Слово 24. На сказанное евангелистами о Спасителе по-человечески, на «плакася» 962 , на «нынѣ душа Моя возмутися» 963 , на «аще возможно есть, да мимоидетъ отъ Мене чаша сія» 964 и «прискорбна есть душа Моя» 965 , и подобные этим речения. От божественного Писания примеры убедительные и опровергающие

If we believe that these words were uttered by someone from ordinary people or just a person, then let him cry like a person, fear and fear death, be sad and embarrassed, and endure everything that human nature usually endures. If He was God in the flesh - and He was Him, and nothing else - then what is God afraid of? If He was truthful when He said: “I am life” 966, then how is Life afraid of death? If He saved others from death, then how was He Himself afraid of death, Who exhorted the disciples to think boldly and said: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul” 967? How was He Himself afraid to endure this, if He encourages Abraham, saying: “Do not be afraid, for I am with you” 968? If He made Moses fearsome for Pharaoh, and said to Joshua: “Be strong and take courage,” 969, then how will He Himself be subject to fear? Or how He feared people, Who advises others not to be afraid and, convincing them, cries out: “The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear: what can man do to me?” 970 How did He who came to slay death Himself fear what He came [to fight] against? And how is it not beyond the bounds of all wickedness to call Him who feared hell, Whom his gatekeepers, as soon as they saw, were afraid 971 and, throwing open the gates through which no one could escape (τὰς ἀφύκτους πύλας), released the spirits imprisoned [in hell] (τὰ ἐναποκλεισθέντα πνεύματα) 972 so that many saints arose and entered the city 973, as it is written, and were seen by some? How afraid of death was He who said to those who came to look for Him: “I am” 974? How afraid of death was he who said: “The area of ​​the Imam to lay down My soul, and the area of ​​​​the Imam to again accept it” 975 and also: “No one will take it from Me, but I lay it down about Myself” 976? Therefore, it was not the Word Himself who feared death, but there was in him a human [nature], which always tends to experience this [feeling]. OTHER, in narrative form. Those who wish to correctly understand what is said in the Divine Scriptures about our Savior Christ must in every possible way examine the time and moment at which either He Himself appears to be saying something about Himself, or the Divine Scriptures [speak] about Him. So, if before the Word of God became flesh, He was ever seen crying or afraid of death, or suffering any other human [suffering], then He must now assimilate all of the above. And if, when He became a man, then the divine Scriptures spoke such words about Him, then why wouldn’t it be better for us to say that these were spoken humanly, in order to avoid the evil arising from blasphemy? OTHER. As if from the objection of the Christ-fighters. He who wept, they say, became frightened and became sad, how will he be God by nature? For such things are characteristic of people. Rebuttal to this. Who raised Lazarus from the dead and turned water into wine, and gave sight to a man blind from birth, who said? “I and the Father are one” 977 - how could he not be God by nature? For what is perfect is seen as the works of God. And if you are tempted by what was said and done humanly, then why did not what He did and said in a Godly manner bring you any benefit? And again: if thanks to these [statements] you descend to the point of thinking something derogatory about the Son of God, then why don’t you rise through these to think great and sublime things? For he who humbly said and endured this, said and did this sublimely, like God. Therefore, the incarnation and dispensation of [His] coming in the flesh was a necessary reason for something human to happen [to Him]. OTHER. May the economy of [Christ's] coming in the flesh and the image (ὁ τρόπος) of His incarnation be examined, and may some of those who hear what the divine Scriptures speak very humanly about the Savior be far from any temptation. So, the purpose of the Word incarnate was to clearly show that He truly took on flesh and became man, without ceasing to be God (for it was impossible to save the human race otherwise); but so that no one who hears that He was flesh would think that the immutable Word of God has been transformed (μεταπεποιῆσθαι) and has become something different from what It was from the beginning, He, of necessity, either utters words befitting a person, or shows deeds for which we can only be obliged to the Divine (πράγματα θεότητι μόνῃ χρεωστούμενα), so that both are considered together. So, when He needed to clearly show that He is truly a man and not a ghost, He hastens to show this with the help of the former. For He, as sinless and unable to sin, rightly rejects sin, but allows the body and humanity to endure what is natural to Him, as proof that He really and truly took on flesh and became man, according to Scripture 978. Since, as we have already said above, it was fitting for Him and the One who began to show Himself as God in the flesh, He from time to time performs deeds befitting God and says to those who see Him: “If you do not believe Me, because, therefore, you see Me as a man, believe in My work: that you may understand and believe, for I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.” 979. So, what was said and done magnificently shows the Savior as God. Conversely, what was said and done humanly shows Him to be truly human. For this is the meaning of the sacrament. OTHER. Opponents of Christ from everywhere appear to be shameless and aiming to vainly swear at the Son of God. For, hearing Him saying: “I and the Father are one” 980, they foolishly do not believe [Him] and try to interpret what was said in a different sense, not allowing the Son to be one with the Father, but trying to distort what was well and truly said. On the other hand, finding in the Gospels what He suffered or said as a man - such as, for example, that He cried, was sad, and the like - they do not attribute this to humanity, but, applying it directly to the Word, they bring it as proof that the one who endures this is not God, so that He, who is its Creator, is also counted among creation. So, either allow the Son to be one with the Father, and then you will not find the Word, who is in identity with the Father, in Himself - since He is the Word - weeping or grieving, or giving in to fear; or - if you do not believe Him, who said that He is one with His Father, - do not believe when He says that He was saddened. And then you will be with the unbelieving Jews, not accepting at all anything that the Savior said. OTHER. Paul says nowhere about the Son of God: “He who was in the image of God was not equal to God by admiration, but He diminished the form of a servant and received Himself in the image of a man.”981 So, the Word of God became man; It did not come into man, as [it was] in the prophets, but truly it became the same as we are, except for sin alone. Consequently, on the one hand, He is God, since He is the Word of the Father and the Property of His nature, and on the other hand, He is a man, since there is flesh, as it is written, and He put on our flesh. So, since this is the nature of faith regarding our Savior Christ, then we should distinguish the sayings spoken about Him according to the meaning appropriate to [them]. And when you hear: “I and the Father are one,” contemplate [mentally] the one Divinity of the Father and the Son and think of the Son as God, existing from the essence of the Father. And when, on the other hand, you hear about Him that He cried, was saddened or afraid, or began to suffer 982, think - after the fact that He is God - that He is a man, and apply to humanity what applies to him. After all, since He received a mortal and corruptible body, subject to such passions, He, of necessity, along with the flesh, assimilates to Himself its passions, and when it endures them, He Himself is called the one who endures. Thus, we say that He was crucified and died, although this happened to the flesh, and not to the Word Himself, for It is impassive and immortal. Consequently, we will Orthodoxy understand what has been said, referring to the Divinity what is fitting for God, and to the flesh - that which is said for its sake or, as it were, on its behalf due to the natural movements existing in us, which the implicit and silent whisper of the mind, possessing feeling, draws out from the depths through the language. OTHER, in narrative form. God’s Word became man for no other reason, but in order to somehow mix and co-dissolve all of His own with our weaknesses, to give strength to human nature and transform it according to His strength. So, when He appears to those who fear death and says: “If it is possible, let this cup pass from Me” 983, you also think that the flesh that fears death, being carried by the Word, has learned to no longer experience this [fear]. After all, He said to the Father: “Not as I will, but as You will.”984. For He Himself, since He is the Word and God, feared death, but sought to complete the economy. For this was the will of the Father. He also has a reluctance to die, since the flesh naturally resists death. So, teaching humanity no longer to think about what is inherent to it, but to seek the will of God, He, as a man, says: “Not as I will, but as You will.” That is why he adds: “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” 985. OTHER. If we find saints so despising death that they rather seem to pass into life when certain circumstances call them to suffer, and they are truly courageous because they have within them Christ, who dwells, as it is written, in the inner man 986 , then how does [Himself] fear death who teaches others to despise death? Isn’t it absurd to marvel at the courage of those who have the Word within them, but to think about the Word Itself that It is so weak and not courageous that it is overcome by fear and the disease of cowardice? OTHER. By His own death the Savior abolished death. And just as death would not have been abolished if He had not died, so [the situation is] in relation to each of the passions of the flesh. For if He had not been afraid, then [our] nature would not have become free from timidity; if she had not been saddened, she would never have gotten rid of sadness; If I hadn’t been embarrassed, I would never have gotten out of this. And, applying this logic to each case in which Christ behaved as a human being, you will find that the carnal passions in Him were set in motion, not to gain the upper hand, as in us, but to be set in motion and abolished by the power of the Word dwelling in the flesh, while nature is transformed into the best. OTHER, on [words]: “My God, My God” 987. We boast in the cross of our Savior Christ and believe that we are saved thanks to the fact that God’s Word became man for our sake and was crucified for us, in order to abolish the death that is in us, and to raise us up again with Himself, transforming us from corruption into incorruption. So, it was fitting for Him, even in the very hour of suffering, to show that He had truly become a man, and not only imagined as a man. And for this reason He uttered the words befitting a man: “My God, My God, have you forsaken Me forever?” 988; and “Let the cup pass from me” 989. By His deeds, He who was crucified for us and endured so much on the cross for the salvation of us all showed that He is God. For He hid the rays of the sun and clothed the sky in darkness, tore apart the stones and the earth, and the veil of the church, and besides this He performed other great [signs] in order to reveal Himself as God incarnate. And so, those who crucified Him and previously laughed at Him, seeing what was accomplished in a divine way, say: “Truly this is the Son of God” 990. OTHER. God's Word became man not in order to again do everything and speak as God before becoming man, but so that often and for the benefit of the economy [performed] with the flesh, he could say something like a man. And since this is the meaning of the sacrament [of the Incarnation], is it not absurd to be tempted by hearing Him sometimes speaking in human terms? For He speaks as a man, but He also speaks as God, having the power to do both. So, in human terms He says: “Today My soul is troubled” 991; and, on the other hand, in a divine way: “The imam will lay down the region, and the imam will again accept the region” 992. To be embarrassed is the own passion of the flesh, but to have an area to put and an area to accept again is a matter of the power of the Word. So, when He says something in a divine way, although He appears to be a man, we are not tempted, realizing that for our sake He became a man and speaks in a manner befitting a man. OTHER. Because of His great and immeasurable love for mankind, God’s Word mixed Himself with us: not in order to transform Himself into our [state], for He is immutable and does not know change, but in order to mix us with Himself and transform us into His. For just as we, having received Him because of His dwelling in the flesh, henceforth have all of His, - after all, we are called sons and gods, although not by nature, like Him, but by grace - so He, when He mixed with us, becoming a man, bore our infirmities 993, and just as the one who suffered is considered to have taken upon Himself, together with the received church [the body], and what is in it, so that the carnal passions might be They are also mortified in us, striving for the likeness of Christ, who for our sake took into Himself. OTHER. God says nowhere through St. prophets, reproaching certain sins of those from among the [sons of] Israel, that they “have led their children through the fire that I did not command them, but have thought lower in my heart” 994. And also, as if [addressing] Jerusalem: “And she made me sad in all of them” 995. And also, regarding other vices: “Am I not angry because of these things,” says the Lord, “or will my soul not take revenge on such people? " 996 So, what will the anti-Christ fighters do, when it is obvious to everyone that it was the Word of God who spoke such things in the prophets? Will they attribute soul and heart to Him, will they say that He is possessed by the passion of sorrow and anger, so that the Word of God, which exists above all created nature and is as great as the Father, does not seem to have any advantage over man? But perhaps they will still shy away from this, and will say that this was spoken by the Word figuratively (τροπικώς) and out of condescension [to the level of perception of those who hear]. So, if in the case when the Son of God says such things before His coming, we preserve for Him the dignity due to Him, affirming that He is above sorrow, and anger, and in general any passion, even if for the benefit of [people] and took on the appearance of undergoing such, then is it not absurd, when He became a man and came down [to earth] in the flesh undergoing these passions, to deny Him that, saying such, He remains dispassionate, whereas the flesh, which He took on for our sake along with everything inherent in it by nature, is endowed with this by nature? It is common for humanity to cry, be embarrassed, be upset, be disgusted by death, and similar experiences. Isa.43:5. We do not find the words “Μὴ φοβοῦ, ὅτι μετὰ σοῦ εἰμι” or similar ones addressed to Abraham in the Bible. Similar words (μὴ φοβοῦ μετὰ σοῦ γάρ εἰμι) are addressed to Isaac in Genesis 26:24: “And the Lord appeared to him that night and said: I am the God of Abraham thy father; fear not, for he is with thee. am." 1 Corinthians 15:14. Words from the Creed. Jer.7:31. The first part of the sentence is different in the original text of this verse, but the expression “to pass through the fire” is found many times elsewhere in Scripture. These words are also present in the Russian Synodal translation of the almost identical verse of Jer. 32:35 (corresponding to Jer. 39:35 of the Septuagint): “They built high places for Baal in the valley of the sons of Hinnom, to bring their sons and daughters through the fire in honor of Molech, which I did not command them, and it did not enter my mind.” Perhaps St. Cyril, like the Russian translators, used the version of Scripture in which they were, and, as can be observed with him in other cases, he mixed two similar verses. You might be interested in: