Scan barcode
jbalmet's review against another edition
5.0
I enjoyed this book as a look at the earliest history of the church. It also includes commentary that helps explain Eusebius’ view on some things, which I found interesting and helpful.
evygirl's review against another edition
2.0
Only good part was when he describes a Roman emperor getting horrible stomach problems
kathryninthelibrary's review against another edition
3.0
I started Eusebius' History of the Church right after finishing Act in my daily Bible reading. While I liked the continuity this provided, I quickly became bogged down in second-century history that simply doesn't interest me as much as the lore surrounding the apostles in the first-century. I say "lore" because I would caution anyone to treat this work as pure truth. While this history is interesting on a speculative level, at the end of the day it is not the inspired Word and should be taken with a grain of salt. There are other issues, but I will say it is a relevant read, even for modern Christians and the issues we face today, because since the beginning of the church (and really the beginning of creation) there is nothing new under the sun.
notwellread's review against another edition
4.0
[Disclaimer: this review was written some time after my completion of the book. Please judge accordingly.]
Eusebius gives us the only historical account of the origins of the Christian Church. In doing so, he created an entire new genre in the form of church history. The emphasis on factual data is one not otherwise found in texts of this period, and many documents and details he includes would otherwise be lost. Like many of his historical subjects, he was imprisoned and tortured during the Roman persecutions, and saw many of his friends and contemporaries suffer martyrdom.
Although Eusebius provides for us a vital source, he is by no means an objective historian: not only was he writing with the perpetual persecution of his people in mind, as well as experiencing it himself, but also writes to elevate and exemplify the figures he admires (especially Polycarp, Origen, and Constantine). It is worth noting that this is entirely in keeping with Classical tradition: Eusebius is sometimes called ‘the Christian Herodotus’, and just like the latter he is writing “so that things done by man not be forgotten in time, and that great and marvellous deeds…not lose their glory” (Histories 1.1). Since no historian (or human being in general) can ever be entirely objective, in a way this is a more honest approach than what is portrayed by some historians today.
A lot of Christians don’t realise the instability of the early church: it’s implied a little in Ignatius’ letters, but laid out much more explicitly here. Things were not plain sailing from Christ’s death to the full establishment of the church; there was a great deal of controversy, argument, and conflict between travelling prophets and established churches, not to mention different schools of thought. We have a little evidence of the disputes between scholars, communicated through letters with arguments taking them to surprising theological heights, though most of this is lost today. Even after the Council of Nicaea, many of these issues (and at that time, particularly the status of Arianism) could hardly be considered settled.
One of the most important aspects of the History is the Christian perspective on their persecution, where otherwise Roman sources (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger) predominate with little to balance them. Christians today are sometimes prone to a ‘persecution complex’ with little to justify it, and even here Eusebius sometimes elicits the response that he takes too much pride or righteous indignation in the way his brothers in the church suffered so horrifically. Since it is so often cited that Christ himself predicted the further persecution of his followers, there may be an element of vindication, or of ‘fulfilling one’s destiny’, in this. On the other hand, the level of gruesome detail Eusebius offers may simply be intended to make the event more ‘real’ to the reader; much like graphic medieval artworks, we’re meant to feel the suffering ourselves as we look upon it, and to share in their religious experience. Either way, there is a concerted effort to relive the experiences of Jesus, and to attempt to mirror his suffering.
It remains strange that such an obscure little group would become the most popular religion ever. I have always thought that the Romans didn’t help matters if they wished to suppress them, since the Christians were so effective in turning their own tactics around on them. They could never kill them all, and the impression they left on bystanders in their willingness to die did more damage than they ever could have done themselves. I think this process, and Eusebius’ industrious chronicling of it all, has more to do with their success than the political manoeuvre embodied in the conversion of Constantine.
Eusebius gives us the only historical account of the origins of the Christian Church. In doing so, he created an entire new genre in the form of church history. The emphasis on factual data is one not otherwise found in texts of this period, and many documents and details he includes would otherwise be lost. Like many of his historical subjects, he was imprisoned and tortured during the Roman persecutions, and saw many of his friends and contemporaries suffer martyrdom.
Although Eusebius provides for us a vital source, he is by no means an objective historian: not only was he writing with the perpetual persecution of his people in mind, as well as experiencing it himself, but also writes to elevate and exemplify the figures he admires (especially Polycarp, Origen, and Constantine). It is worth noting that this is entirely in keeping with Classical tradition: Eusebius is sometimes called ‘the Christian Herodotus’, and just like the latter he is writing “so that things done by man not be forgotten in time, and that great and marvellous deeds…not lose their glory” (Histories 1.1). Since no historian (or human being in general) can ever be entirely objective, in a way this is a more honest approach than what is portrayed by some historians today.
A lot of Christians don’t realise the instability of the early church: it’s implied a little in Ignatius’ letters, but laid out much more explicitly here. Things were not plain sailing from Christ’s death to the full establishment of the church; there was a great deal of controversy, argument, and conflict between travelling prophets and established churches, not to mention different schools of thought. We have a little evidence of the disputes between scholars, communicated through letters with arguments taking them to surprising theological heights, though most of this is lost today. Even after the Council of Nicaea, many of these issues (and at that time, particularly the status of Arianism) could hardly be considered settled.
One of the most important aspects of the History is the Christian perspective on their persecution, where otherwise Roman sources (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger) predominate with little to balance them. Christians today are sometimes prone to a ‘persecution complex’ with little to justify it, and even here Eusebius sometimes elicits the response that he takes too much pride or righteous indignation in the way his brothers in the church suffered so horrifically. Since it is so often cited that Christ himself predicted the further persecution of his followers, there may be an element of vindication, or of ‘fulfilling one’s destiny’, in this. On the other hand, the level of gruesome detail Eusebius offers may simply be intended to make the event more ‘real’ to the reader; much like graphic medieval artworks, we’re meant to feel the suffering ourselves as we look upon it, and to share in their religious experience. Either way, there is a concerted effort to relive the experiences of Jesus, and to attempt to mirror his suffering.
It remains strange that such an obscure little group would become the most popular religion ever. I have always thought that the Romans didn’t help matters if they wished to suppress them, since the Christians were so effective in turning their own tactics around on them. They could never kill them all, and the impression they left on bystanders in their willingness to die did more damage than they ever could have done themselves. I think this process, and Eusebius’ industrious chronicling of it all, has more to do with their success than the political manoeuvre embodied in the conversion of Constantine.
mikusa's review against another edition
4.0
This was quite well written and presented. On the audio version it was hard to distinguish the text from the footnotes. Otherwise, the author's commentary was quite useful in a translation that was very approachable. The author provides some good skeptical criticism of some of Eusebius' writings, but seems to forget that when he describes Eusebius overall as being very accurate and a good historian. Eusebius was far from a good historian but I'm thankful that what he wrote was at least preserved.
tim_michiemo's review
3.0
3.3 Stars
The Church History, by Eusebius of Caesarea, is a classic work of church history. Eusebius, who was born in the 4th Century, details the history of the Christian church from Christ to Constantine. The Church History is an interesting book. Eusebius' work is well known for its inaccuracies, hagiographic nature, and copious quotations, and yet it is an immeasurably valuable ancient writing that has preserved many other ancient writings that have been lost to us. If this were a modern book, I would have rated this book much lower. But because Eusebius' work was one of the first of its kind and it is so valuable to Church historians of the early church, I view this as a good book.
One of the takeaways from Eusebius' book is that "the Church History" gives us more of a look into the 4th-century Christian mind, than the actual workings of the early church. Clearly, much of Eusebius' documenting of the early church is influenced by his 4th-century thinking. Another takeaway is Eusebius' reverence for the martyr. Eusebius spends copious amounts of time detailing out the sufferings of the early Christians and their endurance through hope in God. Last, is Eusebius' view of the development of history. Eusebius views Constantine as the consummate victory of the Christian church. Now that the Christian church has endured through persecution and trials they have now been rescued by God's emissary, Constantine the Great, and will now enter an age of piety and influence. Eusebius' views on Constantine will influence many later Christian thinkers as the age of Christendom begins to emerge.
Overall, this book is a valuable book to Church historians and scholars. For most casual readers, I would not recommend this book. It is repetitive at times, choppy, disorganized, and exaggerative. Yet, it is an invaluable piece of history that should be valuable by all and that Christians should thank God that we have.
The Church History, by Eusebius of Caesarea, is a classic work of church history. Eusebius, who was born in the 4th Century, details the history of the Christian church from Christ to Constantine. The Church History is an interesting book. Eusebius' work is well known for its inaccuracies, hagiographic nature, and copious quotations, and yet it is an immeasurably valuable ancient writing that has preserved many other ancient writings that have been lost to us. If this were a modern book, I would have rated this book much lower. But because Eusebius' work was one of the first of its kind and it is so valuable to Church historians of the early church, I view this as a good book.
One of the takeaways from Eusebius' book is that "the Church History" gives us more of a look into the 4th-century Christian mind, than the actual workings of the early church. Clearly, much of Eusebius' documenting of the early church is influenced by his 4th-century thinking. Another takeaway is Eusebius' reverence for the martyr. Eusebius spends copious amounts of time detailing out the sufferings of the early Christians and their endurance through hope in God. Last, is Eusebius' view of the development of history. Eusebius views Constantine as the consummate victory of the Christian church. Now that the Christian church has endured through persecution and trials they have now been rescued by God's emissary, Constantine the Great, and will now enter an age of piety and influence. Eusebius' views on Constantine will influence many later Christian thinkers as the age of Christendom begins to emerge.
Overall, this book is a valuable book to Church historians and scholars. For most casual readers, I would not recommend this book. It is repetitive at times, choppy, disorganized, and exaggerative. Yet, it is an invaluable piece of history that should be valuable by all and that Christians should thank God that we have.
dkevanstoronto's review against another edition
5.0
Eusebius paints a picture of an early Christianity coming to terms with its fractured community and the prospect of universal power as the state religion of the Roman Empire around 313 CE.
It's easy to criticize Eusebius in his History of the Church as an apologist for Empire and one who buries so much of the Christian tradition to justify its alteration into a state religion. The situation though was not easy one, and the unity of the church mirrored the unity of the Empire itself. It was also an Empire that desperately needed unity.
Just looking at the extremes of interpretation of the life of Christ you get a sense of how different that reality was. In this Eusebius adequately shows the development and the confusion in Church history. With the interpretation of Marcion of Sinope Christ is purely divine and not human at all. With the earliest and most popular heresey of the Ebionites Christ is a man who followed the Judaic law so well God asked him to sacrifice himself to save mankind. To these extremes and many more the Empire and Eusebius in this work attempts to strike a balance. With this theological settlement Christ is both man and God, and the mysterious Trinity becomes a miracle that all Christians must agree to.
This is a remarkable text. For both believer and non-believer the history of the Christian Church gives a picture of faith, bravery and doubt. This history was not a straight path. The story given here is a testament to the indomitable spirit of man as well as a profoundly beautiful vision of the early Church.
It's easy to criticize Eusebius in his History of the Church as an apologist for Empire and one who buries so much of the Christian tradition to justify its alteration into a state religion. The situation though was not easy one, and the unity of the church mirrored the unity of the Empire itself. It was also an Empire that desperately needed unity.
Just looking at the extremes of interpretation of the life of Christ you get a sense of how different that reality was. In this Eusebius adequately shows the development and the confusion in Church history. With the interpretation of Marcion of Sinope Christ is purely divine and not human at all. With the earliest and most popular heresey of the Ebionites Christ is a man who followed the Judaic law so well God asked him to sacrifice himself to save mankind. To these extremes and many more the Empire and Eusebius in this work attempts to strike a balance. With this theological settlement Christ is both man and God, and the mysterious Trinity becomes a miracle that all Christians must agree to.
This is a remarkable text. For both believer and non-believer the history of the Christian Church gives a picture of faith, bravery and doubt. This history was not a straight path. The story given here is a testament to the indomitable spirit of man as well as a profoundly beautiful vision of the early Church.
rick_sam's review against another edition
4.0
Eusebius is a scholar, I learnt a lot of new things from this book. I am encouraged by the Early Church fathers especially Origen. It seems that the Early Christians had to face internal threats (heresies), external threats (ridicule, persecution), this is simply too much to Handle but God blessed them. The persecutions in the Roman empire is appalling. There's depth details about persecution especially during Diocletian Era, I could not digest a lot. I wish the Christians today would read this and teach their children. All the Church fathers had written polemics, defended the Christian claims during their Era. The Questions today faced by the Church are nothing great compared to their Era. Overall, a Great book, Eusebius taught me how the Early Bishops were, they were scholars, preachers, philosophers.