FATHER EUSEBIUS

FATHER EUSEBIUS – FORGER

Hugh Fogelman

Who was Father Eusebius? He was just about the most important man in the early history of the Christian church. Some say he was the "yeast" and his history of the Church was the "bread" on which Christianity was formed. Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea was born in 260 CE and died in 339 CE. He wrote the famous "Historia Ecclesiastica," which was published in 325 CE, seventy-two years before the New Testament was canonized. His book has been referred to as the History of the Church, which laid down the course of Christianity that is still in effect today.

It was with Eusebius' help that his close friend, the ex-pagan Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, won the crown. His close relationship with Constantine, it was easy to bring about the agreement in 329 that gave official sanction to Roman Catholicism as the State Religion of the Roman Empire. Until this time, almost 300 years after the death of Jesus, the New Testament as we know it today did not exist. What did exist were various writings and notes written by Jesus' disciples and followers. The Church Council of Nicaea in 325 CE was presided over by Constantine with Eusebius at his right hand. It was there that the cardinal principle of unity was established. From that time until the Reformation in the 16^th Century there was only one form of Christianity–that which Eusebius had helped to create.

Eusebius wrote, "the names of Jesus and Christ were both known and honored by the ancients" (Hist. Eccl. lib. i. ch. iv). Eusebius, who is Christianity’s chief guide for the early history of the Church, confesses that he was by no means scrupulous (giving careful attention to what is right or proper), to record the whole truth concerning the early Christians in the various works that he has left behind him. (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., ch.8 p. 21).

In the book "Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" it states that: "Eusebius indirectly confesses that he had included stories that would do credit to the glory of Christianity and he had suppressed all that could tend to discredit Christianity. The carefulness of the historian has exposed his own character of censorship" (Eusebius and the Christian Martyrs, Chapter 16, pg. 197).

Edward Gibbon, speaking of Eusebius wrote:

"The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related what might rebound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of religion. Such an acknowledgment will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of history has not paid a very strict regard to the observance of the other; and the suspicion will derive additional credit from the character of Eusebius, which was less tinctured with credulity, and more practiced in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of his contemporaries" (Gibbon, Rome, vol. ii., Philadelphia, 1876).

Gibbon also wrote:

"It must be confessed that the ministers of the Catholic Church imitated the profane model which they were impatient to destroy. The most respectable bishops had persuaded themselves that the ignorant rustics would more cheerfully renounce the superstitions of Paganism if they found some resemblance, some compensation, in the bosom of Christianity. The religion of Constantine achieved in less than a century the final conquest of the Roman empire; but the victors themselves were insensibly subdued by the arts of their vanquished rivals" (Gibbon, Rome, vol. iii. p. 163).

Dr. Robert L. Wilken, first Protestant scholar to be admitted to the staff of Fordham University recently wrote:

"Eusebius wrote a history of Christianity in which there is no real history. Eusebius was the first thoroughly dishonest and unfair historian in ancient times".

Another scholar, Joseph Wheless charged that Eusebius was one of the most prolific forgers and liars of his age in the church.

After reading the above, one should ask two questions:

1. Just how truth worthy are the writings in the New Testament? And

2. Are Christians following a man-made faith?

Paul L. Maier (1999) wrote:

“They cannot deny their crime: the copies are in their own handwriting, they did not receive the Scriptures in this condition from their teachers, and they cannot produce originals from which they made their copies. Some have even found it unnecessary to emend the text but have simply rejected the Law and the Prophets, using a wicked, godless teaching to plunge into the lowest depths of destruction. They have not been afraid to corrupt divine Scriptures, they have rescinded the rule of ancient faith, they have not known Christ, they ignore Scripture but search for a logic to support their atheism. If anyone challenges them with a passage from Scripture, they examine it to see if it can be turned into a common syllogism. Abandoning the holy Scripture of God, they study "geometry" [earth measurement], for they are from the earth and speak of the earth and do not know the One who comes from above.” From Book 5 section 28

After reading how the Church Historian, Eusebius altered early writings to fit his own idea and concept of how he believed Jesus was, could the Christian truly believe that Jesus said all the things credited to him? Are Christians willing to put their souls on the line? Those who will never question what has been written and use “blind faith” as their logic will always dismiss any claims, evidence and facts that have been produced to show that this religion is faulty and could never had happened in the way the New Testament presents it. Like the old saying goes: “Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's already made up!" Are you one of them?

Paul Maier continues:

“Many manuscripts are available because their disciples zealously made copies of their "corrected" -though really corrupted-texts. This sinful impudence can hardly have been unknown to the copyists, who either do not believe the Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit and are unbelievers or deem themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit and are possessed.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia, published with the imprimatur of the Roman Catholic authorities, tell us that the decision to have four gospels instead of just one is credited to the early church father St. Irenaeus, who was the first writer to mention the four gospels by name.

St. Irenaeus wrote:

"It is not possible that the gospels be either more or fewer than they are. For since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principle winds, while the Church is scattered throughout the world and the pillar and ground of the Church is the gospel, it is fitting that we should have four pillars breathing out immortality on every side" (Catholic Encyclopedia vol. VI, pg. 659).

As for the writings of Paul, the Encyclopedia Biblica states categorically:

"With respect to the Canonical Pauline Epistles, none of them are by Paul. They are all, without distinction, pseudographia (false writings). The group (ten epistles) bears obvious marks of a certain unity, of having originated in one circle, at one time, in one environment, but not of unity of authorship" (Encyclopedia Biblica III pg. 3625-26).

The Father of Christianity appears to be Paul and the Father of the history of the Christian Church appears to be Eusebius. Both never knew or walked with Jesus. Yet, Christians today believe everything these two men want them to believe. Christians believe every word they read and hear to be the words from God.

And they are betting their souls on those man-made words. How sad!

RETURN