|
nijjhar1 uploaded a new video
(1 day ago)
Eusebius- How the spiritually blind men of letters rejected Gnostic Gospels as rubbish - 72. HI,
I HAVE GOT THE FULL BOOK OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY...
more
Eusebius- How the spiritually blind men of letters rejected Gnostic Gospels as rubbish - 72. HI,
I HAVE GOT THE FULL BOOK OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY EUSEBIUS:-
PLEASE STUDY THIS AND IF YOU FIND SOME THING INTERESTING THAT I HAVE NOT DEALT WITH, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. EUSEBIUS SEEMS TO BE HONEST BUT AROUND 325A.D., PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SPIRITUALLY BLINDED SO MUCH SO THAT THEY DECLARED CHRIST AND NOT JESUS DIED ON THE CROSS. THAT IS UTTER NON-SENSE AS CHRIST STAND FOR HIS WORD THAT TOOK THE FLESH IN THE NAME OF JESUS AND LIVED AMONG US. SO, JESUS DIED AND NOT CHRIST. EUSEBIUS WAS PRESENT WHEN THEY FORMULATED THIS NON-SENSE NICENE CREED THAT MAKES NO SENSE. SO, THESE MESSIANIC JEWS ALTERED THE NEW TESTAMEN TO ALIGN IT WITH THEIR FAVOURITE WRITTEN TORAH, THE OLD CLOTH FULL OF HOLES GOOD FOR NOTHING. MESSIANIC JEWS KILLED THOSE GENTILE APOSTLES WHO MOCKED THE ROTTEN WRITTEN TORAH, THE OLD TESTAMENT FULFILLING MATT.12.V43-45 MAKING THE SITUATION WORSE THAN THAT UNDER THE HYPOCRITE TEMPLE PRIESTS.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
7. And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected ἐν νόθοις. writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious.
Let us now proceed with our history.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
nijjhar1 uploaded a new video
(1 day ago)
Eusebius-Epistles of Andrew being more spiritual, they rejected it - 71. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
The point to be emphasized is that...
more
Eusebius-Epistles of Andrew being more spiritual, they rejected it - 71. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
The point to be emphasized is that he is separating here the uncanonical from the canonical, without regard to the character of the individual writings within the latter class. are yet at the same time known to most ecclesiastical writers—we have felt compelled to give this catalogue in order that we might be able to know both these works and those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles, including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas The Gospel of Thomas is of Gnostic origin and thoroughly Docetic. It was written probably in the second century. The original Gnostic form is no longer extant, but we have fragmentary Catholic recensions of it in both Latin and Greek, from which heretical traits are expunged with more or less care. The gospel contained many very fabulous stories about the childhood of Jesus. It is mentioned frequently by the Fathers from Origen down, but always as an heretical work. The Greek text is given by Tischendorf and an English translation is contained in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 395405. See Lipsius in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. II. p. 703705. of Matthias,808808 This gospel is mentioned by Origen (Hom. in Lucam I.), by Jerome (Præf. in Matt.), and by other later writers. The gospel is no longer extant, though some fragments have been preserved by Clement of Alexandria, e.g. in Strom. II. 9, Strom. III. 4 (quoted below in chap. 30), and Strom. VII. 13, which show that it had a high moral tone and emphasized asceticism. We know very little about it, but Lipsius conjectures that it was identical with the παραδόσεις Ματθίου which were in high esteem in Gnostic circles, and especially among the Basilidæans. See Lipsius, ibid. p. 716. or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew809809 Eusebius so far as we know is the first writer to refer to these Acts. But they are mentioned after him by Epiphanius, Philaster, and Augustine (see Tischendorfs Acta Apost. Apoc. p. xl.). The Acts of Andrew (Acta Andrææ) were of Gnostic origin and circulated among that sect in numerous editions. The oldest extant portions (both in Greek and somewhat fragmentary) are the Acts of Andrew and Matthew (translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 517525) and the Acts of Peter and Andrew (ibid. 526527). The Acts and Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Andrew (ibid. 511516), or the so-called Epistle of the Presbyters and Deacons of Achaia concerning the Passion of Andrew, is a later work, still extant in a Catholic recension in both Greek and Latin. The fragments of these three are given by Tischendorf in his Acta Apost. Apoc. p. 105 sqq. and 132 sqq., and in his Apocal. Apoc. p. 161 sq. See Lipsius in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. I. p. 30. and John810810 Eusebius is likewise, so far as we know, the first writer to refer to these Acts. But they are afterward mentioned by Epiphanius, Photius, Augustine, Philaster, &c. (see Tischendorf, ibid. p. lxxiii.). They are also of Gnostic origin and extant in a few fragments (collected by Thilo, Fragmenta Actum S. Johannis a Leucio Charino conscriptorum, Halle, 1847). A Catholic extract very much abridged, but containing clear Gnostic traits, is still extant and is given by Tischendorf, Acta Apost. Apoc. p. 266 sq. (translated in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, VIII. 560564). The last two works mentioned belong to a collection of apocryphal Acts which were commonly ascribed to Leucius, a fictitious character who stands as the legendary author of the whole of this class of Gnostic literature. From the fourth century on, frequent reference is made to various Gnostic Acts whose number must have been enormous. Although no direct references are made to them before the time of Eusebius, yet apparent traces of them are found in Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, &c., which make it probable that these writers were acquainted with them, and it may at any rate be assumed as established that many of them date from the third century and some of them even from the second century. See Salmons article Leucius in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. III. 703707, and Lipsius article in the same work, I. 28. and the other apostles, which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
nijjhar1 uploaded a new video
(1 day ago)
Eusebius- Men of Letters mostly Messianic Jews were arguing over Judaised Epistles - 70. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
It is certain that...
more
Eusebius- Men of Letters mostly Messianic Jews were arguing over Judaised Epistles - 70. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
It is certain that the epistle of Barnabas was written between the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) and the time of Clement of Alexandria: almost certain that it was written before the building of Ælia Capitolina; and probable that it was written between 100 and 120, though dates ranging all the way from the beginning of Vespasians reign to the end of Hadrians have been, and are still, defended by able scholars. The epistle is still extant in a corrupt Greek original and in an ancient Latin translation. It is contained in all the editions of the Apostolic Fathers. and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, a brief document in sixteen chapters, was published in 1884 by Philotheos Bryennios, Metropolitan of Nicomedia, from a MS. discovered by him in the Jerusalem convent in Constantinople in 1873. The discovery threw the whole theological world into a state of excitement, and the books and articles upon the subject from America and from every nation in Europe have appeared by the hundred. No such important find has been made for many years. The light which the little document has thrown upon early Church history is very great, while at the same time the questions which it has opened are numerous and weighty. Although many points in regard to its origin and nature are still undecided, the following general positions may be accepted as practically established. It is composed of two parts, of which the former (chaps. 16) is a redaction of an independent moral treatise, probably of Jewish origin, entitled the Two Ways, which was known and used in Alexandria, and there formed the basis of other writings (e.g. the Epistle of Barnabas, chaps. 1821, and the Ecclesiastical Canons) which were at first supposed to have been based upon the Teaching itself. (Bryennios, Harnack, and others supposed that the Teaching was based upon Barnabas, but this view has never been widely accepted.) This (Jewish) Two Ways which was in existence certainly before the end of the first century (how much earlier we do not know) was early in the second century (if not before) made a part of a primitive church manual, viz. our present Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. The Two Ways, both before and at the time of (perhaps after) its incorporation into the Teaching, received important additions, partly of a Christian character. The completed Teaching dates from Syria, though this is denied by many writers, who prefer, upon what seem to me insufficient grounds, Egypt as the place of composition. The completed Teaching formed the basis of a part of the seventh book of the Apostolic Constitutions, which originated in Syria in the fourth century. The most complete and useful edition is that of Schaff (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 3d ed., New York, 1889), which contains the Greek text with English translation and a very full discussion of the work itself and of the various questions which are affected by its discovery. Harnacks important edition Die Lehre der zwölff Apostel (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Gesch. der altchrist. Lit., II. 1 and 2, 1884) is still the standard German work upon the subject, though it represents many positions in regard to the origin and history of the work which have since been proved incorrect, and which he himself has given up. His article in Herzog, 2d ed., XVII. 656 sqq. and his Die Apostel-Lehre und die jüdischen Beiden Wege, 1886, should therefore be compared with his original work. Schaffs book contains a very complete digest of the literature down to the close of 1888. As to the position which the Teaching occupied in the canon we know very little, on account of the very sparing use of it made by the early Fathers. Clement of Alexandria cites it once as Scripture (γραφή), but no other writer before the time of Eusebius treats it in the same way, and yet Eusebius mention of it among the νόθοι shows that it must have enjoyed a wide circulation at some time and have been accepted by at least a portion of the Church as a book worthy to be read in divine service, and thus in a certain sense as a part of the canon. In Eusebius time, however, its canonicity had been denied (though according to Athanasius Fest. Ep. 39, it was still used in catechetical instruction), and he was therefore obliged to relegate it to a position among the νόθοι. Upon Eusebius use of the plural διδαχαί, see the writers article in the Andover Review, April, 1886, p. 439 sq. and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper, which some, as I said, reject,800800 ἀθετοῦσιν. See the previous chapter, note 20. but which others class with the accepted books.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
nijjhar1 uploaded a new video
(1 day ago)
Eusebius- How the dead in spirit men of letters argued about the authencity of the Epistles - 69.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
1. SINCE w...
more
Eusebius- How the dead in spirit men of letters argued about the authencity of the Epistles - 69.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
1. SINCE we are dealing with this subject it is proper to sum up the writings of the New Testament which have been already mentioned. First then must be put the holy quaternion of the Gospels.
2. After this must be reckoned the epistles of Paul; Eusebius evidently means to include the Epistle to the Hebrews among Pauls epistles at this point, for he mentions it nowhere else in this chapter. next in order the extant former epistle of John, and likewise the epistle of Peter must be maintained. After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John. Upon Eusebius treatment in this chapter of the canonicity of the Apocalypse above. concerning which we shall give the different opinions at the proper time. These then belong among the accepted writings.
3. Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude. also the second epistle of Peter and those that are called the second and third of John whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same name.
4. Among the rejected writings must be reckoned also the Acts of Paul and the so-called Shepherd and the Apocalypse of Peter and in addition to these the extant epistle of Barnabas The author of the so-called Epistle of Barnabas is unknown. No name appears in the epistle itself, and no hints are given which enable us to ascribe it to any known writer. External testimony, without a dissenting voice, ascribes it to Barnabas, the companion of Paul. But this testimony, although unanimous, is neither very strong nor very extensive. The first to use the epistle is Clement of Alexandria, who expressly and frequently ascribes it to Barnabas the companion of Paul. Origen quotes from the epistle twice, calling it the Epistle of Barnabas, but without expressing any judgment as to its authenticity, and without defining its author more closely. Jerome evidently did not doubt its authenticity, but placed it nevertheless among the Apocrypha, and his opinion prevailed down to the seventeenth century. It is difficult to decide what Eusebius thought in regard to its authorship. His putting it among the νόθοι here does not prove that he considered it unauthentic nor, on the other hand, does his classing it among the Antilegomena just below prove that he considered it authentic, but non-apostolic, as some have claimed. Although, therefore, the direct external testimony which we have is in favor of the apostolic Barnabas as its author, it is to be noticed that there must have existed a widespread doubt as to its authenticity, during the first three centuries, to have caused its complete rejection from the canon before the time of Eusebius. That this rejection arose from the fact that Barnabas was not himself one of the twelve apostles cannot be. For apostolic authorship was not the sole test of canonicity, and Barnabas stood in close enough relation to the apostles to have secured his work a place in the canon, during the period of its gradual formation, had its authenticity been undoubted. We may therefore set this inference over against the direct external testimony for Barnabas authorship. When we come to internal testimony, the arguments are conclusive against the Levite Barnabas as the author of the epistle. These arguments have been well stated by Donaldson, in his History of Christian Literature, I. p. 204 sqq. Milligan, in Smith and Waces Dict. of Christ. Biog., endeavors to break the force of these arguments, and concludes that the authenticity of the epistle is highly probable; but his positions are far from conclusive, and he may be said to stand almost alone among modern scholars. Especially during the last few years, the verdict against the epistles authenticity has become practically unanimous. Some have supposed the author to have been an unknown man by the name of Barnabas: but this is pure conjecture. That the author lived in Alexandria is apparently the ruling opinion, and is quite probable.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
nijjhar1 uploaded a new video
(2 days ago)
Eusebius- A young Church Bishop became a Robber and John brings Him on the right path-68. HI,
I HAVE GOT THE FULL BOOK OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY...
more
Eusebius- A young Church Bishop became a Robber and John brings Him on the right path-68. HI,
I HAVE GOT THE FULL BOOK OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY EUSEBIUS:- http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf2...
PLEASE STUDY THIS AND IF YOU FIND SOME THING INTERESTING THAT I HAVE NOT DEALT WITH, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. EUSEBIUS SEEMS TO BE HONEST BUT AROUND 325A.D., PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SPIRITUALLY BLINDED SO MUCH SO THAT THEY DECLARED CHRIST AND NOT JESUS DIED ON THE CROSS. THAT IS UTTER NON-SENSE AS CHRIST STAND FOR HIS WORD THAT TOOK THE FLESH IN THE NAME OF JESUS AND LIVED AMONG US. SO, JESUS DIED AND NOT CHRIST. EUSEBIUS WAS PRESENT WHEN THEY FORMULATED THIS NON-SENSE NICENE CREED THAT MAKES NO SENSE. SO, THESE MESSIANIC JEWS ALTERED THE NEW TESTAMEN TO ALIGN IT WITH THEIR FAVOURITE WRITTEN TORAH, THE OLD CLOTH FULL OF HOLES GOOD FOR NOTHING. MESSIANIC JEWS KILLED THOSE GENTILE APOSTLES WHO MOCKED THE ROTTEN WRITTEN TORAH, THE OLD TESTAMENT FULFILLING MATT.12.V43-45 MAKING THE SITUATION WORSE THAN THAT UNDER THE HYPOCRITE TEMPLE PRIESTS.
For the Jews had circumcision for a seal, but we the earnest of the Spirit. he had given him a perfect protection.
9. But some youths of his own age, idle and dissolute, and accustomed to evil practices, corrupted him when he was thus prematurely freed from restraint. At first they enticed him by costly entertainments; then, when they went forth at night for robbery, they took him with them, and finally they demanded that he should unite with them in some greater crime.
10. He gradually became accustomed to such practices, and on account of the positiveness of his character,756756 Literally, greatness of his nature (μέγεθος φύσεως). leaving the right path, and taking the bit in his teeth like a hard-mouthed and powerful horse, he rushed the more violently down into the depths.
11. And finally despairing of salvation in God, he no longer meditated what was insignificant, but having committed some great crime, since he was now lost once for all, he expected to suffer a like fate with the rest. Taking them, therefore, and forming a band of robbers, he became a bold bandit-chief, the most violent, most bloody, most cruel of them all.
12. Time passed, and some necessity having arisen, they sent for John. But he, when he had set in order the other matters on account of which he had come, said, Come, O bishop, restore us the deposit which both I and Christ committed to thee, the church, over which thou presidest, being witness.
13. But the bishop was at first confounded, thinking that he was falsely charged in regard to money which he had not received, and he could neither believe the accusation respecting what he had not, nor could he disbelieve John. But when he said, I demand the young man and the soul of the brother, the old man, groaning deeply and at the same time bursting into tears, said, He is dead. How and what kind of death? He is dead to God, he said; for he turned wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber. And now, instead of the church, he haunts the mountain with a band like himself.
14. But the Apostle rent his clothes, and beating his head with great lamentation, he said, A fine guard I left for a brothers soul! But let a horse be brought me, and let some one show me the way. He rode away from the church just as he was, and coming to the place, he was taken prisoner by the robbers outpost.
15. He, however, neither fled nor made entreaty, but cried out, For this did I come; lead me to your captain.
16. The latter, meanwhile, was waiting, armed as he was. But when he recognized John approaching, he turned in shame to flee.
17. But John, forgetting his age, pursued him with all his might, crying out, Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thine own father, unarmed, aged? Pity me, my son; fear not; thou hast still hope of life. I will give account to Christ for thee. If need be, I will willingly endure thy death as our Brother and not the Lord suffered death for us. For thee will I give up my life. Stand, believe; Christ hath sent me.
18. And he, when he heard, first stopped and looked down; then he threw away his arms, and then trembled and wept bitterly. And when the old man approached, he embraced him, making confession with lamentations as he was able, baptizing himself a second time with tears, and concealing only his right hand.
19. But John, pledging himself, and assuring him on oath that he would find forgiveness with the Saviour, besought him, fell upon his knees, kissed his right hand itself as if now purified by repentance, and led him back to the church. And making intercession for him with copious prayers, and struggling together with him in continual fastings, and subduing his mind by various utterances, he did not depart, as they say, until he had restored him to the church, furnishing a great example of true repentance and a great proof of regeneration, a trophy of a visible resurrection.
less
|
|
God Bless you.
Keep on truckin' :3