By Father Nikolay Afanasiev
1. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world: if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father, but is of the world” (1 John 2:15-16). Both of these sentences speak of the attitude toward the cosmos. God loved the world, and man is obliged not to love the world, because if he loves the world, then the love of the Father is not there. The attitudes of God and man toward the world do not coincide. What He has loved, man is obliged not to love. Can we reconcile this contradiction, if it really is a contradiction? However we solve the problem with the texts from John, it is undeniable that the Gospel of John and the First Epistle of John belong to the same author. Even if this is not the case, in the epistle itself we find a statement analogous to John 3:16: “In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him” (1 John 4:9). That is why we must resolutely abandon the attempt to resolve the contradiction before us by attributing the statements to different, though very similar in spirit, authors. But perhaps we do not have a contradiction here, but two different understandings of the cosmos? We cannot completely exclude such an assumption a priori on the basis of the fact that these different concepts occur in the same author. It is possible that these different concepts of the cosmos were dictated not only by the unstable content of the concept of the cosmos, but also by the fact that the cosmos itself did not remain the same throughout history.
The attitude towards the world presupposes a certain teaching about the world, which conditions the attitude towards it. In order to clarify the teaching about the world in Holy Scripture, we can take two paths. We can subject the very concept of the cosmos that we encounter in Scripture to analysis. Such an analysis, which has already been made more than once, could not give us a final answer regarding the New Testament teaching about the cosmos. Even if we take the expressions in which the term cosmos occurs in their closest context, and not separately, the general context will still escape us. That is why I prefer another path. The teaching about the cosmos that we find in the New Testament writings belongs to the Church. By this I do not mean that the New Testament writings are a creation of the Church, but that they have passed through the prism of the church consciousness. That is why we cannot clarify their true meaning without taking into account the church consciousness. Moreover, we cannot separate Christ from the Church and the Church from Christ. We can determine the doctrine of the cosmos and the attitude towards it only starting from the Church. If we manage to clarify what concept of the cosmos the early Church had and what its attitude towards it was, then we will be able to easily determine the meaning of the New Testament expressions in which the concept of cosmos is found.
2. The eschatological character of the early church consciousness is recognized today by almost all researchers of early Christianity. That is why I can refrain from dwelling on this in detail, although such statements do not always coincide with each other, nor with the conclusions drawn from them.
In the history of the genesis of the Church, there are three moments that are closely linked to each other: the promise or pledge of Christ to create the Church (Matt. 16:18), the establishment of the Church at the Last Supper, and its actualization on the day of Pentecost. All these three moments are united in the fact that the beginning of the Church and its existence lie in Christ. At the moment of the descent of the Spirit during the first Eucharistic assembly, the twelve become the Church of God in Christ. During Christ’s earthly life, the community of the twelve was not a Church. They were constantly with Christ, but they were not in Christ, as they become on the day of the descent of the Spirit. The Church was actualized when “He, the Spirit of truth, (Who) will guide you into all truth” came (John 16:13). He acts in Christ, because he draws from Him (John 16:14). The Spirit descended upon Christ at the time of baptism, and He descended again upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost. In the Spirit and through the Spirit they became in Christ, they became the Church. The beginning of the existence of the Church marked the beginning of a new eon, that is, Christ Himself in Himself discovers the messianic era in the history of God’s economy. The new eon enters the world in the person of Christ and is actualized in the community of Christians. In the first sermon of St. Apostle Peter after Pentecost, the awareness of Christians that the Church belongs to the last days is expressed with complete clarity.
“And behold, in the last days, says God, I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh…” (Acts 2:17). While Christ was not yet glorified, the Spirit had not been sent to those who believed in Him. Through the Spirit and in the Spirit, believers became the Church, and the Church became the place of the Spirit’s action, in Whom and through Whom it lives. The Spirit dwells on those who belong to the new aeon, since to be in Christ means to belong to the new aeon, like Christ. This pledge is given in the Church, and through the Church it is given to everyone who dwells in it, since it is given not only in the Church, but also to the Church.
The Jewish consciousness from the time of Christ perceived the Messianic era as a new aeon, regardless of whether this era was connected with a cosmic catastrophe or not. Even if the cosmic catastrophe in the world did not happen, then according to the Jewish consciousness the new aeon means the end of the old one. The paradox of Christian consciousness consisted in the recognition of the simultaneous existence of two aeons. The beginning of the existence of the Church did not mean the termination of the old aeon. The history of mankind turned out to be very complicated due to the existence of the new aeon, but nevertheless there was no break in it, since the new aeon exists not outside of it, but within itself.
The coexistence of the two aeons should have raised with particular force in the Church the question of their relationship. If the old aeon had interrupted its existence with the beginning of the new aeon, then this question would not have existed, just as it does not exist in Jewish consciousness. The question of the relationship between the aeons should in turn have raised the question of the cosmos itself, but not in general, but from the moment of the actualization of the Church in the world. This was not a purely theoretical question that could have been resolved, but could also have been left unanswered. This was a question of the entire life and behavior of Christians. Everyone who enters the Church becomes a new creature through the Spirit, and the one who has entered it abides in it through the Spirit and in the Spirit. Like the Church, each of its members belongs to the new aeon and lives the life of this aeon. He enters the Church by faith and abides in it in faith in the Son of God. His abiding in the Church is a service to God. “But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23). Faith and the worship of the Father based on faith is possible only through the Son in spirit and in truth. In the Spirit, not spiritually, in truth, not truly. Faith and truth are eschatological concepts, possible only in the new aeon. And yet, becoming a new creature, the believer in Christ continues to abide in the old man. Like the Church, through which and in which he belongs to the new aeon, he remains in the world and lives not only in the Church, but also in the world. The paradox of the Church’s position in the world is matched by the paradox of the position of each of its members. The Christian cannot be taken outside the Church, in himself, because outside the Church he would belong only to the world. Therefore, his position in the world and his attitude towards it are determined by the position of the Church in the world.
3. In the Hebrew writings of the Old Testament we do not find a term to designate the entire world. Instead, the Old Testament writings use descriptive expressions: heaven and earth. “Lord, you are God, who made heaven and earth and the sea and all that is in them” (Acts 4:24). This formula is used several times in the New Testament writings (cf. Acts 14:15; Rev. 10:6). It bears an unmistakable Old Testament imprint. If the world is perceived in its parts, it does not follow that in the Old Testament there was no concept of the world as a whole. The integrity of the world did not arise from the world itself, as in Greek philosophy, but from the idea of the creation of the world by God. As a creation of God’s hands, the world represents a whole, in which the Old Testament consciousness distinguished its separate parts. As a whole, the world includes humanity, without which its separate parts could not constitute the whole. Humanity was included in the concept of the world, but did not represent its part in the strict sense of the word, but a goal for which the world was created. We find this idea as early as the book of Genesis, in which the creation of the world ends with the creation of man. This idea received its further development in Jewish literature. The center of the world is the earth, but not in itself, but as a place where man resides. The land of Canaan is located at the center of the world, but again not in itself, but as the place where Israel resides.
The center of Israel is the temple with its sacred rock, which represents the highest point on the earth’s surface, from which the creation of the world began, including the creation of humanity, of which Israel itself is the leader. This is why the history of Israel is located at the center of world history. This teaching about the world finds its conclusion in the idea that the world was created by God for Israel, which is why its history is the history of the world.
When the term cosmos penetrated the Jewish consciousness through the Greek-speaking Jews, it was perceived not in its Greek content, but was adapted to the Old Testament understanding of the world. Denoting the world as a whole, “cosmos” meant, first of all, humanity, for whom the world was the place of its residence in space and time. Outside of humanity, the world is unthinkable, just as humanity is unthinkable outside of the world. The unity of the world postulates the unity of humanity. “He made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined the times and the boundaries of their habitation” (Acts 17:26). In these words of the Holy Apostle Paul, addressed to the Greek world, the Old Testament understanding of the cosmos was to a significant extent adapted to the Stoic understanding. For the Jewish consciousness, the unity of the human race was empirically violated. On the one hand – Israel, on the other – all the rest of humanity. Among all the nations, only Israel was the people of God with whom God made a covenant. The election of Israel was a unilateral and free act of God. God became the God and King of his people, who were obliged to preserve true worship and knowledge of God. “And lest you lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun, the moon, and the stars (and) all the host of heaven, and be driven to worship them and serve them, for the Lord your God has set them apart from all the peoples under the whole heaven. But the Lord (God) took you and brought you out of the iron furnace, out of Egypt, to be a people for his inheritance, as it is this day” (Deut. 4:19-20). The knowledge of God and the worship of God were contained in the Torah given to the chosen people. Israel was the people of the Torah. The Torah was the light with which the chosen people shone and which led them to salvation. The opposite of Israel were all other nations – because they did not possess the Torah and dwelt in darkness. This darkness was not complete, because through Israel the Torah shone for all nations. The author of the Apocalypse of Ezra, assuming that the Torah was destroyed at the capture of Jerusalem, speaks in his despair:
“For the world lies in darkness, and its inhabitants have no light, because Your law is burned up, so that no one knows what You have done, or what they should do” (3 Ezra 14:20-21).
From these words, the cosmic meaning of the Law, which is connected with the cosmic meaning of Israel, arises perfectly clearly. By virtue of this, the difference between Israel and the Gentiles was like the difference between light and darkness.
The division of humanity into two parts was in a certain sense a division of the world into two parts, since the world is very closely connected with the human race. We do not know whether the term cosmos was used to refer to humanity outside and without Israel, but judging by the fact that such a usage was common in the New Testament writings, we can assume that it already existed in Jewish literature. However, the distinction between the parts of the cosmos was not fundamental, since the fate of both parts of the world was death. The law did not overcome death, but only promised a long and prosperous life in the Promised Land: “Therefore keep all (His) commandments which I command you today, that you may (be alive), and be strong, and go in and possess the land which you are crossing (over the Jordan) to possess; and that you may live long in the land which the Lord swore to your fathers to give to them and to their descendants, a land flowing with milk and honey” (Deut. 11:8-9). When in apocalyptic literature the perspective has expanded and gone beyond the limits of earthly life, then the Torah has become the source not only of long life on earth, but also of eternal life. Through the resurrection, all Israel will participate in it. “And at that time Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation until that same time; and at that time your people shall be delivered, every one who shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to everlasting contempt and shame. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever” (Dan. 12:1-3). The brightness of Israel, and then only of the righteous through the Law, will be the brightness of the Torah. Eternal life has become a sign of the Messianic age, but the Messianic age itself will be primarily an age of Torah. The unity of the human race will be restored, as the nations, except Israel, will be destroyed or enslaved by Israel, which is almost tantamount to their destruction. Jerusalem will shine with eternal light, as either the heavenly Jerusalem will descend in place of the earthly, or the earthly Jerusalem together with Israel will be caught up to heaven. The blessedness of Israel will be the restoration of the paradise bliss lost by the first man: “For Paradise is opened to you, the tree of life is planted, the time to come is appointed, abundance is ready, the city is built, peace, perfect goodness, and perfect wisdom are prepared” (3 Esdras 8:52). This change in the life of humanity, or more precisely in the life of Israel, must correspond to a change in the world, which must return to its paradisiacal state: “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; the calf and the young lion and the ox shall be together; and a little child shall lead them… The child shall play upon the hole of the asp, and a little child shall put his hand upon the viper’s den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:6-9).
The idea of the resurrection drew the final line between Israel and the other nations. Having exchanged true worship for idolatry, all nations outside Israel found themselves in the power of the devil. “What then do I say? Is an idol anything, or is the sacrifice of idols anything? No, but the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons, and not to God” (1 Cor. 10:19-20). The Apostle Paul expressed in these words the basic Jewish belief of his time (cf. Deut. 32:17; Ps. 105:37). It replaced or overshadowed the Old Testament belief that the Gentiles were given over to the possession of angels. Idolatry was defilement in the eyes of God, and association with Gentiles was defilement for the chosen people. At the same time, the idea that the power of the devil is a consequence of sin, since sin brought death with it, penetrates Jewish literature. “God created man incorruptible, and made him the image of His eternal being; but through the envy of the devil death entered into the world, and those who are of his lot are experiencing it” (Wis. Thess. 2:23-24). Israel is the people of God, and the pagans are the people of the devil. The idea of what we now call “original sin” is almost unknown in the Old Testament writings, but it is quite clearly seen in rabbinical literature. In this literature we can find some parallels with the words of St. Paul the Apostle: “Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and so death passed upon all men through one man, for in one all sinned” (Rom. 5:12), but we have no reason to believe that St. Paul’s teaching on sin was borrowed from it. Righteousness or justification (δικαιοσύνη) for Israel was contained in the Torah, and therefore the Torah overcame sin and death. However, in apocalyptic and rabbinical literature the concept of cosmos was not subject to change. By its nature the cosmos of the messianic era does not differ from the cosmos of the pre-messianic time. Indeed, in Jewish apocalyptic, starting from the first century BC, there was the doctrine of the two aeons, but the aeon was understood in its purely temporal meaning: one period of time must succeed another; it will bring about a change in the position of Israel in the world, but it will not fundamentally change the world itself.
4. Christian thought has adopted the basic Jewish attitude towards the world, but it has adopted it in the light of its eschatological consciousness. The New Testament consciousness has perceived the modern world eschatologically, while the Jewish consciousness has perceived the eschatological era empirically. And although this statement sounds paradoxical in a certain sense, it expresses the actual state of things, since to a certain extent the very position of the Church in the world is paradoxical. From the day of Pentecost, when the Church founded by Christ at the Last Supper was actualized, the attitude towards the world could no longer be what it had been up to that moment, since changes had occurred in the world itself. Being the beginning of the last days, the Church belongs to the new aeon. In the New Testament writings the term aeon occurs in the previous temporal sense, but in its ecclesiastical meaning “aeon” means a new state of the world. This new aeon to which the Church belongs remains hidden. The changes that have occurred in the world in connection with the presence of the new aeon in it also remain hidden. The Church awaits the appearance of Christ in glory, which will become the full realization of the new aeon. This aeon is anticipated by the Church and in the Church, but it will be at the same time the destruction of the old aeon. If from the first day of its existence the Church lives under the sign of the coming coming of Christ, then the world in which it resides lives under the sign of its destruction. Thus the world cannot be the world that it was until the time when “the Word became flesh.” This world awaits its salvation, which was accomplished by Christ. “God was reconciling the world to himself through Christ, not imputing their trespasses to them, and committed to us the word of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:19). Reconciliation (κατατλαγά) has an eschatological meaning. It was not a reconciliation with the old world in its former state, as the Jewish consciousness had expected. It was a reconciliation in Christ. Reconciliation in Christ is reconciliation in the Church, since the Church itself is in Christ, as the beginning of the last days. The cosmic catastrophe occurred in a hidden way, just as the new aeon appeared in the world in a hidden way. If before this catastrophe the world was divided into the world of Israel and the world of the rest of the nations, then this division has ceased, because Christ “… is our peace, who has made both one and has broken down the middle wall of partition” (Eph. 2:14).
Instead of the old division, however, a new one has appeared: the Church and the world, the new and the old humanity. This new humanity resided in the Church, in which there is “neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). The beginning and leader of the new humanity was Christ, as a new Adam. Instead of the leader of creation, i.e., according to the Jewish consciousness, Israel with its temple on the sacred rock – the new leader Christ with his temple not made with hands, which is His Body (John 2:21). “The first man is of the earth, earthly; the second man is the Lord from heaven” (1 Cor. 15:47). The first is the beginning of the old humanity, the second – the beginning of the new humanity. As in the Old Testament writings, in the New Testament the concept of world includes humanity within itself. I am ready to repeat Oscar Kuhlmann’s formula that the main line of history runs from the many to the one and from the One to the many, but with the addition that this last many remains one in Christ. The concept of a new world and a new humanity, as a new aeon, is identical with the concept of the Church, and it, as the Church, is hidden in Christ, since the Church is the Body of Christ. The beginning of the existence of the Church was not only the beginning of the existence of the new aeon, but also the beginning of the existence of the old aeon. The old aeon appeared in the world when the new appeared in it. Until the appearance of the new aeon, the old could not exist. This old aeon is only eschatologically identical with the world that existed until the coming of Christ. In the order of God’s economy, which continues, the world remains a cosmos, but at the same time it all represents an old aeon, since the Church is the beginning of the last days. Therefore, terminologically, the “present aeon” means in the New Testament writings both the cosmos in the form in which it resides and the old aeon, as the world will be at the moment of the appearance of Christ, when the new aeon will be revealed in glory. In the period of the Church’s time, the world posits itself as the Church, through a new creation, or as the old aeon. This is the paradox of the existence of the world after the coming of Christ, arising from the paradox of the position of the Church. The new aeon residing in the world is ontologically different from the world, while the world in which the old aeon resides is itself an old aeon. The final transformation of the world into an old aeon will occur in the last days, but it is already constantly happening, since the Church is the beginning of these days. Therefore, the Church is a sword that has divided the world.
Source in Rusian: Afanasyev, N. The Church of God in Christ: a collection of articles, Moscow: PSTGU Publishing House, 2015, pp. 294-314. // Афанасьев, Н. Церковь Божия во Христе: сборник статей, М.: „Издательство ПСТГУ“ 2015, с. 294-314.
