CHURCH HISTORY by EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA translated by ARTHUR CUSHMAN MCGUIRE.
CHAPTER XXIV.
NEPOS AND HIS SKISM.
Besides all these, the two books on the promises were prepared by him.
The occasion of these was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt, who taught that the
promises to the holy men in the divine scriptures should be understood in a more
Jewish manner, and that there would be a certain millennium of bodily luxury upon
this earth.
As he thought that he could establish his private opinion by the revelation of John,
he wrote a book on this subject, entitled Refutation of Allegorists.
Dionysius opposes this in his books on the promises.
In the first he gives his own opinion of the dogma, and in the second he treats of
the revelation of John, and mentioning Nepos at the beginning writes of him in
this manner.
But since they bring forward a certain work of Nepos, on which they rely
confidently, as if it proved beyond dispute that there will be a reign of
Christ upon earth, I confess that in many other respects I approve and love Nepos,
for his faith and industry and diligence in the scriptures, and for his extensive
psalmody, with which many of the brethren are still delighted, and I hold him in the
more reverence because he has gone to rest before us.
But the truth should be loved and honored most of all.
And while we should praise and approve ungrudgingly what is said or write,
we ought to examine and correct what does not seem to have been written soundly.
Were he present to state his opinion orally, mere unwritten discussion,
persuading and reconciling those who are opposed by question and answer,
would be sufficient.
But as some think his work very plausible, and as certain teachers regard the law and
prophets as of no consequence, and do not follow the gospels,
and treat lightly the apostolic epistles, while they make promises as to the
teaching of this work as if it were some great hidden mystery, and do not permit
our simpler brethren to have any sublime and lofty thoughts concerning the glorious
and truly divine appearing of our Lord, and our resurrection from the dead,
and our being gathered together unto him, and made like him, but on the contrary
lead them to hope for small and mortal things in the kingdom of God, and for such
things as exist now, since this is the case, it is necessary that we should
dispute with our brother Nepos as if he were present.
Farther on he says, When I was in the district of Arsinoe, where, as you know,
this doctrine has prevailed for a long time, so that schisms and apostasies of
entire churches have resulted, I called together the presbyters and
teachers of the brethren in the villages, such brethren as wished being also
present, and I exhorted them to make a public examination of this question.
Accordingly, when they brought me this book, as if it were a weapon and fortress
impregnable, sitting with them from morning till evening for three successive
days, I endeavored to correct what was written in it.
And I rejoiced over the constancy, sincerity, docility, and intelligence of
the brethren, as we considered in order and with moderation the questions and the
difficulties and the points of agreement.
And we abstained from defending in every manner and contentiously the opinions
which we had once held, unless they appeared to be correct.
Nor did we evade objections, but we endeavored as far as possible to hold to
and confirm the things which lay before us, and if the reason given satisfied us,
we were not ashamed to change our opinions and agree with others.
But on the contrary, conscientiously and sincerely, and with hearts laid open
before God, we accepted whatever was established by the proofs and teachings of
the Holy Scriptures.
And finally the author and mover of this teaching, who was called Coration,
in the hearing of all the brethren that were present, acknowledged and testified
to us that he would no longer hold this opinion, nor discuss it, nor mention nor
teach it, as he was fully convinced by the arguments against it.
And some of the other brethren expressed their gratification at the conference and
at the spirit of conciliation and harmony which all had manifested.
Chapter 25 THE APOCALYPSE OF JOHN Afterward he speaks in this manner of the
Apocalypse of John.
Some before us have set aside and rejected the book altogether, criticizing it
chapter by chapter, and pronouncing it without sense or argument, and maintaining
that the title is fraudulent.
For they say that it is not the work of John, nor is it a revelation, because it
is covered thickly and densely by a veil of obscurity.
And they affirm that none of the apostles, and none of the saints, nor anyone in the
church is its author, but that Serentis, who founded the sect which was called
after him the Serenthian, desiring reputable authority for his fiction,
prefixed the name.
For the doctrine which he taught was this, that the kingdom of Christ will be an
earthly one, and as he was himself devoted to the pleasures of the body and
altogether sensual in his nature, he dreamed that the kingdom would consist
in those things which he desired, namely, in the delights of the belly and
of sexual passion, that is to say, in eating and drinking and marrying,
and in festivals and sacrifices and the slaying of victims, under the guise of
which he thought he could indulge his appetites with a better grace.
But I could not venture to reject the book, as many brethren hold it in high
esteem.
But I suppose that it is beyond my comprehension, and that there is a certain
concealed and more wonderful meaning in every part.
For if I do not understand, I suspect that a deeper sense lies beneath the words.
I do not measure and judge them by my own reason, but leaving the more to faith,
I regard them as too high for me to grasp, and I do not reject what I cannot
comprehend, but rather wonder because I do not understand it.
After this, he examines the entire book of Revelation, and having proved that it is
impossible to understand it according to the literal sense, proceeds as follows.
Having finished all the prophecy, so to speak, the prophet pronounces those
blessed who shall observe it, and also himself.
For he says, Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book,
and I John, who saw and heard these things.
Therefore that he was called John, and that this book is the work of one
John, I do not deny.
And I agree also that it is the work of a holy and inspired man.
But I cannot readily admit that he was the apostle, the son of Zebedee, the brother
of James, by whom the gospel of John and the Catholic epistle were written.
For I judge from the character of both, and the forms of expression, and the
entire execution of the book, that it is not his.
For the evangelist nowhere gives his name, or proclaims himself, either in the gospel
or epistle.
Farther on he adds, But John never speaks as if referring to himself, or as if
referring to another person.
But the author of the Apocalypse introduces himself at the very beginning,
the revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave him to show unto his
servants quickly, and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant
John, who bare witness of the word of God, and of his testimony, even of all things
that he saw.
Then he writes also an epistle, John to the seven churches which are in
Asia, grace be with you, and peace.
But the evangelist did not prefix his name even to the Catholic epistle, but without
introduction he begins with the mystery of the divine revelation itself, that which
was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes.
For because of such a revelation the Lord also blessed Peter, saying, Blessed art
thou, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
but my heavenly Father.
But neither in the reputed second or third epistle of John, though they are very
short, does the name John appear, but there is written the anonymous phrase,
The Elder.
But this author did not consider it sufficient to give his name once and to
proceed with his work, but he takes it up again, I, John, who also am your brother
and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and in the patience of Jesus
Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos for the word of God and the
testimony of Jesus.
And toward the close he speaks thus, Blessed is he that keepeth the words of
the prophecy of this book, and I, John, who saw and heard these things.
But that he who wrote these things was called John must be believed as he says
it, but who he was does not appear, for he did not say, as often in the
gospel, that he was the beloved disciple of the Lord, or the one who lay on his
breast, or the brother of James, or the eyewitness and hearer of the Lord.
For he would have spoken of these things if he had wished to show himself plainly,
but he says none of them, but speaks of himself as our brother and companion,
and a witness of Jesus, and blessed because he has seen and heard the
revelations.
But I am of the opinion that there were many with the same name as the apostle
John, who on account of their love for him, and because they admired and emulated
him, and desired to be loved by the Lord as he was, took to themselves the same
surname as many of the children of the faithful are called Paul or Peter.
For example, there is also another John, surnamed Mark, mentioned in the Acts of
the Apostles, whom Barnabas and Paul took with them, of whom also it is said,
and they had also John as their attendant.
But that it is he who wrote this I would not say, for it is not written that he
went with them into Asia, but now when Paul and his company set sail from Paphos,
they came to Perga in Pamphylia, and John, departing from them,
returned to Jerusalem.
But I think that he was some other one of those in Asia, as they say that there are
two monuments in Ephesus, each bearing the name of John.
And from the ideas, and from the words and their arrangement, it may be reasonably
conjectured that this one is different from that one.
For the gospel and epistle agree with each other and begin in the same manner.
The one says, In the beginning was the word, and the other, that which was from
the beginning.
The one, And the word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father.
The other says the same things, slightly altered, Which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands
have handled of the word of life, and the life was manifested.
For he introduces these things at the beginning, maintaining them, as is evident
from what follows, in opposition to those who said that the Lord had not come in the
flesh.
Wherefore also he carefully adds, And we have seen and bear witness,
and declare unto you the eternal life which was with the Father and was
manifested unto us.
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also.
He holds to this and does not digress from his subject, but discusses everything
under the same heads and names, some of which we will briefly mention.
Anyone who examines carefully will find the phrases, the life, the light,
turning from darkness, frequently occurring in both, also continually,
truth, grace, joy, the flesh and blood of the Lord, the judgment, the forgiveness of
sins, the love of God toward us, the commandment that we love one another,
that we should keep all the commandments, the conviction of the world of the devil
of Antichrist, the promise of the Holy Spirit, the adoption of God, the faith
continually required of us, the Father and the Son, occur everywhere.
In fact, it is plainly to be seen that one and the same character marks the gospel
and the epistle throughout.
But the Apocalypse is different from these writings and foreign to them, not touching
nor in the least bordering upon them, almost, so to speak, without even a
syllable in common with them.
Nay, more, the epistle, for I pass by the gospel, does not mention nor does it
contain any intimation of the Apocalypse, nor does the Apocalypse of the epistle.
But Paul, in his epistles, gives some indication of his revelations,
though he has not written them out by themselves.
Moreover, it can also be shown that the diction of the gospel and epistle differs
from that of the Apocalypse.
For they were written not only without error as regards the Greek language,
but also with elegance in their expression, in their reasonings,
and in their entire structure.
They are far indeed from betraying any barbarism or solacism or any vulgarism
whatever, for the writer had, as it seems, both the requisites of discourse,
that is, the gift of knowledge and the gift of expression, as the Lord has
bestowed them both upon him.
I do not deny that the other writer saw a revelation and received knowledge and
prophecy.
I perceive, however, that his dialect and language are not accurate Greek,
but that he uses barbarous idioms, and in some places, solacisms.
It is unnecessary to point these out here, for I would not have anyone think that I
have said these things in a spirit of ridicule, for I have said what I have only
with the purpose of showing clearly the difference between the writings.
Chapter 26.
The Epistles of Dionysius.
Besides these, many other epistles of Dionysius are extant, as those against
Sabellius addressed to Ammon, bishop of the church of Bernice, and one to
Telesphorus, and one to Euphronor, and another again to Ammon and Euporus.
He wrote also four other books on the same subject, which he addressed to his
namesake Dionysius in Rome.
Besides these, many of his epistles are with us, and large books written in
epistolary form, as those on nature, addressed to the young man Timothy,
and one on temptations, which he also dedicated to Euphronor.
Moreover, in a letter to Bacillides, bishop of the parishes in Pentapolis,
he says that he had written an exposition of the beginning of Ecclesiastes,
and he has left us also various letters addressed to this same person,
thus much Dionysius.
But, our account of these matters being now completed, permit us to show to
posterity the character of our own age.
Chapter 27, Paul of Samosata, and the heresy introduced by him at Antioch.
After Zistus had presided over the church of Rome for eleven years, Dionysius,
namesake of him of Alexandria, succeeded him, about the same time
Demetrianus died in Antioch, and Paul of Samosata received that episcopate.
As he held, contrary to the teaching of the church, low and degraded views of
Christ, namely that in his nature he was a common man, Dionysius of Alexandria was
entreated to come to the synod.
But being unable to come on account of age and physical weakness, he gave his opinion
on the subject under consideration by letter.
But all the other pastors of the churches from all directions made haste to assemble
at Antioch, as against a despoiler of the flock of Christ.
Chapter 28, the illustrious bishops of that time.
Of these, the most eminent were Firmilianus, bishop of Caesarea in
Cappadocia, the brothers Gregory and Athenodorus, pastors of the churches in
Pontus, Helenus of the parish of Tarsus, and Nicomus of Iconium, moreover Hymenaeus
of the church of Jerusalem, and Theoteknus of the neighboring church of Caesarea,
and besides these Maximus, who presided in a distinguished manner over the brethren
in Bostra.
If any should count them up, he could not fail to note a great many others,
besides presbyters and deacons, who were at that time assembled for the
same cause in the above-mentioned city.
But these were the most illustrious.
When all of these assembled at different times and frequently to consider these
matters, the arguments and questions were discussed at every meeting, the adherents
of the Samosatian endeavoring to cover and conceal his heterodoxy, and the others
striving zealously to lay bare and make manifest his heresy and blasphemy against
Christ.
Meanwhile Dionysius died in the twelfth year of the reign of Gallienus,
having held the episcopate of Alexandria for seventeen years, and Maximus succeeded
him.
Gallienus, after a reign of fifteen years, was succeeded by Claudius, who in two
years delivered the government to Aurelian.
29.
Paul, having been refuted by Malchion, a presbyter from the Sophists,
was excommunicated.
During his reign a final synod composed of a great many bishops was held,
and the leader of heresy in Antioch was detected, and his false doctrine clearly
shown before all, and he was excommunicated from the Catholic Church
under heaven.
Malchion especially drew him out of his hiding place and refuted him.
He was a man learned in other respects and principal of the Sophist school of Grecian
learning in Antioch, yet on account of the superior nobility of his faith in Christ
he had been made a presbyter of that parish.
This man, having conducted a discussion with him, which was taken down by
stenographers and which we know is still extant, was alone able to detect the man
who dissembled and deceived the others.
End of Book 7, Part 3.