- This topic is empty.
- Posts
This is a thread intended to compile quotes of Eusebius from his own writings or other historical writings as they have quoted him. This is not a debate thread but instead, just a collection of Eusebius' understandings.
Please post your quote here and highlight the part that you want to draw special attention to, if desired. You may comment on the quote you post, within that post, but please refrain from commenting here on the comments of another member's post, aside from a simple encouragement, i.e 'good post,' etc. since that leads to runaway discussions which is not the purpose of this thread. If you want to discuss another member's comments, add a link to an appropriate thread to discuss them.
Any post that attempts to debate another member's post or criticize another poster, beyond a link to the challenge elsewhere in the forum, or any post without a quote of Eusebius will be deleted.
As always, provide a link to your source.
Thank you in advance for adhering to the rules set forth in this OP!
Now, let's see what Eusebius believed about some of the important topics that we debate here. Of course the fuller context of the quote is the reader's responsibility and the link to the source should allow for gaining that context.
Eusebius wrote this:
Quote But these are all earthly images and touched with mortality, parts of this lower corrupt and earthly constitution, whereas the scope of the theology we are considering far transcends all illustrations, and is not connected with anything physical, but imagines with the acutest thought a Son Begotten, not at one time non-existent, and existent at another afterwards, but existent before eternal time, and pre-existent, and ever with the Father as His Son, and yet not Unbegotten, but (b) begotten from the Father Unbegotten, being the Only-begotten, the Word, and God of God, Who teaches that He was not cast forth from the being of the Father by separation, or scission, or division, but unspeakably and unthinkably to us brought into being from all time, nay rather before all times, by the Father's transcendent and inconceivable Will and Power. “For who shall describe his generation?” he says, and “As no one knoweth the Father save the Son, so no one knoweth the Son save the Father that begat Him.” http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_06_book4.htm
Eusebius said that the Son was not at one time non-existent…hmmm.
Kathi
In this quote from Eusebius, we see that he referred to the Son as the 'Creator Himself.'
Quote Such, then, was the Son, sole-begotten of His will, Master of fair crafts and Creator of all things, Whom the Highest God, God and Father of the Creator Himself first before all begat, setting in Him and through Him the creative proportions of things about to be, and casting in Him the seeds of  the constitution and the government of the Universe. Here in this quote we can see that Eusebius understands the scriptures to be speaking of two Lords (Jehovah is what the Hebrew word is for 'LORD' in the OT at this event which Eusebius references), btw, he also does not consider the Son as one of the subordinate angels as you can see here:
Quote 9. Moses most clearly proclaims him second Lord after the Father, when he says, “The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord.”3333 Gen. xix. 24. The divine Scripture also calls him God, when he appeared again to Jacob in the form of a man, and said to Jacob, “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name, because thou hast prevailed with God.”3434 Gen. xxxii. 28. Wherefore also Jacob called the name of that place “Vision of God,”3535 εἶδος θεοῦ. saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”3636 Gen. xxxii. 30. 10. Nor is it admissible to suppose that the theophanies recorded were appearances of subordinate angels and ministers of God, for whenever any of these appeared to men, the Scripture does not conceal the fact, but calls them by name not God nor Lord, but angels, as it is easy to prove by numberless testimonies.
from here: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.vi.ii.html
Quote (Lightenup @ Dec. 05 2011,06:01) Here in this quote we can see that Eusebius understands the scriptures to be speaking of two Lords (Jehovah is what the Hebrew word is for 'LORD' in the OT at this event which Eusebius references), btw, he also does not consider the Son as one of the subordinate angels as you can see here: Quote 9. Moses most clearly proclaims him second Lord after the Father, when he says, “The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord.”3333 Gen. xix. 24. The divine Scripture also calls him God, when he appeared again to Jacob in the form of a man, and said to Jacob, “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name, because thou hast prevailed with God.”3434 Gen. xxxii. 28. Wherefore also Jacob called the name of that place “Vision of God,”3535 εἶδος θεοῦ. saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”3636 Gen. xxxii. 30. 10. Nor is it admissible to suppose that the theophanies recorded were appearances of subordinate angels and ministers of God, for whenever any of these appeared to men, the Scripture does not conceal the fact, but calls them by name not God nor Lord, but angels, as it is easy to prove by numberless testimonies.
from here: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.vi.ii.html
Greetings Kathi ….. I find it interesting to delve into the philisophical side of theology,however,the purpose should be to sure up what one has come to know as truth and so believes… It is very easy to become ensnared by the seduction of knowing things that most do not… Iam also curious as to these writings and will follow the link… Good to speak to you again..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
