January 29, 2015, 02:41:54 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
Author Topic: wikipedia entry for Eusuebius' Church History  (Read 418 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Site Supporter
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267

Paint It Red

« on: October 18, 2012, 08:59:39 PM »

"This "historical account" has much of Eusebius's own theological agenda intertwined with the factual text including his view on God, Christ, the Scriptures, the Jews, the church, pagans, and heretics. At the very beginning of the volumes, Eusebius makes a statement about the divinity and pre-existence of Jesus Christ. This is a very strange way to begin a historical narrative proving that Eusebius was attempting to push his own ideas regarding the church into a text.[citation needed]"
Church History on wiki:

Seems like someone isn't happy with Eusuebius' Church History, putting into quotes the veracity of the historical account and asserting an opinion.

But does that have any merit? I haven't read the work, but I've seen Orthodox laymen and priest alike cite this book as part of refutation piece for Protestant objections about the Early Church.

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Fate
Posts: 30,813

« Reply #1 on: October 18, 2012, 09:07:40 PM »

What you quoted sounds like someone trying to apply more secularized modern ideas about how history is done to someone writing 1700 years ago. All historians in all periods are biased, but certainly how things are done has changed. I don't recall any places in which I thought Eusebius was purposely trying to fabricate or stretch things beyond what was acceptable, but certainly he felt freer than most modern historians would in saying "X happened" or "X is true" rather than couching things in language like "X is said to have happened" or "So-and-so believed X is true". I can also think of times when he freely admitted that there were differences of opinion, such as regarding the canonicity of some of the New Testament works.
Virginal Chicano Blood
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 6,204

St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!

« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2012, 09:19:09 PM »

Sounds like something a Protestant minister changed up during a 5 minute break at the office because he tried to research the 'early Church' thinking it would function like a Protestant Church but was disappointed to discover that *gasp* they worshipped liturgically, used Icons and had Priests!!!1

You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
James, you have problemz.
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,978

Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia

« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2012, 09:19:49 PM »

Lots of personal opinion of the Wikipedia writer in the article.

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Pages: 1   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.041 seconds with 31 queries.