They even gather an indignant community for the funeral of the director's talent and write inspirational obituaries.
Hegumen Spiridon (Balandin)
The first thing that came to my mind at the end of the screening was not the present, but a possible future on the screen. There is no more anti-clericalism in the film than in Voinovich's Moscow 2042. The difference is that Father Zvezdonii is still a comical grotesque, and Zvyagintsev's "Vladyka" is already terrible, such is the evolution of the image.
Since 1986 (the time when Moscow 2042 was written), anti-Christianity has become more real, we see it no longer guessingly, as if through a cloudy glass, not through the prophetic intuitions of ancient saints, but we ourselves stand on the threshold, we are almost witnesses.
And what is revealed to the eyes is truly scary. Close your eyes with your hands? As children. Or hide your head in the sand? Like an ostrich. Fuck me! I'd rather live inside my own myth that I've been building for so many years. Yes, it won't.
Zvyagintsev prophesies. THIS is the main thing in the film, and not panoramas of the majestic North, not vodka from throats a , not the relationship of a lawyer with his mistress, not corruption and not the general "realism" of what is happening.
The main thing is the coming hopelessness of the kingdom of Antichrist. And Zvyagintsev masterfully portrays him. Yes, the film smells bad, but it's not the corpse of the director's talent that stinks, no. This is the smell of sulfur, the smell of our future, the smell of the beast.
If we compare “Leviathan” by Zvyagintsev and “Antichrist” by Trier, then the latter will lose, because in it there is only one name from the son of the devil, while “Leviathan” SHOWS him.
In the film there is, as it were, a bishop, as it were priests, as it were a temple, but the Church is not visible, therefore, there is no anti-clericalism. The “lord” of Zvyagintsev is the servant of Leviathan, and not of Christ, the time is shown when the one who restrains is taken from this world (2 Thess.2, 7).
The man's question: "Where is your merciful God?" and other “godless” – the space of a cry from the Cross opened up by the director: “Either, Or! Lama Savahfani?” (Matthew 27:46). All these things lie on the surface, moreover, they are placed in the very title of the work. Let me remind you that Leviathan on the pages of the Bible is a symbol of the devil.
Undoubtedly, the film is a serious warning to the clergy: “Be careful how dangerous you walk” (Eph. 5:15). Zvyagintsev shows the finale of the path, which in recent decades has been diligently lined with good intentions.
The end does not justify the means - this is heresy. The endless search for sponsors, flirting with the authorities for the sake of bonuses from local and federal budgets, commerce that has become the talk of the town ... We built, built and, finally, built (c). But it does look like it!
There are crosses and domes in the film, clergy, a brilliant sermon - everything is there, there is no God. It is not Zvyagintsev who should be vilified for a godless or anti-Russian film, but to look at ourselves before it is too late. Re-read Gogol, Dostoevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin, finally.
They will object to me: but the director himself claims that he depicted the present. Want mathematical precision from an artist? What if it's even worse? And our present is already poorly distinguishable from Leviathan's future? Let us recall the words of Hieromonk Seraphim (Rose): “Now it is later than we think. The apocalypse is already happening."
What other issue does Leviathan raise? The problem of understanding the phrase of the Apostle Paul that there is no power except from God (Rom. 13:1). Its meaning is that if power is not from God, then it is not power.
Everything is simple. To humbly, meekly submit to any rubbish, surrounded by state symbols, to an official because he is an official - in the words of the Apostle Paul there is no and never was such a thought, this is some form of man-godism, Chinese (by the way, it is relevant today), and not Christianity.
I believe that today it is not too late, and Zvyagintsev shows a possible option, and not something that will certainly happen. But Nineveh should repent, the time is right for that.
Or or. lama savakhfani
Or or! lama savahfani? (Eloi, Eloi! lammah savahthani?) One of the sayings of Jesus on the cross, quoted from Ps 21:2: "My God, My God! why did You leave Me?" (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34). Heb. this phrase sounds like: "Eli, Eli, lama azavtani." see Words on the Cross.
Brockhaus Bible Encyclopedia. F. Rinecker, G. Mayer. 1994 .
See what "Or, Or. Lama Savahfani" is in other dictionaries:
Or or! lama savahfani? (Mat.27:46) My God! My God! why did you leave me? the words in Syriac spoken by the Savior on the cross and exactly corresponding to the Hebrew text of Psalm 21:1 ...
OR- (Or (Eli) - one of the names of God (ancient Hebrew); see also ELOIM) Your Starry Pilate stretched out his deaf hands forever. Or, Or, lama savakhfani, Let go into the sunset. (“Or, Or, lama savakhfani” - the words of Jesus Christ, meaning: “My God, My God, why are You ...
Leading to Golgotha, icon, c. 1497 ... Wikipedia
ELOIM- (distorted Eloi (aram. My God); see also OR) Like a wind over a field, as if the First bell is a name. Oh, how tenderly in the night of love Invoke Elohim! // Elohim! Elohim! It's midnight in the world, and the winds have died down. The groom goes to the bride. (an allusion to the call of God by Jesus… Proper name in Russian poetry of the XX century: a dictionary of personal names
Bible. Old and New Testaments. Synodal translation. Bible encyclopedia arch. Nicephorus.
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice: Or, Or! lama savahfani? that is: My God, My God! why did you leave me? Ps.21:2 Mar.15:34 ... Bible. Old and New Testaments. Synodal translation. Bible encyclopedia arch. Nicephorus.
- “What our Savior saw from the cross”, James Tissot The words of Jesus on the Cross seven short gospel phrases, pronounce ... Wikipedia
PILATE- (bibl.; Pontius P. (1st century) Roman procurator in Palestine, out of cowardice who agreed to the execution of Jesus Christ) Your star Pilate stretched out his deaf hands forever. Or, Or, lama savakhfani, Let go into the sunset. Ec916 17 (I.254); And the machine gunner is low-browed ... ... Proper name in Russian poetry of the XX century: a dictionary of personal names
Saint Matthew - chapter 27, verse 46- New Testament, Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice: Or, Or! lama savahfani? that is: My God, My God! why did you leave me? : ஐ Here you are, father, have you ever doubted?... I beg your pardon, but it seems ... Lem's world - dictionary and guide
Ila- Ela 1) The son of King Baasha and his heir among the people of Israel, 930 BC; killed by Zambri two years after the accession, when during the feast Zamri seized the throne (1 Kings 16 6 ff.) 2) The father of King Hosea (2 Kings 15:30) Or, Or, lama ... ... Dictionary of Biblical Names
| Favorites | Correspondence | Calendar | Charter | Audio | |
| Name of God | Answers | divine services | School | Video | |
| Library | Sermons | The mystery of St. John | Poetry | A photo | |
| Publicism | Discussions | Bible | Story | Photobooks | |
| Apostasy | Evidence | Icons | Poems of Father Oleg | Questions | |
| Lives of the Saints | Guestbook | Confession | Archive | site `s map | |
| Prayers | Father's word | New Martyrs | Contacts | ||
Question #2325About the words of the Lord spoken from the Cross: "Eloi! Eloi! lama savakhfani?"
Basil , T, Ukraine
02/11/2006Thank God!
When Jesus was dying on the cross, he shouted: "Eloi, Eloi, le (a) ma savakhtani." In the Bible, for some reason, these words are translated "My God, my God! Why did you leave me?". I have these questions:
1) Why did the Jews not understand these words, if not because they were spoken in the native language of Jesus, which they did not understand?
2) How could God leave God, was the Trinity divided, or did Jesus cease to be God?
3) How do you feel about this interpretation of these words: "Lele, Lele, lam you left (stay)", which for every Western Ukrainian means: "Father, Father, (Dear, Dear) only You remained (stay)"? In this case, there is no contradiction. And if so, then Jesus in the body was precisely the representative of the Japhetic nation, which was the ancestors of the Rus. After all, His ancestor David was just fair-haired, which is what stood out among the Semitic population.
4) If I am right in question 3, is it not maliciously brought a wrong translation in the Gospel to raise doubts about the divine nature of Christ?Father Oleg Molenko's answer:
For more than 2000 years, the Church of Christ has stood on earth. For almost the same number of years, people who believe in Christ have been reading these words and believing what is written in the Gospel. Not a single holy father of the Church has ever had the slightest doubt about the correct translation from Aramaic of these words of Christ. The Fathers explained to us the meaning of these words. Let's start with them exactly. These words of Christ are quoted by two Evangelists, Matthew and Mark:
Matthew 27:
46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, Either, Or! lama savahfani? that is: My God, My God! why did you leave me?
47 Some of those standing there, hearing this, said, "He is calling Elijah."Mk.15:
34 At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, Eloi! Eloi! lama savahfani? which means: My God! My God! why did you leave me?
35 Some of those who were standing there, when they heard it, said, “Behold, he is calling Elijah.”We see that two different Evangelists have almost identical words. The only difference is that in Matthew Christ's address to God the Father was "Or", and in Mark "Eloi". Another word "lama" in Matthew is written through one "m", and in Mark through two "lamma". The slight difference in the indication of 9 o'clock can be ignored.
I am not a connoisseur of the Aramaic and Hebrew languages, which is why I will answer not as an expert, but listening to my heart.
It is interesting to note that in the Church Slavonic language of Matthew these words sound like this: "Ili, Ori, lima savakhfani", and for Mark: "eloi, eloi, lama safakhfani". As you can see, Mark's "Lama" in Church Slavonic is exactly the same as Matthew's "Lama" in Russian (that is, with one "m"). But Matthew in Church Slavonic sounds "lima".
So, there is a problem of different sounding of the same words in meaning, and not a difference in the meaning of similar words. The translations made from Aramaic into Church Slavonic and Russian, which are completely identical, fully confirm this idea.
The pair "lima "lama" in Church Slavonic and its translation "lama" "lamma" in Russian indicate a different dialect of the same language. At the same time, everyone understands the same meaning with different pronunciations of the same word. Evangelist Matthew was a Jew and wrote his gospel for the Jews, and Mark was not a Jew and wrote the gospel for the Gentiles.Therefore, it is not surprising that each of them wrote down these words in Aramaic in a slightly different sound (dialect).They translate these words gave the same.
The question arises: why was it necessary to cite these words of Christ in their Aramaic sound? After all, in other places where the words of Christ are given, they are used immediately according to their meaning in the translation. This use of one's own speech, firstly, emphasized the importance of these words. And secondly, the reader was preparing for verse 47 in Matthew and verse 35 in Mark, which deals with Elijah. Word reader "My God! My God! Why did You leave Me?" it would not be clear why, on the basis of these words, some of those standing there said, "Behold, he calls Elijah." It should be noted that not all those who were there thought so, but only a few. It often happens in life that people standing next to each other hear the same words in different ways, being deceived by the similarity of their sound. The words "Either, Or" (My God, My God), some in their sound could well be mistaken for invoking the name of Elijah. Evangelists refute this erroneous version of the call of Elijah, giving the exact meaning of these words. The error with the invocation of Elijah also had psychological roots. The ancient Jews knew and believed that before the arrival of their Messiah, Elijah the Thesbite must come:
Mk.9:
11 And they asked him, How do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?
12 He answered them and said: True, Elijah must come first and arrange everything; and the Son of Man, as it is written of Him, must suffer much and be humiliated.
13 But I tell you that Elijah also came and did to him as they wished, as it is written about him."From this passage we see that the coming of Elijah was taught by the Jewish scribes themselves. We also see that the Lord confirmed this teaching, but attributed the coming of Elijah the Thesbite to His second coming, and with the words “Elijah came”, confirmed that in His first coming, His Forerunner was Saint John the Baptist who came in the spirit and power of Elijah.
The enemies of Christ (Sadducees, Pharisees, scribes and high priests) knew well these words of Christ about Elijah. Therefore, while mocking the divinity and messianism of Christ, they, at the same time, mocked His teaching about the coming of Elijah, especially in the person of John the Baptist. They also from this side (they say, where is Elijah after all, this is John) wanted to undermine people's faith in the Divine origin of Christ.
This will answer your question 1) .
It remains to find out the technical detail that we see as the difference in the sound and spelling of the words "Or" and "Eloi". Again, these words have the same meaning. I believe that our Lord Jesus Christ, who spoke Aramaic, pronounced the words "My God, My God" precisely as "Either, Or." The Evangelist Mark, who wrote his Gospel in ancient Greek, cited in it a more grammatically correct version of these words, i.e. not in Aramaic, but in Hebrew "Eloi, Eloi."
2) The theological interpretation of this place by the holy fathers clearly teaches us that, on the one hand, God the Father did not leave God the Son Jesus Christ on the Cross, for the Holy Trinity is inseparable. On the other hand, if God had not abandoned Jesus Christ, He, being God, could not have died. This antinomy is resolved in the following way: God the Father diminished His co-presence in Jesus Christ to such an extent that it became intangible for the Son of Man. The same humiliation was done by the Son of God, leaving his human nature to die on the Cross for the redemption of the human race. How this happened is a great and incomprehensible mystery for us, before which we should only be in awe.
3) Based on all of the above, I completely reject your interpretation of the gospel words quoted and consider it an absurd absurdity.
The human origin of Jesus Christ is clearly indicated by two Evangelists, Matthew and Luke.
Matthew 1:
1 Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.
2 Abraham begat Isaac; Isaac begat Jacob; Jacob begat Judah and his brothers;
3 Judah begat Perez and Zerah by Tamar; Perez begat Esrom; Esrom begat Aram;
4 Aram begat Aminadab; Aminadab begat Nahshon; Nahshon begat Salmon;
5 Salmon begat Boaz by Rahava; Boaz begat Obed by Ruth; Obed begat Jesse;
6 Jesse begat David the king; David the king gave birth to Solomon from the former after Uriah;
7 Solomon begat Rehoboam; Rehoboam begat Abijah; Abijah begat Asa;
8 Asa begat Jehoshaphat; Jehoshaphat begat Jehoram; Jehoram begat Uzziah;
9 Uzziah begat Jotham; Jotham begat Ahaz; Ahaz begat Hezekiah;
10 Hezekiah begat Manasseh; Manasseh begat Amon; Amon begat Josiah;
11 Josiah begat Jehoiakim; Joachim begat Jeconiah and his brothers before moving to Babylon.
12 After they had migrated to Babylon, Jeconiah begat Salathiel; Salafiel begat Zerubbabel;
13 Zerubbabel begat Abihu; Abihu begat Eliakim; Eliakim begat Azor;
14 Azor begat Zadok; Zadok begat Achim; Achim begat Elihu;
15 Elihu begat Eleazar; Eleazar begat Matthan; Matthan begat Jacob;
16 Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom was born Jesus, called Christ."Luke 3:
23 Jesus, beginning his ministry, was about thirty years old, and was, as they thought, the Son of Joseph, Elijah,
24 Matfatov, Levin, Melkhiev, Iannaev, Iosifov,
25 Mattafiev, Amosov, Naumov, Eslimov, Naggeev,
26 Maafov, Mattafiev, Semeiev, Iosifov, Judas,
27 Ioannanov, Risaev, Zorovavelev, Salafiev, Niriev,
28 Melkhiev, Addiev, Kosamov, Elmodamov, Irov,
29 Iosiev, Eliezerov, Iorimov, Matfatov, Levin,
30 Simeonov, Judas, Iosifov, Ionanov, Eliakimov,
31 Meleaev, Mainanov, Mattafaev, Nafanov, Davidov,
32 Jesse, Ovid, Boozov, Salmonov, Naassonov,
33 Aminadavov, Aramov, Esromov, Faresov, Judin,
34 Yakovlev, Isaakov, Avraamov, Farrin, Nakhorov,
35 Serukhov, Ragavov, Falekov, Everov, Salin,
36 Cainanov, Arfaksadov, Simov, Noev, Lamekhov,
37 Methuselah, Enoch, Jared, Maleleil, Cainan,
38 Enosov, Sethov, Adamov, God.From these (human origin) genealogies of Christ we clearly see that according to the flesh He was of Jewish (Semitic) origin "Son of Abraham" and by additions through foreign wives He was of Japhetic origin "Son of David". That is why there is no need to prove it with any fabrication about the interpretation of His words.
Question 4) disappears by itself. The version of a malicious translation of Scripture for the Church is not only erroneous, but also extremely harmful, for it undermines faith in the divine origin of the word of God, and hence faith in the divine nature of Christ.
Father, tell me what the words of our Lord Jesus Christ crucified on the cross meant “Either, Or! Lama Savahfani!” i.e. My God, My God! Why did you leave me? (Matthew 27:46).
Hieromonk Job (Gumerov) answers:
Our Lord Jesus Christ spoke a verse from Psalm 21 (21:2), replacing the Hebrew word Azabtani(from the verb Azab- leave, leave) into Aramaic of equal value savakhfani. Since this psalm contains a prophecy about the Messiah, the Savior wanted the blinded Jews, who continued to blaspheme Him even on the Cross, to show once again that He is precisely the Christ foretold by the prophets. Everything that happened then on Golgotha was predicted with impressive details in this psalm by the prophet David: All who see me swear at me, speak with their lips, nodding their heads: "He trusted in the Lord; let him deliver him, let him save him, if he is pleasing to Him"(21:8-9). The Holy Evangelist tells that the Jews gathered for the execution slandered the Crucified with the same words: trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he pleases him(Matthew 27:43). The psalmist also prophesies that the Messiah will be crucified by embittered people who have risen against Him: For the dogs surrounded me, the crowd of the wicked surrounded me, they pierced my hands and my feet. All my bones could be counted; and they look and make a spectacle out of me(21:17-18). One more accuracy of prophetic vision is amazing: they divide my garments among themselves, and they cast lots for my clothes(21:19). According to the gospel: The soldiers, when they crucified Jesus, took His clothes and divided them into four parts, each soldier in a part, and a tunic; the tunic was not sewn, but all woven from above. So they said to each other: Let us not tear him apart, but let us cast lots for him.(John 19:23-24).
The words spoken on the Cross do not give grounds to talk about the feeling of loneliness and the God-forsakenness of the Crucified One. At the moment of the greatest event in world history - the Atonement - the Savior, who took upon himself the sins of the world, pronounces these words on behalf of all mankind. This is how the Holy Fathers explain this verse. “This is the Savior speaking on behalf of mankind, and in order to put an end to the oath and turn the Father's face to us, he asks the Father to look down, adding our need to Himself; because we were rejected and abandoned for the crime of Adam, but now we are received and saved” (St. Athanasius the Great).
Jesus' last words before his death « Or, Or, lama savakhfani!» - still raise many perplexed questions. However, scientists-specialists who are directly related to the problem eschew it. First of all, linguists. As for historians, they have little interest in questions of theology. The comment-translation of the Holy Scriptures does not completely clarify the situation. Here, on the one hand, theologians still interpret the words of Jesus, but at the same time do not explain how and from what language they received such a translation. After all, it is believed that Jesus spoke either in Hebrew, or in Greek, or in the mythical ancient Aramaic language. What kind of language was it, from which even today we are unable to make an authentic translation?
So, « Or, Or, lama savakhfani!»
It was these words of the Son of Heaven, spoken before his last breath, that His followers remembered and then passed on to their descendants. But without knowing the language, we cannot be sure of the exact meaning of Jesus' words. Synodal edition gives its interpretation: « My God, my God, why did You leave me!» .
But on what basis was this translation made? What are the reasons to trust him? Maybe the early scribes of the Bible knew something that was not customary to talk about in the "open access"? On the one hand, without understanding the language, no one can be sure of the accuracy of the translation. On the other hand, the commentary of the synodal publication cited above does not mean anything by itself. And the one who made it, perhaps forever carried this secret to another world.
There are many questions. But we seem to have found the answer to the main one!
We know that the early texts of the Bible, and the Gospels, in particular, contained Slavic terms and meanings that have not yet been "recognized" by theologians and translators. They will probably not be recognized as long as the Church and historical science hold on to the erroneous notion that the biblical stories are ancient. Indeed, can the Bible contain Slavic, including Russian, names and geographical names of localities? After all, the events described in it took place long before the appearance of the Slavs on the historical stage!
Here we will not delve into the Russian-Slavic terminology prescribed in the Bible. Despite the long period of time separating the gospel events from our days, even in a very late synodal edition, such Slavic traces are still preserved. Today, each of us has the right to independently study this issue. It suffices here for us to consider one of these places.
As already mentioned, the last saying of Christ is known to us only from the text of the synodal translation of the Bible. In the Gospel of Matthew (27:46), for example, it says - "... and about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, Or or! lama savakhfani?", that is: " My God, My God! why did you leave me?» . We also know that the synodal version of the Holy Scriptures is considered very late. It is for this reason that we cannot be completely sure of the authenticity of the transfer of the meaning of the "original".
It is alleged that the translation of the Gospel texts into Russian was made from a certain "Greek primary source", which, however, has not survived to this day. Translation " widely used not only in the Orthodox Church, but also in other Christian denominations that use Russian for preaching: Russian Baptists, Evangelists, Pentecostals, Adventists, Charismatics, Catholics, as well as in the para-Christian denomination - Mormons».
But there is another opinion, built on a new approach and understanding of historical events. The early versions of the texts of the Bible not only contained Slavic traces, but also the so-called signs of "winter and the north", which in later translations then "disappeared somewhere". We are sure that the events described in both parts of the Bible really took place, including on the territory of historical Russia. At least, numerous studies of the authors indicated by us in the links clearly speak in favor of this idea.
Therefore, we admit that the first Slavic scribes and commentators of the Holy Scriptures did not need any translation at all. They read and understood the gospel text as if it were their own. It was then, after a while, that the phrase of Jesus, which exists in both (Matthew and Mark) Gospels, "transformed beyond recognition."
Indeed, the exclamation of Jesus, as described in the synodal Bible, is very vague: « Or or! lama savakhfani ! However, if you try to read it, so to speak, with a "Slavic eye", all incomprehensibility is resolved in the most miraculous way.
Moreover, as it turns out, this does not constitute any difficulties. It is enough to arrange the "incomprehensible" words correctly, decomposing them into "syllables". In this case, the saying of Jesus will sound more meaningful: “ Ala, Ala! I am Wahfani!". Here we just divided the "foggy" word lama on the la and ma . And the word savakhfani , respectively, on Xia and Wahfani . The whole meaning of the text will become clear when we take into account those minor literal changes to which it was subjected in the process of repeated rewriting.
In the "foggy" word lama , turns out, contains two Slavic words - whether and me, which we will discuss below. Similarly, in the "incomprehensible" to us savakhfani hidden two words: Xia and vartani . Originally existing in the word Wahfani slavic letter R has been replaced by the letter X . The next letter F(fita), both earlier and now it is voiced in two ways - not only as F but also how T.In this way, savakhfani this is glory. Xia vartani .
This is where the difficulties with translating the “untranslatable” text end. As for the first two words of the saying ( Or or!), then this is undoubtedly an appeal to God. This conclusion is fully shared by the Church.
As you can see, restoring the meaning of Jesus' dying cry is not particularly difficult. It remains to translate the restored Church Slavonic text into modern Russian. Consider all options in sequence:
As we can see, the modern interpretation of the saying of Christ is fully consistent with the Synodal Gospels of Matthew and Mark. However, unlike the synodal version, we have restored the “incomprehensible” New Testament text in its original Slavic sound. And no matter how strange it may sound now, our final conclusion, but it has the most decisive reasons to be considered correct:
1. Jesus communicated with the Heavenly Father in the Slavic language.
2. Those who were near the place of execution listened to and understood Christ, who spoke with them in the same language, Slavonic.
3. The translation of the "difficult" saying of Christ is not difficult. Almost unchanged, this saying is still preserved even in the latest synodal version of the Bible!
4. Despite all of the above, scientists, however, are in no hurry to study the problem and bring their academic conclusion to the general discussion.
Finally, we can only compare the syntax pro-Slavic version with modern Russian and give an interpretation of individual words.
Church Slavonic Xia is an ancient pronoun myself , which today we do not hesitate to add to verbs ( turned away→turned away Xia ). But in the old days it written separately and placed at the beginning, before the verb: Xia turned away = turned away Xia . Pronoun me ancient ancestors pronounced and written as me .
And here is the union whether , what is well known , is still equivalent or : did whether you are? = or you did it?
Summarize. It turns out that Christ did not cry out at all in some unknown “ancient Hebrew” or other mysterious language. On the contrary, this language is still well known to many language specialists, for example, linguists. Given the above, there is no reason to doubt that not only the last words of Jesus sounded in Slavonic. His gospel sermons, his communication with his students, friends, and relatives were probably pro-Slavic in nature.
We hope that the old biblical sayings will now become clearer and closer not only to linguists, but also to simple zealots of the language, and people professing Christian ideals, at least in part of the last death cry of the man Jesus from Nazareth, who gained spiritual flesh Christ and revealed to the world what He is " My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased».
The same words are spoken by David in Psalms (21:2) - “ My God! My God! why did you leave me? Far from saving my word my cry”, which, in our opinion, once again indicates that most of the books of the Old Testament described post-Christian events!
In Mark (15:34) - “At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice: Eloi! Eloi! lamma savahfani? - What means: My God! My God! why did you leave me?". In the Gospel of Luke (23:46), the same episode of the death of the Son is described as follows: “Jesus, having exclaimed with a loud voice, said: Father! into your hands I commit my spirit. And having said this, he gave up his spirit". There are other distorted voicing options, for example, - “ Ate, Ate Lama shabaktani" or "Jewish sounding" in the form - "Eli, Eli, lama azavtani".
“The first synodal translation” (19th century) is a well-established term denoting the translation of the books of Holy Scripture into Russian, approved by the Holy Governing Synod for home reading. For worship in the Russian Orthodox Church, a translation of the Bible into Church Slavonic is used, the so-called Elizabethan Bible.
In our opinion, there are also earlier (ancient) texts in which the text of the saying of Jesus was somewhat different.
