Journal index

Jelen tanulmányunkban szóról szóra elemezzük Pál mellékmondatát, különös tekintettel a gümnosz kifejezésre. A mondatot megpróbáljuk megtisztítani az értelmezések évszázadok alatt rárakódott porától, és keressük a szavak azon jelentését, amely – véleményünk szerint – leginkább megfelel Pál szándékának, majd pedig megfogalmazunk egy olyan, a szövegkörnyezetbe szervesen beépülő mondatot, amelynek üzenete beleillik a páli eszkatológiába.

Szóra bírva – Kozma Zsolttal beszélget Tunyogi Lehel bemutatása

Versuch zur Formulierung der Einheitslehre der Drei-Einigkeit in unserer heutigen Sprache und mit unseren heutigen Begriffen. Nach meiner Erfahrung ist die Frage der Dreieinigkeit kein Problem bei den glaubenden Christen. Sie stehen mit Gott in persönlicher Verbindung und diese Beziehung wird von keiner theologischen Theorie gestört. Aber wir müssen es zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass unsere Gläubigen, vorwiegend ein großer Teil unserer Intelligenz, zwar ernst, aber von weitem sich Gott nähert. Sie erwarten von uns, über Gott sprechenden Fachleuten eine klare, allgemeinverständliche Antwort auf ihre Frage, wer das eigentlich ist, zu dem sie sich instinktiv hingezogen fühlen. Dazu taugen schon unsere tausendsiebenhundert jährigen Begriffe nicht. Nicht die Tatsache der Heiligen Drei-Einigkeit ist untauglich, sondern die Begriffe für ihre Erklärung. László Varga, dessen Schriften immer zur Diskussion veranlassen, geht von dieser Erkenntnis aus um die Einheitslehre in unserer heutigen Sprache und mit unseren heutigen Begriffen zu formulieren.

A Jel 16,16 egy nevet is említ, amikor elbeszéli, hogy a Góg és Magóg népe azon a helyen gyülekezik háborúra, amit zsidóul „Harmagedon”-nak neveznek. Jelen tanulmányunkban erre a megnevezésre tekintünk, úgy, hogy először az ezzel kapcsolatos elméleteket foglaljuk össze, ezt követően pedig egy olyan alapvető szempontra hívjuk fel a figyelmet, amely úgy tűnik, hogy elkerülte a magyarázók figyelmét. Ez lehetőséget nyújthat arra, hogy jobban megértsük János gondolatainak hátterét, és közelebb kerüljünk Harmagedon titkának megértéséhez is.

The Origin of Sin. The origin of sin is a universally commonly discussed problem of theology. It can be clarified only from the original texts of the Bible. There we find a clear answer by its diverse teachers: Sin originates from bodily desires. In our terminology, bodily desires are the biological instincts. In the animal world instincts are specifically restricted. They are only active in necessary times and conditions; they assurae the harmony of nature. Man’s instincts are free; they are always active and biologically unrestricted. The millionaire works for more money, women are able and ready to copulate even while being pregnant, the lust for power is limitless, and even world domination can not fulfil it. Remaining uncontrolled, instincts can destroy all human societies. They must be controlled morally. Man is personally responsible to keep them under God-given moral control. That is the dignity and tragedy of being human. Instincts are biological forces, morally neutral, but by nature self-centered. Godgiven morals are always altruistic. Under the guidance of strong morals, instinct is the force that brings good economy into reality, secures family life, a well trained society. When instinct escapes from under the control of morals, it is a guideless, selfcentered, always active force, which is able to destroy every social human activity, even personal life. Human morals are always questionable. My rules are as valuable as anyone else’s. Only God-given morals can be unquestionable. That is the meaning of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: Man is free to do as he wishes, but moral laws are not under man’s will. To do what moral say is the personal and social responsibility of man. So there is a permanent battle between the moral convictions and the urgings of the instincts striving to get from under it. Consequently sin is the act of self-centered instincts getting out from under the guidance of the God-given moral rules.

Evangelisation through reformed eyes. This study was presented at a small conference of reformed and catholic theologians. The presentation of evangelisation through a reformed prism is underlined by thoughts of great reformed predecessors. There are five points, all presenting a different aspect of this question. The first treats the fashion of evangelisation. Because of the fact that evangelisation, as a term is not firmly identified, using different slogans and dealing with evangelisation as a fashion could be dangerous. This is why a good definition with the approval of all Christian churches is needed. Another important thought of this first point is the fact, that evangelisation is not new, by no means a fashion, it is only the submission to an ancient, biblical command of the great mission. The second point presents the biblical roots of evangelisation through the New Testament, with the conclusion, that evangelisation has to be done within and outside the church, and that preaching itself is in fact evangelisation. The third point explains the slightly synonymous terms of evangelisation, mission and church building by using the works of Sándor Tavaszy, Sándor Makkai and Lajos Imre, with special attention to the differences concerning evangelisation being mission outside or within the church. The fourth point discusses evangelisation viewed as mission. In the first sub point evangelisation is viewed as inner-mission, without which a living congregation and blooming church-life is unthinkable. The second sub point presents evangelisation as outermission, underlining, that these two do not depend on each other, but have to be done together at the same time. The fifth and last point is on classic evangelisation. Here it is said, that the base and background of all evangelisation movements is and has to be the Holy Spirit. It is this point of the study that summarizes the basic and essential parts of the evangelising preaching. The study ends by the final conclusion, that evangelisation can only be done by the church.