Why were the montanists condemned. by david f wright www.earlychurch.org.uk2012-04-07⚑books http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/article_montanists_wright.html montanists Condemned. by David F Wright Why Were the montanists Condemned. David F Wright Themelios 2.1 September 1976 15.22. Reproduced by permission of the author David F Wright is Professor Emeritus of Patristic Reformed Christianity at the University of Edinburgh. Damnatio memoriae is both the fate of the heretic and the frustration of the historian. The history of Montanism suffers from the loss of both Montanist and
Early church history 101. early christian church history, the early church [..] www.churchhistory101.com2012-04-06⚑religion http://www.churchhistory101.com/century2.php montanists were among the martyrs in the famous persecution scene of Lyons in the year 177. Probably the most problematic aspect of the montanists was the view that their prophecies carried the authority of the gospels, and of apostolic teaching. Montanus and his two prophetesses did not see themselves in need of the authority of the church. The leading bishops did, however, prevail even after Tertullian defected from the church
Http://www.asa3.org/asa/topics/book%20reviews2005-/12-10.html www.asa3.org2013-02-12⚑books ⚑r&d http://www.asa3.org/asa/topics/book%20reviews2005-/12-10.html montanists who receive special attention. Ferngren lays out his methodology as a historical.philological approach, which he says is meant to complement textual.philological.historical methodology. He cautions against sociological approaches that he feels privilege social forces over theological and philosophical aspects of the text, and against post.structural interpretations. He is particularly critical of the tendency of
Why were the montanists condemned. by david f wright www.earlychurch.org.uk2012-04-07⚑bookshttp://www.earlychurch.org.uk/article_montanists_wright.html montanists Condemned. by David F Wright Why Were the montanists Condemned. David F Wright Themelios 2.1 September 1976 15.22. Reproduced by permission of the author David F Wright is Professor Emeritus of Patristic Reformed Christianity at the University of Edinburgh. Damnatio memoriae is both the fate of the heretic and the frustration of the historian. The history of Montanism suffers from the loss of both Montanist and
Http://www.asa3.org/asa/topics/book%20reviews2005-/12-10.html www.asa3.org2013-02-12⚑books⚑r&d http://www.asa3.org/asa/topics/book%20reviews2005-/12-10.html montanists who receive special attention. Ferngren lays out his methodology as a historical.philological approach, which he says is meant to complement textual.philological.historical methodology. He cautions against sociological approaches that he feels privilege social forces over theological and philosophical aspects of the text, and against post.structural interpretations. He is particularly critical of the tendency of
Early church history 101. early christian church history, the early church [..] www.churchhistory101.com2012-04-06⚑religionhttp://www.churchhistory101.com/century2.php montanists were among the martyrs in the famous persecution scene of Lyons in the year 177. Probably the most problematic aspect of the montanists was the view that their prophecies carried the authority of the gospels, and of apostolic teaching. Montanus and his two prophetesses did not see themselves in need of the authority of the church. The leading bishops did, however, prevail even after Tertullian defected from the church