Introduction to the History of Christianity

Rating:
Summary: Basic, well organized and easily accessible reference
Review: Compiled and edited by Tim Dowley from the contributions by more than sixty specialists from ten countries, Introduction To The History Of Christianity is a very highly recommended single-volume reference that spans Christian history from the first century AD down to the present day. Enhanced with a wealth of black-and-white and color photographs, maps, diagrams, The History Of Christianity is a thoroughly "reader friendly", straightforward, and comprehensive chronological presentation of the Christianity's many evolutions. Introduction to The History Of Christianity is a solid, basic, well organized and easily accessible reference which is particularly ideal for use by the non-specialist general reader

Rating:
Summary: Inaccurate History at Best
Review: Introduction to the History of Christianity is a text book made for students wishing to learn the basics of Church history. Interestingly enough, no references are given in the entire book, suggesting that the authors are above citing their work. It is obvious, just from flipping through this book that the authors involved all accept the theology of "faith alone", and they all reject papal authority. This wouldn't really matter much if the content was still fair and balanced, but it is far from it. One blatant example is found on page 354, "for all its ideals, piety and art, Catholicism differed from the church of the New Testament in doctrine, morals, and administration. Most men and women of conscience realized this..." The author fails to give evidence for this contemptuous claim, and furthermore, seeks to back it up through other ad hominem attacks on Catholic roots.

All this aside, the book is laughable in that many of its claims are disproved by itself. Throughout the book the author's make the claim that the sacramental system was an invention not to be found in the Bible, and that early Christians believed different doctrine than the latter Catholic Church (p. 265, p. 354, p.372). They particularly point out that the Eucharist (communion) was believed to be symbolic at the earliest Christian "services" (p. 129). Yet, on page 128, the author provides a portion of Justin Martyr's Apology I (65-66, AD 150), and Justin clearly states "We shall call this food `Eucharist', which no one is allowed to share unless he or she believes that the things which we teach are true.............. For we do not receive them as common bread and common drink, but as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the word of God.........similarly we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the word of prayer transmitted from him, and by which our blood and flesh are changed and nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." This example points directly to the fact that the Early Christian Bishops presiding over the Church understood that the bread and wine become Jesus through the sacrament of the Eucharist, just as is described in I Corinthians Ch. 11:

24 When he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "Take, eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. Do this in memory of me."
25 In the same way he also took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink, in memory of me."
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

Additionally, the authors claim that the reformers, for which they are packing them all together as a consolidated one, all knew that the sacraments weren't instituted by Christ and that they were not scriptural (p. 372 bottom of column 1). This is rather ignorant because they are all clearly in the Bible, besides the obvious fact that the reformers themselves couldn't agree on which ones to accept. Luther, for instance, accepted Matrimony, the Eucharist, and Baptism of Infants (p. 374), while other reformers rejected the Eucharist and Infant Baptism while accepting Matrimony.

There are so many gross errors in this book that it would be hard to tackle even a few of them here. A good topic to research would be the origins of the Papacy in Rome. The author claims on page 200 that the Pope wasn't given supreme authority until 366 AD. However, quotes from Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189] by Irenaeus clearly show that Rome was given authority earlier in Christianity, starting with Peter on whom Jesus states He will build His Church (Matthew 16: 18-19). Apostolic succession is demonstrated in the writing of the Early Church Fathers, the sacramental system is clearly understood in these writings, and Church structure/unity is also demonstrated in them as well. In general, The Writings of the Early Church Fathers would provide much more information on the basis for Christian doctrine than this book. Likewise, if you are looking for a book on the history of Christianity, and aren't so much concerned about doctrine, I would suggest at least finding a book with references in it.

Rating:
Summary: AAA
Review: The history of christian thought and practice organized in clean and clear chapters with appropriate maps and pictures to keep the flow of learning going forward. Remarkably free of the feeling of partisan bias and fairly presents the essential facts to make european history understandable even beyond the christian aspect. Gives excellent short descriptions of the formation and content of most of the protestant sects.

Rating:
Summary: A great place to start
Review: This is a beautifully illustrated overview of 2000 years of Christian history. Great graphics, good biographies and short, readable articles all make for an excellent start to Christian history. If you are looking for a place to begin, or just a single volume that gives you breadth without drowning you in the details, this volume is for you.