Christ Is Risen!
🌞
Since in the work published at the link:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
and even earlier in others, published at the 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/12112025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/27112024.html
it is written that the use of prepositions has important significance for the correct understanding of important and topical questions, particularly the question of power, I am writing comments regarding the use of precisely these prepositions. As advice regarding reading what is written — one can read the verse in translation or/and original (whoever has such possibility), and then the corresponding comment regarding prepositions here. Then it is necessary to understand which part of the verse the comment concerns, and also to consider what essential for understanding it affirms — or more rarely — denies. Such thoughtful reading helps to deepen understanding and protects from the mentioned mistakes.
I prepared an improved version of my research, the presentation of which is available at the link:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/vystup-2025-hypo-genitive-Romans-XIII_1.pdf
The research material is currently being prepared for publication. I hope, God willing, to present fuller results later after the publication comes out.
I will update the list of references regarding prepositions at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
the latter — once or twice a month (in Ukrainian), to keep the text version current and up to date.
Translated from Ukrainian by Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic AI), with subsequent editing by me.
Strong's references (note: according to Strong) in the translation of the original text mean that the word is taken from Strong's dictionary, and the specific meaning was chosen following the translation and commentary by Google Gemini Fast 3.
Liturgy:
Acts II, 22 — 'ἄνδρα ἀποδεδειγμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς ὑμᾶς δυνάμεσι καὶ τέρασι καὶ σημείοις' — 'andra apodedeigmenon apo tou theou eis hymas dynamesi kai terasi kai semeiois' - a Man attested (with proofs) from God for you with powers, and wonders, and signs
. The preposition 'apo' indicates here that these attestations, powers, wonders, and signs were God's gift to people in Christ. The preposition 'eis' indicates here the purpose. 'ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν' - 'en meso hymon' - in your midst
. Common expression.
Acts II, 24 — 'οὐκ ἦν δυνατὸν κρατεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ' — 'ouk en dynaton krateisthai auton hyp autou' - it was not possible [that is, death has no ability, power, or capacity] for Him to be held by it
. The preposition 'hypo' in its form before the following vowel here with the genitive case indicates that this is the passive voice of the participle was held
.
Acts II, 25 — 'λέγει εἰς αὐτόν' — 'legei eis auton' - speaks for Him
. That is, the prophecy was spoken for Christ — that is, so that the faithful might hear the prophecy and through it — Christ. 'ἐκ δεξιῶν' - 'ek dexion' - at the right side; at the right hand
. That is, where. Common expression.
Acts II, 27 — 'οὐκ ἐνκαταλείψεις τὴν ψυχήν μου εἰς ᾅδην' — 'ouk enkataleipseis ten psykhen mou eis haden' - you will not leave my soul for Hades
. The preposition 'eis' indicates here the purpose — that is, the Lord will not allow the soul to be a joy and a triumph of victory over the righteous for Hades.
Acts II, 29 — 'ἐν ἡμῖν' — 'en hemin' - among us
. Where.
Acts II, 30 — 'ἐκ καρποῦ τῆς ὀσφύος αὐτοῦ' — 'ek karpou tes osphyos autou' - from the fruit of his loins
. That is, a bodily Descendant. The preposition 'ek' indicates here origin.
Acts II, 31 — 'οὔτε ἐνκατελείφθη εἰς ᾅδην' — 'oute enkateleiphthe eis haden' - He was not left for Hades
. The preposition 'eis' indicates here that Christ as a human being (according to His human nature) was not left by God so that Hades might rejoice in victory over Him.
Acts II, 33 — 'τῇ δεξιᾷ οὖν τοῦ θεοῦ ὑψωθεὶς τήν τε ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου λαβὼν παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξέχεεν τοῦτο' — 'te dexia oun tou theou hypsotheis ten te epangelian tou pneumatos tou hagiou labon para tou patros exekheen touto' - having been exalted, therefore, by the right hand of God and having received the promise of the Holy Spirit from beside the Father, He poured out this
. The preposition 'para' here with the genitive case. Such construction is used concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and also concerning the human nature of Jesus Christ. See more at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/10042026.html
Here this indicates that what is spoken of is the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father in the Divinity — that is, His hypostatic property. If one compares this with the passage where Christ promises to send the disciples the Holy Spirit, and with other passages concerning the Descent of the Holy Spirit, it is evident that this Descent is a consequence of the Incarnation of God and the glorification of Christ. Also here this preposition indicates that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, just as the Son is also begotten from the Father. A testimony concerning the Trinity.
Acts II, 34 — 'εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς' — 'eis tous ouranous' - into the heavens
. Whither. 'κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου' - 'kathou ek dexion mou' - sit at My right side; sit at My right; sit at My right hand
. That is, in the highest glory.
More explanations with details are at the link — the greeting for the feast of Pascha this year:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
Concerning the feast of Pentecost there is a fine poem at the link:
https://www.instagram.com/oleksandr_zhabenko/p/DUu8adRDfD0/?img_index=1
More concerning the reading see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/23042025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/19042023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/08052024.html
John I, 35 — 'ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν' — 'ek ton matheton' - from the disciples
. The preposition 'ek' indicates here a selection from among several people.
John I, 40 (39) — 'παρ' αὐτῷ' — 'par auto' - in the vicinity of Him; near Him
. The preposition 'para' in its form before the following vowel here with the dative case indicates that they were close to Jesus.
John I, 41 (40) — 'εἷς ἐκ τῶν δύο' — 'eis ek ton dyo' - one of the two
. The preposition 'ek' indicates here a selection from a group of people. 'παρὰ Ἰωάννου' - 'para Ioannou' - from beside John
. The preposition 'para' here with the genitive case — such construction is used concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and also concerning the human nature of Jesus Christ. See more at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
Here this indicates that the words of John were from the Holy Spirit — divinely inspired, true — and also testified concerning the Incarnate Christ.
John I, 44 (43) — 'εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν' — 'eis ten Galilaian' - into Galilee
.
John I, 45 (44) — 'ἀπὸ Βηθσαϊδά, ἐκ τῆς πόλεως' — 'apo Bethsaida, ek tes poleos' - from Bethsaida, from the city
. The preposition 'apo' indicates that Philip did not live in Bethsaida (he had moved away from there), whilst the preposition 'ek' indicates that he originated from there, and in particular that his relatives were there.
John I, 46 (45) — 'ἐν τῷ νόμῳ' — 'en to nomo' - in the Law
. 'ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ' - 'apo Nazaret' - from Nazareth
. The preposition 'apo' indicates that Jesus no longer lived in Nazareth — He had left it.
John I, 47 (46) — 'ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ' — 'ek Nazaret' - from Nazareth
. The preposition 'ek' indicates origin.
John I, 48 (47) — 'ἐν ᾧ' — 'en ho' - in whom
.
John I, 49 (48) — 'ὑπὸ τὴν συκῆν' — 'hypo ten syken' - under the fig tree
. The preposition 'hypo' here with the accusative indicates location.
The Lamb of God
— a pointer to the Passover lamb, with the blood of which the Israelites anointed the doorposts and whose flesh they ate before the Exodus from Egyptian slavery. John, in this manner, prophesies concerning Jesus.
The two disciples — Andrew the First-Called and John the Theologian (by general tradition, the second, unnamed, disciple was precisely he).
When the Lord says (for example, in giving the 10 commandments): I am the Lord your God, Who brought you out of Egyptian slavery
— all three of the Trinity are there indirectly referenced — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
John I, 42 — son of Jonah
— the manuscripts differ here; in particular there are some which give son of John
(who is unknown to us) — that is, the translation is ambiguous.
The Lord speaks of Peter (the rock) in the future tense — that is, he will become such in due course.
Concerning the second part of the reading let us consider the following.
This is the well-known passage about the calling of the disciples Philip and Nathanael (most consider that Nathanael and Bartholomew are one and the same person). Nathanael believed because he had been praying for the coming of the Messiah, of Christ — this was an entirely secret prayer (as in Matthew VI), which only God could have seen — and it is considered that he had felt in prayer that God was hearing his prayers, and therefore the long-promised and long-awaited Messiah might come soon.
The response to the words of Philip is connected with the fact that Nathanael, as a well-educated Jew, knew the prophecy about the coming of the Messiah from the line of David, from the city of Bethlehem, and not from Galilee — in which, moreover, by that time there had long been many Gentiles (not for nothing did even the prophets call it Galilee of the Gentiles
).
Nevertheless, the friendship with Philip and the trust in him were genuine, which is why Nathanael went. He went also because he was not biased. Indeed, one thing is to hold one's own view on one question or another in advance, beforehand
, before being asked about it; quite another is to be unwilling to change it for the sake of truth; another is to hold to it out of pride, for example, or for advantage; another is to be unwilling to learn the truth where it is genuinely possible to do so; another is to postpone it on various pretexts, and so on. The list could be continued — and none of all this was present in Nathanael. He was truly an open, sincere person who knew the Scriptures, who awaited the Messiah-Christ, who was already foretelling
Him with his life, though he did not yet know this. This is why Jesus praises Nathanael, and why Nathanael recognises the rightness of the praise. Why does the praise surprise Nathanael? Would you, one might ask, dare to praise a person entirely unknown to you upon first meeting — to praise them with respect to some deeply personal qualities about which it is impossible in any way to judge by outward appearance
? Whereas Christ praises with absolute precision, hitting the mark entirely.
The confession of faith is connected with the fact that Christ spoke of the secret prayer for the Messiah. The words about the angels are a parallel to the well-known dream of the patriarch Jacob (Genesis XXVIII, 11-22), who is also called Israel on account of his wrestling. But this is also instruction for Nathanael and for all who have an open heart — not to become proud. Concerning this there is a fine work at the links:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CF9Iu1Gg3S6/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/mereza/posts/2656891927942736/
More concerning the reading see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/23042025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/19042023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05032023.html
For the Mother of God:
Concerning these frequent readings in honour of the Mother of God see at the links:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2485118798570901&set=pb.100012184148486.-2207520000&type=3
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/15082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/07082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/15082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/28082023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/21042023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/01042023.html
Glory be to Thee, our God, glory be to Thee!