Vous voulez voir cette page en français ? Cliquez ici.

Have one to sell? Sell yours here
The Way to Nicaea V1
 
See larger image
 

The Way to Nicaea V1 [Paperback]

John Behr
5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)

Available from these sellers.


Formats

Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover --  
Paperback --  

Product Details


Product Description

Book Description

This series traces the reflection provoked by Christ's question: "Who do you say that I am?" from the earliest days of Christianity to the Seventh Ecumenical Council. They range from the most fundamental issues, concerning how Christ is known and the standard by which responses to him can be evaluated, to the subsequent reflections regarding his relationship to God and to us.

About the Author

John Behr is Associate Professor of Patristics at St Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary.

Tag this product

 (What's this?)
Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items.
Your tags: Add your first tag
 

 

Customer Reviews

2 Reviews
5 star:
 (2)
4 star:    (0)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:    (0)
1 star:    (0)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
5.0 out of 5 stars (2 customer reviews)
 
 
 
 
Share your thoughts with other customers:
Most helpful customer reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars Was Nicea correct and how did we get there?, Jun 28 2003
By 
matt (the reading room) - See all my reviews
This review is from: The Way to Nicaea V1 (Paperback)
Father John Behr expertly addresses the question of Jesus to the disciples, "Who do you say that I am?" I was very pleased to read this book and found it both critical of and faithful to the apostolic deposit of the faith, as the first Christians understood their experience of the risen Christ. I'll quote Professor Andrew Louth's analysis of the author and the text: "The uneasy relationship between Orthodoxy and critical theology is being transcended in some of our younger Orthodox theologians. The most striking, and hopeful, example is this work by John Behr...Professor Behr does not take refuge in easy answers and...his Orthodoxy is radical not conservative... This is, therefore, a demanding book, requiring of its readers careful attention: but such attention will be richly repaid."

You may also find Jaroslav Pelikan's volume one of "The Christian Tradition" engaging and scholarly. Enjoy!

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5.0 out of 5 stars A Connected if not Winding Road to Nicea, Mar 25 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: The Way to Nicaea (Hardcover)
John Behr, professor of Patristics at St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, has inaugurated a new series in the history of theology (intended to cover the period up to the Second Council of Nicaea) with an interesting and unusual volume on the first three centuries. There is some tension between this book's place in a series and Behr's own project. Though he says "that more attention has been given to understanding earlier writers on their own terms rather than as stages on the way to later landmarks, such as Nicaea and Chalcedon" (5-6), he sometimes slips into the latter approach (for example, 75-76 and 200-201).

Behr attempts neither a history of dogma nor a typical patrology. Instead, he offers a provocative thesis which I would summarize as follows: the main line of development in Christian theology portrays Christ incarnate as the argument, the "hypothesis" of Scripture, that is, of the Old Testament, now come in history, and theology remained safely orthodox only when it maintained that living link to Scripture.

Behr cites Aristotle on the role of hypotheses as "the starting points or first principles (archai) of demonstrations" (32), and he continues the interplay of Scripture and the canon of faith throughout the book, most effectively in the section on Christ in the New Testament and the chapter on Irenaeus. This approach enables him to give the most straightforward account I have seen of Irenaeus' doctrine of "recapitulation" (123-30), and it provides good insight into the aims of Origen (169), which could have been developed further in a different sort of book. Other chapters address Ignatius of Antioch, whose letters are treated as kerygma rather than as works of circumstance; Justin; "Hippolytus and the Roman Debates"; and Paul of Samosata. The eclecticism is justified by the working out of Behr's thesis, not that evidence for it was unavailable in Theophilus, Tertullian, Cyprian, or Lactantius, but that the chosen authors provided enough and seem to be related. I think that the overall thesis deserves extended consideration as a hermeneutical key to ante-Nicene Christian theology, and I hope to see it examined further both by Behr and by others.

Behr makes certain critical decisions, as everyone must: he considers Irenaeus' Demonstration earlier than the Against Heresies (112); he ascribes the Contra Noetum to Hippolytus without hesitation (146; 156); and he accepts the correspondence between Dionysius of Rome and Dionysius of Alexandria as authentic, while recognizing the doubts of Abramowski and Heil (202). These are disputed issues, and one takes one's chances.

My own main questions about Behr's argument concern Justin. For one thing, more respect should be given to the genres of the Apologies and the Dialogue: Justin calls Christ "teacher" in the former, but not in the latter (101, n. 21), and there is no good reason to conclude that "for Justin, Christ is primarily the teacher" (105). In neither genre does Justin need to deal with Paul or John, so there are no grounds for saying that he "seemed reluctant to handle" their texts (113). Albert Houssiau pointed out long ago that for Justin the saints of old saw the Word, but for Irenaeus they saw prophetic visions of the Word incarnate. Behr values this contrast but goes too far when he sees in Irenaeus no "continuity of personal subject acting throughout time in different ways and revealing God in a variety of forms" (116; see his citation from AH 4.9.1 on p. 115). And I would still concur with Houssiau that the logos spermatikos should not be conflated with the theme of pagan borrowings from Moses, as Behr does on 108-9.

I believe that Behr is onto something important with his thesis about the argument of Scripture and its central role in understanding ante-Nicene developments. Any problems of detail in his presentation tend to highlight the theological significance of Behr's approach and make it easier to argue in concrete terms about what it means. This book is a welcome addition to the resources available for graduate classes in patristics.

Michael Slusser

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com: 5.0 out of 5 stars (3 customer reviews)

38 of 38 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A Connected if not Winding Road to Nicea, Mar 24 2004
By A Customer - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Way to Nicaea (Hardcover)
John Behr, professor of Patristics at St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, has inaugurated a new series in the history of theology (intended to cover the period up to the Second Council of Nicaea) with an interesting and unusual volume on the first three centuries. There is some tension between this book's place in a series and Behr's own project. Though he says "that more attention has been given to understanding earlier writers on their own terms rather than as stages on the way to later landmarks, such as Nicaea and Chalcedon" (5-6), he sometimes slips into the latter approach (for example, 75-76 and 200-201).

Behr attempts neither a history of dogma nor a typical patrology. Instead, he offers a provocative thesis which I would summarize as follows: the main line of development in Christian theology portrays Christ incarnate as the argument, the "hypothesis" of Scripture, that is, of the Old Testament, now come in history, and theology remained safely orthodox only when it maintained that living link to Scripture.

Behr cites Aristotle on the role of hypotheses as "the starting points or first principles (archai) of demonstrations" (32), and he continues the interplay of Scripture and the canon of faith throughout the book, most effectively in the section on Christ in the New Testament and the chapter on Irenaeus. This approach enables him to give the most straightforward account I have seen of Irenaeus' doctrine of "recapitulation" (123-30), and it provides good insight into the aims of Origen (169), which could have been developed further in a different sort of book. Other chapters address Ignatius of Antioch, whose letters are treated as kerygma rather than as works of circumstance; Justin; "Hippolytus and the Roman Debates"; and Paul of Samosata. The eclecticism is justified by the working out of Behr's thesis, not that evidence for it was unavailable in Theophilus, Tertullian, Cyprian, or Lactantius, but that the chosen authors provided enough and seem to be related. I think that the overall thesis deserves extended consideration as a hermeneutical key to ante-Nicene Christian theology, and I hope to see it examined further both by Behr and by others.

Behr makes certain critical decisions, as everyone must: he considers Irenaeus' Demonstration earlier than the Against Heresies (112); he ascribes the Contra Noetum to Hippolytus without hesitation (146; 156); and he accepts the correspondence between Dionysius of Rome and Dionysius of Alexandria as authentic, while recognizing the doubts of Abramowski and Heil (202). These are disputed issues, and one takes one's chances.

My own main questions about Behr's argument concern Justin. For one thing, more respect should be given to the genres of the Apologies and the Dialogue: Justin calls Christ "teacher" in the former, but not in the latter (101, n. 21), and there is no good reason to conclude that "for Justin, Christ is primarily the teacher" (105). In neither genre does Justin need to deal with Paul or John, so there are no grounds for saying that he "seemed reluctant to handle" their texts (113). Albert Houssiau pointed out long ago that for Justin the saints of old saw the Word, but for Irenaeus they saw prophetic visions of the Word incarnate. Behr values this contrast but goes too far when he sees in Irenaeus no "continuity of personal subject acting throughout time in different ways and revealing God in a variety of forms" (116; see his citation from AH 4.9.1 on p. 115). And I would still concur with Houssiau that the logos spermatikos should not be conflated with the theme of pagan borrowings from Moses, as Behr does on 108-9.

I believe that Behr is onto something important with his thesis about the argument of Scripture and its central role in understanding ante-Nicene developments. Any problems of detail in his presentation tend to highlight the theological significance of Behr's approach and make it easier to argue in concrete terms about what it means. This book is a welcome addition to the resources available for graduate classes in patristics.

Michael Slusser


10 of 12 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Was Nicea correct and how did we get there?, Jun 28 2003
By matt - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Way to Nicaea V1 (Paperback)
Father John Behr expertly addresses the question of Jesus to the disciples, "Who do you say that I am?" I was very pleased to read this book and found it both critical of and faithful to the apostolic deposit of the faith, as the first Christians understood their experience of the risen Christ. I'll quote Professor Andrew Louth's analysis of the author and the text: "The uneasy relationship between Orthodoxy and critical theology is being transcended in some of our younger Orthodox theologians. The most striking, and hopeful, example is this work by John Behr...Professor Behr does not take refuge in easy answers and...his Orthodoxy is radical not conservative... This is, therefore, a demanding book, requiring of its readers careful attention: but such attention will be richly repaid."

You may also find Jaroslav Pelikan's volume one of "The Christian Tradition" engaging and scholarly. Enjoy!


2 of 18 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The Way to Nicaea (The Formation of Christian Theology, V. 1), Dec 9 2007
By Walter Terehoff "PRAVOSLAVYA" - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Way to Nicaea V1 (Paperback)
The Way to Nicaea (The Formation of Christian Theology, V. 1) by John Behr.

This book teaches about TRUE ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY, not the fragmented christianity that has been fallen away from the original design of the church Jesus founded on the 1st day of Pentecost. From the begining there was and still is THE ONE HOLY catholic and apostolic church.

This book explains to the reader the importance of staying on the narrow path, for wide and broad is the path to perdition. By understanding the TRUE christianity in it's purest form one can rest assure that they will not drift into heresies and manmade errors from all the reformations that took place after the great SCHISM of 1054AD.

AFTER the west separated from the east, All denominations came of the RCC, each drifting further and further from the true church. With each separation , reformation new heresies and errors were established in new created churches.
This book will keep you focused on the true christian theology based on the church fathers and not manmade missinterpretations of the word of Christ. Do not forget to complement this book with PART II called FORMATION of CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY volumes I and II "The Nicene faith"

Glory be to God for having such rich food for the soul and for having the TRUE church shown in text in todays antichristian world.
 Go to Amazon.com to see all 3 reviews  5.0 out of 5 stars 
 
 
Only search this product's reviews



Listmania!

Create a Listmania! list

Look for similar items by category


Look for similar items by subject


Feedback