From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: 2 Traditions
Date: 7 Sep 92 16:07:04 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    In response to Drew Corrigan:
DC>From: drew@cs.anu.edu.au (Drew Corrigan)
DC>Date: 21 Aug 92 05:03:44 GMT
DC>Organization: Computer Science Department, ANU, Australia

    The following from Daniel Gruber's "The Church and the Jews: The
Biblical Relationship."
    "On different issues in his 'Ecclesiastical History,' Eusebuis often
quotes earlier writers in the Church who embraced views similar to his
own. That is natural and acceptable for any writer who seeks to support
and establish his own views.  On the issue of a literal, Millennial
restoration of the kingdom to Israel--THE theological issue on which the
new {Roman} Church-State relationship would stand or fall--Eusebius does
not quote from any in the early Church who embraced his own view.  He
does not because he cannot.  There were none who supported his view.
    "Eusebius shows that he had early Church writings on the issue.
But these writings expressed a faith in a literal, Millennial
restoration of the kingdom to Israel.  Since Eusebius rejected that
view, and because he wanted to brand it as heresy, he chose not to quote
from any of the early Church writers at all.
    "So it is understandable that those who accept the writings of
Eusebius as an accurate representation of the theology of the early
Church tend to believe as he did. Unfortunately, Eusebius is not
faithful in this regard.
    "Eusebius happens to reveal, albeit quite reluctantly, that the 'new
Israel' view which he embraced was not held by the apostles or by those
who were instructed by them. One such student of the apostles was Papias
who was taught by the Apostle John, by Philip the evangelist (Acts
21:8), and by others. He was an associate of Polycarp. In one section,
Eusebius says, 'At this time, also, Papias was well known as bishop of
the church at Hierapolis, a man well skilled in all manner of learning,
and well acquainted with the Scriptures.' Throughout the 'Ecclesiastical
History,' with one exception, and in the writings of all others who
spoke of him, Papias is characterized as a very godly man of exceptional
learning, faithful to the teachings of the apostles.
    "The one exception occurs when Eusebius mentions that 'he [Papias]
says there would be certain millennium after the resurrection, and that
there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which
things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the
apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which
they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very
limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he
was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the
antiquity of the man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as for
instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments."

    "Eusebius' opposition to this apostolic teaching was so great, that
he certainly would have, if he could have, presented the teaching of
anyone contemporary with the apostles or their disciples who believed in
the 'mystical,' spiritual interpretation which he himself adopted.
However, he is not able to present the writings of anyone--not one--from
that earlier age who believed as he did.  He had the documents.  He had
the full support of the Emperor Constantine. But he still could not
produce any evidence in support of his position.
    "That being the case, Eusebius chose not to present the millennial
teaching of 'most of the ecclesiastical writers,' because it
contradicted his own beliefs.  In fact, he does not quote from any of
them on this matter.  Their writings were known and still in circulation
when Eusebius wrote his 'Ecclesiastical History'."
    A continution next post.........

--  
Donna D'Iorio - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG