Death of Tsarevich Alexei. Tsarevich Alexey. Fatal love for a serf spy. Real events through the eyes of artists
Prot. Sergius Bulgakov
Apocalypse of John
(Experience of dogmatic interpretation)
INTRODUCTION
John's "Revelation" is last a book in the Bible, which it completes. This alone suggests that “Revelation” begs comparison with the book Genesis, as with the beginning of the Bible, of which it is the end, in general plan and theme. At the same time, it is, in its own way, a book the only one, in general, unlike anything else in the Bible. This place of her, as well as her general character, testifies to some special nature of her significance And originality, although it does not prevent its particular comparisons in content with other biblical books. In any case, already with this external place "Revelations" in the Bible he learns final character of some last word in the Bible, which is in accordance with the first.
These are the features of “Revelation” that are subject to general disclosure and identification. But such a special place and meaning of the last word is characteristic of “Revelation” and in its dogmatic content, dogmatic theology is agreed upon and completed in a unique way.
“Revelation” is generally one of the most studied books of Holy Scripture from the philological, exegetical, religious-historical, and general biblical perspectives. You could even say that every word and comma has been studied here. If, despite all this, there remains enough room for diverse and controversial interpretations and constructions of a general exegetical, as well as dogmatic nature, then this is the general destiny of scientific biblical research, since it is based, after all, on human conjectures, breaking away from the soil of positive church understanding , since, however, it is sufficient for this, at least in its given state. However, there is already some indisputable area of scientific achievements of critical exegesis, which can also be used for the needs of dogmatics. They establish general character“Revelations” from the literary side of its external style and structure. First of all, as regards its language, it must be said that it bears obvious and pronounced features of the Hebrew style, which is flawed due to its Hebraisms regarding the correctness of language and grammar. However, this does not prevent him from being distinguished by his exceptional strength, so that one can rightly say about him: “the author of the Apocalypse, although not a perfect artist, he is a brilliant writer, possessing the rare power of his calling.” Of course, one cannot deny the obvious difference in style "Revelations" and the fourth Gospel, which is considered to have been written later than the first. However, such a difference does not force us to assert, contrary to church tradition, that both books are the works of different writers. In any case, the possibility of purely scientific disagreement and dispute remains for this. For us, therefore, there is a complete and even scientific opportunity to calmly follow the testimony of tradition, for which “the author of the Apocalypse, as well as the Gospels and Epistles, is one and the same, i.e., the Apostle John of Zebedee,” John the Theologian, son of Gromov (as this was accepted and attested in the canon of sacred books in the East and West).
This peculiar style of the Apocalypse testifies to the special strength of the Jewish spirit and temperament, inherent in this book, and comparatively even weakened in the fourth Gospel, in this sense more Hellenistic. And this deliberately Jewish character of this book is even more reflected in its special literary genre and style, just like Apocalypse. It is equally characteristic here that the Apocalypse as such is of its own kind the only one book in the entire Bible (despite the presence of individual apocalyptic texts in some places in other books), and at the same time it is one of the many apocalypses that abound in Jewish writing, starting from the second century BC and until the second century and after him. Despite the presence of individual monuments and non-Jewish origins (like the Sibylline books), it can be said that this apocalypticism for several centuries (from the 2nd century BC to the 2nd century after it) was a particularly characteristic expression of the Jewish spirit in its self-awareness and his historical destinies. Already starting with the great post-exilic prophets, Jewish people thinks and feels life apocalyptically, although this was not the only thing defining his self-awareness. The preaching of the Forerunner, Christ and the Apostles, and all of Christianity in general could find a place in it. It defeated the apocalypse. The latter died out with the destruction of Jerusalem, which followed a series of messianic-apocalyptic movements and uprisings led by false messiahs. However, the Church of the Tongues, which adopted Christianity from Israel, did not accept it apocalyptically, but remained free from it.
However, and this cannot be emphasized with sufficient force, the Church, having rejected the apocalypse as a special form of national Jewish self-consciousness, chose and proclaimed as divinely inspired one of the apocalypses, the only one of its kind, She preserved and glorified it, adding it to the canon of sacred books. Thus, the Church at the same time abolished, as if unnecessary, but at the same time affirmed in its abiding meaning, as a kind of vetus testamenium in novo, [**1] our “Christian” Apocalypse. In all the sacred books, not only the Old, but even the New Testament (albeit in the Greek text), the word of God sounds in a Jewish voice, speaks in in a certain sense, on Hebrew, so it needs to be translated into a universal dialect, accessible to “all languages.” Therefore, in the New Testament we hear the living speech of St. Paul, as well as the other apostles, which, without losing its personal and national-Jewish character, already becomes a universal preaching. And the same should be said about the Apocalypse, which betrayed and preserved its Jewish style, imagery, temperament as universal, all-human, and this unique text of local and particular generalized to the national
But this generalization is not exhausted by this spiritual translation alone. It also has another, broader and deeper meaning. The fact is that the language and thought of apocalypses included elements, one might say, of universal paganism; syncretic character, the study of which religious-historical science is so successfully and so persistently engaged in. Through her analyzes and inspirations, Jewish images and teachings of the apocalypses are revealed as containing the heritage of deep antiquity from different religions and peoples. We can say that they, and in particular our Apocalypse, were written with thick syncretic ink religious history peace. They can be identified, and these images can be deciphered by tracing them back to their original sources. In them one can find various influences, traditions and borrowings, which are now being revealed more fully and wider in religious-historical science. Even if the sacred text of the Bible as a religious tradition of the chosen people is not closed to these influences of the surrounding pagan peoples, then for apocalyptic writing it is general rule. And through it, syncretic images penetrate into our Christian Apocalypse, which through this preserves and carries them, assimilating them with a universal character. "Religious-historical" science , triumphantly revealing these features of syncretism, he often uses this to profane the sacred book, secularize and destroy its content. However, this kind of application is not at all necessary and not uncontroversial. There is no need to reject or question the historical correctness of these scientific observations to invalidate their application and meaning. The content of the sacred books, in particular the Apocalypse, does not decompose and is not abolished in its own strength, it includes as material, colors and images, and these alien elements. Through this, the power and richness of his images only multiply without losing their own meaning. The language and images of the apocalypse, as well as our Apocalypse, thus open the door for world history to the last book of the New Testament.
So, the Apocalypse, both in its style and in its character, is an alien book in the Bible, belonging to a certain literary genre of a certain era. However, it is included in the Bible as an organic part of it, an essential one. And this inclusion as a well-known biblical dogma has become so organic that it makes one forget the historical and specific features of the Apocalypse. It stands before us in all its originality, like a monolith. Its literary and historical features did not prevent it from being accepted as Christian revelations of a certain nature. This Judaistic book of a syncretic nature took on the features of the Christian revelation and became Christian book, organically becoming part of the New Testament as a revelation about Christ and His Church. Its language and images were assimilated and transformed here to a complete rebirth, and we, reading this book, as part of the Christian revelation of the New Testament, forget about this origin and special properties. She's for us given How Holy Bible, like a book written by the great Christian apostle. We perceived it in the general biblical context as part of the Bible, a New Testament book, in connection with the entire New Testament revelation. She belongs to the number prophetic books and as such there are the only one prophetic book in the New Testament. Although all the prophetic books in the Bible, namely in the Old Testament, have the character of revelation, since they also contain Christian prophecies, the Apocalypse has an exceptional place in this regard as a specifically Christian, New Testament prophecy: “the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants, which must soon take place... Blessed is he who reads and hears the words of this prophecy" ( Open. I, 1, 3). John, the apostle and evangelist who wrote the fourth Gospel and three conciliar epistles, he is also a prophet in Revelation.
John's "Revelation" is last a book in the Bible, which it completes. This alone suggests that “Revelation” begs comparison with the book Genesis, as with the beginning of the Bible, of which it is the end, in general plan and theme. At the same time, it is, in its own way, a book the only one, in general, unlike anything else in the Bible. This place of her, as well as her general character, testifies to some special nature of her significance And originality, although it does not prevent its particular comparisons in content with other biblical books. In any case, already from this external place "Revelations" in the Bible he learns final character of some last word in the Bible, which is in accordance with the first.
These are the features of “Revelation” that are subject to general disclosure and identification. But such a special place and meaning of the last word is characteristic of “Revelation” and in its dogmatic content, dogmatic theology is agreed upon and completed in a unique way.
“Revelation” is generally one of the most studied books of Holy Scripture from the philological, exegetical, religious-historical, and general biblical perspectives. You could even say that every word and comma has been studied here. If, despite all this, there remains enough room for diverse and controversial interpretations and constructions of a general exegetical, as well as dogmatic nature, then this is the general destiny of scientific biblical research, since it is based, after all, on human conjectures, breaking away from the soil of positive church understanding , since, however, it is sufficient for this, at least in its given state. However, there is already some indisputable area of scientific achievements of critical exegesis, which can also be used for the needs of dogmatics. They establish the general character of the “Revelation” in terms of its literary features, external style and structure. First of all, as regards its language, it must be said that it bears obvious and pronounced features of the Hebrew style, which is flawed due to its Hebraisms regarding the correctness of language and grammar. However, this does not prevent him from being distinguished by his exceptional strength, so that one can rightly say about him: “the author of the Apocalypse, although not a perfect artist, he is a brilliant writer, possessing the rare power of his calling.” Of course, one cannot deny the obvious difference in style "Revelations" and the fourth Gospel, which is considered to have been written later than the first. However, such a difference does not force us to assert, contrary to church tradition, that both books are the works of different writers. In any case, the possibility of purely scientific disagreement and dispute remains for this. For us, therefore, there is a complete and even scientific opportunity to calmly follow the testimony of tradition, for which “the author of the Apocalypse, as well as the Gospels and Epistles, is one and the same, i.e., the Apostle John of Zebedee,” John the Theologian, son of Gromov (as this was accepted and attested in the canon of sacred books in the East and West).
This peculiar style of the Apocalypse testifies to the special strength of the Jewish spirit and temperament, inherent in this book, and comparatively even weakened in the fourth Gospel, in this sense more Hellenistic. And this deliberately Jewish character of this book is even more reflected in its special literary genre and style, precisely how Apocalypse. It is equally characteristic here that the Apocalypse as such is of its own kind the only one book in the entire Bible (despite the presence of individual apocalyptic texts in some places in other books), and at the same time it is one of the many apocalypses that abound in Jewish writing, starting from the second century BC and until the second century and after him. Despite the presence of individual monuments and non-Jewish origins (like the Sibylline books), it can be said that this apocalypticism for several centuries (from the 2nd century BC to the 2nd century after it) was a particularly characteristic expression of the Jewish spirit in its self-awareness and his historical destinies. Already starting with the great post-exilic prophets, the Jewish people think and feel life apocalyptically, although this was not the only thing defining his self-awareness. The preaching of the Forerunner, Christ and the Apostles, and all of Christianity in general could find a place in it. It defeated the apocalypse. The latter died out with the destruction of Jerusalem, which followed a series of messianic-apocalyptic movements and uprisings led by false messiahs. However, the Church of the Tongues, which adopted Christianity from Israel, did not accept it apocalyptically, but remained free from it.
However, and this cannot be emphasized with sufficient force, the Church, having rejected the apocalypse as a special form of national Jewish self-consciousness, chose and proclaimed as divinely inspired one of the apocalypses, the only one of its kind, She preserved and glorified it, adding it to the canon of sacred books. Thus, the Church at the same time abolished, as if unnecessary, but at the same time affirmed our “Christian” Apocalypse in its abiding meaning, as a kind of vetus testamenium in novo. In all the sacred books of not only the Old, but even the New Testament (albeit in the Greek text), the word of God sounds in a Jewish voice, speaks, in a certain sense, in the Hebrew language, so it needs to be translated into a universal dialect, accessible to “all languages." Therefore, in the New Testament we hear the living speech of St. Paul, as well as the other apostles, which, without losing its personal and national-Jewish character, already becomes a universal preaching. And the same should be said about the Apocalypse, which betrayed and preserved its Jewish style, imagery, temperament as universal, all-human, and this unique text of local and particular generalized to the national
But this generalization is not exhausted by this spiritual translation alone. It also has another, broader and deeper meaning. The fact is that the language and thought of apocalypses included elements, one might say, of universal paganism; syncretic character, the study of which religious-historical science is so successfully and so persistently engaged in. Through her analyzes and inspirations, Jewish images and teachings of the apocalypses are revealed as containing the heritage of deep antiquity from different religions and peoples. We can say that they, and in particular our Apocalypse, were written in the thick syncretic ink of the religious history of the world. They can be identified, and these images can be deciphered by tracing them back to their original sources. In them one can find various influences, traditions and borrowings, which are now being revealed more fully and wider in religious-historical science. Even if the sacred text of the Bible as the religious tradition of the chosen people is not closed to these influences of the surrounding pagan peoples, then for apocalyptic writing it is a general rule. And through it, syncretic images penetrate into our Christian Apocalypse, which through this preserves and carries them, assimilating them with a universal character. "Religious-historical" science , triumphantly revealing these features of syncretism, he often uses this to profane the sacred book, secularize and destroy its content. However, this kind of application is not at all necessary and not undeniable. There is no need to reject or question the historical correctness of these scientific observations to invalidate their application and meaning. The content of the sacred books, in particular the Apocalypse, does not decompose and is not abolished in its own strength; it includes these alien elements as material, colors and images. Through this, the power and richness of his images only multiply without losing their own meaning. The language and images of the apocalypse, as well as our Apocalypse, thus open the door for world history to the last book of the New Testament.
INTRODUCTION
John's "Revelation" is last a book in the Bible, which it completes. This alone suggests that "Revelation" be compared with the book Genesis, as with the beginning of the Bible, of which it is the end, in general plan and theme. At the same time, it is, in its own way, a book the only one, in general, unlike anything else in the Bible. This place of her, as well as her general character, testifies to some special significance And originality, although it does not prevent its particular comparisons in content with other biblical books. In any case, already by this external place" Revelations"in the Bible he learns final character of some last word in the Bible, which is in accordance with the first.
These are the features of “Revelation” that are subject to general disclosure and identification. But such a special place and meaning of the last word is characteristic of “Revelation” and in its dogmatic content, dogmatic theology is agreed upon and completed in a unique way.<<1>>
“Revelation” is generally one of the most studied books of the Holy Scriptures from the philological, exegetical, religious-historical, and general biblical perspectives. You could even say that every word and comma has been studied here. If, despite all this, there remains enough room for diverse and controversial interpretations and constructions of a general exegetical, as well as dogmatic nature, then this is the general destiny of scientific biblical research, since it is based, after all, on human conjectures, breaking away from the soil of positive church understanding , since, however, it is sufficient for this, at least in its given state. However, there is already some indisputable area of scientific achievements of critical exegesis, which can also be used for the needs of dogmatics. They establish the general character of the Revelation in terms of its literary features, external style and structure. First of all, as regards its language, it must be said that it bears obvious and pronounced features of the Hebrew style, which is flawed due to its Hebraisms regarding the correctness of language and grammar. However, this does not prevent him from being distinguished by his exceptional strength, so that one can rightly say about him: “the author of the Apocalypse, although not a perfect artist, he is a brilliant writer, possessing the rare power of his calling.”<<2>> Of course, one cannot deny the obvious difference in style " Revelations"and the fourth Gospel, which is considered to have been written later than the first. However, such a difference does not force us to assert, contrary to church tradition, that both books are the works of different writers. In any case, the possibility of purely scientific disagreement and dispute remains for this. For us, therefore, there is complete and even scientific opportunity to calmly follow the testimony of tradition, for which “the author of the Apocalypse, as well as the Gospel and Epistles, is one and the same, i.e., the Apostle John Zebedee,”<<3>> John the Theologian, son of Gromov (as was accepted and attested in the canon of sacred books in the East and West).
This peculiar style of the Apocalypse testifies to the special strength of the Jewish spirit and temperament, inherent in this book, and comparatively even weakened in the fourth Gospel, in this sense more Hellenistic. And this deliberately Jewish character of this book is even more reflected in its special literary genre and style, precisely how Apocalypse. It is equally characteristic here that the Apocalypse as such is of its own kind the only one book in the entire Bible (despite the presence of individual apocalyptic texts in some places in other books), and at the same time it is one of the many apocalypses that abound in Jewish writing, starting from the second century BC and until the second century and after him. Despite the presence of individual monuments and non-Jewish origins (like the Sibylline books), it can be said that this apocalypticism for several centuries (from the 2nd century BC to the 2nd century after it) was a particularly characteristic expression of the Jewish spirit in its self-awareness and his historical destinies. Already starting with the great post-exilic prophets, the Jewish people think and feel life apocalyptically, although this was not the only thing defining his self-awareness. The preaching of the Forerunner, Christ and the Apostles, and all of Christianity in general could find a place in it. It defeated the apocalypse. The latter died out with the destruction of Jerusalem, which followed a series of messianic-apocalyptic movements and uprisings led by false messiahs. However, the Church of the Tongues, which adopted Christianity from Israel, did not accept it apocalyptically, but remained free from it.
However, and this cannot be emphasized with sufficient force, the Church, having rejected the apocalypse as a special form of national Jewish self-consciousness, chose and proclaimed as divinely inspired one of the apocalypses, the only one of its kind, She preserved and glorified it, adding it to the canon of sacred books. Thus, the Church at the same time abolished it, as if it were unnecessary, but at the same time affirmed it in its abiding meaning, as a kind of vetus testamenium in novo,<<**1>> our "Christian" Apocalypse. In all the sacred books of not only the Old, but even the New Testament (albeit in the Greek text), the word of God sounds in a Jewish voice, speaks, in a certain sense, in the Hebrew language, so it needs to be translated into a universal dialect, accessible to “all languages." Therefore, in the New Testament we hear the living speech of St. Paul, as well as the other apostles, which, without losing its personal and national-Jewish character, already becomes a universal preaching. And the same should be said about the Apocalypse, which betrayed and preserved its Jewish style, imagery, temperament as universal, all-human, and this unique text of local and particular generalized to the national
But this generalization is not exhausted by this spiritual translation alone. It also has another, broader and deeper meaning. The fact is that the language and thought of apocalypses included elements, one might say, of universal paganism; syncretic character, the study of which religious-historical science is so successfully and so persistently engaged in. Through her analyzes and inspirations, Jewish images and teachings of the apocalypses are revealed as containing the heritage of deep antiquity from different religions and peoples. We can say that they, and in particular our Apocalypse, were written in the thick syncretic ink of the religious history of the world. They can be identified, and these images can be deciphered by tracing them back to their original sources. In them one can find various influences, traditions and borrowings, which are now being revealed more fully and wider in religious-historical science. Even if the sacred text of the Bible as the religious tradition of the chosen people is not closed to these influences of the surrounding pagan peoples, then for apocalyptic writing it is a general rule. And through it, syncretic images penetrate into our Christian Apocalypse, which through this preserves and carries them, assimilating them with a universal character. "Religious-historical" science , triumphantly revealing these features of syncretism, he often uses this to profane the sacred book, secularize and destroy its content. However, this kind of application is not at all necessary and not undeniable. There is no need to reject or question the historical correctness of these scientific observations to invalidate their application and meaning. The content of the sacred books, in particular the Apocalypse, does not decompose and is not abolished in its own strength; it includes these alien elements as material, colors and images. Through this, the power and richness of his images only multiply without losing their own meaning. The language and images of the apocalypse, as well as our Apocalypse, thus open the door for world history to the last book of the New Testament.
So, the Apocalypse, both in its style and in its character, is an alien book in the Bible, belonging to a certain literary genre of a certain era. However, it is included in the Bible as an organic part of it, an essential one. And this inclusion as a well-known biblical dogma has become so organic that it makes one forget the historical and specific features of the Apocalypse. It stands before us in all its originality, like a monolith. Its literary and historical features did not prevent it from being accepted as Christian revelations of a certain nature. This Judaistic book of a syncretic nature took on the features of the Christian revelation and became Christian book, organically becoming part of the New Testament as a revelation about Christ and His Church. Its language and images were assimilated and transformed here until it was completely reborn, and we, reading this book as part of the Christian revelation of the New Testament, forget about its origin and special properties. She's for us given like Holy Scripture, like a book written by the great Christian apostle. We perceived it in the general biblical context as part of the Bible, a New Testament book, in connection with the entire New Testament revelation. She belongs to the number prophetic books and as such there are the only one prophetic book in the New Testament. Although all the prophetic books in the Bible, namely in the Old Testament, have the character of revelation, since they also contain Christian prophecies, the Apocalypse has an exceptional place in this regard as a specifically Christian, New Testament prophecy: “the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants, which must soon take place... Blessed is he who reads and hears the words of this prophecy" ( Open. I, 1, 3). John, the apostle and evangelist who wrote the fourth Gospel and three conciliar epistles, he is also a prophet in Revelation.
There is a difference between prophets, apocalyptics and apostles, although there are also common features, on the basis of which they come closer to each other. Prophets teach, denounce, but also foretell the future - sometimes in general and abstract terms, sometimes symbolically and figuratively, and then they come close to the apocalyptics: such is the book of the prophet Daniel and some others. There are insights and prophecies regarding the future in the Gospels, as well as in the apostolic epistles. However, Revelation has a special character, which combines literary features and images characteristic of apocalypses with prophecies characteristic of prophets. We can say that in it the apocalypse ceases to be itself, for it becomes a prophecy, although expressed in a special, apocalyptic language. Apocalypse ceases to belong to apocalypse, but becomes a prophecy. This is the whole uniqueness of the character of the Christian apocalypse. This is also expressed in his self-determination.
Open. I, 1-2-3: "And He showed, sending (it) through His angel to His servant John, who testified the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, and that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and hears words prophecies this."
John the Theologian, the evangelist, is also a seer. On the one hand, he is witness as a confessor and preacher, an apostle, whose words are “prophecy” in their content and dignity, so to speak, in their meaning and value. This assumes that he worthy accept the prophecy, become its preacher in the world. To that extent and in this sense he is and prophet. However, his spiritual image at the same time differs from that which is characteristic of the prophet in his own ministry. It is he who is not characterized by prophetic searching, questioning and inspiration, in response to which prophecy is given by the Holy Spirit as the “word of God”, as the “hand of God” on the prophet. To this extent, prophecy is not only illumination from above, but also an answer to a question, a divine-human affair. But the seer has visions like revelations. He is shown something about which he did not ask and could not even ask, since what is revealed exceeds the human horizon, extends beyond it, into a region transcendental to him. If prophecy is a divine-human illumination in which creative inspiration meets divine inspiration, then the “vision” represents, as it were, a unilateral act of God in man or on man. The image of such divine influence is expressed as a state of “being in the spirit,” in a trance that leads to transcendence. On the human side, this obviously presupposes chosenness, a corresponding special dignity, but the seer does not ask, but sees, is shown to him or spoken to through an angel. He is required ability see what is shown, perceive it, tell it to people, but at the same time to oneself resist, bear the prophecy, and not be spiritually corrupted by it. This is precisely the property of “apocalypse”, revelation, in contrast to prophecies. If one can look for an answer to the question here, it is only in the general form some bewilderment, embarrassment, confusion, nothing more. With all the grandeur of the revelations of the Apocalypse, the visions here simply alternate, follow one another, and then fit according to a certain plan into the narrative about them, and the attitude of the beholder towards them remains passive, receptive. This spiritual comparative passivity distinguishes apocalypses from prophecy. IN known cases something that has the character of an apocalypse in its content and style can also become a prophecy, including elements of a question-answer. Such, for example, are the apocalyptic chapters of the book of the prophet Daniel (cf., for example, Dan. VIII, 27: “And I, Daniel, was exhausted and sick for several days; then I got up and began to attend to the king’s affairs; I was amazed at this vision and did not understand it.” Wed. In., I, 3). Here, although in general outlines, the personality of the contemplator of the visions himself appears. But we would look in vain for this personality in the John revelation with all its amazing power: here we find only visions of mysteries, but not the seer himself, who remains hidden, not revealed in his personality, although such exists. Perhaps this is one of the reasons for all the difficulty and even unanswerability of questions about the relationship between both sacred writers - the compilers of the fourth Gospel and Epistles, on the one hand, and the seer, on the other.
This impersonality, as it were, the absence of individual traits in apocalyptic writing explains pseudonymous character that is characteristic of her. Pseudonymy is not only a symptom of a spiritual illness that is characteristic of the state of the diaspora to this day (the disease is contagious, both corresponding to a certain spiritual state and professions: stage, literature, etc.), but also corresponds to that absence individual person and the state of the apocalyptic, the passivity of his contemplation, which we talked about above. In any case, it should be stated that pseudonymy is a feature inherent in apocalyptic writing, which is why it is called apocrypha (except, of course, the Apocalypse of John).
A few words should also be said about the place of Revelation in the New Testament. Revelation takes last thing place in the Bible, and this follows from its entire content, as well as its special meaning. Its content is devoted to what can be called the Christian philosophy of history, and this historiosophy borders on eschatology and passes into it. It reveals the fate of the Christian Church in the world, precisely from a special angle - like the struggle of Christianity with anti-Christianity. World history is depicted here as the greatest world tragedy, in which the heavenly armies, together with the earthly church, war against the dragon and his angels, the beast and the harlot fight the saints, Christ wages war and defeats the dragon, and all this ends with a picture of the chiliastic, and then the eschatological (about which below) transformation of the world. So everything" Revelation"is dedicated to one topic, one question and answer - it talks about the destinies of the Church of Christ in the world within the limits of history. These destinies are considered not only in the light of the earthly, but human history, but the forces of heaven also participate in them, so that the result is an exhaustive in depth and power revelation of the destinies of the Christian Church, a truly “apocalypse.” Such a question and to such extent was not raised in the entire New (and also Old) Testament. Apart from individual episodic texts, Christian teaching was not revealed from such a perspective at all. “Revelation” has a completely special place in this regard, a place peculiar to it alone. In this sense, it can be said that if “Revelation” were absent from the Bible, then such a teaching about the militant church would not be in it at all. There would be a gaping void in this place, and the burning question about the fate of Christianity in history would be marked... by silence. (Of course, apart from brief instructions from weather forecasters and in the apostolic epistles). But such a question is not a product of curiosity and idleness, which could and even should be dispensed with through humility or laziness of thought. No, this is an urgent and burning question that cannot be avoided in the Christian consciousness.
The theme of “Revelation” is necessary in the Bible, the latter cannot avoid it. ABOUT future, or that " coming soon", neither the early Christian church nor all subsequent centuries could help but ask, each in its own way, with growing torment, anxiety and tension. Humanity is immersed in history and cannot help but think about it. The Church has its own historical destinies, the revelations of which it cannot help but seek. Christ reigns in His church in the struggle with the beast and the Antichrist, and we, being present and participating in this struggle, cannot help but ask about it. And with such an answer to these questions, the teaching about the destinies of the Christian world in connection with the church. and “Revelation” appears. In its presence, it is organically connected with all the revelation that we have in the word of God.
What has been said sufficiently explains the special place that “Revelation” is characteristic of in the Bible; this is exactly what it is last thing place, end and conclusion. And this naturally begs comparison with the book in the Bible to which it belongs first place, exactly the book Genesis. It contains a revelation about the creation of the world and man, the origin of created being, the beginning of the earthly world and its history. Naturally, otherwise the Bible could not have begun as divine revelation about the world: God himself told us about it. Humanity could not remain without such a revelation; its absence would signify a stunning emptiness with which the human spirit could not reconcile and calm down. But the world not only begins, but also ends in history: the beginning seeks the end for itself and looks towards it.<<4>> Therefore, the place occupied in the Bible is correlative, both for Genesis and for “Revelation”, the beginning and the end; "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, says the Lord, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" ( Open. I, 8). "I am Alpha and Omega, First and Last" (10).
Of course, if we consider Genesis and Revelation exegetically, religious-historically, scientifically-philologically, then between them there will be such features of difference and originality that, as if in advance, exclude this convergence as the beginning and end. However, we can say, without fear of paradox, that all the differences between them in terms of their historical appearance or transcription are insignificant and even seemingly accidental in relation to their general theme and its significance. Both of them express in human language the same general thought, namely about the history of the created, becoming world as having a beginning and an end. Such is this special specific gravity" Revelations"as part of the Bible, in its general plan.
Speaking, in particular, about " Revelation", it must be said that he tends to be the end The Bible, which contains the completion of the historical world. Therefore, it is a book about the future, about what “will soon be” (I, 1; XXII, 6). It is a book about end stories about what will happen and how it will happen. It is a book about the entire world history in its content and accomplishment. It is the history of the world, outlined in symbols and images, in its most essential content. It is by no means a history of earthly events, as it is written and studied; it does not describe any external events or facts that can be precisely confined to space and time. It is the symbolism of these events, their internal summary, ontology, or, in this sense, the philosophy of history. It has its own specific task, special content, which is equally not characteristic of both the Bible and general history. The Bible knows its historical books, and they are really dedicated to the history of the chosen people, their destinies. This is the “sacred history” dedicated to the construction of salvation. However, their content is limited; it does not include the ontological completeness of history, as well as its end. " Revelation“But it is universal, it contains, if not the beginning, then, in any case, the end, there is a philosophy of the end, or rather, a prophecy about it. This is the own and exclusive theme of “Revelation”, which in this form absent in the Bible, particularly in the New Testament. Of course, it cannot be denied that it also touches on apocalyptic themes and contains apocalyptic and eschatological prophecies - their complete absence would be simply unthinkable and impossible, as they are in the Old Testament, especially in its prophetic books. However, one cannot even compare and contrast their presence in Revelation with the rest of the Bible. We can say directly that the revelation relating to the destinies of the whole world and the Church in their coherent history does not exist in other books of the New Testament, and it is the exclusive property of his last book in its general plan and main task (although we will have to make its comparisons with the corresponding biblical texts, in particular the Gospel and Apostolic texts, which relate here).
This character of “Revelation” is associated with its special meaning, internal and external. necessity the presence in the canon of a book of such content. Its absence would give rise to a feeling of irresistible emptiness and insufficiency, which would seek satisfaction for itself in non-canonical or “apocryphal” replenishment, as was the case along with the canonical “ Revelation"before and after its composition. Its special problems relate to the revealed doctrine of end and the end of history. Could revelation be deprived" Revelations"about the fate of the world and the Church in it, containing, so to speak, the dynamics of ecclesiology, the symbolism of the war of the world with Christ and His victory over it? Of course, all this is already contained in the Gospel, but here it is not the subject of special prophecy, deliberate revelation.
However " Revelation", obviously, already presupposes and includes the Gospel teaching about Christ. Outside of it and apart from it, it is unthinkable and incomprehensible, although it is not exhausted by it and does not completely coincide with it. It is characterized by its own features, a special dogmatic and historical perspective, your image of Christ along with its own special apocalypticism and eschatology. Therefore, it should also be said that all New Testament, evangelical and apostolic dogma is without “Revelation” incomplete, in him she finds her fulfillment, or at least her special perspective. We can say that Christ “Revelation” is not in the Gospel, as well as vice versa: the latter does not contain the features characteristic of the first. “Revelation” is, in its way, like the fifth Gospel, or, if we consider it to belong to the fourth evangelist, it is his second Gospel, although written completely differently and according to a different plan. Although each of the four Gospels contains its own end as the completion of the earthly life of the Savior and His earthly ministry, none of them is characterized by the teaching about the end of the world and all earthly human history in connection with the power second the coming of Christ, which is the completion of the entire path of the history of the world and the Church. But it is precisely this, and only this, that represents the content of “Revelation” as a book about end earthly history in connection with all its accomplishments.
The “Revelation” of John, although it has similarities with the Old Testament apocalypses (in Daniel and other prophets), as well as non-canonical apocrypha, it differs from them as a New Testament, Christian revelation, containing the teaching about Christ and His image. In this sense, we repeat, it is in some way the fifth Gospel. There are synoptic gospels, which contain, although each with its own distinctive features, a single synoptic image of Christ, and there is also the Johannine image of Christ, characteristic of the fourth Gospel. But there is also a special image of Christ, although it is John’s, but has its own features that distinguish it even from John’s, but the Gospel. The apostolic writings do not have such a special image of Christ, although they have certain features of the dogmatic teaching about Him.
This special image of Christ, inherent in Revelation, combines the general evangelical and apostolic teaching with its own properties. In the first sense, we can say that Revelation, according to its relatively late origin, at the end of the 1st century, although preceding the fourth Gospel in time, is characterized by dogmatic completeness, characteristic of the entire New Testament Christology. Here we have a teaching about Him primarily as historical person who personally has the name Jesus (I, 9; XII, 17; XIV, 12), it is accompanied by the name Christ, separately (XI, 15; XII, 10; XX, 4, 6) or in combination of both names (I, 1, 2, 6; XXII, 21). He is assigned descent from Israel, a descendant from the line of David, Leo from the tribe of Judah (X, 5). He has 12 apostles (XXI, 14). It speaks of His crucifixion (XI, 8), resurrection (I, 5, 18) and ascension (III, 21; XII, 5).
At the same time, He is the Son of God, the only one who pre-exists in His Divinity (I, 2; II, 18, 27; III, 5, 21; XIV, I). He is the Word of God (XIX, 13), as He is called even earlier than the Fourth Gospel in the only text besides it. He is the “Holy and True” (XII, 7) and the “Holy and True Lord” (VI, 10), “The First and the Last” (I, 17; II, 8; XXII, 13). He is also the beginning of God’s creation (III, 14). He sits on the throne with God (III, 21; VII, 17; XII, 5; XXI, 1, 3). Many of the names and expressions given to God in the Old and New Testaments are also applied to Christ.<<5>> Further, Christ is depicted with many features in Glory His as “Firstborn from the dead and Lord of the kings of the earth” (I, 5), “Having the keys of death and hell” (I, 18). “He is the Lord of Lords and the King of Kings (XVI, 14; XIX, 16). He is the Supreme High Priest, the Lamb of God, “who loved us and washed us from our sins in His blood and made us kings and priests to God and the Father” (I, 5-6). Before the Lamb it is sung in a new song: “You were slain and redeemed us to God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and made us kings and priests to our God” (V, 9). sit on My throne, just as I also conquered and sat down with My Father on His throne" (III, 21). In Revelation there is in its entirety the teaching about the Redeemer and redemption, which is found in the Apostolic Epistles (as well as in the Old Testament prophecies, in in particular in Isaiah, chapter LIII). This is in general connection with the doctrine of the incarnation, in which the Son of man is also the Son of God.
In short, Revelation contains within itself the fullness of Christology<<6>> also in connection with triadology.<<7>> In this respect, it contains, in general, one might say, what stems from the general New Testament teaching. But at the same time, it also contains something of its own, which the latter does not contain: its own special, apocalyptic image of Christ, revealed in history, in the struggle with the prince of this world, the dragon, in world tragedy. This image must, of course, be combined with the Gospel and Apostolic, and this is the special task of the dogmatics of the Apocalypse. (Connected with this is the doctrine of the Church as the Wife and Bride of the Lamb, as well as the end of the world - eschatology. Finally, this also includes that feature that can be defined as Christian, mystical sociologism in such a depiction of history, where it is not so much the individuals who act their individuality, as well as the images of spiritual forces in their association.
It remains to add a few words about the relationship that exists between John the Evangelist and the compiler of the epistles and the Seer who wrote the Apocalypse. In terms of language, the character of both is different; this is directly felt when reading. Whether this difference is so great that one can deny that they belong to the same pen, the opinions of learned researchers diverge to the complete opposite. For some, these differences are so great that they exclude such affiliation, while for others there are no such obstacles, and philological examination does not have the last word here. Therefore, there remains every possibility, in accordance with church tradition, to consider both the evangelist and the prophet-seer as one and the same person. However, this does not deny or even diminish the difference in style and general literary character The Gospels with the Epistles and the Apocalypse, so much so that, in any case, the question may arise as to the reasons and source of such a difference. Of course, it may also be related to the age at which these works were written. The Apocalypse appeared earlier than the Gospels and Epistles, but this difference is not so significant, it is determined (presumably) in just a few years (3-5), and the sacred writer was already an old man and in exile on Fr. Patmos (about 96). One can seek explanations for the differences in style, based on the assumption that the Gospel and the Epistles had their own editor, which was reflected in the nature of his style. These kinds of assumptions in their various combinations are, of course, possible, but they are arbitrary guesses that can neither be proven nor disproved due to the lack of data. However, the impression remains undeniable that, moving from the Apocalypse to the Gospel, we seem to be entering another world, immersing ourselves in a different atmosphere.
The “spiritual” (pneumatic) Gospel of John is all luminous, imbued with peace, goodness, love; on the contrary, the Apocalypse is all on fire, full of storms and revelations, exciting, shocking. It’s as if there are two images of one and the same apostle: the first is the “beloved disciple,” reclining on the Teacher’s forearms at the Last Supper, standing at the cross and adopted from it by the Mother of God, all silence, and love, and tender caress, as in his youth, so in old age, as if not subject to human age, the “old man” owns the voice of eternity. The second, the Seer of Secrets, with a fiery straightened soul, his book of revelation belongs not to supertemporal old age, but to supertemporal youth, it is a young book, although it also belongs to old age, it makes one remember other features, albeit of the same image. This is Boanarges, the son of Gromov, this is one of the sons of Zebedee, who wants to bring fire down to earth on the rebellious Samaritans and for whom his mother asked to be seated on the right or left side in the Kingdom of God. A still unpacified human power boils within him, which, however, is pacified in the nearness of the Lord. But the Seer needs this strength to endure all the power and difficulty of revelation. However, these human traits are not sufficient to explain all the huge differences that remain in the general spirit of the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse, so that the difficulty and paradox of church tradition, which unites them in belonging to the same sacred writer, the Apostle John, remains in full force . There can be two outcomes here: one - in disobedience to church tradition, which requires what seems humanly impossible, namely to unite the Gospel and Revelation as sculptures of the same chisel, or to accept it by faith and seek an answer to perplexities in it. And it is this last outcome that remains the only convincing and intelligible. Yes, the style and general character of both, the Gospel and Revelation, are different, it seems, to the point of incompatibility. However, does it apply to literary style or that special, one-of-a-kind content that is inherent in both? Of course, the latter. In all sacred writing, in the Bible, yes, it seems to us, and in all world literature in general, there is no other case such a combination not of two styles, but of two different contents, relating to two different objects of religious experience, each of which is so amazing in its uniqueness and strength. We ask ourselves: if it is truly given to one and the same chosen one of God to meet on the path of life and experience in religious experience all the immensity of the Fourth Gospel and all the shock of Revelation, then what Should this, albeit one, sacred writer feel himself in the face of both experiences? How will he narrate it in both cases?
Thus, the difference in the nature of tension, which is characteristic of the Gospel and the Apocalypse, must be entirely attributed to the special tone in its uniqueness, the nature of their content, and this constitutes additional evidence of their spiritual authenticity. This Not literature, but a narrative about the inexpressible, although seeking expression for itself in human language. And for each of these stories there is its own heavenly music, which corresponds to them in sublimity and inspiration. Moreover, this difference not only does not eliminate the affinity of objects, but presupposes it, although in some cases they are presented differently (as we will note below).
1 I must make a similar confession about myself, in connection with my own dogmatic writings and inquiries. Only at the very end of his presentation of dogma, in its final part, in For the bride Lamb, the theme of which, like the title, is in a certain sense given by Revelation, I felt the need to rethink "Revelation", namely how the last word dogmatics and in particular ecclesiology and eschatology. This is what I am doing now as an afterword to her - as an afterword specifically to To the Bride of the Lamb, since only brief and insufficient pages are devoted to it here. In this sense own theme of the present essay is not exegetical, but dogmatic, although in this case, of course, purely exegetical excursions are inevitable, in which, however, I openly rely not on my own, but on other people’s research.
2 Hello. Saint Jean. L "Apocalypse, Introduction, p. CXXXIX. Paris. 1921.
3 Hello, 1. p. CCII.
**1 New Old Testament (lat.).
4 Wed. R. Bonnetain. Grace (Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplement, t. III, p. 1146.). Paris 1938.
5 See Charles, I, xii.
6 Allo, 1, p. IX.