Theodore is was the Bishop of Mopsuestia in the late 4th and early 5th centuries, a town in the vicinity of Antioch. He was a fellow student of the much more famous Chrysostom. He is a good representative of the interpretive method that Antioch is known for, more historical/grammatical/literal and less allegorical like their Alexandrian counterparts. He is (in)famous for his association with Nestorianism. Nestorianism’s namesake, Nestorius, was his pupil and became Archbishop of Constantinople in the year Theodore died. It was after Theodore’s death that Nestorius was condemned and Theodore with him.
Category: Early Christianity
So I was planning on starting to blog about Theophilus of Antioch, but that will wait. At the end of the week I received a request for comment about a bit of Greek from Epiphanius’ Panarion. Figured I would share about that.
For the last several Sundays I have been taking our adult morning study group through a survey of early Christianity. It has been a lot of fun. Also, I know there are some out there in the ether that are listening to the recordings, so I've been meaning to post the readings (and discussion questions when I have them)...and here they are (or were), including the readings I'm taking the group through this Sunday. I hope someone finds this beneficial.
Just saw this post over at The Way of the Fathers blog All of Migne? Not quite. But I'm glad to see it online.
Thanks for pointing it out, Mike.
Ran across this is my reading just now. It's not surprising but is worth jotting down so I can find it later.
In Irenaeus' Against Heresies IV 20:2 says "Truly, then, the Scripture declared, which says..." and then proceeded to quote the Shepherd of Hermas, Commandment 1. Like I said...not surprising. But there it is if you need a reference to something like that.
Some friends and I are reading through Augustine's On Christian Doctrine together. It's a pretty interesting volume. This week we met to discuss book 2 which had quite a bit to say about the Septuagint (LXX). For easy reference, here are some interesting quotes. And just because it would be exceedingly annoying to actually type these in, I'm just going to copy from ccat, at least usually.
Today was the first actual day of SBL for me. It began bright and early at 9:00 with the first meeting of the Computer Assisted Research section.
Today I was searching for the text of the anti-Marcionite prologues for books of the New Testament (surprisingly hard to find) and came upon some interesting things. In my never-ceasing quest to not be completely useless, here are the three things I found:
The title of the post was taken from this post over at godfearin.blogspot.com. It and its comment thread are definitely worth reading.
So I was checking out some of the materials on the most recent patristics carnival over at Hyperekperissou (by the way Phil, are you aware of this other hyperekperissou blog?). As you know I have a keen interest in the development of the canon and other things in early/archaic Christian history, so the the couple articles on the topic caught my eye. One is here and the other is here.
The review is now posted in my "Reviews" section. You can read it here.
If you have any questions or thoughts, feel free to leave a note here.
Random interesting stuff for the day:
Today I read an interesting article from the latest issue of Themelios (which can be found here in PDF). Not only does it use a nice serif font for the article text (I wonder what it is) but the article itself is interesting. If you are interested in the early church's thinking on Christianity and violence, it is certainly worth your read.
Decoding Early Christianity: Truth and Legend in the Early Church is a book I was able to pick up off of the new books shelf at DTS. It looked interesting enough, had a cool cover (even if a bit odd for the subject matter), a great title, was short, and fell within my reading interests, so I decided to check it out. In summary, it is a book of inconsistent quality, and will not be the book I end up recommending for a good introduction to early Christianity (despite its cool name).
So what will reading the Epistle to Diognetus (hereafter Diogn as is recommended in the SBL Handbook of Style) tell us about the views of the Apostolic Fathers on authority, revelation, Scripture, etc.? Let's find out.
As I mentioned in a recent post on Ignatius, I am beginning a new series. This series discusses how the Apostolic Fathers viewed viewed authority, revelation, the New and Old Testament documents, tradition, and other related important things. This is ultimately to bring this data, along with the witness of the New and Old Testament writings, in for a discussion of church authority and Scripture in modern Christianity.
Well, he had a σκέπαρνον ("axe") anyway. So I read only one more chapter (#9) in the Protoevangelium of James today. My cold/flu/crud pretty much kept me down today.
The quixotic infidel had a very good visualization for describing the canonical status of various books by various entities in early Christianity.
Michael from Pisteuomen is in a discussion with the author of the blog on the authorship of Hebrews. I happen to agree with Quixie; Paul did not write Hebrews.