The first problem is arrangement. This book is arranged topically, rather than historically. This makes it hard to follow. At times it reads like a dictionary.
The second problem is this book is not engaging; perhaps this is because the author tries to write from a 'neutral' position, coolly considering the history of heresy, not taking sides. Actually, his neutrality IS a position: he values tolerance above all (pg. 157). This leads Evans to defend heretics (pg. 81).
The third problem: historically sloppy. For example, Evans claims that Calvin executed Servetus (Evans also misspells Servetus' name!). Historical sloppiness at times is the by-product of the genre, "A Brief..." You can only be so brief and be accurate. This books fails on accuracy for the sake of brevity.
Fourth problem: sloppy definitions, categories. For example, Wycliffe is lumped with Arius as a similar 'heretic.' This is ridiculous.
Fifth problem: beset by historical skepticism of 21st century. This skeptic needs to be more skeptical of his own age.
No comments:
Post a Comment