We are going to have to move through material pretty quickly in the next several weeks. In order to expedite matters, I would appreciate it if you would skim the first two books (not chapters) of Euesebius of Caesarea's History of the Church for Tuesday's class (April 9). Read more carefully the first two pages and a few passages that particularly get your attention. We are going to be looking at Eusebius' strengths and weaknesses as a historian.
In my view, a good history should be interesting. Do Books I and II meet this standard? What do you find interesting in these books? Does Eusebius ever lose your attention? If so, why?
Please bring the book to class with you Tuesday.
In Book I, I found the passage about the use of the names Jesus and Christ to be very interesting. I especially found how Moses was the first to announce how glorious the name Christ was to be very interesting. To think that prophets and religious figureheads like Moses were talking about Christ so many years before He came to earth is pretty cool. I also found Book II to be interesting. I especially found the part about Tiberius finding out about Jesus to be very interesting. It sounds like Tiberius was a believer and proposed the idea to the Roman senate who rejected that Christ was a God. I found it extremely interesting how the Romans went about and voted on whether someone could be a god or not.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy how Eusebius puts his information in a neat pattern and presents this information in stories. That makes it easier to follow along. The only times he lost me is when he continued to use names of figures that I really do not know much about.
By skimming the first few books, I was really mind-boggled with the numbering system that the author uses to break up his thoughts. To me as a reader, this made the books much more difficult to read and to comprehend, just because of how they were broken up into smaller pieces. But, this does not mean that I didn't like the books as a whole. Because I still feel like Eusebius presents the history of the church in a decently interesting way.
ReplyDeleteFor example, chapter nine, entitled The Times of Pilate, is actually very interesting and very short. It only has three short paragraphs numbered one, two and three. Overall, I think it takes some getting used to, but this style of writing can be useful in getting information in an easier manner
I found it interesting how Eusebius quotes and talks about many other authors and contrasts them with divine scripture. Some of the topics he talks about were interesting - I liked his explanation of the genealogy difference in Matthew and Luke. Some of the things in the first few sections of book I were pretty dry, though. Sometimes it seems like he’s pretty wordy, or adds things that aren’t really important or necessary? I’m excited to learn more about this guy and his book in class.
ReplyDeleteI think both books were interesting. I find it interesting that these books cover so much time into about 30ish pages. They cover very important stuff on Jesus and the apostles. I did not really lose my attention much because it was kind of brief and then went to the next topic. I think these books give you both a in-depth and good overview. I think quoting the Bible will help everyone understand this author. I thought Jesus and Christ names were known during Moses's time was a very interesting part.
ReplyDeleteI also thought that some parts of the books were a little dry and that he seems to be a little wordier than is entirely necessary at times. The division of the books into smaller chapters helped to make it a little easier to understand I think.
ReplyDeleteIf I am being completely honest, parts of the first 2 books, especially the first, lost my attention. There were a few factors in this, be it a college basketball game or opening day of baseball season, but my mind did wander a bit.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, I really appreciated they way the first 2 books basically lay out Jesus and the Apostles. I love the connections to the old testament and especially like the word uses that are brought out. Like Donavan, I thought it was very interesting that so much time was covered in just 30 or so pages. I am excited about reading more of this book.
Just skimming the books and it hard for me to understand but when I did understand a portion I found it to be interesting. In particular I found the portion about the disciples to be very interesting I had never really heard about the seventy disciples before .
ReplyDeleteAfter skimming through the first two books, I feel a bit conflicted as to how I feel about the material. At times, it is quite interesting, like when in Book 1 he talks about how as early as Moses, the term Christ was regarded as a holy and sacred name. I also liked the structure of the books, with each number marking a new section of material, easily defining where a topic begins and ends.
ReplyDeleteI did, however, think that Eusebius could get awfully long-winded in his writings. It is very easy to get distracted or lose interest while reading these books. At times, it gets very wordy, and its hard to follow along with all the different people that are being mentioned.
Unlike most, I found Eusebius to be a good and understandable read. I may not have read all I wanted to due to poor time management, but so be it.
ReplyDeleteI love how Eusebius wrote this work as a history of the Christians, by the Christians, and for the Christians (and everyone else). It's great how he doesn't pull punches with the Gnostics and uses Josephus as a cross reference.
Looking forward to the next chapters.