https://blox.land/ref/f1f289a3-d773-64d6-caa4-a45c89af54a7
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Do you consider Bishop Eusebius’s account to be reliable?
No, really not.
The reason why because his account had created many controversies.
Eusebius has been known as the official historian of the church. He participated in the Council of Nice in 314, organized by Roman Emperor Constantine to revise the religious or historic documents that would end up being in the Bible.
So Eusebius based most of his comments on personal opinions and other historic document's interpretations. It is difficult to say that he did the proper research and had reliable sources. During the Nicea Council, a group of Bishops decided what documents had to be part of the Bible and which not, based on their own criteria. That is not a good indicator of the validity of the documents included, even less we can consider those as sacred.
The force between them is such that like charges repel and opposite charges attract. For example, two positive charges brought near each other will be pushed away from each other. On the other hand, one positive charge and one negative charge brought near each other will be pulled towards each other.
Hi there!
During the renaissance, many believe who read the ancient texts and informed themselves began accusing the Catholic church that it wasn't very attentive about people and that it was assertive, always searching for ways to assemble affluence and more potential. These ancient texts came from many origins such as Plato and Aristotle from the western hemisphere, or as far away as india.
<u>I hope this helped</u>
<em>-WolfieWolfFromSkech</em>
