# Top 3 Church historians ?



## PresbyDane (Jun 30, 2009)

I would Luke a list og Tour top 3 historians and the name og their work and maybe some reasons for the 3 you have chosen, thanks


----------



## ewenlin (Jun 30, 2009)

Schaff!

As for a contemp, I like Mark Noll for the easy reading but he is in no way comprehensive.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 30, 2009)

I do not know if he would consider himself one but Iain Murray has done an excellent job recording the history of the Church in the 20th century.


----------



## tgoerz (Jun 30, 2009)

I would add Wm Cunningham to the list

Hard to name just 3, so many these days specialize in a specific area.

John Hannah definitely be a very good modern day historian.


----------



## rbcbob (Jun 30, 2009)

Merle d'Aubigné - several volumes on the Reformation


----------



## Romans922 (Jun 30, 2009)

Eusebius has to be one, i would think, with all his work on Ecclesiastical History in the Early Church. 

So in order, I would put him first because he came first. William Cunningham WOW, praise God for working through him. I'd have to put him on there and then probably Schaff.

1. Eusebius
2. Cunningham
3. Schaff


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 30, 2009)

Mark Knoll,
Kenneth Scott Latourette
Schaff

-----Added 6/30/2009 at 11:12:52 EST-----

Don't forget Kenneth Scott Latourette; his is the best history of missions ever written.

Stephen Neill is also good for missions history.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 30, 2009)

Merle d'Aubigné - I love his non-contemporary attitude that God is an actor in history's drama

P. Schaff

Wm. Cunningham

J. Gonzalez, G. Marsden, M. Noll, I. Murray, and D. Bebbington are also very good, but probably too recent to know the enduring value of their scholarship.


----------



## Christusregnat (Jun 30, 2009)

D'Aubigne
Eusebius
Neander


For Schaff lovers, you may find this paper I did on Volume 1 of his history here.

Cheers,


----------



## Curt (Jun 30, 2009)

tgoerz said:


> John Hannah definitely be a very good modern day historian.



He wasn't a bad offensive lineman, either.


----------



## Edward (Jun 30, 2009)

Dr. Hannah is an excellent teacher on the subject. He also has some reformed leanings, although he is at DTS.


----------



## J. David Kear (Jun 30, 2009)

In addition to Eusebius and Schaff I would Add J.N.D. Kelly.


----------



## Romans922 (Jul 1, 2009)

OOOOO, good one Mr. Kear.


----------



## greenbaggins (Jul 1, 2009)

Schaff is definitely one of the three best. I think that Pelikan is a good contender. I'm not sure anyone has done history of doctrine better than he has (not even Harnack). Eusebius, d'Aubigne, Cunningham, Everett Ferguson are also all excellent.


----------



## Sven (Jul 1, 2009)

Philip Schaff: _History of the Christian Church; Creeds of Christendom_

Reinhold Seeberg: _Textbook of the History of Doctrines (Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte)_

William Cunningham: _Historical Theology; The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation_

Jaroslav Pelikan: _The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, 5 vols._

Richard A. Muller: _Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics_

J. N. D. Kelly: _Early Christian Doctrines_

-----Added 7/1/2009 at 09:55:14 EST-----

Etienne Gilson: _The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy; Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages; The Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas_


----------



## JOwen (Jul 1, 2009)

1. Eusebius
2. A.J Whylie
3. Schaff


----------



## christiana (Jul 1, 2009)

We used Earle E. Cairns for our Church History class.

Amazon.com: Christianity Through the Centuries: Earle E. Cairns: Books


----------



## Robbie Schmidtberger (Jul 1, 2009)

Most Church Historians are either generalists or specialists. It is hard to break it down from there; but my list reflects men still living. 

In terms of generalists: Noll (Turning Points is the best summary of Christian history), Nichols of Lancaster, very easy to read and well researched, and Justo Gonzalez (The Story of Christianity: excellent and thorough as he seeks to look at the theological, political, and sociological reasons Christians did things.) 

In terms of specialists: Carl Trueman on the reformation ( I put him ahead of Schaefer, Scott Clark, Godfrey, Beeke, and Hoffecker) Michael Hayken on Patristics (we need a lot more men who know this time period. In terms of a sociological method I enjoy Rodney Stark's Cities of God and the Rise of Christianity.) And Nick Needham (4 volume set of 2000 Years of Christ's power). In terms of American history- George Marsden and DG Hart are both excellent. [I know that is 4; go ahead and sue me]. 

I do not like Eusebius, even though he is "the father of church history" because of his over all bias and favor of Constantine. He is helpful in the sense that when one reads him you understand how Christians thought and lived in that time.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 1, 2009)

1. Eusebius 
2. Schaff
3. The third and final one here a bit hard. John Fox would probably been one of the most influential. But personally, I like Everett Ferguson/ Tom Nettles.


----------



## Irish Presbyterian (Jul 1, 2009)

1. Richard Muller
2. J.N.D Kelly
3. Henry/Owen Chadwick


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Jul 1, 2009)

1) Philip Schaff
2) Eusebius
3) John Gerstner


----------



## VanDood (Jul 1, 2009)

I am no expert, but three that I have benefited from:

1. Michael Haykin 
2. C. Gregg Singer (Theological Interpretation of American History)
3. Hughes Oliphant Old (Reading and preaching of the scriptures series.)


----------



## py3ak (Jul 1, 2009)

I'm surprised at all the commendations of Schaff. I soldiered through two volumes and found him turgid, tendentious, pompous and really surprisingly uninformative given the sheer quantity of words.


----------



## Sven (Jul 1, 2009)

py3ak said:


> I'm surprised at all the commendations of Schaff. I soldiered through two volumes and found him turgid, tendentious, pompous and really surprisingly uninformative given the sheer quantity of words.



The reason that there are so many commendations of Schaff is because he is brilliant. I might grant you that he is turgid, but then again, who wasn't back then? He was an academic and it seems to me that the academic style back then was to be excessive and complex. As far as being tendentious and pompous he says things we might disagree with, but that hardly qualifies as tendentious or pompous. As to being uninformative, how on earth can you say that? Whoever reads Schaff and comes away uninformed either is really really smart or hasn't taken care in reading him. Every time I pick up Schaff, I am amazed at the vastness of his learning, and the range of his abilities. I really hope that one day I can have a quarter of the knowledge and ability that he had.


----------



## WarrenInSC (Jul 1, 2009)

On a related note, is there any such thing as an "Adult Sunday School" curriculum that could give a rough outline of church history in a year's time - maybe something of a mix between lecture and video. Something to inform the lay person who is not going to pickup Schaff, etc. but who is interested enough to attend a weekly SS class for a year to become informed? Or am I dreaming?


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jul 1, 2009)

As far as Reformation history, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Heiko Oberman. I never knew the man, but one of my undergrad history profs was a student of his and he has been hugely influential in modern historical studies. Steven Ozment (another student of Oberman) is also worth reading and Richard Muller has also been mentioned a couple of times. On North American church history, Nathan Hatch (The Democratization of American Christianity), D.G. Hart, and George Marsden are excellent.


----------



## Robbie Schmidtberger (Jul 2, 2009)

WarrenInSC said:


> On a related note, is there any such thing as an "Adult Sunday School" curriculum that could give a rough outline of church history in a year's time - maybe something of a mix between lecture and video. Something to inform the lay person who is not going to pickup Schaff, etc. but who is interested enough to attend a weekly SS class for a year to become informed? Or am I dreaming?



In terms of Sunday School education curriculum I have no idea. Your best bet is to read Turning Points by Noll; Crossway sells another overview but I forget the author. I teach church history at a local Christian school and have lots of notes on the subject, perhaps I can turn it into a SS. curriculum. Most pastors study our history in great detail and are a tremendous resource.


----------



## py3ak (Jul 2, 2009)

Sven said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > I'm surprised at all the commendations of Schaff. I soldiered through two volumes and found him turgid, tendentious, pompous and really surprisingly uninformative given the sheer quantity of words.
> ...



In my view his generalizations and summarizations alone probably disqualify him from brilliance. Certainly he had the ability to read a lot of material. But I don't think his bad style can be wholly blamed on the times.


----------



## christianyouth (Jul 2, 2009)

Alister McGrath- His books are very well written and easy to read, even when they deal with a technical subject, like _Iustitia Dei_.

Mark Noll- I put him in here just for his work done on American Christianity. His book _America's God_ helped me greatly in understanding the religious atmosphere of 21st century American Christianity.

I haven't read much too many church historians, so I don't know if either of them qualify as the best, but they both write in an accessible style and seem to be non-partisan in their interpretations of history(i.e. Mark Noll disapproving of evangelicalism, yet writing _The Age of Evangelicalism_ which convicted me more than ever that evangelicalism is an accurate representation of biblical Christianity).

What about historians dealing with the 1st and 2nd centuries of Christianity? Does anyone have any suggestion for a historian that specializes in that time?


----------



## Christusregnat (Jul 2, 2009)

py3ak said:


> I'm surprised at all the commendations of Schaff. I soldiered through two volumes and found him turgid, tendentious, pompous and really surprisingly uninformative given the sheer quantity of words.



Plus, he was a liberal, and his liberalism is the most dangerous kind: the kind that pretends to be orthodox. I did a book review you may want to read.

Cheers,


----------

