Please read Book III of his History of the Church. What do you see in this book that would be particularly worth adding to an essay on the strengths/weaknesses of Eusebius as a historian? Was there anything you found particularly interesting in this book?
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
From the history perspective the book follows in line very well with the first few chapters of the book. It follows the chronological chain of events of Christian history. I find it interesting on how this book talks about Jesus' relatives. You never hear about them in many christian books. The only ones who are ever talked about in the Bible are his parents and a couple relatives. It must have been difficult to be related to such an amazing person. Jesus being perfect and all powerful. It is almost a funny thought of Jesus as a kid and comparing his accomplishments to his relatives. -Kelly Longden
ReplyDeleteBook III is full of detailed information that would be appealing to any historian. I found it difficult to read because information is choppy and separated into chunks that I couldn't connect everything together. The long quotes from other books provide a background info I wouldn't otherwise be familiar with, but it also makes it hard to get through. I also don't know who all the bishops are and their significance so I wasn't able to fully appreciate the thoroughness of it. It’s just source after source!
ReplyDeleteI found the tiny chapter on the evangelist missionaries interesting. Service and spreading the Gospel is deeply rooted in Christianity and this reinforces that fact.
In book 3, Eusebius has great information and I was actually able to stay focused on it. However, I feel he is still struggling with jumping around with his information. Also, the order that he puts the information can be confusing at times. I feel Eusebius took whatever information he could find and put it in wherever he believed it could fit; confusing yes, but it still provides needed information for historians.
ReplyDelete-Melinda Quade
I find Book III interesting because in giving us histories of missions and persecutions Eusebius gives me some information I know and a lot that I never knew. I guess the only problem I have is that it's a lot to take in. I like how he always goes back to Jesus and explains what that means for the church but he also gives a lot of other people the spotlight as well. He highlights a lot of writings and gives many details to the persecution of Christians, like Trajan's Edict that called for the halt of hunting Christians- I like that because so far we've only had one source for Christian history (the New Testament) which is a great source but doesn't include a lot of the writings and details that Eusebius provides here. - Zach Kuhlman
ReplyDeleteBook III offers a rather important account of Christian persecution. It's astonishing to think of how Eusebius' recording of such an account would be so to instrumental in our understanding of the early church. In book III however, Eusebius seems to try to hard as his information is again rather disorganized and confusing. The information he provides is necessary and perhaps he documented it for future scholars to sort out later as they saw fit,
ReplyDelete-Zack Krage
The third book of Eusebius there was a lot of great info about the people not only related directly to Jesus but also his apostle and there life with wives, this I found very interesting in that one doesn't see this anywhere in the Bible, and in a way makes them have more of the human characteristics. Another one perhaps more important is that of the family directly linked to Jesus. As Kelly stated before you don't hear much about them in the Bible and I found that this was interesting. And finally the missions of the church and how Christianity spread.
ReplyDelete-Dylan Mickelson
He makes use of a number of distinct sources in his work for each topic. disregarding whether these sources are reliable, he does at least keep it varied rather than have the skewed perspective of one person for each subject, which i thought he was going to do when i kept seeing The Jewish War. this is a sign of not only a good historian but a good writer as well. I also agree with Kelly and Dylan in their opinions about the mention of Jesus' relatives. Until recently i didn't think Jesus had any form of lineage to speak of so i thought it was interesting. -Sean M.
ReplyDeleteIn this book he uses a lot of very specific sources that make it easier to believe that it is a reliable source. I love that when talked about the Jewish War book he used biblical references to show that this was predicted by Jesus and his disciples. He used very graphic descriptions which I was not particularly found of but I think that they are good because it would be hard to just completly make up a mother eating her own child. that is pretty graphic and this is one part that makes it easier to believe. -Taylor Linn
ReplyDeleteI think that much of the information that Eusebius includes is complementary to a lot of scripture in the Bible, and it gives a greater picture. Like others have said, the information at times seems a little choppy, but the translating has fortunately already been done for us.
ReplyDeleteSome stories that I found really interesting include the whole section about the destruction of famine that came upon the Jews during the siege. Certainly, at that time many might think that this horrifying event could be what Jesus had fortold, but I think their treatment in WWII could have applied as well, granted they lived well before that time.
Another section I found interesting was titled "Menander the Charlatan" (115). I honestly don't recall having come across an account of someone else claiming to be a savior, but it makes perfect sense. Especially if you're trying to sully the Christian faith by making it appear to have all just been sorcery and necromancy.
~Aaron Johnston
The obvious strength of this book is the sheer amount of detailed information and the passages from the sources Eusebius took the information from. However, like many of my classmates, found it difficult to get through. I did, however, find the section about John, the apostle beloved by Jesus, to be really interesting.
ReplyDeleteClaire DeMilia
Eusebius definitely likes to use primary sources. That is definitely considered a strength in the history department. He uses Josephus and other writers more than I initially thought, but after you pointed it out that is basically all he uses. Eusebius also justifies his sources by explaining all the works they wrote. The beginning of the book was detailed and scary. But it also sparked an interest. I didn't realize that they had been shut in Jerusalem when everyone was back for Pentecost.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy how Eusebius fills in the gaps, which is not to say that the bible is lacking in some of its information. Eusebius simply provides a clear picture as to what was going on during and in between the writing of the letters to the church. I really like how the book draws strait from scripture backing all of his other primary sources. (ex. Josephus) Over all with a historical outlook, Eusebius seems to provide what we are taught is important to documenting an effective historical timeline.
ReplyDelete