Stylos is the blog of Jeff Riddle, a Reformed Baptist Pastor in North Garden, Virginia. The title "Stylos" is the Greek word for pillar. In 1 Timothy 3:15 Paul urges his readers to consider "how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar (stylos) and ground of the truth."
Image (left side): Decorative urn with title for the book of Acts in Codex Alexandrinus.
This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes
and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The
Ecclesiastical History: Book 8, chapters 5-6.
Notes and Commentary:
These chapters continue to describe
the Diocletian persecution, focusing on the sufferings of Christians in
Nicomedia (now the modern city of Izmit, Turkey), which Diocletian had made
capital of the Eastern Roman Empire in AD 286, and in the imperial circles.
Chapter 5 notes that
when the edict against Christians were announced, one unnamed upper-class Christian
boldly took down a publicly posted copy and tore it to pieces. A footnote
explains that this was probably the martyr Euethius, adding, “Tradition, however,
identified him with St. George of England” (263, n. 2).
Chapter 6 describes
the sufferings of those in the imperial household. The eunuch Dorotheus and
Gorgonius were strangled.
An imperial servant named Peter suffered
violent torture on the gridiron.
Anthimus, the bishop of Nicomedia
was beheaded.
After a fire broke out in the
palace, Christians were blamed and many more were “butchered with the sword” or
burned, and the bodies of many were cast into the sea for fear that Christians
would “worship” them if they were placed in tombs.
After an uprising in Melitene in
Armenia, an imperial command was given for the “presidents” of the churches and
other officers to be arrested and imprisoned. Further letters urged that the
church officers to either sacrifice or face mutilation and torture. This led to
numerous martyrdoms in each province and city.
Conclusion:
These chapters note that among the
first to suffer in the Diocletian persecution were those in the imperial
household and in the city of Nicomedia. Christians were blamed for fires and insurrection
to give cover to their persecution. This persecution is presented by Eusebius as
the most serious and widespread faced by early Christians, and yet the believers
remained faithful to death.
Image: The original depiction of Mary by Bartolome Esteban Murillo before its "restoration"
The story broke this week of yet another botched art
restoration (read this article).
A priceless seventeenth century Baroque depiction of Mary by
Bartolome Esteban Murillo was “cleaned and repaired” by a private art
collector, but the restoration effort was something of a failure. A second attempt
did not make things any better. Here are the two restoration efforts below:
This brought to mind the botched effort to restore a fresco titled
Ecce Homo in a Spanish church eight years ago and now dubbed the “Monkey
Christ.” See here:
Readers of this blog probably know where I am going with
this. Can we draw an analogy from these recent calamitous attempts to “restore” master works of visual art with parallel effort to "fix and repair" the traditional text
of Scripture, leaving a masterpiece mangled and distorted? Food for thought.
In the comments of the WM 163 article, Swedish Baptist scholar Tommy Wasserman offered this rejoinder:
You cited me (and Jennifer Knust) again in your last comment, so perhaps I should emphasize again that it is not an either-or for me. I think that polarization is so unfortunate.
1) I do not believe the pericope adulterae belongs in the initial text of the Gospel of John, it entered in the early third century.
2) Our focus in this book was not on the initial text ... we did not find the pericope there. The focus was on the available textual objects, etc.
3) I am very interested in the reconstruction of the initial text and wrote another book with Peter Gurry whom you debate here. I think the easiest hypothesis is the assumption that the initial text is the authorial text.
4) I think the position that the Textus Receptus is God's word exclusively is completely untenable from both a logical–scientific and a theological viewpoint. I have no desire to debate with proponents of the Textus Receptus (I have done my share of that, and urge those who want more knowledge to first study the manuscripts and read an introduction to New Testament textual criticism).
Wasserman then offered a post on The Goal(s) of New Testament Textual Criticism on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog, in which he again lamented the insistence of an "either-or" approach to text criticism.
In the second part of this episode I offer a draft of my review of Jennifer Knust & Tommy Wasserman, To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel Story (Princeton University Press, 2019).
A friend of
mine, Mark Tuso, a pastor in Florida, recently shared the devotion below, relating
to discerning the times in which we live:
According to God’s design from the
Bible, there are three main institutions:
The home;
The Church;
The state.
According to the Bible, God gave each of them a means of
restraining/correcting evil/sin:
The home - the rod – Proverbs 22:15;
The Church - the keys – Matthew 16:19;
The state - the sword – Romans 13:4.
Satan has been working together through the world to break
down the first institution of the home and to remove the rod, effectively
removing the restraints of evil and sin designed to be used during the
formative years of children born into sin. We have also seen Satan,
working through the world, to oppose the church in general, rejecting the Word
of God, and the church of God, undermining what she teaches and her role in
society. In turn, we have seen churches across the country abandon God’s
design for the church including the use of the keys (church discipline),
effectively filling churches with unregenerate members free to sin without
restraint. Now, we are watching, for the first time in this country, a
full attack by Satan on the third institution, and especially on its means of
restraining and correcting evil in the cries and the moves to defund and
abolish the police department. Make no mistake, Satan’s aim is to ensure
sin rules the day, and to remove any and all obstacles to it, while encouraging
men and women and children to reject God and embrace their depravity.
This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes
and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The
Ecclesiastical History: Book 8, chapters 1-4.
Notes and Commentary:
These opening chapters set the
stage for book 8.
Chapter 1 provides a
prelude to the great persecution suffered by the church under the emperor Diocletian.
As noted at the end of book 7,
Eusebius sees the events recorded here as marking a significant transition in
the Christian movement.
He begins by describing the freedom
and privileges enjoyed by the church before this persecution. The Roman rulers
allowed Christians to practice their faith, even as members of their households.
Christian men like Dorotheus and Gorgonius were esteemed. Spacious church
buildings were constructed in various cities.
With greater freedom, however, there
also arose pride and sloth. Christians began to rail against one another and
break into factions. When the persecution began among Christian brothers in the
army, Eusebius says that the church did not seek the favor and goodwill of God.
Chapter 2 turns to
the persecution itself. Eusebius notes that he was an eyewitness of “the houses
of prayer” being cast to the ground, of the scriptures being “committed to the
flames” in the marketplaces, and of pastors either hiding or being captured and
mocked by their enemies.
He notes that the persecution began
in the nineteenth year of Diocletian’s reign (c. 303) with the issuing of an imperial
letter at the time of the “the festival of the Savior’s Passion.” This letter
was promulgated which ordered, “the razing of churches to the ground and the
destruction by fire of the Scriptures,” as well threatening loss of liberty to Christian
leaders and ordinary believers. Later letters instructed the “presidents of the
local churches to be imprisoned and pressured to make sacrifices.”
Chapter 3 describes
the sufferings of the rulers of the churches. Some contended with stout hearts,
while others proved cowardly and weak at the first assault. He gives several
examples of those who stood firm in the faith.
Chapter 4 notes again
how early attacks upon Christians began among those “in the camps” (i.e., in
the army) with some leaving the military lest they should become renegades in
the faith. A particular “supreme commander” (whom Oulton identifies in a footnote
as Veturius) is mentioned, who, in the early stages, deprived some Christians
of their rank if they disobeyed the command to sacrifice and even took the lives
of several. In time to come there would be countless martyrs in all the cities
and the countryside.
Conclusion:
These chapters introduce the beginnings
of the devastating Diocletian persecution which began with imperial letters in AD
303. This persecution would include the destruction of many churches and copies
of Scripture, as well as producing numerous martyrs from the church’s officers
and laymen. Eusebius saw this period as pivotal in the history of the Christian
movement.
Part Two of the interview I did on the Church History Matters podcast discussing Eusebius of Caesarea's Ecclesiastical History has been posted. You can listen above or find here. For Part One, look here.
2 Kings 23:27 Notwithstanding the LORD turned not from the fierceness
of his wrath, wherewith his anger was kindled against Judah, because of all the
provocations that Manasseh had provoked him withal.
2 Kings 23:1-24 describes the unprecedented efforts at spiritual
reformation in Judah brought about by godly King Josiah. These reforms involved
not only the removal of what was wicked (like the “high places”) but the restoration
of what was right (like the celebration of the Passover). True revival involves
both mortification (removing the evil) and vivification (including
the right).
In the end, however, the historian must report that Josiah’s
reformation failed. The announcement begins with these jarring words:
“Notwithstanding the LORD turned not from the fierceness of his wrath….” (v. 26).
Judah would be destroyed and carried off into exile (see v. 27).
Even the godliness of Josiah, great as it was, could not, in
this instance, overcome the wrath that had been stored up against Judah. Dale
Ralph Davis observes: “It is very sobering: there is such a thing as the hot
heat of Yahweh’s anger that no amount of repentance or reform can dampen or
douse” (2 Kings, 330). Davis then adds another intriguing observation:
“But Josiah’s is a faithfulness that does not confuse obedience with pragmatism
and so pushes on, not because it will change anything but simply because God demands
it” (2 Kings, 330).
We are reminded that pragmatism is not the reason to be
faithful. We may never be able to bring revival to our land, but that is no
reason for the church to cease to be faithful. We live a faithful life not for
what we can get or accomplish, but because the Lord is worthy of our obedience.
We can also be thankful that though there was no hope for
faithless Judah who would be defeated by the Babylonians and carried away into
exile, there is always hope for faithless and sinful men. In the last moments
of his life, the thief on the cross heard Christ say, “Today thou shalt be with
me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). I was born in South Carolina where the state motto
is the Latin dictum dum spiro, spero, “while I breathe, I hope.” If you
are alive, there is still hope for you in Christ.
Josiah was not able to bring ultimate revival to Judah. He
could not overcome their sin, as earnest and faithful as his efforts at
reformation were. But we have one who is greater than Josiah, and who can bring
salvation and reformation to sinful men. He is the Lord Jesus Christ.
Image: Dunes, Topsail Island, North Carolina, June 2020
I'm continuing to work my way through Volume 1 of Hilarion Alfeyev's Jesus Christ: His Life and Teaching. In an overall discussion of how the prologue of John and Hebrews serve as "manifestos of the faith of the ancient church" in Jesus as not a mere prophet but as the Son of God (369-370), Alfeyev adds this footnote on the authorship of Hebrews:
Here and later in the present book, as well as in other books in the series Jesus Christ: His Life and Teaching, we will refer to the epistle of the Hebrews as one of the general epistles of the apostle Paul, in accordance with the attribution accepted in the tradition of the Church. An analysis of the polemics surrounding the authorship of this epistle is outside the scope of our investigation (369, n. 8).
It is interesting that though conversant with the findings of modern historical-critical methodology on this subject (the authorship of Hebrews), as on other topics, Alfeyev's orientation is to adopt the traditional perspective.
This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes
and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The
Ecclesiastical History: Book 7, chapter 32.
Notes and Commentary:
This final chapter in book 7 begins
with a summary of the succession of bishops in various cities.
In Rome Felix was followed by the
short-lived rule of Eutychianus. Next came Gaius, and then Marcellanius.
In Antioch, Domnus was followed by
Timaeus, and then Cyril. It is noted that during Cyril’s time, the eunuch
Dorotheus came to prominence, who was skilled in reading the OT in the original
Hebrew. After Cyril came Tyrannus, who was bishop when the attack upon the
churches “was at its height.”
Next, Eusebius turns to the
community at Laodicea. Here he notes that Socrates was followed by Eusebius of
Alexandria as bishop. He was apparently drafted for this office when he came
from Alexandria for the synod regarding Paul of Samosata. After him came
another bishop from Alexandria named Anatolius, a learned man who, Eusebius
states, had been deemed worthy by those of Alexandria to establish a
philosophic school there in the tradition of Aristotle.
Eusebius then relays a rather lengthy
anecdote to illustrate the worthiness of both Eusebius and Anatolius, from a
time when they were both in Alexandria and the city came under siege, and they
were able to arrange for the protection of and provision for innocent
civilians, suffering under the siege.
To illustrate Anatolius’s gifts,
Eusebius offers an extended citation from “The Canons of Anatolius on the
Pascha.” This work was dedicated to determining the proper calendar for the
celebration of the Pascha.Translator
and editor J.E.L. Oulton offers an extended note on this work, which begins,
“The Paschal Table of Anatolius is based on the supposition that after the
lapse of every cycle of nineteen years the full moons recur on the same days of
the month, and at the same hours” (see pp. 244-245). Though noting that his
method of calculation was not “strictly accurate”, he adds that Anatolius
rightly insisted that “the pascal full moon must fall after the equinox,
as opposed to those … who regarded the full moon (“the fourteenth day”), if it fell
on the day before the equinox, as the pascal moon” (p. 245).
Eusebius further notes that
Anatolius had written an Introduction to Arithmetic in ten treatises. He
had originally been sought out by Theotecnus of Caesarea in Palestine to
succeed him as bishop, but he was pressed into serve at Laodicea after the
death of Eusebius while traveling to Antioch for deliberations on Paul. After
Anatolius, Stephen was made bishop in Laodicea, “the last bishop before the
persecution.” Though much admired before the persecution, Eusebius relays that
Stephen did not prove to be a “true philosopher” but a dissembler and a coward.
Things were, however, in the providence of God, set right when the worthy
Theodotus became bishop after Stephen. Theodotus, it seems, had been a
prominent physician who had reached “the first rank in the science of healing
bodies” but was second to none in “the curing of souls.”
In Caesarea of Palestine,
Theotecnus was succeeded by the worthy Agapius, distinguished in his care for
the poor. Eusebius notes that in Agapius’s day he had come to know the
presbyter Pamphilius, who became his mentor, whom he describes as “as most
eloquent man and a true philosopher in his mode of life.” For more on
Pamphilius Eusebius refers readers to his work on his life.
He adds notes on other godly men
including the presbyter Pierius of Alexandria and Meletius, bishop of Pontus.
Pierius, he says, was noted for his “life of extreme poverty and for his
learning in philosophy.” Meletius was an accomplished scholar, called “the honey
(Greek: melu) of Attica,” a gifted orator, who spent seven years fleeing
from persecution in Palestine.
In Jerusalem, Hymenaeus was
followed by Zabdas and then Hermo, the last bishop before the persecution. It
is noted that the “throne” of the bishop of Jerusalem (see 7.19) was preserved
up to that day.
In Alexandria, Maximus was followed
by Theonas. At this time the presbyter Achillas was entrusted with “the school
of sacred faith.” After Theonas came Peter who ruled three years before the
persecution and nine years afterwards and was eventually crowned with
martyrdom, by beheading, after twelve years as bishop.
At the close of this book, Eusebius
notes a transition in this narrative. Heretofore the narrative has covered
roughly the first 305 years of Christianity from the birth of Christ up to the
Diocletian persecution and “the destruction of the places of prayer.”
Conclusion:
This chapter continues Eusebius’s
pattern of tracing the succession of bishops in the key city centers of early
Christianity and the prominent bishops, writers, and theologians of the era. With
the end of book 7, Eusebius sees this as a turning point as the movement is on
the verge of experiencing its greatest period of persecution. There is a sense,
however, that it will be able to endure due to the stability, giftedness, and
faithfulness of its leaders. The churches were enjoyed a calm before the storm
of persecution.
This is an occasional series of readings from and brief notes
and commentary upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The
Ecclesiastical History: Book 7, chapter 31.
Notes and Commentary:
This short chapter briefly
describes the gnostic Manichaean heresy which, Eusebius says, arose at this
time (mid to late third century).
If we go back to EH 1.1 we see that
Eusebius had stated at that time that his goal in this work was not only to
present a history of the faithful orthodox teachers of the church, but also the
heretical teachers who had ravaged the flock of Christ.
He begins his description of Mani,
the leader of the Manichaeans, with a play on words, calling him a “madman” (maneis).
The language he uses in describing
Mani is harsh and unsparing.
Mani is said to have had a “mental
delusion, to have been “insane”, and to have been possessed by the devil. In
mode of life, he was a “barbarian.”
Among his many doctrinal errors Mani
is said to have attempted to pose as Christ, even choosing twelve disciples in
imitation of Christ, while also making himself out to be the Paraclete, or Holy
Spirit.
Eusebius notes that Mani “stitched
together” his presumably dualistic false doctrine from the Persians and that he
claimed to have “knowledge … falsely so called.” In closing he laments that the
profane name of the Manichaeans was still on the lips of men in his day.
Conclusion:
This brief chapter continues
Eusebius’s task in the EH of compiling a catalogue of the heretical movements
of the early years of Christianity by introducing and highlighting that of the
Manichaean sect. He uses harsh and unsparing language in order to set a contrast
of this false teaching with orthodoxy and to offer a warning to those tempted
by this heresy.
And [Josiah] did that which was right in the sight of the LORD,
and walked in all the way of David his Father, and turned not aside to the
right hand or the left (2 Kings 22:2).
2 Kings 22 describes the rise of godly Josiah as king of Judah. The
key event of this rule was the discovery, in the temple, of the book of the law,
which had been suppressed, perhaps by his father Manasseh. When Josiah heard this
word read, he “rent his clothes” in repentance (v. 11). Huldah prophesied that
the Lord saw that Josiah’s heart was “tender” and that he humbled himself
before him (v. 19).
Here a few a few points of spiritual application we can draw from this
chapter:
First,
we can aspire to live as Josiah did. Will it be said of us that we did what was
right in the sight of the LORD, that we walked in the way of Son of David, that
we turned not aside to the right or the left?
Second,
we can learn how God preserves his Word. There were those in that day who had tried
to suppress God’s Word. Paul noted in Romans 1:18 that ungodly men “hold
[suppress] the truth in unrighteousness.” God’s Word and his truth, however, is
like a beach ball. The more you try to push it under the surface, the more it
keeps popping up!
Christ taught in Matthew 5:18: “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth
pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be
fulfilled.”
Third, we
are reminded of the power of the intake of God’s Word. We need to hear it read,
preached, and taught.
Fourth, we
are exhorted to respond to God’s Word as did Josiah, to have a tender heart and
conscience, to rend, as it were, our garments before him and humble ourselves
before him.
Josiah was indeed a great king, but we have a greater king.
Josiah would die in peace, not seeing the destruction of Jerusalem. Christ
would have the temple of his body crucified on the cross for us, so that we
might have peace with God. Let us then look to him and live.
I was happy to do an interview last week with fellow RB brothers and members of Grace Baptist Chapel in Hampton, Virginia, Joseph Knowles and Rueben Rosalez, for their podcast Church History Matters.
The topic was Eusebius, Father of Church History. You can listen to part one of the interview above (and find it here also). Part two will be forthcoming.
My book review of Robert W. Yarbrough, Clash of Visions: Populism and Elitism in New Testament Theology appeared in Midwestern Journal of Theology, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Spring 2020): 165-167.
You can read it here on my academia.edu page or listen to the video or audio versions above.
Image: CRBC meeting house, Louisa, Virginia, May 2020.
Here are the May "Thought for the Day" updates from the CRBC website:
May 1:
“Affliction is for our profit, as it is a refiner. It works
us up to further degrees of sanctity…. The leaves of the fig tree and root are
bitter, but the fruit is sweet; so afflictions are in themselves bitter, but
they bring forth the sweet fruits of righteousness” (Thomas
Watson, A Body of Practical Divinity, 1692).
May 4:
“There is a kindness in affliction, in that there is no
condition so bad but it might be worse. When it is dusk, it might be darker.
God does not make our cross so heavy as he might: he does not stir up all his
anger” (Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical Divinity, 1692).
May 6:
“Here was a stately building; man carved like a fair palace,
but now lying in ashes: let us stand and look on the ruins and drop a tear….
Could we avoid weeping if we saw our country ruined and turned by the enemy
into a wilderness? If we saw our houses on fire, and our property perishing in
the flames? But all this comes far short of the dismal sight—man fallen as a
star from heaven” (Thomas Boston, Human Nature in Its Fourfold State, 1720).
May 8:
“There is a kindness in affliction, in that your case is not
as bad as others, who are always upon the rack, and spend years with sighing
(Psalm 31:10). Have you a gentle fit of the ague [a fever or shivering]?Others cry out of the stone and
strangulation. Do you bear the wrath of men? Others bear the wrath of God. You
have but a single trial: others have them twisted together. God shoots but one
arrow at you, he shoots a shower of arrows at others. Is there no kindness in
all this? (Thomas
Watson, A Body of Practical Divinity, 1692).
May 12:
“There is a kindness in affliction, in that, if we belong to
God, it is all the hell we shall have. Some have two hells: they suffer in
their body and conscience, which is one hell, and another hell to come is
unquenchable fire. Judas had two hells, but a child of God has but one. Lazarus
had his hell here; he was full of sores, but had a convoy of angels to carry
him to heaven when he died. Say then, Lo! If this be the worst I shall have, if
this be all my hell, I will patiently acquiesce: ‘Thy will be done.’” (Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical
Divinity, 1692).
May
21:
“There
is a kindness in that God gives gracious supports in afflictions. If he strikes
with one hand, he supports with the other... There is not the least trial, but
if God would desert us, and not assist us with his grace, we should sink under
it….” (Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical
Divinity, 1692).
May 26:
“There is a kindness in affliction that is preventative. God,
by this stroke of his, would prevent some sin…. Affliction is sometimes sent
for the punishing of sin, at other times for its prevention…. God’s people know
not how much they are beholden to their affliction; that they might have fallen
into some scandal, had not God set a hedge of thorns in their way to stop them.
What kindness is this! God lets us fall into sufferings to prevent falling into
snares; say then, Lord, do as it seems good in thy sight, ‘Thy will be done’” (Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical
Divinity, 1692).
May 30:
“God by affliction would prevent damnation… A man by falling
into briars, is saved from falling into the river; so God lets us fall into the
briars of affliction that we may not be drowned in perdition” (Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical
Divinity, 1692).
