A Group Blog

Archive for July, 2009|Monthly archive page

Paul's Philosophy of History, Part Two

In Uncategorized on 19 July 2009 at 10:37 pm

I believe in a sovereign God who ordains all things and knows all things. He knew humankind, our actions, and our inmost thoughts from before the foundation of the world, in other words, before the beginning of history. The trajectory of history was foreordained. You can see the basic arc laid out in Scripture starting with “in the beginning God created” and ending with the second coming of Christ (well, I guess that depends on your eschatology, but you get my point). The medieval chroniclers incorporated this grand sweep of history into their works. A chronicler might have been writing a chronology of the Anglo-Saxons in the 9th century, but he would start by linking his work with the time of Christ.

Most Christians hold to some grand narrative of history. The concept of the “grand narrative” is properly called teleology, the idea that there exists an end of history. I believe that all history has a beginning and an ending. A biography begins and ends with birth and death. An institutional history might show the triumphant maturation or the slow decline of a school. As William Cronon has noted, even environmental historians find themselves turning the eruptions of earthquakes and other natural events into narratives. We shape our stories into narratives because narratives are “fundamental to the way we humans organize our experience.” This fact shouldn’t worry Christian historians. As Cronon further explained, “this commitment to teleology and narrative gives environmental history – all history – its moral center.” Narratives tell the reader what is good or bad, right or wrong.

Read the rest of this entry »

Paul's Philosophy of History, Part One

In Uncategorized on 17 July 2009 at 7:46 pm

In 1994 Mark Noll, then the McManis Professor of Christian Thought at Wheaton College, published The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. Chapter One, sentence one: “The scandal of the evangelical mind is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.” Noll spends the rest of the book examining why the evangelical mind was so flaccid. Noll defines fundamentalism as a subset of evangelicalism and the preeminent source of the ailments which Noll believed had sapped evangelicalism of its intellectual vigor. Noll is right.

This accusation is cod liver oil to the fundamentalist. We splutter quick rebuttals, asserting that fundamentalism has long encouraged the life of the mind. We point to the fundamentalist defense of orthodox Christianity. Noll does not neglect those virtues. He readily acknowledges the vital role fundamentalists played in preserving doctrinal orthodoxy, yet he simultaneously identifies a current of anti-intellectualism, one which we often overlook, within fundamentalism.

Read the rest of this entry »

Fundamentalism's Philosophy of History

In Uncategorized on 8 July 2009 at 3:46 pm

As Paul mentioned in his first post, “we both were raised in fundamentalist communities, both were educated at the same conservative Christian university, and both have decided to pursue graduate training in American religious history.” As historians, we have been exposed to various philosophies of history. But as fundamentalists, we have also been taught a fundamentalist philosophy of history in sermons, Bible classes, Sunday schools, and in our own reading. My goal is to explain that fundamentalist philosophy historically, in order to identify the tension between our identities as fundamentalists and as historians.

Read the rest of this entry »

Historical Philosophy, An Introduction

In Uncategorized on 1 July 2009 at 9:09 pm

Welcome to Religion in America. We hope that this blog will interest all students of America’s religious history. Whether you are an amateur or professional historian, you should find something of interest. We intend to post book reviews, photo tours of historical sites, and historiographical essays in order to inform you about current topics in American religious history.

For our first series of posts, Lincoln proposed that we each summarize our historical philosophy. As Lincoln and I discussed starting a blog we realized that we had both been engaging fundamental philosophical ideas over the past two years but had yet to compile those late-night wonderings and isolated thoughts into an overarching philosophy of history. Even though our philosophies are not set in stone, airing our philosophies is a useful exercise. It brings into conflict or cohesion ideas that have previously been considered only apart.

Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.