If there is something that ties together the history of the church from the first to the twenty-first century, it is Christians disagreeing about biblical interpretations. Often times it got quite nasty and not infrequently, resulted in someone’s death. But sometimes it was done right.
Dionysius of Alexandria was a bishop during the third century. This was a time when doctrine was being worked out and one of the most controversial of subjects then, as today, was eschatology. Some were arguing for a literal earthly rule of Jesus as described in Revelation with the millennium and others strongly disagreed.
In this passage, Dionysius takes a different interpretation than another Christian leader named Nepos. Notice how Dionysius speaks of Nepos.
Seeing that they bring forward a composition of Nepos, on which they rely too much as showing irrefutably that the Kingdom of Christ will be on earth, though I accept and love Nepos for many other things, his faith, his laboriousness, his study of the Scriptures, and the many psalms he has written, by which already many of the brethren are encouraged, and though I hold him in all the greater respect because he has gone to his rest before us, yet the truth is so dear to me and to be preferred that I can indeed applaud and give my full assent to right propositions, but must examine and correct whatever appears to be unsoundly stated. – “On the Promises” cited by Eusebius
Instead of attacking Nepos’s character, Dionysius recognizes that there is much to praise about Nepos and therefore focuses on the interpretive differences. This is a lesson that the church needs to relearn today.
If you want to read more of Dionysius of Alexandria, you can find his extant writings here. I especially appreciated the discussion in On Promises where he examines the various ways churches have approached the Book of Revelation.
Subscribe to the History of Christianity podcast on Apple Podcasts.
