71 see the meaning in human history because mankind was created and given the ability to glorify God. In being giving the ability to do so, men were also given the ability to denigrate God. In essence, what Butterfield argued for was the recognition that human beings had free will and could make choices regarding the unfolding of their lives. As a result, Butterfield suggested that Christian historians should reject deterministic understandings of the past, where human players are directed about by unseen powers, such as economic or environmental forces, that cause humans to act in ways that are outside of their control. A Marxist interpretation of history that suggests a cyclical process of class conflict, revolution, and utopian progress for example, is ruled out by a proper biblical understanding of mankind. Butterfield’s examination of what influence a proper, biblical understanding of man has on the historian’s examination of the past is quite consistent with the position Augustine held. In other areas, however, Butterfield did not quite see eye to eye with Augustine. Butterfield made a distinction between what he called “technical history” and “interpretive” or “providential history.”2 In researching and writing the former, he argued, the Christian historian does his or her work no differently than a secular historian. The Christian has a distinctive foundation from which to work, however, when working in the realm of “providential history.” Here, Butterfield argued, the Christian historian explores interpretations of the past based on biblical principles and arrives at conclusions that may be radically different from those of the secular historian. Augustine would probably not have driven such a wedge between the two types of history. Others have examined this dichotomy as well, and the question of this divide continues to be a source of debate among Christian historians to this day as will be discussed later. In fact, it is in that debate that Cedarville’s distinctiveness will be most clearly seen. Gordon Clark, a philosopher and theologian in the Reformed tradition, supported the concept of a presuppositional approach to knowledge as outlined earlier.3 More importantly, he argued that there was an objective reality to the past and that it can be discovered. While this seems innocuous enough, it is a position that has become rather controversial in recent years. Postmodern thinking has undermined the notion that the past can be discovered at all. While postmodernism is difficult to categorize and define, various strains of it have chipped away at the concept of 2 Herbert Butterfield, Christianity and History. Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1949. 3 Gordon H. Clark, A Christian View of Men and Things. William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1951.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=