I brought you not a shield but a sword. Blacksmith Konstantin about the meaning of Christ's words: "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword"

"and the sword (!) of the Spirit, which is the Word of God."
Epistle to the Ephesians of the Holy Apostle Paul, Chapter 6 verses 10-17

• Ilya Popov:
• 14:03 | 29.06.2011 |

• Vasily Ivanov-Ordynsky:
• 14:04 | 29.06.2011 |

*** I did not bring you peace, but a sword ***

The teaching of Christ makes a person reconsider his imaginary well-being, makes you think. And peace is lost...
A person begins to accompany every step in his life with the question: "Am I doing the right thing? Should a Christian do this?"

But, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

• Ilya Popov:
• 15:04 | 29.06.2011 |

Jesus Christ says in the Holy Gospel: "I did not come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword, for I came to divide a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother, and a daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law" (Matthew 10, 34-35). That is, the Lord came to earth to separate the peace-lover from the God-lover.

Now many people talk about the world, but all these talks are lies and deceit. How can there be peace on earth when there is no unanimity in faith? One is Orthodox, another is Catholic, the third is Lutheran, the fourth is a sectarian or atheist. Only the Lord alone can give true Divine peace. He said in the holy Gospel: "My peace I give you" (John 14:27). Whoever has this peace of God in his heart, who has Christ in his heart, for that there are no wars, no earthquakes, no fires, no disasters. Such a person is always good under all circumstances of life.

August 14, 1960
Archimandrite Alipy (Voronov)
http://www.pravoslavie.ru/put/030813121155.htm

• Artyom Bykov:
• 15:00 | 23.09.2011 |

yeah, there's a lot going on here...
afraid, hike =))

• Natalya Vikhareva:
• 15:00 | 23.09.2011 |

I really liked the explanation in #5. For some reason, I used to take these words too literally.

• Tatyana Balashova:
• 16:05 | 23.09.2011 |

Saint Nicholas of Serbia.
"On the meaning of Christ's words: "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword":
http://pravklin.ru/publ/8-1-0-411

• Maya Piskareva:
• 17:00 | 23.09.2011 |

That is, the Lord came to earth to divide the peace-lover from the God-lover.*******

it is strange how this phrase sounds ... either the monk said. For whom the world is an enemy ... or disagreement with that. that "peace to the world" ...))

• Galina Smirnova:
• 17:01 | 23.09.2011 |

Well, yes, it sounds cool.
A peace-loving person here is not a pacifist, but one to whom what is in the world is more important than God. To a greater or lesser extent, this is about all of us. "Do not love the world, nor what is in the world." Indeed, in the world there is the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life. I'm still amazed at how true this is. For all times and peoples...

• Maya Piskareva:
• 17:02 | 23.09.2011 |

and best said by Christ:
"Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up treasures for yourselves in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in and do not steal, for where your treasure is, there your heart will also be." (Matthew 6:20-21)

tell me... and here it is. that we are called laymen, what is this?

• Alexandra Nikolaeva:
• 18:01 | 23.09.2011 |

• Maya Piskareva:
• 19:02 | 23.09.2011 |

Why was the quote cut off? after all, the most important thing is to continue ...
"For everything that is in the world: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and pride...is not from the Father, but from this world. And the world is passing away, and its lust, but he who does the will of God abides forever."

otherwise, we can assume that in the world of God there is only lustful pride.

• Margarita Ivanova:
• 19:03 | 23.09.2011 |

***Catholics used this phrase in the Middle Ages as one of the reasons for the Crusades.***

If we exclude the plunder of Constantinople and other Christian lands from the crusades, then the crusades were aimed at a noble goal: the liberation of Christian lands occupied by Muslim invaders.

But, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".===

In the Catechism of the KC it is written that on earth - the church is militant, but with God - the church is triumphant. For Christianity more than once had to fight. So the word "sword" has a very real meaning. True, here a contradiction is easily seen with the fact that if you are slapped on one cheek, turn the other. This phrase is misunderstood by some as a call to non-resistance to evil.

• Galina Agapova:
• 19:04 | 23.09.2011 |

#5 Ilya, I completely agree with you. Jesus Christ came to separate those who are with God and those who are against God. This is the main principle according to which all mankind is divided into two parts. The sheep are on the right hand of Christ, and the goats are on the left.

• Alexandra Nikolaeva:
• 23:03 | 23.09.2011 |

#14 <а зачем обрезали цитату >But I know that you know...

• Vasily Ivanov-Ordynsky:
• 17:03 | 05.10.2011 |

I also agree with Ilya.

More precisely - with the words of Archimandrite Alipiy

• Natalia Zaitseva:
• 15:05 | 10.12.2011 |

Was looking for a topic suitable for my question.
I didn't find better than this one. In order not to open a new one, do not produce similar topics.
According to my observations, people who are harsh, ascetic, who love to teach others that one should "pray, fast and listen to the radio" Radonezh "(figuratively speaking) - these are people who are not very friendly and cordial to their neighbors.
Lately I've been thinking: well, how is this connected ...
Why does asceticism (not even the maximum, as in a monastery, but at least some kind of feat) make the soul more callous? (((

• Alexander Solovyov:
• 16:05 | 10.12.2011 |

"Why does asceticism (not even the maximum, as in a monastery, but at least some kind of feat) make the soul more callous? ((("
Probably because the ascetic building fell on an unsuitable foundation (foundation).

• Natalia Zaitseva:
• 16:05 | 10.12.2011 |

In itself, this is so.
But..
Maybe I'm inattentive, but here's how it happens on purpose, according to personal observations:
- who is "more relaxed" (in terms of fasting prayers and other feats) - he is kinder to his neighbor;
- who is more severe - he is more vicious. Well, what is it? Why is that?(((((
(Applies to both priests and laity.)
After all, asceticism is given in order for the soul to IMPROVE, and not become embittered ...

This famous saying of Christ, known to us from the Gospel of Matthew, can truly plunge a person discovering the New Testament for the first time into bewilderment and even indignation. After that, someone closes this Book, considering it gloomy and fanatical, someone tries to “slip through” phrases that confuse him, taking out from Scripture only what lies on the heart, which is convenient, someone uncritically accepts such phrases “on faith without trying to penetrate into their depths. We are living people. Any normal person, regardless of his confessional and religious affiliation, knows that the world is good and good, and the sword and war are evil, grief and suffering. Does it mean that the words of the Lord call for abandoning this conviction? What does the gospel call for violence?

Unfortunately, today some believers, especially those who take radical political positions, take this saying literally and believe that war is actually a good thing, that it is good for the spiritual state of the people, etc. Such frank cynicism, hiding behind piety , paving the way with countless quotations from saints, taken out of context, of course, has nothing to do with Christianity, is deeply heretical in essence and immoral. The New Testament is unequivocal in its complete denial of violence and hatred, without which it does not exist, which does not tolerate semitones and exceptions: “You heard what was said, love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I say to you: love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven, for He commands His sun to set on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.” (Matthew 5:43-45); “You heard what the ancients said: do not kill, whoever kills is subject to judgment. But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be judged in vain; whoever says to his brother: “cancer”, is subject to the Sanhedrin” (Matt. 5: 21-22).

But then we have an obvious contradiction. The cornerstone of Christianity is Revelation and the knowledge of God as absolute and infinite Love, which will never become scarce and will never stop pouring out on the world He created. That is why we perceive the words of the Savior so bewildered: “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34). But this bewilderment should not be afraid and run away from it, for it should make us read deeper and more thoughtfully into the gospel text. Let's try to do it.

First, we note that the interpretation of any text of Holy Scripture should, if possible, contain three essential components. First, no phrase can be taken out of context. We must read and comprehend it as part of one whole: a verse, a chapter, a book. Secondly, the context, in addition to the textual aspect, includes the historical one. This does not mean, however, that any person, when reading the Gospel or the epistles of the apostles, must necessarily resort to complex scientific biblical literature or learn ancient languages ​​in order to read these texts in the original, it is enough just to keep in mind the presence of a historical moment in Scripture. Such historicity also does not mean that certain phrases are relevant only for the past, and in the present they may not be taken seriously, because most of them, especially in the New Testament, are addressed to historical reality in its fundamental principle, which goes beyond the boundaries of specific eras. , that fundamental principle, thanks to which we can recognize ourselves in ancient people, in bygone times to discern the most acute and living modernity. And finally, the third component is theology. When we read this or that text of the Bible, we must see how God Himself is revealed in it. Here, both personal experience is present, for penetration into the Holy Scripture is a form of prayer, and the catholic experience of the Church, which is expressed, properly in dogma, but also in other types of theological creativity.

We will follow this path in understanding the saying of the Savior that interests us. What is its context?

Looking at the gospel as a whole, one can easily come to the conclusion that this Book is contrary to all our ordinary ideas about man, his hopes and happiness. Let us remember the commandments of blessedness. Whom does Christ call blessed? Poor in spirit, weeping, meek, exiled for the truth. Such people make up the salt of the earth, its meaning, deep content. How difficult it is to accept such a view of the world when you see the greatness of the earthly rulers, the glory of the gigantic projects that have been carried out in history. Nevertheless, the Truth of God from the very beginning leads us away from this deception. The basis of being lies not in the brilliance of worldly dominion, but in what at first glance seems so thin and fragile that it cannot withstand the slightest blow, but in reality turns out to be stronger than armor and destroys the arrogance of earthly magnificence.

But, although with great difficulty, a person can agree with such a view. After all, we all, one way or another, feel the terrible and destructive power of pride, its hatred, incinerating everything good and tender in the world. The barrier to accepting the words of the Lord is, perhaps, natural skepticism: this is good and right, but in reality pride and ambition will always prevail, for they help a person achieve results here and now, and the poor in spirit, weeping, exiled for the truth, being beautiful and saints, not one iota do not change this world, which is still in evil and violence - to live with wolves, howl like wolves - many people think so, but this is the philosophy of the Grand Inquisitor.

But what a shock comes when Christ questions even what a person considers to be the kindest, closest, tenderest. That for which he is ready to give his life, which really awakens in him nobility, courage, love: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword, for I came to divide a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother, and a daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law. And the enemies of a man are his household. Whoever loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who saves his soul will lose it; but he who loses his own for My sake will keep it” (Matt. 10:34-39). How can this be understood? Does it make any sense at all? Indeed, at first glance, these words deprive a person of a chance for the most minimal happiness on earth.

The Jews were waiting for the Anointed Messiah, who would establish an ideal earthly order. This order will be maintained by the justice of the divine law, there will be no poor, suffering, destitute, the kingdom of universal harmony will be established - a paradise on earth, based on the worship of the One God. Pain, anger, horror of the world will leave, giving way to goodness and love. Do not underestimate these aspirations of the Jews, they have suffered through centuries of terrible and difficult history of Israel. Nevertheless, the Kingdom of God was conceived by them, in the images and categories of earthly happiness. The coming of the Messiah, accordingly, was understood as the onset of an era of prosperity - social and spiritual stability.

First of all, Christ destroys precisely this stereotype. Not comfortable well-being promises His coming into this world, but separation, temptation, hatred for Him. Not a feast in the royal halls He can give His disciples, but martyrdom, the contempt of people, the arena of the Colosseum. The one who accepts Christ with all his heart is thrown out of the usual connections and relationships between people. The family suddenly becomes hostile to him, friends suspicious. A person cannot even trust himself to the end, because in the depths of his soul he knows that he can not withstand this burden: "It is impossible for people ...". But neither the family, nor everything that is considered right and moral in this world, can be an adequate "substitute" for Christ, for He is the beginning and end of everything, Lord of the Sabbath.

This is the textual and historical aspect of Christ's saying about the world and the sword. The division does not come from Him, but from the world, the habitual foundations of which are shaken at their very foundation. But here the theological meaning of these words begins to emerge clearly.

What do we hate in this life? That which is contrary to the will to it is the enemy. This enemy can be sin, both mine and the sins of the world as a whole, death, the will to destruction and self-destruction. This is the main criterion by which a person distinguishes good from evil, this is the foundation of ethics. The boundaries here are quite obvious: it is easy to distinguish the moral from the immoral. But Jesus puts them under a radical comparison. It turns out that not only ugliness, baseness should be hated, but everything that is associated with the most beautiful sublime.

The differences between good and evil are obvious to everyone, but they are felt only on the basis of the world, within the framework of earthly categories. When there is a movement into the plane of the Other, the Extraterrestrial, which is beyond the limits of the created, these differences become more shaky, transparent. Eventually, they may disappear altogether. Jesus is resisted not only by outright sin, but also by what is moral, pious. In the Gospel one can come across a huge number of episodes when hatred of Christ, resistance to His Will, is dressed up in the clothes of righteousness, following the law.

The Savior says: “Peace I leave you, My peace I give you” (John 14:27). But it turns out that this is God's World, in principle, cannot be reduced to any human ideas about it, to what people expect from God: "not as the world gives, I give to you." This new reality that comes with Christ is hidden from view: “Like the Kingdom of Heaven is a treasure hidden in a field, which, having found, a person hid, and for joy over it he goes, and sells everything that he has, and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls, who, having found one pearl of great value, went and sold everything he had and bought it” (Matthew 13:44-46).

Let's think about the meaning of this famous parable. A man is limited by his field: he cultivates it, builds a house, starts a family, lives righteously. All this is the key to his peace, self-sufficiency, stability. But suddenly a different reality breaks into such regularity: he discovers something that makes him radically reevaluate everything on which he based his whole life. To give everything accumulated by labor and sweat, for the sake of acquiring a new treasure.

The peace of God is opposed, first of all, to the illusion of earthly peace. The tragedy of the fall was in the will and desire of man for self-sufficiency, even at the cost of leaving God. Since then, the earthly world has been trying with all its might to prove to itself its strength, explainability, and predictability. Earthly happiness is attractive, it is passionately sought and awaited. But it is precisely this imaginary strength that Christ destroys. He challenges the world, which does not see how tormented he really is, what countless crimes he commits in his thirst for peace and well-being. In an effort to open a different reality to man, the Lord neglects the most familiar connections: true joy lies not in cultivating the field, but in following God, who deigned to give His little flock the Kingdom.

So, Christ calls to hate the world in its fallen and sinful state, which often strives to take on a good and moral image. An attempt by the earthly to protect itself from the words of the Lord, to prove its own significance and leads to the sword, to Golgotha, to the extermination of Christians, to fierce anger at them. This is how the saying of the Savior about the world and the sword can be briefly described. But how can we understand them practically? After all, we know about the sacrament of Christian marriage, about the great Christian culture, which does not at all neglect earthly beauty.

Let us ask ourselves the question: is it even possible to combine the possession of earthly happiness and the desire for the Kingdom of Heaven? It seems that the answer to this question is obvious and well known to us: the first and foremost thing for a Christian should be Christ, and then everything else. Someone is called to the monastic path and tries to reject worldly life, devoting himself entirely to God, someone serves God in marriage, also based on sacrificial and pure love. Here, earthly happiness is as if pierced by the Light of Christ, which removes it from the world of worldly conditioning. For the world, in its original essence, was created in order to be open to the Creator, and being with Him, it regains its true being.

But the path of possessing earthly things in a Christian way is monstrously difficult. “To have as not to have” (1 Cor. 7:29) can only be done by one who has inwardly given up the thirst for comfort. Regardless of status, social position, a Christian must always be aware that there is not a single place, thing, connection in the world that would be neutral from the standpoint of his striving for the Kingdom of Heaven. The danger for a person who follows Christ is not only in outright evil, it is also hidden in obvious good.

It is impossible to gain the peace of God without questioning and rethinking the values ​​by which the human world lives, because in the Divine understanding they may not be so obvious. The earthly good, therefore, must be fundamentally reconsidered by the Christian. To be with the gospel truth means to accept it with all your heart and mind, without semitones and exceptions. This is the feat of faith, its truly fundamental challenge to the earthly order of things.

One of the most profound German thinkers of the 20th century, Martin Heidegger, once wrote about how he understands the essence of philosophical creativity: a philosopher, he said, is someone who constantly goes beyond the usual way of thinking and reasoning, he is in some way on the other side of thinking, in an effort to comprehend being, hiding behind the existent. In this vein, one can say about the Christian, because he, too, being a part of this world, internally lives outside of it. The earthly, with its ideas of good and evil, moral and immoral, beautiful and ugly, is, as it were, transformed by Christ in order to find its true meaning, which lies only in God. He created this world for Himself, and only with Him and in Him does created being become truly beautiful, kind, radiating light and love.

Although many texts of the Old Testament have lost their relevance for Christianity and are perceived by the Holy Fathers as valuable sources for understanding the history of our salvation.

BUTsecond Artemy Safyan.

How is it that such a righteous and merciful person does not know the deep meaning of these words? I think you know, but you're only looking for confirmation. To the righteous and merciful, God Himself reveals mysteries by His Spirit. If you had been the only blacksmith in Jerusalem when the Jews were crucifying the Lord, there would have been no one to forge nails for them.

Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; not peace came I bring, but a sword(Matthew 10:34). So said the Lord. Read it like this: "I did not come to reconcile truth with falsehood, wisdom with stupidity, good with evil, truth with violence, bestiality with humanity, innocence with debauchery, God with mammon; no, I brought a sword to cut and separate one from the other so that there is no confusion."

What to cut, Lord? By the sword of truth or by the sword of the word of God, for they are one. The apostle Paul advises: Take the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God(Eph. 6:17). Saint John in Revelation saw the Son of Man Seated in the midst of the seven lampstands, and out of His mouth came a sword sharp on both sides(Rev. 1, 13, 16). The sword that comes out of the mouth - what else can there be but the word of God, the word of truth? This sword brought Jesus Christ to earth. This sword is saving for the light, not the world of good and evil. And now and forever, and forever and ever.

That this interpretation is correct is evident from the further words of Christ: I came to divide a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother, and a daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law(Matthew 10:35). And if the son follows Christ, and the father remains in the darkness of lies, the sword of the truth of Christ will divide them. Isn't truth dearer than a father? And if the daughter follows Christ, and the mother persists in not recognizing Christ, what can they have in common? Is not Christ sweeter than a mother? The same is true between daughter-in-law and mother-in-law.

But do not understand it in such a way that the one who knows and loves Christ must immediately separate himself bodily from his relatives. This is not said. It will be enough to be spiritually divided and not to receive into your soul anything from the thoughts and deeds of unbelievers. If believers were now to separate physically from unbelievers, two hostile camps would form. Who would then teach and correct unbelievers? The Lord Himself endured unfaithful Judas beside Himself for three whole years. Wise Paul writes: The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband(1 Corinthians 7:14).

Finally, I can tell you how Theophilus of Ohrid spiritually explains these words of Christ: “By father, mother and mother-in-law, you mean everything old, and by son and daughter everything is new. The Lord wants His new Divine commandments and teachings to overcome all our old sinful habits and customs." So, the words about the sword brought to earth fully correspond to Christ the Peacemaker and the Peacekeeper. He gives His heavenly peace as a kind of heavenly balm to those who sincerely believe in Him, but He did not come to reconcile the sons of light with the sons of darkness.

I bow to you and the children. Peace be upon you and God's blessing.

Reprinting on the Internet is allowed only if there is an active link to the site "".
Reprinting of site materials in printed publications (books, press) is allowed only if the source and author of the publication are indicated.

The Holy Church reads the Gospel of Matthew. Chapter 10, Art. 32 - 36; chapter 11, art. one

32. Therefore, whoever confesses Me before men, I will confess him also before My Father in heaven;

33. And whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him before my Father in heaven.

34. Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; not peace I came to bring, but a sword,

35. For I have come to divide a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother, and a daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law.

36. And the enemies of a man are his household.

11:1. And when Jesus finished teaching his twelve disciples, he went from there to teach and preach in their cities.

(Matthew 10:32-36; 11:1)

Today we hear the conclusion of the 10th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew, which we have been reading for almost a whole week - this is the instruction that the Lord gives His disciples before sending them to preach.

“Therefore, anyone who confesses Me before men, I will confess him also before My Father in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him before my Father in heaven.”. The Christian is always faced with a choice; it inevitably happens when we meet with Christ: accept Him in our lives or reject Him. The world is divided into those who accepted Christ and those who did not accept Him. Probably the most terrible situation is when we have to choose between Himself and our earthly attachments.

When we read in the Gospel about attitudes towards material or social issues, they are not that everything that concerns this world is bad or sinful. The principle is what our heart is riveted to. As the Lord says, "Where your heart is, there your treasure will be." If we direct it to heaven, this means that we are looking for treasure there, and no worldly connections and attachments will become an obstacle for us and will not prevent us from ascending to heaven. But there is always a choice.

What does it mean to "confess Christ before men"? It means not to hide, to be a real Christian, such as the Lord speaks of in Scripture. But this does not mean at all that we need to perform some supernatural deeds and incredible deeds. The Lord does not call us to do something overwhelming, but even the smallest deeds can bring us great benefits and give us hope and a chance to be in the Kingdom of Heaven. The Lord says: “Give cool water to a passing traveler and you will gain for yourself great wealth in heaven.” That is, our life is made up of the smallest things: these little “puzzles” form the whole picture of our life and what we ultimately go to.

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword, for I came to divide a man from his father, and a daughter from her mother, and a daughter-in-law from her mother-in-law ”. Words that are incomprehensible to us, because we said that the Christian religion unites people, but here it is said about separation. The Christian faith is a sermon about love, and love is unity, a sermon about the high moral qualities of the human heart: kindness, honor, conscience.

Why did the Romans hate Christians so much? It turns out that Christians bring this division into the world. The Roman Empire was huge and included different peoples and nationalities, but for the Romans it was not important who worshiped or another people. The main thing is to bow to the Roman emperor, but you can believe in whoever you want: "we will include your god in our pantheon." Such is the unity.

But a Christian does not want to worship the Roman emperor as a god, and then there is a division. It would seem that there is a common flow, common principles. Live like everyone else, why show your individuality? After all, then persecution, prohibition, everything that separates people begins. That is why the Romans hated Christians who did not want to put up with things that at first glance are simple, but behind which a completely different reality could be hidden. The Lord says: "I did not bring peace to earth, but a sword", and this sword really separates, separating sin from another state. We always have a choice, but only two ways: either go to God, to heaven, or in the opposite direction. There is no other way. “Let your word be yes-yes, no-no,” Christ said, “everything else is from the evil one.” In Christianity there are no halftones, no gray, there is only white and black. This gradation is objective, because everything that is outside of God, everything turns out to be fatal. "I came to bring the sword" - this sword separates us, and we must make a choice.

"Enemies of a man's household". The devil sometimes slyly acts through close and dear people. The most striking example is in the book of Job, when relatives and friends come to him, asking questions and putting crafty thoughts against God in Job's heart. Homemade can become real enemies for us. Here is a very serious and terrible choice - to follow Christ or to obey relatives and friends with whom we have close ties. Therefore, this moment is also very important for us.

“And when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went from there to teach and preach in their cities”. Now they were clothed with power - and the preaching of the apostles began. The Lord gave them power and warned them that this power was given to them not for war and not for fighting, but so that they would bring light to the world. And for this light they will have to suffer, and suffer as the Lord Himself did.

Priest Daniil Ryabinin

Transcription: Yulia Podzolova

Commentary on the book

Section comment

34 The teaching of Christ is much more conducive to establishing peace on earth than any other teaching that has appeared in the history of mankind. However, not everyone agrees to accept and fulfill it. Therefore, it becomes a source of contention and enmity even in the bosom of the family. The words "not the world, but the sword" also apply to public, state and international life.

35-37 These words do not mean that Christ desires separation, but He knows that it will occur due to the hardness of heart and callousness of people. Loyalty to the gospel goes beyond blood ties. "Enemies of man" - a saying from Micah 7:6.

38 In the mouth of Christ, "carrying the cross" means patiently enduring life's trials in union with Him.

39 "Soul" in this context means life. He who loses his life for Christ gains it in eternity.

1. The Evangelist Matthew (which means “gift of God”) was one of the Twelve Apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Luke (Lk 5:27) calls him Levi, and Mark (Mk 2:14) calls him Levi of Alpheus, i.e. son of Alpheus: it is known that some Jews had two names (for example, Joseph Barnabas or Joseph Caiaphas). Matthew was a tax collector (collector) at the Capernaum customs house, located on the coast of the Sea of ​​Galilee (Mk 2:13-14). Apparently, he was in the service not of the Romans, but of the tetrarch (ruler) of Galilee - Herod Antipas. Matthew's profession required knowledge of the Greek language from him. The future evangelist is depicted in Scripture as a sociable person: many friends gathered in his Capernaum house. This exhausts the data of the New Testament about the person whose name is in the title of the first Gospel. According to legend, after the Ascension of Jesus Christ, he preached the Good News to the Jews in Palestine.

2. Around the year 120, the disciple of the Apostle John Papias of Hierapolis testifies: “Matthew wrote down the sayings of the Lord (Logia Cyriacus) in Hebrew (Hebrew here should be understood as the Aramaic dialect), and he translated them as best he could” (Eusebius, Church History, III.39). The term Logia (and the corresponding Hebrew dibrei) means not only sayings, but also events. Papias' message repeats ca. 170 St. Irenaeus of Lyon, emphasizing that the evangelist wrote for Jewish Christians (Against Heresies. III.1.1.). The historian Eusebius (4th century) writes that “Matthew, having first preached to the Jews, and then, intending to go to others, expounded in the native language the Gospel, now known by his name” (Church History, III.24). According to most modern scholars, this Aramaic Gospel (Logia) appeared between the 40s and 50s. Probably, Matthew made the first notes when he accompanied the Lord.

The original Aramaic text of the Gospel of Matthew has been lost. We have only the Greek translation, apparently made between the 70s and 80s. Its antiquity is confirmed by the mention in the works of "Apostolic Men" (St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius the God-bearer, St. Polycarp). Historians believe that the Greek Ev. Matthew arose in Antioch, where, along with Jewish Christians, large groups of Gentile Christians first appeared.

3. Text Ev. from Matthew indicates that its author was a Palestinian Jew. He is well acquainted with the OT, with the geography, history and customs of his people. His Ev. closely related to the OT tradition: in particular, it constantly points to the fulfillment of prophecies in the life of the Lord.

Matthew speaks more often than others about the Church. He devotes considerable attention to the question of the conversion of the Gentiles. Of the prophets, Matthew quotes Isaiah the most (21 times). At the center of Matthew's theology is the concept of the Kingdom of God (which, in accordance with Jewish tradition, he usually calls the Kingdom of Heaven). It resides in heaven, and comes to this world in the person of the Messiah. The gospel of the Lord is the gospel of the mystery of the Kingdom (Matthew 13:11). It means the reign of God among people. In the beginning, the Kingdom is present in the world "in an inconspicuous way", and only at the end of time will its fullness be revealed. The coming of the Kingdom of God was foretold in the OT and realized in Jesus Christ as the Messiah. Therefore, Matthew often calls Him the Son of David (one of the messianic titles).

4. Plan MF: 1. Prologue. Birth and childhood of Christ (Mt 1-2); 2. Baptism of the Lord and the beginning of the sermon (Mt 3-4); 3. Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5-7); 4. Ministry of Christ in Galilee. Miracles. Those who accepted and rejected Him (Mt 8-18); 5. The road to Jerusalem (Mt 19-25); 6. Passion. Resurrection (Mt 26-28).

INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

The Holy Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which is said to have been written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not survived, the Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages ​​around the world are translations from the Greek original.

The Greek language in which the New Testament was written was no longer the classical Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. This is the colloquial everyday language of the first century A.D., spread in the Greco-Roman world and known in science under the name "κοινη", i.e. "common speech"; yet the style, and turns of speech, and way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal the Hebrew or Aramaic influence.

The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Until recent years, the most ancient of them did not go back beyond the 4th century no P.X. But lately, many fragments of ancient NT manuscripts on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd c) have been discovered. So, for example, Bodmer's manuscripts: Ev from John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and other languages ​​(Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the oldest existed already from the 2nd century AD.

Finally, numerous quotations from the Church Fathers in Greek and other languages ​​have been preserved in such quantity that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then specialists could restore this text from quotations from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and refine the text of the NT and to classify its various forms (the so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern - printed - Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. Both in the number of manuscripts, and in the shortness of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and in the number of translations, and in their antiquity, and in the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see "The Hidden Treasures and New Life, Archaeological Discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is fixed quite irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. They are subdivided by the publishers into 260 chapters of unequal length for the purpose of providing references and citations. The original text does not contain this division. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been attributed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugh (1263), who elaborated it in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with great reason that this division goes back to Stephen the Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him into his edition in 1551.

The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into law-positive (Four Gospels), historical (Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John the Evangelist (see the Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).

However, modern experts consider this distribution outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are law-positive, historical, and instructive, and there is prophecy not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament science pays great attention to the exact establishment of the chronology of the gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to follow with sufficient accuracy the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the original Church according to the New Testament (see Appendixes).

The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:

1) Three so-called Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationship of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (the synoptic problem).

2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul ("Corpus Paulinum"), which are usually divided into:

a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.

c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.

d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st to Timothy, to Titus, 2nd to Timothy.

e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Catholic Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum").

4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they single out "Corpus Joannicum", i.e. everything that ap Ying wrote for a comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).

FOUR GOSPEL

1. The word "gospel" (ευανγελιον) in Greek means "good news". This is how our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the "gospel" is inextricably linked with Him: it is the "good news" of salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.

Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the middle of the 1st century, this sermon had been fixed by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts by heart helped the Christians of the apostolic age to accurately preserve the unwritten First Gospel. After the 1950s, when eyewitnesses to Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one by one, the need arose to record the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, the “gospel” began to denote the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.

2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own gospels. Of these, only four (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called "from Matthew", "from Mark", etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set forth in these books by these four priests. Their gospels were not brought together in one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus of Lyon calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against Heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, composed of various texts of the four gospels, the Diatessaron, i.e. gospel of four.

3. The apostles did not set themselves the goal of creating a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses are always individual in color. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but the spiritual meaning contained in them.

The minor contradictions encountered in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the priests complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and direction of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

34 Parallel place near Luke Luke 12:51 where the same idea is expressed somewhat differently. The best explanation for this verse is the words of Chrysostom: How then did He Himself command them (the disciples), entering every house, to greet with peace? Why, likewise, did the angels sing: Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth? Why did all the prophets preach the same gospel? Because then, especially, peace is established when the infected with the disease is cut off, when the hostile is separated. Only in this way is it possible for the sky to unite with the earth. After all, the doctor then saves other parts of the body when he cuts off an incurable member from it; likewise, the military leader restores calm when he destroys by agreeing between the conspirators". Then Chrysostom says: unanimity is not always good; and the thieves agree. So, the scolding was not a consequence of Christ's determination, but a matter of the will of the people themselves. Christ Himself wanted all to be unanimous in the matter of piety; but as people divided among themselves, then there was a fight».

35-36 (Luke 12:52,53) Here an idea is expressed that was probably well known to the Jews, because the words of Christ are a quotation from Micah 7:6: “for the son dishonors the father, the daughter rebels against the mother, the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; A man's enemies are his household."

37 (Luke 14:26) Luke expressed the same idea, but much stronger. Instead of: “who loves more” - if someone “does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children,” etc. circumstances require, for example, when the closest relatives do not agree with His commandments, when love for them would require violation of these commandments. Or: love for Christ must be distinguished by such strength that love for father, mother, and others must seem hatred in comparison with love for Christ. It should be noted that these words are reminiscent of Deut 33:9, where Levi “speaks of his father and mother: I do not look at them, and do not recognize my brothers, and do not know my sons; for they, the Levites, keep your words and keep your covenant”; and Ex 32:26-29, which speaks of the massacre of the Israelites after the device of the golden calf, when each killed his brother, friend, neighbor. Thus, there is no shortage of examples in the Old Testament when the fulfillment of the commandments of the Lord required hatred and even murder of loved ones. But, of course, one cannot think that Christ, by His words, inspires any kind of hatred towards those close to us, and that this commandment of His is distinguished by some kind of callousness. In life, cases are not at all unknown when love, for example, for friends exceeds love for the closest relatives. The words of the Savior point to the divine and exalted self-consciousness of the Son of Man; and no one, in sound reasoning, can say that He required here anything beyond human strength, immoral or illegal.

38 (Mark 8:34 ; Luke 9:23 ; 14:26 ) The real meaning of this saying is quite clear. To follow Christ means first of all to take up the cross. Here, for the first time, there is a literal reference to the cross in the Gospel of Matthew. The Savior Himself already carried this cross in secret at that time. Cross-bearing by others is supposed to be voluntary. There is no need to take this expression literally. The cross refers to suffering in general. This expression is found in Matthew 16:24 .

39 (Mark 8:35 ; Luke 9:24) Lit. "whoever finds his soul..." "will find it." In addition to the indicated place, the saying in a slightly modified form is found in Matthew 16:25 ; Luke 9:24 ; 17:33 ; John 12:25 .

Gospel

The word "Gospel" (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in the classical Greek language was used to denote: a) the reward given to the messenger of joy (τῷ εὐαγγέλῳ), b) the sacrifice sacrificed on the occasion of receiving some kind of good news or a holiday made on the same occasion and c) the good news itself. In the New Testament, this expression means:

a) the good news that Christ accomplished the reconciliation of people with God and brought us the greatest blessings - mainly establishing the Kingdom of God on earth ( Matt. 4:23),

b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( 2 Cor. 4:4),

c) all New Testament or Christian teaching in general, primarily the narrative of events from the life of Christ, the most important ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), and then an explanation of the meaning of these events ( Rome. 1:16).

e) Finally, the word "Gospel" is sometimes used to refer to the very process of preaching the Christian doctrine ( Rome. 1:1).

Sometimes the designation and content of it is attached to the word "Gospel". There are, for example, phrases: the gospel of the kingdom ( Matt. 4:23), i.e. joyful tidings of the kingdom of God, the gospel of peace ( Eph. 6:15), i.e. about the world, the gospel of salvation ( Eph. 1:13), i.e. about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genitive following the word "Gospel" means the originator or source of the good news ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the identity of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).

For quite a long time, stories about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself left no record of His words and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts. 4:13), although they are literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time there were also very few "wise according to the flesh, strong" and "noble" ( 1 Cor. 1:26), and for the majority of believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. Thus the apostles and preachers or evangelists "transmitted" (παραδιδόναι) stories about the deeds and speeches of Christ, and the faithful "received" (παραλαμβάνειν), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said about the students of rabbinic schools, but whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition was to end. On the one hand, Christians must have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as you know, denied the reality of the miracles of Christ and even claimed that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have genuine stories about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or who were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of the miracles of Christ were thinning out. Therefore, it was necessary to fix in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His whole speeches, as well as the stories about Him of the apostles. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. Most carefully they wrote down the words of Christ, which contained the rules of the Christian life, and much more freely related to the transmission of various events from the life of Christ, retaining only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial notes did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the words and deeds of Christ. This is evident, among other things, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts. 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compose narratives about the life of Christ, but that they did not have the proper completeness and that therefore they did not give sufficient “confirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).

Evidently, our canonical gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined at about thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three Gospels are called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (forecasters - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called gospels each separately, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “The Gospel of Matthew”, “The Gospel of Mark”, etc., then these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “The Gospel according to Matthew”, “The Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this, the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.

four gospel

Thus the ancient Church looked upon the depiction of the life of Christ in our four gospels, not as different gospels or narratives, but as one gospel, one book in four forms. That is why in the Church the name of the Four Gospels was established behind our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them "the fourfold Gospel" (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hérésies, livre 3 ., vol. 29 11, 11).

The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why did the Church accept not one gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Is it really impossible for one evangelist to write everything that is needed. Of course, he could, but when four wrote, they did not write at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring among themselves, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be pronounced by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: "However, the opposite happened, for the four Gospels are often convicted in disagreement." This is the very sign of truth. For if the Gospels were exactly in agreement with each other in everything, even regarding the very words, then none of the enemies would believe that the Gospels were not written by ordinary mutual agreement. Now, a slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently about time or place does not in the least impair the truth of their narration. In the main thing, which is the foundation of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything and nowhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, ascended into heaven. ("Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew", 1).

Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the quaternary number of our Gospels. “Since there are four parts of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the earth and has its affirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for her to have four pillars, from everywhere emanating incorruption and reviving the human race. The all-arranging Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but imbued with one spirit. For David also, praying for His appearance, says: "Seated on the Cherubim, reveal Yourself" ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God. Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of the calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). In other Church Fathers, the symbols of the lion and calf are moved and the first is given to Mark, and the second to John. Starting from the 5th c. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to join the images of the four evangelists in church painting.

Reciprocity of the Gospels

Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as already mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even with a cursory reading of them. Let us first of all speak of the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the causes of this phenomenon.

Even Eusebius of Caesarea in his "canons" divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that all three forecasters have 111 of them. In recent times, exegetes have developed an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters goes up to 350. In Matthew, then, 350 verses are peculiar only to him, in Mark there are 68 such verses, in Luke - 541. The similarities are mainly seen in the transmission of the sayings of Christ, and the differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally converge in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. C. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages in all three evangelists go in the same sequence, for example, the temptation and speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears and the healing of the withered hand, the calming of the storm and the healing of the demoniac of Gadarene, etc. The similarity sometimes extends even to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the citation of the prophecy Mal. 3:1).

As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a few of them. Others are reported only by two evangelists, others even by one. So, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the story of the birth and the first years of Christ's life. One Luke speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Other things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as well as the expressions.

This phenomenon of similarity and difference in the synoptic gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been put forward to explain this fact. More correct is the opinion that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere with a sermon and repeated in different places in more or less extensive form what was considered necessary to offer those who entered the Church. In this way a well-known definite type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in writing in our synoptic gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his gospel took on some special features, only characteristic of his work. At the same time, one cannot rule out the possibility that an older gospel might have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. At the same time, the difference between synoptics should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.

As we have already said, the synoptic gospels are very different from the gospel of John the Theologian. Thus they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, while the apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In regard to content, the synoptic gospels also differ significantly from the gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ, and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the whole people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot of the activities of Christ, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but on the other hand, those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and extreme importance about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the synoptics depict Christ primarily as the founder of the Kingdom of God, and therefore direct their readers' attention to the Kingdom he founded, John draws our attention to the central point of this Kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the Kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John depicts as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John predominantly spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to synoptic ones, as depicting a predominantly human side in the person of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. bodily gospel.

However, it must be said that weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that, as weather forecasters, the activity of Christ in Judea was known ( Matt. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ, which testify to His divine dignity ( Matt. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the synoptics and John in the depiction of the face and deed of Christ.

Reliability of the Gospels

Although criticism has long been expressed against the authenticity of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have become especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not at all recognize the existence of Christ), however, all objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are shattered at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics. . Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only speak about the main general grounds on which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of the tradition of eyewitnesses, of whom many survived until the era when our Gospels appeared. Why should we refuse to trust these sources of our gospels? Could they have made up everything that is in our gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is incomprehensible why the Christian consciousness would want - so the mythical theory asserts - to crown the head of a simple rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and the Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he did not create them. And from this it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event in ancient history (see ch. 1 Cor. fifteen)?

Bibliography of Foreign Works on the Four Gospels

Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.

Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Göttingen, 1911.

Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.

B. Weiss - Wikiwand Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1901.

Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei alteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Göttingen, 1907.

Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.

Name De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.

Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.

Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.

Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Göttingen, 1867.

Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.

Lagrange M.-J. Études bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.

Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.

Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième evangile. Paris, 1903.

Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les evangeles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, pres Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.

Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.

Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Göttingen, 1864.

Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Göttingen, 1902.

Merckx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.

Merckx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.

Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Morison Matthew. London, 1902.

Stanton - Wikiwand Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluc (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.

Tolyuk (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.

Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).

Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tübingen, 1901.

Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.

Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.

Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.

Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.

Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.

Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt fur Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.

Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.

Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.

Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.

Alford - Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

39 The concept of the soul, in this and in some other cases, is almost equivalent to the concept of life.

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

The author of the first Gospel in the New Testament, Matthew, was a collector of taxes and duties in favor of the authorities of the Roman Empire. One day, as he was sitting in his usual tax collection area, he saw Jesus. This meeting completely changed the whole life of Matthew: from that time on he was always with Jesus. He walked with Him through the cities and villages of Palestine and was an eyewitness to most of the events that he tells about in his Gospel, written, as scholars believe, between 58 and 70 years. according to R.H.

In his narrative, Matthew often quotes the Old Testament to show readers that Jesus is the same Savior promised to the world, whose coming was already foretold in the Old Testament. The Evangelist presents Jesus as the Messiah, sent by God to build the Kingdom of Peace already on this earth. As the One who came from the Heavenly Father, Jesus can and does speak like God, with the consciousness of His divine authority. Matthew gives five great sermons, or speeches, of Jesus: 1) the Sermon on the Mount (ch. 5-7); 2) the commission given by Jesus to His disciples (ch. 10); 3) parables about the Kingdom of Heaven (ch. 13); 4) practical advice to students (ch. 18); 5) the judgment of the Pharisees and the prediction of what awaits the world in the future (ch. 23-25).

The third edition of the "New Testament and Psalter in Modern Russian Translation" was prepared for publication by the Institute for Bible Translation in Zaoksky at the suggestion of the Ukrainian Bible Society. Recognizing their responsibility for the accuracy of the translation and its literary merits, the staff of the Institute used the opportunity of a new edition of this Book in order to make clarifications and, where necessary, corrections to their previous long-term work. And although in this work it was necessary to keep the deadlines in mind, maximum efforts were made to achieve the task facing the Institute: to convey to the readers the sacred text, as far as possible in translation, carefully verified, without distortion or loss.

Both in previous editions and in the present, our team of translators has strived to preserve and continue the best that has been achieved by the efforts of the Bible Societies of the world in the translation of Holy Scripture. In an effort to make our translation accessible and understandable, however, we still resisted the temptation to use rude and vulgar words and phrases - the vocabulary that usually appears in times of social upheaval - revolutions and unrest. We tried to convey the Message of the Scriptures in common, settled words and in such expressions that would continue the good traditions of the old (now inaccessible) translations of the Bible into the native language of our compatriots.

In traditional Judaism and Christianity, the Bible is not only a historical document that should be preserved, not only a literary monument that can be admired and admired. This book was and remains a unique message about God's proposed resolution of human problems on earth, about the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, who opened the way for humanity into an unending life of peace, holiness, goodness and love. The news of this should sound to our contemporaries in words directly addressed to them, in a language that is simple and close to their perception. The translators of this edition of the New Testament and the Psalters have done their work with prayer and the hope that these sacred books in their translation will continue to support the spiritual life of readers of any age, helping them to understand the inspired Word and respond to it by faith.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

Almost two years have passed since the "New Testament in modern Russian translation" was published at the Mozhaisk printing plant by order of the Dialog Educational Foundation. This edition was prepared by the Bible Translation Institute in Zaoksky. It was received warmly and with approval by readers who love the Word of God, readers of various confessions. The translation was met with considerable interest by those who were just getting acquainted with the primary source of Christian doctrine, the most famous part of the Bible, the New Testament. Just a few months after the publication of The New Testament in Modern Russian Translation, the entire circulation was sold out, and orders for publication continued to arrive. Encouraged by this, the Institute for Bible Translation in Zaoksky, whose main goal was and remains to promote the familiarization of compatriots with the Holy Scriptures, began to prepare the second edition of this Book. Of course, at the same time, we could not help thinking that the translation of the New Testament prepared by the Institute, like any other translation of the Bible, needed to be checked and discussed with readers, and our preparations for a new edition began with this.

After the first edition, along with numerous positive reviews, the Institute received valuable constructive suggestions from attentive readers, including theologians and linguists, who prompted us to make the second edition as popular as possible, naturally, without compromising the accuracy of the translation. At the same time, we tried to solve such problems as: a thorough revision of the translation we had previously made; improvements, where necessary, of the stylistic plan and easy-to-read layout of the text. Therefore, in the new edition, in comparison with the previous one, there are significantly fewer footnotes (footnotes that had not so much practical as theoretical significance were removed). The previous letter designation of footnotes in the text is replaced by an asterisk to the word (expression) to which a note is given at the bottom of the page.

In this edition, in addition to the books of the New Testament, the Bible Translation Institute publishes its new translation of the Psalms - the very book of the Old Testament that our Lord Jesus Christ so loved to read and often referred to during His life on earth. Over the centuries, thousands and thousands of Christians, as well as Jews, considered the Psalter to be the heart of the Bible, finding for themselves in this Book a source of joy, consolation and spiritual enlightenment.

The translation of the Psalter is taken from the standard scholarly edition Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Stuttgart, 1990). A.V. took part in the preparation of the translation. Bolotnikov, I.V. Lobanov, M.V. Opiyar, O.V. Pavlova, S.A. Romashko, V.V. Sergeev.

The Institute for Bible Translation brings to the attention of the widest circle of readers "The New Testament and the Psalter in a modern Russian translation" with due humility and at the same time with the confidence that God still has new light and truth, ready to illuminate the reader of His holy words. We pray that, with the blessing of the Lord, this translation will serve as a means to that end.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION

Meeting with any new translation of the books of Holy Scripture gives rise to any serious reader a natural question about its necessity, justification and an equally natural desire to understand what can be expected from new translators. This circumstance dictates the following introductory lines.

The appearance of Christ in our world marked the beginning of a new era in the life of mankind. God entered history and established a deeply personal relationship with each of us, showing with obvious clarity that He is on our side and is doing everything possible to save us from evil and destruction. All this manifested itself in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. The world was given in Him the ultimate possible revelation of God about Himself and about man. This revelation is striking in its grandeur: He who was seen by people as a simple carpenter, who ended his days on a shameful cross, created the whole world. His life did not begin in Bethlehem. No, He is "He Who was, Who is, Who is to come." This is hard to imagine.

Yet all sorts of people steadily came to believe this. They were discovering that Jesus is God who lived among them and for them. Soon the people of the new faith began to realize that He lives in themselves and that He has the answer to all their needs and aspirations. This meant that they acquire a new vision of the world, themselves and their future, a new, previously unknown experience of life.

Those who believed in Jesus were eager to share their faith with others, to tell everyone on earth about Him. These first ascetics, among whom were direct witnesses of the events, clothed the biography and teaching of Christ Jesus in a vivid, well-remembered form. They created the Gospels; in addition, they wrote letters (which became “messages” to us), sang songs, prayed, and recorded the divine revelation bestowed upon them. To a superficial observer it might seem that everything written about Christ by His first disciples and followers was not specially organized by anyone in any way: it was all born more or less arbitrarily. For some fifty years, these texts amounted to a whole Book, which later received the name "New Testament".

In the process of creating and reading, collecting and organizing recorded materials, the first Christians, who experienced the great saving power of these sacred manuscripts, came to the clear conclusion that all their efforts were led, directed by Someone Mighty and Omniscient - the Holy Spirit of God Himself. They saw that there was nothing accidental in what they recorded, that all the documents that made up the New Testament are in a deep inner relationship. Boldly and resolutely, the first Christians could call and called the existing code "the Word of God."

A remarkable feature of the New Testament was that the entire text was written in simple, colloquial Greek, which at that time spread throughout the Mediterranean and became the international language. However, for the most part, "it was spoken by people who were not accustomed to it from childhood and therefore did not really feel the Greek words." In their practice, "it was a language without soil, a business, commercial, official language." Pointing to this state of affairs, the outstanding Christian thinker and writer of the 20th century K.S. Lewis adds: “Does this shock us?... I hope not; otherwise we should have been shocked by the Incarnation itself. The Lord humbled Himself when He became a baby in the arms of a peasant woman and an arrested preacher, and according to the same Divine plan, the word about Him sounded in the folk, everyday, everyday language. For this very reason, the early followers of Jesus, in their testimony of Him, in their preaching and in their translations of the Holy Scriptures, sought to convey the Good News about Christ in a simple language that was close to the people and understandable to them.

Happy are the peoples who have received the Holy Scriptures in a worthy translation from the original languages ​​into their native language that they can understand. They have this Book can be found in every, even the poorest family. Among such peoples, it became not only, in fact, a prayerful and pious, soul-saving reading, but also that family book that illuminated their entire spiritual world. Thus, the stability of society, its moral strength and even material well-being were created.

It pleased Providence that Russia should not be left without the Word of God. With great gratitude we, Russians, honor the memory of Cyril and Methodius, who gave us the Holy Scripture in the Slavic language. We also preserve the reverent memory of the workers who introduced us to the Word of God through the so-called Synodal Translation, which to this day remains our most authoritative and best known. The point here is not so much in his philological or literary characteristics, but in the fact that he remained with Russian Christians in all the difficult times of the 20th century. In many respects, it was thanks to him that the Christian faith was not completely eradicated in Russia.

Synodal translation, however, with all its undoubted merits, is not considered quite satisfactory today due to its well-known (obvious not only for specialists) shortcomings. The natural changes that have taken place in our language over more than a century, and the long absence of religious enlightenment in our country, have made these shortcomings sharply tangible. The vocabulary and syntax of this translation are no longer accessible to direct, so to speak, "spontaneous" perception. The modern reader in many cases cannot do without dictionaries in his efforts to comprehend the meaning of certain formulas of the translation that was published in 1876. This circumstance responds, of course, to a rationalistic “cooling” of the perception of that text, which, being spiritually uplifting by its nature, must not only be understood, but also experienced by the whole being of a pious reader.

Of course, to make a perfect translation of the Bible "for all times", such a translation that would remain equally understandable and close to readers of an endless succession of generations, is impossible, as they say, by definition. And this is not only because the development of the language we speak is unstoppable, but also because over time, the very penetration into the spiritual treasures of the great Book becomes more and more complicated and enriched as more and more new approaches to them are discovered. This was rightly pointed out by Archpriest Alexander Men, who saw the meaning and even the need for an increase in the number of Bible translations. In particular, he wrote: “Today pluralism dominates the world practice of biblical translations. Recognizing that any translation is, to one degree or another, an interpretation of the original, translators use a variety of techniques and language settings ... This allows readers to experience different dimensions and shades of the text.

In line with this understanding of the problem, the staff of the Institute for Bible Translation, established in 1993 in Zaoksky, considered it possible to make their own attempt to make a feasible contribution to the cause of familiarizing the Russian reader with the text of the New Testament. Driven by a high sense of responsibility for the cause to which they have devoted their knowledge and efforts, the project participants have completed this translation of the New Testament into Russian from the original language, taking as a basis the widely accepted modern critical text of the original (4th revised edition of the United Bible Societies, Stuttgart , 1994). At the same time, on the one hand, the orientation towards Byzantine sources, characteristic of the Russian tradition, was taken into account, on the other hand, the achievements of modern textual criticism were taken into account.

The employees of the Zaoksky Translation Center, naturally, could not but take into account in their work foreign and domestic experience in translating the Bible. In keeping with the principles that govern Bible Societies around the world, the translation was originally conceived as free from confessional bias. In accordance with the philosophy of modern biblical societies, the main requirements for translation were recognized as faithful to the original and preserving the form of the biblical message wherever possible, while being ready to sacrifice the letter of the text for the sake of an accurate transmission of the living meaning. At the same time, it was impossible, of course, not to go through those torments that are completely inevitable for any responsible translator of the Holy Scriptures. For the inspiration of the original obliged us to treat with reverence the very form of it. At the same time, in the course of their work, translators had to constantly convince themselves of the validity of the thought of the great Russian writers that only that translation can be considered adequate, which, first of all, correctly conveys the meaning and dynamics of the original. The desire of the staff of the Institute in Zaoksky to be as close as possible to the original coincided with what V.G. Belinsky: “Closness to the original does not consist in conveying the letter, but the spirit of creation ... The corresponding image, as well as the corresponding phrase, do not always consist in the apparent correspondence of words.” Looking back at other modern translations that convey the biblical text with severe literalness, forced to recall the well-known saying of A.S. Pushkin: "An interlinear translation can never be correct."

The Institute's team of translators at all stages of their work was aware of the fact that no real translation can equally satisfy all the demands of different readers, which are diverse in nature. Nevertheless, the translators strove for a result that could, on the one hand, satisfy those who turn to Scripture for the first time, and, on the other hand, satisfy those who, seeing the Word of God in the Bible, are engaged in its in-depth study.

In this translation, addressed to the modern reader, words, phrases and idioms that are in living circulation are mainly used. Obsolete and archaic words and expressions are allowed only to the extent that they are necessary to convey the color of the narrative and to adequately represent the semantic shades of the phrase. At the same time, it was found expedient to refrain from using sharply modern, fleeting vocabulary and the same syntax, so as not to violate that regularity, natural simplicity and organic majesty of presentation that distinguish the metaphysically non-futile text of Scripture.

The Bible message is of decisive importance for the salvation of every person and in general for his entire Christian life. This Message is not a mere report of facts, events, and a straightforward exposition of commandments. It is able to touch the human heart, induce the reader and listener to empathize, arouse in them the need for living and sincere repentance. Zaoksky's translators saw it as their task to convey such power of the biblical narrative.

In cases where the meaning of individual words or expressions in the lists of books of the Bible that have come down to us does not lend itself, despite all efforts, to a certain reading, the reader is offered the most convincing, in the opinion of the translators, reading.

In striving for clarity and stylistic beauty of the text, translators introduce into it, when it is dictated by the context, words that are not in the original (they are marked in italics).

The footnotes offer the reader alternative meanings for individual words and phrases in the original.

To help the reader, the chapters of the biblical text are divided into separate semantic passages, which are supplied with subheadings typed in italics. While not part of the translated text, subheadings are not intended for oral reading or interpretation of Scripture.

Having completed their first experience of translating the Bible into modern Russian, the staff of the Institute in Zaoksky intend to continue searching for the best approaches and solutions in translating the original text. Therefore, all those involved in the appearance of the completed translation will be grateful to the deeply respected readers for any help that they find possible to provide with their comments, advice and wishes aimed at improving the text now proposed for subsequent reprints.

The employees of the Institute are grateful to those who, during all the years of work on the translation of the New Testament, helped them with their prayers and advice. Especially should be noted here V.G. Vozdvizhensky, S.G. Mikushkina, I.A. Orlovskaya, S.A. Romashko and V.V. Sergeev.

The participation in the now implemented project of a number of Western colleagues and friends of the Institute, in particular, W. Ailes, D.R. Spangler and Dr. K.G. Hawkins.

For me personally, it was a great blessing to work on the published translation together with highly qualified employees who devoted themselves entirely to this matter, such as A.V. Bolotnikov, M.V. Boryabina, I.V. Lobanov and some others.

If the work done by the Institute's team helps someone in knowing our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, this will be the highest reward for everyone who was involved in this translation.

January 30, 2000
Director of the Institute for Bible Translation in Zaoksky Doctor of Theology M. P. Kulakov

EXPLANATIONS, SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

This translation of the New Testament is made from the Greek text, mainly according to the 4th edition of the Greek New Testament (The Greek New Testament. 4th revision edition. Stuttgart, 1994). The translation of the Psalter was taken from the edition of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Stuttgart, 1990).

The Russian text of this translation is divided into semantic passages with subtitles. Subheadings in italics, which are not part of the text, are introduced to make it easier for the reader to find the right place in the proposed translation.

In small capital letters in the Psalms, the word "LORD" is written in those cases when this word conveys the name of God - Yahweh, written in Hebrew with four consonants (tetragrammaton). The word "Lord" in its usual spelling conveys another appeal (Adon or Adonai), used in relation to both God and people in the sense of "Lord", friend. transl.: Vladyka; see Dictionary Lord.

In square brackets words are concluded, the presence of which in the text of modern biblical studies is considered not fully proven.

In double square brackets words are concluded that modern biblical studies consider inserts into the text made in the first centuries.

Bold quotes from the books of the Old Testament are highlighted. At the same time, poetic passages are placed in the text with the necessary indents and breakdown in order to adequately represent the structure of the passage. A note at the bottom of the page indicates the address of the citation.

Words in italics are actually absent in the original text, but the inclusion of which seems justified, since they are implied in the development of the author's thought and help to clarify the meaning inherent in the text.

An asterisk raised above the line after a word (phrase) indicates a note at the bottom of the page.

Individual footnotes are given with the following conventional abbreviations:

Letters.(literally): a formally accurate translation. It is given in those cases when, for the sake of clarity and a more complete disclosure of the meaning in the main text, it is necessary to deviate from a formally accurate transmission. At the same time, the reader is given the opportunity to come closer to the original word or phrase and see conceivable translation options.

In the meaning(in meaning): is given when a word translated literally in the text requires, in the translator's opinion, an indication of its special semantic connotation in this context.

In some manuscripts(in some manuscripts): used when quoting textual variants in Greek manuscripts.

Greek(Greek): used when it is important to show which Greek word is used in the original text. The word is given in Russian transcription.

Ancient per.(ancient translations): used when it is necessary to show how a particular passage of the original was understood by ancient translations, possibly based on a different original text.

Friend. possible per.(another possible translation): is given as another, although possible, but, according to translators, less well-founded translation.

Friend. reading(other reading): is given when, with a different arrangement of signs denoting vowel sounds, or with a different sequence of letters, a reading is possible that is different from the original, but supported by other ancient translations.

Heb.(Hebrew): used when it is important to show which word is used in the original. It is often impossible to convey it adequately, without semantic losses, into Russian, so many modern translations introduce this word in transliteration into their native language.

Or: is used when a note gives a different, well-founded translation.

Some manuscripts are added(some manuscripts add): given when a number of lists of the New Testament or Psalms, not included in the corpus of the text by modern critical editions, contain an addition to what was written, which, most often, is included in the Synodal translation.

Some manuscripts are omitted(some manuscripts are omitted): it is given when a number of copies of the New Testament or the Psalter, not included in the corpus of the text by modern critical editions, do not contain an addition to what was written, but in some cases this addition is included in the Synodal translation.

Masoretic text: text accepted as the main one for translation; a footnote is given when, for a number of textological reasons: the meaning of the word is unknown, the original text is corrupted - in translation, one has to deviate from the literal transmission.

TR(textus receptus) - an edition of the Greek text of the New Testament, prepared by Erasmus of Rotterdam in 1516, based on lists of the last centuries of the existence of the Byzantine Empire. Until the 19th century this edition served as the basis for a number of well-known translations.

LXX- Septuagint, translation of the Holy Scriptures (Old Testament) into Greek, made in the III-II centuries. BC References to this translation are given according to the 27th edition of Nestle-Aland (Nestle-Aland. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27. revidierte Auflage 1993. Stuttgart).

ABBREVIATIONS USED

OLD TESTAMENT (OT)

Life - Genesis
Exodus - Exodus
Leo - Levite
Number - Numbers
Deut - Deuteronomy
Is Nav - Book of Joshua
1 Kings - First Book of Kings
2 Kings - 2 Kings
1 Kings - 1st Book of Kings
2 Kings - Fourth Book of Kings
1 Chron - First Book of Chronicles
2 Chron - Second Book of Chronicles
Job - Book of Job
Ps - Psalter
Proverbs - Book of Proverbs of Solomon
Eccles - The Book of Ecclesiastes, or Preacher (Ecclesiastes)
Isaiah - The Book of the Prophet Isaiah
Jer - The Book of Jeremiah
Lamentations - Book of Lamentations of Jeremiah
Ezek - The Book of Ezekiel
Dan - Book of Daniel
Os - Book of the Prophet Hosea
Joel - The Book of the Prophet Joel
Am - The Book of the Prophet Amos
Jonah - Book of Jonah
Micah - The Book of Micah
Nahum - The Book of the Prophet Nahum
Avv - The book of the prophet Habakkuk
Haggai - The Book of the Prophet Haggai
Zech - The Book of Zechariah
Mal - The Book of the Prophet Malachi

NEW TESTAMENT (NT)

Matthew - Gospel according to Matthew (From Matthew the gospel)
Mk - The gospel according to Mark (From Mark the holy gospel)
Luke - Gospel according to Luke (From Luke the holy gospel)
Jn - Gospel according to John (From John the holy gospel)
Acts - Acts of the Apostles
Rome - Epistle to the Romans
1 Corinthians - First Epistle to the Corinthians
2 Corinthians - Second Epistle to the Corinthians
Galatians - Epistle to the Galatians
Eph - Epistle to the Ephesians
Php - Epistle to the Philippians
Col - Epistle to the Colossians
1 Thess - First Epistle to the Thessalonians
2 Thess - Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
1 Timothy - First Epistle to Timothy
2 Tim - 2 Timothy
Titus - Epistle to Titus
Heb - Epistle to the Hebrews
James - The Epistle of James
1 Peter - First Epistle of Peter
2 Peter - Second Epistle of Peter
1 Jn - First Epistle of John
Revelation - Revelation of John the Theologian (Apocalypse)

OTHER ABBREVIATIONS

app. - apostle
aram. - Aramaic
in. (centuries) - century (centuries)
g - gram
year(s) - year(s)
ch. - head
Greek - Greek language)
others - ancient
heb. - Hebrew (language)
km - kilometer
l - liter
m - meter
note - note
R.H. - Nativity
Rome. - Roman
Syn. per. - Synodal translation
cm - centimeter
see - see
Art. - verse
cf. - compare
those. - that is
t. - so-called
h - hour