| 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 Feasts Today the Russian Church Commemorates the Holy Fool-for Christ St. Xenia of St. Petersburg 06 February 2021 Frederica Matthewes-Green The Light of Epiphany 19 January 2021 Priest Luke A. Veronis Homily on the Circumcision of Our Lord Jesus Christ 14 January 2021 Protopresbyter George D. Konstantopoulos Paradise is Open Again 08 January 2021 Archpriest Michael Gillis Paradise is open for all, yet why do I not enter? Good News of Great Joy For These Difficult Times 07 January 2021 Priest Luke A. Veronis Christ is Born! Glorify Him! A blessed and joyous Christmas to all! Archbishop of Australia: The Son and Word of God is the Antidote to the Virus of Sorrow and Fear 24 December 2020 Archbishop Makarios of Australia Homily on St. Nicholas Day 19 December 2020 Archpriest Thaddaeus Hardenbrook Our Entrance into Holiness 04 December 2020 Fr. Gabriel Bilas What The Angels Can Teach Us 21 November 2020 Fr. Gabriel Bilas Today the Russian Church Commemorates the Kazan Icon of the Holy Theotokos 04 November 2020 pravmir_com_team Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 79 Next News 30 September His Holiness Patriarch Kirill Contracted the Coronavirus 4th Plenary Session between ROC and Coptic Church Held 29 September His Beatitude Metropolitan Tikhon Calls for Prayer for Those Facing Hurricanes Ian and Fiona 28 September Patriarch Kirill: The Church Prays for the Fraternal Strife to End as Soon as Possible Besides intellectual instruction, young people also need prayer, Patriarch Daniel says as new academic year begins 27 September The Synodal Residence in New York hosts the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Voluntary Blood Donation Takes Place in Churches in Serbia 26 September The work of the Church in society is quiet, but full of hope and love, says the Director of Lumina Publications 25 September Epistle of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia 23 September “The models par excellence are the great hesychast saints,” says Romanian Orthodox Bishop of Oradea Commentary All commentary Other media The Word of the Day How to Deal with Sin |
| 4766 Safrai, «Education,» 964–65. As a ruler (3:1), Nicodemus would not have to work during the day. 4767 E.g., Judg 6:27 ; 1Sam 28:8; 2 Kgs 25:4; Sophocles Ajax 47; Ant. 494; E1. 1493–1494; Euripides E1. 90; Iph. taur. 1025–1026; Livy 27.5.18; Ovid Metam. 7.192; Lucian Phalaris 1; Hermogenes Issues 50.14–16; Maximus of Tyre Or. 19.4; Gen. Rab. 74:7; Pesiq. Rab. 8:2. Even the Scrolls could use «night» and «darkness» literally at times (4Q299 frg. 5, lines 1–4). 4769 So also John Chrysostom Hom. Jo. 24 (on 2:23–3:4), though noting that Nicodemus acts more courageously in 7and 19:39. 4770 As often noted, e.g., Hoskyns, Gospel, 211; Ellis, World, 63; Barrett, John, 204–5; Ellis, Genius, 52–53; Brown, John, 1:130; Morris, John, 211. The symbolic use of «night» appears elsewhere in the Jesus tradition (Luke 22:53), but John " s light/darkness dualism draws from a broader base of imagery. 4772 Schnackenburg, John, 1:366, suggests that Nicodemus " s agenda behind his question is the desire for eternal life «which preoccupied all Jews.» Others did ask the question (e.g., b. Ber. 28b, bar.; cf. Luke 3:10; Acts 2:37; 16:30), but Schnackenburg overstates the case here. 4775 See Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.21.29–4.22.32; Quintilian 8.3.11–12; 9.3.66–67; Rowe, «Style,» 132; Anderson, Glossary, 93, 127; idem, Rhetorical Theory, 283–85; cf. Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, Grammar, §488. For clarifying word meanings normally, see Rhet. Alex. 25, 1435b. 19–22; for deliberate ambiguity and homonymy, see Anderson, Glossary, 81–82; for discussion of homonyms (words sharing the same name but a different «essence»), see, e.g., Porphyry Ar. Cat. 61.10–68.3. Cf. also συζυγα (Anderson, Glossary, 111) and ντανκλασις (ibid., 20). For an example, see τρυφν and τρφειν in Musonius Rufus 9, p. 70.28–31; or κρακας and κλακας in Diogenes Laertius 6.1.4. 4777 E.g., Book of the Dead spells 145–146; Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 382F-383A; Heraclitus Ep. 5; Frankfurter, Religion in Egypt, 261–62. The soul returns to its place of heavenly origin (e.g., Maximus of Tyre Or. 41.5; Menander Rhetor 2.9,414.21–23); this can be portrayed as divinization (2.9, 414.25–27). Some philosophers, including later Platonists, prepared for such ascents by «ascending» out of bodily attention into contemplation of the divine (e.g., Porphyry Marc. 6.103–108; 7.131–134; 10.180–183; 16.267–268; 26.415–416; cf. Col 3:1–2). |
| The two disciples are thus paradigmatic for disciples in John " s day. When the disciples ask where Jesus «dwells,» they are allowed to stay with him and learn as disciples; 4198 Johannine believers can dwell in Jesus» presence and learn from him continually (14:23,26). 4199 Just as the model disciples in the narrative «come and see» where Jesus «abides,» and then began to «abide» with him, so other disciples who follow Jesus will «abide» or «dwell» with him where he is (cf. 14:2,6,23; 15:4–10); only those who continue as Jesus» disciples will truly be his disciples (8:31). 4200 Those who «come and see» are those who experience Jesus for themselves (1:46, 50), and disciples can repeat the invitation first offered by Jesus (1:46; 4:29). 2B. Testing Would-Be Disciples Not only did Jesus sometimes make it difficult for would-be disciples to follow him; sometimes he thrust them aside (Q material in Matt 8:19–22; Luke 9:57–62), especially if they held high worldly status ( Mark 10:21–22 ; Matt 19:21–22; Luke 18:22–23). 4201 In the same way, the Johannine Jesus is particularly hard on Nicodemus and the wealthy official of Antipas (3:3, 10; 4:48) and to a lesser extent on members of his family (2:4; 7:6–8)–on those who would be most likely to assume their right of access to him (contrast his inviting treatment toward the Samaritan woman). But Jesus probably thrust aside or made matters difficult for prospective disciples for the reason other ancient popular teachers did: to test the would-be student " s real willingness to become a learner, challenging a disciple to recognize the need to sacrifice. The sacrifice of following a traveling teacher like Jesus could be demanding. Although disciples usually studied with local teachers, remaining with their wives during study, this may not have always been the case, even in formal rabbinic schooling reported in second-century sources. 4202 An epideictic story of Rabbi Akiba, whether wholly or only partly apocryphal, reflects the views of this period: having returned home after years of study, he heard that his wife was willing to be apart from him for as many more years, for the sake of learning–whereupon he returned to his studies and came back to her at their completion with an abundance of disciples. 4203 Similarly (perhaps due to the transfer of the story from Akiba), R. Simeon ben Yohai and another rabbi were said to have left their families for thirteen years to study under Akiba. 4204 While these examples may represent patent exaggerations–Tannaitic law forbids leaving ones wife for more than thirty days to engage in Torah study 4205 –they may indicate that despite rulings of first-century schools prohibiting long-term abstinence, some Jewish men would go to study with famous teachers of the Law. 4206 It is at least clear that those who circulated these traditions about Akiba and his disciples viewed such sacrifice as laudatory. |
| 8678 Particularly Brown, summarized by Kysar, Evangelist, 128; Müller, «Parakletenvorstellung,» 57–60, both citing such relationships as Moses-Joshua (cf. also Glasson, Moses, 85); Woll, Conflict, 48, 79–80; Windisch, Spirit-Paraclete, 5. For the continuance of Jesus» work here, cf., e.g., Carson, Discourse, 50; Holwerda, Spirit, 26–27; Mielgo, «Presencia»; Gryglewicz, «Geist»; Martyn, History, 148; Bornkamm, «Paraklet,» 12; Isaacs, «Spirit,» 402–4; Hunt, «Paraclete,» 21. The presence of two paracletes in 14is difficult to miss and is generally recognized (e.g., Becker, Evangelium, 2:471); and Bacon, «Comforter,» 277 (cf. Windisch, Spirit-Paraclete, 22), remarks that the doctrine of heavenly and earthly paracletes is also found in Rom 8 . 8681 Mek. Pisha 1.150–153; cf. «Abot R. Nat. 1 A; »Abot R. Nat. 1, §2 B; the baratta in Pesiq. Rab. 51:2. Joshua appears as Moses " successor also in Sir 46 (διδοχος); T.Mos. 1:7; 10:15; and Elisha as Elijah " s apparently in Sir 48:12 . Some late sources imply diminution of authority (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:18). 8683 Foakes Jackson and Lake, «Evidence,» 182; Ehrhardt, Acts, 12–13; Goulder, Acts, 54, 61–62; cf. Gibert, «L " invention.» Tannehill, Luke, and idem, Acts, points out abundant connections between and within the works. Cf. similarly the martyrdom accounts of Acts 7 and Luke 23, and Mart. Po1. 6–8, 19, with Jesus» triumphal entry and execution. 8684 Brawley, Jews, 43; he cites a German work from 1841 that had already noted many of these parallels. 8685 E.g., Pericles and Fabius Maximus, Nicias and Crassus, Demosthenes and Cicero, Alexander and Caesar, etc. On his use of sources and compositional methods, see Pelling, «Plutarch " s Method.» Kee, Miracle, 190, also compares Lukés historiography to Greco-Roman practice on this point; cf. Aune, Environment, 119. 8686 Plutarch Sertorius 1.1. Greco-Roman historians examined parallels in history as signs of a divine plan (e.g., Appian R.H. 7.8.53; Plutarch Demosthenes 3.2); see further comments on 13:23–24. |
| 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 “If Anyone Comes to Me and Does not Hate His Father”: Are We Really Called to Hate? Source: Glory to God for All Things Archpriest Stephen Freeman 18 February 2019 Do you hate your father? Do you hate your mother? Christ says: “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26). Of course, any Christian with a modicum of understanding knows that such a verse is not to be taken literally. Christ does not mean that we should hate anyone. He certainly does mean that nothing, not even wife and children, should come between us and the Kingdom of God. In truth, we do not truly love our wives and children (and others) rightly if we love them in a manner that comes between us and the Kingdom. The verse is a parallel to Matt. 10:37: “He who loves father or mother more than Me than Me is not worthy of Me.” But the above represents a short, and obvious lesson in reading the Scriptures. A similar verse: your Father, He who is in heaven (Matt. 23:9). Despite the long-running attempts of certain Protestants to distort this verse – it has nothing to do with how priests are addressed or calling our earthly fathers, “father.” Some (in English) feel secure from the strictures of this verse when they call their earthly fathers, “Dad, or Daddy, Papa, etc.” as if Christ somehow only meant to forbid a certain word. The statement concerning our earthly fathers belongs to the same category of statement as the one in Luke 14. They are statements given to us in such an extreme form that their value lies in their ability to startle . The application of Matthew 23:9 to the title of priests distorts its meaning and perverts Christ’s intention. The only value remaining in such a twisted interpretation is its usefulness in insulting otherwise honorable persons. |
| The healed man responds with a heightened Christology as soon as the word makes a more adequate interpretation possible (9:38). Gentiles sometimes prostrated themselves before rulers, 7174 and Jewish people apparently often followed suit; 7175 even looking at another " s feet instead of another " s face showed respect for the other " s higher status. 7176 It could connote intense respect (e.g., Rev 3:9) or that one was begging or seeking mercy. 7177 Thus the term by itself need not indicate worship of a deity; but in its broader Johannine context (4:20–24; 12:20–21), including John " s Christology (1:1, 18; 20:28), it fits the Johannine portrait of Jesus» deity and invites John " s own audience to worship Jesus. 7178 2. Jesus Convicts the Pharisees (9:39–41) In 9:39–41 John epitomizes and makes more explicit the guiding irony that dominates the whole of ch. 9. 7179 John earlier affirms that Jesus did not come to judge the world (3:17; also 12:47); here (9:39) he claims that he came to bring about judgment (a characteristic messianic mission); the judgment here is to divide people into two groups, those who heed the light and those who reject it (also 3:19; cf. 1 John 2:11 ). One who presses far enough, however, will have the paradox resolved (12:44–49). John " s words about spiritual blindness develop his dualism of light and darkness (see comment on 1:4–5). Greek and Roman tradition could play on the irony of the spiritual sight of a blind seer like Tiresias; 7180 one Greek philosopher allegedly blinded himself physically to make his mental contemplations more accurate. 7181 But pagan sources more frequently viewed figurative blindness as a primarily intellectual than as a primarily moral fault, 7182 and the Jewish tradition provides much more abundant source material for John " s irony. 7183 Isaiah the prophet offered the standard text about spiritual blindness adopted by John (Isa 6:9–10 in John 12:40 ), but the image was common in the biblical prophets (Isa 29:9; 42:18–19; 56:10; Jer 5:21 ; Ezek 12:2 ), the Jesus tradition (cf. Matt 13:14–15; 15:14; 23:16; Mark 4:12; 8:17–18 ; Luke 8:10; perhaps Luke 4:18; cf. Acts 28:26–27), and appears in other early Jewish sources. 7184 John " s irony sometimes turns on convicting the leaders from their mouths, but sometimes on paradox from Jesus» own. 7185 |
| 7688 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 286. Some Pharisaic opposition remains likely; Paul was a Pharisee ( Phil 3:5 ) and persecuted Christians ( Phil 3:6 ), though he acted in connection with the high priest (Acts 9:1–2); but other Pharisees, perhaps especially Hillelites, were more consistent with their general stance of tolerance (Acts 5:34–35). 7690 His Jewish name was Joseph, but his cognomen was Caiaphas, perhaps meaning «inquisitor» (Stauffer, Jesus, 122). 7691 Winter, Trial, 39, doubts that Caiaphas was much involved with the tria1. But while Luke also knows of Caiaphas (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6), only Matthew and John (Matt 26:3, 57; John 18:13–14, 24,28 ) connect him with Jesus» trial, which strongly suggests (in view of John " s very likely independence from Matthew) independent traditions attesting Caiaphas " s role. On Annas and Caiaphas in John, see Brown, Death, 404–11. 7692 Stauffer, Jesus, 102. (Stauffer, p. 54, thinks that Caiaphas «held his peace» when Pilate introduced standards into Jerusalem; but Josephus Ant. 18.57–59 is unclear.) 7693 See the very debated, so-called Caiaphas family tomb (Riesner, «Familiengrab»; Reich, «Inscriptions»; idem, «Name»; Evans, «Caiaphas Ossuary»). Even if it did not belong to Caiaphas himself, it probably belonged to aristocratic priests (see Horbury, «Ossuaries») and so illustrates the point; for health advantages of Jerusalem " s upper class, cf. Zias, «Remains.» 7695 E.g., Case, Origins, 56; cf. Winter, Trial, 43. The aristocracy undoubtedly considered their method of silencing Jesus successful; Rome regarded Palestine as quiet during Tiberius " s reign I Judge, Pattern, 23, citing Tacitus Hist. 5.9). 7700 Mylonas, Eleusis, 230. Cf. also Caesar as Pontifex Maxim us, which appears in Greek as ρχιερες (P.Lond. 1912.14; Alexandria, 41 C.E.). 7702 Westcott, John, vi; Strachan, Gospel, 157; MacGregor, John, 256; Hoskyns, Gospel, 411; Lightfoot, Gospel, 230; Reicke, Era, 148 n. 17; Grundmann, «Decision,» 304; ÓDay, «John,» 697, with Origen. |
| 1073 Cf., e.g., ] Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, passim; in Greek oracles, see Aune, Prophecy, 51–52. Some philosophers also strove to make their teachings enigmatic to outsiders (Culpepper, School, 50, cf. 92). 1074 See Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 239; Haenchen, Acts, 559 n. 2; Yamauchi, Archaeology, 99–100; cf. Ramsay, Cities, 229–30. On public lectures in philosophical schools, cf., e.g., Aulus Gellius Attic Nights 1.26 (Stowers, «Diatribe,» 74); Malherbe, «Life» 35; Latourette, Expansion, 1:16. Early Christian congregations naturally appeared to many outsiders as philosophical schools or associations (Wilken, «Collegia,» 277; idem, «Christians,» 107–10; cf. idem, «Social Interpretation,» 444–48), and Paul may have been fulfilling this function even if the hall he was renting from Tyrannus was a guild hall (Malherbe, Aspects, 89–90). Some have seen even in Romans evidence of the teaching style he employed with students (Stowers, Diatribe, 183). 1075 Even in rhetorical schools, different disciples of a single teacher might exhibit widely diverging styles (Cicero Brutus 56.204). 1076 That authors adapted style to genre is commonly noted; e.g., Stowers, Diatribe, 69; cf. Cicero Yam. 9.21.1. 1077 Compare, e.g., Diogenes Laertius 3.8; Ps-Melissa Ep. (Letter to Kleareta in Malherbe, Exhortation, 82). 1078 This is an argument by analogy, not implying that later Christian perspectives should be read back into the NT documents (though this happens, as Brown, Community, 163, for instance notes, when the inclusion of John [Kysar " s «maverick gospel " ] in the same canon with the Synoptics provides interpretive boundaries for both). But the DSS indicate major variations of genre and perspective within the same community and perhaps from the same ultimate author (e.g., the community " s rules and hymns), which were not viewed as in conflict with one another (cf. Keck, «Ethos,» 448–49; cf. also the compatibility of rabbinic and apocalyptic piety in Sanders, Judaism, 8). 1081 Cf. also καθστημι in Acts 7:10; 17:15; perhaps λαμπρν in Luke 23:11; Acts 10:30. Similarly, ομοθυμαδν is common (ten times) in Acts, but never appears in Luke (and only once elsewhere in the NT). |
| Nicodemus, by contrast, had to be named because he recurs in 7and 19:39.) The contrast between Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman (as well as some other characters) would frustrate a normal ancient Jewish reader " s expectations (although John s own original audience already may be predisposed to suspect that the Judean elite is more hostile); in matters of ministry as well as Christology, one dare not judge by outward appearance (7:24). Because Nicodemus eventually believes (19:39), this text illustrates the wide spectrum of believers in Jesus. 5210 Other, more subtle narrative connections are also possible, like the comparison with Jesus» crucifixion scene, the epitome of his rejection by his own people in contrast to the positive Samaritan reception. 5211 1. Theological Themes in the Narrative Jesus crosses at least three significant barriers in the story: the socioethnic barrier of centuries of Jewish-Samaritan prejudice; the gender barrier; and a moral barrier imposed by this woman " s assumed behavior. The heart of the story appears in 4:23–24: the Father has been seeking true worshipers who will worship him in Spirit and truth, and that was why the Father sent Jesus (4:4) to this particular woman. Outward markers, which John " s religious contemporaries would contemplate, such as her gender, religious tradition and ethnicity, and past moral activity, prove irrelevant in revealing the sort of person God seeks to worship him. Indeed, whereas Jesus sought Philip (1:43), he did not seek out members of the religious elite; even open-minded Nicodemus had to come to Jesus (3:2); but Jesus went to great lengths and took serious risks to reach the Samaritan woman. 5212 All of these barriers appear individually in other Gospel traditions. Thus Jesus ministers to Samaritans in Luke (10:33; 17:16–19), 5213 and Gentiles appear at notorious points in Mark (7:26–29) and Q (Matt 8:5–13; Luke 7:1–10); the later church found these few traditions particularly usefu1. Still more clearly, women appear in prominent roles in the gospel tradition, 5214 with an undoubtedly historical core. 5215 Although later Christians like Paul seem to have moderated this emphasis for apologetic reasons, many of these traditions, distinctly progressive by ancient Mediterranean standards, remained. 5216 Jesus» banquets with sinners, as well as complaints of the pious against this practice, are also significant in the tradition and undoubtedly reflect a historical nucleus. 5217 Mark " s account of the Syro-Phoenician woman combines two of these issues, 5218 but John " s account of the sinful Samaritan woman underlines three of these issues latent in the Jesus tradition. |
| Рейтинг: 10 Голосов: 1325 Оценка: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 скрыть способы оплаты Смотри также Комментарии Игорь, Киев 23 января 2022, 10:27 Спаси Христос. Утешает, что есть еще священники, хотящие жить в единстве с Духом Божиим. Елена 23 января 2022, 03:18 Спасибо, дорогой батюшка!Божией помощи в трудах на благо паствы! Доброго здоровья Вам и всех благ на многая лета! Gary 22 января 2022, 06:36 An uplifting article. Church rules are important but the acquisition of God is the main thing. We don " t need to leave the main thing undone. Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42. Катерина 21 января 2022, 20:45 Статья понравилась. Такой ревностный пастырь и неуверенеых овечек зажжет своей верой. Спасибо. рБ Марина 21 января 2022, 15:50 СПАСИ ГОСПОДИ ОТЕЦ ВАЛЕРИЙ ОЛЬГА за статью!!!ПОМОЩИ БОЖИЕЙ ВАМ В СЛУЖЕНИИ И В ТРУДАХ!!! Алексей 21 января 2022, 13:06 Статья озаглавлена вот этим утвержднием священника: " Соблюдение правил – это ещё не воцерковление, если не иметь в душе мира, добра, любви " . К сожалению, мысль неверная. Воцерковление - это вход в Церковь и оно не может не дать человеку мир и любовь. Если воцерковление миру не помогло - виноват прежде всего священник. Не вдаваясь в обшие рассуждения лучше бы признать, что если перестаем соблюдать св.Каноны - Церковь рушится. Как это и произошло на Украине. Очень важно, например говорит св.Афанасий Ковровский, «воспитать пастыря и пасомых в духе церковности, в любви к Св. Церкви, послушании ей, смиренной покорности её св.Уставам». Извините, если обидел, но это так. Андрей-12 21 января 2022, 12:00 Очень актуальное и полезное интервью!Поход в храм,участие в таинствах -это только средства, главное- стяжание Святого Духа. " Даждь ми, сыне, твое сердце " (Притч.23:26)Надо очистить своё сердце, чтобы Господь мог в него войти- " Блаженны чистые сердцем, ибо они Бога узрят " (МФ.5:8).А как это сделать? Только молитвой- " непрестанно молитесь " 1Фес 5:17).Среди всех коротких молитв для постоянного повторения самая глубокая по смыслу и наиболее часто повторяемая на протяжении веков – это, конечно, Иисусова молитва: «Господи, Иисусе Христе, Сыне Божий, помилуй меня». «...все мы христиане имеем долг всегда пребывать в молитве» св.Григорий Палама. |
|
|
