I have my Church History exam tomorrow morning. In preparing for it, I've noticed something interesting. Most of my study is taken up with looking at specific (famous) people, like John Knox (with whom to argue was like a foretaste of Judgment Day) or George Whitefield (who according to Cowper "followed Paul - his zeal a kinded flame / his apostolic charity the same"). This is one particular perspective on history - that, as Henry James put it, "the history of the world is the history of the privileged few."
The other view of history looks more ordinary people, and sees them as being far more important than any particular individuals. The brilliant Dutch theologian Abraham Kuyper came to an appreciation of this when he visited Vienna, saw the cathedral there, and realised that this great structure had been built by unknown and indeed un-named people.
We see these two perspectives on history in Washington D.C. In one spot there is the Washington monument, dedicated to that great American leader, while nearby is the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial, with the names of every single American missing or killed in the Vietnam conflict. One focuses on an individual, the other exhaustively recognises everyone.
Well, I have my Old Testament exam on Friday, and one of the books we've covered is Ezra-Nehemiah. This book follows the second view of history. Especially with Nehemiah - despite having the book named after him, he doesn't actually seem to do much. Instead, we have long lists of all the people who contributed to rebuilding the city. The common people are vitally important - it is they who get the work done.
It is interesting to consider what the book of Acts would have been like if it was written by the author of Ezra-Nehemiah - presumably we'd have been given the names of all the 120 people in the upper room...
| ← Previous day | (Calendar) | Next day → |