Search

Cilj je rada obraditi dva veoma važna antropološka pojma svetog apostola Pavla i kroz dijalektiku odnosa »Prvog Adama« i »Posljednjeg Adama« (1 Kor 15,45), kao i »staroga čovjeka« i »novoga čovjeka« (Ef 4,22 – 24; Kol 3,9-10), ukazati da je kršćanska antropologija u svojoj ontologiji izravno povezana s ontologijom samoga Boga. Po nauku apostola Pavla neophodno je odbaciti sa sebe staroga čovjeka i obući se u novoga, jer je čovjek pozvan od Boga u novi život u Crkvi. Apostol Pavao naglašava da je Prvi Adam sazdan kao »duša živa«, međutim punoću svojeg bića i života kao i ostvarenje svojega konačnog cilja nalazi u osobi Posljednjeg Adama – »duha koji oživljuje«, tj. u otajstvu Bogočovjeka Krista. Novost novozavjetne antropologije u odnosu na starogrčku i starozavjetnu, koju nam donosi apostol Pavao, jest posljednji, Novi Adam, koji je začetnik novog čovječanstva i života., The aim of this paper is to analyse two very important anthropological notions of the Apostle Paul and to try to point out, through the dialectic relationship of the »First« and the »Last« Adam (1 Cor 15:45), as well as the »old« and the »new« human being (Eph. 4, 22 – 24; Kol. 3, 9-10), that the Christian anthropology in its ontology is directly linked to the ontology of God himself. According to the teaching of the Apostle Paul, it is necessary to reject the old human being and put on the new human being, because the human being is called by God to a new life in the Church. The apostle Paul points out that the first Adam, created as a »living soul«, found the fullness of his being and life and the realization of his ultimate goal in the person of last Adam – »the life-giving Spirit«, i.e. in the Mystery of God that became the Human Being, Christ. The novelty of the New Testament anthropology, in relation to the ancient Greek and Old-Testamentary, brought by the Apostle Paul, is the Last, New Adam, who is the originator of the new humanity and life.

Autor polazi od prikaza mesijanskih očekivanja u židovstvu Isusova vremena na temelju dostupnih izvora kako bi se u tom kontekstu bolje shvatilo mesijanske tipologije kojima se Marko služi za prikaz Isusova mesijanskog identiteta i poslanja. Posebnu pažnju poklanja naslovu (1,1) i proslovu Markova evanđelja (1,2-13), gdje Isus biva predstavljen naslovima »Krist« i »Sin Božji« od kojih drugi izražava Isusov božanski identitet i kao takav bitno određuje Isusov mesijanski identitet i narav njegova poslanja. U nastavku se autor posebno fokusira na mjesta gdje se ta dva naslova ponovno susreću (Petrova vjeroispovijest i preobraženje, Isusov odgovor velikom svećeniku, izrugivanje svećeničkih poglavara i satnikova vjeroispovijest) da bi istražio njihov odnos i značenje. Uz naslove »Krist« i »Sin Božji«, autor se pita i o značenju ostalih mesijanskih naslova (Sin Čovječji, Prorok, Kralj Izraelov/židovski, Sin Davidov) za Isusov mesijanski identitet i zaključuje da svi oni u kontekstu Markova evanđelja bivaju semantički radikalno modificirani kako bi se mogli primijeniti na Isusa kojemu je kao Sinu Božjemu jedini kriterij mesijanstva put Gospodnji., The author starts with an overview of messianic expectations in Judaism of Jesus’ time on the basis of available sources, so that this context might serve to better understand messianic typologies that have been used by Mark in order to present Jesus’ messianic identity and mission. The author gives special attention to the title (1:1) and the prologue of Mark’s Gospel (1:2-13), which present Jesus with titles of Christ and the Son of God. The latter title expresses Jesus’ divine identity and, as such, essentially determines Jesus’ messianic identity and the nature of his mission. In continuation the author has specially focused on those places where the two titles reappear (Peter’s confession and transfiguration; Jesus’ reply to the High Priest; mocking of priestly leadership and centurion’s confession) in order to explore their relationship and meaning. Beside the titles »Christ« and the »Son of God«, the author also explores the meaning of other messianic titles (the Son of Man, the Prophet, the King of Israel/Jews, the Son of David) for Jesus’ messianic identity and concludes that all of them have been semantically radically modified within the context of Mark’s Gospel so that they might be applied to Jesus to whom, as the Son of God, the only criterion of messianism is the way of the Lord.

Po svojem sadržaju i strukturi Lk 4,16-30 bi se mogao svrstati u razne kategorije: od kraljevsko-davidovskog, proročko-mojsijevskog do mesijanskog teksta. Svaka od tih kategorija ima svoje utemeljene argumente. Međutim, na temelju analize Lukina teksta, to jest, posebno na temelju analiziranja riječi koje se koriste u odabranom Lukinu ulomku, on bi prije svega pripadao mesijanskim ulomcima. Da se radi o mesijanskom tekstu pokazuje programatski značaj ulomka, zatim širi kontekst, a to je Lk 4,14-44. Citirajući proroka Iz 61,1-2, Luka je aludirao na Mesiju, posebno stoga što dva kumranska teksta povezuju Iz 61,1-2 s Mesijom. No, najjaču argumentativnu snagu da se radi o mesijanskom tekstu ima korištenje riječi ..., koja u Lukinu evanđelju ima kristološko značenje. Još nekoliko izričaja u Lk 4,16-30 ima kristoloških konotacija ... Kad se pogledaju svi izričaji koje Luka koristi u 4,16-30, opravdano se može tvrditi da je to, iako se direktno ne koristi riječ Krist, jasan kristološki ulomak., Looking at the content and structure of Luke 4:16-30, the text may be placed in various categories: from royal-Davidic, to prophetic-Mosaic to messianic. There are reasonable arguments for each of these. However, based on an analysis that is specifically based on the words used in the passage, the text will be seen as belonging, first and foremost, to the messianic category. The arguments that support the messianic character of the text include the following: the programmatic significance of the passage; the broader context (i.e., Luke4:14-44); the quoting of Is 61:1-2 (especially as two Qumran texts link Is 61:1-2 with the Messiah). However, the strongest argument that this is a messianic text is the use of the word ... which in Luke’s gospel has a Christological meaning. There are also a number of other expressions in Luke 4:16-30 that have Christological connotations ... Looking at all the expressions used in Luke 4:16-30, it may be said that the passage, although it does not directly use the word »Christ«, is clearly Christological.

Starozavjetni mesijanski naslovi odigrali su značajnu ulogu u nastanku novozavjetne kristologije. Pavao dijeli većinu tih naslova s drugim novozavjetnim autorima, što ne znači da s njima u potpunosti dijeli i njihov sadržaj. To proizlazi iz same činjenice da se on ne bavi životom i učenjem Isusa iz Nazareta i odnosom niskosti njegove zemaljske egzistencije prema uzvišenosti mesijanskog poslanja, već je sav usredotočen na Isusovu smrt i uskrsnuće. Još k tome, Pavao nema pred očima samo Isusovu smrt nego smrt na križu. Štoviše, križ postaje središtem njegova evanđelja, što i ideji starozavjetnog mesijanizma daje posve novo obilježje. Članak se bavi upravo tim pitanjem odnosa Pavlove teologije križa i ideje mesijanizma. Točnije, kako je u Pavlovim zajednicama od ranokršćanske vjere da je Bog Isusa, optužena za mesijanizam i osuđena na sramotnu smrt na križu, učinio Mesijom i Spasiteljem, došlo do vjere u Isusa kao Gospodina i Sina Božjega? Usto, važnu ulogu u nastanku specifične Pavlove kristologije ima i ideja preegzistentnoga Sina Božjega, odnosno njezin odnos prema ideji mesijanizma i teologiji križa., The Old Testament messianic titles played a significant role in the creation of the New Testament Christology. Same as the other New Testament authors, Paul also uses most of these titles, but that does not mean that what he means by them is entirely the same as for the other New Testament authors. The reason for this is because Paul is not writing about the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and about the relationship between the lowliness of his earthly existence and the highness of his messianic mission, but instead he is entirely focused on Jesus’ death and resurrection. Furthermore, Paul is not simply considering Jesus’s death, but his death on the cross. More precisely, the cross became the centre of his gospel, which also gives an entirely new characteristic to the Old Testament idea of messianism. The article discusses precisely this issue of the relationship between Paul’s theology of the cross and the idea of messianism. More specifically, how Paul’s communities, starting from the early Christian faith that Godmade Jesus, although convicted of messianism and a shameful death on the cross, the Messiah and the Saviour, came to believe in Jesus as the Lord and the Son of God. Besides this, an important role in the emergence of the specifically Pauline Christology has the idea of the pre-existing Son of God, i.e. its relationship with the idea of messianism and theology of the cross.

Pavlova lamentacija u Rim 9,1-5 sadrži osam pozitivnih vrijednosti koje Izrael posjeduje trajno: on je Božji narod Izrael zato što je njihovo posinstvo, slava, savezi (diathēkai), zakonodavstvo, bogoštovlje, obećanja, patrijarsi, Krist po obiteljskoj i nacionalnoj pripadnosti. Unatoč tužnoj činjenici da u vrijeme pisanja Poslanice Rimljanima većina Židova odbija povjerovati u Isusa Nazarećanina kao Mesiju, Apostol u Rim 11,26-29 najavljuje da će se cijeli Izrael spasiti tako što će Bog oprostiti grijehe svome narodu i obnoviti nikada prekinuti savez s njima. Ova dva odlomka autor egzegetski istražuje u kontekstu cijele Poslanice Rimljanima te posebno »traktata o Židovima« u poglavljima 9 - 11. U trećem dijelu iznosi pregled novijih crkvenih dokumenata Drugoga vatikanskog sabora (LG 15; NAE 4) i poslijesaborskih dokumenata učiteljstva od 1974. do 2001. godine u kojima se potreba dijaloga s današnjim Židovima izvodi iz Rim 9-11., Paul's lamentation in Rom 9:1-5 contains eight positive qualities durably present in the Jewish people as a religious and ethnic community: they are God's chosen people Israel because theirs are the adoption, the glory, the covenants (diathēkai), the giving of the law (nomothesia), the worship, the promises, the patriarchs and the Messiah as member of a family and ethnic community. Despite the fact that in the time when Paul was writing his Letter to the Romans the majority of the Jews refused to believe in Jesus as the Messiah, the Apostle points out in 11:25-29 that all of Israel will be saved because God will forgive the sins of his people and restore his covenant with Israel which in fact was never abandoned from his side. The author explores exegetically these two pericopes within the context of the entire Letter to the Romans, especially within the Traktat über die Juden of Rom 9 – 11 (expression of D. Zeller and Fr. Mussner). In his third part the author depicts the teaching of the Second Vatican Council (LG15; NAE 4) on dialogue of Christians with Jews, as people living now, based on Rom 9-11. He quotes documents and guidelines of the Catholic Magisterium from 1974 to 2001 on Christian-Jewish dialogue.

Navedeni pojmovi iz naslova upućuju nas na činjenicu da se službe u Crkvi promatraju kroz prizmu služenja. Oni koji u Crkvi imaju vodeće uloge pozvani su, djelujući in persona Christi, svoje djelovanje suobličiti Kristovom, »koji nije došao da mu služe, nego da on služi« (Mt 20,28). Služenje, ako ga se želi kristovski živjeti, dovodi do egzistencijalnih kriza, koje su uvjetovane vanjskim i unutarnjim čimbenicima, s obzirom da nije uvijek moguće udovoljiti ljudskim željama i u isto vrijeme ostati vjeran Kristu i njegovoj Crkvi. Prezbiteri služe Kristu, Crkvi i zajednici vjernika. Munus docendi, sanctificandi et regendi jesu temeljne odrednice služenja i predstojništva zaređenih službenika. Poučavanje, posvećivanje i predvođenje zajednice neodvojivi su jedno od drugoga i to je imanentno samom pojmu prezbiterat. Iako je u prvom redu službenik Riječi prezbiter ne zanemaruje niti zapostavlja druge oblike služenja, sve do žrtvovanja sebe, jer djeluje in persona Christi. U tom duhu mudro i razborito pokušava povezati mnoštvo karizmi u jedan duh, dajući prednost karizmama koje više koriste zajednici. Autor navodi i nekoliko razloga za ustanovljenje prezbiterata. Analizom biblijskih tekstova dolazi do zaključka da su oni bili pastiri i čuvari Crkve te kao takvi služe Bogu i predvode zajednicu vjernika. Na kraju autor predlaže teolozima da što preciznije definiraju službu prezbitera kako bi samom prezbiteru bilo jasno što mu je činiti, čemu dati prednost u djelovanju, kako ostati vjeran Kristu i Evanđelju i ne zanemariti potrebe današnjega čovjeka, te ne iznevjeriti mnogobrojna očekivanja onih kojima je poslan., The notions noted in the title direct us towards the fact that ministries of the Church are observed through the prism of serving. They, who have a leading role in the Church are called up to act in the name of Christ and to shape their actions according to Christ's »who did not come to be served but to serve (Mt 20:28). Serving, if we wish to live it as Christ did leads to existential crises conditioned by external and internal factor because it is not always possible to satisfy human desires and at the same time remain faithful to Christ and His Church. Priests (presbyters) serve Christ, the church and the community of the faithful. Munus docendi, santificandi et regendi are the fundamental determinants of (he ministry and leadership of ordained ministers. Teaching, dedicating and leading the community are inseparable from each other and this is imminent to the actual notion of a priest. Although the minister of the Word, the priest does not neglect other forms of serving, to the point of sacrificing himself because he is acting in the name of Christ. In that spirit, he wisely and rationally endeavours to tie a multitude of charismas into one spirit, giving advantage to that charisma that best serves the community. The author notes several reasons why the notion of priesthood was founded. With an analysis of Biblical texts, he arrives at the conclusion that presbyters were the pastors and minders of the Church and as such, they served God and lead the community of the faithful. In conclusion the author suggests that theologians should be more precise in defining the ministry of presbyters so that presbyters themselves can be assured of what he should do, where his priorities should be, how to remain faithful to Christ and the Gospel and not to neglect the needs of contemporary man and not to forsake the numerous expectations of those for whom he was sent.