The Council was forced to take this action because it does not agree with their method of work which is designed to confuse them with already existing well established organizations, and also because we feel that their objectives do not accurately reflect the legacy of Emperor Haile Selassie I.
They give not merely a sense of belonging; they give a sense of pride, and — to use the term coined by my colleague, Gregory Copley — “identity security”.
The letter doesn’t stand alone. It is housed in a small volume with other letters to Longman by Wordsworth’s sister Dorothy as well as his friend Samuel Taylor Coleridge. It belonged to R. G. Longman and these letters were clearly treasured by the Longman family as the volume was created especially to house them. You’d be forgiven for thinking that the volume contained only letters written by Coleridge as his name is the only one to grace the spine. A note inside the cover states: ‘4 ST Coleridge letters left to me by my uncle, T. N. Longman’. A further note underneath this was added many years later recording the addition of the letters by William and Dorothy. Given the strong bond of love and friendship between the three of them, it seems only fitting that the letters should reside together.
Origenistic exegesis?When I read the comment of Eusebius, I was reminded of the statement inOrigen's 4, 3, 5, that in Scripture:
'all has a spiritual meaning, but not everything has a literal meaning.'Eusebius' mentor Pamphilus wrote a defence of Origen, to which Eusebius addeda final book (all now lost except for an unreliable Latin version of the firstbook by Rufinus). It seemed to me that Eusebius has the allegoricalapproach of this school in mind.
But to persuade people of it isnot easy.' Plato disagrees; but Eusebius omitted his disagreement. Eusebius' comments follow this connecting phrase in the .
[Note: Plato does goon to say that in fact people will easily believe quite ridiculous stories - but Eusebius skips thatbit. Since Eusebius' point is that some people have difficultyunderstanding some things (a theme already raised in, in which Eusebius explains his view of scripture), and soscripture resorts to narrative fiction to help them visualise the abstract, itis not surprising that he ignores this part of the . Since hedoes ignore it, it has to be asked whether it is relevant in understanding thepoint of this part of the PE.]
Pulling it togetherI think we're asking too much of the text, and trying to build aphilosophical statement on an inference. Eusebius was concerned to show that Greek ideas had theirorigin in the bible. For this purpose he ransacked his library formaterial that would illustrate this. Of course this material was oftenwritten with quite other values in mind, and we need not suppose that every wordhe quotes supports his thesis, or is even relevant. In of the PE he returns to the Laws, a bit further on, and in his comment heignores all of what he quotes apart from the conclusion. In chapter 31, heis responding to the observation of Clinias, picking up on the idea of fictionas a way to convince more easily than reason, and making a general point aboutthe bible. That Plato's purpose is to the advantage of the community, andthe disadvantage of the individual is irrelevant to Eusebius, and he ignoresit. All he picks up on is the method of teaching a useful idea, by meansof words not strictly true.
Of the rest each one endured different forms of torture. [etc]I think we can see that v.2 is the bit that Gibbon has used. Butdoes it mean what Gibbon says? Or is Eusebius, faced with a hugeamount of material for contemporary events, simply honestly stating thatfrom here on he won't cover everything, but only those which are in someway useful to know about, whether positive, or negative but with a usefulmoral, and for the rest stick to general statements? It seems asif that the latter is more consistent with the context, although one couldmake out some sort of case that Gibbon is misrepresenting something thatis really there in Eusebius. But is the idea that Gibbon is makingin Eusebius' mind at all? Surely he's thinking about writing somethinguseful to his public?
The Martyrs of PalestineThis is an appendix to Book VIII of the HE, and is not a history buta martyrology - a book intended for devotional use. Here's the ANFtext:1. I Think it best to pass by all the other events which occurredin the meantime: such as those which happened to the bishops of the churches,when instead of shepherds of the rational flocks of Christ, over whichthey presided in an unlawful manner, the divine judgment, considering themworthy of such a charge, made them keepers of camels, an irrational beastand very crooked in the structure of its body, or condemned them to havethe care of the imperial horses;-and I pass by also the insults and disgracesand tortures they endured from the imperial overseers and rulers on accountof the sacred vessels and treasures of the Church; and besides these thelust of power on the part of many, the disorderly and unlawful ordinations,and the schisms among the confessors themselves; also the novelties whichwere zealously devised against the remnants of the Church by the new andfactious members, who added innovation after innovation and forced themin unsparingly among the calamities of the persecution, heaping misfortuneupon misfortune.
When also,according to another prophetic word, "Contempt was poured out upon rulers,and he caused them to wander in an untrodden and pathless way."2 But it is not our place to describe the sad misfortunes which finallycame upon them, as we do not think it proper, moreover, to record theirdivisions and unnatural conduct to each other before the persecution.
As we have seen, Gibbon's statements do not tie up much with what Eusebiuswrote. It is fair to say that Gibbon gave the facts the worst interpretationthey could bear. The master of English prose also phrased his remarksin such a way that many people would take them as meaning more than hesaid - and he placed no barrier to that interpretation. And so itduly occurred.
my citations of the thoughts of Lloyd-Jonesand Käsemann concerning this view in part one above). Of course,the Jews themselves are not thinking this way any more than did Paul thinkthis way before he trusted Christ. His description in 7:14-25 isnot a psychological depiction of the agony the Jew feels while trying toobey the law; if it were, the entire Jewish nation would have been rushingto faith in Christ for relief from their struggle! Paul's descriptionis more pointedly the Christian awareness of the inability of humanityapart from God to do what is good, which, in the final analysis, wouldbe to come to Christ on our own and by our own efforts. The purposeof the law is to lead people to Christ for justification (cf.
Some person unknowing excerpted Gibbon into some sort of anthology ofanti-Christian 'evidence'. Someone else (who probably honestly didn'tnotice Gibbon's little qualification) then altered the indirect statementto direct statement, producing our 'quote'. How the reference tothe Praeparatio became attached to it is hard to say, except that mostpeople have access to the text of the HE and MP, and no-one to the Praeparatio. Perhaps some quote or other from the Praeparatio also appeared in our anthologyand crossed over?
So “traditional leadership” is not something which takes away from modern, elected governance, it is something which adds to it, and actually makesmodern government more feasible, giving the population a sense of belonging with, and pride in, their civil institutions.