Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy
I would venture a guess that a majority of the majority (much greater than just 51%) of Apostolics know anything about the history of the movement, much less care about it.
It has been said that the victors write the history books, therefore which perspective is truth? There is a version from the organization/movement side, and there is a version from those who have left the movement and are strongly on the academic side, and there are those who are simply bitter and don't mind trashing the whole thing.
I know for a fact that J.L. has, in the past, embellished the history of the movement in order to maintain its legacy of posessing truth.
Fudge? I think because of his academic background, he has written the closest work. Boyd? 
Can a work be written sans propaganda? Yea, but I can't imagine where it would come from. |
This problem I see with Fudges' book is many things are assummptions that are unprovable either way. Like the percentage of PCI men who believed saved at repentance though he has no idea he quotes men who say both ways and then comes up with his own conclusion that he wants. Many of the PCI leaders believers believed salvation at repentance but some did not and the constituent body was diverse as the PAJC was also diverse not as much but was certainly diverse. His bias is clearly seen yet he plummets the official UPC response as bias. But it is a very interesting book indeed I am enjoying rereading it.
Threaded Mode
