Freethought & Rationalism Archive

jgreen44 · 06-25-2011, 08:42 PM

Just wondering if anybody here would care to offer an effective critique of this book

The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk)

"In the beginning was Diversity. And the Diversity was with God, and the Diversity was God. Without Diversity was nothing made that was made. And it came to pass that nasty old 'orthodox' people narrowed down diversity and finally squeezed it out, dismissing it as heresy. But in the fullness of time (which is of course our time), Diversity rose up and smote orthodoxy hip and thigh. Now, praise be, the only heresy is orthodoxy. As widely and as unthinkingly accepted as this reconstruction is, it is historical nonsense: the emperor has no clothes. I am grateful to Andreas Köstenberger and Michael Kruger for patiently, carefully, and politely exposing this shameful nakedness for what it is."

—D. A. Carson, Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

ApostateAbe · 06-25-2011, 10:21 PM

When the face of the evidence tells a story that is quite different from the thesis that a modern author presents, then it doesn't seem like a full review is necessary. Divisions within the church are seen from the second iteration after the founding of the religion and onward, beginning with the Apostle Paul's sharp dispute with the disciples, as seen in the epistle to the Galatians. Divisions within the church are one of the central themes of canon itself--the three Johannine epistles were written exclusively to combat the docetist doctrine that existed within the Johnannine community! The divisions are undeniable, and the most that could be said would be that they were too small and obscure to be so important. Again, such a claim is contrary to the evidence on the face--the early church fathers spent an excessive amount of ink in rhetorical battles with such doctrines, much more so than the competing ideologies that existed on the outside.

No Robots · 06-25-2011, 10:41 PM

There is but one river of truth, but many streams pour into it from this side and from that.--Clement of Alexandria

ApostateAbe · 06-25-2011, 10:44 PM

There is a review of the book at the "Earliest Christianity" blog, and it seems to be fair, more or less. Three parts of the review are linked below.

http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-1/
http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-2/
http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-3/

Toto · 06-26-2011, 01:44 AM

Another review, from Tony Burke

Tony Burke Pt 1

Quote:

K&K describe the purposes behind their work in language of alarm. They are concerned that the modern attraction to diversity is interfering with the determination of what is truth. On the title of the book they say, “It is an epithet that aptly captures the prevailing spirit of the age whose tentacles are currently engulfing the Christian faith in a deadly embrace, aiming to subvert the movement at its very core” . . . “The main reason why we feel so strongly about this issue is that the scholarly squabbles about second-century geographical expressions of Christianity, the formation of the canon, and the preservation of the text of Scripture are part of a larger battle that is raging today over the nature and origins of Christianity. This battle, in turn, we are convinced, is driven by forces that seek to discredit the biblical message about Jesus, the Lord and Messiah and Son of God, and the absolute truth claims of Christianity. The stakes in this battle are high indeed” (18). These “forces” are more fully described at the very end of the book, where they are given supernatural form: “we must proceed prayerfully, recognizing that it is the god of this world who has blinded the minds of unbelievers. With God’s help, we should wage spiritual warfare circumspectly and seek to demolish demonic strongholds n the minds of people” (234).

Tony Burke Pt 2 with comments from Roger Pearse and Stephan Huller

Roger Pearse reviewed it on his blog here

06-25-2011, 08:42 PM	#1
jgreen44 Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: About 120 miles away from aa5874 Posts: 268	The Heresy of Orthodoxy Just wondering if anybody here would care to offer an effective critique of this book The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk) "In the beginning was Diversity. And the Diversity was with God, and the Diversity was God. Without Diversity was nothing made that was made. And it came to pass that nasty old 'orthodox' people narrowed down diversity and finally squeezed it out, dismissing it as heresy. But in the fullness of time (which is of course our time), Diversity rose up and smote orthodoxy hip and thigh. Now, praise be, the only heresy is orthodoxy. As widely and as unthinkingly accepted as this reconstruction is, it is historical nonsense: the emperor has no clothes. I am grateful to Andreas Köstenberger and Michael Kruger for patiently, carefully, and politely exposing this shameful nakedness for what it is." —D. A. Carson, Research Professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-25-2011, 10:21 PM	#2
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	When the face of the evidence tells a story that is quite different from the thesis that a modern author presents, then it doesn't seem like a full review is necessary. Divisions within the church are seen from the second iteration after the founding of the religion and onward, beginning with the Apostle Paul's sharp dispute with the disciples, as seen in the epistle to the Galatians. Divisions within the church are one of the central themes of canon itself--the three Johannine epistles were written exclusively to combat the docetist doctrine that existed within the Johnannine community! The divisions are undeniable, and the most that could be said would be that they were too small and obscure to be so important. Again, such a claim is contrary to the evidence on the face--the early church fathers spent an excessive amount of ink in rhetorical battles with such doctrines, much more so than the competing ideologies that existed on the outside.

06-25-2011, 10:41 PM	#3
No Robots Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edmonton Posts: 5,679	There is but one river of truth, but many streams pour into it from this side and from that.--Clement of Alexandria

06-25-2011, 10:44 PM	#4
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	There is a review of the book at the "Earliest Christianity" blog, and it seems to be fair, more or less. Three parts of the review are linked below. http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-1/ http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-2/ http://earliestchristianity.wordpres...hodoxy-part-3/

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.