Spirituality Column #799

March 8, 2022

Common Christianity / Uncommon Commentary

Eusebius and Athanasius

By Bob Walters

Owing to my affection for church history, Eusebius and Athanasius have popped up recently in my email notes and posts.  Who are those guys?

Both were bishops circa 300 A.D. (or C.E. – Common Era – for the secularists and academic nerds).  It’s not like you need to know these two fellows in order to know Jesus, but because of them the development of the Christian church was both reported on and defended from heresy.  They provide original history and orthodox truth.

I think it is a mistake to limit our scope of faith or engage our modern Sunday worship at church by jumping whole-cloth from the Book of Acts (2:42) and the Apostle Paul in the first century to Billy Graham and Pope John Paul II in the 20^th century.

It takes effort to erase centuries of bald spots, but we find there are no gaps.

Addressing the early going, I just finished reading Eusebius’ The Church History (English translation and notes by Paul L. Meier).  The book is four-hundred eye-opening pages about who developed the church, assembled the Bible, discerned the canon, defended against heresies, tried to destroy both the Bible and Christians (persecutions), and how terrible those persecutions were.  Many texts Eusebius quotes no longer exist.

Eusebius (you-SEE-bee-us) of Caesarea, recounts in nearly real time the key church and Bible dialogues of early Christianity.  Like … when should Easter be celebrated?  Who wrote Hebrews?  Why the “variant genealogies” of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 6?  Who actually wrote Revelation?  John? Documents herald Revelation as Spirit-inspired but say the Greek style does not match John’s Gospel and Letters at all.

Athanasius (at-uh-NAY-sh’ess) of Alexandria wrote eloquently (e.g. On the Incarnation) and convincingly (Against the Arians).  The Arian heresy took hold in the late third century and, in the shortest of shorthand, asserted that Jesus was a man but not God.  Athanasius’ defense led to the Council of Nicaea, convened in 325 A.D. which later gave us the Nicene Creed: “I believe in one God the father Almighty …” etc.

My lament against the modern Bible-based church – my church – is its communal absence of interest, understanding, or appreciation for all that came before and the oft-miraculous heroics of the early faithful and martyrs.  Now?  We peruse an MSG Bible and sip latte while pondering hip, therapeutic devotionals.  Christ is served?

My lament against the liturgical and historic churches – Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, mainline Protestants – is their prevalent, congregation-wide, gaping biblical illiteracy.  Scripture?  It is the clergy’s and church’s job to study and discern Bible truth, and to broker a believer’s relationship with Jesus.  Seems demeaning and distancing.

When Luther broke the Christian world into newly-awakened pieces in 1517 A.D., it was because Luther, unlike other Roman seminarians of the era, read his Bible.

Why care about this ancient stuff?  I care because it establishes a vivid, real, and trackable timeline and relationship chain retracing this breath I’m taking right now back to the last breaths Jesus panted on the Cross.  It is evidence His love is never-ending.

I understand Christianity is about the future, but the solid foundation of where this truth came from, and why we can believe it, speaks resolute and convincing volumes.

The early church wasn’t therapy, it was truth.  Praise God for those who kept it.

Walters (rlwcom@aol.com) is still a B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini, Year of our Lord) guy.  Academia’s B.C.E. (Before Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era) seem annoying affectations of those who value “inclusion” over truth.  Jesus turned the world around, including the calendar, and humanity around, providing hope.