by those who are thus prepared, who have driven out the unclean and worldly spirit from their souls, and have swept and adorned their own souls by self-examination, and have not left them idle or without employment, so as again to be occupied with greater armament by the seven spirits of wickedness...the same number as are reckoned of virtue (for that which is hardest to fight against calls for the sternest efforts)...but besides fleeing from evil, practise virtue, making Christ entirely, or at any rate to the greatest extent possible, to dwell within them, so that the power of evil cannot meet with any empty place to fill it again with himself, and make the last state of that man worse than the first, by the greater energy of his assault, and the greater strength and impregnability of the fortress. |
|
|
