Comments on: Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/ Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:57:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mebaqqer and Bishop | FAIR Blog http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-9128 Mebaqqer and Bishop | FAIR Blog Sat, 28 May 2011 18:06:51 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-9128 [...] Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity , The Editors’ Preface and Introduction (Some early attempts to summarize Nibley’s book on my Mormon and Catholic blog). [...] [...] Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity , The Editors’ Preface and Introduction (Some early attempts to summarize Nibley’s book on my Mormon and Catholic blog). [...]

]]> By: Dave Keller http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-2014 Dave Keller Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:58:39 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-2014 Darth, It is back up. I must have accidentally removed it while fixing some formatting problems. I should have more installments up in the weeks ahead. Darth,

It is back up. I must have accidentally removed it while fixing some formatting problems. I should have more installments up in the weeks ahead.

]]> By: Darth_Bill http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-1905 Darth_Bill Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:32:15 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-1905 Hey, what happened to the review? I know it was there at one point. Hey, what happened to the review? I know it was there at one point.

]]> By: Dave Keller http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-1676 Dave Keller Mon, 20 Nov 2006 02:09:46 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-1676 Brad, I look forward to your review of <i>ECiD</i>, but I totally understand motivational issues and competing priorities. I continue to enjoy reading what you do cover on your blog so please keep up the good work. Darth, Thanks for that quick summary as it paints a realistic picture of what to expect from A&BiEC. It is a very unfinished, raw product. Nibley is good at sifting through numerous sources, but I think the definitive work on ancient priesthood concepts has yet to be written. No doubt progress has been made by Christian scholars since the 50's and some of Nibley's ideas might not hold up, but they deserve a hearing. Brad,

I look forward to your review of ECiD, but I totally understand motivational issues and competing priorities. I continue to enjoy reading what you do cover on your blog so please keep up the good work.

Darth,

Thanks for that quick summary as it paints a realistic picture of what to expect from A&BiEC. It is a very unfinished, raw product. Nibley is good at sifting through numerous sources, but I think the definitive work on ancient priesthood concepts has yet to be written. No doubt progress has been made by Christian scholars since the 50′s and some of Nibley’s ideas might not hold up, but they deserve a hearing.

]]> By: Darth_Bill http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-1589 Darth_Bill Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:55:11 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-1589 I just finished reading it. Warning. It never comes to a conclusion. These are just class notes. Nibley attacked the issue in a couple of different ways. First, establishing that the office of Bishop changed over time. Second, succession of Peter to the bishop of Rome being unsupported by period documentation. Third, logic of succession of Peter to Rome is faulty. Those are the things that I remember. Some arguments are stronger than others. FWIW http://www.christiansonline.cc/forum/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=3136 I just finished reading it. Warning. It never comes to a conclusion. These are just class notes.

Nibley attacked the issue in a couple of different ways. First, establishing that the office of Bishop changed over time.
Second, succession of Peter to the bishop of Rome being unsupported by period documentation.
Third, logic of succession of Peter to Rome is faulty.

Those are the things that I remember. Some arguments are stronger than others.

FWIW
http://www.christiansonline.cc/forum/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=3136

]]> By: Brad Haas http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-1420 Brad Haas Mon, 06 Nov 2006 06:45:55 +0000 http://www.mormonandcatholic.org/apostles-and-bishops-in-early-christianity/#comment-1420 I actually have that book, though I haven't even come close to reading it. I need to buck up and finish <i>Early Christians In Disarray</i> and review it first. I actually have that book, though I haven’t even come close to reading it. I need to buck up and finish Early Christians In Disarray and review it first.

]]>