FFL Quotes: History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Book 2, Section 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/baker-the-history-of-rome-vol-1


"[...] The chief of these measures were the provision of the right of appeal to the people against a decision of the magistrates, and loss of all civil rights for anyone convicted plotting for the return of the monarchy. As Valerius was anxious to have all the credit for these popular measures, he did not hold elections for the consular office left vacant by Brutus' death until they were carried through. [...]" 
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added)
OR
"[...] Above all, the laws regarding an appeal to the people against the magistrates, and that devoting the life and property of any one who should form a design of assuming regal authority, were grateful to the people. And after he had passed these while sole consul, so that the merit in them was exclusively his own, he then held an assembly for the election of a new colleague. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8
(italics added)
OR
"[...] Such particularly, was that concerning an appeal to the people against the decrees of the magistrates, and that which devoted both the person and goods of any who should form a design of assuming regal power. These laws were highly acceptable to the populace, and having effected the ratification of them, while alone in office, in order that the credit of them might be entirely his own, he then held an assembly for the election of a new colleague. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8

"The temple of Jupiter on the Capitol had not yet been dedicated, and the two consuls now drew lots to determine which of them should perform the ceremony. The lot fell to Horatius, and Publicola proceeded to conduct the operations against Veii. Publicola's relatives were unreasonably hurt that duty of dedicating so splendid a temple should fall to Horatius, and did everything they could to prevent it. When all else failed, and Horatius, with his hand on the door-post, was actually in the middle of his prayer, they broke in on the ceremony with the news that his son was dead, implying that while his house was in mourning he was not in a position to dedicate a temple. Horatius either did not believe the message, or showed extraordinary presence of mind -- which, we are not told, nor is it easy to guess; but in any case the news had so little effect that he merely gave instructions for his son's funeral and went on to complete the ceremony of dedication."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added)
OR
"[...] Jupiter's temple in the Capitol had not yet been dedicated; the consuls Valerius and Horatius cast lots which should dedicate it. It fell by lot to Horatius. Publicola departed to the war of the Veientians. The friends of Valerius were more annoyed than they should have been, that the dedication of so celebrated a temple should be given to Horatius. Having endeavoured by every means to prevent that, when all other attempts had been tried in vain, when the consul was now holding the door-post during his offering of prayer to the gods, they suddenly announce to him the shocking intelligence that his son was dead, and that his family being defiled he could not dedicate the temple. Whether he did not believe the fact, or possessed such great firmness of mind, is neither handed down for certain, nor is a conjecture easy. Diverted from his purpose at this intelligence in no other way than to order that the body should be buried, he goes through the prayer, and dedicates the temple. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8

(italics added)
OR
"[...] The temple of Jupiter in the Capitol had not yet been dedicated; the consuls Valerius and Horatius cast lots which should perform the dedication, and it fell to Horatius. Publicola set out to conduct the war against the Veientians. The friends of Valerius showed more displeasure, than the occasion merited, at the dedication of a temple so celebrated being given to Horatius. Having endeavoured, by every means, to prevent its taking place, and all their attempts having failed of success, when the consul had already laid his hand on the door-post, and was employed in offering prayers to the gods, they hastily addressed him with the shocking intelligence, that his son was dead, and insisted that his family being thus defiled, he could not dedicate the temple. Whether he doubted the truth of the intelligence, or whether it was owing to great firmness of mind, we are not informed with certainty, nor is it easy to conjecture; but he was no farther diverted from the business he was engaged in, by that information, than just to give orders that the body should be buried; and, still holding the post, he finished his prayer, and dedicated the temple.[...]
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8

"[...] This completes the tale of Rome's achievements at home and abroad during the first year after the expulsion of the kings. For the year following the consuls were Valerius, for a second term, and Titus Lucretius."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 8 (italics added)
OR
"[...] These were the transactions at home and abroad the first year after the expulsion of the kings. After this P. Valerius, a second time, and Titus Lucretius, were elected consuls."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 8
(italics added)
OR
"[...] Such were the transactions at home and abroad, which occurred during the first year after the expulsion of the royal family. The next consuls appointed were, Publius Valerius, a second time, and Titus Lucretius."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 8

FFL Quotes: History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Book 2, Section 7

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm

https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/baker-the-history-of-rome-vol-1

"Oddly enough, however, though the engagement was indecisive, Tarquin and his Etruscans seem to have been suddenly overcome by despair of success, and the contingents of Veii and Tarquinii both dispersed during the night and went home, as if all were lost. There is a strange story that in the silence of the night after the battle a great voice, supposedly the voice of Silvanus, was heard from the depths of the Arsian wood, saying that the Etruscans had lost one more man in the fight than the Romans and the Romans were therefore victorious. Legends apart, there is no doubt that the Romans left the field as conquerors and that their enemies admitted defeat[.]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7

(italics added)
OR
"After the issue of this battle, so great a terror seized Tarquin and the Etrurians, that both the armies, the Veientian and Tarquinian, giving up the matter as impracticable, departed to their respective homes. They annex strange incidents to this battle,—that in the silence of the next night a loud voice was emitted from the Arsian wood; that it was believed to be the voice of Silvanus: these words were spoken, "that more of the Etrurians by one had fallen in the battle; that the Roman was victorious in the war." Certainly the Romans departed thence as victors, the Etrurians as vanquished. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7

(italics  added)
OR
"Though such was the issue of the battle, yet so great terror took possession of Tarquinius and the Etrurians, that, giving up the enterprise as impracticable, both armies, the Veientian and the Tarquinian, retired by night to their respective countries. To the accounts of this battle, writers have added miracles; that, during the silence of the following night, a loud voice was uttered from the Arsian wood, which was believed to be the voice of Sylvanus, in these words: “The number of the Etrurians who fell in the engagement was the greater by one. The Romans have the victory.” The Romans certainly departed from the field as conquerors, the Etrurians as vanquished [.]"

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7

"[...] [For] when at dawn next morning not a man of the Etruscan army remained to be seen, the consul Valerius marched back to Rome with the spoils of battle, to celebrate his triumph. Brutus was given as splendid a funeral as those early days could afford; but an even greater tribute to him was the nation's sorrow, of which the most poignant expression was given by the women of Rome, who mourned him for a year, as a father. It was their special tribute to his fierce championship of a woman's honour. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added)
OR
"[...] For as soon as it was light, and not one of the enemy was now to be seen, P. Valerius the consul collected the spoils, and returned thence in triumph to Rome. His colleague's funeral he celebrated with all the magnificence then possible. But a far greater honour to his death was the public sorrow, singularly remarkable in this particular, that the matrons mourned him a year, as a parent, because he had been so vigorous an avenger of violated chastity. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7

(italics  added)
OR
"[For] when day appeared, and not one of the enemy was to be seen, the consul, Publius Valerius, collected the spoils, and returned in triumph to Rome. He celebrated the funeral of his colleague [Brutus] with the utmost degree of magnificence which those times could afford; but a much higher mark of honour to the deceased, was the grief expressed by the public, singularly remarkable in this particular, that the matrons mourned for him as for a parent, during a whole year, in gratitude for his vigorous exertions in avenging the cause of violated chastity. [...]"

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7

"[...] The passions of the mob are notoriously fickle, and Valerius, the surviving consul, soon lost his popularity and came not only to be disliked but suspected on the gravest possible grounds. Rumour had it that he was aiming at the monarchy. The reasons for suspicion were two: first, because he had taken no steps to supply the place of his dead colleage; secondly, because he was building himself a house on the top of the Velia, which might well, in such a position, be turned into an impregnable fortress. Valerius, deeply distressed by the prevalence of these unworthy rumors, called a mass meeting of the people, and, before mounting the platform, ordered his lictors, as a gesture of sympathy with popular feeling, to lower their rods. The gesture was well-received; the lowering of the fasces - the emblem of authority -- in the people's presence was taken as an admission that the majesty of power was vested in themselves rather than in the consul. [...]

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added)
OR
"[...] Afterwards the consul who survived [Publius Valerius], so changeable are the minds of the people, from great popularity, encountered not only jealousy, but suspicion, originating in an atrocious charge. Report represented that he aspired to the crown, because he had not substituted a colleague in the room of Brutus, and was building a house on the summit of Mount Velia, that there would be there an impregnable fortress on an elevated and well-fortified place. When these things, thus circulated and believed, affected the consul's mind with indignation, having summoned the people to an assembly, he mounts the rostrum, after lowering the fasces. It was a grateful sight to the multitude that the insignia of authority were lowered to them, and that an acknowledgment was made, that the majesty and power of the people were greater than that of the consul."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7

(italics  added)
OR
"[...] In a little time, the consul who survived [Publius Valerius], so changeable are the minds of the populace, from having enjoyed a high degree of popularity, became an object not only of jealousy, but of suspicion, attended with a charge of an atrocious nature: it was given out that he aspired at the sovereignty, because he had not substituted a colleague in the room of Brutus; and besides, was building a house on the summit of Mount Velia, which, in such a lofty and strong situation, would be an impregnable fortress. The consul’s mind was deeply affected with concern and indignation, at finding that such reports were circulated and believed; he therefore summoned the people to an assembly, and, ordering the fasces to be lowered, mounted the rostrum. It was a sight highly pleasing to the multitude, to find the ensigns of sovereignty lowered to them, and an acknowledgment thus openly given, that the majesty and power of the people were superior to those of the consul. [...]"

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7

"[...] Valerius then began to speak: he dwelt on the good fortune pf his colleague [Brutus] who, having set Rome free, had held the highest office in the state, and had died fighting for his country at the very peak of his fame, before the breath of envy could tarnish its brightness. 'While I,' he went on, 'have outlived my good name; I have survived only to face your accusations and your hate. Once hailed as a liberator of my country, I have suck in your eyes to the baseness of traitors like Aiquilii and Vitelii. Will you never find in any man merit so tried and tested as to be above suspicion? How could I, the bitterest enemy of monarchy, ever have believed that I should face a charge of coveting a throne? If I lived in the fortress of the Capitol itself, could I ever have thought that my own fellow-citizens would be afraid of me? Can me reputation be blown away by so light a breath? Are the foundations of my honour so insecure that you judge me more by where I live than by what I am? No, my friends: no house of mine shall threaten your liberties. The Velia shall hold no dangers. I'll build my house on the level -- mor, I'll build it at the very base of the hill, so that you can live above me and keep a wary eye on the fellow-ciizen you mistrust. House on the Velia must be reserved for men better to be trusted with Rome's liberty than I am."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 7 (italics added)
OR
"[...] When they were called to silence, Valerius highly extolled the good fortune of his colleague [Brutus], "who after delivering his country had died vested with the supreme power, fighting bravely in defence of the commonwealth, when his glory was in its maturity, and not yet converted into jealousy. 

That he himself [Valerius], having survived his glory, now remained as an object of accusation and calumny; that from the liberator of his country he had fallen to the level of the Aquilii and Vitellii. Will no merit then, says he, ever be so tried and approved by you, as to be exempted from the attacks of suspicion. Could I apprehend that myself, the bitterest enemy of kings, should fall under the charge of a desire of royalty? Could I believe that, even though I dwelt in the very citadel and the Capitol, that I could be dreaded by my fellow citizens? Does my character among you depend on so mere a trifle? Is my integrity so slightly founded, that it makes more matter where I may be, than what I may be. The house of Publius Valerius shall not stand in the way of your liberty, Romans; the Velian mount shall be secure to you. I will not only bring down my house into the plain, but I will build it beneath the hill, that you may dwell above me a suspected citizen. Let those build on the Velian mount to whom liberty is more securely intrusted than to P. Valerius." Immediately all the materials were brought down to the foot of the Velian mount, and the house was built at the foot of the hill where the temple of Victory now stands."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 7

(italics  added)
OR
"[...] Attention being ordered, the consul [Publius Valerius] extolled the good fortune of his colleague [Brutus], who, “after having accomplished the deliverance of his country, and being raised to the highest post of honour, met with death while fighting in defence of the republic, when his glory had arrived at full maturity, without having excited jealousy: whereas he himself [Valerius], surviving his glory, was become an object of calumny; and from the character of deliverer of his country, had sunk to a level with the Aquillii and Vitellii. Will no degree of merit then,” said he, “ever gain your confidence, so far as to be secure from the attacks of suspicion? Could I have the least apprehension that I, the bitterest enemy to kings, should undergo the charge of aiming at kingly power? Supposing that I dwelt in the very citadel, and in the Capitol, could I believe that I was an object of terror to my countrymen? Does my reputation among you depend on so mere a trifle? Is my title to your confidence so slightly founded, that it is more to be considered where I am, than what I am? Citizens, the house of Publius Valerius shall be no obstruction to your freedom; the Velian mount shall be secure to you: I will not only bring down my house to the plain, but will fix it under the hill, that your dwellings may overlook that of your suspected countryman. Let those build on the Velian mount to whom ye can better intrust your liberty than to Publius Valerius.” Immediately all the materials were brought down from the Velian mount, and the house was built at the foot of the hill, where the temple of victory now stands."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 7

FFL Quotes: History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Book 2, Section 6

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm

https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/baker-the-history-of-rome-vol-1

"News of the events had a profound effect upon Tarquin; disappointed by the failure of his grand design, he was filled with violent resentment against Rome. One way -- the way of treachery -- being blocked, he turned to the only alternative, the preparation of open war. For this purpose he visited the various Etruscan towns in order to solicit their support, and his best hopes of success were centred on Venii and Tarquinii. 

   (THE COMPLAINT)

   'I am of the same blood as you,' -- so ran his argument -- 'yesterday I was a king in no mean kingdom; now I am a penniless exile. Do not let me perish with my young sons before your eyes. 

   -Other men have been abroad to rule in Rome; 

   -I, when the throne was mine, when I was extending Roman dominion by my conquests, was driven from power by a foul conspiracy in which my on kindred took part. 

   (CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)

   -My enemies could find no worthy successor, no one man fit to reign; so they snatched at fragments of power -- broke it and divided; 

   (CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)

   -they let the rabble, like a gang of thieves, plunder my wealth, that even the lowest might have a share of the guilt. 

   (THE REQUEST)

   -It is my purpose to recover my country and my throne, 

   -to punish my ungrateful subjects. 

   -I appeal to you for aid. 

   -March with me to avenge the injuries you, too, have suffered in the past -- your many defeats in battle and the loss of your lands.'

   The men of Veii were not deaf to this appeal; it touched them on the quick, and Tarquin's words were met by the sturdy response that every man was ready to wipe out the stain of old defeats and win back what they had lost in war."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added)
OR
"On these things being announced to him, as they had occurred, Tarquin, inflamed not only with grief for the frustration of such great hopes, but with hatred and resentment also, when he saw that the way was blocked up against stratagem, considering that he should have recourse to war openly, went round as a suppliant to the cities of Etruria,[:] 

   (THE COMPLAINT)

   "that they should not suffer him, sprung from themselves, of the same blood, exiled and in want, lately in possession of so great a kingdom, to perish before their eyes, with the young men his sons. 

   -That others had been invited to Rome from foreign lands to the throne; (irony)

   -that he, a king, extending the Roman empire by his arms, was driven out by those nearest to him by a villanous conspiracy; 

   (CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)

   -that they had by violence divided the parts among themselves, because no one individual among them was deemed sufficiently deserving of the kingdom; 

   (CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)

   -that they had given up his effects to the people to be pillaged by them, that no one might be free from that guilt. 

   (THE REQUEST)

   -That he was desirous to recover his country and his kingdom, and 

   -to punish his ungrateful subjects. 

   -That they [the people of Veii] should bring succour and aid him; 

   -that they might also revenge the injuries done to them of old, their legions so often slaughtered, their land taken from them." 

These arguments prevailed on the people of Veii, and with menaces they declare that now at least, under the conduct of a Roman general, their former disgrace should be wiped off, and what they had lost in war should be recovered."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics  added)
OR
"Tarquinius, on being informed of these transactions, became inflamed, not only with grief for the disappointment of such promising hopes, but with hatred and resentment; and finding every pass shut against secret plots, determined to have recourse to open war; and to that end, he went round to all the cities of Etruria, in the character of a suppliant, addressing himself particularly to the people of Veii and Tarquinii, intreating them, 

   (THE COMPLAINT)

   “not to suffer him, who was sprung from themselves, and of the same blood; who was lately possessed of so great a kingdom, now exiled and in want, to perish before their eyes, together with the young men his sons. 

   -Others had been invited from foreign countries to Rome, to fill the throne; 

   -but he, when in possession of the government, and while he was employing his arms in extending the limits of the Roman empire, was expelled by a villainous conspiracy of men who were most closely connected with him; 

   (CRITICISM OF THE NEWLY ESTABLISHED OFFICE OF CONSULSHIP)

   -who, because no one of their number was qualified to hold the reins of government, had forcibly shared the several parts of it among them, 

   (CRITICISM OF THE SENATE'S FINAL DECISION REGARDING HIS PROPERTY)

   -and had given up his property to be plundered by the populace, to the intent that all might be equally guilty. 

   (THE REQUEST)

   -He only wished to be restored to his own country and crown, 

   -and to be avenged on his ungrateful subjects. 

   -He besought them to support and assist him, 

   -and at the same time, to take revenge for the injuries which they themselves had sustained of old, for their legions so often slaughtered, and their lands taken from them.” 

   These arguments had the desired effect on the Veientians, every one of whom earnestly, and with menaces, declared that they ought now at least, with a Roman at their head, to efface the memory of their disgraces, and recover, by arms, what they had lost."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6

"[...] While the hostile forces were still some distance apart, Arruns [Tarquin's son] recognized the consul [Brutus] by his lictors, and presently, coming near enough to distinguish his features, knew without a doubt that it was Brutus. 'There is the man,' he cited in a burst of anger, 'who drove us from our country! Look how he comes swaggering on, with all the marks of a power and a dignity which by right are ours! Avenge, O God of battles, this insult to a king!' Setting spurs to his horse, he made straight for the consul. Brutus was aware of the threat -- a general was expected in those days to play his part in the actual fighting -- and eagerly accepted the challenge. The two met with extreme violence, each without a thought for his own safety, intent only to strike his enemy down; and such weight was behind their thrust that the spear of each drove clean through his adversary's shield deep into his body, and both fell dying to the ground."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added)
OR

"[...] Aruns [Tarquin's son], when he knew at a distance by the lictors that it was a consul, and on coming nigher discovered for certain that it was Brutus by his face, all inflamed with rage, he cried out, "There is the villain who has banished us from our native country! see how he rides in state adorned with the ensigns of our dignity! now assist me, gods, the avengers of kings." He put spurs to his horse and drove furiously against the consul. Brutus perceived the attack made on him; as it was honourable in these days for the generals to engage in combat, he eagerly offered himself to the combat. They encountered one another with such furious animosity, neither mindful of protecting his own person, provided he could wound his adversary; so that both, transfixed through the buckler by the blow from the opposite direction, fell lifeless from their horses, entangled together by the two spears. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics  added)
OR
"[...] Aruns, perceiving at a distance, by the lictors, that a consul was there, and afterwards, on a nearer approach, plainly distinguishing Brutus by his face, became inflamed with rage, and cried out, “That is the man who has driven us as exiles from our country; see how he marches in state, decorated with our ensigns: ye gods, avengers of kings, assist me!” He then spurred on his horse, and drove furiously against the consul. Brutus perceived that the attack was meant for him; and as it was at that time reckoned not improper for generals themselves to engage in fight, he eagerly offered himself to the combat; and they advanced against each other with such furious animosity, neither thinking of guarding his own person, but solely intent on wounding his enemy, that, in the violence of the conflict, each of them received his antagonist’s spear in his body, through his buckler, and being entangled together by the two spears, they both fell lifeless from their horses."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6

"[...] the contingent from Veii, accustomed to defeat by Rome, was once more routed, while the men of Tarquinii, who had no previous experience against Roman troops, not only held firm but forced Rome to withdraw. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt., Book 2, Section 6 (italics added)
OR
"The Veientians, accustomed to be discomfited by the Roman soldiers, were routed and put to flight. The Tarquinienses, who were a new enemy, not only stood their ground, but even on their side obliged the Romans to give way."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 6 (italics  added)
OR
"[...] At length the Veientians, accustomed to be vanquished by the Roman troops, were routed and dispersed: the Tarquinians, a new enemy, not only kept their ground, but even, on their side, made the Romans give way."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 6

QUOTES: Historical Theology I, Dr. Nathan Busenitz, 2012, Lecture 1b

 

"[I] think it's important for us to recognize that the tongues that were spoken of in Acts chapter 2 were clearly authentic foreign languages. And you have a list of those languages in verses nine through verse eleven, of these different tongues in which the Gospel was proclaimed by not only the Apostles but also the others of the one hundred and twenty gathered in the upper room. And those true authentic foreign languages to Jews who did not understand those languages sounded like gibberish, which is why they said they were drunk; but to those who came from all parts of the world and truly did understand those languages, they recognized that nothing less than a genuine, unexplainable, supernatural miracle had taken place. I just think it's important at the outset of Church history that we emphasize that the beginning of the Church was authenticated by a true supernatural unexplainable miracle, and not by a bunch of guys speaking gibberish. [...] That will become relevant when we get to Pentacostal history in the twentieth century, but for now, we'll leave it there."

55:43 - 56:59

"In Acts chapter 6, we have deacons chosen, and this is because it has become too much for the Apostles to handle all of the day to day details of the Church. And I do think we have something of a paradigm here for the offices that are established and the way that those offices are to function. You have the Apostles functioning really as the elders/pastors of the Church, and it says there that their goal, their job, is to devote themselves to prayer and the preaching of the Word. And your job as an elder and a pastor is likewise to devote yourself to prayer and to the preaching and teaching of the Word. You bring alongside you faithful men as deacons who are willing to oversee the administrative tasks within Church ministry. I think you see that outlined here in Acts 6, and I think you see it fleshed out in Paul's epistles to Timothy and to Titus. But oftentimes the reason pastors experience what is called 'burnout' [...] is because they're not sticking to their God-ordained role of prayer and preaching, they're trying to do what God has designed deacons to do."
1:01:53 - 1:03:22

QUOTES: Historical Theology I, Dr. Nathan Busenitz, 2012, Lecture 1a

"I would say that in the minds of most people, [...] most Christians, their understanding of Church history kind of goes like this (and this may be representative of some of you as well): That the Apostle John was put on the isle of Patmos where he received a revelation from the Lord Jesus which he recorded for us, and which constitutes the last book of the New Testament. John then probably was released from Patmos, went back to Ephesus, and died shortly thereafter. And after the death of the Apostle John, Church history fell off a cliff and became Roman Catholic almost instantly, and it existed in this amorphous, dejected, heretical state for essentially the next 1400 years. There was a guy named Augustine or Augustin, and there was a guy named Aquinas -- and you've probably heard those names. There was a guy named Constantine, who debuted in The Da Vinci Code. And outside of that, nothing really happened. It was the Dark Ages, and it was completely enveloped in error and darkness.

   Along came Martin Luther, a German monk in the 16th century, who, for reasons unknown to any of us, nailed 95 theses onto a castle door in Germany, sparked a Reformation, saved Church history, and gave us Protestant Evangelicalism. And after him came names like [John Calvin], and [John Knox], and [Charles Spurgeon?], and [Martyn Lloyd Jones], and [John F. MacArthur], and here we are. That's Church history, [... and] we are now part of the reformed conservative Evangelical Protestant Christianity.

   Well I've got good news for you! There's a lot of things that happened in that 1500-year period before Martin Luther, and I think you're going to be encouraged over the course of this semester to find that Church history did not just drop off a cliff, that there were faithful men for many generations throughout Church history, really a line of faithful men all the way through to the Reformation, even during the High Middle Ages when things really started to get diluted and deformed even in Roman Catholic theology. So I think you're gonna find these first 1500 years to be fascinating, partly because most of you don't know anything about what happened during this period of time, and partly because you have misconceptions about what happened, and you've been led into thinking that the early Church Fathers [...] were somehow more Roman Catholic than they were Protestant, or that they somehow had twisted the Gospel into thinking that its salvation by works rather than salvation by faith alone. And we're going to spend quite a bit of time debunking that myth, and hopefully introducing to a heritage that belongs to you as a Bible-believing Evangelical Protestant Christian more so than any other branch of the Christian world today. It is your history, and it is not Roman Catholic history."

1:38 - 5:10

"God is at work in history. Conversely, history is a testimony to God's sovereign providence. [...] Think of Church history not as, again, a bunch of dates and dead people. Think of Church history as an exciting unfolding of the tapestry of God's sovereign providence as He fulfills His Gospel promises generation after generation after generation."

5:40-7:10

"It is another misconception about Church history that studying Church history and loving Church history is going to put Church history into a position of competition over and against the authority of the Bible. The reality is the more you study Church history the more you realize that the Church desperately needs an unchanging standard of truth if it is to remain pure and not get embroiled in compromise. So Church history, I've found, actually underscores a commitment to the authority of scripture; it does not compete against it."

7:38 - 8:10

"[...] Church is history is our history as members of the body of Christ. [...] When we study the history of the Church, we are not merely studying people, places, and events; we are the history of the bride of Christ, and we are part of that bride, we are part of the Church. When we study Church history then we come to see who we are, where we've come from, and how we fit into the flow of God's kingdom-work in the world. [...]"

9:41 - 10:17

"[... You] must be careful not to disconnect yourself from Church history. You are part of Church history. We have this temptation think of Church history as everything that happened before us, because we're not part of history, we're living in the Present, we're living in the Modern Age. (Which is kind of ironic, every generation thinks that it's the Modern Age.) The reality is [...] will continue to be part of Church history either until we go home to Heaven or until Christ comes back and Church history ends. [...] But in any case, for right now, we are part of Church history, and understanding our connectedness to those who've come before us is part of having a right perspective on what we are called to do."

11:07 - 12:10

"[...] 1 Peter 1:8 "Though you have not yet seen him, you love him; and though you do not see him now but believe in him, you rejoice greatly with joy inexpressible and full of glory." The New Testament is full of this idea of passing on the truth faithfully from one generation to the next generation. As Paul told Timothy, "Guard that which has been entrusted to you." And we see that principle lived out generation after generation in Church history. The doctrine of God's preservation of the truth, not miraculous preservation, but providential preservation, is illustrated throughout Church history. We see it specifically with the doctrine of canonicity, how the Canon was collected and defended over those first few generations of the history of the Church. [...]"

13:26 - 14:21

"Because, just as we are encouraged by the history of truth, we are also warned by the history of error. The New Testament is full of warnings about false teaching, [...] refuting it in the first century and warning that it would come in the centuries that followed. When we study Church history, we not only learn the history of truth, we also learn the history of error. We see for example where the cults originated, and we have the benefit of seeing orthodoxy defended and the truth being preserved. One of the interesting things that we'll see in the first 500-year period in Church history is really the origination of ancient heresies, almost all of which have been regurgitated in modern-day cults. We'll see Gnosticism, which shows up again, in form, as New Age theology, as Word of Faith theology, as Mormonism, as Christian Science -- Gnosticism's pretty much everywhere because it's the exaltation of human wisdom above the revelation of God. Then we have the legalism of the Judaizers, which shows really in cult groups like the Seventh-Day Adventists, which were very much a cult group when they started. We see the denial of the deity of Christ in the Arians (Arianism), and of course we see that regurgitated not only in Mormonism, but also probably most closely in the modern Jehovah's Witness-Watchtower movement. So learning a little about Church history and the history of error really equips you well when you're at home on a Saturday and your doorbell rings and two guys who look like seminary students but are holding bike helmets are standing there ready to argue with you about something as basic as the deity of Christ. [...] This stuff really is practical, I promise. It's not just learning about the past, it's learning about the past because it has import for the present."

14:24 - 16:26

Foxe's Book of Martyrs

"[...] There are countless illustrations of godly men and women throughout the history of the Church who remained faithful to the Gospel in the midst of persecution, in the midst of temptation, and the potential to compromise. [...] There's a lot of negative examples in Church history as well, and we're going to see some of those negative examples. We're going to see times when men who really knew much better defected to false forms of theology, to heresy; or when they gave in to what they really knew were unbiblical practices, and we're going to see the detrimental ramifications of that level of compromise, and I hope that will serve as a warning to you men as you think about your future ministries."

17:43 - 19:39

"Every Christian to a certain extent is called to be an apologist -- that's what 1 Peter 3:15 says, that we are called to give a 'defense' (the Greek word from which we get the word 'apologetics'), we are called to give a defense for the hope which is in us. And yet specifically Church leaders must be those who are equipped to defend and protect the flock from false teaching. Dr. McArthur in chapel on Tuesday said that part of protecting the sheep means hunting the wolves (I don't know if that's a quote but that's a summary of what he said). And that involves Apologetics. Understanding just a little bit of Church history gives you a huge advantage when it comes to responding to Greek Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Islam, or any of the modern American cults. And modern American cults would be anything from Seventh-Day Adventism to Christian Science to Scientology to Mormonism to Jehovah's Witnesses to the Word of Faith segment of broader Pentacostalism. Knowing just a little but of Church history, you can stand your ground and go toe to toe with any of those groups, because I guarantee you Church history is on your side. Now, the Bible more importantly is on your side, but isn't it nice to know that you don't have to give any ground to those who espouse error, in particular the Roman Catholics. Because it is a common Protestant conception that Church history belongs to the Catholics and the Bible belongs to us. Well, yes, the Bible belongs to us, and Church history also belongs to us. So don't give it to them."

20:46 - 22:28

"[...] I think it's important to realize that we're not the first generation to get it right. So remember that earlier generations of Christians lived much closer to the time of the Apostles, and that we should treat their writings seriously, and that we should take time to learn from them. It's important to realize that we are part of something much bigger than ourselves, our local congregations, or even the Evangelical movement as it exists today. We are part of something that's much bigger than just American Christianity, and I think that's especially important to those of us who were raised here in the United States. Because sometimes we think that Church history and American history are somehow synonymous. They are not. American history represents only 200 years of a 2000-year period of time in which God has been working through the Church.

   To realize then forthly that every generation of believers is greatly affected by the time and culture in which they live, this is something that we'll see in Church history, such that they themselves do not realize the effects, and then in turn to ask ourselves what effect our own culture has on our application of Biblical truth. I think this is one of the most helpful things we can learn from Church history. We look at the early Church Fathers and we see them highly influenced by Platinism, and we think Platinism is absolutely and totally ridiculous, 'how in the world could they have allowed themselves to be so influenced by this clearly unbiblical philosophy? We look at the time of the Reformation, and we see some of the violence that characterized even Protestant reformers, and we think 'how in the world could they have allowed themselves to be so violent in their response to those with whom they disagreed?' And then we get to the twenty-first century and we act as through we are completely unbiased and unaffected by our own culture. If Christ tarries for another few generations, future generations of Church historians will look back on our time and they will point to things in our culture and they will say, 'how in the world could the Church have been so influenced by ... fill in the blank?' And it's, I think, a really useful exercise for us to ask ourselves, what are those things in our culture that we have allowed to so influence us that we're actually being unbiblical in these particular areas?'"

22:56 - 25:24

"What the Church is doing today when it tries to reinterpret Genesis 1-11 through a Darwinistic evolutionary paradigm is the exact same thing that guys like Clement of Alexandria and Origen were doing when they said the Bible should be interpreted allegorically in order to fit a Platonic philosophy. It's just that it's not Platinism, it's Aristotelianism, because the materialism that undergirds non-supernatural Darwinistic evolutionary thought is Aristotelian at it's core. So we're involved at integrating Greek philosophy into Christianity; we've just given it the name 'science' rather than the name 'philosophy.'"

25:57 - 26:39

"We all come to history with preconceived ideas, and the reality is that no historian can be entirely objective, it's impossible to be entirely objective. Well that's okay with me, because I'm not going to try to be objective. How's that for stating it upfront? I have a very clear goal in this class, and that is to show how Church history fits with what I believe the Biblical Gospel is and what I believe the Bible proclaims in terms of those priorities that God had in fulfilling the Great Commission. So I'm not really that interested in being purely objective, because pure objectivity is impossible to achieve anyway. So why try? So, we're going to come at Church history from a very particular viewpoint which is to say, [...] We believe that the Bible is our ultimate authority and we believe that the Biblical Gospel is a gospel of faith alone, in Christ alone, based on his work on the cross alone. [With that in mind], we will then interpret Church history[.]"

28:02 - 29:24

"[There] can be a tendency to be a little bit arrogant in our [speaking generally] approach[.] The contemporary temptation always is to think that whatever's happening now is better than what was happening way back when. And we have to approach history with a little bit of humility, recognizing that we have a lot to learn from men and women in the past whom God used mightily for His purposes. And when we sit at their feet, we can really benefit."

29:40 - 30:18

"Please make sure to include Biography as part of your regular reading."

30:46 - 30:53

"I just wanted to make a connection between what we are attempting to do in this class and what you will one day be doing -- maybe some of you already are doing -- in the pulpit. One of the primary, if not the primary, objectives at the Masters Seminary is to train you men how to preach. That preaching starts with interpreting the Word of God correctly, and then being able to take that correct interpretation and put it into a format in which you can deliver it effectively to the people of God through the power of the Spirit so that their lives are changed."

32:35 - 33:11

"For the record, the Protestant reformers themselves -- Luther, Swingley, Calvin, Knox, and others later, Chemnitz and others -- these men were very interested in what the Church Fathers had to say on things. In fact, if you read Calvin's Institutes he quotes from the Church Fathers almost as much as he quotes from the Bible. He quotes from Augustin over 100 times. So if you think that it is impossible or incongruent for a Protestant to also love Church history, then you don't understand really what Protestantism is, because the Protestant Reformation was about recovering Church history, not about abandoning it."

42:15 - 42:56

FFL Quotes: History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Book 2, Section 5

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm
https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/baker-the-history-of-rome-vol-1

"The question of the Tarquins' property was brought up in the Senate for reconsideration. This time indignation prevailed; the Senate refused to restore it, and refused to confiscate it officially; instead, they let the people loose on it to take what they pleased, hoping that once the lower orders had stained their hands with the gold of kings they would lose for ever all hope of making peace with them again. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added)
OR
"The question concerning the restitution of the tyrants' effects, which the senate had formerly voted, came again under consideration. The fathers, fired with indignation, expressly forbad them either to be restored or confiscated. They were given to be rifled by the people, that after being made participators in the royal plunder, they might lose for ever all hopes of a reconciliation with the Tarquins. [...]"
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added)
OR
"With respect to the effects of the princes, which they had before ordered to be restored, the business was now laid before the senate for re-consideration; and they, actuated entirely by resentment, decreed, that they should not be restored, but converted to the use of the state. They were, therefore, given up to the commons as plunder, with the intent, that these, after such an act of violence against the princes, as the seizing of their effects, might for ever lose all hope of reconciliation with them.[...]
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5

"When everything that belonged to the Tarquins had been pillaged and gutted by the populace, the traitors received their sentence, and their punishment. It was a memorable scene: for the consular office imposed upon a father the duty of exacting the supreme penalty from his sons, so that he who, of all men, should have been spared the sight of their suffering, was the one whom fate ordained to enforce it. The condemned criminals were bound to the stake; all were young men of the best blood in Rome, but only the consul's sons drew the eyes of the spectators; the others, for all the interest they aroused, might have come from the gutter. There was pity for their punishment, and greater pity for the crime which had brought it upon them; in which heart was a sort of incredulous sorrow for such treachery at such a time: that these young men, in the very year when Rome was liberated -- and by their father's hand -- when the newly created consulship had fallen first to a member of their own family, should have brought themselves to betray the entire population of Rome, high and low alike, and all her gods, to a man who had once been a haughty tyrant and now, from his place of exile, was planning her destruction!
The consuls took their seats on the tribunal; the lictors were ordered to carry out the sentence. The prisoners were stripped, flogged, and beheaded. Throughout the pitiful scene all eyes were on the father's face, where a father's anguish was plain to see."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added)
OR
"After plundering the tyrants' effects, the traitors were condemned and capital punishment inflicted. Their punishment was the more remarkable, because the consulship imposed on the father the office of punishing his own children, and him who should have been removed as a spectator, fortune assigned as the person to exact the punishment. Young men of the highest quality stood tied to a stake; but the consul's sons attracted the eyes of all the spectators from the rest of the criminals, as from persons unknown; nor did the people pity them more on account of the severity of the punishment, than the horrid crime by which they had deserved it. "That they, in that year particularly, should have brought themselves to betray into the hands of Tarquin, formerly a proud tyrant, and now an exasperated exile, their country just delivered, their father its deliverer, the consulate which took its rise from the family of the Junii, the fathers, the people, and whatever belonged either to the gods or the citizens of Rome." The consuls seated themselves in their tribunal, and the lictors, being despatched to inflict punishment, strip them naked, beat them with rods, and strike off their heads. Whilst during all this time, the father, his looks and his countenance, presented a touching spectacle, the feelings of the father bursting forth occasionally during the office of superintending the public execution."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added)
OR
"After the people had made plunder of the effects of the princes, the traitors were condemned and executed. And the execution was the more remarkable on this account, that his office of consul imposed on a father the severe duty of inflicting punishment on his own sons; and that he, who ought not to have been present as a spectator, was yet the very person whom fortune pitched on to exact the penalty of their offence. The youths, all of the first distinction, stood tied to stakes, but the sons of the consul entirely engaged the eyes of the spectators, as if the others were persons unknown; and people felt compassion, not only for their punishment, but even for the crime by which they had brought it on themselves: to think that “they could, during that year particularly, have been induced to entertain a design of betraying their country, just delivered from tyranny, their father its deliverer, the consulship, which had commenced in the Junian family, the patricians, commons, in a word, whatever Rome held in highest veneration, into the hands of one who was formerly a tyrannical king, now an enraged exile.” The consuls mounted their [108] throne, and the lictors were sent to inflict the punishment: after stripping the criminals naked, they beat them with rods, and beheaded them; whilst, through the whole process of the affair, the looks and countenance of Brutus afforded an extraordinary spectacle, the feelings of the father often struggling with the character of the magistrate enforcing the execution of the laws. [...]"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5

PUNISHMENT...

VS REWARD

"After the execution, the informer was rewarded; in addition to a gift of money he was granted his liberty with citizen rights. It was hoped that this measure might double the effect of the execution as a deterrent. The informer is said to have been the first slave to be emancipated by touching with the vindicta (staff); some think that the vindicta was derived from his name, Vindicius. It was the custom subsequently to regard all slaves who were freed in this way as admitted to the rights of citizenship."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics added)
OR
"Next after the punishment of the guilty, that there might be a striking example in either way for the prevention of crime, 

   a sum of money was granted out of the treasury as a reward to the discoverer; 

   liberty also and the rights of citizenship were granted him. 

He is said to have been the first person made free by the Vindicta; some think even that the term vindicta is derived from him. After him it was observed as a rule, that those who were set free in this manner were supposed to be admitted to the rights of Roman citizens."

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 2, Section 5 (italics and formatting added)

OR
"[...] Justice done to the offenders, in order to exhibit a striking example for the prevention of crimes, in their treatment of the several parties, they gave, as a reward to the discoverer of the treason, a sum of money out of the treasury, his freedom, and the rights of a citizen. This man is said to be the first who was made free by the Vindicta.* Some think that the term “Vindicta” was taken from him, his name having been Vindicius: after him, it obtained, as a rule, that whoever was made free in that manner, should be considered and admitted a citizen."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 2, Section 5

FFL Quotes: History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Book 1, Preface

I purchased the complete four-book set of The History of Rome published by Penguin Classics, translated by Aubrey de Selincourt. The audiobooks for these volumes are available on Audible, but as four separate audiobooks. I opted to purchase the complete History of Rome audiobook (just under 89 hours in length) by ARN Publications, translator not mentioned in the Introduction. For quick reference, I also use The History of Rome as transcribed on gutenberg.org, which web address I include below. Three sources, three different translations -- maybe it would have been easier to learn Latin.  Be that as it may, I pray the indulgence of my reader. I will sometimes include multiple translations of the same quote, in the effort for clarity short of either posting the original Latin (which I can't read), or translating the Latin myself (which I don't know). It ought to be noted that many of our Founding Fathers who Latin, and read the Latin classics in their original Latin.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/19725/19725-h/19725-h.htm#FNanchor_2_2

I also later found yet a third translation, that by George Baker, on the Online Library of Liberty.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/baker-the-history-of-rome-vol-1

"Whether in tracing the history of the Roman people, from the foundation of the city, I shall employ myself to a useful purpose, I am neither very certain, nor, if I were, dare I say: inasmuch as I observe, that it is both an old and hackneyed practice, later authors always supposing that they will either adduce something more authentic in the facts, or, that they will excel the less polished ancients in their style of writing. Be that as it may, it will, at all events, be a satisfaction to me, that I too have contributed my share to perpetuate the achievements of a people, the lords of the world; and if, amidst so great a number of historians, my reputation should remain in obscurity, I may console myself with the celebrity and lustre of those who shall stand in the way of my fame."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 1, Preface
OR
"The task of writing a history of our nation from Rome's earliest days fill me, I confess, with some misgiving, and even were I confident in the value of my work, I should hesitate to say so. I am aware that for historians to make extravagant claims is, and always has been, all too common: every writer on history tends to look down his nose at his less cultivated predecessors, happily persuaded that he will better them in point of style, or bring new facts to light. But however that may be, I shall find satisfaction in contributing -- not, I hope, ignobly -- to the labor of putting on record the story of the greatest nation in the world. Countless others have written on this theme and it may be that I shall pass unnoticed amongst them; if so, I must comfort myself with the greatness and splendour of my rivals, whose work will robe my own of recognition"
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Book 1, Preface

OR

"Whether, in tracing the series of the Roman History, from the foundation of the city, I shall employ my time to good purpose, is a question which I cannot positively determine; nor, were it possible, would I venture to pronounce such determination: for I am aware that the matter is of high antiquity, and has been already treated by many others; the latest writers always supposing themselves capable, either of throwing some new light on the subject, or, by the superiority of their talents for composition, of excelling the more inelegant writers who preceded them. However that may be, I shall, at all events, derive no small satisfaction from the reflection that my best endeavours have been exerted in transmitting to posterity the achievements of the greatest people in the world; and if, amidst such a multitude of writers, my name should not emerge from obscurity, I shall console myself by attributing it to the eminent merit of those who stand in my way in the pursuit of fame."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 1, Preface

"Moreover, the subject is both of immense labour, as being one which must be traced back for more than seven hundred years, and which, having set out from small beginnings, has increased to such a degree that it is now distressed by its own magnitude. And, to most readers, I doubt not but that the first origin and the events immediately succeeding, will afford but little pleasure, while they will be hastening to these later times, in which the strength of this overgrown people has for a long period been working its own destruction. I, on the contrary, shall seek this, as a reward of my labour, viz. to withdraw myself from the view of the calamities, which our age has witnessed for so many years, so long as I am reviewing with my whole attention these ancient times, being free from every care that may distract a writer's mind, though it cannot warp it from the truth."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 1, Preface
OR
"My task, moreover, is an immensely laborious one. I shall have to go back more than severe hundred years, and trace my story from its small beginnings up to these recent times [again, about th time of the reign of Caesar Augustus] when it ramifications are so vast that any adequate treatment is hardly possible. I am aware, too, that most readers will take less pleasure in my account of how Rome began and in her early history; they will wish to hurry on to more modern times and to read of the period, already a long one, in which the might of an imperial people is beginning to work its own ruin. My own feeling is different; I shall find antiquity a rewarding study, if only because, while I am absorbed in it, I shall be able to turn my eyes from the troubles which for so long have tormented the modern world, and to write without any of that over-anxious consideration which may well plague a writer on contemporary life, even if it does not lead him to conceal the truth."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Book 1, Preface

OR
"It may be farther observed, that such a subject must require a work of immense extent, as our researches must be carried back through a space of more than seven hundred years; that the state has, from very small beginnings, gradually increased to such a magnitude, that it is now distressed by its own bulk; and that there is every reason to apprehend that the generality of readers will receive but little pleasure from the accounts of its first origin; or of the times immediately succeeding, but will be impatient to arrive at that period, in which the powers of this overgrown state have been long employed in working their own destruction. On the other hand, this much will be derived from my labour, that, so long at least as I shall have my thoughts totally occupied in investigating the transactions of such distant ages, without being embarrassed by any of those unpleasing considerations, in respect of later days, which, though they might not have power to warp a writer’s mind from the truth, would yet be sufficient to create uneasiness, I shall withdraw myself from the sight of the many evils to which our eyes have been so long accustomed."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 1, Preface


"The traditions which have come down to us of what happened before the building of the city, or before its building was contemplated, as being suitable rather to the fictions of poetry than to the genuine records of history, I have no intention either to affirm or refute. This indulgence is conceded to antiquity, that by blending things human with divine, it may make the origin of cities appear more venerable: and if any people might be allowed to consecrate their origin, and to ascribe it to the gods as its authors, such is the renown of the Roman people in war, that when they represent Mars, in particular, as their own parent and that of their founder, the nations of the world may submit to this as patiently as they submit to their sovereignty.—But in whatever way these and such like matters shall be attended to, or judged of, I shall not deem of great importance."
Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 1, Preface
OR
"Events before Rome was born or thought of have come to us in old tales with more of the charm of poetry than of a sound historical record, and such traditions I propose neither to affirm nor refute. There is no reason, I feel, to object when antiquity draws no hard line between the human and the supernatural: it adds dignity to the past, and, if any nation deserves the privilege of claiming a divine ancestry, that nation is our own; and so great is the glory won by the Roman people in their wars that, when they declare that Mars himself was their first parent and father of the man who founded their city, all the nations of the world might well allow the claim as readily as they accept Rome's imperial dominion."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Book 1, Preface
OR
"As to the relations which have been handed down of events prior to the founding of the city, or to the circumstances that gave occasion to its being founded, and which bear the semblance rather of poetic fictions, than of authentic records of history—these, I have no intention either to maintain or refute. Antiquity is always indulged with the privilege of rendering the origin of cities more venerable, by intermixing divine with human agency; and if any nation may claim the privilege of being allowed to consider its original as sacred, and to attribute it to the operations of the Gods, surely the Roman people, who rank so high in military fame, may well expect, that, while they choose to represent Mars as their own parent, and that of their founder, the other nations of the world may acquiesce in this, with the same deference with which they acknowledge their sovereignty."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 1, Preface

"[...] I would have every man apply his mind seriously to consider these points, viz. what their [the Romans'] life and what their manners were; through what men and by what measures, both in peace and in war, their empire was acquired and extended; then, as discipline gradually declined, let him follow in his thoughts their morals, at first as slightly giving way, anon how they sunk more and more, then began to fall headlong, until he reaches the present times, when we can neither endure our vices, nor their remedies. This it is which is particularly salutary and profitable in the study of history, that you behold instances of every variety of conduct displayed on a conspicuous monument; that from thence you may select for yourself and for your country that which you may imitate; thence note what is shameful in the undertaking, and shameful in the result, which you may avoid. But either a fond partiality for the task I have undertaken deceives me, or there never was any state either greater, or more moral, or richer in good examples, nor one into which luxury and avarice made their entrance so late, and where poverty and frugality were so much and so long honoured; so that the less wealth there was, the less desire was there. Of late, riches have introduced avarice, and excessive pleasures a longing for them, amidst luxury and a passion for ruining ourselves and destroying every thing else. [...]"

Titus Livius (Livy), History of Rome, Translated by D. Spillan, A.M.M.D., Book 1, Preface
OR
"[...] I invite the reader's attention to the much more serious consideration of the kind of lives our ancestors lived, of who they were as men, and what the means both in politics and war by which Rome's power was first acquired and subsequently expanded; I would then have him trace the process of our moral decline, to watch, first, the sinking of the foundations of morality as the old teaching was allowed to lapse, then the rapidly increasingly disintegration, then the final collapse of the whole edifice, and the dark dawning of our modern day [around the time of Caesar Augustus] when we can neither endue our vices nor face the remedies needed to cure them. The study of history is the best medicine for the sick mind; for in history you have a record of the infinite variety of human experience plainly set out for all to see; and in that record you can find for yourself and your country both examples and warnings; fine things to take as models, base things, rotten through and through, to avoid."
History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Book 1, Preface

OR
"To the following considerations, I wish every one seriously and earnestly to attend; by what kind of men, and by what sort of conduct, in peace and war, the empire has been both acquired and extended: then, as discipline gradually declined, let him follow in his thoughts the structure of ancient morals, at first, as it were, leaning aside, then sinking farther and farther, then beginning to fall precipitate, until he arrives at the present times, when our vices have attained to such a height of enormity, that we can no longer endure either the burden of them, or the sharpness of the necessary remedies. This is the great advantage to be derived from the study of history; indeed the only one which can make it answer any profitable and salutary purpose: for, being abundantly furnished with clear and distinct examples of every kind of conduct, we may select for ourselves, and for the state to which we belong, such as are worthy of imitation; and, carefully noting such, as being dishonourable in their principles, are equally so in their effects, learn to avoid them."

History of Rome, Titus Livius (Livy), Translated by George Baker, Book 1, Preface

QUOTES: The History of Christian Thought and Practice 1, Prof. Jim L, Papandrea, 2012, Lecture 1a, Course Introduction

"What I want you to understand in terms of the big picture, before we get into the details, is that the history of Christianity is very much the history of the interpretation of Scripture." 5:13-5:24

Bumper sticker: The Bible say it. I believe it. That settles it.
"Now I respect the sentiment, because I'm a huge fan of the Bible. I really am. However, knowing what the Bible says is not the end of the question; because once you know what the Bible says, that then begs the question what the Bible means. And the gap between what it is says and what it means is a little thing we call interpretation.
   And if you've ever had a discussion with a fellow believer over the interpretation of Scripture, where the two of you are reading the exact same passage but have radically different understandings of what it's supposed to mean, then you know what I'm talking about.

   And the history of the Church, which should be no surprise, is the history of people disagreeing over the interpretation of Scripture, and sorting out what the interpretation ought to be."

5:35-6:40

"We are living in a world where there are right answers and there are wrong answers. [...There] is an assumption built in that ... some answers are mutually exclusive, and so, therefore, some of them may be wrong. There is such a thing as a wrong answer. And, the other side of that coin is that there is such a thing as a right answer. Now there may multiple right answer, but the point is that part of the history of the Church is the search for authoritative answers -- in other words -- what are the official answers to some of these questions."

6:41-7:21

"The other thing that the history of the Church is the history of the development of doctrine. And the image I like to use is imagine if you wanted to build a house. [You] got an empty lot, and you decided you were going to build a house on this lot. So you call the Apostolic Construction Company[. The] Apostles pull up to your empty lot with a dump truck full of bricks, [...] pull the lever, dump the bricks onto your empty lot, and then they drive away[.] 'Now it's up to you to build the house.' 

   And in a way that's kind of what the Apostles did. Because all of the building blocks for doctrine are in the Apostolic documents -- they're in the New Testaments, they're in the writing the Apostles gave us -- but they're a brick here and a brick there. And it was up to the early Church then to put those bricks together[.] In other words, it's in the time of the early Church when doctrine is clarified and developed."

7:25 - 8:35

"And when you put these two concepts together -- that the history of the Church is the history of the interpretation of scripture and [...] the history of the development of doctrine -- [...] and you track it over time, you begin to get a picture of a kind of a pendulum. [...] And this is a bit what you see in the early Church. Because as the early Christians attempted to interpret scripture and clarify doctrine, people proposed answers that many thought were too far afield from what they considered correct. And so some answers represented a kind 'pushing of the envelop' toward one extreme. But eventually, that momentum is overcome and there's a pull back toward the center. But what almost always happens is that, in reacting against one extreme, there are those who ultimately overreact and swing the pendulum to the other extreme. And so you have this back and forth, with the gravity of time always pulling things back to a kind of center."

8:39-10:21

Papandrea's Three Laws of Early Church History, or the Development of Doctrine

1) Heresy forces orthodoxy to define itself. [...] 

ortho = "straight, correct", dox = "praise", orthodox = "correct doctrine"

heresy = "going off on a tangent, off on your own way," "deviating from a mainstream within the Church"

"In our world, we're going to give the heretics the benefit of the doubt. We are going to assume that they are well-meaning believers who had an alternative interpretation but that interpretation was determined by a majority within the Church it be incorrect." 12:09-12:25

"What makes them a heretic though is not really so much that they had a difference of opinion. What makes them a heretic is that they continue to teach the interpretation that was considered incorrect even after they were confronted." 12:25-12:40

"[My] first law says that heresy forces orthodoxy to define itself,' and what I mean by that is, not that heresy precedes orthodoxy, but that the orthodox position is often the one that is held by most people, but kind of assumed and perhaps even unclarified, until it's challenged by an alternative interpretation. And so it's the challenge of the alternative interpretations that will force what becomes to be called orthodoxy to define itself, to clarify itself. So the orthodox are those who overtime defined and clarified doctrine in the Church" 12:52-13:42

"Now, it is in part true that these are labels [namely 'orthodox' and 'heretic'] that can only be applied after the argument is over. [...To] a certain extent, you only know who the orthodox are until you know who won the argument. And even then, over time, it is not always clear who won the argument. 

   On the other hand, it is also true that there is an orthodoxy in every generation. [...] And the orthodoxy of every generation is based on the orthodoxy of previous generations. And [...] many times the heresies in every generation are based on the heresies of the previous generations." 13:43-14:38

2) Orthodoxy is the middle way between the extreme alternatives. 

3) Christology (the person, nature, role of Christ) informs soteriology (the doctrine of salvation)

"soter" = "savior"

"And you can see how the concepts of christology and soteriology would have to be interrelated because what you believe about the Savior has to be consistent some way with what you believe about salvation, how salvation works. It works the other way too, because, if you start with the soteriology, you end up being forced to back into the corresponding christology. In other words, if you start with assumptions about how salvation works and what salvation is, then you back into an understanding of how the Savior saves.  " 16:03-16:38

10:22-16:44

"[Remember,] this class is about historical Christianity and historical theology; this class is not about what you believe. So, none of your papers are going to be faith statements or your own perspective. You'll have plenty of time for that in other courses, but this course is about understanding the foundation. So you gotta get that first before you go on from there." 

25:52-26:14

"The history of early and medieval Church is, at the same time, everyone's and no one's tradition. Here's what I mean by that: 

   It is everyone's tradition because the early and medieval Church is the trunk of the family tree that we are all apart of, regardless of your denomination. Everything we are going to study in this class is your tradition, because this is the background of your Christianity. This is not just Eastern Christianity or Catholic Christianity, this is Christianity. And so, what we are going to study in this class belongs to you as a descendant, a spiritual descendant of the people you're going to be studying. These people you're going to be reading, they are that great cloud of witnesses that cheers you on in the race of faith.

   On the other hand, when I say that the early and medieval Church is no one's tradition, I mean this:

   When we read documents, we often try to find ourselves in the document. And that's natural. If I was writing fiction, I would create a protagonist that people could identify with. That's good writing. And so it's natural to look, to try to find yourself in the text. But the problem with that is there's no one like you living at that time. And what I mean by that is that the world was so very different from the world we live in that it's difficult to relate to some of these people on the level of 'oh, this person is like me,' 'I can relate to this person,' 'I can put myself in their shoes.' 

    One of the aspects of this is the issue of race. 

    Race in the ancient world is a very different thing than what is it now, because I imagine that immediately when I said the word 'race,' the first thing you thought of was skin color. And there's a very good reason for that because there's a sad history in [the United States] and in other [countries] in the last several hundred years that makes us think that way. But in the ancient world, race had nothing to do with skin color. In the ancient world, race was where you were from. So, my race would be the Italian race [. ...] But skin color wasn't nearly the issue back then that it is now. And in fact, even slavery was different than what you think of when you think about slavery in the history of [the United States], for example. 

   You will read about slavery. And there were a lot of slaves in the Roman world. But slavery was not justified on the basis of skin color back then; slavery was justified on the basis of the rights of conquest. If my country conquers your country, I can make you slaves; if your country conquers my country, then you can make me a slave -- but it has nothing to do with skin color, and it is nothing to do with assumptions that one group of people is less human than another. In fact, it was widely acknowledged in the Roman world that Greek slaves were good for teaching your children because they were smart. The idea is that you sort of have to put that out of your mind a little bit, as much as you can. 

   What that means is when we read these documents, we have no way of knowing, in virtually all cases, what these authors or these people looked like. Even when you read that someone is from North Africa, for example. North Africa was a coastal area, kind of the Los Angeles of the ancient world, where most people are from somewhere else. So you can't assume that people looked a certain way based on where you think they were from in the ancient world. [...]  [Again,] you just have to sort of go into this knowing that when you read these texts, you can't assume that you know what people looked like or that you can relate to certain people because you think they might have looked like you. [...]"   

27:20-33:26

"Now, I'm not saying that they didn't have racism in the ancient world. Because they did. It just wasn't based on skin color. It was based on language. Racism in the ancient world wasn't based on how you looked, it was based on sound you sounded. If you could be speak Greek or Latin, you were civilized; if you could not speak Greek or Latin, then you're a barbarian. That's the racism of the ancient world, at least in simplified form."

33:27-33:58

QUOTES: Story of Civilization, Will Durant, Vol.1, 1935, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 3

                         https://archive.org/stream/TheStoryOfCivilizationcomplete/Durant_Will_-_The_story_of_civilization_1#page/n101/mode/2up/search/one+life

“Indeed each city, as long as it could, maintained a jealous independence, and indulged itself in a private king. 

   It called him 'patesi', or priest-king, indicating by the very word that government was bound up with religion.

   By 2800BC, the growth of trade made such municipal separatism [that is, the complete sovereignty by city] impossible, and generated 'empires' in which some dominating personality subjected the cities and their patesis to his power, and wove them into an economic and political unity. [That] despot lived in a Renaissance atmosphere of violence and fear; at any moment he might be despatched by the same methods that had secured him the throne. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)

"[...] The wars were waged frankly for commercial routes and goods, without catchwords as a sop for idealists. King Manishtusu of Akkad announced frankly that he was invading Elam to get control of its silver mines, and to secure diorite stone to immortalize himself with statuary -- the only instance known of a war fought for the sake of art. 

   The defeated were customarily sold into slavery; or, if this was unprofitable, they were slaughtered on the battlefield. Sometimes a tenth of the prisoners, struggling vainly in a net, were offered as living victims to the thirsty gods. As in Renaissance Italy, the chauvinistic separatism of the cities stimulated life and art, but led to civic violence and suicidal strife that weakened each petty state, and at last destroyed Sumeria."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 3, 1935 (italics, bold, and formatting added)

"To this system of royal and feudal administration was added a body of law, already rich with precedents when Ur-engur and Dungi codified the statutes of Ur; this was the fountainhed of Hammurabi's famous code. 

   It was cruder and simpler than later administration, but less severe: where, for example, the Semitic code killed a woman for adultery, the Sumerian code merely allowed the husband to take a second wife, and reduce the first to a subordinate position.

   The law[:]

      covered commerical as well as sexual relations

      regulated all loans and contracts

      [regulated] all buying and selling

      [regulated] all adoptions and bequests

   Courts of justice sat in the temples

   [Judges] were for the most part priests

   [Professional] judges presided over a superior court

   The best element in this code was a plan for avoiding litigation: every case was first submitted to a public arbitrator whose duty it was to bring about an amicable settlement without recourse to law. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 3, 1935 (italics and formatting added)

QUOTES: Story of Civilization, Will Durant, Vol.1, 1935, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 2

                        https://archive.org/stream/TheStoryOfCivilizationcomplete/Durant_Will_-_The_story_of_civilization_1#page/n101/mode/2up/search/one+life

“But Sumerian civilization remained [after it was conquered by the Elamites from the East and Amorites from the North]. Sumer and Akkad still produced handicraftsmen, poets, artists, sages and saints; the culture of the southern cities passed north along the Euphrates and the Tigrus to Babylonia and Assyria as the initial heritage of Mesopotamia civilization."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 2, 1935 (italics added)

"At the basis of this [Sumerian] culture was a soil made fertile by the annual overflow of rivers swollen with the winter rains. The overflow was perilous as well as useful; the Sumerians learned to channel it safely through irrigating canals that ribbed and crossed their land; and they commemorated those early dangers by legends that told of a flood, and how at last the land had been separated from the waters, and mankind had been saved."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 2, 1935 (italics added)

"[...] Weaving [in Sumeria] was done on a large scale under the supervision of overseers appointed by the king, after the latest fashion of governmentally-controlled industry. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 2, 1935

"Goods were carried chiefly by water. [...] 

   There was no coinage yet, and trade was normally by barter; but gold and silver were already in use as standards of value, and were often accepted in exchange for goods -- sometimes in the forms of ingots or rings of definite worth, but generally in quantities measured by weight in each transaction. [...] 

   Contracts had to be confirmed in writing and duly witnessed. 

   A system of credit existed by which goods, gold or silver might be borrowed, and at rates ranging from 15 to 33 percent per annum. Since the stability of a society may be partly measured by inverse relation with the rate of interest, we may suspect that Sumerian business, like ours [in about 1936], lived in an atmosphere of economic and political uncertainty and doubt.

   [...] Rich and poor were stratified into many classes and gradations; slavery was highly developed, and property rights were already sacred.

   Between the rich and poor a middle class took form, composed of small-business men, scholars, physicians, and priests. Medicine flourished, and had a specific for every disease; but it was still bound up with theology, and admitted that sickness, being due to possession of evil spirits, could never be cured without the exorcising of these demons. [...]

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 2, 1935 (italics, bold, and formtting added)

QUOTES: Story of Civilization, Will Durant, Vol.1, 1935, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1

                       https://archive.org/stream/TheStoryOfCivilizationcomplete/Durant_Will_-_The_story_of_civilization_1#page/n101/mode/2up/search/one+life

“The early history of Mesopotamia is in one aspect the struggle of the non-Semitic peoples of Sumeria to preserve their independence against the expansion and inroads of the Semites from Kish and Agade and other centers of the north. In the midst of their struggles these varied stocks unconsciously, perhaps unwillingly, cooperated to produce the first extensive civilization known of history, and one of the most creative and unique.

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 (italics added)

"Despite much research we cannot tell of what race the Sumerians were, not by what route they entered Sumeria. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 

"When their civilization was already old -- about 2300BC -- the poets and scholars of Sumeria tried to reconstruct its ancient history. The poets wrote legends of a creation, a primitive Paradise and a terrible flood that engulfed and destroyed it because of a sin of an ancient king. This flood passed down into Babylonain and Hebrew tradition, and became part of the Christian creed. 

   In 1929 Professor Woolley, digging into the ruins of Ur, discovered, at considerable depth, an eight-foot layer of silt and clay; this, if we are to believe him, was deposited during a catastrophic overflow of the Euphrates, which lingered in later memory as the Flood. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, 1935 (italics and formatting added)

"Meanwhile the priest-historians sought to create a past spacious enough for the development of all the marvels of Sumerian civilization. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935

"[...] Tenacious dynasties of city-kings seem to have flourished at Kish ca. 4500BC, and at Ur ca. 3500BC. In the competition of these two primeval centers we have the first form of that opposition between Semite and anti-Semite which was to be one bloody theme of Near-Eastern history[:]

  1) from the Semitic ascendancy of Kish and the conquests of the Semitic kings Sargon I and Hammurabi, 

  2) through the capture of Babylon by the 'Aryan' generals Cyrus and Alexander in the sixth and fourth centuries before Christ, 

  3) and the conflicts of Crusades and Saracens for the Holy Sepulchure and the emoluments of trade,

  4) down to the efforts of the British Government to dominate and pacify the divided Semitics of the Near East today."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 (formatting added)

"[...] the writing of history and the partiality of historians are very ancient things. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935

"[...] It was the King's boast that he 'gave liberty to his people'; and surely the tablets that preserve his decrees reveal to us the oldest, briefest, and justest (?) code of laws in history."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 (italics and bold added)

"[...] A monolith found in Susa portrays [Sargon I] armed with the dignity of a majestic beard, and dressed in all the pride of long authority. His origin was not royal: history could find ne father for him, and no other mother than a temple prostitute. Sumerian legend composed for him an autobiography quite Mosaic in its beginning: 'My humble mother conceived me; in secret she conceived me. SHe placed me in a basket-boat of rushes; with pitch she closed my door.' Rescued by a workman, he became a cup-bearer to the king, grew in favor and influence, rebelled, displaced his master, and mounted the throne of Agade. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935 (italics added)

"(as an introduction to the rule of Gudea of Lagash) To be burned to the ground is not always a lasting misfortune for a city; it is usually an advantage from the standpoint of architecture and sanitation. [...]"

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935

 

"Meanwhile, "Ur of the Chaldees" was having one of the most prosperous eposhs in its long career from 3500BC (the apparent age of its oldest graves) to 700BC. Its greatest king, Ur-engur, brought all western Asia under his pacific sway, and proclaimed for all Sumeria the first extensive code of laws in history. "By the laws of righteousness of Shamash forever I established justice." As Ur grew rich by the trade that flowed through it on the Euphrates, Ur-engur, like Pericles, beautified his city with temples, and built lavish ly in the subject cities of Larsa, Uruk, and Nippur. His son Dungi continued his work through a reign of fifty-eight years, and ruled so wisely that the people deified him as the god who had brought back their ancient Paradise.

   But soon that glory faded. The warlike Elamites from the East and the rising Amorites from the West swept down upon the leisure, prosperity and peace of Ur, captured its king, and sacked the city with primitive thoroughness. The poets of Ur sang sad chants about the rape of the statue of Ishtar, their beloved mother-goddess, torn from her shrine by profane invaders."

Will Durant, Story of Civilization, Vol.1: Our Oriental Heritage, Book 1, Ch.7, Part 2, Segment 1, 1935