in Book 7 of his History of the Church, Eusebius discusses several figures whom he regarded as heretics, among them Paul of Samosata, Sabellius, and Novatian (whom he calls Novatus). Do you agree with Eusebius' evaluation of these men? Are they truly heretics? If so, is false doctrine the central problem, or does something else seem to be involved? WWhat techniques does the church seem to be using in dealing with the divisions caused by such men? Does the "surgery" in each case seem successful or not?
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Eusebius on Heretics and Heresy (Extra Credit)
in Book 7 of his History of the Church, Eusebius discusses several figures whom he regarded as heretics, among them Paul of Samosata, Sabellius, and Novatian (whom he calls Novatus). Do you agree with Eusebius' evaluation of these men? Are they truly heretics? If so, is false doctrine the central problem, or does something else seem to be involved? WWhat techniques does the church seem to be using in dealing with the divisions caused by such men? Does the "surgery" in each case seem successful or not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
In the case of Paul of Samosata, the elders of the church debated Paul and his followers, exposed them as charlatans, and excommunicated Paul. The ideas of exposing the heresy through debate and exposure of the heretical ideas worked in this instance.
In the other two cases, the description of the men of the men indeed sounded like heretics who tried to confuse the congregations with their evil ideas. The techniques that the church used was to find these heresy, expose them, and throw them out of the church. In these cases, they would be right to excommunicate them.
Valerian was a poor militarily leader against the Persians. As a Roman leader he was actually captured by the Persians. This was very unusual.
This is odd that a Roman army does a terrible job against the Persian army. Considering when you look into early times. Many Roman army's previously easily defeated the Persians. Many Greek forces before the Romans conquered the Persians. Look at Alexander the Great defeating King Darius
I forgot to sign my name again. Alex Mason
in paul of samosata case.When you teach jesus is an ordinary man well that is heresy as far as the christian belief. therefore you should be consider a heretic and by excommunicating him was a way to stop the division.
dave potts
Paul of Samosata appeared to people like modern evangelists. He was loud and conniving and tried to sway crowds by catering to their misendeavors. Other Bishops didn’t like him because of his popularity and arrogance. They voted to bar him from the church. The one to find Paul out and try to prove he was a hieratic was a man named Malchion. Paul banned all Christian hymns. He didn’t conform to the beliefs of other bishops. Paul believed Jesus was just a man who had been recruited by God to do his bidding.
There were other things considered hierarchal such as getting baptized more than once. People would be put to death for such a crime under church law. Those who turned away from Christianity during persecution were let back into the church. Many believed those people should have been barred from the church.
Do you agree with Eusebius' evaluation of these men? Are they truly heretics? If so, is false doctrine the central problem, or does something else seem to be involved? WWhat techniques does the church seem to be using in dealing with the divisions caused by such men? Does the "surgery" in each case seem successful or not
in paul of samosata's case could be used as a good lesson. he is like was mentioned in class a modern day evangelical. he was using god as his own personal accountant. he tried to make people believe they could buy their way in to heaven. he comitted heresy to it truest exent.
the others were men who comitted true melpractice of the gospel. they taught their followers the wrong way and tried turn the congregations in to cults. these people had to be weeded out for the growth of the church.
I think they were heretics in the sense that they went against what the early church believed. However, I think that their false doctorine isn't the problem, it is the other things that they do that makes them a big deal. It looks like many of the problems of varying beliefs were handled with letters written back and forth. But in the case of Paul of Samosata, they excommunicated him. He was not only teaching the wrong things but he was using his position for fame and fortune.
How the church dealt with each heretic varied by case. A common theme seemed to be exposure. Also, excommunication was another option the early church chose. Unfortunately, the herecies were a cancer to the early church and some would argue that they are still around even today.
Kevin Dahlberg
Post a Comment