Explanatory Bible
New Testament

All these terms, i.e. both the word “covenant” itself and its combination with the adjectives “old” and “new” are taken from the Bible itself, in which, in addition to their general meaning, they also have a special one, in which we use them when speaking about well-known bible books.

The word "covenant" (Heb. - Berit, Greek - διαθήκη, Latin - testamentum) in the language of Holy Scripture and biblical usage primarily means a known decree, condition, law, on which the two contracting parties converge, and from here already - this very treaty or union, as well as those external signs that served as his certificate, a staple, as it were, a seal (testamentum). And since the sacred books, which described this covenant or the union of God with man, were, of course, one of the best means of verifying it and fixing it in the memory of the people, the name “covenant” was also transferred to them very early. It already existed in the era of Moses, as can be seen from the book of Exodus (), where the record of the Sinai legislation read by Moses to the Jewish people is called the book of the covenant (“sefer hubberit”). Similar expressions, denoting not only the Sinai legislation, but the entire Mosaic Pentateuch, are also found in subsequent Old Testament books (; ; ). The Old Testament also owns the first, still prophetic indication of, namely, in the famous prophecy of Jeremiah: "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah" ().

Division of the New Testament books by content

The historical books are the four Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and the book of the Acts of the Apostles. The Gospels give us a historical picture of the life of our Lord Jesus Christ, while the book of the Acts of the Apostles gives us a historical picture of the life and work of the apostles, who spread Christ's message throughout the world.

Teaching books are the Apostolic Epistles, which are letters written by the apostles to different Churches. In these letters, the apostles clarify various perplexities regarding the Christian faith and life that arose in the Churches, expose the readers of the Epistles in various disorders they allow, convince them to stand firm in the Christian faith devoted to them, and expose the false teachers who disturbed the peace of the primordial Church. In a word, the apostles appear in their Epistles as teachers of the flock of Christ entrusted to their care, being, moreover, often the founders of those Churches to which they address. The latter takes place in relation to almost all the Epistles of the Apostle Paul.

There is only one prophetic book in the New Testament - the Apocalypse of the Apostle John the Theologian. Here are contained various visions and revelations which this apostle received, and in which future destiny Church of Christ before its glorification, i.e. before the opening of the kingdom of glory on earth.

Since the subject of the content of the Gospels is the life and teachings of the very Founder of our faith - the Lord Jesus Christ, and since, undoubtedly, in the Gospel we have the basis for all our faith and life, it is customary to call the four Gospels books law-positive. This name shows that the Gospels have the same meaning for Christians as the Law of Moses - the Pentateuch had for the Jews.

A Brief History of the Canon of the Holy Books of the New Testament

The word "canon" (κανών) originally meant "cane", and then began to be used to denote what should serve as a rule, a model of life (;). The Fathers of the Church and the Councils used this term to designate a collection of sacred inspired writings. Therefore, the canon of the New Testament is a collection of sacred inspired books of the New Testament in its present form.

What guided the first, accepting this or that sacred New Testament book into the canon? First of all, the so-called historical legend. They investigated whether this or that book was actually received directly from an apostle or a collaborator of the apostle, and, after a rigorous study, they included this book in the list of inspired books. But at the same time, attention was also paid to whether the teaching contained in the book under consideration, firstly, with the teaching of the entire Church and, secondly, with the teaching of the apostle whose name this book bore. This is the so-called dogmatic tradition. And it never happened that, once recognizing a book as canonical, it subsequently changed its view of it and excluded it from the canon. If individual fathers and teachers of the Church even after that still recognized some New Testament writings as unauthentic, then this was only their private view, which should not be confused with the voice of the Church. In the same way, it has never happened that the Church did not first accept a book into the canon, and then included it. If there are no references to some canonical books in the writings of the apostolic men (for example, to the Epistle of Jude), then this is due to the fact that the apostolic men had no reason to quote these books.

The order of the New Testament books in the canon

The New Testament books found their place in the canon according to their importance and the time of their final recognition. In the first place, of course, were the four Gospels, followed by the book of the Acts of the Apostles; The Apocalypse formed the conclusion of the canon. But in some codices, some books do not occupy the place they occupy with us now. Thus, in the Codex Sinaiticus, the book of the Acts of the Apostles comes after the Epistles of the Apostle Paul. Until the 4th century the Greek Church placed the Catholic Epistles after the Epistles of the Apostle Paul. The very name "cathedral" was originally used only by 1st Epistle of Peter and 1st Epistle of John, and only from the time of Eusebius of Caesarea (4th century) did this name begin to be applied to all seven Epistles. Since the time of Athanasius of Alexandria (mid-fourth century), the Catholic Epistles have taken their present place in the Greek Church. Meanwhile, in the West they were still placed after the Epistles of the Apostle Paul. Even the Apocalypse in some codices is earlier than the Epistles of the Apostle Paul and even earlier than the book of Acts. In particular, the Gospels go in different codices in a different order. So, some, undoubtedly, putting the apostles in the first place, place the Gospels in this order: Matthew, John, Mark and Luke, or, giving special dignity to the Gospel of John, they put it in the first place. Others put the Gospel of Mark last, as the shortest. Of the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, originally the first place in the canon was occupied by two to the Corinthians, and the last to the Romans (a fragment of Muratorius and Tertullian). Since the time of Eusebius, the Epistle to the Romans has occupied the first place, both in its volume and in the importance of the Church to which it is written, indeed, deserving of this place. In the arrangement of the four private Epistles (1 Tim.; 2 Tim.; Tit.; Philp.), apparently, they were guided by their volume, approximately the same. The Epistle to the Hebrews in the East was placed 14th, and in the West - 10th in the series of Epistles of the Apostle Paul. It is clear that the Western Church has put the Epistles of the Apostle Peter in the first place among the Catholic Epistles. The Eastern Church, putting the Epistle of James in the first place, was probably guided by the listing of the apostles by the Apostle Paul ().

History of the New Testament Canon since the Reformation

During the Middle Ages, the canon remained indisputable, especially since the books of the New Testament were read relatively little by private individuals, and only certain chapters or sections were read from them during divine services. The common people were more interested in reading the stories of the lives of the saints, and the Catholic even looked with some suspicion at the interest that certain societies, such as the Waldensians, showed in reading the Bible, sometimes even forbidding the reading of the Bible on in native language. But at the end of the Middle Ages, humanism renewed doubts about the writings of the New Testament, which were the subject of controversy in the first centuries. The Reformation began to raise its voice even more strongly against certain New Testament writings. Luther, in his translation of the New Testament (1522), in the prefaces to the New Testament books, expressed his view of their dignity. Thus, in his opinion, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not written by an apostle, as well as the Epistle of James. Nor does he recognize the authenticity of the Apocalypse and the Epistle of the Apostle Jude. Luther's disciples went even further in the strictness with which they treated various New Testament writings and even began to directly single out "apocryphal" writings from the New Testament canon: until the beginning of the 17th century, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 were not even considered canonical in Lutheran bibles. -e of John, Jude and the Apocalypse. Only later did this distinction between scriptures disappear and the ancient New Testament canon was restored. At the end of the 17th century, however, writings of a critical nature about the New Testament canon appeared, in which objections were raised against the authenticity of many New Testament books. The rationalists of the 18th century (Zemler, Michaelis, Eichgorm) wrote in the same spirit, and in the 19th century. Schleiermacher expressed doubts about the authenticity of some of the Pauline Epistles, De Wette rejected the authenticity of five of them, and F.X. Baur recognized only the four main Epistles of the Apostle Paul and the Apocalypse from the entire New Testament as truly apostolic.

Thus, in the West, in Protestantism, they again came to the same place that the Christian Church experienced in the first centuries, when some books were recognized as genuine apostolic works, others were controversial. It was already established that it was only a collection of literary works of early Christianity. At the same time, the followers of F.X. Bauer - B. Bauer, Loman and Steck - no longer found it possible to recognize any of the New Testament books as truly apostolic works ... But the best minds of Protestantism saw the depth of the abyss into which the Baur school, or Tübingen, carried Protestantism, and opposed its provisions with strong objections. Thus, Ritschl refuted the main thesis of the Tübingen school about the development of early Christianity from the struggle between Petrinism and Peacockism, and Harnack proved that the New Testament books should be regarded as truly apostolic works. Scientists B. Weiss, Gode and T. Tsang did even more to restore the significance of the New Testament books in the view of Protestants. “Thanks to these theologians,” says Barthes, “no one can now take away from the New Testament the advantage that in it, and only in it, we have messages about Jesus and about the revelation of God in him” (“Introduction”, 1908, p. 400). Barth finds that at the present time, when such confusion reigns in the minds, it is especially important for Protestantism to have a "canon" as a guide given from God for faith and life, "and," he concludes, "we have it in the New Testament" (There same).

Indeed, the New Testament canon is of great, one might say, incomparable significance for the Christian Church. In it we find, first of all, such writings that present in its relation to the Jewish people (the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistle of the Apostle James and the Epistle to the Hebrews), to the pagan world (1st and 2nd to the Thessalonians, 1st to the Corinthians ). Further, we have in the New Testament canon writings that aim to eliminate the dangers that threatened Christianity from the Jewish understanding of Christianity (Epistle to the Galatians), from the Jewish-legalistic asceticism (Epistle to the Colossians), from the side of the pagan desire to understand religious society as a private circle in which one can live apart from church society (Ephesians). The Epistle to the Romans indicates the worldwide purpose of Christianity, while the book of Acts indicates how this appointment was realized in history. In a word, the books of the New Testament canon give us a complete picture of the primordial Church, depict life and its tasks from all sides. If, as a test, we wanted to take away from the canon of the New Testament any book, for example, the Epistle to the Romans or the Galatians, we would thereby cause significant harm to the whole. It is clear that the Holy Spirit led the Church in the gradual establishment of the composition of the canon, so that the Church introduced into it truly apostolic works, which in their existence were caused by the most essential needs of the Church.

What language are the holy books of the New Testament written in?

Throughout the Roman Empire, during the time of the Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles, Greek was the dominant language, it was understood everywhere and it was spoken almost everywhere. It is clear that the writings of the New Testament, which were intended by the Providence of God for distribution to all churches, also appeared in Greek, although almost all of their writers, with the exception of St. Luke, were Jews. This is also evidenced by some internal signs of these writings: a play on words possible only in Greek, a free, independent attitude to the translation of the Seventy, when Old Testament passages are given - all this undoubtedly indicates that they are written in Greek and are intended for readers. who know Greek.

However, the Greek language in which the books of the New Testament are written is not the classical Greek language in which the Greek writers of the heyday of Greek literature wrote. This so-called κοινὴ διάλεκτος , i.e. close to the Old Attic dialect, but not too different from other dialects. In addition, it included many Arameisms and other foreign words. Finally, special New Testament concepts were introduced into this language, for the expression of which, however, old Greek words were used, which received a special new meaning through this (for example, the word χάρις - "pleasantness", in the sacred New Testament language began to mean "grace"). For more details, see the article by prof. S.I. Sobolevsky " Κοινὴ διάλεκτος ”, placed in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia, vol. 10.

New Testament text

All the originals of the New Testament books perished, but copies (ἀντίγραφα ) had long been taken from them. Most often, the Gospels were written off and least often - the Apocalypse. They wrote with reed (κάλαμος ) and ink (μέλαν ) and more - in the first centuries - on papyrus, so that the right side of each papyrus leaf was glued to the left side of the next sheet. From here, a strip of greater or lesser length was obtained, which was then rolled onto a rolling pin. This is how a scroll (τόμος) appeared, which was kept in a special box (φαινόλης). Since reading these strips, written only on the front side, was inconvenient and the material was fragile, from the 3rd century New Testament books began to be copied on leather or parchment. Since parchment was expensive, many used the old manuscripts on parchment they had, erasing and scraping out what was written on them and placing some other work here. This is how palimpsests were formed. Paper came into use only in the 8th century.

The words in the manuscripts of the New Testament were written without stress, without breaths, without punctuation marks and, moreover, with abbreviations (for example, IC instead of Ἰησοῦς, RNB instead of πνεῦμα), so it was very difficult to read these manuscripts. Letters in the first six centuries were used only in capital letters (uncial manuscripts from "ounce" - inch). From the 7th, and some say, from the 9th century, manuscripts of ordinary cursive writing appeared. Then the letters decreased, but abbreviations became more frequent. On the other hand, accents and breaths were added. There are 130 first manuscripts, and the last (according to von Soden) - 3700. In addition, there are so-called lectionaries, containing either gospel or apostolic readings for use in worship (evangeliaries and praxapostles). There are about 1300 of them, and the oldest of them date back in their origin to the VI century.

In addition to the text, manuscripts usually contain introductions and afterwords with indications of the writer, time and place of writing the book. To get acquainted with the content of the book in manuscripts divided into chapters (κεφάλαια ), these chapters are preceded by the designations of the content of each chapter (τίτλα , αργυμεντα ). The chapters are divided into parts (ὑποδιαιρέσεις) or sections, and these last into verses (κῶλα, στίχοι). According to the number of verses, the size of the book and its selling price were determined. This processing of the text is usually attributed to Bishop Euphalia of Sardinia (7th century), but in fact all these divisions took place much earlier. For interpretative purposes, Ammonius (3rd century) added parallel passages from other Gospels to the text of the Gospel of Matthew. Eusebius of Caesarea (4th century) compiled ten canons or parallel tables, on the first of which the designations of sections from the Gospel, common to all four evangelists, were placed, on the second - designations (by numbers) - common to three, etc. to the tenth, where the stories contained in only one evangelist are indicated. In the text of the Gospel, it was marked with a red number to which canon this or that section belongs. Our present division of the text into chapters was done first by the Englishman Stephen Langton (in the thirteenth century), and the division into verses by Robert Stephen (in the sixteenth century).

Since the 18th century uncial manuscripts began to be denoted by capital letters of the Latin alphabet, and cursive manuscripts by numbers. The most important uncial manuscripts are as follows:

N - Codex Sinaiticus, found by Tischendorf in 1856 in the Sinai Monastery of St. Catherine. It contains the whole, together with the epistle of Barnabas and a significant part of the "Shepherd" of Hermas, as well as the canons of Eusebius. It shows proofreadings of seven various hands. It was written in the 4th or 5th century. Kept in the St. Petersburg Public Library (now kept in the British Museum. – Note. ed.). Photographs were taken from it.

A - Alexandria, located in London. The New Testament is placed here, not in its entirety, along with the 1st and part of the 2nd epistle of Clement of Rome. Written in the 5th century in Egypt or Palestine.

B - Vatican, which concludes with the 14th verse of the 9th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. It was probably written by someone close to Athanasius of Alexandria in the 4th century. Stored in Rome.

S - Efremov. This is a palimpsest, so named because the treatise of Ephraim the Syrian was subsequently written on the biblical text. It contains only passages from the New Testament. Its origin is Egyptian, dates back to the 5th century. Stored in Paris.

A list of other manuscripts of later origin can be seen in the 8th edition of Tischendorf's New Testament.

Translations and quotations

Together with the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, translations of the sacred books of the New Testament, which began to appear already in the 2nd century, are very important as sources for establishing the text of the New Testament. The first place among them belongs to the Syriac translations, both in their antiquity and in their language, which approaches the Aramaic dialect spoken by Christ and the apostles. It is believed that Tatian's Diatessaron (circa 175) was the first Syriac translation of the New Testament. Then comes the Syro-Sinai codex (SS), discovered in 1892 in Sinai by Mrs. A. Lewis. Also important is the second-century translation known as the Peshitta (simple) translation; however, some scholars attribute it to the 5th century and recognize it as the work of the Bishop of Edessa Rabbula (411-435). Of great importance are also the Egyptian translations (Said, Fayum, Bohair), Ethiopian, Armenian, Gothic and Old Latin, subsequently corrected by Blessed Jerome and recognized as self-reliant in the Catholic Church (Vulgate).

Of no small importance for the establishment of the text are quotations from the New Testament, which are available from the ancient fathers and teachers of the Church and church writers. The collection of these quotes (texts) was published by T. Tsan.

The Slavic translation of the New Testament from the Greek text was made by the holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Cyril and Methodius in the second half of the 9th century and, together with Christianity, passed to us in Russia under the holy noble prince Vladimir. Of the copies of this translation that we have preserved, the Ostromir Gospel, written in the middle of the 11th century for the mayor of Ostromir, is especially remarkable. Then in the XIV century. Saint Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow, translated the sacred books of the New Testament while Saint Alexis was in Constantinople. This translation is stored in the Moscow Synodal Library and in the 90s of the XIX century. published in phototype. In 1499, together with all the biblical books, it was corrected and published by Metropolitan Gennady of Novgorod. Separately, the entire New Testament was first printed in Slavic in Vilna in 1623. Then he, like the others bible books, was corrected in Moscow at the synodal printing house and, finally, published together with the Old Testament under Empress Elizabeth in 1751. First of all, the Gospel was translated into Russian in 1819, and the New Testament appeared in full in Russian in 1822, in 1860 it was published in a corrected form. In addition to the synodal translation into Russian, there are also Russian translations of the New Testament published in London and Vienna. In Russia, their use is prohibited.

The fate of the New Testament text

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 (),

c) all the New Testament or Christian teaching in general, first of all, the narrative of the events from the life of Christ, the most important (), and then the explanation of the meaning of these events ().

d) Being actually the news of what he did for our salvation and good, the Gospel at the same time calls people to repentance, faith and change of their sinful life for the better (; ).

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

Sometimes the designation and content of it is attached to the word "Gospel". There are, for example, phrases: the gospel of the kingdom (), i.e. joyful news of the Kingdom of God, the gospel of peace (), i.e. about the world, the gospel of salvation (), i.e. about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genitive case following the word "Gospel" means the originator or source of the good news (; ; ) or the person of the preacher ().

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 "people unlearned and simple"(), although literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic age there were also very few "wise according to the flesh, strong" and "noble" (), 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, while 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 authentic 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. The most meticulously recorded the words Christ's, which contained the rules of Christian life, and were much more free to transfer 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 (), 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”(). 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 ().

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 commonly referred to in biblical scholarship synoptic, 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 ( weather 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 I wanted to say that in all the Gospels lies single the Christian gospel of Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.

four gospel

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. A more correct opinion seems to be that our three evangelists enjoyed a common oral source for his account of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeating in different places in a more or less extensive form, what was considered necessary to offer those who entered into. 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 considerably 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 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 portray 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 the weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that just as the weather forecasters knew the activity of Christ in Judea (;), so John has indications of the continuous activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ that testify to His Divine dignity (), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man (and others; 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 reliability 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 the 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 would it be possible to deny the authenticity of the miracles of Christ, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event in ancient history (see)?

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 – 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.

De Wette – 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 - 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 – Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Toluk (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. Tubingen, 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. The Church, with such respect for the apostles, and, in particular, for the apostle Paul, could completely lose any of the apostolic works.

According to some Protestant theologians, the New Testament canon is something accidental. Some writings, even non-apostolic ones, were simply lucky enough to get into the canon, because for some reason they came into use during worship. And the canon itself, according to the majority of Protestant theologians, is nothing more than a simple catalog or list of books used in worship. On the contrary, Orthodox theologians see in the canon nothing more than the composition of the sacred New Testament books, already recognized at that time, devoted to the apostolic to subsequent generations of Christians. These books, according to Orthodox theologians, were not known to all Churches, perhaps because they had either a too particular purpose (for example, the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of the Apostle John), or too general (The Epistle to the Hebrews), so that it was not known to which Church to turn for information regarding the name of the author of this or that epistle. But there is no doubt that these were books that truly belonged to those persons whose names they bore on themselves. The Church did not accidentally accept them into the canon, but quite deliberately, giving them the meaning that they actually had.

The Jews had the word "ganuz", corresponding in meaning to the word "apocryphal" (from ἀποκρύπτειν - "to hide") and was used in the synagogue to designate such books that should not have been used in the performance of worship. However, this term did not contain any censure. But later, when the Gnostics and other heretics began to boast that they had "hidden" books, which allegedly contain the true apostolic teaching, which the apostles did not want to make available to the crowd, who collected the canon, already reacted with condemnation to these "hidden" books and began to look at them as "false, heretical, fake" (decree of Pope Gelasius). Currently, 7 apocryphal gospels are known, of which 6 supplement the story of the origin, birth and childhood of Jesus Christ with different decorations, and the seventh - the story of His condemnation. The oldest and most remarkable of them is the First Gospel of James, the brother of the Lord, then come: the Greek Gospel of Thomas, the Greek Gospel of Nicodemus, the Arabic story of Joseph the woodworker, the Arabic Gospel of the childhood of the Savior and, finally, the Latin Gospel of the birth of Christ from St. Mary and the story of the birth of the Lord by Mary and the childhood of the Savior. These Apocryphal Gospels were translated into Russian by Prot. P.A. Preobrazhensky. In addition, some fragmentary apocryphal stories about the life of Christ are known (for example, Pilate's letter to Tiberius about Christ).

In ancient times, it should be noted, in addition to the apocryphal, there were also non-canonical Gospels that have not survived to our time. They, in all likelihood, contained in themselves the same thing that is contained in our canonical Gospels, from which they took information. These were: the Gospel of the Jews - in all likelihood, the corrupted Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Peter, the apostolic memoirs of Justin the Martyr, the Tatian Gospel in four ("Diatessaron" - a set of Gospels), the Gospel of Marcion - a distorted Gospel of Luke.

Of the recently discovered stories about the life and teachings of Christ, "Λόγια", or the words of Christ, deserves attention - a passage found in Egypt. This passage contains brief sayings of Christ with a brief initial formula: "Jesus speaks." This is a fragment of the deepest antiquity. From the history of the apostles, the recently discovered "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles" deserves attention, the existence of which was already known to ancient church writers and which has now been translated into Russian. In 1886, 34 verses of the Apocalypse of Peter, which was known to St. Clement of Alexandria, were found.

It is also necessary to mention the various "acts" of the apostles, for example, Peter, John, Thomas, and others, where information about the preaching work of these apostles was reported. These works undoubtedly belong to the category of so-called "pseudo-epigraphs", i.e. to the category of false ones. However, these "deeds" were highly respected among ordinary pious Christians and were very common. Some of them, after a certain alteration, entered the so-called "Acts of the Saints", processed by the Bollandists, and from there they were transferred by St. Demetrius of Rostov to our Lives of the Saints (Fourth Menaion). This can be said about the life and preaching work of the Apostle Thomas.

"The Spirit of God speaking through them decided not to tell people about heaven: this knowledge could not bring salvation" Blessed Augustine

For hundreds of years, Christians have recognized the existence of two God's books: the Bible and the book of God's works - nature. The first tells about the fate of mankind and the path of salvation. The second shows the scheme of the created world, which science is exploring. A clear distinction between the subjects of science and theology helps to avoid unnecessary conflicts between them. In 1605, Francis Bacon wrote: "Let no one think or suppose that a man can go too far in his search, study too well the book of God's Word or the book of God's works, theology or philosophy ... (We should not) in foolishness to mix or combine these two areas of knowledge" (1) .

In the first part of this book, we talked about the emergence of modern science, which studies observable phenomena - those that can be measured and expressed in mathematical forms. mules. Now let's talk about the Bible. It concerns, first of all, the history of mankind, for in history God reveals Himself and His plans. Nevertheless, in Scripture one can also find the doctrine of the universe, although it is spoken of from other positions than science considers it. In chapters 8-10, we will focus on the biblical view of nature, list a number of principles for biblical interpretation, address the issue of miracles and scientific laws, and analyze the creation narrative from chapter 1 of Genesis.

To some, the Bible seems like a very old-fashioned book. But, if you understand it correctly, it will become clear: the biblical message has a direct bearing on the science and technology of today. It answers acute questions about the meaning, essence and purpose of life, that is, those questions that modern science does not give an answer to.

biblical revelation

The main thing actor Old Testament - a prophet, not a philosopher. Unlike the modern scientist, who must have a sharp mind and serious training, the biblical prophet did not need such qualities. He could be a leader raised in a royal court (Moses), a talented writer (Isaiah), or a shepherd and sycamore gatherer. They were united by one thing - they received a word from God, who decided to speak with his people. That is why it is so often repeated in the Bible: "And the word of God came to ...".

Two New Testament authors also speak of the role of a prophet: "God, who at many times and in various ways spoke of old to the fathers in the prophets" (Heb. 1:1);

“Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy in Scripture can be resolved by oneself. For prophecy was never uttered by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:20-21).

Prophecy can only come from God's initiative and God's authority. This is the main difference between the biblical prophets and modern scholars who Scientific research on their own initiative, and the scientific community accepts their work based on how authoritative the scientist is.

The most common meaning of the word "prophecy" is "foretelling the future", but in the Bible it has a slightly different connotation. First, the prophets were the religious and social reformers of their day. They proclaimed God's displeasure with the idolatry of the people, social injustice, economic oppression. The prophetic word always called to repentance, called to leave unrighteous paths and embark on the path of worshiping the true God. From time to time, the prophecy included elements of predicting the future - usually it predicted punishment for those who did not leave their evil ways. But whatever the prophecy, the authority of the prophet was never based on his own ability and gift of foresight, but came from God, whose word he proclaimed.

Through the prophets, God revealed Himself and His plans to the created world. The Bible contains prophecies about God, people and nature and their interaction. The main thing in revelation is the word. It is a symbol of communication. The word is pronounced and then transferred to paper. The written word - Holy Scripture - is kept and passed down from generation to generation.

But the revelation of God can be clothed not only in verbal form. Being the Lord and Judge of mankind, God reveals Himself in His deeds: He brings judgment and mercy. The action and the word, the event and its interpretation constitute biblical revelation, which has strong historical roots (2) . On the one hand, an action without interpretation may seem unclear - one can only guess about its meaning. Also, words taken apart from action seem too far from life and reality. But the combination of God's deeds and the prophetic word shows us God's character and His plans: it answers all "Who?" and "Why?" arising in the created world.

God and human history

The meaningful revelation that God sends to His people is still not very easy to interpret. Jesus taught that "God is spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). The Apostle Paul wrote that God is "the only one who has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see" (1 Tim. 6:16). The Israelites were forbidden to make any images of God and worship them. How can we understand Him who is spirit, Who cannot be seen, Who cannot be approached?

To reveal Himself, God uses the principle of analogy - the similarity of objects in some properties, which are incomparable in other properties. (The analogy of being is one of the basic principles of Catholic scholasticism, which substantiates the possibility of knowing the existence of God from the existence of the created world). "God chooses those elements of our being or language that can serve as analogies for the truth about His being and manifestations of His nature" (3) . In other words, God uses a certain scheme - a set of analogies drawn from situations familiar to us (4) . (Science uses the same method. For example, to explain the behavior of gas molecules that are too small to see, physicists use the model or analogy of billiard balls colliding with each other. Although molecules are not miniature balls, they move and interact with each other in a similar way - see chapter 9).

In biblical revelation, the main model of God is the person. Analogies are called anthropomorphisms, because they describe God's actions like human ones. Therefore, the Old Testament shows God speaking to His people, seeing their sins, hearing their groaning, fighting the battle on their side.

To understand the essence that the model is intended to express, one must be able to separate elements that correspond to reality (the behavior of colliding balls) from elements that do not correspond to reality (for example, their color). The comparisons used in the Bible indicate that God cares about His people, acts for their good, and not at all that He has legs, eyes, ears or hands. The Bible shows that God is characterized by human feelings - love, anger, jealousy. The comparison of God with man, for which modern scholars so often accuse the Bible of primitivism (although they recognize the analogy of a billiard ball and a molecule), is a very lively and powerful analogy, because in all ages and in all corners of the earth, it was thanks to it that people came to know God. Very often, a certain state position is used as a biblical model, with which the position of God (ruler, judge, master, father) is compared. This technique is also intended to reveal to us some properties of the Creator. Unlike scientific models, such comparisons (for example, "The Lord is my shepherd") also have a specific emotional connotation. They influence people's attitude towards Him, their actions. The word becomes an action when the reader feels himself an accomplice in the events.

Of course, when you try to create a model of God, there is some danger: the main thing is not to take comparisons literally, that is, you do not need to identify the comparison with the depicted reality. The ban on making images of God is more than a ban on idolatry. It is based on the firm belief that God is a spirit, and it is impossible to depict Him in a material form. He is always beyond our understanding. "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor your ways are My ways"" (Is. 55:8). There are many metaphors in the Bible also because they all correct and complement each other in some way (5) .

The highest model of God in the Bible is Jesus Christ. He is the living Word, who reveals to us the character and purposes of God.

"In the beginning was the Word...and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:1,14).

"In these last days he has spoken to us in the Son... This one, being the radiance of glory and the image of His hypostasis..." (Heb. 1:2-3). Christ is the greatest Act of God and His Word. He can be known through His life, ministry as a healer, teaching. The climax of the gospels is the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ. This is the climax of the story of redemption. The apostles told about these events, revealing their meaning. Their message is not good advice, but rather the Good News: "Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again on the third day, according to the Scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3-4). The trouble of mankind is not that we do not know what is good and what is bad (this can be taught!), but that we have rebelled against God and now cannot do without redemption and reconciliation. The essence of Christianity is the message of God's love and mercy in Christ. God calls us to repent, believe, and live in a new way.

The Bible reflects a linear, uninterrupted view of human history that has an ultimate goal and unfolds according to a specific design. The story begins with Adam and Eve, flows to the New Testament in Jesus Christ and ends with the universal Kingdom of God. Unlike the ancient Greeks' notion of recurring cycles in human history, none of which has a special, inherent significance, biblical history consists of unique decisive events leading to the fulfillment of a higher goal. More than half of the Old Testament is a historical narrative, a chronicle of events that happened in the lives of people, families, tribes and peoples. In the New Testament, the Gospels and Acts, approximately the same proportion is preserved. Other books contain theological interpretation of history in letters to individuals or churches. God reveals His character and His purposes through history. In this sense, archeology and history have largely confirmed the authenticity of the biblical chronicles (6) .

Bible interpretation

In order for future generations to hear God's oral Word, it became written. And this has a number of advantages. First, the biblical message has acquired durability: it is no longer afraid of someone's weak memory. It can be saved for for a long time. Secondly, the message acquired a completeness and orderliness, which do not differ in other forms of information transmission. And, thirdly, it is easy for a written text to disperse all over the world - it can be translated and reprinted.

God revealed His character and purpose through the prophets, He also led the priests in writing the text of the prophecies. In one of his letters, the apostle Paul wrote to his younger colleague: “Moreover, from childhood you know the sacred scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation by faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:15-17).

There are two important thoughts in these words. First, not only is the author inspired by God, but the Scriptures themselves are inspired by God. Such a doctrine does not at all imply "mechanical writing", since each of the sacred writers expresses himself only in his own language and style. We are not told how God did this, but we can be sure that He influenced the very process of recording the revelation so that the message retained its original meaning. The Word of God is clothed in the words of men. They accurately convey the thoughts of God - as the notes written down by a composer convey his music; how the formulas deduced by the scientist are the embodiment of his theory. In both cases, knowing the meaning of the symbols used, we understand the essence of what they are intended to reflect.

The second thought is also important. It tells us why the Bible was given to us. Paul gives two reasons: 1) we must understand the biblical message in order to be saved; 2) she instructs us to live a good life. The Scriptures contain a teaching (doctrine) that is useful for "teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." And the Bible has been considered the highest authority in matters of faith and morality for centuries. The creed used by the InterVarsity Christian Fellowship states that the Bible is "unique, supreme authority, inspired, and absolutely reliable" (7) . It is important to remember that all these properties speak of the "purpose of Scripture" (8) . Unfortunately, at the time of Galileo, it was believed that the biblical authority, its infallibility, extended to science as well.

If we perceive the Bible exactly as we said above, then the question of its interpretation inevitably arises. How can we understand its essence, in which we must unconditionally believe? Many authors contributed to the writing of the Bible. For one and a half thousand years they wrote it under the most diverse circumstances. Moreover, each of the priests expressed his thoughts in his own way and spoke in his own language, starting from the cultural attitudes of his time. So, "how do we interpret the Bible and apply it to our cultural context?" - that's the main question. However, this task is solvable if the same criteria are applied to the interpretation of the Bible as to the coverage of any other literary work.

The interpretation process is divided into two stages. At the first stage, we try to determine what was the original meaning of the message addressed to the author's contemporaries. The second stage is when we try to understand what significance it has for us today. Initially, God's Word came to people through events they understood in a language they understood. We do not speak this language today. Therefore, we have to understand what the author wanted to say to his contemporaries. Only then will we know what the practical value of these messages is today. Unfortunately, in seeking to see God's leading, we too often skip the first stage.

The very process of explaining and searching for the practical essence of a text is called hermeneutics. A number of authors prefer the word exegesis (critical analysis) to him - the search for the historical meaning of the text, and by hermeneutics they understand the second stage - the search for the practical significance of the found truth (9) .

1. Interpretation. Correct exegesis begins with careful reading of the text and asking the right questions. First, you need to remember the historical context. What do we know about the time when the author of the text and his contemporaries lived? What do we know about the geography of their area, political, economic and spiritual situation? What events took place in Israel (or in New Testament times in the church) that led to the need for such words? Main question Why are these words written? The significance of the first stage will become clear in chapter 10 when we talk about the interpretation of chapter 1 of Genesis.

Secondly, you need to think about the literary context. Christians are often asked, "Should the Bible be taken literally?" The answer should be: "Sometimes. Depending on what literary genre the given biblical text belongs to." What is written in ordinary language should be taken literally, and what is given in figurative expressions should also be taken as images. And remember: the priests used many literary genres, widely used figurative language. However, the reader often forgets the distinction between literary genres, and a mixture of genres can be found not only in individual books, but also in passages, with each genre to be interpreted in its own way. “In order to convey His Word to people under all the variety of historical conditions, God used all possible means of speech transmission: these are historical chronicles, genealogies, historical narratives, laws, poetry, parables, prophetic words, riddles, plays, biographical sketches, letters, sermons and revelations" (10) .

Once we have dealt with the historical and literary context, we can move on to the third step - finding the essence of the passage (although in practice these three steps can be closely intertwined). You should analyze the meaning of words and individual phrases, the grammatical structure of sentences, paragraphs and large passages. The goal is the same - to understand how the author's contemporaries perceived this passage. Another important principle is that Scripture is to be interpreted with the help of Scripture itself. In other words, how does this passage or book fit into the Bible?

This process is often called the grammar-historical method of exegesis. A good interpretation does not claim to be unique, and a good interpreter does not seek to dig out in the text what no one else has seen in it. He seeks only the "pure meaning" of the text. Perhaps not every scientist will notice this meaning, but this is precisely the ultimate goal. And one more thing: a good interpretation will never be contrary to common sense.

2. Practical value. The next step is to see the relevance of the biblical text to the present moment. How can its original meaning be translated into modern conditions? At this stage, certain contradictions and differences of opinion between interpreters may arise. Those scientists who went hand in hand through the entire first stage can now disperse into different sides. To be honest, the question of the methods of hermeneutics has become one of the main topics in theological discussions. There are a number of very difficult questions about the connection between the text and the personality of the interpreter (11) .

At the second stage, one should not forget about the original theological intention of the author, because it is he who is the basis of the practical conclusions of the modern interpreter. It should be noted that a number of Old Testament prophecies became clear only in recent centuries. Nevertheless, there is a danger: the main thing is not to read in the text what is not there and was not there, not to wishful thinking, otherwise each reader will find his own meaning in the passage. Very often, crazy ideas are dragged into hermeneutics through the "back door" or through the "window", and then they are forced to exit through " front door"as if they were rightful inhabitants of the Scriptures.

The expounded imagination of the interpreter, ideas that run counter to the principles outlined above, flooded the early Christian church, and largely due to the influence of the Alexandrian school. Alexandria reached not only high level culture, philosophy and science (chapter 1), but later became the theological and spiritual center of Christianity. The most influential of the Alexandrian theologians was Origen (A.D. 185-254), one of the greatest Greek church fathers, who presided over a school for converts. Later theologians wrote commentaries on his writings, of which only fragments have come down to us. Origen was one of the first to present the gospel in a form that was understandable to people who grew up in the Hellenic world. An inventive theologian, he had a huge impact on the development of biblical studies. Many commentaries on the Bible were based precisely on his method of interpreting Scripture. The sermons said that, according to Origen's theory, any biblical text contains three semantic levels: "literal" (which is visible), "moral" (what to do), "allegorical or spiritual" (what to believe).

"Scripture was created through the mediation of God's Spirit and has a number of semantic levels - what can be seen in fact, and what is hidden from most readers. For the content of Scripture is the outward expression of certain sacraments, a reflection of divine things .. which only those can understand who has been given the grace of the Holy Spirit - the word of wisdom and the word of knowledge" (12).

This theory, reflecting Platonic philosophy, helped Origen to discover the "secret teaching" that lay deeper than the "pure meaning" - knowledge lying on the surface (13) . The allegorical method gives scope to the play of the imagination and leads to reflections on the dramatic, sometimes fantastical meaning of passages from the biblical text. At the same time, there was a clear tendency to extract "gnostic" knowledge - knowledge for the elect, which, in turn, led to the formation of a group of "superspiritual Christians" who "knew God's depths."

In the Middle Ages, another semantic layer was added. To the literal, moral and spiritual semantic levels, they also added an apagogic - mystical meaning related to the events of the future. For example, in any passage, the word "Jerusalem" can have four meanings: the capital of Judah, human soul, church and heaven (14) . The Bible became a storehouse of "spiritual" truths for sermons - one had only to give free rein to the imagination. Martin Luther vehemently opposed this practice. His principle was different: "You don't need to carry your ideas into the Bible - you need to draw them from it." Although the allegorical method of interpretation no longer enjoys success with Christian hermeneutics, it has not completely disappeared, and most often it is it that gives rise to all cults and heresies (15) .

The essence and significance of a number of Old Testament prophecies were revealed in their entirety only in New Testament times. Such "reinterpretation" took place within the framework of a specific biblical teaching. Today we should keep in mind one principle of hermeneutics: the most important thing for us is the meaning of the text, which was seen in it by the contemporaries of the author of the text. Otherwise, our "ship" of understanding the Bible, having lost its map and compass, will go astray and get lost in the seas of subjectivism.

Sometimes this principle is difficult to apply, because the original meaning of the text has been lost practical value for modern church. For example, while certain elements of the moral law of the Pentateuch (such as the Ten Commandments) are of eternal value, there are a number of commandments (including the ceremonial and civil laws) that were addressed only to Israel, an ancient theocratic society. In hermeneutics, there is a concept of "progressive" revelation that develops throughout the Old and New Testaments, with some elements passing from testament to testament and others not. Applying Old Testament examples and teachings to the lives of Christians today is sometimes difficult.

As for our task - to give a biblical view of nature - then it is a little easier to solve it. The most difficult problems of hermeneutics relate to the main theme of the Bible - the relationship between God and man, the relationship of people in society. In addition, the Old and New Testaments speak of natural phenomena in a similar language that has a number of common features.

Bible - about nature

The main theme of the Bible is what is happening to mankind, but both the Old and New Testaments are full of references to nature. The fact is that the Jews, among whom there were no great artists or writers, drew comparisons and images, mainly from nature.

Scripture (like the book of nature) has its own specific description of natural phenomena. The Bible does not write about nature in the way that the Greeks (a living divine organism) or Newtonian science (a mechanism that exists by itself) described it. The Bible says that the created world in everything depends on God's will - according to God's will it arose and exists (16) .

Galileo and Newton emphasized that science uses the language of mathematics to measure and calculate quantitative quantities - mass, speed, distance. Students, "nibbling" the granite of modern science, should understand the meaning of these terms and have an idea about the atom, proton, electron, as well as the concepts of hypothesis, law and theory. Only then, with mathematical equations they will be able to explain the mechanism of action of natural forces. Scientific discussions about nature without the use of "scientific language" have no right to exist, even if freshmen argue. Students of the Bible, too, should take their time to learn its language, to understand what it says about nature. So, let's look at a few basic properties of the language in which the Bible talks about nature (17) .

1. Cultural context. The Old Testament has come down to us in Hebrew. But just knowing the language is not enough - you need to remember about the peculiarities of the culture of ancient Israel. For example, the Hebrew concept of time cannot be called accurate: light and darkness (from sunset to sunset) determined the boundaries of the day. The phases of the moon were used to recognize the end and beginning of the month. According to seasonal natural cycles and the movement of stars, the beginning and end of the year were established. Since the annual revolution of the Earth around the Sun does not fit into an integer number of days, the calendar had to be amended from time to time. This means that in those days people were content with such approximate measures of time, which are in no way suitable for modern science, which requires accuracy to a fraction of a second, but they were quite satisfied with them. One thing is clear: the way of life of the ancients did not suffer from the fact that they measured time less accurately than we do.

Mathematics is another example. In ancient Israel, numbers were sometimes replaced by the words "few", "a few" and "many". "Three" meant "little", "ten" meant few, "forty" meant many, "seventy" meant a large but indefinite number: like us, biblical authors liked to round numbers.

The names of the internal organs - "heart", "liver", "innards" - sometimes told about the feelings of the author. From the point of view of modern psychology or physiology, such comparisons do not make sense. However, we still use these "primitive" images. Even a cardiologist can say that his heart is broken by the death of a child. 2. Spoken language. The Bible speaks of nature in more colloquial than scientific language. This is the language that ordinary people spoke every day. The New Testament was also not written in classical Greek 350 B.C. (and not at all in the special Greek "language of the Holy Spirit", as was believed a century ago). It is written in "Koine" - the Greek that was spoken in the markets and streets in the 1st century. The similarity between classical Greek and Koine is approximately the same as between modern Russian and Russian from the time of Ivan the Terrible. The Bible is a book for people of all times, and therefore the language in which it speaks must be understood by everyone.

Scientific and spoken languages ​​serve different purposes. For example, a philosopher or scientist uses scientific terms to communicate with colleagues, write articles in scientific journals, but uses colloquial language in everyday life. So it is unwise to interpret colloquial biblical language according to the rules of scientific language. It is equally foolish to search the Bible for hidden echoes of contemporary scientific controversy. The Holy Spirit did not intend to inspire the writers on such topics.

John Calvin noted that the clergy describe natural phenomena in the form in which they are perceived by the senses, and not by scientific instruments. "The Holy Spirit did not intend to teach us astronomy. What He taught should be understandable even to the simplest and least educated person. Moses and others biblical prophets spoke plain language so that not one of the instructions was hidden from the understanding of the people "(18). In everyday life, scientists, like other people, use the spoken language. Not a single astronomer has yet objected to the phrase: "The sun rises." Ptolemy, Copernicus and Einstein had completely different ideas about the universe, however, if they wanted to go fishing together, it would not be difficult for them to arrange a meeting with each other "at dawn".

3. Non-scientific terminology. The clergy did not even set out to describe the mechanism of natural phenomena. They are concerned not with Aristotle's "motive cause" but with the "formal" and "final" causes - design and purpose. The Bible is not interested in the question "How?" but answers the questions "Who?" and why?" - questions about the Creator and His purposes. Man is given the ability to think, and therefore, even a century before the debate on the theory of evolution flared up, a Christian geologist noted: “None of the places in the Bible that speaks of nature contains a definite explanation of natural phenomena. observable phenomena, and the way they describe them is admirable" (19) .

Biblical descriptions of nature are usually called "pre-scientific" (with a note of disdain in the voice). Chronologically this approach is correct, but the term "pre-scientific" does not show the main difference between biblical and scientific language. The modern scientific language is not at all the standard against which the Hebrew text, ancient Greek tragedy and Roman poetry are compared. Each literary genre has its own laws, distinctive features and goals. Therefore, for the sake of accuracy, it is better to say that the biblical language is "unscientific", i.e. does not use scientific terms.

Such a description should not be considered primitive, because it contains the universal truth. There are two reasons for this. First, if one of the modern writers introduces a scientific description of nature into his work, then who can guarantee that he will be understood in any country, regardless of its cultural characteristics and the educational level of the population? Secondly, how long "modern scientific theories"will remain modern? Will the next generation of scientists agree with them? When Moses spoke about nature, he set himself different goals than Aristotle. Ancient Greek philosopher managed to reign in the minds of Western thinkers for more than two millennia, but the Jewish prophet spoke to the soul, and therefore his words do not lose their significance today.

Summarize. Biblical descriptions of nature are rooted in the culture of that time, they are written in colloquial language without the use of scientific terms. The third property is especially important, because it speaks of the relationship between the biblical language and the scientific one. When it is claimed that the Bible is scientifically infallible, it should be clarified: what kind of science are we talking about? About the science of Aristotle or Copernicus? Newton or Einstein? Or about the science of that genius whose theories will replace modern ones tomorrow? All scientific theories are temporary: they change or disappear altogether. It is worth proving to one generation the "scientific inerrancy" of the Bible, and the next will use this proof to archive it.

The Bible does not offer a systematic explanation of nature, but several basic axioms can be found in it. First, it is the belief that God created the universe. The prophets and apostles repeatedly spoke of the truth of this proposition. The pagan gods are powerless. Only the Lord God of Israel created "heaven and earth" (Ps. 145:6).

Secondly, nature is not an object for worship. She can be admired, for she is the creation of God's hands, but one cannot worship. All worship of nature is a form of idolatry. The Jews were strict monotheists, and therefore in their writings one cannot often find grotesque mythology, the heroes of which are plants and animals, although such myths were created by all the peoples surrounding Israel.

Thirdly, the writers are confident in the knowability and predictability of natural phenomena, and this confidence rests on the knowledge of God's nature (Jer. 31:35-36). The same confidence that there is a single order in the world, that uniform natural forces operate in it, lies at the basis of the scientific worldview. But the clergy do not reflect on the mechanisms of action of natural forces.

Fourth, the Old and New Testaments are dominated by the view that God's providence moves the world. Biblical theism is opposed to pantheism and deism: God is not just a part of nature and He did not "wash his hands" after the creation of the world. God is constantly doing His work in nature, as in history, in fulfillment of His purposes. The priests believe that all natural phenomena - regularly repeated and those that can be considered a miracle - are performed according to God's will.

Miracles are possible, God answers prayers. The basis for this confidence is God's concern for the world. How are the laws of nature and miracles related? We will talk about this now.

Similar information.

To the question "what is the Bible" there are two equivalent answers. For believers, these are, first of all, the words of God, written down and conveyed to the rest of mankind. For scientists, historians and culturologists, atheists or adherents of other religious movements, the Bible is just a book. Literary work created by people and for people. It is in this fundamental difference that lies the fundamental dissimilarity in the work with the text of the Bible by theologians and scientists.

What is the Bible

Before discussing the secret meanings hidden in the text, or discussing the secondary nature of the mythological plots used in it, it is necessary to clarify what the Bible is. The fact is that even representatives of various Christian denominations invest in this concept a different meaning. And Jehovah's Witnesses or Jews, speaking of the Bible, mean a book whose content is more than half different from the Orthodox or Catholic canon.

Byblos means "book" in ancient Greek. And "bible" is the plural form of this word. Therefore, the literal answer to the question of what the Bible is is "many books". Indeed, the canonical text of any Book of Life consists of dozens of books.

Old Testament

The Jewish Bible consists of 39 texts. They coincide with the books of the Old Testament, well known to all Christians. These texts were created by various authors between the 13th and 1st centuries. BC e. Although, of course, in fact, many more such religious works were written than 39. But only these books were chosen by the ancient Indian sages from a huge number of other religious texts and considered worthy of canonization.

All these books were written in Hebrew and have survived in this form to this day, not a single word in them has been changed. It is with them that any translations of the Bible are checked in order to eliminate distortions or inaccuracies. The only thing that can be discussed in relation to the coincidence or non-coincidence of the texts of these books and the Old Testament is the initial semantic content of the Hebrew words. What exactly did the ancient Jews mean when they said "heaven", "earth", "god"? Is the earth like a planet or like land, firmament? Is the sky like space, the universe, or like a blue dome overhead? Or maybe it's air? It is these questions that are of interest to translators from Hebrew. Often, such a difference in interpretations fundamentally changes the meaning of the text.

catholic bible

Answering the question: “What is the Bible?”, a Christian, unlike a Jew, will rather remember the New Testament. This is precisely the deep contradiction between the two religions, originating from a single source. Jews, unlike Christians, do not consider Jesus to be the messiah and therefore do not include his teachings in canonical texts.

There are also some other differences that give rise to a different understanding of the same moments in the Bible. Catholics, creating their own list of canonized texts, did not use the Hebrew originals, but their translation into Greek - the so-called Septuagint. This is how the Vulgate was created. At the same time, the Septuagint did not coincide with the original tests in everything, and after the translation into Latin, the number of discrepancies increased significantly. Later, the Catholic Church repeatedly edited the Vulgate, checking it with Hebrew manuscripts. Bible translations have become more accurate, but the work is still ongoing, and discussions about the appropriateness of using certain sources do not stop.

Orthodoxy and Protestantism

Another trouble with the Septuagint is that it includes moments that are not confirmed by the original Hebrew sources. That is why the rest of the Christian denominations classified such sections of the "translation of the seventy elders" as undoubtedly spiritually useful, but not sacred, and they are not considered canonical.

The Protestants, editing the text of the Bible, abandoned the fragments of the text that did not have confirmation in the form of Hebrew texts. The Russian Bible, more precisely, the Orthodox one, gives the reader the opportunity to get acquainted with such controversial details of the Holy Scriptures. But next to these fragments there is always a clarification warning about their non-canonicity. Usually these are notes or highlighting text in square brackets.

How ancient theologians studied the Bible

Bible interpretation has always been one of the cornerstones of theological studies. The book, given to humanity by God, was supposed to hide more than it really seems. Therefore, sages and priests used many methods to discover the secret meaning hidden between the lines of Holy Scripture. As Stanislav Lem wrote, one can find a secret cipher hidden in the text, but one cannot prove that it is not there. One of the countless decryption systems will provide a meaningful result even if the author did not use any secret code. This is how the most innocent and easy-to-understand book can be "unraveled". The Bible is no exception in this regard.

The most ancient attempts to find the secret meaning of the Holy Scriptures were made in Judea. Interpretation of midrash is an oral section of the Torah, dealing exclusively with the interpretation of the books of the Old Testament. The principles underlying such studies seem rather strange to contemporaries:

• Giving exceptional meaning to insignificant details.
• Analysis of words or fragments of text outside the semantic context in which they were used.
• The combination into one logical segment of texts different in meaning and content based only on the fact that they contain similar words or phrases.

The first attempts to search for hidden meaning

Thus, theologians counted letters or their numerical values ​​in words and, finding coincidences, drew conclusions about the identity of the meaning in different passages of the text. Examples of such studies now seem naive and very far-fetched. So, the name of one of Abraham's servants is Eliezer. In Hebrew transcription, this word corresponded to the number 318. Abraham also had 318 slaves, and therefore, according to ancient researchers, the value of Eliezer as a servant corresponded to the value of all three hundred and eighteen slaves.

Naturally, being carried away by such studies, it is easy to lose sight of the literal, basic Testaments of the Bible, to neglect them as too obvious. Thus, the Song of Songs is interpreted as the allegorical love of the church for Jesus in the interpretation of Christians, or love for Yahweh and his chosen people in the interpretation of the Jews. At the same time, the clergy completely ignore the literal meaning of this literary masterpiece - the chanting of the love of a man and a woman as the highest sacrament of life. It's too simple, and therefore not interesting. The essence of the Bible, the true content of its texts cannot be so simple and primitive.

Such allegorical searches are characteristic of apocalyptic interpretations. Ancient scholars along these lines also searched for hidden meanings in the simplest texts. But they focused on the predictions encoded in the text of the Bible.

Reasons for the emergence of the allegorical method of interpretation

One of the reasons for the popularity of this method lies in the variability of cultural and moral norms. Holy Scripture is an ancient book. The Bible already in the eyes of the Jews and Greeks contained fragments that seemed to them immoral and unworthy of the divine text. In order to come to terms with such a discrepancy, these sections were assigned a hidden meaning that had nothing to do with the actual. Moreover, it was believed that the higher the level of dedication of the interpreter, the less the result of his research would have in common with the source text.

Alas, each researcher found something of his own there, and there was no unanimity on the issue of allegorical interpretations among Bible students. And the degree of abstraction of such research exceeded the boundaries of reason.

Thus, one of the interpreters understood the story of Abraham traveling to Palestine as an allegory of the sage's renunciation of the sensory perception of the world. And the subsequent marriage to Sarah, in his opinion, was a symbol of comprehending true, out-of-body wisdom, entering into a sacred union with her.

Jesus also interpreted the Bible

The interpretation of the Bible is not only for the clergy. Jesus also used the text of the Old Testament in his sermons, drawing his own conclusions from it. That is, in fact, he interpreted the Holy Scripture that existed before him. He turned to the examples of Cain and Abel, Isaac, David, Jacob and used them in an absolutely literal sense. He categorically rejected the complex, casuistic method of searching for hidden meaning, considering the Word of God to be an independent text that does not need additional processing.

At the same time, the Pharisees never reproached Jesus for his unusual interpretation of the Testament, which was unheard of at that time, although they had enough complaints on other points. They were surprised, disagreed, but did not condemn. Apparently, the religious doctrine of the ancient Jews assumed considerable free-thinking in this matter. Everyone was entitled to their own opinion.

Position of St. Augustine

In the future, excessively elaborate interpretation of the Bible was abandoned. The first to convincingly prove its uselessness and even harmfulness for theology was Blessed Augustine. He believed that when analyzing the Testaments of the Bible, one should never break away from the historical and cultural context. The basis for the study of God-given texts should be, first of all, their literal meaning, and it is this meaning that serves as the basis for building any logical construction.

The interpreter of the Bible, in addition to Latin, must know Hebrew, Ancient Greek, geography and other subjects necessary to understand the realities of the text. Although Augustine believed that the Bible had a hidden, allegorical meaning, he specifically warned about the danger of introducing the personality of the researcher into such studies.

And although Blessed Augustine himself often deviated from these rules, they all played a huge role in determining the future direction of Bible study.

New trends of the Reformation

The theologians of the Reformation fully shared the opinion of Blessed Augustine on the inadmissibility of false interpretations that contradicted the text of the book. But they went even further. Both Martin Luther and Calvin believed that biblical texts should be taken primarily literally. They did not share a position catholic church who believed that the Word of God is extremely difficult to understand and requires clarification by a professional interpreter, that is, a priest. Protestants believed that God is wise enough to give people the knowledge that they are able to accept and realize. In doing so, the Church of the Reformation abandoned the monopoly on truth that had existed for many centuries. The new Bible was not written in Latin, but in a language close and accessible to readers, with the simplification of some excessively outdated phrases and their replacement with more modern word forms.

Modern scholars of Scripture have gone even further. They not only do not deny the role of the human author in writing the text, but also consider it to be the leading one. Even under the condition of divine inspiration, Scripture was created by people. That is, any knowledge granted by the Almighty passed through the prism of personal experience and perception, and this could not but leave its mark on the text of the Bible.

Research scientists

Scholars, studying the Holy Scriptures, pay special attention mainly to historical and cultural realities. The language of the Bible, the actual reliability of the events described, the authorship of individual books - all this constitutes a separate and very interesting area for studying the work.

So, speaking of the miracle of resurrection, one cannot ignore the fact that the motif of a dying and resurrecting deity was extremely common at that time. Osiris, Persephone, Mithra in the south and east, Balder in the north. It is no coincidence that the Easter holiday coincides with the active spring awakening of nature. Yes, and its date is conditional, it does not coincide with the real date of the death of Christ, but is calculated according to the lunar cycle. For a culturologist, the element of interpenetration of religious motives of different cultures is obvious.

Historians easily interpret some apocalyptic stories, pointing to real prototypes of mysterious descriptions. So, the Babylonian harlot sitting on the seven-headed beast is Rome, and for the Jew this analogy was obvious. The seven hills were already a stable association back then. And the following description confirms this assumption. Seven fallen kings - seven Caesars who had died by the time the text was written, one existing - the ruling Galba at that time, and the future ruler - a contender for the title, who was just conducting active hostilities, seeking the throne.

Many miraculous predictions after a detailed study of the Bible turn out to be not predictions at all, but descriptions of events that have already occurred - simply because this piece of text was written much earlier than it was thought. So, the prophecy about the successive change of the Babylonian, Persian, Greek and then the Roman empires, a detailed description of the events taking place in Palestine for many centuries, after careful research by historians, turned out to be ... chronicles. This text was written in the 2nd century. BC e., and its author only wanted to tell about events that he considered extremely important, and did not prophesy.

Such studies may take away some of the supernatural flair from the Bible, but they certainly confirm its historical accuracy.