Customer Review

11 of 13 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars CORE KNOWLEDGE for Christians, November 9, 2008
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: On the Apostolic Preaching (Paperback)
"On the Apostolic Preaching" by St. Iranaeus of Lyon is amongst the definitive works of the Christian Church.

St. Iranaeus was the most influential and influential Christian writer of the Second Century (about 101 to 200 A.D.)

In his youth, Iranaeus had known Polycarp who had known the Apostles personally. The Apostles themselves had appointed Polycarp, who was later martyred in Rome about the late 150's, as Bishop in Smyrna.

Iranaeus had journeyed to Gaul (France) and the Lyon area, which was subjected to one of the most violent persecutions of early Christianity by Rome.

Iranaeus contended with this, and also with the growing threat to Christianity of the Heretical movements.
However, the writings of Iranaeus tell little of Iranaeus himself. Two works are known to exist.

(1) "AGAINST THE HERESIES" is a refutation of the heresies of the day, which much like the New Age works of our modern era, serve to pre-empt and subvert Christian doctrines. The commonality between ancient Gnosticism and New Age writings may come as a shock. Actually, they are one and the same.

For example, the reader will find that neither Gnosticism nor New Age writing possess a full doctrine of their own. Both operate in a "parasitic" manner. They adopt themselves to any and all relgious traditions, then invert, re-define or re-invent the theology of the tradition. Christianity is only one of the relgions which ancient Gnosticism subjected to this process. What one finds in both movements is the absence of a core doctrine, and rational corrollary doctrines derived from a single premise. Both are diffuse, scattered, and solipsistic (self-serving).

(2) "THE DEMONSTRATION OF THE APOSTOLIC PREACHING" is the work reviewed here. It is more commonly referred to as "On The Apostolic Preaching".
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 1, 2009 6:31:29 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 1, 2009 6:31:43 PM PDT
Coot says:
"For example, the reader will find that neither Gnosticism nor New Age writing possess a full doctrine of their own. Both operate in a "parasitic" manner. They adopt themselves to any and all relgious traditions, then invert, re-define or re-invent the theology of the tradition. Christianity is only one of the relgions which ancient Gnosticism subjected to this process." --- BAIN

It's much more likely that religion is not static. Much like science or art or philosophy it changes and molds itself as man evolves. But the power elite of the church must have control of belief in order to be needed by the masses. Why would anyone want to listen to the church preach yesterdays ideas about god if the good stuff was found down the road. So the church fights change. Much like governments fight change. Generations fight change.

I'm sure Jesus was considered a "New Ager," to use BAIN's hate filled tag, but he was the guy with the good stuff the church wasn't preaching.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 2, 2009 4:45:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 2, 2009 5:18:55 AM PDT
Bruce Bain says:
/

Thanks for the comment Coot.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*ISSUE THE FIRST*

"It's much more likely that religion is not static."------sentence 1, paragraph 2, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

The comment is not substantiated in fact.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

**ISSUE THE SECOND**

"Much like science or art or philosophy it changes and molds itself as man evolves."---------sentence 2, paragraph 2, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

Perhaps you need reminding that the subject is "Gnosticism" and "New Age" writing. You neglected to factually establish the nature of change in regard to:

(1) Religion

(2) New Age Writing

(3) Gnosticism

(4) Art

(5) Science

(6) Philosophy

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
/

***ISSUE THE THIRD***

"But the power elite of the church must have control of belief in order to be needed by the masses."------ sentence 3, paragraph 2, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

This is nice rhetoric, if your name is Karl Marx. Notwithstanding, your statement is a generalization, lacking specificity.

For example, these are the following non-specific subjects in your rhetorical comment.

(1) Church

(2) Belief

(3) Control

(4) Masses

(4) Power Elite

None of these is factually specified, nor identified with any specificity.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
/

****ISSUE THE FOURTH****

"Why would anyone want to listen to the church preach yesterdays ideas about god if the good stuff was found down the road."------- sentence 4, paragraph 2, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

More generalization.

(1) You neglect to specify who ANYONE is.

(2) You neglect to identify the CHURCH.

(3) You neglect to specify YESTERDAY's IDEAS.

(4) You neglect to specify THE GOOD STUFF

________________________________________________________________________________________________

/

*****ISSUE THE FIFTH*****

"So the church fights change."---------sentence 5, paragraph 2, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

Again, it is a generality, void of specificity. Neither (1) CHURCH nor (2) CHANGE are specified.

Neither have you presented a reasonable case in regard to a necessity for CHANGE, and you certainly have not specified a specific CHURCH.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

******ISSUE THE SIXTH******

"I'm sure Jesus was considered a "New Ager," to use BAIN's hate filled tag, but he was the guy with the good stuff the church wasn't preaching."----------sentence 1, paragraph 3, comment of Coot on April 1, 2009 6:31 PM PDT

There are numerous errors of fact in this statement.

(1) The statement exhibits the common Non Sequitur Fallacy, in which a conclusion is offered in the absence of an identifiable premise.

(2) No evidence in the form of a relevent fact is offered to substantiate the rationale for which the phrase "I'm sure..." is offered

(3) The author of the remark does not substantiate that Jesus was considered a "New Ager"

(4) The author of the remark does not substantitate the identify of the "church"

(5) "good stuff" is not factually identified

(6) No factual evidence is offered to establish that the reviewer has employed a TAG idenfified as "NEW AGER"

(7) No factual evidence is offered to establish that the reviewer has employed a HATE-FILLED term.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

********CONCLUSION*********

The comment is exemplary of an extremely over-reaching rhetoric.

/

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 5, 2009 11:03:27 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 6, 2009 1:53:02 PM PDT
Coot says:
Of course BAIN THE COWARD simply DISMISSES and DISSECTS. He can do nothing but ask for definitions and avoid a real discussion.

BAIN LOGIC = BAIN AGENDA

He never DISSECTS people who praise him. He never DISSECTS his own garbage either. He discribed the universe as a "race track" and a book as "magnetic," but "the good stuff down the road" is beyond his comprehension. HA!

I guess it's easier to IGNORE others than analyze the BAIN worldview. (He dismissed that term too... Even though it is a common philisophical term. Rather than deal with the point. He wanted me to define world and view and to explain how seeing the earth was relevant...)

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 8, 2009 3:28:01 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 8, 2009 3:34:11 AM PDT
Bruce Bain says:
/

Thank you for the comment Coot.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*ISSUE THE FIRST*

"He never DISSECTS people who praise him."--------------sentence 1, paragraph 3, comment of Coot on April 5, 2009 11:03 AM PDT

In point of fact, I never DISSECT people at all. Whether people agree or disagree with my book reviews, it would be a violation of law to engage in human DISSECTION without some kind of a medical license. If you have knowledge that a crime has been committed, that is, human DISSECTION performed without a medical license, please notify the municipal authorities immediately.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


/

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 13, 2009 5:03:40 PM PDT
Coot says:
That was funny. For once I'm laughing with you and not at you. Kudos.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details

Item

5.0 out of 5 stars (10 customer reviews)
5 star:
 (10)
4 star:    (0)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:    (0)
 
 
 
$17.00 $15.22
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Reviewer


Location: Englewood, CO United States

Top Reviewer Ranking: 60,470