- uploaded: Feb 5, 2010
- Hits: 1857
Eusebius - How the Messianic Jews bring in written Torah into Espistles to falsify them?-34.
I HAVE GOT THE FULL BOOK OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY EUSEBIUS:- http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.vii.v.html 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.
CHAPTER III.â€”The Epistles of the Apostles.
In regard to the so-called Acts of Paul, where they are classed among the Î½á½¹Î¸Î¿Î¹, implying that they had been originally accepted as canonical, but were not at the time Eusebius wrote widely accepted as such. This implies that they were not, like the works which he mentions later in the chapter, of an heretical character. They were already known to Origen, who refers to them in such a way as to show that they were in good repute in the Catholic Church. They are to be distinguished from the Gnostic Ï€ÎµÏá½·Î¿Î´Î¿Î¹ or Ï€Ïâ‚¬Î¾ÎµÎ¹Ï‚ Î Î±á½»Î»Î¿Ï…, which from the end of the fourth century formed a part of the Manichean canon of the New Testament, and of which some fragments are still extant under various forms. The failure to keep these Catholic and heretical Acta Pauli always distinct has caused considerable confusion. Both of these Acts, the Catholic and the heretical, formed, according to Lipsius one of the sources of the Catholic Acts of Peter and Paul, which in their extant form belong to the fifth century. I have not found them among the undisputed writings.
6. But as the same apostle, in the salutations at the end of the Epistle to the Romans, The greater part of this last chapter of Romans is considered by many a separate epistle addressed to Ephesus. This has been quite a common opinion since 1829, when it was first broached by David Schulz, and is accepted even by many conservative scholars (e.g. Weiss), while on the other hand it is opposed by many of the opposite school. While Aquila and Priscilla, of verse 3, and EpÃ¦netus, of verse 5, seem to point to Ephesus, and the fact that so many personal friends are greeted, leads us to look naturally to the East as Pauls field of labor, where he had formed so many acquaintances, rather than to Rome, where he had not been; yet on the other hand such names as Junias, Narcissus, Rufus, Hermas, Nereus, Aristobulus, and Herodion point strongly to Rome. We must, however, be content to leave the matter undecided, but may be confident that the evidence for the Ephesian hypothesis is certainly, in the face of the Roman names mentioned, and of universal tradition (for which as for Eusebius the epistle is a unit), not strong enough to establish it. has made mention among others of Hermas, to whom the book called The Shepherd The Shepherd of Hermas was in circulation in the latter half of the second century, and is quoted by IrenÃ¦us as Scripture, although he omits it in his discussion of Scripture testimonies in Bk. III. chap. 9 sqq., which shows that he considered it not quite on a level with regular Scripture. Clement of Alexandria and Origen often quote it as an inspired book, though the latter expressly distinguishes it from the canonical books, admitting that it is disputed by many. Eusebius in chap. 25 places it among the Î½á½¹Î¸Î¿Î¹ or spurious writings in connection with the Acts of Paul and the Apocalypse of Peter. According to the Muratorian Fragment it was written very recently in our times in the city of Rome by Hermas, while his brother, Bishop Pius, sat in the chair of the Church of Rome. And therefore it also ought to be read; but it cannot be made public in the Church to the people, nor placed among the prophets, as their number is complete, nor among the apostles to the end of time. This shows the very high esteem in which the work was held in that age. It was very widely employed in private and in public, both in the East and the West, until about the fourth century, when it gradually passed out of use. Jerome says that it was almost unknown among the Latins of his time. As to the date and authorship of the Shepherd opinions vary widely. The only direct testimony of antiquity is that of the Muratorian Fragment, which says that it was written by Hermas, the brother of Pius, during the episcopacy of the latter (139154 A.D.).