Antropologia (teologica) ortodoxa

[Fani71]

Trebuia sa ma tin de ce a zis, sa nu mai scriu pana nu termin de citit cateva omilii la Hexaimeron in intregime. Atunci voi putea raspunde mai in cunostiinta de cauza la ceea ce scrii tu acum.

Un singur lucru: tu citezi tot o interpretare a sfantului Vasile, nu ce spune el de fapt despre ziua intai.
Uite ce spune sfantul Vasile textual (scuze, nu ma gasit decat in engleza):

'Why does Scripture say “one day the first day”?
Before speaking to us of the second, the third, and the fourth days, would it not have been more
natural to call that one the first which began the series? If it therefore says “one day,” it is from a
wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to combine the time that they contain. Now
twenty-four hours fill up the space of one day—we mean of a day and of a night; and if, at the time
of the solstices, they have not both an equal length, the time marked by Scripture does not the less
circumscribe their duration. It is as though it said: twenty-four hours measure the space of a day,
or that, in reality a day is the time that the heavens starting from one point take to return there.
Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun, evening and morning occupy the world, their
periodical succession never exceeds the space of one day. But must we believe in a mysterious
reason for this? God who made the nature of time measured it out and determined it by intervals
of days; and, wishing to give it a week as a measure, he ordered the week to revolve from period
to period upon itself, to count the movement of time, forming the week of one day revolving seven times upon itself: a proper circle begins and ends with itself. Such is also the character of eternity,
to revolve upon itself and to end nowhere. If then the beginning of time is called “one day” rather
than “the first day,” it is because Scripture wishes to establish its relationship with eternity. It was,
in reality, fit and natural to call “one” the day whose character is to be one wholly separated and
isolated from all the others. If Scripture speaks to us of many ages, saying everywhere, “age of
age, and ages of ages,” we do not see it enumerate them as first, second, and third. It follows that
we are hereby shown not so much limits, ends and succession of ages, as distinctions between
various states and modes of action. “The day of the Lord,” Scripture says, “is great and very
65
terrible,”1454 and elsewhere “Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord: to what end is it for
you? The day of the Lord is darkness and not light.”1455 A day of darkness for those who are worthy
of darkness. No; this day without evening, without succession and without end is not unknown to
Scripture, and it is the day that the Psalmist calls the eighth day, because it is outside this time of
weeks.1456 Thus whether you call it day, or whether you call it eternity, you express the same idea.
Give this state the name of day; there are not several, but only one. If you call it eternity still it is
unique and not manifold. Thus it is in order that you may carry your thoughts forward towards a
future life, that Scripture marks by the word “one” the day which is the type of eternity, the first
fruits of days, the contemporary of light, the holy Lord’s day honoured by the Resurrection of our
Lord. And the evening and the morning were one day.”
But, whilst I am conversing with you about the first evening of the world, evening takes me by
surprise, and puts an end to my discourse. May the Father of the true light, Who has adorned day
with celestial light, Who has made the fire to shine which illuminates us during the night, Who
reserves for us in the peace of a future age a spiritual and everlasting light, enlighten your hearts
in the knowledge of truth, keep you from stumbling, and grant that “you may walk honestly as in
the day.”1457 Thus shall you shine as the sun in the midst of the glory of the saints, and I shall glory
in you in the day of Christ, to Whom belong all glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.'
(sfarsitul omiliei 2)

De aici se vede ca nu e chiar atat de simplua cum spui tu interpretarea lui.
Vom mai vorbi dupa ce vom mai citi.