Book 1 also condemns those among the Gnostics who directed religious rites and invocations towards images (chs. 24-25). Having said that, I found that each book was better than the last until reaching a crescendo at book 4 (with book 5 being on the level of book 3); can't wait for the rest of your reviews.
I loved what he wrote on it. Clearly held to the Word of God as the ultimate authority and talked about the importance of handing down the faith in generation after generation in multiple cities whose churches were established by the apostles.
I'm guessing the closest thing to gnosticism today would be some of the new age stuff that talks about the "Universal Christ" and "Christ Consciousness"?
Really enjoy the church history books reviews! Thanks
Book 1 also condemns those among the Gnostics who directed religious rites and invocations towards images (chs. 24-25). Having said that, I found that each book was better than the last until reaching a crescendo at book 4 (with book 5 being on the level of book 3); can't wait for the rest of your reviews.
I liked one better than two until the very end of two.
you are talking about a Catholic bishop, you bonehead. look at the 2nd council of Ephesus
You would do well to read everything he said about Apostolic TRADITION and SUCCESSION
I loved what he wrote on it. Clearly held to the Word of God as the ultimate authority and talked about the importance of handing down the faith in generation after generation in multiple cities whose churches were established by the apostles.
I'm guessing the closest thing to gnosticism today would be some of the new age stuff that talks about the "Universal Christ" and "Christ Consciousness"?
That might be the closest but I wouldn't even call them Gnostic since you really need to be polytheists and most new agers are not.