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:
1 Corinthians VI, 20 — 'ἐν τῷ σώματι' - 'en to somati' - in the body; with the body
. Both variants are possible, but translations predominantly give the first. The first emphasises the body as a place of glorification, as God's temple, while the second points to the body as a means of glorification and better corresponds to the ideal of holiness and divinisation. In many ancient texts there are no words about the spirit and that they are God's
(in a similar meaning as the temple is called God's, though built by humans). Also the first emphasises the body as a component of human nature, while the second - that it should be a sanctuary and thus glorify God. Words about the spirit together with the body are absent in many ancient manuscripts.
1 Corinthians VII, 5 — 'ἐκ συμφώνου' - 'ek symphonou' - (proceeding) from agreement, consonance, harmony
. 'συμφωνος' — 'symphonos' — symphonic, harmonious, consonant, which sound similarly together; conveys through a sonic musical image the notion of agreement, unanimity
. See also:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/26072024.html
1 Corinthians VII, 7 — 'ἐκ θεοῦ' - 'ek theou' - from God
. The preposition 'ek' here emphasises the deepest significance, the highest degree of significance of the person's state for themselves. These are the most trusting relationships with God — to entrust all/one's entire self in the most secret and profound components of one's being to God. Due to such depth and trustfulness, many people need work and certain efforts for acceptance, and often even for awareness and recognition of God's intention regarding what this or that person should be. See the links cited above in particular.
1 Corinthians VII, 10 — 'γυναῖκα ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς μὴ χωρισθῆναι' - 'gynaika apo andros me khoristhenai' - wife from husband let not be divorced (separated)
. The preposition 'apo' points here to the fact that it concerns complete divorce, separation.
Regarding temptations in the verse it speaks of lack of restraint
, that is of the virtue of restraint, that is the ability to completely and easily rule over one's desires and inclinations. The evil one can by God's permission tempt people in marriage to marital infidelity if they lack precisely this virtue of restraint. About how well to acquire this virtue in this matter, it is well written at the link:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/Adultery-briefly.html
I will also add that in the Old Testament there is also much said about marriage, see in particular:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
Paul speaks about marriage, matrimony and related questions. He thereby clearly distinguishes where he has the Lord's commandment, and where he gives his own advice. Nevertheless, the faithful, the Church sees in the apostle's words the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, therefore also generally perceives these counsels as God's will.
It is important to note, about what was written earlier, that Paul could not refer to Christ's words on this matter everywhere where he says from myself
. This is possible only in two cases — either Christ said nothing about it, or He spoke, but Paul does not know about it. In the second case doubts arise about the authoritativeness in general of the apostle Paul's learning, and this variant, I consider, is erroneous. Therefore, Christ said nothing on this topic. But something He did say, about which is spoken in the Gospels. Christ's silence on such a vital and important topic is quite multifaceted. It must be said that the Lord said that I have much more to tell you, but now you cannot contain it
(John XVI, 12). One can also think that the perception and understanding of the faithful in different times will be somewhat different, therefore the Lord Jesus Christ spoke on this matter only what is unchangeable and fundamental — right up to the time of His Second Coming. See, in particular:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
More about the reading from the Apostle see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/12062025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/18072023.html
Matthew XIV, 1 — 'Ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ' - 'en ekeino to kairo' - at that time
. Common expression. When.
Matthew XIV, 2 — 'ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν' - 'apo ton nekron' - from the dead
. The preposition 'apo' is atypical for describing resurrection from the dead, points to leaving, abandoning
by John of the dead. This testifies to Herod's weak knowledge of faith as such. 'ἐν αὐτῷ' - 'en auto' - in Him; by Him
. Rather the first, since the second assigns Christ a secondary role as an instrument
of miracles. Though here the words of Herod are conveyed, who could perceive Christ thus (one can recall the interrogation of Jesus by Herod on Good Friday, described in the Gospel).
Matthew XIV, 3 — 'ἐν φυλακῇ' - 'en phylake' - in prison
. Where. The preposition points here to the fact that John did not offer physical resistance to imprisonment, though it was unlawful.
Matthew XIV, 6 — 'ἐν τῷ μέσῳ' - 'en to meso' - in the middle; in the midst
. Where. Common expression.
Matthew XIV, 8 — 'ὑπὸ τῆς μητρὸς' - 'hypo tes metros' - by the mother
. The preposition 'hypo' here with the genitive case points to the passive state of the participle urged
. Herodias's daughter acted as an instrument of sin.
Matthew XIV, 10 — 'ἐν τῇ φυλακῇ' - 'en te phylake' - in the prison
. Where.
Matthew XIV, 13 — 'ἐν πλοίῳ εἰς ἔρημον' - 'en ploio eis eremon' - in a boat to a desert (uninhabited) place
. Where to in what (by what). 'ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων' - 'apo ton poleon' - from the cities
(having left the cities).
The story of the imprisonment and martyrdom of Saint John the Forerunner. More is mentioned on the Day of remembrance of the event itself (29 August). John's reproach was righteous — Herod indeed sinned, taking Herodias as his wife. In another Gospel about John and Herod it is said that not only did people consider John a prophet, but Herod himself did. Nevertheless, sin overcame Herod and he did not heed the voice of the prophet, moreover imprisoned him.
Herodias hated John for exposure in sin, and desired his death.
Herod foolishly made an oath (see, in particular at the link Jesus's words about this:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
). Herod should have better broken his oath than, fulfilling it, killed John the Baptist. But here too he did not heed God's will and sinned gravely together with Herodias and her daughter.
Jesus's sorrow is seen in His withdrawal. This His reaction corresponds to the situation when, as they say, there are simply no words…
. Jesus withdraws, giving us also an example, so that people do not sin in such situations with words and deeds.
More about the reading from the Gospel see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/18072023.html
To the Co-apostolic Mary Magdalene, the myrrh-bearer:
1 Corinthians IX, 2 — 'ἐν κυρίῳ' - 'en kyrio' - in the Lord
.
1 Corinthians IX, 7 — 'ἐκ τοῦ γάλακτος τῆς ποίμνης' - 'ek tou galaktos tes poimnes' - from the milk of the flock
. The preposition 'ek' points here to the fact that such bodily support is completely natural, justified, correct, logical.
1 Corinthians IX, 9 — 'ἐν γὰρ τῷ Μωϋσέως νόμῳ γέγραπται' - 'en gar to Moyseos nomo gegraptai' - for in the Law of Moses it is written
. Where.
Luke VIII, 1 — 'ἐν τῷ καθεξῆς' - 'en to kathexes' - after that
. Common expression. When.
Luke VIII, 2 — 'ἀπὸ πνευμάτων πονηρων και ασθενειων' - 'apo pneumaton poneron kai astheneion' - from evil (bad) spirits and infirmities
. The preposition 'apo' points here to the fact that the liberation was complete, total. 'ἀφ' ἧς' - 'aph es' - from whom
. The preposition 'apo' also in its form before a vowel in both cases emphasises that the exit of evil spirits was complete, full, the healing was total. I will also mention that saint Mary Magdalene is my beloved female Saint (if one does not count the Mother of God).
Luke VIII, 3 — 'ἕτεραι πολλαί, αἵτινες διηκόνουν αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων αὐταῖς' - 'heterai pollai, haitines diekonoun autois ek ton hyparkhonton autais' - many others, who all served them from their possessions
. The preposition 'ek' points here to the fact that the sacrificial service of those women was complete, sincere, they were completely self-devoted.
A reading about how women served Jesus, accompanied Him and the apostles and helped them with their means (property). In particular three are mentioned by name, they all later became women myrrh-bearers, and among them my beloved Saint — the Co-apostolic Mary Magdalene. There were attempts to understand by this name the forgiven sinner at the end of the previous chapter, but there are no real confirmations of this, but there are weighty objections. In particular that at the forgiveness of the repentant sinner there is not even a hint of unclean spirits (and if they had been, the Lord would have delivered the woman from them together with such an instructive example of forgiveness and love, and it would also be strange if spirits continued to remain in the woman even after her forgiveness by Jesus). It would also be strange if a rich woman (Mary Magdalene was such, at least well-to-do, so that she could help for a long time the community of men, which was the community of Jesus and His apostles) was both possessed and a known sinner (this is a weak argument, but quite real, because in those times it would be difficult for a possessed and publicly known sinful woman to be among Jews truly wealthy, at least possession and public sinfulness would greatly hinder her in being truly wealthy, not being with some ruler). In view of the last consideration it is quite possible that those seven demons did not manifest themselves too noticeably and obviously, so that the woman mainly suffered from them internally, but this was little manifested externally.
In general the named women (and those who are not named) later became myrrh-bearers. Among them also two of my beloved Saints — Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus.
I will also note that many people observe that women did not act hostilely against Jesus. That is the Incarnate Son of God was worthy in the eyes of all contemporary women.
About the reading from the Gospel see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/08102024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/10102023.html
Glory be to Thee, our God, glory be to Thee!