Names

The crucifixion of Christ from a medical point of view. Why was Jesus crucified

Why was Jesus Christ crucified? This question may arise in a person who either refers to this event only as a historical fact, or takes the very first steps towards faith in the Savior. In the first case, the most correct decision is to try not to satisfy your idle interest, but to wait until a sincere desire appears in the mind and heart to understand this. In the second case, you need to start looking for an answer to this question, of course, from reading the Bible. In the process of reading, various personal considerations in this regard will inevitably arise. This is where the division begins. Some believe that each person has the right to his own reading of the Holy Scriptures and remain with their opinion, even if it is fundamentally different from the opinion of other people. This is the Protestant position. Orthodoxy, which is still the main Christian denomination in Russia, is based on the reading of the Bible by the Holy Fathers. This also applies to the question: why was Jesus crucified? Therefore, the next sure step in trying to understand this topic is to turn to the works of the Holy Fathers.

Don't search the internet for answers.

Why does the Orthodox Church recommend this particular approach? The fact is that any person who tries to live a spiritual life necessarily reflects on the meaning of the events connected with the earthly life of Christ, on the meaning of His sermons and apostolic epistles. If a person moves in the right direction, then the meaning, the hidden subtext of Scripture, is gradually revealed to him. But attempts to unite the knowledge and understanding accumulated by all spiritual people and those who try to be them into one gave the usual result: how many people - so many opinions. For each, even the most insignificant issue, so many understandings and assessments were found that, as an inevitability, there was a need to analyze and summarize all this information. The result was the following picture: several people necessarily covered the same topic absolutely, almost verbatim, in the same way.

Having traced the pattern, it was easy to notice that opinions exactly coincided with a certain kind of people. Usually these were saints, theologians, who chose monasticism or simply led a particularly strict life, were more attentive than other people to their thoughts and actions. The purity of thoughts and feelings made them open to communion with the Holy Spirit. That is, they all received information from the same source. The discrepancies arose from the fact that yet no man is perfect. No one can escape the influence of evil, which will surely seduce, try to mislead a person. Therefore, in Orthodoxy it is customary to consider the opinion confirmed by the majority of the Holy Fathers to be the truth. Single assessments that do not coincide with the vision of the majority can be safely attributed to personal conjectures and delusions.

For everything related to religion, it is better to ask the priest

For a person who has just begun to be interested in such issues, the best solution would be to seek help from a priest. He will be able to advise literature that is suitable for a beginner. You can apply for such help to the nearest temple or spiritual and educational center. In such institutions, priests have the opportunity to devote sufficient time and attention to the issue. It is more correct to look for an answer to the question “Why was Jesus Christ crucified?” in exactly this way. There is simply no unequivocal answer to it, and independent attempts to seek clarification from the Fathers are dangerous, since they wrote mainly for monks.

Judgment by Pilate

Since Judea was captured by Rome in those years and it was ruled by the procurator (prefect) Pontius Pilate, namely, it was in his power to pass death sentences, it was to him that Jesus was sent early on Friday morning.

Pilate asked those who brought Jesus to Him, "What do you accuse this man of?" They answered him: "If He had not been a villain, we would not have betrayed Him to you." Pilate said, "Take him and judge according to your law." The Jews objected, “We are not allowed to put anyone to death. We have found that He corrupts our people and forbids giving tribute to Caesar, calling Himself the Messiah the King,” — thus the accusers tried to bring the accusation under the Roman laws, where crimes against Caesar were punishable by death.

Pilate called Jesus and asked, “Are you the King of the Jews? Your people and your chief priests have delivered you to Me. What did you do?". Jesus answered: “My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight for me, so that I would not be betrayed; but my kingdom is not from here.” Pilate said to Him, "So, You are the King?" Answering him, Jesus said, “You say the truth that I am the King. I was born for this, and for this I came into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is from the truth hears my voice.”

Pilate, skeptically noticing, “What is truth?”, went out to the chief priests and the people and said: “You brought Him to me as a corrupter of the people. And behold, I examined in your presence, and did not find this man guilty of anything of which you accuse Him. So, having punished Him, I will let him go.” And for the sake of the Passover holiday (in memory of the salvation of the Israeli people from Egyptian captivity), it was necessary to release one prisoner, for whom the people asked. Pilate wanted to turn this in favor of the Innocent, for he knew that the chief priests had betrayed Jesus out of envy. But all the assembled people cried out: "No, let not him go, but Barabbas." Barabbas was a robber and a murderer. Pilate again asked them which of the two they wanted to let go - Barabbas or Jesus, who is called the Messiah? They again shouted: "Barabbas."

Pilate asked, “What should I do with Jesus? What evil did he do? I do not find anything worthy of death in Him, having punished Him, I will let him go. They all shouted: “Let him be crucified! Crucify Him! If you let Him go, you are not a friend of Caesar; we have no king but Caesar; everyone who makes himself a king is opposed to Caesar.” And he overcame the cry of the people and the high priests. Seeing that nothing helps, but the excitement increases, he took water and, washing his hands before the people, said: “I am innocent of the blood of this Just One; see for yourself." All the people, answering him, said: "His blood is on us and on our children." Then at last Pilate, wanting to please the people, released Barabbas to them and handed Jesus over to be crucified.

gospel narrative

Pilate's trial of Jesus is described in all four evangelists:

Gospel	Court description
From Matthew (Matthew 27:11-14)	…and having bound Him, they took Him away and handed Him over to Pontius Pilate, the governor… And Jesus stood before the governor. And His ruler asked: Are you the King of the Jews? Jesus said to him: You speak. And when the chief priests and elders accused Him, He answered nothing. Then Pilate said to him: Do you not hear how much they testify against you? And he did not answer him a single word, so that the ruler was very surprised.
From Mark (Mark 15:1-5)	Immediately in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders and scribes, and the entire Sanhedrin held a meeting, and, having tied Jesus, they took him away and handed him over to Pilate. Pilate asked Him: Are you the King of the Jews? And he said to him in answer: You speak. And the chief priests accused Him of many things. Pilate asked Him again: You don't answer anything? you see how many accusations are against you. But Jesus made no answer to that either, so Pilate was amazed.
From Luke (Luke 23:1-7)	And all the multitude of them rose up, and led Him to Pilate, and began to accuse Him, saying: We found that He corrupts our people and forbids giving tribute to Caesar, calling Himself Christ the King. Pilate asked Him: Are you the King of the Jews? He said to him in reply: You speak. Pilate said to the chief priests and the people: I find no fault in this man. But they persisted, saying that He was stirring up the people by teaching all over Judea, from Galilee to this place. Pilate, hearing about Galilee, asked: Is He a Galilean? And knowing that He was from the province of Herod, He sent Him to Herod, who in those days was also in Jerusalem.
From John (John 18:29-38)	Pilate went out to them and said: What do you accuse this Man of? They said to him in reply: If He had not been a villain, we would not have betrayed Him to you. Pilate said to them: You take him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews said to him: We are not allowed to put anyone to death, so that the word of Jesus, which He spoke, may come true, making it clear by what death He will die. Then Pilate entered the praetorium again, and called Jesus, and said to Him: Are you the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him: Are you saying this on your own, or have others told you about Me? Pilate answered: Am I a Jew? Your people and chief priests delivered you to me; what did you do? Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight for me, so that I would not be delivered to the Jews; but now my kingdom is not from here. Pilate said to Him: So You are the King? Jesus answered: You say that I am the King. For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to bear witness to the truth; everyone who is of the truth hears my voice. Pilate said to him, What is truth? And having said this, he again went out to the Jews and said to them, I find no fault in Him.

Apocryphal tales

Pilate's trial is described in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus. In it, in addition to the information contained in the canonical Gospels, the author makes additions that emphasize the messianic status of Christ (for example, an episode with the worship of Christ with a banner in the hands of standard-bearers). Pilate's trial begins with a dispute about the legality of the birth of Jesus, which ends with Pilate's dialogue with 12 men who were at the betrothal of the Virgin Mary and testified to the legality of the birth of Jesus:

The Gospel of Nicodemus quotes Jesus' answer to Pilate's question, "What is truth?" (the question according to the Gospel of John remained unanswered): “Jesus said: ‘Truth is from heaven. Pilate said to Him: “Is there no truth in earthly things?” Jesus said to Pilate: “Pay attention - the truth is on earth among those who, having power, live by the truth and do righteous judgment.”

Witnesses in defense of Christ at the trial are the miraculously healed by him sick: paralyzed, born blind, Veronica, a bleeding wife; the inhabitants of Jerusalem remember the miraculous resurrection of Lazarus. In response to this, on the occasion of the feast, Pilate invites the people to release Christ or Barabbas of their choice, and in the future the apocrypha repeats the canonical Gospel text, with the exception of bringing Jesus out to the people after the reproach.

One of the hypotheses why they executed Christ?

The conviction, implanted from childhood into the consciousness of millions over sixty generations, that Pontius Pilate did not want the execution of Christ, was one of the conditions for the adoption of Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire in the 4th century. It was politically motivated and conditioned, and did not correspond to reality. The governor in charge of the situation in the Roman province, if he was not an insane or a revolutionary a la Lenin and Trotsky (and Pontius Pilate, of course, was not an enemy of the existing order), could not allow the continuation of sermons that destroyed the existing Law and Order to the very foundation . Deeper and much more serious destruction than 16 centuries after Christianity destroyed pagan Rome, the Bolsheviks dreamed.

So, since it was impossible to shut Christ's mouth except by destroying him, Jesus could not help but be destroyed by Rome. Moreover, it was destroyed not in the Jewish way (by stoning), by chopping off the head in an oriental manner, or in any other way, but underlined by the Roman execution: by crucifixion. Well, when Christianity really overthrew paganism, which resisted for four centuries, and it became the official religion of Rome, a cardinal question arose: the state cannot accept religion as the State if the founder of this religion is destroyed by the same State.

Needless to say, Pilate needed to be whitewashed. And whitewashed. And how! Against common sense and facts. And they, the facts, which are clear and understandable, if not dodge, convincingly say that the procurator of the province, who is obliged to fight with everyone who destroys order in the Empire, simply could not not crucify Jesus Christ.

The commandments of Christ, which were preached openly, could not help but lie on the table of the Roman Procurator of Judea during the interrogation of Jesus. Among them, the fourth, preceding the acceptable following after it

5. "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God is giving you."

6. "Don't kill."

7. "Do not commit adultery."

8. "Don't steal."

9. "Do not bear false witness against your neighbor."

10. “Do not covet your neighbor's house; Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor's. It stood like this: “The fourth commandment of Jesus Christ: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Work six days, and do all your work; and the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: you shall not do any work on it, neither you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your servant, nor your maidservant, nor your livestock, nor the stranger that is in your dwellings. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them; and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”

In other words, Christ, following the Jewish tradition, as well as the main principle of his Mission proclaimed by Him: “I did not come to break the Law, but to fulfill,” the slaves were recognized not as living tools, but as people.

But the Roman procurator could not allow this. Understanding that the recognition of human rights for slaves, Pax Romana will destroy. Which happened - despite four centuries of resistance from the Romans.

According to the Jewish religion - and Christianity, which inherited its main provisions - the slave is a man. In contrast to the fundamental principle of the Roman Empire: a slave is not a man. Like his masters, the slave did not work on the seventh day of the week (Saturday), and on the seventh year the Jewish master was obliged to set the slave free. The Romans tolerated this as long as these rules were valid only within one of the peoples. In the end, the Italic Romans were also free to release slaves as freedmen if they wanted. And give them the opportunity not to work - if they want. But to declare every slave a man in the Pax Romana, so that he, like his masters, did not work on Saturday (or Sunday - in comparison with the principle of recognizing a slave as a man, it does not matter) - the fourth Commandment of Christ threatened to destroy the fundamental foundations on which it was based Empire.

By the way, remember. The Essenes preached about the same as Jesus before him, and declared free everyone who came to their community - but they lived as hermits in the desert and were not dangerous. The Essenes could not develop into a world religion. Just like Judaism with 613 commandments that are obligatory for everyone who truly believes.

When Jesus began to preach the ten commandments, including the fourth, to everyone (that is, by being baptized, the slave became a man from a tool of labor) and (to put it simply) preserved the ethics of Judaism to the limit by simplifying the requirements that believers are required to comply with; and reducing 613 in Judaism to ten principles, limiting themselves to them - this the Romans could not allow.

Rome crucified Jesus because it was suicidal for the empire not to destroy Christ. Pilate understood this immediately - and acted as a statesman dressed in responsibility should act in such conditions. Rome killed Jesus so that Jesus would not destroy Rome. And also - what is not customary to talk about - Rome martyred eleven of the twelve apostles for the same reason: trying to prevent the destruction of the Empire by Christianity. What is not advertised and not depicted on the iconostases, so that unnecessary questions do not arise: what does the Jews have to do with it? Because the Jews obviously had nothing to do with the executions of the apostles: Peter, Paul and the rest, but only the Roman Authorities.

It was precisely because it was clear to the Roman authorities that the spread of Christianity would destroy Rome that Christians were persecuted most severely for almost three hundred years. Many of Christ's followers were even more martyred than Jesus. Nero, for example, lit up the streets of Rome with Christians, turning them into torches.

But only temporarily helped: Christianity crushed Rome. At the same time, as soon as Christianity became the ruling religion (under Theodosius and his son Honorius), paganism in the Roman Empire was prohibited. Christianity defeated paganism in Rome - and began to persecute pagan traditions (including the ban on the Olympic Games) as harshly as paganism had persecuted Christianity for three centuries. It was not between Christianity and Judaism that there was a struggle (how absurdly the tradition tries to present, trying to whitewash Pilate and the Romans), but between paganism and Christianity. A fight for life and death. If paganism had survived (and things are rapidly moving towards its restoration in our 21st century throughout the Christian world), Pilate would have been recognized as the first Hero on the many-hundred-year-old road of struggle for the pagan world. And it will not be surprising if soon they are actually recognized as such.

Christ was not crucified

Any Gospel event has two meanings: explicit and hidden (spiritual). If you look from the point of view of the Savior and Christians, then the answer could be this: Christ was not crucified, He voluntarily allowed himself to be crucified for the sins of all mankind - past, present and future. The obvious reason is simple: Christ called into question all the usual views of the Jews on piety, undermined the authority of their priesthood. The worship of God among the Jews, before the coming of the Messiah, consisted in excellent knowledge and exact execution of all laws and regulations. The sermons of the Savior made many people think about the falsity of this view of the relationship with the Creator. In addition, the Jews expected the King promised in the prophecies of the Old Testament. He was to free them from Roman slavery and stand at the head of a new earthly kingdom. The high priests were probably afraid of an open armed uprising of the people against their power and the power of the Roman emperor. Therefore, it was decided that “it is better for us that one person should die for the people than that the whole nation should perish” (see the Gospel of John chapter 11, verses 47-53). This is why they crucified Jesus Christ.

Commentary on the book

Section comment

27 "Lots of women"- according to the custom reported in the Talmud, noble Jerusalem women prepared soothing drinks and brought them to the executed.

27-30 Christ mourns the city, which in 40 years will be destroyed; hundreds of its inhabitants will be crucified by the Romans.

31 "With a green tree"- a symbol of the righteous (cf. Ps 1-3).

"With dry" - with the Jews who rejected the Savior.

34 "Father! Forgive them because they don't know what they're doing"- cf. Is 53 12; Acts 3 17; 7 60 ; 13 27 ; 1 Peter 2 23; 1 Cor 2 8.

36 "Bringing" - see Mt 27:48.

42 "When you come to your kingdom"- letters: with your kingdom, i.e. to take possession of your kingdom; option: when you come to your kingdom, i.e. to start it.

44 Cosmic phenomena characteristic of the "day of Yahweh" (cf. Mt 27:51).

46 The prayer that was recited before going to bed (cf. Ps 30:6).

54 "Saturday was coming"- option: it began to glow - an indication of the Jewish custom to light lamps at the onset of the Sabbath (on Friday evening).

56 cm Matthew 28:1.

1. Luke, "beloved physician", was one of the closest associates of St. Paul (Colossenses 4:14). According to Eusebius (Church East 3:4), he came from Syrian Antioch and was brought up in a Greek pagan family. He received a good education and became a doctor. The history of his conversion is unknown. Apparently, it happened after his meeting with ap Paul, whom he joined c. 50 He visited with him Macedonia, the cities of Asia Minor (Actus 16:10-17; Actus 20:5-21:18) and remained with him during his stay in custody in Caesarea and Rome (Actus 24:23; Actus 27; Actus 28; Colossenses 4:14). The narration of Acts was brought to the year 63. There is no reliable data on the life of Luke in subsequent years.

2. Very ancient information has come down to us, confirming that the third Gospel was written by Luke. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3, 1) writes: "Luke, the companion of Paul, expounded the Gospel taught by the Apostle in a separate book." According to Origen, "the third gospel is from Luke" (see Eusebius, Church. East 6, 25). In the list of sacred books that have come down to us, recognized as canonical in the Roman Church since the 2nd century, it is noted that Luke wrote the Gospel on behalf of Paul.

Scholars of the 3rd Gospel unanimously recognize the writer's talent of its author. According to such a connoisseur of antiquity as Eduard Mayer, ev. Luke is one of the best writers of his time.

3. In the preface to the gospel, Luke says that he used previously written "narratives" and the testimonies of eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word from the very beginning (Lucam 1:2). He wrote it, in all probability, before 70 AD. He undertook his work "by careful study of everything from the beginning" (Lucam 1:3). The gospel is continued by Acts, where the evangelist also included his personal memories (starting with Actus 16:10, the story is often told in the first person).

Its main sources were, obviously, Mt, Mk, manuscripts that have not come down to us, called "logy", and oral traditions. Among these traditions, a special place is occupied by stories about the birth and childhood of the Baptist, which developed among the admirers of the prophet. At the heart of the story of the infancy of Jesus (chapters 1 and 2) lies, apparently, a sacred tradition in which the voice of the Virgin Mary herself is still heard.

Not being a Palestinian and speaking to Gentile Christians, Luke reveals less knowledge than Matthew and Jn of the setting in which the gospel events took place. But as a historian, he seeks to clarify the chronology of these events by pointing to kings and rulers (eg Lucam 2:1; Lucam 3:1-2). Luke includes prayers that, according to commentators, were used by the first Christians (the prayer of Zechariah, the song of the Virgin, the song of the angels).

5. Luke views the life of Jesus Christ as a path to voluntary death and victory over it. Only in Lk the Savior is called κυριος (Lord), as was customary in the early Christian communities. The Evangelist repeatedly speaks of the action of the Spirit of God in the life of the Virgin Mary, Christ Himself, and later the apostles. Luke conveys the atmosphere of joy, hope and eschatological expectation in which the first Christians lived. He lovingly paints the merciful appearance of the Savior, clearly manifested in the parables of the merciful Samaritan, the prodigal son, the lost drachma, the publican and the Pharisee.

As a student of Paul Luke emphasizes the universal character of the Gospel (Lucam 2:32; Lucam 24:47); the genealogy of the Savior he leads not from Abraham, but from the forefather of all mankind (Lucam 3:38).

INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

a) Early Epistles: 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

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

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

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

e) The Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Catholic Epistles ("Corpus Catholicum").

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

FOUR GOSPEL

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

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

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

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

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

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Section comment

26-32 Christ's procession to Golgotha is depicted in such detail by one Ev. Luke: only the 26th verse is borrowed by him from Mark ( Mark 15:21). Ev. Luke says that Christ was followed by many women who wept (ἐκόπτοντο cf. 8:52 ) and wept for Him, considering Him an innocent victim of the malice of His enemies. The Lord, at the sight of these signs of sympathy, told them (however, Merckx believes that in Hebrew the expression “daughters of Jerusalem” meant not only women, but all the inhabitants of the capital) that their fate would also be unhappy, even more disastrous than the fate of Christ ( because Christ after death awaits glorification, and theirs is only a painful and inglorious death). In particular, it will be hard for them to look at the torment that their little children will obviously undergo during the destruction of Jerusalem. In those days, those who have no children will be considered happy, and in horror they will turn to the mountains and hills with a prayer that they will quickly fall on them and end their painful existence. Why the inhabitants of Jerusalem should expect such a terrible fate for themselves - this is explained by the Lord in the words: for if with a green tree(31). According to the usual interpretation (see, for example, Bishop Michael in the Commentary of the Gospel), here Christ understands Himself under the green tree, and under the dry Jews, who will be exterminated by the Romans. But one cannot agree with such an interpretation, firstly, because Ev. Luke, the Romans are not at all responsible for the death of the Savior (according to him, only the Jews are guilty of it, who, one might say, forced Pilate to pronounce judgment on Christ), and secondly, if - let's say - the Romans are represented by the evangelist as an unrighteous judge who condemned Christ, then, after all, this cannot serve as a basis for hoping that this unrighteous judge, who condemned the Righteous One, will also treat strictly the enemies of this righteous man - the wicked Jews ... Therefore, it is better to accept the interpretation proposed by Merckx (p. 491). According to him, the Lord speaks here of that corruption among the ruling classes of the Jewish people, which led to such a terrible injustice towards Christ. But the further, the more this corruption will be. What can ordinary Jews expect from such leaders? What will the children of these women have to experience when these children grow up and become under the power of such cruel people as the leaders of the Jewish people?

32 Lead with Him to death and two villains- cf. Mark 15:27 .

33-43 About the crucifixion of Christ ev. Luke narrates, in essence, according to Mark ( Mark 15:22-32), but it also has something special.

33 Place of execution - see Mt 27:33 .

34 He spoke, obviously, while they were crucifying Him.

Forgive them, i.e., not the soldiers who were only the executioners, but the high priests and leaders of the Jews, the true culprits of the death of Christ.

They don't know what they're doing. The Lord somewhat mitigates the guilt of His enemies: they, of course, did not know that they were killing the real Messiah (cf. 1 Cor 2:8).

35 And the chiefs laughed along with them(ἐξεμυκτήριζον; cf. Luke 16:14), that is, while the people looked with curiosity at the crucifixion of Christ, the leaders even mocked Christ.

If He - in Greek. εἰ οὑ̃τός - an expression of mockery and contempt: "this one."

Chosen of God - cf. 9:35 .

36-37 And the warriors swore. One Evangelist notes this. Luke, adding that, among other things, they expressed their mockery in offering vinegar to the crucified Christ. Ev. Mark ( Mark 15:36). Of the whole character of the narration of Ev. Luke about the death of Christ, one can conclude that these were not Roman, but Jewish soldiers, in all likelihood, from among those who served at the temple.

38 And there was an inscription above Him. And the placement of this inscription ev. Luke obviously understands this as a mockery of Christ.

39 One of the hanged. Ev. Luke here depicts the matter in more detail than the first two evangelists, according to which the crucified thieves generally slandered the Lord ( Mark 15:32 and Mt 27:44).

If you are the Christ, it would be more correct: “Are you not the Messiah? ( οὐχὶ σὺ εἰ̃ ὁ Χριστός according to the best reading) Save yourself and us in this case.

40 Or are you not afraid of God, i.e., is there really no fear of God in you - if you are already not able to repent even at this hour, - after all, you are also condemned to death, like the One over whom you mock! The speaker apparently repented of the deed that brought him to the cross (cf. Art. 41).

42 Remember me Lord i.e. remember me (resurrect me and accept me into your Messianic Kingdom) when you come to earth in your royal majesty (cf. Mt 16:28). The repentant thief, obviously, heard the teaching of the Lord about His second coming to judgment, for the foundation of His glorious Kingdom, and now the impression of what he heard came to life under the influence of the thought of his imminent death, that he believed in Christ as the Messiah. Of course, at the same time, the grace of God also helped him, mysteriously disposing the hearts of people to faith in Christ.

43 Now you will be with me in paradise. Instead of a distant reward in His future earthly glorious Kingdom, the Lord promises the thief who believed in Him a speedy reward: now both of them, Christ and the thief, will die (sometimes the crucified remained alive for several days), and both will enter paradise together. This paradise (ὁ παράδεισος ), as can be deduced from the parable of the rich man and Lazarus ( Luke 16:23), was, according to the Jews, in Sheol, and was a blessed abode of righteous souls until the day of resurrection. It should not be confused with the heavenly paradise of which St. Pavel ( 2 Cor 12:4) and Apocalypse ( Rev 2:7). Keil, along with Schenkel, however, means heavenly paradise here, finding no grounds for the assumption and existence of a temporary paradise in Sheol. But in this case, the expression “now you will ...” becomes incomprehensible. The pardoned robber could not get into heavenly paradise on the same day ... But does Christ's answer represent a promise to grant the thief's request? Some interpreters argue that the robber did not receive what he asked for. But this is not true. The Lord makes it clear to the thief that his request will be fulfilled, because if the soul of the thief goes to paradise, then, it means that he will participate in the resurrection of the righteous and in the future glorious Messianic Kingdom.

44-56 On the death and burial of Christ ev. Luke speaks in general terms with Ev. Mark ( Mark 15:33-47), however, sometimes makes borrowings from another source known to him.

45 And the sun faded. According to Ev. Luke's darkness, which came around the sixth hour, was due to an eclipse of the sun, which, obviously, was miraculous, since during the full moon - and then there was a full moon - usually there are no solar eclipses (Mercks, p. 504).

46 Father! into your hands I commit my spirit. One Ev. Luke cites this exclamation of Christ, which is a repetition, in a slightly modified form, of the words of Psalm 30 (v. 6). The Lord dies with full consciousness, and Himself betrays His spirit to God, since He has completed all the work of redemption entrusted to Him.

47 Seeing what happened, - i.e. hearing Christ's dying exclamation and hearing His last breath, and not tearing the veil ( Art. 45) seeing what was and was impossible for him.

He glorified God - he glorified God by the very deed, through his confession (cf. John 9:24). However, Ev. Luke puts into the mouth of the centurion only the confession of righteousness, that is, the innocence of Christ, and not the recognition of Him as the Son of God, even if not in the true sense of the word (cf. Mark 15:39).

48 The people, who earlier, being excited by the high priests, demanded the execution of Christ ( Art. 4,5,13,18,21,23), now showing remorse, beating his chest (cf. 8:52 ), thereby pleading guilty to the crucifixion of Christ (cf. 18:13 ). The reason for this change that happened to the people was that they saw what happened, that is, everything that happened at the crucifixion and, in particular, the sudden darkening of the sun (v. 45) In some ancient Syrian translations, after the expression: “returned”, it is added “saying: Woe to us, what has happened today because of our sins. For the desolation of Jerusalem is at hand." But, probably, these words are taken from the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, where they are given in this form: woe to our sins, for the judgment and destruction of Jerusalem is near"(Merckx, p. 505)..

49 Those who knew Him were the disciples and other followers of Christ, who, however, did not follow Him, as well as the women who came after Him from Galilee (cf. 8:2ff.). They were afraid to come close to the cross, so as not to incur any suspicions (the crucified were sometimes secretly kidnapped with the cross by their relatives and friends).

51 Not participating in the council and in their affairs, i.e., not agreeing with the decision of the Sanhedrin and the way the members of the Sanhedrin act in relation to Christ.

54 And Saturday came. Saturday came from Friday evening at about six o'clock in the evening, with the setting of the sun. Thus, the burial of Christ was performed just before the onset of the Sabbath.

55 Women also followed.- of course, they followed Joseph from Golgotha to the burial place of Christ.

56 When they returned, they prepared incense and ointments. According to Ev. Mark, they acquired the fragrances later ( Mark 16:1). V. Luca here more accurately determines the time of this purchase Thus the death of Christ followed, according to our account, at about three o'clock in the afternoon, the burial at about six o'clock in the evening, while Joseph's journey to Pilate took place between three and six o'clock..

Personality of the gospel writer. The Evangelist Luke, according to legends preserved by some ancient church writers (Eusebius of Caesarea, Jerome, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigaben, and others), was born in Antioch. His name, in all likelihood, is an abbreviation of the Roman name Lucilius. Was he a Jew or a Gentile? This question is answered by that place from the epistle to the Colossians, where ap. Paul distinguishes Luke from the circumcised (Lucam 4:11-14) and therefore testifies that Luke was a Gentile by birth. It is safe to assume that before entering the Church of Christ, Luke was a Jewish proselyte, since he is very familiar with Jewish customs. In his civil profession, Luke was a doctor (Colossenses 4:14), and church tradition, although rather later, says that he was also engaged in painting (Nikephor Kallistos. Church. history. II, 43). When and how he converted to Christ is unknown. The tradition that he belonged to the 70 apostles of Christ (Epiphanius. Panarius, haer. LI, 12, etc.) cannot be recognized as credible in view of the clear statement of Luke himself, who does not include himself among the witnesses of the life of Christ (Lucam 1:1 et seq.). He acts for the first time as a companion and assistant to the Apostle. Paul during Paul's second missionary journey. This took place in Troas, where Luke may have lived before (Actus 16:10 et seq.). Then he was with Paul in Macedonia (Actus 16:11ff.) and, on his third journey, Troas, Miletus, and other places (Actus 24:23; Colossenses 4:14; Philemonem 1:24). He also accompanied Paul to Rome (Actus 27:1-28; cf. 2 Timotheum 4:11). Then information about him ceases in the writings of the New Testament, and only a relatively late tradition (Gregory the Theologian) reports his martyr's death; his relics, according to Jerome (de vir. ill. VII), at imp. Constantius was transferred from Achaia to Constantinople.

Origin of the Gospel of Luke. According to the evangelist himself (Lucam 1:1-4), he compiled his gospel on the basis of the tradition of eyewitnesses and the study of written experiences of the presentation of this tradition, trying to give a relatively detailed and correct orderly presentation of the events of the gospel history. And the works that Ev. Luke, were compiled on the basis of the apostolic tradition - but nevertheless, they seemed to be ev. Luke is insufficient for the purpose he had in compiling his gospel. One of these sources, perhaps even the main source, was for Ev. Luke Gospel of Mark. They even say that a huge part of the Gospel of Luke is in literary dependence on Ev. Mark (this is exactly what Weiss proved in his work on Ev. Mark by comparing the texts of these two Gospels).

Some critics still tried to make the Gospel of Luke dependent on the Gospel of Matthew, but these attempts were extremely unsuccessful and are now almost never repeated. If there is anything that can be said with certainty, it is that in some places Ev. Luke uses a source that agrees with the Gospel of Matthew. This must be said primarily about the history of the childhood of Jesus Christ. The nature of the presentation of this story, the very speech of the Gospel in this section, which is very reminiscent of the works of Jewish writing, make us assume that Luke here used a Jewish source, which was quite close to the story of the childhood of Jesus Christ, set forth in the Gospel of Matthew.

Finally, even in ancient times, it was suggested that the Ev. Luke, as a companion of ap. Paul, expounded the "Gospel" of this particular apostle (Irenaeus. Against heresies. III, 1; in Eusebius of Caesarea, V, 8). Although this assumption is very likely and agrees with the nature of the gospel of Luke, who, apparently, deliberately chose such narratives as could prove the general and main point of the gospel of Paul about the salvation of the Gentiles, nevertheless the evangelist's own statement (1:1 et seq.) does not refer to this source.

Reason and purpose, place and time of writing the Gospel. The Gospel of Luke (and the book of Acts) was written for a certain Theophilus to enable him to be convinced that the Christian doctrine taught to him rested on solid foundations. There are many assumptions about the origin, profession and place of residence of this Theophilus, but all these assumptions do not have sufficient grounds for themselves. One can only say that Theophilus was a noble man, since Luke calls him “venerable” (κράτ ιστε 1:3), and from the character of the Gospel, which is close to the character of the teachings of St. Paul naturally concludes that Theophilus was converted to Christianity by the apostle Paul and was probably previously a pagan. One can also accept the evidence of the Encounters (a work attributed to Clement of Rome, x, 71) that Theophilus was a resident of Antioch. Finally, from the fact that in the book of Acts, written for the same Theophilus, Luke does not make explanations of those mentioned in the history of the journey of St. Paul to Rome of the localities (Actus 28:12.13.15), it can be concluded that Theophilus was well acquainted with the named localities and, probably, he himself traveled to Rome more than once. But there is no doubt that the gospel is its own. Luke did not write for Theophilus alone, but for all Christians, for whom it was important to get acquainted with the history of the life of Christ in such a systematic and verified form as this history is found in the Gospel of Luke.

That the Gospel of Luke was in any case written for a Christian, or rather, for Gentile Christians, is clearly seen from the fact that the evangelist nowhere presents Jesus Christ as the Messiah predominantly expected by the Jews and does not seek to indicate in his activity and teaching Christ the fulfillment of messianic prophecies. Instead, we find repeated indications in the third gospel that Christ is the Redeemer of the entire human race and that the gospel is for all nations. Such an idea was already expressed by the righteous elder Simeon (Lucam 2:31 et seq.), and then passes through the genealogy of Christ, which in Ev. Luke brought to Adam, the ancestor of all mankind, and which, therefore, shows that Christ does not belong to one Jewish people, but to all mankind. Then, beginning to depict the Galilean activity of Christ, Ev. Luke puts in the forefront the rejection of Christ by His fellow citizens - the inhabitants of Nazareth, in which the Lord indicated a feature that characterizes the attitude of the Jews towards the prophets in general - the attitude by virtue of which the prophets left the Jewish land for the Gentiles or showed their favor to the Gentiles (Elijah and Elisha Lucam 4 :25-27). In the Conversation on the Mount, Ev. Luke does not quote Christ's sayings about His attitude to the law (to Lucam 1:20-49) and Pharisaic righteousness, and in his instruction to the apostles he omits the prohibition of the apostles from preaching to the Gentiles and Samaritans (Lucam 9:1-6). On the contrary, he only tells about the grateful Samaritan, about the merciful Samaritan, about Christ's disapproval of the immoderate irritation of the disciples against the Samaritans who did not accept Christ. Here it is also necessary to include various parables and sayings of Christ, in which there is a great similarity with the doctrine of righteousness from faith, which St. Paul proclaimed in his epistles, written to the churches, which were composed predominantly of Gentiles.

The influence of ap. Paul and the desire to clarify the universality of salvation brought by Christ undoubtedly had a great influence on the choice of material for compiling the Gospel of Luke. However, there is not the slightest reason to assume that the writer pursued purely subjective views in his work and deviated from historical truth. On the contrary, we see that he gives a place in his Gospel to such narratives, which undoubtedly developed in the Judeo-Christian circle (the story of the childhood of Christ). In vain, therefore, they attribute to him the desire to adapt the Jewish ideas about the Messiah to the views of St. Paul (Zeller) or else the desire to exalt Paul before the twelve apostles and Paul's teaching before Judeo-Christianity (Baur, Gilgenfeld). This assumption is contradicted by the content of the Gospel, in which there are many sections that go against such an alleged desire of Luke (this is, firstly, the story of the birth of Christ and His childhood, and then such parts: Lucam 4:16-30; Lucam 5:39; Lucam 10:22 ; Lucam 12:6 et seq.; Lucam 13:1-5 ; Lucam 16:17 ; Lucam 19:18-46 et al. to resort to a new assumption that in its present form the Gospel of Luke is the work of some later living person (editor).Golsten, who sees in the Gospel of Luke a combination of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, believes that Luke had the goal of uniting the Judeo-Christian and The same view of the Gospel of Luke, as a work pursuing purely reconciliatory aims of the two tendencies that fought in the primordial Church, continues to exist in the latest criticism of the apostolic writings. I have a preface to the commentary on Heb. Luke (2nd ed. 1907) to come to the conclusion that this gospel can by no means be regarded as pursuing the task of exalting peacockism. Luke shows his complete “non-partisanship”, and if he has frequent coincidences in thoughts and expressions with the epistles of the Apostle Paul, then this is only due to the fact that by the time Luke wrote his Gospel, these epistles were already widely distributed in all churches . But the love of Christ for sinners, on the manifestations of which so often ev. Luke, is not anything particularly characterizing the Pauline idea of Christ: on the contrary, the whole Christian tradition presented Christ as loving sinners...

The time of writing the Gospel of Luke by some ancient writers belonged to a very early period in the history of Christianity - back to the time of the activity of St. Paul, and the latest interpreters in most cases claim that the Gospel of Luke was written shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem: at the time when the two-year stay of Apostle ended. Paul in Roman imprisonment. There is, however, an opinion, supported by rather authoritative scholars (for example, B. Weiss), that the Gospel of Luke was written after the year 70, that is, after the destruction of Jerusalem. This opinion wants to find a basis for itself, mainly in the 21st ch. The Gospel of Luke (v. 24 et seq.), where the destruction of Jerusalem is assumed as if it had already taken place. With this, it seems, the idea that Luke has about the situation of the Christian Church, as being in a very oppressed state (cf. Lucam 6:20 et seq.), also agrees. However, according to the same Weiss, the origin of the Gospel cannot be attributed further to the 70s (as do, for example, Baur and Zeller, who believe the origin of the Gospel of Luke in 110-130, or as Gilgenfeld, Keim, Volkmar - in 100- m g.). Regarding this opinion of Weiss, it can be said that it does not contain anything incredible and even, perhaps, can find its basis in the testimony of St. Irenaeus, who says that the Gospel of Luke was written after the death of the apostles Peter and Paul (Against Heresies III, 1).

Where the Gospel of Luke was written is nothing definite from tradition. According to some, the place of writing was Achaia, according to others, Alexandria or Caesarea. Some point to Corinth, others to Rome as the place where the Gospel was written; but all this is mere conjecture.

On the Authenticity and Integrity of the Gospel of Luke. The writer of the Gospel does not call himself by name, but the ancient tradition of the Church unanimously calls the writer of the third Gospel St. Luke (Irenaeus. Against heresies. III, 1, 1; Origen in Eusebius, Tserk. ist. VI, 25, etc. See also the canon of Muratorius). There is nothing in the Gospel itself that would prevent us from accepting this testimony of tradition. If opponents of authenticity point out that the apostolic men do not cite any passages from it, then this circumstance can be explained by the fact that under the apostolic men it was customary to be guided more by oral tradition about the life of Christ than by records about Him; in addition, the Gospel of Luke, as having, judging by its writing, a private purpose primarily, could just so be considered by the apostolic men as a private document. Only later did it acquire the significance of a universally binding guide for the study of gospel history.

The latest criticism still does not agree with the testimony of tradition and does not recognize Luke as the writer of the Gospel. The basis for doubting the authenticity of the Gospel of Luke is for critics (for example, for John Weiss) the fact that the author of the Gospel must be recognized as the one who compiled the book of the Acts of the Apostles: this is evidenced not only by the inscription of the book. Acts (Actus 1:1), but also the style of both books. Meanwhile, criticism claims that the book of Acts was not written by Luke himself or by any companion of St. Paul, and a person who lived much later, who only in the second part of the book uses the records that remained from the companion of ap. Paul (see e.g. Lucam 16:10 : we...). Obviously, this assumption, expressed by Weiss, stands and falls with the question of the authenticity of the book of the Acts of the Apostles and therefore cannot be discussed here.

With regard to the integrity of the Gospel of Luke, critics have long expressed the idea that not the entire Gospel of Luke came from this writer, but that there are sections inserted into it by a later hand. Therefore, they tried to single out the so-called "first Luke" (Scholten). But most of the new interpreters defend the position that the Gospel of Luke, in its entirety, is the work of Luke. The objections which, for example, he expresses in his commentary on Ev. Luke Yog. Weiss, they can hardly shake the confidence in a sane person that the Gospel of Luke in all its departments is a completely integral work of one author. (Some of these objections will be dealt with in the Commentary on Luke.)

content of the gospel. In relation to the choice and order of gospel events, ev. Luke, like Matthew and Mark, divides these events into two groups, one of which embraces the Galilean activity of Christ, and the other his activity in Jerusalem. At the same time, Luke greatly abridges some of the stories contained in the first two Gospels, citing many such stories that are not at all found in those Gospels. Finally, he groups and modifies those stories, which in his Gospel are a reproduction of what is in the first two Gospels, in his own way.

Like Ev. Matthew, Luke begins his Gospel from the very first moments of the New Testament revelation. In the first three chapters, he depicts: a) the foreshadowing of the birth of John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ, as well as the birth and circumcision of John the Baptist and the circumstances that accompanied them (ch. 1), b) the story of the birth, circumcision and bringing of Christ to the temple , and then the speech of Christ in the temple, when He was a 12-year-old boy (ch. 11), c) the performance of John the Baptist as the Forerunner of the Messiah, the descent of the Spirit of God on Christ during His baptism, the age of Christ, in which He was at that time, and His genealogy (ch. 3rd).

The depiction of Christ's messianic activity in the Gospel of Luke is also quite clearly divided into three parts. The first part embraces the activity of Christ in Galilee (Lucam 4:1-9:50), the second contains the speeches and miracles of Christ during His long journey to Jerusalem (Lucam 9:51-19:27) and the third contains the story of the completion of the messianic ministry Christ in Jerusalem (Lucam 19:28-24:53).

In the first part, where the Evangelist Luke apparently follows Ev. Mark, both in choice and in the sequence of events, made several releases from Mark's narrative. Omitted precisely: Marcum 3:20-30, - the malicious judgments of the Pharisees about the expulsion of demons by Christ, Marcum 6:17-29 - the news of the taking into prison and the death of the Baptist, and then everything that is given in Mark (and also in Matthew) from history the activities of Christ in northern Galilee and Perea (Marcum 6:44-8:27ff.). The miracle of the feeding of the people (Lucam 9:10-17) is directly connected with the story of Peter's confession and the first prediction of the Lord about His sufferings (Lucam 9:18ff.). On the other hand, Ev. Luke instead of the section on the recognition of Simon and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee to follow Christ (Marcum 6:16-20; cf. Matthaeum 4:18-22) tells the story of the miraculous fishing, as a result of which Peter and his companions left their occupation in order to constantly follow Christ (Lucam 5:1-11), and instead of the account of the rejection of Christ in Nazareth (Marcum 6:1-6; cf. Matthaeum 13:54-58) he places an account of the same content in describing Christ's first visit as Messiah of his fatherly city (Lucam 4:16-30). Further, after the calling of the 12 apostles, Luke places in his Gospel the following departments that are not found in the Gospel of Mark: the Sermon on the Mount (Lucam 6:20-49, but in a shorter form than it is set out in Ev. Matthew), the question of the Baptist to the Lord about His Messiahship (Lucam 7:18-35), and inserted between these two parts is the story of the resurrection of the youth of Nain (Lucam 7:11-17), then the story of the anointing of Christ at a dinner in the house of the Pharisee Simon (Lucam 7:36-50) and the names of the women of Galilee who served Christ with their property (Lucam 8:1-3).

Such closeness of the Gospel of Luke to the Gospel of Mark is undoubtedly due to the fact that both evangelists wrote their Gospels for Gentile Christians. Both evangelists also show a desire to depict the gospel events not in their exact chronological sequence, but to give the fullest and clearest possible idea of Christ as the founder of the Messianic kingdom. Luke's departure from Mark can be explained by his desire to give more space to those stories that Luke borrows from tradition, as well as the desire to group the facts reported to Luke by eyewitnesses so that his Gospel represents not only the image of Christ, His life and works, but also His teaching. about the Kingdom of God, expressed in His speeches and conversations both with His disciples and with His opponents.

In order to carry out systematically such an intention, ev. Luke places between the two, predominantly historical, parts of his Gospel - the first and third - the middle part (Lucam 9:51-19:27), in which conversations and speeches predominate, and in this part he cites such speeches and events that, according to others The gospels took place at a different time. Some interpreters (for example, Meyer, Godet) see in this section an accurate chronological presentation of events, based on the words of Ev. Luke, who promised to state “everything in order” (καθ ’ ε ̔ ξη ̃ ς - 1:3). But such an assumption is hardly sound. Although Ev. Luke also says that he wants to write "in order", but this does not mean at all that he wants to give in his Gospel only a chronicle of the life of Christ. On the contrary, he made it his goal to give Theophilus, through an accurate presentation of the gospel history, complete confidence in the truth of those teachings in which he was instructed. General sequential order of events ev. Luke kept it: his gospel story begins with the birth of Christ and even with the birth of His Forerunner, then there is an image of the public ministry of Christ, and the moments of the disclosure of Christ's teaching about Himself as the Messiah are indicated, and finally, the whole story ends with a presentation of the events of the last days of Christ's stay on the ground. There was no need to enumerate in sequential order everything that was accomplished by Christ from baptism to ascension, and there was no need - it was enough for the purpose that Luke had, to convey the events of the gospel history in a certain grouping. About this intention ev. Luke also speaks of the fact that most of the divisions of the second part are connected not by exact chronological indications, but by simple transitional formulas: and it was (Lucam 11:1; Lucam 14:1), it was (Lucam 10:38; Lucam 11:27 ), and behold (Lucam 10:25), he said (Lucam 12:54), etc. or in simple connectives: a, and (δε ̀ - Lucam 11:29; Lucam 12:10). These transitions were obviously made not in order to determine the time of events, but only their setting. It is also impossible not to point out that the evangelist here describes events that took place either in Samaria (Lucam 9:52), then in Bethany, not far from Jerusalem (Lucam 10:38), then again somewhere far from Jerusalem (Lucam 13 :31), in Galilee - in a word, these are events of different times, and not only those that happened during the last journey of Christ to Jerusalem on the Passover of suffering Some interpreters, in order to keep the chronological order in this section, tried to find in it indications of two journeys of Christ to Jerusalem - on the feast of renewal and the feast of the last Easter (Schleiermacher, Ohlshausen, Neander) or even three, which John mentions in his Gospel ( Wieseler). But, apart from the fact that there is no definite allusion to various journeys, the place in the Gospel of Luke clearly speaks against such an assumption, where it is definitely said that the evangelist wants to describe in this section only the last journey of the Lord to Jerusalem - on the Pascha of suffering. In the 9th ch. 51st Art. It says, “When the days of His taking away from the world drew near, He desired to go up to Jerusalem.” Explanation see in a sense. 9th ch. .

Finally, and in the third section (Lucam 19:28-24:53) Heb. Luke sometimes departs from the chronological order of events in the interests of his grouping of facts (for example, he places Peter's denial before the trial of Christ by the high priest). Here again ev. Luke keeps the Gospel of Mark as the source of his narratives, supplementing his story with information drawn from another source unknown to us. So, Luke alone has stories about the publican Zacchaeus (Lucam 19:1-10), about the dispute of the disciples during the celebration of the Eucharist (Lucam 22:24-30), about the trial of Christ at Herod (Lucam 23:4-12), about the women mourning Christ during His procession to Golgotha (Lucam 23:27-31), the conversation with the thief on the cross (Lucam 23:39-43), the appearance of the travelers of Emmaus (Lucam 24:13-35) and some other messages representing a replenishment to the stories of ev. Brand. .

Gospel plan. In accordance with his intended goal - to provide a basis for faith in the teaching that has already been taught to Theophilus, ev. Luke planned the entire content of his Gospel in such a way that it really leads the reader to the conviction that the Lord Jesus Christ accomplished the salvation of all mankind, that He fulfilled all the promises of the Old Testament about the Messiah as the Savior not of one Jewish people, but of all peoples. Naturally, in order to achieve his goal, the Evangelist Luke did not need to give his Gospel the appearance of a chronicle of gospel events, but rather, it was necessary to group all the events so that his narrative would make the desired impression on the reader.

The evangelist's plan is already evident in the introduction to the history of Christ's messianic ministry (chapters 1-3). In the story of the conception and birth of Christ, it is mentioned that an angel announced to the Blessed Virgin the birth of a Son, whom she would conceive by the power of the Holy Spirit and who therefore would be the Son of God, and in the flesh, the son of David, who would forever occupy the throne of his father, David. The birth of Christ, as the birth of the promised Redeemer, is announced through an angel to the shepherds. When Christ the Infant is brought to the temple, the inspired elder Simeon and the prophetess Anna testify to His high dignity. Jesus Himself, still a 12-year-old boy, already announces that He should be in the temple as in the house of His Father. When Christ is baptized in the Jordan, He receives a heavenly witness that He is the beloved Son of God, who received the fullness of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for His messianic ministry. Finally, His genealogy, given in chapter 3, going back to Adam and God, testifies that He is the founder of a new humanity, born from God through the Holy Spirit.

Then, in the first part of the Gospel, an image is given of the Messianic ministry of Christ, which is accomplished in the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling in Christ (4:1) By the power of the Holy Spirit, Christ triumphs over the devil in the wilderness (Lucam 4:1-13), and then appears in this "power of the Spirit" in Galilee, and in Nazareth, His native city, declares Himself the Anointed One and Redeemer, about whom the prophets of the Old Testament foretold. Not meeting faith in Himself here, He reminds unbelieving His fellow citizens that God, even in the Old Testament, was preparing the acceptance of the prophets among the Gentiles (Lucam 4:14-30).

After this, which had a predictive value for the future attitude towards Christ on the part of the Jews, the event follows a series of deeds performed by Christ in Capernaum and its environs: the healing of the demon-possessed by the power of the word of Christ in the synagogue, the healing of Simon's mother-in-law and other sick and demon-possessed who were brought and brought to Christ (Lucam 4:31-44), miraculous fishing, healing of a leper. All this is depicted as events that led to the spread of the rumor about Christ and the arrival to Christ of whole masses of the people who came to hear the teaching of Christ and brought their sick with them in the hope that Christ would heal them (Lucam 5:1-16).

This is followed by a series of incidents that provoked opposition to Christ from the Pharisees and scribes: the forgiveness of the sins of the healed paralytic (Lucam 5:17-26), the announcement at the publican's dinner that Christ did not come to save the righteous, but sinners (Lucam 5:27-32 ), the justification of the disciples of Christ in non-observance of the fasts, based on the fact that the Bridegroom-Messiah is with them (Lucam 5:33-39), and in violating the Sabbath, based on the fact that Christ is the lord of the Sabbath, and, moreover, confirmed by a miracle, which Christ did it on the Sabbath over the withered hand (Lucam 6:1-11). But while these deeds and statements of Christ irritated his opponents to the point that they began to think about how to take Him, He chose from among His disciples 12 to be apostles (Lucam 6:12-16), announced from the mountain in the ears of all the people who followed Him, the main points on which the Kingdom of God, which He founded, should be built (Lucam 6:17-49), and, after descending from the mountain, not only fulfilled the request of the centurion's Gentile for the healing of his servant, because the centurion showed such faith in Christ, which Christ did not find in Israel (Lucam 7:1-10), but also resurrected the son of the widow of Nain, after which he was glorified by all the people accompanying the funeral procession as a prophet sent by God to the chosen people (Lucam 7:11-17 ).

The embassy from John the Baptist to Christ with the question of whether He is the Messiah prompted Christ to point to His deeds as evidence of His Messianic dignity and together reproach the people for not trusting John the Baptist and Him, Christ. At the same time, Christ makes a distinction between those listeners who are eager to hear from Him the indication of the way to salvation, and between those who are a huge crowd and who do not believe in Him (Lucam 7:18-35). The subsequent sections, in accordance with this intention of the evangelist to show the difference between the Jews who listened to Christ, report a number of such facts that illustrate such a division in the people and together Christ's attitude to the people, to its different parts, in accordance with their attitude to Christ, namely: the anointing of Christ the repentant sinner and the behavior of the Pharisee (Lucam 7:36-50), the mention of the women of Galilee who served Christ with their property (Lucam 8:1-3), a parable about the various qualities of the field on which the sowing is done, indicating the bitterness of the people (Lucam 8: 4-18), the attitude of Christ towards His relatives (Lucam 8:19-21), the crossing into the country of the Gadarenes, at which the distrust of the disciples was revealed, and the healing of the possessed, and the contrast between the stupid indifference shown by the Gadarenes to the miracle performed by Christ, and the gratitude of the healed (Lucam 8:22-39), the healing of the bleeding woman and the resurrection of the daughter of Jairus, because both the woman and Jairus showed their faith in Christ (Lucam 8:40-56). What follows are the events recounted in chapter 9, which were intended to strengthen Christ's disciples in the faith: equipping the disciples with the power to cast out and heal the sick, along with instructions on how they should act during their preaching journey (Lucam 9:1- 6), and it is indicated, as Tetrarch Herod understood the activity of Jesus (Lucam 9: 7-9), the feeding of five thousand, by which Christ showed the apostles who returned from the journey His power to help in any need (Lucam 9: 10-17), the question of Christ , for whom His people consider and for whom the disciples, and the confession of Peter on behalf of all the apostles is given: “You are the Christ of God”, and then the prediction by Christ of His rejection by the representatives of the people and His death and resurrection, as well as an exhortation addressed to the disciples, so that they imitated Him in self-sacrifice, for which He would reward them at His second glorious coming (Lucam 9:18-27), the transfiguration of Christ, which enabled His disciples to pierce with their eyes into His future pro glorification (Lucam 9:28-36), the healing of a possessed lunatic lad, whom the disciples of Christ could not heal, due to the weakness of their faith, which had as its result an enthusiastic glorification by the people of God. At the same time, however, Christ once again pointed out to His disciples the fate awaiting Him, and they turned out to be dull in relation to such a clear statement made by Christ (Lucam 9:37-45).

This inability of the disciples, despite their confession of the Messiahship of Christ, to understand His prophecy about His death and resurrection, had its basis in the fact that they were still in those ideas about the Kingdom of the Messiah, which were formed among the Jewish scribes, who understood the Messianic Kingdom as an earthly kingdom, political, and at the same time testified to how weak their knowledge of the nature of the Kingdom of God and its spiritual blessings was. Therefore, according to Ev. Luke, Christ devoted the rest of the time until His solemn entry into Jerusalem to teaching His disciples precisely these most important truths about the nature of the Kingdom of God, about its form and distribution (second part), about what is needed to achieve eternal life, and warnings - not to get carried away the teachings of the Pharisees and the views of His enemies, whom He will in time come to judge as the King of this Kingdom of God (Lucam 9:51-19:27).

Finally, in the third part, the evangelist shows how Christ, by His sufferings, death and resurrection, proved that He is indeed the promised Savior and King of the Kingdom of God anointed by the Holy Spirit. Depicting the solemn entrance of the Lord into Jerusalem, the evangelist Luke speaks not only of the rapture of the people - which other evangelists also report, but also that Christ announced His judgment on the city that disobeyed Him (Lucam 19: 28-44) and then, according to with Mark and Matthew, about how He shamed His enemies in the temple (Lucam 20:1-47), and then, pointing out the superiority of the alms to the temple of the poor widow over the contributions of the rich, He announced to His disciples the fate of Jerusalem and His followers ( Lucam 21:1-36).

In describing the suffering and death of Christ (chap. 22 and 23), it is exposed that Judas was induced by Satan to betray Christ (Lucam 22:3), and then Christ's assurance is put forward that He will eat the supper with His disciples in the Kingdom of God and that the Passover of the Old Testament must henceforth be replaced by the Eucharist instituted by Him (Lucam 22:15-23). The evangelist also mentions that Christ at the Last Supper, calling the disciples to service, and not to domination, nevertheless promised them dominion in His Kingdom (Lucam 22:24-30). This is followed by an account of the three moments of Christ's last hours: Christ's promise to pray for Peter, given in view of his imminent fall (Lucam 22:31-34), the call of the disciples against temptations (Lucam 22:35-38), and Christ's prayer in Gethsemane, in which He was strengthened by an angel from heaven (Lucam 22:39-46). Then the evangelist speaks about the taking of Christ and the healing by Christ of the wounded servant of Peter (51) and about the denunciation by Him of the high priests who came with the soldiers (53). All these particulars clearly show that Christ went to suffering and death voluntarily, in the consciousness of their necessity in order for the salvation of mankind to be accomplished.

In depicting the very sufferings of Christ, the evangelist Luke presents Peter's denial as evidence that even during His own sufferings, Christ had pity on His weak disciple (Lucam 22:54-62). Then follows a description of the great sufferings of Christ in the following three lines: 1) the denial of the high dignity of Christ, partly by the soldiers who mocked Christ in the court of the high priest (Lucam 22:63-65), but mainly by the members of the Sanhedrin (Lucam 22:66-71), 2 ) the recognition of Christ as a dreamer at the trial of Pilate and Herod (Lucam 23:1-12) and 3) the preference of the people for Christ Barabbas the robber and the condemnation of Christ to death by crucifixion (Lucam 23:13-25).

After depicting the depth of Christ's suffering, the evangelist notes such features from the circumstances of this suffering, which clearly testified that Christ, even in His sufferings, nevertheless remained the King of the Kingdom of God. The Evangelist reports that the Condemned 1) as a judge addressed the women weeping over Him (Lucam 23:26-31) and asked the Father for his enemies who committed a crime against Him without consciousness (Lucam 23:32-34), 2) gave a place in paradise to the repentant thief, as having the right to do so (Lucam 23:35-43), 3) realized that, dying, He betrays His own spirit to the Father (Lucam 23:44-46), 4) was recognized as a righteous man by the centurion and aroused repentance among the people by his death (Lucam 23:47-48) and 5) was honored with a particularly solemn burial (Lucam 23:49-56). Finally, in the history of the resurrection of Christ, the evangelist exposes such events that clearly proved the greatness of Christ and served to explain the work of salvation accomplished by Him. This is precisely: the testimony of the angels that Christ overcame death, according to His predictions about this (Lucam 24:1-12), then the appearance of Christ himself to the Emmaus travelers, to whom Christ showed from Scripture the necessity of His suffering in order for Him to enter into glory. His (Lucam 24:13-35), the appearance of Christ to all the apostles, to whom He also explained the prophecies that spoke of Him, and instructed in His name to preach the message of the forgiveness of sins to all the peoples of the earth, while promising the apostles to send down the power of the Holy Spirit (Lucam 24:36-49). Finally, having depicted briefly the ascension of Christ into heaven (Lucam 24:50-53), ev. Luke ended his Gospel with this, which really was the affirmation of everything taught to Theophilus and other Christians from the Gentiles, the Christian teaching: Christ is really depicted here as the promised Messiah, as the Son of God and the King of the Kingdom of God.

Sources and aids in the study of the Gospel of Luke. Of the patristic interpretations of the Gospel of Luke, the most detailed are the writings of Blessed. Theophylact and Euphemia Zigaben. Of our Russian commentators, Bishop Michael (The Explanatory Gospel) should be placed in the first place, then D.P. Kaz. spirit. Academy of M. Bogoslovsky, who compiled the books: 1) The childhood of our Lord Jesus Christ and His forerunner, according to the Gospels of St. Apostles Matthew and Luke. Kazan, 1893; and 2) The public ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the sayings of the holy evangelists. Issue. first. Kazan, 1908.

Of the writings on the Gospel of Luke, we have only the thesis of Fr. Polotebnova: The Holy Gospel of Luke. Orthodox critical-exegetical study against F. H. Baur. Moscow, 1873.

Of the foreign commentaries, we mention interpretations: Keil K. Fr. 1879 (in German), Meyer, revised by B. Weiss 1885 (in German), Jog. Weiss "The Writings of N. Head." 2nd ed. 1907 (in German); Trench. Interpretation of the parables of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1888 (in Russian) and Miracles of our Lord Jesus Christ (1883 in Russian, lang.); and Mercks. The four canonical gospels according to their oldest known text. Part 2, 2nd half of 1905 (in German).

The following works are also cited: Geiki. The Life and Teachings of Christ. Per. St. M. Fiveysky, 1894; Edersheim. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Per. St. M. Fiveysky. T. 1. 1900. Reville A. Jesus the Nazarene. Per. Zelinsky, vol. 1-2, 1909; and some spiritual journal articles.

Gospel

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

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

b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the identity of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).

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

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

four gospel

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

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

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

Reciprocity of the Gospels

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reliability of the Gospels

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

Bibliography of Foreign Works on the Four Gospels

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Heitmüller - see Jog. Weiss (1907).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Almost all churches until 1948 taught that the Israel of God as a state would no longer exist, that the Church had replaced Israel, that God had cursed them for killing Christ. He, they say, is not going to restore Jerusalem, turning it into a desert forever, like the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Many theologians said that God no longer keeps the Covenant with Israel, He replaced Israel with believing Gentiles. The lie has spread throughout the Church. What a "blow" these "theologians" received recently when Israel reappeared on the world map! The Bible is always right.

All the misadventures of the Jews were associated with the fact that they killed Christ, crucified their Mission. Drive them away, they say, they are cursed. This has been done for almost 2000 years. But this position is not biblical. It was not the Jewish people who crucified Christ. This delusion brought grief to the whole world, not only to the Jews. "Replacement Theology" armed anti-Semites of all stripes, even the devil "assed" the Church in this persecution of the Jews, and "rubbed his hands." Modern tyrants destroyed, as in ancient times, the seed of Israel. It is terrible that the Church was involved in this sin... But Israel survived! And it flourished exactly in its place, where God promised, in Jerusalem!

Although Israel is a "lost woman" and God led the Church into the deserted "Bridegroom's Chamber", this does not mean that He betrayed Israel, even in her unfaithfulness. God unilaterally fulfills the promise to her, will return Israel to Himself, who, as a result of His actions, will repent when her time comes. All the people will accept their Messiah when He comes specifically "for Israel" and not "for the Gentiles." The Bible clearly speaks of not one, but two Jerusalems - the heavenly church and the earthly Jewish.

All Israel (the state) will be saved in the "Come Christ" - they will accept Him as the Savior. God has a special earthly plan for Israel. It must be said right away that the Bible speaks of Israel as the Jewish people as a whole. For the salvation of an individual soul, there is no "neither Jew nor Greek." But "times for the countries of the Gentiles" and "times for the land of Israel" are conditioned by God.

I don't mean a particular case of faith of an individual Jew in America or in Russia. The communities of Russian Jews in Israel came from the region of the USSR, they have neither the roots nor the spirit of Judaism. In Israel, only 0.017% of such Jewish Christians. Billions of pagans have turned to Christ in all countries of the world during this time of grace upon them! But only a few Jews. The Church has stained itself with pogroms, how will the Jews believe that the Church came from their God?

From the very beginning, Satan opposed God's People, trying to destroy them in every way. The truth is that through Christ we are "grafted into Israel" while the Israelites walk in unbelief "until the time". The Bible speaks for itself - "... Did God really reject His people? Not at all. God did not reject His people, whom He knew in advance. But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive tree, were grafted into their place and became a partner in the root and juice of the olive tree ... it is not you who hold up the root, but the root of you. The hardening took place in Israel in part, before the time." (Rom 11:1,2,17,18, 25)

The tree of Israel was cut down, but the root remained in the ground. But the time has come, and the olive has turned green! Israel rose from the ashes to the astonishment of Catholic, Orthodox and Lutheran "prophets" who said that Israel was finished forever because "Jews crucified Christ!" Millions of Jews are killed because of ignorance of Scripture. The devil had the right to the Holocaust, because the Church spoke lies about the Jews. Jews didn't crucify Christ! Here is proof of that:

Conspiracy against Christ and against the Jewish people did the proteges of pagan Rome - King Herod and the High Priest Caiaphas with their "administration". They in no way represented the Jewish people, who were in a state of rebellion against them and their pagan Rome: "... then the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people gathered in the courtyard of the High Priest, named Caiaphas, and decided in council to take Jesus by cunning and kill; but they said: only not on a holiday, so that there would be no indignation among the people" (Matthew 26:3-5)

The Jewish people accepted Jesus, believed in Him, loved Him. Crowds followed Him. "The scribes and the chief priests heard this, and sought how to destroy him, for they feared him, because all the people marveled at his teaching" (Mark 11:18). The Word of God clearly says THREE TIMES that the Jews were for Jesus and they did not crucify Him. "... the chief priests and scribes were looking for how to destroy Him, because they were afraid of the people" (Luke 22:2)

Important takeaway:

1. The "Golgotha Conspiracy" was made by two people - Herod and Caiaphas to please pagan Rome and themselves, but NOT to please Israel. Crucifixion is a Roman, not a Jewish execution. They "feared" Him and His People - for one who can easily feed an entire army and heal the wounded is invincible! They, the puppets of Rome, were losing power every day! The Jewish people were not with them, but with Him. "All the people follow Him!"

2. Anti-people power does not characterize the people, moreover, such a people that contradicted this power in everything, rebellion after rebellion! Reading: "... and they tried to seize Him, but they were afraid of the people" (Mark 12:12)."And the chief priests and the scribes were looking for ways to seize Him with Cunning and kill him; but they said: Only not on a feast day, so that there would be no indignation among the people" (Mark 14:1,2)

3. By cunning they presented the case in such a way that it was as if the Jews had crucified Christ! The devil is cunning, the Church often forgets about this, hoping for a "fair game". Otherwise, the Jews would have "recaptured" Christ from the high priests, who were in fact not the Jewish People, but the "politicians" of pagan Rome, both of them with a strange pedigree.

Herod and Caiaphas ended badly, Herod was struck by an angel and he "being eaten by worms, died." Caiaphas “committed suicide, “worn out” by his own conscience,” writes the historian Josephus Flavius.

1 . Directed by the "enemies of the Jewish people," the script went further. "Decoy ducks" shouted from the crowd learned lies - "His blood is on us and our children!" This lie of the conspirators still inspires anti-Semites to the "holy war of Jihad." Conspirators-conspirators also "helped" to choose a thief instead of Jesus... "But the chief priests and elders stirred up the people to ask Barabbas, and to destroy Jesus" (Mt. 27:20)

2 . Caiaphas was the Great Conspirator - he bought everyone, not just one Judas. All the conspirators worked for them in this "murder of a competitor". Pagan Rome "did not wash its hands," as Pilate wanted to appear to everyone. He was in business. Even the Roman soldiers took a bribe, which was unheard of in the Roman army... "We gave enough money to the soldiers, and said: say that His disciples, having come at night, stole Him when we were sleeping; and if the rumor about this reaches the ruler, we will convince him and save you from trouble. They, having taken the money, did as they were taught; and this word has spread among the Jews to this day."(Matthew 28:12-15)

3 . The Jews were deceived "to this day!" The Church also believed in this performance.

But the days of ignorance are over. Jesus Himself said of those who would crucify Him: "And having called away His twelve disciples, He said to them, Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished, for they will hand him over to the GENTIANS, and (THEY) will mock him, and (THEY) will insult him, and spit on him, and (THEY) will beat, and (THEY) will kill him: and on the third day he will rise again. But they did not understand any of this; these words were hidden from them, and they did not understand what was said." (Luke 18:31-34).

Over a million Jews lived in Israel at this time. And only a hundred "bought" by Rome did their dirty work, deceiving the crowd. Why did the Jews succumb so easily, why didn't they stand up? Some say - "everyone is guilty of murder!" Well, it can be said that the disciples of Jesus killed Him, they also did not intercede, they stood in the crowd, doubted, feared.

FINALLY it is important to say that the Church and Israel both exist as the People of God. The Body of Christ as spiritual Israel, and the State of Israel as the Chosen People among all nations. God did not break the covenant with the Jewish people through the miracle of the birth of Jacob (Israel). The covenant with Israel continues. What God has promised will be fulfilled! Israel on the world map is one of those promises. God will fulfill all the prophecies that he gave to the Prophets of Israel, up to the world domination of "Israel of Christ" 1000 years.

After 2000 years of the Church, we see, by the fact, that although Jesus died for the sin of everyone, He became the Messiah so far only for the Gentiles. The time has come for Israel to be glorified. Elder Simeon said: "... my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared before the face of all peoples, a light to enlighten the Gentiles and the glory of your people Israel" (Luke 2:28-32).

The glory of Israel is just beginning. For more on the coming glory of Israel and their coming Messiah Jesus Christ, read the Bible Study on the Christian Nation website.

The execution of crucifixion on the cross was the most shameful, the most painful and the most cruel. In those days, only the most notorious villains were executed like this: robbers, murderers, rebels and criminal slaves. The suffering of a crucified man is indescribable. In addition to unbearable pain in all parts of the body and suffering, the crucified one experienced terrible thirst and mortal spiritual anguish. Death was so slow that many were tormented on the cross for several days. Even the executioners - usually cruel people - could not coolly look at the suffering of the crucified. They prepared a drink with which they tried either to quench their unbearable thirst, or, by the admixture of various substances, to temporarily dull their consciousness and alleviate their torment. According to Jewish law, a person hung from a tree was considered cursed. The leaders of the Jews wanted to disgrace Jesus Christ forever by condemning Him to such a death.

When they brought Jesus Christ to Golgotha, the soldiers served Him to drink sour wine mixed with bitter substances in order to alleviate suffering. But the Lord, having tasted it, did not want to drink it. He did not want to use any remedy to relieve suffering. He voluntarily accepted these sufferings upon Himself for the sins of people; That's why I wanted to endure them.

When everything was ready, the soldiers crucified Jesus Christ. It was about noon, in Hebrew, at the 6th hour of the day. When they were crucifying Him, He prayed for His tormentors, saying: “Father! forgive them because they don't know what they're doing."

Two villains (thieves) were crucified next to Jesus Christ, one on the right and the other on the left side of Him. Thus, the prediction of the prophet Isaiah was fulfilled, who said: “And he was counted among the villains” ().

By order of Pilate, an inscription was nailed to the cross over the head of Jesus Christ, signifying His guilt. On it was written in Hebrew, Greek and Roman: Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews and many have read it. Such an inscription did not please the enemies of Christ. Therefore, the chief priests came to Pilate and said: “Do not write: King of the Jews, but write that He said: I am the King of the Jews.”

But Pilate replied: "What I wrote, I wrote."

Meanwhile, the soldiers who crucified Jesus Christ took His clothes and began to divide among themselves. They tore the outer garment into four pieces, one piece for each warrior. The chiton (underwear) was not sewn, but all woven from top to bottom. Then they said to each other: "We will not tear it apart, but we will cast lots for it, whoever gets it." And casting lots, the soldiers sitting guarded the place of execution. So, here, too, the ancient prophecy of King David came true: “They divided My garments among themselves, and they cast lots for My clothes” ().

Enemies did not stop insulting Jesus Christ on the cross. As they passed, they slandered and, nodding their heads, said: “Eh! Destroying the temple and building in three days! Save Yourself. If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross."

Also the chief priests, the scribes, the elders, and the Pharisees, mockingly, said: “He saved others, but He cannot save Himself. If He is the Christ, the King of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, that we may see, and then we will believe in Him. Trusted in God; may God deliver him now, if he pleases him; for He said: I am the Son of God.

Following their example, the pagan warriors, who sat at the crosses and guarded the crucified, mockingly said: "If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself."

Even one of the crucified thieves, who was to the left of the Savior, slandered Him and said: “If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us.”

The other robber, on the contrary, calmed him and said: “Or are you not afraid of God when you yourself are condemned to the same thing (that is, to the same torment and death)? But we are justly condemned, because we received what was worthy according to our deeds, but He did nothing wrong. Having said this, he turned to Jesus Christ with a prayer: remember me(remember me) Lord, when you come into your kingdom!"

The merciful Savior accepted the heartfelt repentance of this sinner, who showed such wondrous faith in Him, and answered the prudent thief: " I tell you truly, today you will be with me in paradise".

At the cross of the Savior stood His Mother, the Apostle John, Mary Magdalene and several other women who revered Him. It is impossible to describe the sorrow of the Mother of God, who saw the unbearable torment of Her Son!

Jesus Christ, seeing His Mother and John standing here, whom He especially loved, says to His Mother: Geno! behold, thy son". Then he says to John: here, your mother". From that time on, John took the Mother of God to his house and took care of Her until the end of Her life.

Meanwhile, during the suffering of the Savior on Calvary, a great sign occurred. From the hour the Savior was crucified, that is, from the sixth hour (and according to our account from the twelfth hour of the day), the sun darkened and darkness fell over all the earth, and lasted until the ninth hour (according to our account until the third hour of the day) , i.e. until the death of the Savior.

This extraordinary, universal darkness was noted by pagan historian writers: the Roman astronomer Phlegont, Phallus and Junius Africanus. The famous philosopher from Athens, Dionysius the Areopagite, was at that time in Egypt, in the city of Heliopolis; observing the sudden darkness, he said: “Either the Creator suffers, or the world is destroyed.” Subsequently, Dionysius the Areopagite converted to Christianity and was the first Bishop of Athens.

The Holy Cross of Christ is the Holy Altar on which the Son of God, our Lord, offered Himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.

It was the most cruel and painful way to kill. Then it was customary to crucify only the most notorious, rebels, murderers and criminal slaves. The crucified man experienced suffocation, unbearable pain from twisted shoulder joints, terrible thirst and mortal anguish.

According to Jewish law, the crucified were considered cursed and disgraced - that is why this type of execution was chosen for Christ.

After the condemned Jesus was brought to Golgotha, the soldiers furtively offered him a cup of sour wine, to which were added substances designed to alleviate his suffering. However, Jesus, after tasting the wine, refused it, wanting to accept the intended pain voluntarily and in full, so that people could be cleansed of their sins. Long nails were driven into the palms and feet of Christ lying on the cross, after which he was raised to a vertical position. Above the head of the executed on the orders of Pontius Pilate, the soldiers nailed a tablet with the inscription "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews", carved in three languages.

Death of Jesus Christ

Jesus hung on the cross from nine o'clock in the morning until three o'clock in the afternoon, after which he called out to God with the words "My God, my God! Why did You leave Me?" So he tried to remind people that he was the Savior of the world, but almost no one understood him, and most onlookers simply laughed at him. Then Jesus asked for a drink and one of the soldiers gave him a sponge soaked in vinegar on the tip of a spear. After that, the crucified man uttered the enigmatic “It has happened” and died with his head on his chest.

It is believed that with the word "it is done" Jesus fulfilled the promise of God by completing the salvation of mankind by his death.

After the death of Christ, an earthquake began, which terribly frightened all those present at the execution and made them believe that the person they executed was indeed the Son of God. On the same evening, people celebrated Easter, so the body of the crucified Jesus had to be removed from the cross, because Easter Saturday was considered a great day, and no one wanted to defile it with the spectacle of the dead executed. When the soldiers approached Jesus Christ and saw that he was dead, they were visited by doubts. To make sure of his death, one of the soldiers pierced the rib of the crucified with his spear, after which blood and water flowed from the wound. Today this spear is considered one of the greatest relics.