About

The Holy Bible

 

Bishop Nathanael (Lvov, 1906-1985).

Translated from Russian by Tatiana Pavlova/ Natalia Semyanko

 

Contents:

The Subdivision of the Bible and the Problem of Canon. The Creation of the First Man. The Downfall. The First Human Generations. The Flood. After the Flood. Noah’s Descendants. Abraham, Moses and Elijah as the Preparers of the Salvation of Mankind. Manasseh, the King of Judea.The Holy Scripture and Divine Service. The Importance of the Septuagint.The Bible and Archeology. The Ancient Mesopotamian Writings and Narrations of the Holy Bible. The Stella with the Name of Pontius Pilate.

Appendix: " Concerning the Book of Professor Kartashev, “The Notion of Historicity and the Critical Study of the Old Testament.”

 

 

 

The Subdivision of the Bible and the Problem of Canon.

The word Bible is a Greek word, meaning "books." This word is used in Greek with the definite article "ta" in the plural form, and this acquires the meaning: "Books, with a certain content."

This "certain content" is the Divine revelation for people, given in order that they could find the path to salvation, i.e. would become capable of living a mutual life with God, a life which is eternal and joyful, in love for the Creator and for one another.

This objective of the Bible must be remembered while one studies it, for otherwise it will not be clear, why the Bible notes some phenomena and omits others, answers some questions and says nothing about others, which seem to deserve no less attention.

The Bible is a document of the absolute truth. It does not contain a single word which does not correspond to the perfect Divine Truth. All the paternal literature, all the authentic church writings and sermons are the continuation and the development of the Bible teachings, the testimonies of life of the Same Life-Creating Holy Spirit, Who talked to the fathers through the prophets and will talk in the Holy Church of Christ till the end of ages.

An Orthodox Christian cannot be content with the Bible alone, which is what the Protestants want. The more a Christian lives by the Bible, the more It will make him ponder, experience, strive to make real and develop everything set forth in it. The pondering, experiencing, embodiment and development of the Holy Divine Law has always been the content of the lives of the saints of Christ’s Church. And an Orthodox Christian cannot "enter into contradiction with the Bible" in anything, whether minor or major, or consider anything in It to be "out-of-date," something that had lost its power, or incorrect, as the contemporary critics of the Holy Scripture want to assure us of. "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away" (Matt. 34:35) and "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:18) said the Lord.

The Bible is the voice of the Holy Spirit. But this voice was heard through human intermediates and by human means. Therefore, the Bible is a book with its own history. It did not appear at once. It was written by many people over a long period of time, in several languages in different countries.

The Bible is divided into the Old and New Testaments. The New Testament contains the fulfillment and completeness of the entire Divine truth, while the Old Testament — the preparatory, pedagogically incomplete unfolding of it.

Human nature is distorted by sin, which penetrated it through the downfall of our forefathers and increased in the further generations with countless personal sins of people. In order to prepare decayed mankind to accept the Son of God and His Full Divine Law, a most attentive and thoughtful process was necessary. It is that process which the Lord carries out in the Old Testament.

The very appearance of the Old Testament, the gift of the initial Divine Revelation on Mount Sinai, is a rather significant juncture, prepared in its turn by the careful process of Divine selection among people and the fostering of this selection.

Originally, God gave Moses only the first part of the Bible, or the Torah, i.e. "the Law," consisting of the five books of the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

For a long period of time, only the Pentateuch, or Torah, was the Holy Scripture in the full meaning of the word, God’s Word for the Old Testament Church, though immediately after the Torah, the first lines of the subsequent writings appeared, organically proceeding from the original Divine Law. The Book of Joshua began to be written, while the creation of Deuteronomy was coming to an end. The Book of Judges is the continuation of the book of Joshua, and the Books of Kings are the continuation of the book of Judges. The Paralipomenon, i.e. the Chronicles, supplement the books of Kings. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah are continuations of the Books of Kings and Paralipomenon. The Books of Ruth, Esther, Judith and Tobit describe individual episodes of the history of the chosen nation. Finally, the books of the Maccabees end the narration of the history of Israel and lead it to the threshold of the coming of Christ.

. Thus, the second section of the Holy Scripture appears, following the Law, which is called the Historic Books, or in the narrow meaning of the word — the Holy History.

The Historic Books are sprinkled with individual poetical works: chants, prayers, psalms, as well as teachings (for example Gen. chap.11, Ex. chap.15, many extracts of Deuteronomy, Judg. Chap. 5, 2 Kings 1:19 and on, Tob. chap.13, and so on and so forth). Later on, chants and teachings grew into whole books, which comprise the third section of the Bible — the Instructive Books, in Hebrew — Ketubim. This section contains the books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiasts, Songs of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach.

Finally, the works of the holy prophets, who acted among the Hebrew people according to the Divine will after the division of the kingdom and the Babylonian captivity, comprise the fourth section of the Holy Books — the Prophetic Books, in Hebrew called "Nebiim." This section includes the books of the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, the Epistle of Jeremiah, Baruch, Prophet Ezekiel, Prophet Daniel, and the 12 Minor Prophets, i.e. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonas, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. This same division of the Bible into Legislative, Historical, Instructive, and Prophetic Books, was used in the New Testament, where the Legislative books are the Gospels, the Historical Book — the Acts of the Apostles, the Instructive Books — the Epistles of the Holy Apostles, and the Prophetic Book is the Revelations of St. John the Theologian.

Besides this division, there are also divisions in the Old Testament of the Holy Scripture into Canonic and Non-Canonic books.

The Question about Canon.

To clarify this question, we need to recall that, originally, only the Torah-Law, i.e. the five books of Moses, were in the full sense of the word the Holy Scripture, the Law for the Old Testament Church.

The rest of the books now included in the Bible were, for the ancient pious Hebrew, the same continuation of the Law, its development, but not a part of it, like the works of the Apostles, holy fathers, the lives of saints and Patericks are to us, including the works of such contemporary writers as Theophan the Recluse, Father John of Krondstadt, Metropolitan Anthony.

A similar attitude towards the Holy Books in ancient Israel was held until the epoch of the return from Babylonian captivity (500 years B.C). The Samaritans, separated at that time from the Hebrews, accept only the Pentateuch of Moses as the Holy Scripture, though they know some other books of the Bible in an instructional capacity.

Having assimilated this information, we can understand more clearly, how the question about the canon of the Old Testament Church arose, i.e. the question about which of the writings had such high authority that they were put together with the Sinai Law, and which did not. Even for us some of the works of the church writers have more authority, and some — less. This is especially true in relation to the most recent, less glorified by holiness, writers.

The question about canon, i.e. about which of the pious scriptures can be considered to be authentically God-inspired and could be put together with the Torah, occupied the Old Testament Church throughout the last centuries before Christ’s Nativity. But the Old Testament Church did not establish any canon, though it did all the preparatory work. One of the stages of this preparatory work is noted in the 2d Book of Maccabees, saying that Nehemiah "founding a library gathered together the acts of the kings, and the prophets, and of David, and the epistles of the kings" (2:13). To a greater extent the establishment of a canon was prepared by the process of the selection of books for the translation of the 70 interpreters, which was triumphantly completed collectively by the Old Testament Church.

Both events could somewhat rightly be counted as the establishment of a canon, if we had a list of the books, which righteous Nehemiah collected as holy, or which were selected by the God-chosen interpreters. But we do not have the precise list of either the first or the second.

The separation between the accepted and unaccepted, canonical and non-canonical was established by the Hebrew community only after the rejection of Christ the Savior by the leaders of the Hebrew people, after the destruction of Jerusalem, on the brink of the 1st and 2nd centuries after the Nativity of Christ, by the council of Jewish rabbis in the city of Jamnia in Palestine. Among the rabbis, the most outstanding were Rabbi Akiba and Gamaliel Junior. They determined the list of 39 books, which they skillfully reduced to 24, combining into one unit the books of Kings, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah and the 12 books of the Minor Prophets, according to the number of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. This list was accepted by the Judean community and introduced in all the synagogues. This is that very "Canon," according to which the books of the Old Testament are called canonical or non-canonical.

Of course, this canon, established by the Judean community which rejected Christ the Savior and who was therefore no longer the Old Testament Church, losing any right to the Divine legacy, which is the Holy Scripture, — such a canon cannot be obligatory for the Church of Christ.

Nevertheless, the Church took into account the Judaic canon, for example, the list of holy books, which was established by the local Holy Laodicean Council, was obviously composed under the influence of Jamnia list. This list does not include the books of the Maccabees, nor the Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon or the 3d book of Ezra. But this list does not fully coincide with the list of the Judaic canon, because the list of the Laodicean Council includes the book of the prophet Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah and the second book of Ezra, which were excluded by the Judaic canon (in the New Testament, the Laodicean Council did not include the Revelation of St. John the Theologian in the Canon).

But the Laodicean Council did not acquire prevailing importance in the life of the Church. In the determination of its holy books, the Church is led in a much greater degree by the 85th Apostolic Rule and the Epistle of Athanasius the Great, including 50 books of the Old, and 27 books of the New Testament in the contents of the Bible. This broader selection was influenced by the list of books of the 70 interpreters (the Septuagint). However, the Church did not submit to this choice unconditionally, including in its list books, written after the translation of the 70, for example, the Maccabees and the book of Jesus, son of Sirach (Ecclesiastes).

The fact that the so-called "non-canonical" books were accepted by the Church can be seen from their use in church services,, where they are used in the same way as canonical ones, and, for example, the book of the Wisdom of Solomon, rejected by the Judean canon, is the most read book of the Old Testament at church services.

The 11th chapter of the Book of Wisdom of Solomon speaks so prophetically clearly about the sufferings of Christ, possibly more than any other extract from the Old Testament, other than the book of the Prophet Isaiah. Is it not for that reason that the rabbis, who gathered in Jamnia, rejected this book?

Christ the Savior in the Sermon on the Mount quotes, though without any references, the words from the book of Tobit (compare Tob. 4:15 with Math. 7:12 and Luke 4:31, Tob. 4:16 with Luke 14:13), from the book of Sirach (comp. 28:2 with Math. 6:14 and Mark 2:25), from the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon (comp. 3:7 with Math. 13:43). The Apostle John in his Revelations takes the words and images from the book of Tobit (comp. Rev. 21:11-24 with Tob. 13:11-18). In Apostle Paul’s Epistles to the Romans (1:21), to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 1:20-27; 2:78), to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:15), we find the words of the Prophet Baruch. Apostle James has many phrases in common with the book of Jesus, Son of Sirach. The Epistles to the Hebrews of the Apostle Paul and the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon are so similar, that some moderately negative critics considered them to be the works of one and the same author.

All the countless legions of the Christian martyrs of the first centuries were inspired for their exploit by the holiest example of the Maccabees’ martyrs, which is described in the second book of Maccabees.

Metropolitan Anthony absolutely precisely determines: "The holy books of the Old Testament are divided into canonical, which are recognized by Christians and Jews, and non-canonical, which only the Christians recognize, but which the Jews have lost" (The Experience of the Christian Orthodox Catechism, page 16)

All this unquestionably testifies to the high authority and Divine inspiration of the holy books of the Bible, which are incorrectly, or to be more precise, ambiguously called non-canonical.

We discussed this question in detail, because Protestantism obediently following the Judean canon, rejects all the books, rejected by the Jews.

The Language of the Bible.

The Holy Scripture was originally written in 3 languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

The greater part of the Old Testament is written in Hebrew. The following were written in Aramaic: in the Old Testament, chapters 2-8 of the book of the Prophet Daniel, chapters 4-8 of the 1st book of Ezra and the book of Sirach; and in the New Testament, the Gospel of St. Matthew.

In the Old Testament, the 2d and 3d books of Maccabees, and the entire New Testament, except for the Gospel of Matthew, were written in Greek. Besides this, the Gospel of Matthew, and all the Books of the Old Testament which are not accepted by the Jewish canon, only survived in Greek, while their Hebrew and Aramaic originals were lost.

The first translation of the Holy Scripture known to us was the translation of all the books of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek, which was completed by the so-called 70 (to be more exact, 72) interpreters in the 3d century BC.

oly scripture

Demetrius Phalareus, the learned noble of the Hellenistic Egyptian King Ptolemaios Philadelphus, set a goal to gather all the books, existing in the whole world at the time, in the capital of his king. Judea at that time (284-247 BC) was subject to the Egyptian kings, and Ptolemaios Philadelphus ordered the Jews to send all their existing books to the Alexandrian library, together with their Greek translation. Probably none of the contemporaries understood that this desire of the king and his noble, typical of bibliophiles, to compile the most complete collection of books, would have such an important significance for the spiritual life of mankind.

The Judean high priests treated this task with great seriousness and awareness of their responsibility. In spite of the fact that, by that time, the entire Hebrew nation was concentrated in the single tribe of Judas, and the Judeans could boldly fulfill the wishes of the Egyptian king themselves, however, fully justly and sacredly longing for the participation of all Israel in this task, the spiritual leaders of the Hebrew nation proclaimed a fast and intense prayer among all the people, and called upon the 12 tribes to choose 6 interpreters from each of them, so that they could jointly translate the Holy Scripture into Greek, the language then most widespread.

This translation, which in this way became the fruit of the mutual effort of the Old Testament Church, received the title the Septuagint, i.e. the Seventy, and became the most authoritative narration of the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament for Orthodox Christians.

Considerably later (evidently, around the 1st century BC for the Old Testament part of the Holy Scripture and around the beginning of the 2d century AD for Its New Testament part) the translation of the Holy Scripture into Syrian appeared, the so-called Peshitta, which coincides in all the most important details with the translation of the Septuagint. For the Syrian Church, and the Eastern churches connected to the Syrian church, the Peshitta is as authoritative as the Septuagint is to us, but in the Western church, the translation done by blessed Jeronim, the so-called Vulgate (which in Latin means exactly the same thing as Peshitta in Aramaic — "simple"), was considered more authoritative than the Hebrew original. This might seem strange, but we shall try to explain it.

By the time Christ the Savior was born, Ancient Hebrew, in which the Law and the majority of the other books of the Old Testament were written, was already a dead language. The Jewish population of Palestine spoke the language, then common to the Semitic tribes of Near Asia — Aramaic. Christ the Savior spoke that language as well. Those few words of Christ, which the Evangelists cite literally: "Talitha cumi" (Mark 5:41); "Abba," when the Lord addressed God the Father (Mark 5:41); the mortal cry of the Lord on the Cross: "Eloi, Eloi, lama Sabachthani" (Mark 15:34) — are in Aramaic (in the Gospel of Matthew, the words "Eloi, Eloi" — My God, My God) — are given in the Ancient Hebrew form "Ili, Ili," but the second half of the phrase in both Gospels is given in Aramaic).

When, during the 1st and 2nd centuries, after the storms of the Jewish war and the rebellion of Bar Kochba, the existence of Judeo-Christian communities ceased, then the Holy Scripture in Hebrew disappeared from the Christian backdrop. It pleased God’s will, that the Judean community, which rejected Him and thus betrayed its original destiny, received a different assignment, turning out to be the only keeper of the Holy Scripture in the original language, and contrary to its own will, became a witness, that everything that is said by the Church of Christ concerning the ancient prophesies and prototypes of Christ the Savior and about the Divine Fatherly preparation of people for acceptance of the Son of God, is not an invention of Christians, but is the actual truth.

When, after many centuries of separate existence in different and, in addition, deadly warring surroundings, in the Greek and Aramaic translations of the Holy Scripture and in the translations from Greek and Aramaic on one side and the Jewish original on the other, when they all were brought together for comparison, it turned out, that in all the least-bit important things they, with rare exceptions, are identical. This unanimity is a testimony to how carefully the holy text of the Divine words was preserved, how triumphantly mankind justified the Divine confidence, which had entrusted the absolute truth to the infirm and limited human powers.

But if the texts coincide so well in all the main details, then why does the Greek translation remain more authoritative for Orthodox Christians than the Hebrew original? — Because it was kept by Divine grace in the Church of Christ from Apostolic times. When the lines of the Bible were copied by Christian writers, then the writer himself, being a child of the Church, a participant of the Godly Church life, knowing the Truth, did not make grave mistakes in the text being re-written, and the listeners of that text, to whom he passed the copied book, could not ignore anything distorting the significance of the holy words, to which the Church was always so attentive.

The Targums and Other Translations of the Scripture.

Besides the ancient translations of the Scripture, there exist more or less loose interpretations of it in Aramaic, the so called targums, i.e. interpretations.

When the Judeans replaced the ancient Hebrew with Aramaic, the rabbis had to use this language specifically to interpret the Scripture in the synagogues. But they did not want to completely abandon the precious legacy of their fathers — the original of the Divine Law — and therefore, instead of a direct translation, introduced explanatory interpretations in Aramaic. These interpretations are called targums.

The most ancient and famous of the targums are the Babylonian Targum on all the Holy Scripture, which was compiled in the 1st century BC by one rabbi Onkelos, and the Jerusalem targum, written somewhat later, attributed to Joathan ben Uzziel, compiled only on the Torah. Several more, later targums, also exist. Though both of the oldest ones appeared before the Massorite reform, the text, interpreted by them, coincides almost exactly with the Massorite one, first of all, because the targums came out of the same rabbinical milieu, from which the Massorites originated, and secondly, because the text of the targums (which reached us only in the latest rewritings) was subjected to editing by the Massorites.

In this respect, the Samaritan targum is very important. It was compiled in the 10-11th centuries, but takes as its basis for interpretation not the Massorite, but the Pre-Massorite Hebrew text, coinciding with the text of Septuagint in many respects.

In our, Russian Church, we have at hand first-class translations of both variants of the Holy Scripture: the Church Slavonic translation from the Septuagint, and the Russian Synodal one — from the Hebrew text.

The original translation into the Church Slavonic of the Holy Scripture was done by the Equal-to-the-Apostles brothers Cyril and Methodius, but only those parts of the Old Testament text which are included in the church services’ readings, the so-called paremias, have survived to this day. In the 16th century, at the start of the Church’s battle with the Judaizing heresy, it was discovered that there was no complete Bible in all of Russia. Therefore, Archbishop Gennady of Novgorod ordered the translation of the holy books from the Greek anew. This translation, with many corrections and adaptations, reached us as the contemporary Church-Slavonic Bible.

The Russian translation of the Bible was done from the Hebrew in the 19th century. However, in the good Synodal editions, the more important divergences from the Septuagint are marked, and the translations from Greek are given in brackets. The Biblical Society editions are done exclusively from the Hebrew text without any variations from the Greek.

Almost simultaneously with the Church Slavonic translation (even later than that), the Holy Scripture was translated into Arabic by Saadia ben Joseph al Fayumi (Saadia Gaon) (in the beginning of the 10th century). This translation was done from the Peshitta.

Such a late translation of the Holy Scripture into Arabic is explained by the fact that Aramaic, which received its most recent and final form in Palmyra among the northern Arabic tribes, was, before the onslaught of the Mohammedans, the literary language of all northern Arabs and Syrians, understandable even to the simple people. The Muslim conquest brought the language of the Southern Arabs to the North, from which the modern Arabic language descended. But, Arabs and Christian Syrians continued to use Aramaic in their church life for a long time, precious for the reason that Christ Himself spoke it.

The Creation of the First Man

"And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness"

The external material world is created and brought forth, the receptacle is ready. The Earth — the material world — is no longer without aspect, or shapeless, but it is still empty, for it does not yet have moral worth, for it is morally reckless, irresponsible.

And so, in order to fill the emptiness, to give moral sense to all creation, to call into existence beings, which are capable of the joy of living, like the angels, in which God delights, the creative Divine word is pronounced: "Let Us make man." So that the new creature could be truly kind, it must be similar to its Creator, and therefore the Lord says: "Make in Our image."

Here, in this most important moment of creation, in the moment of calling to existence the God-like creature, which gave moral sense to the whole material world, we again see the holy seal of Trinity on the Biblical lines: "In Our image," not Mine, says the Lord.

Being Himself Tri-Hypostatical, united by the perfect Divine love of the Three Hypostases into one Divine Being, He makes His creature, as once He had made angels, not single, but binary, so that they would produce a multitude of persons, but they would all be one being.

"So God created man in his Own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it."

In these verses of the 1st chapter of the Bible, speaking of the original creation of the man, the Hebrew word "bara" is used —creating from nothing. Consequently, paraphrasing, we can say about the first Biblical report of man’s creation this way: God, One in essence, but Tri-Hypostatic, made man from nothing, in His image and His likeness, man and woman, two persons in one essence, and gave them a blessing to multiply their number and to rule the visible world.

But the creation of man is mentioned in the Bible not once, but twice: the first time in the 1st chapter, the second time in the second, verse 7. "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground." At first glance, both stories are different: in the first it says that God "bara," i.e. created man from nothing, in His image and likeness; in the second that He "assa," i.e. formed him from the dust of the ground, the same way he formed all the animals, about which it is said "formed." (In Hebrew it is the same verb "assa") "And out of the ground the LORD God formed…every fowl of the air" (Gen. 2:19). And just like the animals, in the 2d chapter of Genesis it is said about man: "and man became a living soul." Further on: in the first narration, God simultaneously creates a man and a woman, two persons, potentially a multitude of persons, similar to the multiple angelic council, in one essence; in the second narration it speaks only about the creation of the man, Adam, and only later his wife, Eve, is formed (assa) out of his rib.

This duality was used by the enemies of the Christianity as a "proof" of the fallacy of the Bible and the difference of the origin of the Biblical narrations. Meanwhile, if we remember the truth about man, as a bi-singular spiritual/physical creature, then the church’s understanding of the two narrations of the Bible about the creation of man would become evident to us, as the description of the different essences of human nature: spiritual and emotional-physical.

St. Gregory of Nyssa in his work "The Making of Man," when pointing out the duality of the creation-formation of the man, says: "God created (i.e. "bara") the inner man and formed ("assa") the external one, the flesh was formed, but the soul was created."

That is why man, by his corporal nature, is a part of the external animalistic-materialistic world. All that is in us exists in the world surrounding us. We are even closer to the living animal world, to these God-created living souls. Therefore, a Christian can very easily agree with the observation that, in their physical nature, a man and a chimpanzee are closer to one another, than a chimpanzee and a marmoset. If speaking of the physical nature of man, then we would not be embarrassed by the possibility of putting man in the modern zoological classification in a designated place in the order of primates, in the class of mammals.

But a Christian cannot suppose that our place in the ranks of creations ends there. No, in spirit we are God-like creatures, "a little lower than the angels" (Ps. 8:5-7 and Hebr. 2:7), and a profound and impassible abyss exists between us, on the one hand, and the rest of the animal world on the other: fulfilling our resemblance to God, we can get to know the terrestrial animals and the furthest worlds of the universe, similarly to how the Lord knows His creation, but nobody but us, in the boundless material world, can get to know either us, or themselves, or the external or internal world.

St. Anthony the Great says the following about the relationships of the human and animal worlds: "Man mentally comes in contact with the inexpressible Divine power, but physically he is related to animals" (The Teachings, book 2, chap. 42). And more: ‘All that grows can be called living, for it is growing and living, but it cannot be said that all of it has a soul. Plants have a physical life, but do not have souls. Man is called a spiritual, reasoning creature, for he has a spirit (mind) and is able to acquire knowledge. The rest of the animals have breath and souls…There are four different types of living creatures: some are immortal and have souls, such as angels; others have spirit, soul and life, such as people, still others have life and souls, such as animals; and the rest have only life, such as plants" (the same source, chap. 166)

Nemesius of Emessa, a 5th century teacher of the Church, in his work about the "nature of man" writes: "Physically and through the combination of elements, man belongs to lifeless creatures. By the same traits, and also through the ability to grow and multiply, he belongs to plants. He has all these features in common with mute animals, and besides, he is similar to them in his desire to move, in feelings and wishes. And through his reasoning source, he comes in contact with the incorporeal spiritual beings — angels."

"And God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. (Gen. 1:28-29).

After populating the Earth, introducing into it one, who is the bearer of moral value, the Divine-like spirit, God subdued to him all the matter brought forth by Him previously, fulfilling and developing his Divine similarity. The Ruler of the Universe Himself, the Lord, makes man the ruler of the material and animal world, and, at the same time, makes this material and animal world, which does not have any moral value by itself, the participant of the God-like, morally worthy human life; the inanimate world –as a spacious place for man to live, the world of plants — as food for man, the animal world — as man’s kingdom, subservient to him, which he gets to know, discover, understand, name (Gen. 2:20).

"And it was so" (Gen. 1:30).

There was not a trace of evil, everything was wisely arranged, all was perfectly good, in accordance to the Divine will, the Divine plan.

The creation of the world was finished. Through the human, God-like spirit, the Lord bound the whole material and animal world created by Him to Himself, making it a participant of the God-like, light and joyful, right, reasonable and good life. "And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." "And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made" (Gen.2:1).

This seventh day, in which God "rested" from His work, i.e. in which the creative process of forming new creatures ceased, continues until now and will continue till the end of ages.

 

The Downfall

"And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed" (Gen. 2:8).

Called to the Divine-like and equal-to-the-angels life, and to increasingly greater and closer communication with God, man should not have been distracted from this most important goal by excessive care about himself. The Creator gave him everything that was necessary for life. He also gave man a commandment: "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it" (Gen. 2:16-17).

As in any act of God, this first commandment has several facets. The freedom of the man is fulfilled in reality: he can obey or disobey. There was no guard at the tree of knowledge of good and evil, like the archangel with a fiery sword later on.

Man was to be trained by that commandment, to grow in love for God. Man, like the angels, was created by God for a blissful life, which is obtained by spiritual growth. Man was created for the development of the feeling of love for his Creator and for beings similar to himself — other people and lower creatures.

But love, as a purely theoretical confession, as a simple statement of fact — is fruitless. Moreover, by not developing, it becomes petrified, atrophies. Love demands its expression, and the most direct, natural display of it is the fulfillment of a loved one’s will. Therefore, the commandment "do not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" had the goal of developing and strengthening the love of Adam and Eve for their Creator, as well as strengthening their will and improving their morality.

The Church rejects the idea, prevalent since ancient times, that the trying of the fruit from the tree of knowledge should be understood as the carnal communication of Adam and Eve. This communication was not only not forbidden, on the contrary, it was blessed by God, Who said: Be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28).

The first people were childishly inexperienced, simple and primitive, more unfamiliar with life than modern children, for children, who do not have personal experience, learn from their parents. Such experience was lacking for the first people, who were taught by the blissful communication with God, but were absolutely naïve and untried. Therefore, they needed a simple and understandable commandment. Such was given by God: ""Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it." In this commandment, we recognize one of the simplest, accessible to all people, and most basic, Church commandments, as ancient as the Church itself — the commandment about abstention, i.e. about fasting.

Why is the forbidden tree called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Because man came out of the hands of God absolutely clean, not knowing any evil. By eating the forbidden fruit, he would come into contact with evil for the first time, and then could distinguish, from experience, between it and the original good put into him by God. God did not want His beloved creation to know evil from his own experience. Just as good parents try to protect their children from acquaintance with the wickedest and most disgusting sides of life as long as possible, God wished the same for His beloved children.

It is absolutely futile to make suppositions about what the destiny of mankind would be, if there would have been no initiator of evil in the world — the fallen spirit, who rejected God and who hates everything, created by Him. Led by pride, and then by hatred, once an angel of light, he became "the old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan" (Rev. 12:9; 20:2). It was he who attempted to sway the new creations of God — people — to the same rebellion against God and disobedience to Him, which he himself performed and towards which he won over a multitude of spirits that fell with him. St. Basil the Great says the following about this: "The devil, seeing that he is excommunicated from the angels, could not watch indifferently, how one Earth-born ascends to angelic merit through successes" (Conversations, 9th, "About how God is not the cause of evil").

And the serpent said to the wife: "Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" The one, who had rebelled against the Truth, the father of lies, cannot speak the truth. He uses slander in the very first words which man hears from him. He knows that God allowed people to eat from any of the trees, but one. Through slander, the devil wishes to represent this commandment about the only tree as God’s ban on all heavenly fruits. Besides this, the slander is so cunningly disguised, that it is not obvious to naïve people. Those who do not read the Bible thoughtfully enough often do not notice where the slander is hidden. In this ancient trick of Satan, we easily recognize the contemporary variants of essentially the same methodology: contemporary anti-religious and anti-Christian forces use it on the government scale, while the same thing happens in complaints at God or in slander at neighbors. This testifies to the lack of creative variety of God’s enemy and of the banality of his methods in tempting people throughout many centuries.

And the woman replied to the serpent: "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die."

The fact that Eve enters into the conversation with the serpent, in spite of the fact that she had heard slander at God from him, shows that her love for God had not yet had time to develop, that she is not yet spiritually mature. And in her answer, she obviously succumbs to the deceit of the serpent: she somewhat distorts the words of God as well, exaggerating their strictness. God did not say: "Do not touch them." Maybe, if Eve had repeated God’s words with absolute precision and truthfulness, the devil would have run away from her, for he hates only the absolute truth of God’s words. But he tolerates the distorted half-truth and continues his tempting tactics.

"And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

This slander is subtle and very significant. God created people to be God-like and for gradually gaining greater and greater similarity to Him, as St. Basil the Great writes: "We are creatures, but are called to become gods by grace."

Later on, the Son of God will come to the earth in order to make man divine, of which church chants speak many times: "God became man, so that man would become god." Not knowing the Divine plan concerning man, the devil could, nevertheless, guess about it, for God’s plan for him was the same, when he was an angel of light. Therefore, Satan knew that the temptation "ye shall be as gods" would be attractive to man, who was created for that. But instead of becoming similar to God through love for God and through unity with Him, the devil offers Divine similarity through rebellion and disobedience to Him.

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise"

The devil does not know the depths of the human spirit, not yet spoiled by sin, but he understands the spiritual movements on the surface, connected with the physical nature, which can be equally directed towards the good or the evil. And he mobilizes these, as he does everything that he has in his disposal, in this decisive moment of temptation, later repeating his method of tempting millions of millions of times over all human creatures throughout all of the very grievous human history. "The lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life" — the holy fathers call this the "triple temptation," used by the devil at the dawn of ages in relation to Eve.

"She took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat" —A cosmic catastrophe happened, but so simply and, on the surface, imperceptibly. There was no thundering, the skies did not quake, the mountains did not stir nothing outwardly reacted to the terrible catastrophe which upset the entire universe, the entire Divine plan for the world created by Him.

But the downfall of each individual is, in essence, the same catastrophe, the same tragedy, and each one of us knows from personal experience, how outwardly simply and insignificantly these catastrophes happen. If we were in need of confirmation of the Divine truth of each word of the holy Divine Revelation, then the simplicity and outward imperceptibleness of the description of the catastrophe of the first people’s downfall would be one of the most striking proofs that what is in front of us is not a myth.

"And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden … and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden."

The poison of the downfall was reflected immediately and quite evidently in the self-sense of Adam and Eve. Up till now, association with God was the main joyful content of their lives. It was the reason for which they were created, it was the source of their bliss, for it included in itself all the subsequent pure delights of man: the artistic delights, for God is the Fullness of Beauty; and the joy which we experience, when we see the triumph of a just matter, for God is the Fullness of Truth and Justice; and the joy of scientific creation, which comes from the comprehension of the laws of nature, the Lawgiver of which is God. So, now, with the appearance of God, Adam and Eve, after the downfall, try to avoid meeting God for the first time. "And Adam and his wife hid themselves." For people, who have dimmed the image of God in themselves, communication with God becomes burdensome.

Simultaneously they also lost their inherent knowledge of God. Before the downfall, they knew God with the inner consciousness of their Godlike soul and through the association of their spirit with the Spirit, a knowledge which was not yet strengthened, was unformed and therefore easily lost. This association was broken by sin: there is no sin in God, but it appeared in man. That was why man ceased to know God. This is already evident from the fact that Adam and Eve forgot about God’s omnipresence and omniscience. They naively tried to hide "amongst the trees" from the All-Seeing Eye. In this obscured notion of God, from the very first moments of the downfall —lies the seed of all the subsequent false teachings — idolatry and heresies, for all of them, in essence, stem from the same mistake: either assigning inappropriate qualities to God, or negating the perfections, which are inherent to Him.

And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? The Lord shows the greatest fatherly leniency towards the sinful irrationality of people. He does not rush to expose or punish them. With the most delicate care, He wishes to call them to repentance. He does not discover the childishly naïve shelter of the sinning people, but calls them to fulfill the act of the acceptance of guilt, calls the man by name. Finally, Adam answers: "I heard Thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself."

The first weak sign in Adam of a unenthusiastic turn towards the better can be seen in the fact that he responded to the Divine call, and did not stay concealed in his shelter. But even this minor improvement of his he spoils immediately by an attempt to deceive God: "and I was afraid, because I was naked."

The Lord waits, but the man does not admit his sin, does not confess it, and does not repent of it. Meanwhile, it would have been so appropriate and necessary! What a deeply human, familiar to us from personal experience and experience with other people, subtle drama is described for us by the Holy Bible in a few words.

"And He said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?"

Adam does not confess, he does not show repentance. The leniency of God goes further. As a most careful confessor in relation to the clumsily repenting sinner, God Himself pronounces Adam’s fault instead of him, names his sin, leaving to the one, who had sinned, only to say the short, confessionary "Yes!" Farther and farther goes the Child-loving Father towards the prodigal son.

But, adding to the already committed sins of violation of the Divine love in breaking the simple commandment, the attempt to hide from God, and therefore — to deceive Him, Adam commits one more sin, not only against God, but now against the wretched accomplice of his crime, the wife one in essence with him: "The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat."

Piling up crime upon crime, Adam breaks the connection of love with these words — the guarantee of one essence between him and Eve, and makes more profound the rebellion against the Creator, striving to shift part of the guilt for his crime onto Him: "The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me…"

The Lord then turns from Adam, so as not to multiply his sins, and addresses Eve. Until that moment He had not addressed her, because she, connected by nature with Adam, was one being with him. But by the shifting of his fault onto Eve, Adam breaks his unity with her.

Waiting for repentance at least from Eve, God says to her: "What is this that thou hast done?" But she, too, continues with the persistent self-justification, saying: "The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat."

The Lord does not ask anything of the serpent — the ancient dragon, called the Devil, the slanderer, who deceives the entire universe (Rev. 12:9). He does not waste a single word in vain with the conscious slanderer, for whose repentance there is no hope. Asking him nothing, the Lord lays a curse on him, which ends with the promise that is terrible for the devil but reassuring to grave, but not hopeless, sinners: "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel," or in the more expressive Slavonic variant, translated from the Greek by the 70 interpreters (the Septuagint): "It shall wipe off your head."

This promise, with which God reassured the sinful people, the Church called the First Gospel — the first good news.

"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken."

God exiling the people who had sinned is, as many other Divine acts, many-faceted. The Bible points out one of the reasons directly: "Lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever." Living in heaven is connected with the eating from the tree of life, which made people immortal. Meanwhile, for sinful people with a corrupt nature, such an eternal life in a lasting sinful state and in an ever-deepening moral decomposition would truly be an infernal existence, a source of hopeless tortures and despair. They had to be removed from heaven, so that, as St. Gregory the Theologian says, evil would not become immortal.

The heavenly state was bound to Divine association. Meanwhile, by spiritual law, which we observe in guilty children, association with God, which used to be the source of supreme bliss, became the source of sufferings for our forefathers from the moment of the downfall. As the child, who feels his fault before his parents, no longer wants to be in the same room with them, guilty people tried to hide from God in the same way.

Moreover: we know from the example of children who are at fault before their parents, how harmful it is to let their lack of repentance become entrenched, for they become even more impudent, insolent and shameless. In a similar way, the Lord, in order to prevent their further downfall, casts them out of heaven, for they did not show any signs of repentance.

Before casting them out of heaven, the Lord orders Adam to work. "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken." This commandment of God, as the majority of the acts of God, is many-sided: for together with the punishment for sin the medicine for it is also given.

In heaven, people were free from hard labors connected with their physical nature, for the nature they headed obediently fulfilled all the work, concerning their nourishment and service. And such freedom from labors and material worries was morally necessary for man while he remained righteous, in order to have the opportunity to be in continuous association with God.

But as soon as man fell away from God, nature rose up against him. Having violated his calling, he disrupted the whole system of the physical world, having stopped being the connection between it and God. Both plants and animals lost their master and intercessor before the Creator: his rebellion caused "rebellion" on their part.

The time which man could earlier use for his spiritual growth and association with God, he now had to spend on hard labor in order to maintain his physical existence. But if time were not filled this way, life, deprived of the association with God, would become unbearable. When our soul is tormented, then labor is the only balm. For this reason, the Lord commands man to work when He casts him from heaven.

The First

Human Generations

The fifth chapter of the book of Genesis opens with a brief repetition of the history of the creation of man (and here again the word "bara" is used — creation from nothing), as the group oneness in multiplicity, in image and likeness a group oneness in the Three-in-One God.

"In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him; Male and female created He them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." Then Adam’s age in years is given, and the description of the birth of Adam and Eve’s righteous son— Seth: "Begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth."

The Lord created Adam and Eve in His image, after His likeness, and preserving this image and likeness (though harmed by sin), Adam passes them on to his progeny. "And he begat sons and daughters."

If in the previous chapter we noted the exceptional loving attention of the holy fathers to every word of the Bible, then here we shall note, how blind the most recent and little believing critics and researchers of the Holy Scripture are.

In the book of Genesis, in verse 4 of chapter 5, it is clearly written that Adam begat sons and daughters, but contemporary critics are bewildered: how does the Bible represent the multiplication of mankind, if Adam and Eve are said to have only three sons? Whom did they marry? Surely, their sisters, without falling into criminal incest, for such marriages then were dictated purely by necessity, and not in any way by perversion. Besides, mankind was young and fresh then, and marriages between the closest relatives could not introduce the elements of degradation in them, which accompany the incestual relations of later times and present days.

The exceptional longevity of the people of that time can be explained by the same freshness of forces in young mankind. Originally created for eternal life, people of the first human generations did not give into the unnatural, for people, winnowing of death longer. Adam lived for 930 years, Methuselah lived even longer, 969 years.

From among the names of the ten descendents of Adam before the Great Flood, let us focus on Enoch, the seventh after Adam. Enoch means "dedication." "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him."

Righteous Enoch is mentioned in the Book of Sirach: "Enoch pleased God, and was translated into paradise, that he may give repentance to the nations" (Sirach 44:15). The Apostle Paul says about him: "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him (took him alive to heaven; Hebr. 11:5). And the Apostle Jude even kept the words of righteous Enoch for us, witnessing in his epistle: "And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him"(Jude 1:14-15).

Blessed Theodorite says that the Lord freed righteous Enoch from death, in order to testify to even ancient, primitive mankind that "the determination of death is temporary and is subject to extermination." Blessed Theodorite ends his interpretation about Enoch with the words, which are appropriate to be quoted: "So, we know he was translated alive, and that he lives now—we know, but where and how —is unknown, for the Scripture does not say anything about that."

A church legend is connected with the name of righteous Enoch, which blessed Ieronim and Augustine describe in the most detail (translation Ep. Ad Marcellam; Aug. De gen. Ad Litt. 11:6) The blessed Righteous Enoch did not taste death. Meanwhile, by Divine determination: "for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," all people have to pass through the gates of death, and we know that even the More Honorable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare More Glorious than the Seraphim, the Mother of God, passed over the threshold of death, to be resurrected by Her Son and God. The Holy Scripture says that only two people did not face death: righteous Enoch and the Prophet Elijah. About one can say of both of them, using the words of bless Theodorite: "They are still living, but it is unknown — where and how."

When, in the last days, lawlessness will increase, love will dry up, so that faith will become depleted, then there will appear "two witnesses…the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth" (Rev. 11:4), which will testify to the Divine truth among corrupt mankind. By God’s permission, these two candlesticks will be killed by the Antichrist and will rise on the third day. The Church teaching says that these two candlesticks, these witnesses, will be Sts. Enoch and Elijah — those righteous men of the Old Testament who did not face death, precisely in order to perform the work of God at the end of ages, when the spiritual forces of mankind will be depleted.

The very sermon of the righteous Enoch, as blessed Theodorite says, applies more to the last days than to those preceding the flood: "Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment upon all."

The Problem of Chronology

The problem of Biblical chronology is connected with the 5th chapter of the book of Genesis. It is well known that in Byzantium and pre-Peter the Great Russia, they counted years "from the creation of the world," not from the Nativity of Christ. Such chronology is found in contemporary church calendars, though it is more and more subject to criticism, for it is known that our earth appeared several billions of years ago.

We can provide two answers for solving this problem. First: precisely what should we understand as the date of "the creation of the world"? According to the words of the prophet Moses, the Apostle Peter and the greatest church interpreter of the Holy Scripture, St. Basil the Great, the epoch of the days of the world’s creation should be understood as very prolonged periods of time, because the 7th day, which ended the course of the six days of creation, the Church calls the entire present, on-going period, till the end of the world, when the infinite night-less 8th day will take the place of the 7th.

Consequently, when did the 6th day end and the 7th day begin? According to the sense of the corresponding narration of the book of Genesis we can say: at the time, when the creation of man in the present spirit-bearing state was completed. But precisely when this moment took part in the historical process, we do not know. And it is important to note that none of the historical testimonies about the religious life of man, such as written testimonies, step beyond the limits of what is mentioned in the Bible.

Secondly: the unchangeable word of God, the holy Bible, does not give us any chronological tables. It gives only the ages of the Patriarchs — the descendents of Adam before the Flood and then after the Flood to Abraham. Adding up these years, one pious monk of the Middle Ages, Dionysius Exiguus (the same one, who calculated the year of the Nativity of Christ), calculated the years from the Creation of the World, and this calculation, exclusively by reason of its convenience, was accepted in Byzantium, and borrowed from Byzantium by Russia.

But, if we look attentively at the Biblical text, we see that it does not give a precise chronology. In reality, what does the Bible say? "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years." And the same method is applied to every descendant of Adam: the years of their lives are given, before the birth of the mentioned children and after it.

But in fact, the Biblical expression "X the son of Y" and "Y begat X" do not always mean that this X was his immediate son. In the Old Testament, we see that it is said about almost all the kings of Judea "he did as David, his father," or "he did not do as David, his father." And in the New Testament, Christ the Savior is called the Son of David, the Son of Abraham and the Son of Adam. In the genealogy of the Lord, given by the Apostle Matthew, we see that when the Evangelist says: "And Ozias begat Joatham," he omits 4 generations (compare Matt. 1:9 and 4 Kings chap. 11 and 15, and 1 Kings 3:10).

Consequently, when the Bible says that Y has son X, we should understand that X is the direct descendant of Y, but how many generations are between them —cannot be asserted. Ozias begat Joatham, but between them are four generations! Christ the Savior is the son of David, but between them there are over 30 generations, Christ the Savior is the son of Abraham, but they have almost 50 generations between them, Christ the Savior is the Son of Adam, but between them is a huge, impossible to even approximately count, multitude of generations. But one thing we know for certain is immutable: if someone in the Holy Bible is called the son of X, then he is his direct descendant. Christ the Savior is the Son of David, the Son of Abraham, the Son of Adam, for He is their direct descendant. This is what is asserted and emphasized by the Holy Scripture, because it is exactly what we need to know in order to see in Christ the authentic Savior of the world, proclaimed to the first people by God.

Thus, chronological calculations are not part of the Bible’s goal. This, like all scientific or historical research, the Lord leaves to people, who feel called to do such laborious, but non-essential for salvation, occupations.

In order to understand why such a method of numbering the years was convenient for Byzantium, one needs to recall that Byzantium was a cultural and political heiress of both Rome and eastern monarchies, and a difficult task lay before the Byzantium chronologists: for their historical labors, they needed to combine extremely different methods of chronology: the Roman — from the foundation of Rome, the Greek — calculating the Olympiads, as well as the Hellenic-Syrian Era of Seleucids (since 312 AD, look, chap. 1, Mac.) and the most complex calendar systems — the Alexandrian and Babylonian.

The religious motives even then dictated the preference of the era of the Nativity of Christ. According to the church understanding, from the time of the Coming of Christ into the world, He Alone really, in the full meaning of the word, reigns and rules, and the terrestrial kings only rule temporarily. "One King and Lord," church chants say about the Savior. "Christ is our King" — exclaimed holy martyrs, refusing to submit to the terrestrial kings-tormentors. That was why it was so natural for the Christian consciousness in countries, where historically the chronology was measured by the number of years of rule of this or that leader, to adopt the chronology according to the years of rule of Christ the Lord — from the day of His Nativity.

But in practice, the era of the Nativity of Christ was not convenient for the Byzantine historians, for the Nativity of Christ was too recent a date at the time. When telling the story of Alexander of Macedonia, Ancient Rome, Pompeii, Caesar, one had to give a year before the Nativity of Christ. This inconvenience can be felt by us, but for us it is rather diminished by the fact that the date of the Nativity of Christ is far enough in the past for us, and this inconvenience becomes inconvenient only while narrating the history of the centuries close to it.

Due to all these reasons, the era calculated by Dionysius Exiguus from the creation of the world was willingly accepted by Byzantine historians, and from them adapted by the Byzantine state. However, very often we find both dates in Byzantine documents: from the creation of the world, and from the Nativity of Christ.

 

The Flood

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose" (Gen. 6:1-2).

These lines of the Bible have been bewildering since ancient times: who are these "sons of God"— "bne Elogim," who took the human daughters as wives? In the Pre-Christian epoch, in the ancient targums, the Hebrew Scribes interpreted this extract of the Holy Scripture, as the joining of angels and women (the Targum of Oncelos). But, certainly, such an understanding does not at all coincide with our Christian teaching about angels as incorporeal spirits with no physical traits; it also does not coincide with the belief of our faith, that mankind evolved solely from Adam and Eve. At a time when the ancient pagan legends assigned a Divine or semi-Divine origin to their kings and heroes, the Holy Scriptures from the most ancient times categorically assert the unified descent of all people from common antecedents. That is why even the early fathers of our Church did not accept the rabbinical interpretations of this extract (St. Justin, St. Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Lactancius and Commodian), but taught that "the sons of God" must be understood as the righteous part of mankind.

Truly, the righteous are referred to as of the sons of God even in the Old Testament. For example, in the Wisdom of Solomon: "How is he numbered among the children of God, and his lot is among the saints!" (5:5), "But thy sons not the very teeth of venomous dragons overcame" (16:10). And the Lord Himself says: "But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world… are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection" (Luke 20:36). St. John the Theologian testifies: "What manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God." And St. John Chrysostom, explaining these words of the Apostle, teaches: "Anytime, when we do the good, we are born from God, for His seed abides in us" (Discussion about 1 John, 3:9)

And St. Basil the Great writes: "Many in the Scriptures are called the sons of God by the words: "I have nourished and brought up children" (Commentary on Isaiah).

So, in full concordance with the testimony of the Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Lord Himself and holy fathers, we should understand the first lines of chapter 6 of the book of Genesis to be the narration about how righteous men, seeing the daughters of the unrighteous, were tempted by them.

Taking into consideration that, at the time, mankind consisted of two branches: the descendents of Cain, the first murderer, and the progeny of the righteous Seth, who were the ones who began to appeal to the Lord, we, without any ticklish fantasies, shall understand what this excerpt is talking about: men from the progeny of the righteous Seth began to be fascinated by the women of Cain’s descendants and became corrupt because of it.

Why does the Bible continue to call these people, in spite of their downfall, "the sons of God"? — The words of the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon, cited above, explain this: "Thy sons (i.e. God’s)…by whom the uncorrupt light of the law was to be given unto the world" (18:4). The progeny of Seth — are the sons of God not only because they are righteous themselves, but mostly because, after many centuries would pass, the unfading light of the Divine Law would be given through them to the world, and the Only Perfect Son of God — Jesus Christ — will appear to people.

And the Lord said: "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh." We can imagine the picture of the internal state of antediluvian mankind thanks to the analogy with the contemporary one, because now we basically see the same thing: people are becoming more and more carnal, they are interested only in the material, while spiritual good freezes in them and even their emotions become dull, and because the corporeal is powerless by itself, the power of evil spirits acts more and more aggressively in ever-increasingly corporeal mankind.

"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Like angels, the Lord created man so that he could attain a blissful eternal life, as we have said before: "being Himself Ever-Blissful and Ever-Joyful, He wanted the other creatures to have this joy of life, joy of existence."

But mankind sinned, and by that fell away from its calling: instead of blissful immortal life, it gained disastrous and mortal life. But the downfall of mankind was temporary and not hopeless. Adam and Eve repented. Seth was righteous, with Enos they started to call the name of the Lord. Enoch pleased God to the highest degree. In the spiritual depths of mankind, the precious process of the spiritual ripening is occurring, thanks to which the moment approaches when the Son of God — the Savior — will be able to come to people, join them and again make them the heirs of the Kingdom of God.

This process occurs in the best currents of the righteous branch of mankind. This process is precious to the Lord, for His human-loving, salutary goals. But even for its sake, He does not at all deprive man of free will, of free choice. The process of spiritual ripening occurs in mankind while people, by their own free will, strive to it.

And so, this process in mankind in the antediluvian epoch halts. The sons of God — the descendants of righteous Seth, Enos and Enoch, being righteous (even if comparatively) grew close to the daughters of the cruel and dissolute branch of mankind, the descendants of Cain, and began to be tempted by them. The process of spiritual ripening of the human spirit stops. People became corporeal, without a shadow of spiritual movement, and evil penetrates them without hindrance, all their thoughts and contemplations became evil at all times.

But if the process of spiritual ripening in the souls of people ceases forever, the existence of mankind would become senseless. Truly, for a spirit-bearing creature to be born into the world in order to feel pleasant physical feelings for a number of years, and then, dying, descend into hell without hope of ever being free from this place of agony and tortures — what can be more terrible and senseless than such a prospect? What can be further from the Divine plan for man, as the co-heir of the reign of God, called to eternal joy and bliss? Antediluvian mankind firmly and irrevocably stepped onto the path of moral degeneracy.

But, by that time, there remained only one bright exception in all of mankind: "Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."

Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth. In them was concentrated all the hope for the possibility of moral restoration of mankind, and consequently — for the possibility of its moral salvation, its return to God, to Divine eternal bliss.

But if Noah and his children were left among dissolute mankind, they would inevitably become corrupt, would become infected with the common depravity, if not Noah himself and his children, then his grandsons and great-grand-sons would yield to the common corruption, for under the influence of the sinful downfall of the forefathers, human nature became more inclined to evil.

And then the Lord, the Ever-Merciful and Human-Loving Lord, decides on an extreme measure: to exterminate the greater part of mankind, which had lost any meaning in life, in order to preserve the only branch of people which had not yet lost this meaning, and which is capable of spiritual perfection.

And the Lord said: "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth." So, the Lord decides to exterminate mankind by a flood of waters.

And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth." The Lord sets a time period for people to repent: "Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

To save Noah and his family, the Lord commands him: "Make thee an ark of gopher wood (probably, cypress)… and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh…But with thee will I establish My covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee."

Let us consider the questions, connected with the narration of the Scripture about the Flood, in detail. This narration is subjected to criticism more often than others.

As one of the testimonies of the immutable truth of this narration let us note the exceptional universality of the legends about it. The French scientist, the very non-religious writer-archeologist François Lenorman, brilliantly testifies to that: "The flood is not a myth, but a historical fact, for at least three independent racial branches of the ancient civilized world preserved comparable legends about it."

[In order to demonstrate to our readers the extent to which legends about the Flood extend, we shall list several nations, among which such legends are noted, at a time which preceded their knowledge of Biblical writings. Two cycles of Babylonian legends about the Flood exist. The well-known tale from cuneiform annals, originating from around the 2d century BC about Utnapishtim, and the legend about Ksinsufr, preserved by the Babylonian-Greek chronicler Berrows. The Syrians: The ancient-Roman writer Lucinian (De Dea Syra) relates the Syrian legend about the flood. Joseph Flavius also speaks of it (Ant. 1,3,6). The Arabs: The Koran mentions the Flood several times. The Suras 54,9 and 69,11 without doubt are inspired by the Biblical narration, but in the Sura 18,59, the ancient Arabic legend, independent of the Bible, is apparently given. The Greeks: The classical legend about Deucalion, the son of Prometheus and his wife Pyrrha. The Persians: The flood is spoken of in the Avesta. (Vendidad 2,46). The Hindus: Three sources speak about the flood: the Satapat-Brahman, Mahabharata and Bhagavat Purana. The Algonquins (North American Indians): First written down by the missioner Per-Le-Jeune in 1634, a legend tells about a muskrat, which found dry land during the Flood. The Aztecs: The known legend about Quetzalcoatl. The Polynesians: on the Hawaiian islands — the legend about the Flood and the ship Tango Loa; on Tahiti — about the flooding of the sun; in New Zealand — about Maui (the New-Zealand Noah) ]

The flood was for all people, but not for all territories. Neither Africa, nor southwest Asia, nor Australia, nor America were covered by Flood’s waters. The Universal Flood means the death of all mankind and all the living creatures in the places of their inhabitance, but not throughout the planet Earth. One must remember the reason the Lord created the Flood: "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth… And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth." Consequently, we can fully imagine the Flood in the form of flooding, which covered only the "ecumeni," i.e. only the space of the earth, inhabited by people, and how large this territory was — we do not know.

At the same time, we should not be troubled by the fact that the Holy Bible speaks about the Flood several times, as spread "upon the earth." The Bible and all religious works, concerned only with the care of human souls and not the problems of geography, often call land and universe only the regions, inhabited by people, and sometimes only the region of some definite human culture — the one, which had matured enough to be influenced by the Holy Scripture. Byzantium, brought up on the Bible, called the Mediterranean Sea Basin the Universe, therefore it called its emperors "the rulers of the universe," and gave the Patriarch of Constantinople the title "universal."

When was the Flood?

We do not know that. In our previous discussion, we spoke of the impossibility of constructing a chronology on the basis of narration of the book of Genesis. In any case, the flood must refer to a very distant epoch in human history, and the very dispersed legends about it prove that.

The one who writes these lines (to me, personally, by the way, very debatably) considers that the Flood should most likely be assigned to the time period known in science as the boundary between the epoch Mustier and the epoch Orignac, the boundary between the upper and lower Paleolith, when, suddenly and unexpectedly, the previously numerous race of Neanderthal man disappeared from the face of the planet, some traits of which (the absolute absence of burials, consequently, one can presume, the absence of faith in life after death, the absence of any artistic drawings, i.e. contempt towards the feeling of beauty, etc.) correspond to the primary indications of the negative branch of primitive man: "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh," i.e. without any signs of spiritual life.

Note: Animals which inhabited the place where the flood would happen were taken onto the ark. There was no word about any giraffes, rhinoceroses, etc., which did not live in that area. "And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before Me in this generation. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens": ducks, geese, chickens, maybe, swans, storks, etc, with which Mesopotamia is so rich, and besides pigeons and crows. "And it came to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood were upon the earth. The same day were all the fountains of the great deep (i.e. the sea and ocean) broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." Of course, the expression about the windows of heaven is not literal, but figurative.

The dimensions of Noah’s ark coincide with those of the research of Fernando Navvar. During an expedition to the peak of Ararat in 1956, he saw the outlines of the Arc under the eternal ice and brought back part of its frame, made of oak, the age of which was determined by radioactive method to be 5 thousand years old. See the book of F. Navvar in French "J’ai trouve l’arc de Noah," (I Found Noah’s Ark), 1956.

The narration about the flood is very important for all times, in the light of Christ’s warning to all of us: "And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man: They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all" (Luke 17:26).

We have already said that the Universal Flood, which destroyed ancient, fallen into deprivation, mankind, in spite of the seeming cruelty of this measure, was an expression of Divine care for mankind. In order to save the last branch of mankind, capable of spiritual revival and perfection, in order to some day, maybe even far away in the future, to become able to inherit heavenly life, in order to save that branch, it was necessary to destroy the rest of corrupted mankind, so that it would not infect the last healthy branch by its moral corruption.

But having destroyed this corrupt majority of mankind by the waters of the Flood, did God forgot about it, did He totally reject those sinners who had turned away from Him? — No, the Merciful and Human-Loving Lord many centuries later recalled His lost sheep! When the appearance of the Son of God to the world and His atonement of mankind occurred, then, as Apostle Peter testifies, the Lord stretched His saving hand into hell to those souls, destroyed by the Flood. "By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing" (1 Pet. 3:19-20).

Blessed Theothilactus, interpreting these words, says that this means all primitive mankind from the times of Adam. Naturally, here also belongs that generation, which was washed away by the waters of the Flood.

St. Gregory the Theologian reminds us besides (Word 45) that "Christ, appearing to those found in hell, does not save everyone, but those who believed in Him." And though it is hidden from us, who of the common people will be saved and who will perish, we can guess with hope, that a great number of those, miserable, God-forgetting souls destroyed by the Flood, having experienced the torture of hell, made use of the Good News of the Conqueror of Death, and having believed in Him, followed Him into the Reign of His eternal joy.

 

After the Flood

"And God remembered Noah — The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. And the ark rested…upon the mountains of Ararat."

It is delightful for us, Russians, to pause on these lines, in which for the first time, on the pages of the Bible, an area is mentioned, which later on was destined to be a part of the Russian state.

This is an important region in other aspects. Here, later on, appeared a powerful state, which the Bible calls the land of Ararat (4 Kings 19:37, Ex. 7:38, Jer. 51:27), and contemporary science — the state of Urartu. This state performed a great service to mankind in the field of culture: here for the first time in the 11-12th centuries BC the method of extracting iron out of ore was discovered, and the Iron Age began, with the mass production of objects made of iron. [Till that time mankind used only rare meteorite, chemically more or less pure iron, and to the ancient Babylonians and Egyptians iron was more precious than gold].

The state of Urartu fulfilled another, more spiritual service. With the appearance and wide expansion of the militant Assyrian kingdom, Urartu took the strongest blows of the Assyrians onto itself, and it turned out to be the only state bordering on Assyria, which did not submit to the cruel conquerors. Throughout consecutive numbers of ages, Urartu fought with Assyria, that way diverting the attention and powers of this predatory state onto itself and thus saving other nations from terrible Assyrian slavery. Does this not remind us of the role, which many-many centuries later our Russia played, saving the Christian world from Asiatic conquerors?

Thus, we have reason to say that the Ararat land is blessed.

"And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark… Also he sent forth a dove from him… But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot… And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark; And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf plucked off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth." Ever since then, the image of a dove with an olive leaf in its beak became the symbol of Divine goodness and peace with God.

We may guess that the Holy Spirit, appearing at the Baptism of the Lord Jesus Christ "as a dove," thus reminded people about the hour of Divine mercy after the Flood. Thus, outwardly differently, but inwardly similarly, the Lord in both cases "drowns sin with water" and in both events a dove appears.

And what an onerous blasphemy we feel, that nowadays this holy symbol has become the symbol of the disgusting caricature of peace, the symbol of mendacious propaganda of the enemies of God.

"In the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry… And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and offered burnt offerings on the altar."

This first offering of mankind rose to God on the blessed land of Ararat, after the punitive anger — the hour of mercy and Divine blessing had come.

It is interesting to compare this short Biblical description of Noah’s offering after the Flood with the description, though the nearest one to the Biblical, but still a heathen narration, about the same event in the Babylonian myth.

Babylonian Noah — Utnapishtim tells: [The modern semantologists bring both the names to one: Napishtim and Noepishtim, which means "The Savior of Life," Noah-Noe is simply "a savior"]:

"When the seventh day came, I took the dove out and set him free, the dove flew away, flew in circles, there was no land, and he came back… I took a crow out and set him free, the crow flew and saw the water drying. He ate, cawed and did not come back. I went into the four winds, and made an offering, I burnt the incense on the peak of a mountain. I set seven and seven censers and spread under them reeds, cedar branches and brushwood. The gods felt the odor; the gods felt the sweet scent, the gods, like flies, gathered above the altar… "

We will not pause on the repulsive image of gods, as flies, gathering above the altar. We understand that the Babylonians did not imagine their gods as flies, as we do not imagine the Holy Spirit as a dove. These are images. But what an attractive image is the one, and how repulsive is the other.

But in the very description of the offering of Utnapishtim our attention is drawn to the difference from the Biblical story. How many unnecessary details we see in the Babylonian story. They do not exist in the Biblical narration. Maybe, it happened the way Utnapishtim tells it historically: he put down reeds, cedar branches and brushwood. But all these details do not serve the aim of the Bible to foster human souls. And in this example, we can see how under the guidance of the Holy Spirit the hand of Moses, recording the history of mankind, cleansed the ancient legends, eliminating everything secondary and superfluous from them. When it is necessary, even for a limited historical period, the Bible is able to present the most minute details in its narrative, as, for example, further on, when recording the rules of Old Testament offerings. When this is not necessary, the Bible, passing over meaningless details, relates only the essence.

From this example, it is clearly seen what we mean when we say that one cannot search for anything extraneous to its goals: neither naturalistic, nor geographical or ethnographical details, if they are superfluous.

In this same example of the two narrations, close in their natural origin (let us remember that Abraham, an antecedent of Moses and the whole Chosen nation, traced his ancestry from Ur of the Chaldees, i.e. Babylon) we see the difference between a narration which had passed through the oven of inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and a narration which is purely human, i.e. natural. We clearly see both their similarity and difference.

"And the LORD said in His heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake… While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."

Footnote: The City of Ur (contemporary Muge Yir), judging by the inscriptions remaining in it, was a port, which led vast sea trade, but, at the same time, this city is now located more than 70 km from the shore of the Persian Gulf. At the same time, it is known that Tigris and Euphrates flowed into the gulf through separate riverbeds, and now they enter it through one common bed, artificially formed upon the soft, silty soil through stratification. The process of stratification measures about one English mile in 66 years, because of which the country noticeably expands thanks to the Persian Gulf. If Egypt, according to Herodotus, is the gift of the Nile, then Babylon is a similar gift of the Tigris and Euphrates. On the rich, silty soil, rich vegetation was cultivated, which in antiquity made Babylon a synonym for amazing fruitfulness. Herodotus, describing this country, considers it necessary to remark, that he refrains from a detailed depiction of its fruitfulness from fear of awakening distrust in the reader. The date palm-tree gave an inexhaustible supply of national provisions. Bread grains produced harvests 200, sometimes 300-fold.

Noah’s Descendants

"And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered."

Again, the Lord repeats the commandment given to people in heaven. But now he adds something different. The Lord says: "And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth." In heaven it was only said: "Have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." Here, because of the changed relations between man — the crown of creation, who because of his sin did not fulfill his designation — and the other creatures, which arose against him because of that, man is given the weapon of fear instead of the former friendly superiority.

And the Lord adds: "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you." Here the blessing to eat meat is given. This was not originally part of God’s plan for man. According to the Divine plan, plants, not animals, were to be food for man. Animals were to serve man as his subjects and helpers. Man, through sin, violated his calling, and because of that, broke his connection with the animal world and the amicable cooperation of animals. Instead of submitting to man and cooperating with him, the stronger animals started attacking people, and the smaller ones began hiding from man, or harming him secretly. The man became imbued with fear of animals, with hostility towards them, entered into battle with the animal world.

Instead of the bright friendly and disinterested relations with animals that predominated in heaven, new relationships with the animal world are introduced after the flood, built upon the lowered moral state of people: mankind starts to see animals as sources of nourishment.

One can only guess that man started to eat meat much earlier, in the antediluvian period of his existence. At least, this is what pre-historic archeological data suggests, testifying that the most ancient people ate meat. But then, it was by the self-will of people who did not know God, and now Divine permission was given to people to do so. We know that later on, the Lord miraculously sent His prophet as food "bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening" (3 Kings 17:6). And the very Son of God ate "a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb" (Luke, 24:42). And the Holy Apostolic Rule 51 prescribes: "If someone… refrains from eating meat not for the exploit of abstention, but by reason of disdain, let him reform, or be excommunicated." The Church, Which esteems fasting so highly, does not approve of vegetarianism as a philosophy.

The difference between the willful meat-eating of primitive man and the God–permitted nourishment of man with meat, is striking, if one delves into its essence. An embittered struggle existed between man and beasts: the terror of predators and merciless unconditional extermination of the herbivorous. Now, maybe in the covetous, but caring looking after the animal world, the domestication and care for animals became possible.

All the bright, kind relations between man and animals: friendship with a dog, the attachment of horses, the care of a shepherd for mules, sheep and goats, the protection of the animal world, which is so highly developed nowadays, but which existed much earlier as well — all this has its roots not so much in the commandment of God, given to people in heaven, but in His new blessing to post-flood mankind.

"And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish My covenant with you, and with your seed after you…neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood…This is the token of the covenant which I make between Me and you and every living creature that is with you…I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between Me and the earth."

Is it possible that there had never before been a rainbow? — a skeptical critic would ask. Without a doubt, there was. The Lord does not create it anew. This would contradict the Biblical definition of the seventh day, existing then and lasting till now, as the day when the Lord rested from all his work. But until that time, a rainbow was a simple physical phenomenon, which did not mean anything, such as fata morgana, northern lights, etc. But from that moment, it gained the meaning of a reminder about the covenant between God and people and the whole world. And blessed are the people, who observe this beautiful natural phenomenon with a blissful and joyful feeling.

"And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent."

The English theologian and priest T.C.Chain, a professor at Oxford University, speaking about this extract from the Bible, seriously expresses the opinion that apparently there are two narrations in the Bible about two different Noahs, for the Bible testified that "Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God," and therefore the proof given here that Noah drank wine are incompatible. We can only smile at that typically Anglo-Saxon naïve idea, to which indecency is a worse crime than sin. There was no sin there: Noah did not yet know the intoxicating properties of wine. And the fact that a righteous man could drink "an intoxicating beverage," which shocks the English theologian the most, is absolutely funny to anyone even slightly acquainted with the nations of the Mediterranean culture, for whom wine, often weak, is not a luxury, not an excess, but a daily necessity. Not for nothing does the Lord establish His Holiest Sacrament under the appearance of bread and wine as the most natural products for man. Not for nothing does the righteous Father John of Kronstadt say that the Lord chose the most accessible substances for man for this Holy Sacrament — bread and wine.

"And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness."

The selection of mankind had just been performed, it had just been cleansed from corruption by the waters of the Flood, and only the best things were preserved in it for further history. And now, in the very first generation of the best people saved by God, a new, disgusting type of sin is born — disrespect: the mockery of a son at his father, the inferior at the superior, the impudent scorn towards any authority.

Noah, upon awakening, and hearing what had happened, cursed Ham in his posterity, and blessed Shem and Japheth. The first racial division of mankind is associated with this event.

 

Abraham, Moses and Elijah

As the Preparers of the Salvation of Mankind

The names of three righteous men: the Patriarch Abraham, God-Seeing Moses and the Prophet Elijah — mark the stages of mankind’s spiritual ripening in the Old Testament.

St. Basil the Great says that he cannot look at the depiction of Abraham, sacrificing Isaac, without tears. Really, if one ponders the moral image of righteous Abraham in this matter, our soul cannot but be filled with the most ardent admiration.

Obeying the Divine word, Abraham leaves his native city Ur of the Chaldees, which was flourishing culturally, with conveniences for living, everything attractive for life, and goes to a far-away country, which the Lord promises to give to his descendents to rule over: "in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 12:3).

After that migration, many years passed. Abraham, already old, but still childless, asks God: "LORD God, what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?... Behold, to me Thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir" (Gen.15:2-3).

But with what ardent love this powerful and great in his righteousness patriarch is inflamed, when, finally, in his old age, his long-waited for son Isaac is born! This love is all-embracing: in it, there is the natural attachment of a father to his son, and the joyfully triumphant contemplation of the beginning of the fulfillment of the Divine promises, which were to be fulfilled through this son. Therefore, in the love of Abraham for Isaac, one can see the generation of the elements of perfect love, which will be revealed two thousands years after Abraham through his blessed Grand-daughter in Her relationship to Her Son and God.

And then Abraham takes this beloved son, at the word of God, to slay him, ready to sacrifice him to the Lord God, Whom he loves more than his own life. In addition, the decisiveness to sacrifice his son at God’s command — is not a brief elevation of feelings, not simply an ardent burst. For three days Abraham and Isaac walk towards the place of sacrifice, the torturing agony of the sacrificing father, his readiness for this terrible offering, lasts for 72 hours. Really, there can be no human heart so hard that it would not tremble from anxiety while carefully reading this Biblical narration (Gen. 22)

Abraham receives the highest honor which is accessible to man in this exploit of his. According to the church’s view, he becomes the prototype of Almighty God Himself— God the Father, Who for the sake of mankind’s salvation sacrifices His Only-Begotten Son. And meek Isaac, carrying the wood for the burnt offering, on which he had to lie down as a sacrifice, humbly questioning the father and being bound by him without complaint — becomes the prototype of Christ the Savior.

The first people sinned through disobedience. Through the exploit of the righteous Abraham and Isaac, their disobedience is conquered with the greatest power and vividness. Human nature ascends to the highest stage of obedience, dictated by the purest love for God — the quality which the Lord wanted to develop in man as the ruling one, in giving him the original commandment. For He created man for the augmentation of submission and love — the Divine-like qualities, which the Son of God later showed in abundance on Earth.

Truly, the Lord brings us to salvation not without our participation, but He chooses from our medium those faithful to Him, whom He makes His co-participants.

But we have the right to ask: why then, if Abraham was brought to such a spiritual height through his exploit, why did he remain only a prototype of the Lord, but did not take part in the real salvation of mankind? Why did not the Lord hurry to descend onto the Mount of Moria, where this tremendous sacrifice was about to be carried out, the way He later descended to the room in Nazareth and the Bethlehem cave? Why did He linger for more than two thousand years to come to people?

In order to answer that question, we should grievously turn our attention from the shining peaks of holiness, which Abraham had attained, to those testimonies of slipping up and infirmities, into which the same great patriarch fell.

We see that, before the birth of Isaac, fearing the Egyptians and Abimelech, Abraham hid behind his wife Sarah and was ready to sacrifice her — the co-participant of his holiest exploits, out of faint-hearted cowardice, and lead a whole nation to Divine punishment (Gen. 12:11, 12). We see Abraham, after the death of his wife Sarah, getting consolation from a handmaiden, Keturah.

Let not any pen, any tongue, judge the greatest and holiest of the Old Testament patriarchs. But, seeing such slips, these human infirmities, we understand that the Lord could not descend to him for the closest unity, could not make him, the way he was, the participant of the Divine life: we see that human nature in Abraham did not yet ripen to accept God. But Abraham participated, like none other, in the process of the preparation of mankind to accept the Lord, in the process of ripening of the opportunity for the Divine-Human life. "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it, and was glad — said the Lord the son of David, the son of Abraham" (John 8:56 and Math. 1:1).

With Abraham, the Lord talked to him in visions at night (Gen. 15:1) or appeared before him in the image of Three Wanderers. Meanwhile, before the downfall, people talked with God face to face, knew Him as a Figure, for they were created to know God in love and obedience to Him. And it was necessary that, even before the Coming of the Lord, people would be given back the possibility to know God, see Him, and recognize Him.

For this, the Lord calls upon one of the descendants of Abraham — the righteous Moses, filled with love for his brothers, the co-heirs of the promise, to such an extent, that he abandons his brilliant (by earthly standards) state as the adopted son of a princess, Pharaoh’s daughter, as something contemptible and not deserving attention, comes to the defense of an offended countryman-Israelite, and runs from Egypt. If, in Abraham, we see the peak of the Old-Testament love for God, then in Moses, in addition to love for God, which is not less than that of the righteous Abraham, we see the incarnation of the second half of the basic Divine law: the peak of love for others, as for oneself.

The Lord greatly elevates Moses among the elect. Among storm and thunder, He gives him His law on Mount Sinai. He talks with Moses face to face, and for the first time after the downfall, the only time before the pre-Golgotha hours, the Lord proclaims a person, in the face of Moses, as His friend: "If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make Myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold" (Numb. 12:6-8) and "And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend" (Ex.33:11).

Abraham is also called the friend of God in the Old Testament (Is. 41:8), but not during his lifetime, only many centuries after his death.

Using his friendship with God for the realization of his strong love for others as for himself, in the terrible hour of Divine anger for the sin of the Israeli nation, Moses turns to God with a most daring prayer: "Yet now, if Thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray Thee, out of Thy book which Thou hast written" (Ex. 32:32).

Footnote: Since the sin of the nation was in violation of the Covenant, then the request of Moses "to forgive their sin" is equal to an appeal: "Do not think the Covenant to be violated, do not reject Israel, do not take away its name and rights of the God-chosen nation." The necessity for such a request was caused by the following. (chap.11-13) The Lord answered the first appeal of Moses with the promise not to destroy Israel. In this way, its continued existence was guaranteed. But a similar promise still did not mean that the Jews would remain the God-chosen nation. The very frame of mind of the nation raised doubts, for it not only did not reveal a readiness to return to themselves the mercy of God, but displayed extreme stubbornness, which placed them under the threat of being fully rejected by God. In view of this, Moses begs: ‘forgive their sin." If forgiveness cannot be granted, then he offers his life as a sacrifice: "blot me, I pray thee, out of Thy book which Thou hast written."

Moses is the tool of a great Divine act: through him, the Divine law, of which people were deprived after having sinned in Eden, is returned to them; they are given back the possibility of Divine Services, partial communication with God; the earth stops being absolutely alien to heaven. Incompletely, imperfectly, in shades, in images and conjectures, but still, into the terrestrial life comes the uninterrupted process of the preparation of people for the acceptance of the Son of God, through Moses, in the God-given Divine Service. Therefore the Church, in special measure, sees, in Moses, the prototype of Christ, and often in the festal divine services sings chants, which relate to him and to Christ the Lord, comparing them: "The shadow of the law has passed now that grace has come, for as the Bush in flames was not consumed, so as a Virgin You bore a Child and remained a Virgin; instead of a pillar of fire the Sun of righteousness has dawned, instead of Moses — Christ, the salvation of our souls" (Dogmaticon 2nd Tone).

But the Lord could not descend even to Moses in the closest union.

In the hour of his selection, we see him negotiating with the Lord, evoking Divine anger by his persistent unwillingness to follow the Divine call: "O my LORD, send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send" (Ex. 4:13, and chap.3 and 4 of Ex.); we see Moses sinning before God by the waters of Meribah in Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin (Num. 20:12 и 27 and Deut. 1:37 и 32:51).

The Lord said to Moses: "Yet thou shalt see the (promised) land before thee; but thou shalt not go thither unto the land which I give the children of Israel" (Deut.32:52). The Promised Land was not only a real earthly phenomenon, but it was the prototype of the Kingdom of God, and God’s words to Moses are related to both meanings of the Promised Land: the great holy righteous God-Seeing Moses was given the chance to see the Divine-Human life — the tabernacle of God and men, but he was not permitted to enter it.

The third great spiritual figure of Old-Testament mankind is holy prophet Elijah.

Unusual power and love for God penetrate all the activity of this greatest of righteous men. In the days of the unrighteous King Ahab and his wife Jezebel, who became the symbol of everything vicious and wicked, a powerful prophet arises, burning with great zeal for the Lord. By Divine will, he seals the heavens with a single word, as a result of which not a single drop of rain falls onto the whole land of Israel for more than 3 years— as a punishment for idolatry. In his zeal for God, Elijah calls fire down from heaven on a sacrifice to God, so that Israel would cease "floundering," so that the nation would admit who is the true God: the wicked Baal or the righteous Lord. In the unrestrained, but righteous rage against the tempters and corruptors of the people of God, St. Elijah with the own hand slew the prophets of Baal and Astarte – 450 people! (3 Kings, chap.18).

Righteous Elijah cannot be reproached for anything. His devotion to God is not less than the devotion of Abraham, his forefather. In addition, he had no slip ups, similar to those of Abraham. He is able to communicate with God no less than Moses: the Lord appears to him, as he did to Moses, on the Mount of Horeb, and in the New Testament only these two — Moses and Elijah—from all of Old Testament mankind, were found to be called to see the Tabor light, emanated by the Incarnated Son of God on the day of Transfiguration.

Possibly, one can reproach the Prophet Elijah for the fear of death, when he runs from Jezebel, pursuing him: "And when he saw that, he arose, and went for his life" (3 Kings. 19:3). But this fear — is an absolutely natural feeling, typical of every man, and the Lord does not reproach His prophet for this fear, because Elijah does nothing unrighteous, opposing the Divine will, under the influence of his fear, even on the scale of the self-initiated blows of Moses upon the rock by the water of Meribah. He only runs from the pursuing Jezebel after he fully completes God’s mission.

But Elijah also cannot become the vessel of the Divine incarnation due to the spontaneous unrestrained character of his anger, his all-embracing fiery zeal for the Lord God. This rage, this zeal, differ in spirit in comparison with the Spirit of the One, Who is meek and subdued in His heart. That is why, when the Disciples of Christ, James and John, want to "command fire to come down from heaven, even as Elias did," Christ prohibits them, saying: "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them" (Luke 9:55,56).

The Lord speaks of this with love and delicacy to the Prophet Elijah as well, when He appears to him on the Mount Horeb: "What doest thou here, Elijah? And he said, I have been very jealous for the LORD God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant, thrown down Thine altars, and slain Thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away. And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice" (3 Kings 19:9-12).

Elijah was "a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD," but not a still small voice. The Lord waited for this still small voice, which was not in Elijah, or in mankind, for many more centuries. The Lord, carrying out the salvation of those created by Him in His image, after His likeness, and, consequently, spiritually autocratic creatures, could not come down to men without this still small voice, without their participation, for He is not in the wind or fire, but in the breath of a calm breeze.

This breath of quiet wind appeared in mankind, when "in the sixth month the Angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth… To a Virgin… and the Virgin's name was Mary" (Luke 1:26-27), and when in answer to the Annunciation, which was more amazing than the one to Abraham, more crucial than the one to Moses, and infinitely much more blissful than the one to Elijah, a quiet voice sounded: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to Thy word" (Luke 1:38). This was the moment when the Son of God’s descent to man could occur, and it occurred at that same moment, for the Omnipotent Lord, long-sufferingly awaiting many centuries for this moment, did not wait an iota longer, but immediately joined with the human nature created by Him, torn away from Him by sin, but not forgotten by His love, recreating it in the womb of the Ever-Virgin.

Still, Abraham, Moses and Elijah were not left without participation in this matter. The Holy Virgin — was the descendant of Abraham in soul and body. For the sake of Her appearance, he left the flourishing culture and conveniences of his native Ur of the Chaldees. From him, Her forefather, She inherited Her highest flight of sacrificial love for God, shown by Abraham on the mount of Moria in sacrificing his son. This flight of sacrificial love is revealed by Her in an even more elevated way, through Her participation in the salutary sufferings of the Lord on the Mount of Golgotha.

The Virgin Mary grew and was brought up in the Law, given by God through Moses on the holy Mount Sinai, brought up in the temple, built by Divine will through Moses, and She corrected his imperfectness, which caused God’s rage by the Bush that Never Burns (Ex.3:2, where the burning bush was a prototype of Virgin Mary), for She did not doubt at all, did not oppose God, Who had chosen Her, but with the humble answer: ""Behold the handmaid of the Lord" she effaced the inappropriate lethargy of Moses, who said to God: "Send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send" (Ex. 4:13).

By the stirring of a quiet wind, with a still small voice, She rights the scorching storm of Elias’s zeal, and Her relative, coming after Her, takes part in this exploit of Hers, the great prophet, who appeared in the spirit and strength of Elijah, i.e. in no way inferior to Elijah in Divine zeal. The Prophet John the Baptist, this new Elijah, was not frightened by his contemporary Jezebel, but accepted a martyr’s death from her on the border of the Old and New Testaments, in order to become the Forerunner of Jesus Christ even in hell.

The Prophet Elijah was taken to heaven alive, but the church teaching tells us that when, in the last days, the violations of the law will increase and the love of many will fade so, that the manifestation of people’s zeal for God will be depleted, then two witnesses will appear, two olives, two candlesticks (Rev. 11:3-4), which will testify to the Divine Truth among the grown-fainthearted mankind, putting fresh heart into the small flock of those who stayed faithful up to the end, embarrassing and exposing the multitudinal, impudently celebrating enemies of God. By Divine permission they — these two candlesticks — will be killed by the Antichrist and will be resurrected on the third day. The church teaching says that these two candlesticks-witnesses will be the saints Enoch and Elijah, those righteous men of the Old Testament who did not taste death, precisely in order to fulfill the act of God at the end of ages, when human forces will be exhausted.

We clearly and painfully feel this terrible depletion of human moral forces now as never before. Does it mean that the hour of the coming of the prophet Elijah and righteous Enoch, as the forerunners of the Second Coming of Christ, is close — we cannot say, and without a doubt believe that sooner or later this will happen, and the earth will still hear the formidable voice, saying: "As the LORD of hosts liveth, before whom I stand… How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow Him: but if Baal, then follow him" (3 Kings 18:15-21). And many, many of the signs of modern days testify that there is little time left until the days when this voice will be heard, and maybe our generation will meet face to face on this earth, in the modern concrete surroundings, with the formidable, fire-breathing Divine prophet, who is called in the church chants "the second Forerunner of the coming of Christ, glorious Elijah."

The Footnote: The Antichrist, coming out of the dark and infernal places of the earth, to where the devil was banished by the permission of God, will kill them and leave their bodies unburied in the same Jerusalem, ancient and destroyed, where the Lord had suffered. In this city he will establish his kingdom and royal throne, like David, the Son of whom by His flesh was Christ, our true God, and in that way wanting to prove that he is Christ, fulfilling the prophetic word: "In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen" (Amos 9:11), which the wayward Jews accept and relate to His Coming.

Deluded by the false miracles of the Antichrist and having ineffaceably written him in their hearts, the Jews and pagans will not allow the holy bodies to be buried, and will rejoice over the freedom from the punishments, which they tolerated for their own admonishment.

Lying dead for the same number of days as the number of years their prophetic activity lasted, Enoch and Elijah again, to the fear and horror of those who see it, will ascend to heaven in a fiery chariot — cloud (The Interpretation of the Revelation of St. Andrew, the Archbishop of Caesarea).

 

Manasseh

King of Judea

Among many extremely dramatic personalities, commemorated in the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament, one of the most dramatic is Manasseh — one of the last kings of the southern Hebrew kingdom.

In his time the northern Hebrew kingdom — that of Israel, was already destroyed and conquered by the bloodthirsty Assyria