Restoring The Ancient Church?

[drums12]

I've read several reviews of Barry Bickmore's "Restoring the Ancient Church," and am considering purchasing a copy.  However, a friend of mine who has a Masters Degree in Ancient Religious Texts (he is active LDS) said he doesn't recommend it.  He says it would be difficult for either a Mormon or a Catholic to write a book trying to show that their respective Churches are the Church started by Jesus.  It, according to him, isn't likely to be "methodologically sound."  I think what he means is that either one would have to be apologetic by nature. 

 

So my question is this:  Is Bickmore's book methodologically sound?  Or is it strictly an apologetic work.  Can a book be apologetic and "methodologically sound" at the same time?  I'm no scholar so forgive me if I'm ignorant of scholarly vernacular.

 

I'm one of our resident scholars (hint: Robert F. Smith, Daniel O., et al) will opine.

Edited April 12, 2014 by drums12

[readstoomuch]

I read the first edition. It is interesting to say the least. I think it does pretty good job. Like any LDS book, can you convince another Christian to join by reading it. Would scholars from other churches agree? Take theosis. Genuine doctrine from early Christianity. Greek Orthodox teach it, but they say it is much different then our version. A lot if difference is because of our belief in corporeal nature of God. There's evidence of many doctrines that many churches don't practice today. Some of these writings are from what many Christians would call heretics.

[BCSpace]

I purchased it.  It's a good book.  It is sound.  It shows evidence of views and doctrines of the Early Christian Fathers that match or are similar to LDS views.  It traces the development of the trinity.  I've looked up many of the various quotations from the ECF in the actual works they are found in and found them to be in context.  I highly recommend it as an excellent primer on the Apostasy of the Early Christian church.  If there was an apostasy and a Restoration, one would certainly expect LDS-like views to be present in the early Church and indeed they were.

 

You can access all the works of the ECF for free online here:

 

http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html

 

I would also check out Barry's site.  Some stuff essentially directly from the book. Some other very useful stuff related to  the ECF, the trinity, and some debates with trinitarians.

 

http://www.geocitiessites.com/Athens/Parthenon/2671/

Edited April 12, 2014 by BCSpace

[mfbukowski]

I've read several reviews of Barry Bickmore's "Restoring the Ancient Church," and am considering purchasing a copy.  However, a friend of mine who has a Masters Degree in Ancient Religious Texts (he is active LDS) said he doesn't recommend it.  He says it would be difficult for either a Mormon or a Catholic to write a book trying to show that their respective Churches are the Church started by Jesus.  It, according to him, isn't likely to be "methodologically sound."  I think what he means is that either one would have to be apologetic by nature. 

 

So my question is this:  Is Bickmore's book methodologically sound?  Or is it strictly an apologetic work.  Can a book be apologetic and "methodologically sound" at the same time?  I'm no scholar so forgive me if I'm ignorant of scholarly vernacular.

 

I'm one of our resident scholars (hint: Robert F. Smith, Daniel O., et al) will opine.

Objectivity does not exist in such matters, period, end of story.  There are only interpretations as seen through the eyes of very fallible human beings.  Isn't that great?  We all get to be creative.

[Calm]

Objectivity does not exist in such matters, period, end of story.  There are only interpretations as seen through the eyes of very fallible human beings.  Isn't that great?  We all get to be creative.

What is great is having the availability of original...well translated so at least one layer of interpretation already...material so we can go to those sources to explore ourselves. Works like Bickmore's are great for collecting relevant material making it easier to study and having his interpretation can help us look at things in ways we wouldn't consider, but since we are dealing with interpretations I wouldn't rely on one book if I wanted to be educated about a subject. At the very least reading the material myself in context is important IMO.

[Calm]

" I think what he means is that either one would have to be apologetic by nature."

Any book promoting a particular viewpoint/interpretation is apologetic by nature. Good apologetics includes sound methodology. As long as one understands the bias one is approaching a topic with, I see no reason to discount it solely because the person believes in what he is arguing for rather than is just someone defending a viewpoint of others' beliefs.

If I had to choose, I would go for this book...it is even available for free online, but even better read both:

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/book/early-christians-in-disarray-contemporary-lds-perspectives-on-the-christian-apostasy/

PS: both books can be found at the FairMormon Bookstore here with the profits going to a good cause rather than just providing the bookstore owner with an income so they can feed and clothe their family.

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=1538

http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=974

Edited April 12, 2014 by calmoriah

[Alan]

I have read this book.

I was impressed, but not overwhelmed.

It was ok, but there is nothing new therein. I had read much of it before from other sources.

It is certainly apologetic in nature and therefore doesn't include information which points in a contrary direction.

However, as no historian is truly objective, despite what they may claim, this is not a major handicap.

 

Buy the book by all means; just don't expect it to be something it doesn't claim to be.

[drums12]

Thank you all for your replies.