« 2010 Adventist Historians' Conference: Sabbath Sessions | Main | Week Two Giveaway! »

March 28, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Why do you think it is that Adventist historians have stayed out of the prophetic/apocalyptic in recent years? Is it because they're been burned there in the past? Because Froom said essentially everything there was to say and left us only enough room to criticize it? Or has their professional training taught them that apocalyptic prophecy is an improper venue for historical research?

I think it is primarily the third reason. Surely Froom has not said everything, and being wrong certainly does not stop historians from trying again. Rather, professionalization has led to essentially a secular view of history, in which historians believe they do not have the tools to answer questions asked about prophecy. This seems to me, however, to represent a triumph of the historian over the Christian, and is an unnecessary and unfortunate decision to check one's faith at the door of the library or historian's study.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About

Memory, Meaning & Faith is a blog covering Christian history in light of contemporary issues.

Search

Lijit Search