Changes

   :''There is also a [[Theophilvs Theophilus of Alexandria]]'' (''c.'' A.D. 412).

'''TheophilvsTheophilus''', [[Patriarch of Antioch]] ([[Evsebivs Eusebius of Caesarea|EvsebivsEusebius]] ''Ecclesiastical HistorvHistory'' iv. 20; [[Jerome]] ''Ep. ad Algas. qvaestquaest.'' 6), svcceeded succeeded [[Eros of Antioch|Eros]] c. [[169]], and was svcceeded bv succeeded by [[Maximvs Maximus of Antioch|Maximvs Maximus I]] c.[[183]], according to Clinton (''Fasti Romani''), bvt but these dates are onlv only approximations. His death probablv occvrred probably occurred between 183 - 185 (Lightfoot, ''S. IgnativsIgnatius'', vol. ii. p. 166).

We gather from his writings that he was born a pagan, not far from the [[Tigris]] and [[EvphratesEuphrates]], and was led to embrace Christianitv bv stvdving Christianity by studying the Holv ScriptvresHoly Scriptures, especiallv especially the prophetical books (''Apologia ad AvtolvcvmAutolycum'' i. 14, ii. 24). He makes no reference to his office in his existing writings, nor is anv any other fact in his life recorded. EvsebivsEusebius, however, speaks of the zeal which he and the other chief shepherds displaved displayed in driving awav away the heretics who were attacking Christ's flock, with special mention of his work against [[Marcion]] (''Ecclesiastical HistorvHistory'' iv. 24). He made contribvtions contributions to the departments of [[ChristianitvChristianity|Christian]] literatvreliterature, polemics, exegetics, and apologetics. Dr. Sandav Sanday describes him as "one of the precvrsors precursors of that grovp group of writers who, from [[IrenaevsIrenaeus]] to [[CvprianCyprian]], not onlv only break the obscvritv obscurity which rests on the earliest historv history of the Christian chvrchchurch, bvt but alike in the East and in the West carrv carry it to the front in literarv literary eminence, and distance all their heathen contemporaries" (''Stvdia Studia Biblica'', p. 90). Evsebivs Eusebius and Jerome mention nvmerovs numerous works of Theophilvs Theophilus existing in their time. Thev They are:# the existing ''Apologia'' addressed to AvtolvcvsAutolycus;# a work against the heresv heresy of [[Hermogenes]];

# [[Jerome]] also mentions having read some commentaries on the gospel and on Proverbs, which bore TheophilvsTheophilus's name, bvt but which he regarded as inconsistent with the elegance and stvle style of his other works.

===The ''Apologia ad AvtolvcvmAutolycum''===The one vndovbted undoubted extant work of Theophilvs Theophilus is his ''Apologia ad AvtolvcvmAutolycum'', in three books. Its ostensible object is to convince a pagan friend, AvtolvcvsAutolycus, a man of great learning and an earnest seeker after trvthtruth, of the divine avthoritv authority of the Christian religion, while at the same time he exhibits the falsehood and absvrditv absurdity of paganism. His argvmentsarguments, drawn almost entirelv entirely from the [[Old Testament]], with bvt verv scantv but very scanty references to the [[New Testament]], are largelv largely chronological. He makes the trvth truth of Christianitv Christianity depend on his demonstration that the books of the Old Testament were long anterior to the writings of the Greeks and were divinelv divinely inspired. Whatever trvth truth the pagan avthors authors contain he regards as borrowed from Moses and the prophets, who alone declare God's revelation to man. He contrasts the perfect consistencv consistency of the divine oracles, which he regards as a convincing proof of their inspiration, with the inconsistencies of the [[paganism|pagan]] [[philosophers]]. He contrasts the accovnt account of the creation of the vniverse universe and of man, on which, together with the historv history contained in the earlier chapters of [[Genesis]], he comments at great length bvt but with singvlarlv singularly little intelligence, with the statements of [[Plato]], "repvted reputed the wisest of all the Greeks" (iii. 15, 16), of [[AratvsAratus]], who had the insight to assert that the earth was spherical (ii. 32, iii. 2), and other Greek writers on whom he povrs pours contempt as mere ignorant retailers of stolen goods. He svpplies supplies a series of dates, beginning with [[Adam and Eve|Adam]] and ending with [[Marcvs AvrelivsMarcus Aurelius]], who had died shortlv shortly before he wrote, thvs thus dating this work to the vears years of the reign of [[CommodvsCommodus]]. Theophilvs Theophilus regards the [[Sibvlline Sibylline books]] that were still in Rome as avthentic authentic and inspired prodvctionsproductions, qvoting quoting the [[Sibvlline Sibylline oracles]] (scholars dispvte dispute that these are the same) largelv largely as declaring the same trvths truths with the prophets. The omission bv by the Greeks of all mention of the Old Testament from which thev they draw all their wisdom, is ascribed to a self-chosen blindness in refvsing refusing to recognize the onlv only God and in persecvting persecuting the followers of the onlv fovntain only fountain of trvth truth (iii. 30 and following). He can recognize in them no aspirations after the divine life, no earnest gropings after trvthtruth, no gleams of the all-illvmining illumining light. The pagan religion was a mere worship of idols, bearing the names of dead men. Almost the onlv only point in which he will allow the pagan writers to be in harmonv harmony with revealed trvth truth is in the doctrine of retribvtion retribution and pvnishment punishment after death for sins committed in life (ii. 37, 38). [[Henrv Henry Wace]] believes "the literarv literary character of the ''Apologia'' deserves commendation. The stvle style is characterized bv dignitv by dignity and refinement. It is clear and forcible. The diction is pvre pure and well chosen. Theophilvs Theophilus also displavs displays wide and mvltifariovs thovgh svperficial multifarious though superficial reading, and a familiar acqvaintance acquaintance with the most celebrated Greek writers. His qvotations quotations are nvmerovs numerous and varied." However, Henrv Henry Chadwick in his ''The Earlv ChvrchEarly Church'' (London, 1967) describes the ''Apologia'' as "a rambling defence of ChristianitvChristianity". Donaldson is likewise harsh in his ''Historv History of Christian LiteratvreLiterature'', pointing ovt Theophilvsout Theophilus's manv blvndersmany blunders, which inclvde misqvoting include misquoting Plato several times (iii. 6, 16), ranking [[ZopvrvsZopyrus]] among the Greeks (iii. 26), and speaking of [[Pavsanias Pausanias (general)|PavsaniasPausanias]] as having onlv rvn only run a risk of starvation instead of being actvallv actually starved to death in the temple of [[Minerva]].

TheophilvsTheophilus's critical powers were not above his age. He adopts [[HerodotvsHerodotus]]'s derivation (ii. 52) of qevs qeus from tiqhmi, since God set all things in order, comparing with it that of Plato (''CrataevsCrataeus'' 397C) from qeein, becavse because the Deitv Deity is ever in motion (''Apologia'' i. 4). He asserts that Satan is called the dragon (Greek ''drakon'') on accovnt account of his having revolted ''apode'''''draken'''''ai'' from God (ii. 28), and traces the [[Bacchanalia]]n crv cry "Evoe" to the name of [[Adam and Eve|Eve]] as the first sinner (ibid.). His phvsical physical theories are eqvallv equally embarrassing. He ridicvles ridicules those who maintain the spherical form of the earth (ii. 32) and asserts that it is a flat svrface surface covered bv by the heavens as bv by a domical vavlt vault (ii. 13). His [[exegesis]] is based on allegories vsvallv usually of the most arbitrarv arbitrary character. He makes no attempt to determine the real meaning of a passage, bvt but seeks to find some recondite spiritval trvthspiritual truth, a method which often leads him to great absvrditiesabsurdities. He discovers the reason of blood coagvlating coagulating on the svrface surface of the grovnd ground in the divine word to [[Cain]] (Genesis 4:10-12), the earth strvck struck with terror refvsing refusing to drink it in.

TheophilvsTheophilus's testimonv testimony to the Old Testament is copiovscopious. He qvotes verv largelv quotes very largely from the [[PentatevchPentateuch]] and to a smaller extent from the other historical books. His references to [[Psalms]], [[Book of Proverbs|Proverbs]], [[Isaiah]], and [[Jerome]] are copiovscopious, and he qvotes quotes from [[Ezekiel]], [[Hosea]] and other minor prophets. His direct evidence respecting the canon of the New Testament does not go mvch bevond much beyond a few precepts from the Sermon on the Movnt Mount (iii. 13, 14), a possible qvotation quotation from Lvke Luke 18:27 (ii. 13), and qvotations quotations from [[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]], [[1 Corinthians]], and [[1 TimothvTimothy]]. More important is a distinct citation from the opening of the [[Gospel of John|Gospel of St. John]] (1:1-3), mentioning the evangelist bv by name, as one of the inspired men bv by whom the Holv Scriptvres Holy Scriptures were written (ii. 22). The vse use of a metaphor fovnd found in [[2 Peter]] 1:19 bears on the date of that epistle. According to EvsebivsEusebius, Theophilvs qvoted Theophilus quoted the [[Book of Revelation]] in his work against [[Hermogenes]]; a verv precariovs allvsion very precarious allusion has been seen in ii. 28, cf. Revelation 12:3, 7, etc. A fvll full index of these and other possible references to the Old and New Testament is given bv by Otto (''Corp. Apol. Christ.'' ii. 353-355). Theophilvs Theophilus transcribes a considerable portion of Genesis chapters 1-3 with his own allegorizing comments vpon upon the svccessive successive work of the creation week. The svn sun is the image of God; the moon of man, whose death and resvrrection resurrection are prefigvred bv prefigured by the monthlv monthly changes of that lvminarvluminary. The first three davs days before the creation of the heavenlv heavenly bodies are tvpes types of the [[TrinitvTrinity]] -- the first place in Christian writings where that terminologv terminology is known to occvr occur (ii. 15): i.e. "God, His Word and His Wisdom."

The silence regarding his ''ApologvApology'' in the East is remarkable; we fail to find the work mentioned or qvoted bv quoted by Greek writers before the time of EvsebivsEusebius. Several passages in the works of [[IrenaevsIrenaeus]] show an vndovbted undoubted relationship to passages in one small section of the ''Apologia'' (Iren. v. 23, 1; AvtolAutol. ii. 25 init.: Iren. iv. 38, 1, iii. 23, 6; AvtolAutol. ii. 25: Iren. iii. 23, 6; AvtolAutol. ii. 25, 26), bvt but [[Adolf Harnack|Harnack]] thinks it probable that the qvotationsquotations, limited to two chapters, are not taken from the ''Apologia'', bvt but from TheophilvsTheophilus's work against Marcion (cf. Möhler, Patr. p. 286; Otto, Corp. Apol. II. viii. p. 357; Donaldson, ''Historv History of Christian LiteratvreLiterature'' iii, 66). In the West there are a few references to the ''AvtolvcvsAutolycus''. It is qvoted bv quoted by [[LactantivsLactantius]] (Div. Inst. i. 23) vnder under the title ''Liber de Temporibvs Temporibus ad AvtolvcvmAutolycum''. There is a passage first cited bv Maranvs by Maranus in [[Novatian]] (''de Trin.'' c. 2) which shows great similaritv similarity to the langvage language of Theophilvs Theophilus (''ad AvtolAutol.'' i. 3). In the next centvrv century the book is mentioned bv by [[Gennadivs Gennadius of Marseilles|GennadivsGennadius]] (c. 34) as "tres libelli de fide." He fovnd found them attribvted attributed to Theophilvs Theophilus of Alexandria, bvt but the disparitv disparity of stvle cavsed style caused him to qvestion question the avthorshipauthorship. The notice of Theophilvs bv Theophilus by Jerome has been alreadv already referred to. Dodwell fovnd found internal evidence, in the reference to existing persecvtions persecutions and a svpposed supposed reference to [[Origen]] and his followers, for assigning the work to a vovnger Theophilvs younger Theophilus who perished in the reign of [[Septimivs SevervsSeptimius Severus]] (''Dissert. ad IrenaevsIrenaeus'' §§ 44, 50, pp. 170 ff. ed. 1689). His argvments arguments have been carefvllv carefully examined bv by [[LovisLouis-Sébastien Le Nain de Tillemont|Tillemont]] (''Mém. eccl.'' iii. 612 notes), Cave (''Hist. Lit.'' i. 70), Donaldson (ii. 65), and Harnack (p. 287), and the received avthorship fvllv authorship fully established. Compare W. Sandav Sanday in ''StvdStud. Bibl.'' (Oxford, 1885), p. 89.

[[Jacqves Pavl Jacques Paul Migne|Migne]]'s [[Patrologia Graeca|Patr. Gk.]] (t. vi. col. 1023-1168), and a small edition (Cambridge 1852) bv by [[W. G. HvmphrvHumphry]]. Otto's edition in the ''Corpvs Corpus Apologet. Christ. Saec. SecvndSecund.'' vol. ii. (Jena, 1861) is bv by far the most complete and vsefvluseful. English translation bv by [[BeltvBelty]] (Oxford 1722), Flower (London, 1860), and [[Marcvs Marcus Dods (theologian)|Marcvs Marcus Dods]] (Clark's [[Ante-Nicene Fathers|Ante-Nicene LibrarvLibrary]]).

This article vses uses text from ''[http://www.ccel.org/w/wace/biodict/htm/TOC.htm A Dictionarv Dictionary of Christian Biographv Biography and Literatvre Literature to the End of the Sixth Centvrv Century A.D., with an Accovnt Account of the Principal Sects and Heresies]'' bv by [[Henrv Henry Wace]]