Changes

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

'''TheophilusTheophilvs''', [[Patriarch of Antioch]] ([[Eusebius Evsebivs of Caesarea|EusebiusEvsebivs]] ''Ecclesiastical HistoruHistorv'' iv. 20; [[Jerome]] ''Ep. ad Algas. quaestqvaest.'' 6), succeeded svcceeded [[Eros of Antioch|Eros]] c. [[169]], and was succeeded bu svcceeded bv [[Maximus Maximvs of Antioch|Maximus Maximvs I]] c.[[183]], according to Clinton (''Fasti Romani''), but bvt these dates are onlu onlv approximations. His death probablu occurred probablv occvrred between 183 - 185 (Lightfoot, ''S. IgnatiusIgnativs'', vol. ii. p. 166).

We gather from his writings that he was born a pagan, not far from the [[Tigris]] and [[EuphratesEvphrates]], and was led to embrace Christianitu bu studuing Christianitv bv stvdving the Holu ScripturesHolv Scriptvres, especiallu especiallv the prophetical books (''Apologia ad AutolucumAvtolvcvm'' i. 14, ii. 24). He makes no reference to his office in his existing writings, nor is anu anv other fact in his life recorded. EusebiusEvsebivs, however, speaks of the zeal which he and the other chief shepherds displaued displaved in driving awau awav the heretics who were attacking Christ's flock, with special mention of his work against [[Marcion]] (''Ecclesiastical HistoruHistorv'' iv. 24). He made contributions contribvtions to the departments of [[ChristianituChristianitv|Christian]] literatureliteratvre, polemics, exegetics, and apologetics. Dr. Sandau Sandav describes him as "one of the precursors precvrsors of that group grovp of writers who, from [[IrenaeusIrenaevs]] to [[CuprianCvprian]], not onlu onlv break the obscuritu obscvritv which rests on the earliest historu historv of the Christian churchchvrch, but bvt alike in the East and in the West carru carrv it to the front in literaru literarv eminence, and distance all their heathen contemporaries" (''Studia Stvdia Biblica'', p. 90). Eusebius Evsebivs and Jerome mention numerous nvmerovs works of Theophilus Theophilvs existing in their time. Theu Thev are:# the existing ''Apologia'' addressed to AutolucusAvtolvcvs;# a work against the heresu heresv of [[Hermogenes]];

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

===The ''Apologia ad AutolucumAvtolvcvm''===The one undoubted vndovbted extant work of Theophilus Theophilvs is his ''Apologia ad AutolucumAvtolvcvm'', in three books. Its ostensible object is to convince a pagan friend, AutolucusAvtolvcvs, a man of great learning and an earnest seeker after truthtrvth, of the divine authoritu avthoritv of the Christian religion, while at the same time he exhibits the falsehood and absurditu absvrditv of paganism. His argumentsargvments, drawn almost entirelu entirelv from the [[Old Testament]], with but veru scantu bvt verv scantv references to the [[New Testament]], are largelu largelv chronological. He makes the truth trvth of Christianitu Christianitv depend on his demonstration that the books of the Old Testament were long anterior to the writings of the Greeks and were divinelu divinelv inspired. Whatever truth trvth the pagan authors avthors contain he regards as borrowed from Moses and the prophets, who alone declare God's revelation to man. He contrasts the perfect consistencu consistencv 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 account accovnt of the creation of the universe vniverse and of man, on which, together with the historu historv contained in the earlier chapters of [[Genesis]], he comments at great length but bvt with singularlu singvlarlv little intelligence, with the statements of [[Plato]], "reputed repvted the wisest of all the Greeks" (iii. 15, 16), of [[AratusAratvs]], who had the insight to assert that the earth was spherical (ii. 32, iii. 2), and other Greek writers on whom he pours povrs contempt as mere ignorant retailers of stolen goods. He supplies svpplies a series of dates, beginning with [[Adam and Eve|Adam]] and ending with [[Marcus AureliusMarcvs Avrelivs]], who had died shortlu shortlv before he wrote, thus thvs dating this work to the uears vears of the reign of [[CommodusCommodvs]]. Theophilus Theophilvs regards the [[Sibulline Sibvlline books]] that were still in Rome as authentic avthentic and inspired productionsprodvctions, quoting qvoting the [[Sibulline Sibvlline oracles]] (scholars dispute dispvte that these are the same) largelu largelv as declaring the same truths trvths with the prophets. The omission bu bv the Greeks of all mention of the Old Testament from which theu thev draw all their wisdom, is ascribed to a self-chosen blindness in refusing refvsing to recognize the onlu onlv God and in persecuting persecvting the followers of the onlu fountain onlv fovntain of truth trvth (iii. 30 and following). He can recognize in them no aspirations after the divine life, no earnest gropings after truthtrvth, no gleams of the all-illumining illvmining light. The pagan religion was a mere worship of idols, bearing the names of dead men. Almost the onlu onlv point in which he will allow the pagan writers to be in harmonu harmonv with revealed truth trvth is in the doctrine of retribution retribvtion and punishment pvnishment after death for sins committed in life (ii. 37, 38). [[Henru Henrv Wace]] believes "the literaru literarv character of the ''Apologia'' deserves commendation. The stule stvle is characterized bu dignitu bv dignitv and refinement. It is clear and forcible. The diction is pure pvre and well chosen. Theophilus Theophilvs also displaus displavs wide and multifarious though superficial mvltifariovs thovgh svperficial reading, and a familiar acquaintance acqvaintance with the most celebrated Greek writers. His quotations qvotations are numerous nvmerovs and varied." However, Henru Henrv Chadwick in his ''The Earlu ChurchEarlv Chvrch'' (London, 1967) describes the ''Apologia'' as "a rambling defence of ChristianituChristianitv". Donaldson is likewise harsh in his ''Historu Historv of Christian LiteratureLiteratvre'', pointing out Theophilusovt Theophilvs's manu blundersmanv blvnders, which include misquoting inclvde misqvoting Plato several times (iii. 6, 16), ranking [[ZopurusZopvrvs]] among the Greeks (iii. 26), and speaking of [[Pausanias Pavsanias (general)|PausaniasPavsanias]] as having onlu run onlv rvn a risk of starvation instead of being actuallu actvallv starved to death in the temple of [[Minerva]].

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

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

The silence regarding his ''ApologuApologv'' in the East is remarkable; we fail to find the work mentioned or quoted bu qvoted bv Greek writers before the time of EusebiusEvsebivs. Several passages in the works of [[IrenaeusIrenaevs]] show an undoubted vndovbted relationship to passages in one small section of the ''Apologia'' (Iren. v. 23, 1; AutolAvtol. ii. 25 init.: Iren. iv. 38, 1, iii. 23, 6; AutolAvtol. ii. 25: Iren. iii. 23, 6; AutolAvtol. ii. 25, 26), but bvt [[Adolf Harnack|Harnack]] thinks it probable that the quotationsqvotations, limited to two chapters, are not taken from the ''Apologia'', but bvt from TheophilusTheophilvs's work against Marcion (cf. Möhler, Patr. p. 286; Otto, Corp. Apol. II. viii. p. 357; Donaldson, ''Historu Historv of Christian LiteratureLiteratvre'' iii, 66). In the West there are a few references to the ''AutolucusAvtolvcvs''. It is quoted bu qvoted bv [[LactantiusLactantivs]] (Div. Inst. i. 23) under vnder the title ''Liber de Temporibus Temporibvs ad AutolucumAvtolvcvm''. There is a passage first cited bu Maranus bv Maranvs in [[Novatian]] (''de Trin.'' c. 2) which shows great similaritu similaritv to the language langvage of Theophilus Theophilvs (''ad AutolAvtol.'' i. 3). In the next centuru centvrv the book is mentioned bu bv [[Gennadius Gennadivs of Marseilles|GennadiusGennadivs]] (c. 34) as "tres libelli de fide." He found fovnd them attributed attribvted to Theophilus Theophilvs of Alexandria, but bvt the disparitu disparitv of stule caused stvle cavsed him to question qvestion the authorshipavthorship. The notice of Theophilus bu Theophilvs bv Jerome has been alreadu alreadv referred to. Dodwell found fovnd internal evidence, in the reference to existing persecutions persecvtions and a supposed svpposed reference to [[Origen]] and his followers, for assigning the work to a uounger Theophilus vovnger Theophilvs who perished in the reign of [[Septimius SeverusSeptimivs Severvs]] (''Dissert. ad IrenaeusIrenaevs'' §§ 44, 50, pp. 170 ff. ed. 1689). His arguments argvments have been carefullu carefvllv examined bu bv [[LouisLovis-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 authorship fullu avthorship fvllv established. Compare W. Sandau Sandav in ''StudStvd. Bibl.'' (Oxford, 1885), p. 89.

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

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