ПАЖЊА - Хришћанске вести - ПОТРЕБАН ПРЕВОД!

[Дијана.]

За Бога, сви су добродошли

 

Живимо у свету преплављеном предрасудама. Према нашој деци се понекад у школи односе као према аутсајдерима. Наше пријатеље колеге на послу понекад посматрају као да су им туђи. Наша породица се понекад осећа недобродошлом чак и у суседству где живимо годинама. Осећај да ниси добродошао може бити обогаљујућа стварност која присиљава многе породице да остану изоловане и одвојене и од најближег људског бића. На крају крајева, стални осећај недобродошлице може да нас превари да поверујемо да нас ни Бог неће дочекати добродошлицом у Својој Цркви. Али ми ипак долазимо јер у свом срцу знамо да нам Бог може помоћи, кад би само могао да погледа мимо наших прегрешења.

 

Ја замишљам да су управо ово била осећања десеторице људи који су пришли Исусу Христу по исцељење. У причи о десет губаваца, сведоци смо деловања Божје бескрајне љубави на животима десеторице одбачених од друштва. Десеторица људи који нису били добродошли код својих суграђана дошли су Богу, молећи за милост, и све их је излечио Исус Христос. Десеторици који су били довољно храбри да „се искључе“ од речи других и приђу Богу дата је нова прилика за живот.

 

Није било важно што су ову десеторицу други „угледнији“ грађани избегавали. Није било важно што су ова десеторица били дошљаци пре него локални и домаћи. Сваког од њих исцелио је Бог. Али из ове приче увиђамо још једну, а важнију поуку. ЈЕДНОГА човека, који се вратио да се поклони Богу, „препородио је“ и поздравио с поштовањем Исус. А он беше странац! Ово само служи да вам покаже – СВИ су за Бога добродошли... али неће сви издвојити времена да Му принесу слављење и хвалу. А од којих си ти?

 

Ова порука се налази на насловној страници Поука. Погледајте!

[Иван Ивковић]

A Story of Two Visions

 

 

In the Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee, we hear the story of two visions. Each man had a vision, but only one man had the proper vision. Each man was in Church, but only one man had the vision to see God. Each man was a sinner, but only one man had the vision to see their own sins. One man could see the sins of others, but it was the other man who went away justified. It was the Publican who had the vision to see his own heart needed to be healed by God. It was the Publican who had the vision to beg God for mercy.

 

Life is about vision; not physical vision, but vision of the heart. The Pharisee, the righteous man who obeyed the law, used his vision; but he could only see the sins of others, even thanking God that he was not like all those other sinners. The Publican, a man of sin, also used his vision; but he was able to see his own sin. Two visions; one saved the sinner, while the other condemned the righteous.

 

You also have vision? Do you use your vision to see the sins of others, or do you use your vision to see your own sins? Do you use your vision to look into your heart and beg God for mercy, or do you use your vision to look into the lives of others, and thank God you’re not like “all those other” sinners? You also have two visions; one will save you, while the other will condemn you.

 

Which vision will you use?

 

http://www.liveanewlifeinchrist.org/2015/01/a-story-of-two-visions.html

[Дијана.]

@, Tek sad vidjeh ovo (vision je na eng. i vid kao culna sposobnost, i nacin vidjenja/posmatranja, i vizija...)

 

Прича о два начина посматрања 

 

У  параболи о митару и фарисеју, чујемо причу о две способности виђења. И један и други су имали вид, али је само један имао исправан начин посматрања. И један и други су припадали Цркви, али је само један имао вид да види Бога. И један и други су били грешници, али само је један имао вид да види своје сопствене грехе. Један је могао видети грехе других, али други отиде оправдан. Митар (цариник) је онај који је имао вид да види да његовом сопственом срцу  треба излечење од Бога. Митар је био тај који је имао виђење да моли Бога за милост.

 

У животу је све у начину посматрања; не физички вид, него вид срца. Фарисеј, праведник који се држао закона, користио је своје виђење; али он је једино могао видети грехе других, чак захваљујући Богу што није као сви други грешници. Цариник, човек грешник, исто је користио своје виђење; али он је био у стању да види своју сопствену грешност. Два посматрања; једно спасе грешника, а друго осуди праведника.

 

И ви имате способност виђења? Да ли је користите да видите грехе других, или користите свој вид да видите сопствене грехе? Да ли користите вид да гледате у своје срце и молите Бога за милост, или користите вид да гледате у животе других, и захваљујете Богу што нисте као „сви они други“ грешници? И вама су дата два начина посматрања, један ће вас спасти, а други ће вас осудити.

 

Који начин посматрања ћете одабрати? 

[Dijasporka]

Mogu da prevodim tekstove sa italijanskog...

[Иван Ивковић]

Church as an Opportunity Rather than an Obligation

 

With the coming of Great Lent in February, it brings along with it, the sense of obligation to God and His Church. During the weeks of Great Lent, the Church invites us to increase our daily prayer, increase our fasting, increase our reading of the Holy Scriptures, increase our assistance to the poor, and increase our participation in the Divine Services of our Church. To assist us in responding to these invitations, the Church provides us with daily fasting guidelines, daily Scripture readings, daily Lenten prayers for the home, and additional, almost daily services in the Church.

 

All this increased spiritual involvement is supposed to draw us closer to God, but oftentimes the actual result is that we are pushed further from God. We end up at the end of Great Lent, after weeks of hearing the Church invite us to “dig deeper into our souls” and discover the great love that God has for us, feeling exhausted rather than refreshed. We feel limited by the Church rather than free. We feel as if the Church has beaten us down rather than lifted us up. Why do we feel this way?

 

After twenty centuries of guiding her faithful through Great Lent, the Church’s way of life has been met with a sense of obligation rather than opportunity. The way of life of the Church has been seen by most as forced upon the people rather than welcomed by them, and the result has been for most faithful to reject the way of life of the Church. We choose freedom rather than obligation.

 

You will hear many faithful complain that the Church expects too much of her people, but in reality the Church INVITES her faithful to the journey that is Great Lent. You will hear many faithful complain that the Church limits our life too much during Great Lent, when in reality the Church FREES us from the slavery of the flesh and worldly passions. You will hear many faithful complain they “have” to go to Church, when in reality attending the Divine Services FREELY is the only genuine worship of God. You will hear many of the faithful speak of obligation to the Church, when in reality the entire way of life of the Church is an OPPORTUNITY to draw closer to God.

 

Fasting is an OPPORTUNITY to rededicate your entire body to God.

Reading the Holy Scriptures is an OPPORTUNITY to hear God speaking to your heart.

Prayer is an OPPORTUNITY for you to speak to God.

Helping the poor is an OPPORTUNITY to share the love you have for God with others.

Attending Divine Services is an OPPORTUNITY to leave the world behind and enter Heaven.

Great Lent is an OPPORTUNITY rather than an obligation.

 

I invite you to welcome the OPPORTUNITY of Great Lent this year and draw closer to God. You might even thank me for it later.

[Viktor Ljvovic]

Islamska drzava je u Libiji 3. juna kidnapovala 86 hriscana,a medju njima je 12 zena i dece. Strahuje se da im s ne desi isto sto i  hriscanima koji su stradali od iste te organizacije.

 

http://www.katholisches.info/2015/06/08/islamischer-staat-entfuehrte-86-christen-in-libyen-bist-du-moslem/

[Kaludjerovic Sreten]

Islamska drzava je u Libiji 3. juna kidnapovala 86 hriscana,a medju njima je 12 zena i dece. Strahuje se da im s ne desi isto sto i  hriscanima koji su stradali od iste te organizacije.

 

http://www.katholisches.info/2015/06/08/islamischer-staat-entfuehrte-86-christen-in-libyen-bist-du-moslem/

to je jedan od dokaza da je Islam religija mira ... e niko ne zna ko su oni i na sta spremni kad im se ukaze prilika.

[Viktor Ljvovic]

Novi predsednik Poljske podigao pricesce sa zemlje.

 

Prosle nedelje u Varsavi, na praznik Tijelovo, misu je sluzio kardinal Kazimir Nycz. Posle osvecenja darova, jedna osvecena hostija je oduvana sa oltara  snaznim vetrom i pala je na zemlju. Svi ugledni gosti su posmatrali, a novoizabrani predsednik Andrej Duda je brzo odreagovao: skocio, podigao osvecenu hostiju i odneo je do kardinala. Narod je odsusevljen predsednickim postupkom.

 

 

 

http://www.katholisches.info/2015/06/09/polens-neuer-staatspraesident-hebt-den-herrn-vom-boden-auf/

[ivona]

evo ovo je jedan sjajan clanak o homoseksualnosti sagledanoj na  jedan potkovan bogosloski način, pa ako laos zanima da prevedemo

 

Another Jesus

By Fr. Lawrence Farley in The Sounding

Apr 03, 2015 ⋅ 44 Comment(s) ⋅ Tags: Arian, Christian, Different Christ, Ecumenical, Ecumenism, Homosexual,Jesus Christ, PreachingE

• 

One is tempted to hearken to the siren song of our relativistic and pluralistic society and conclude that all Christian churches believe pretty much the same thing.  There are differences, of course—some have bishops and some don’t; some consider the Eucharist to be the true Body and Blood of Christ, and some don’t.  And, of course, Catholics have the Pope.  But apart from these incidentals (as the world regards them), all people calling themselves Christians share the same faith and worship the same Jesus.  As long as we confess the same Christ, let’s not sweat the small stuff.

This approach was not the one taken by St. Paul.  Consider, for example, his approach to his Judaizing opponents.  These were men who followed him about, slandering his character, denigrating his apostolic authority.  In the churches of Galatia, they were preaching that to be saved, one needed more than simply baptism and faith in Christ.  One also needed circumcision—in other words, one needed to become a Jew in order to really be a Christian.  The Galatians were impressed with their arguments, and although they had not taken the definitive step of becoming circumcised, they did begin to otherwise live as Jews, keeping a Jewish calendar of festal days, months, seasons, and years (Galatians 4:10).  These same teachers were dogging Paul’s steps elsewhere, and making trouble for him in Corinth.

Here we must be clear: both the Judaizers and the people to whom they were preaching were baptized Christians, members of the church, Christians who confessed Christ.  According to our modern model, should not Paul have simply accepted them and agreed to disagree about “the small stuff”?  After all, they both worshiped the same Jesus.

Not according to Paul.  To the Galatians, he wrote that such “Christians” were preaching “a different Gospel” (Galatians 1:6).  They were “severed from Christ”, “fallen away from grace” (Galatians 5:4).  They were preaching “another Jesus” than the one Paul preached, and offered “another Spirit” in their counterfeit baptisms (2 Corinthians 11:4).  All this, just because some Christians insisted on circumcision as necessary for salvation!  So much for first-century ecumenism.

But it was not just in the first century that the Church “sweated the small stuff” and declared that such deviance from the purity of the faith constituted apostasy from Christianity.  In the fourth century, St. Athanasius also insisted that his foes were proclaiming another Jesus.  Both the presbyter Arius and the deacon Athanasius confessed that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God, and both could sign on to some sort of the faith in the Holy Trinity.  But they differed on the tiny detail of what the title “Son of God” actually meant. Athanasius said that it meant the full and undiluted deity of Jesus; Arius said that it simply meant that Jesus was created by God as the first and noblest of His creatures, and that it was through the Word that God made the rest of His creation.  Couldn’t they agree to disagree?  After all, both considered themselves Christians, and both could confess Jesus as the Son of God.  Even the emperor Constantine initially considered the dispute a merely verbal one and thought they should simply chill out and not fight over such minutiae.  But for Athanasius, the dispute was not over minutiae, but over the basics, and he declared that deviance in this matter of Christology meant that Arius had forfeited any real claim to be considered a Christian.  Accordingly, Athanasius called him and his followers not “Christians”, but “Arians”.  The label contained Athanasius’ denunciation of Arius as no real Christian at all.  Arius, of course, considered himself a Christian, but it was just this label that Athanasius denied him.

We come now to the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.  The front line has now shifted from Christology to anthropology, and we now debate matters of gender.  In the fourth century, the question was, “Is Jesus the Word as fully divine as the Father?”  In our day, the question is, “Is homosexual activity blessable or damnable?  Is it something to be celebrated and accepted, or to be repented of?  Is it legitimate as part of God’s will for His creatures, or is it an abomination?”  Or, put another way, “Does Jesus bless homosexual activity?” Our news casts and Facebook posts are full of the cultural warfare in North America as people give varied and opposing answers to this question.  Some churches and denominations are answering in the affirmative, and saying, “Yes, Jesus does bless homosexual activity and finds nothing wrong with it.”  Other churches are answering, “No, Jesus does not bless homosexual activity, but calls His disciples to repent of it as sinful.”

Of course, other questions are asked in this long and complicated discussion of gender, just as other questions could have been asked about the nature of Jewish Law in the first century, and the Christological debate in the fourth century.  Yes, it’s all very complicated.  But the basic questions still remain:  Does Jesus insist that His disciples be circumcised in order to be saved?  Is Jesus less divine than the Father?  Does Jesus bless homosexual activity?  Answering the first two questions in the affirmative resulted in the Church declaring that you were not a Christian in the first and in the fourth centuries.  I suggest that answering the third question in the affirmative results in forfeiting a credible claim to be a Christian now.  For in all three cases, the person answering in the affirmative is thereby proclaiming another Jesus.

Think back, for example, to the heresy of the Nicolaitans, a “Christian” movement in Asia in the late first century which tolerated eating food offered to idols and fornication.  Small stuff, right?  After all, there is no reason to think that their Christology was weird.  Like St. John, they also confessed Jesus as the Son of God.  But Christ Himself, speaking in the Book of Revelation, declared that He “hated” the works of the Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6), and would “war against them” with the sword of His mouth (Revelation 2:15-16)—i.e., pronounce judgment against them.  The Nicolaitans, of course, did not think that they were doing anything wrong, and thought that Jesus had no problem with people who ate food offered to idols or with casual sex.  But actually, Jesus did have a problem.  The real problem was that the Nicolaitans were proclaiming another Jesus.

Those welcoming the gay cultural steam-roller also proclaim another Jesus—one who blesses any sexual union as long as the partners love each other.  This Jesus presumably would have no time for the prescriptions in the Law which denounce homosexuality as “an abomination” (Leviticus 21:13); nor would He thank St. Paul for writing in his epistle that homosexual behaviour was “against nature” (Romans 1:26), and that practicing homosexuals were among those who would not inherit the Kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).  Instead, His anger and indignation would be turned on those who denounce such behaviour and refuse to celebrate it.  This Jesus is a nice Jesus, harmless, sweet, emphatically open, inclusive, and non-judgmental.  There is nothing sinful that would provoke His condemnation, with the exception, of course, of fundamentalists and people from the American Religious Right.  This Jesus is, of course, at odds with the mindset of the early Church and the Fathers; and He would have nothing but derision for the traditional stand which condemns homosexual behaviour.  This Jesus is therefore radically incompatible with the Jesus the Church has been proclaiming for two millennia, and is at least as different from Him as were the Nicolaitan Jesus and the Judaizers’ Jesus of the first century, and the Arian Jesus of the fourth.  If the Church values its traditional past at all, it should regard groups which confess this new Jesus as it once regarded the Judaizers, the Nicolaitans, and the Arians—namely as non-Christian groups.

If it did, this would have immediate consequences for the Church’s ecumenical conversations.  Groups that preach another Jesus and another Gospel are rightly regarded by us now as heretically non-Christian, and  thus the Orthodox Church does not have an official ecumenical dialogue with Mormons (that I know of) or with Jehovah’s Witnesses.  Our message to them is simply “Repent and believe”; we do not meet with them for wine and cheese to discuss Christology at conferences or produce scholarly papers at symposia about the thought of Joseph Smith or Charles Taze Russell.  In the same way, any church group or denomination which officially commits itself to blessing homosexual activity or gay marriage is preaching another Jesus, and Orthodoxy should also suspend any official ecumenical dialogue with them.  We badly misread the homosexual debate if we regard it simply as another moral issue (like abortion), and a debate over whether or not a particular activity is sinful.  It is more basic than that.  It is not simply a moral issue; it is a Christological one.  If we continue ecumenical dialogue with groups that bless homosexuality, at best we are wasting our breath.  At worst we are adding credibility to what Paul called “another gospel”.

The problem, of course, is a perennial one.  In every age, there are Christians who compromise with the standards of their age, and accept the world’s values as their own.  These people always call themselves “Christians” and denounce those who disagree with them as rigid and wrong.  But the Christ whom they preach is not the real Christ.  They in fact misrepresent Him, and preach a Christ made up by themselves, one who conforms more closely to their own secular age.  St. Paul, St. John, and St. Athanasius pulled the mask off them in their day, and denied them the label of “Christian”.  It is time that we Orthodox follow in their footsteps now and do the same to those who offer a counterfeit faith and another Jesus.

http://myocn.net/another-jesus/

[Viktor Ljvovic]

Prva muslimanska (alavitska) dzamija posvecena Mariji (Bogorodici) u sirijskom, nekada krstaskom, gradu Tartusu.

 

U vecinski alavitskom Tartusu je izgradjena prva dzamija posvecena Djevi Mariji. Bejrutske dnevne ''Daily Star'' novine obavestavaju da ce se nova dzamija zvati Al-Sayyida Maryam . Sirijski ministar vere i kulture Mohammad Abdel-Sattar al-Sayyed je istakao da je nova dzamija znak: ''otvaranja Islama, uprkos ekstremistickim aberacijama''.

 

http://www.katholisches.info/2015/06/10/in-syrischer-kreuzfahrerstadt-tartus-erste-alawitische-marien-moschee-der-welt/

[Иван Ивковић]

Има ли неко вољан и способан за превођење Богородичника са руског на српски језик? Јесте већи посао али би много значило. Мислим да до сада није превођен.

[Иван Ивковић]

Ово је лепо па ако неко има снаге, воље и времена... : https://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/28418-middle-east-christians-%D1%85%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%88%D1%9B%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%B8-%D1%81%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%9A%D0%B5%D0%BC-%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%83/#entry1319725 

[Иван Ивковић]

The definitive guide to Trolls

 

 

https://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/13703-the-definitive-guide-to-trolls/

[Иван Ивковић]

Да ли је неко расположен за превођење кратких тумачења сестре Васе (од по десетак реченица) која се односе на свакодневна читања из Светог Писма? Ако јесте нека ми се јави на пп да се договоримо нешто.

Ми већ почели. Овако би то требало да изгледа: https://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/29982-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%84%D0%B0-%D1%81%D0%B0-%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BC-%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%B8-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D1%81%D1%80%D0%BF%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC/page-10#entry1359830.

[Paradoksologija]

Prijavljujem se za prevod. Nemoj da mi je neko uzeo, ovo mi je jedan od plaćenih poslova, ne razonoda, te nije svejedno hoću li se baviti gratis prevodom ovde ili profi prevodom elsewhere

 

Šaljem prevod sutra.