heresies

In Christian theological discourse, it's not uncommon to see people accuse certain liberal theologians of first-millennium heresies.

If your concern is always how to please people, how can you be expected to explore heresies?

Appearing together doesn't imply any general endorsement, or risk any sort of infection by diabolical libertarian heresies.

Reynolds critiques the common scholarly practice of searching for obscure Christian heresies to explain the Quran's views on Jesus.

This article says that Nicene Christianity is more difficult to believe and more illogical than some of the heresies.

This is exactly the sort of idea Paul Graham spoke about in his modern heresies essay.

The rules of war have changed drastically in the course of history, in the sense that despised heresies become orthodoxy.

All of the heresies you listed were technological innovations that changed the dynamics of warfare.

History is littered with all sorts of cults and heresies that have since long been swept into the dustbin of history.

During the first centuries, the Church had to defend and clarify this truth of faith against the heresies that falsified it.

Next step is to extrapolate the saints, dogmas and heresies of the current church.

Eventually this leads to heresies like daxp b y, and where does the madness stop once you’ve allowed that sort of thing?

From pg's own "What you can't say" Every era has its heresies, and if you don't get imprisoned for them you will at least get in enough trouble that it becomes a complete distraction.

Reminds me of some of the arguments from "Heresies: Against Progress and Other Illusions" by John Gray "The core of the belief in progress is that human values and goals converge in parallel with our increasing knowledge.

You can find these dates discussed by Sextus Julius Africanus (160-240 AD), Irenaeus (in Against Heresies, 180 AD), and Hippolytus (commentary on Daniel, 204 AD).

Smant, Principles and Heresies: Frank S.