ANTILEGOMENON. Word used by Eusebius of Caesarea HE III, 25,3 and later by other authors to indicate those OT and NT writings whose inspiration or canonicity were not agreed on. In contrast to those accepted by all homologoumena, NT antilegoumena were Heb, 2 Pet, Jas, Jude, 2 3 Jn and Rev. By introducing the distinction between books considered canonical by all and those about which there was debate and dissent, Eusebius calls attention to the fact that not all agreed on the latter. Regarding the OT, Melito of Sardis Eus., HE IV, 26 and Origen ibid., VI, 25 prefer to list the protocanonical books, which suggests they were faithful to the Hebrew canon, which did not accept the deuterocanonical books antilegoumena. Cyril of Jerusalem qualifies the deuterocanonical books of the OT with the epithet incerti Lat. uncertain; Gk. amphiballomena disputed Catech. IV, 33-35. Eusebius grasped the situation better than any other ancient author: besides the books universally recognized as inspired homologoumena, he cites two series of contested books: those under discussion, cited above, and those considered spurious Acts of Paul, The Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, the Apocalypse, accepted by some but not by others. He then adds another list of heretical books that no writer of the ecclesiastical tradition invokes in support of doctrine HE III, 25,3-7. Those sacred books classified by the ancient Christian tradition as antilegoumena were first called deuterocanonical, the term now used in treatises on the inspiration of Scripture, by Sixtus of Siena d. 1569.Homologoumena – definition and synonims of «homologoumena» in … holidaymapq


A Bible You’d Never Find at the Christian Bookstore holidaymapq


Leave a Reply

7 + 3 =