My photo at home
A Lot of Joy from God!

Oleksandr Zhabenko 🇬🇧
Glory Be to Jesus Christ!
🌞

Since in the works published at the following links:
https://churchandsociety.org.ua/pdf/projects/zbirnyk.pdf
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/17082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/27112024.html
it is written that the use of prepositions is important for the correct understanding of important and actual issues, in particular the issue of power, I am writing commentaries on the use of these prepositions. As a piece of advice on how to read the text, you can read the verse in translation and/or in the original (if you have the opportunity), and then the commentary on prepositions here. Next, you need to understand which part of the verse the commentary refers to, and consider what it affirms — or less often, denies — that is essential to understanding. This thoughtful reading helps to deepen understanding and protects against the mistakes mentioned above.

Liturgy:
(Romans XV, 7-16)
Romans XV, 7 — 'εἰς δόξαν τοῦ θεοῦ' - 'eis doxan tou theou' - to glory (into glory) of God. The preposition 'eis' emphasises the movement towards glory and the state, the moment of entering into it, that is, glorification.

Romans XV, 8 — 'εἰς τὸ βεβαιῶσαι' - 'eis to bebaiosai' - in confirmation; so as to confirm. Here the preposition 'eis' indicates the purpose of the action.

Romans XV, 9 — 'ἐν ἔθνεσιν' - 'en ethnesin' - amongst the nations; amongst the ethnoses; amongst the Gentiles. All three translation variants are correct, but each is partial due to the richness of meaning in the words. In the following verses-prophecies, as well as in verse 16, the forms of this word have three meanings, all of which are correct simultaneously, but in different senses.

Romans XV, 13 — 'ἐν τῷ πιστεύειν, εἰς τὸ περισσεύειν ὑμᾶς ἐν τῇ ἐλπίδι ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος ἁγίου' - 'en to pisteuein eis to perisseuein hymas en te elpidi en dynamei pneumatos hagiou' - in faith (as 'space and time of faith') in overflowing (for overflowing; so that you might overflow) you in hope in the Holy Spirit (with hope, by the Holy Spirit; in hope by the Holy Spirit; with hope in the Holy Spirit). All translation variants are correct, but carry different meanings. Perhaps it is appropriate to consider the combination of all variants as the complete meaning.

Romans XV, 15 — 'ἀπὸ μέρους' - 'apo morous' - in part. This is an established expression. 'ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ' - 'apo tou theou' - from God. Here 'apo' emphasises that grace is God's gift to Paul. Granted to such an extent as to be entirely Paul's, without ceasing to be God's.

Romans XV, 16 — 'εἰς τὸ εἶναί με λειτουργὸν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη' - 'eis to einai me leitourgon CHristou Iesou eis ta ethne' - so as to be a co-minister (that is, one who serves together with others) of Christ Jesus to (amongst) the nations (Gentiles; ethnoses). The word used here has important significance for theology, as the name of the Liturgy, common service, derives from it. Many translations omit the part co- (together), which highlights and emphasises the significance of Paul as a person, but diminishes the meaning for other people. Paul's words are actually very humble here. He is not only merely a servant, but also one of many others who serve together with him. 'προσφορα' - 'prosphora' - offering (this is also what the bread is called that is used for the celebration of the Eucharist). 'εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἡγιασμένη ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ' - 'euprosdektos, hegiasmene en pneumati hagio' - well received, sanctified in the Holy Spirit; acceptable, sanctified in the Holy Spirit; well received, sanctified with the Holy Spirit. Variants with the preposition 'in' in translation indicate that the Holy Spirit Himself sanctifies, as God, whilst with the 'with' - that the Father and Son sanctify through the Holy Spirit. Generally - it concerns the Trinity explicitly or implicitly.

More about the Apostle reading see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05072023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/24072024.html

(Matthew XII, 38-45)
Matthew XII, 38 — 'θέλομεν ἀπὸ σοῦ σημεῖον ἰδεῖν' - 'thelomen apo sou semeion idein' - we desire, we long, we want from You a sign, a miracle to see, to know, to experience, to deeply perceive. Actually, the words used here emphasise not only the desire for miracles, but more a deep miraculous experience, living through, fullness of the miraculous not only from an objective, but also from a subjective point of view. Moreover, the preposition 'apo' here emphasises that they are not interested in the actual meaning of the miracle itself and the testimony about Jesus, they are not interested in Who He Himself is and what follows from this, but they are interested in the possibility to receive and appropriate the experienced entirely miraculous.

Matthew XII, 40 — 'ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους' - 'en te koilia tou ketous' - in the belly of the sea monster; in the belly of the great fish. Where. Various translation variants are possible. See also the famous story from modern times:
https://parafia.org.ua/biblioteka/hrystyyanstvo-virovchennya-ta-tradytsiji/zakon-bozhyj/
'ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς γῆς τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας' — 'en te kardia tes ges treis hemeras kai treis nyktas' - in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. Where. The place that seems very simply to indicate the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Christ during three days. But if one begins to think deeply, then very significant details become visible. I wrote earlier, I quote:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
Various explanations exist, whilst the naive one, that it concerns Good Friday, Saturday and the Day of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and our ordinary days and nights — is erroneous, although it seems most logical. It is erroneous because Christ was a dead body from 15 hours on Friday until 00.00 (approximately, more generally - before dawn) on Sunday - and this cannot be our three days and three nights (if a part is considered as a whole, then this is two days and two nights, regardless of how the beginning of the day is counted - according to the Biblical and liturgical way - that is, from the evening of the previous day, or according to our modern way - from midnight). Even if we divide the night by midnight into two nights, each of which belongs to different modern days, then even with such an artificial construction we would have only two days (still incomplete) and three nights. Therefore the naive interpretation is obviously incorrect, but only approximate.
In my opinion, the most correct is such an understanding that the heart of the earth is not hell, where Christ descended with His soul after death on the cross, but this is a metaphor that generally means His voluntary suffering, death, burial, descent to hell, Resurrection.
It is called the heart because these events concentrate, focus everything that is principal in people's lives — everything that life became after the fall, everything that briefly describes temporal life in this age and the future resurrection, just as the heart most meaningfully characterises a person. Earth is the world in the sense of the way of existence of all humanity.
And where do the days and nights come from? The darkening of the sun during Christ's sufferings according to the prophecies is the third night that came during the day. And since days and nights alternate, then in the heart of the earth we have such three days and three nights:
1st day — Good Friday until the onset of darkness during the crucifixion;
1st night — darkness during the crucifixion;
2nd day — from the cessation of darkness until the night from Friday to Saturday;
2nd night — from Friday to Saturday;
3rd day — Great Saturday;
3rd night — Easter night.
This understanding is also confirmed by Matthew's mention of the resurrection of many dead and their appearance to many precisely after the crucifixion, and not after the Resurrection of Jesus, although the second is logical.
Therefore here Christ speaks not about our days and nights and not about hell, but about what is the concentration of His ministry and the image of all our life.
I shall say a little more about the evil and adulterous generation (Matthew XII, 39). Evilwicked, if to say more precisely, not by nature, but by virtue of their doing evil, effectively wicked; adulterous - like a woman who betrays her husband - Israel is called God's Bride, and later the Church likewise. The prophets compared apostasy from God for the sake of creation with adultery.
And that there are no real grounds (and moreover, there cannot be any) to deny God, is well explained in the work Existence we cognize by faith, available at the link:
https://sites.google.com/view/rozdumy23/home/isnuvanna-piznaemo-virou

Matthew XII, 41 — 'ἄνδρες Νινευεῖται ἀναστήσονται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτήν' - 'andres Nineueitai anastesontai en te krisei meta tes geneas tautes kai katakrinousin auten' - the men of Nineveh will rise up, will stand, will resurrect in judgement with this generation and will condemn it. That is, not simply will stand, but will rise up, will prove higher or will resurrect in judgement. It concerns both the general Resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgement, but also the fact that those Ninevites will be raised up, exalted alongside the Pharisees. 'εἰς τὸ κήρυγμα' - 'eis to kerygma' - to the preaching. The change in the Ninevites under the action of preaching is emphasised, one can say, their entering into what was heard, their faith and conversion.

Matthew XII, 42 — 'βασίλισσα νότου ἐγερθήσεται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης καὶ κατακρινεῖ αὐτήν' - 'basilissa notou egerthesetai en te krisei meta tes geneas tautes kai katakrinei auten' - the queen of the South will rise up (will stand, will resurrect) in judgement with this generation and will condemn it. See above, analogously. 'ἐκ τῶν περάτων τῆς γῆς' - 'ek ton peaton tes ges' - from the ends of the earth. The preposition 'ek' indicates here that she comes (originates) from a people distant and foreign to the Israelites. These two examples from Old Testament history show that neither cultural difference, which existed particularly between the Ninevites and the Israelites, nor geographical distances and boundaries, which existed between the queen of the South and Solomon, can be a true justification for complete impenitence and insensitivity, or even malice towards Christ.

Matthew XII, 43 — 'ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου' - 'apo tou anthropou' - from the man. The preposition 'apo' indicates here that it will come out entirely, completely, wholly.

Matthew XII, 44 — 'εἰς τὸν οἶκόν μου' - 'eis ton oikon mou' - to my house. Where to.

More about the Gospel reading see at the links:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05072023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/24072024.html

Glory be to Thee, our God, glory be to Thee!

List of Used Sources