The calvinistic concept of culture pdf

Saturday, September 25, What is an Evangelical? This question is the title of chapter sixteen in the book Knowing the Times - Addresses Delivered on Various Occasions - by D. There is much in this book, especially in this chapter, with which I am in whole-hearted agreement. I commend it to you for your thoughtful study. Longsight Market "Bloggs". This is a painting that I did at school circa It was loosely based on recollections of my childhood visits with my mother to the market in Longsight , Manchester UK.

The painting was displayed briefly at an exhibition of school art in the Whitworth Gallery in Manchester. You might wonder what this has to do with either Engineering or Theology?

Not much, actually! I'm just exploring the technology of blogging , and there seemed nothing more appropriate to upload than a picture which included the word " Bloggs ".

Thursday, September 23, Why Engineering and Theology? Simple really. This blog will cover topics of interest in both areas. Maybe some posts will touch on both at the same time?

I've been working in the semiconductor industry since My theological position is that of a Reformed Evangelical. I also have my own web-site , which has been on-line since I live in the United Kingdom. Jeffrey , James Hopkins. Linkages and effectiveness of relationships between the Alberta Teachers ' Association and other organizar tions.

This volume chronicles the development of Calvin College, focusing in particular on the interaction and mutual influence between the college and the church.

They would ''transform'' culture by analyzing societal issues and responding to them in a distinctly Christian way. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Create a free website or blog at WordPress. The Domain for Truth. Feeds: Posts Comments.

The work will have the cover on it—but the content is the same. Like this: Like Loading Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:. Common grace is not spiritual but restricted to the temporal and material.

Nevertheless, it is rooted in Christ as mediator of creation. Kuyper gave common grace the independent role of developing creation and making culture possible and he was not always consistent in this because he also held that without special grace, common grace had no purpose. Common grace has both a negative effect of restraint and a positive effect of progress. Based on Revelation , Kuyper held that the universal human development in every field of culture, minus the influences of sin, will be carried over into eternity.

Creation will not be destroyed but be glorified. One of the purposes of common grace is to give special grace a basis of operation. Thus, the pagan world in general performs an indirect service to the church in its cultural strivings. In order to reconcile the problem of common grace being both a help and a handicap to special grace, Kuyper held to two levels of common grace, namely, one technical and intellectual while the other ethical and spiritual.

Particular grace is Gods gracious inclination toward elect sinners on account of Christs atonement. The church is the instrument of particular grace. Kuyper was concerned to keep culture secular, i. There is both an indirect and direct influence of particular grace upon common grace. As for the first, Christianity has caused life in general to flourish. As for the second, culture is directly affected through the cultural subject, i. This new humanity functions in the area of common grace to fulfill the creative will of God.

All of a believers life is affected by his regeneration. Particular grace does not give a man a better understanding of technical matters or craftsmanship, but it does affect the way a man interprets the facts that have been collected. This leads to two very different kinds of science which are antithetical, each having its own faith. Note that Kuyper did not accept a two-level theory of truth, which divides the religious from the scientific.

This antithesis between the two sciences is not more apparent because there are some common areas, e. Furthermore, Christians do not always live according to this new principle of life in the whole of their being.

Kuyper called on Christians to establish their own scientific laboratories and carry out their investigation on the basis of their presuppositions. Kuyper saw that Calvinism, with its doctrine of foreordination, made a great contribution to science, which seeks unity of comprehension. Calvinism also freed men from the tutelage of the church to develop science and art.

The doctrine of election had the practical effect of drawing attention to the little and insignificant and the lowly for nothing is worthless and without value in Gods creation. Christians are to live for the King in every cultural activity, societal relationship and communal organization. The spiritual opposition to Gods kingdom comes to expression in the sphere of common grace and the church as well.

In order to do battle with the world, Christian ought to organize their opposition in the various spheres, e. This does not constitute a going out of the world for Christians are called to live in the world in three ways, namely, as a member of the church, as a member of Christian organizations in opposition to the world, and finally as members of society as a whole joining with unbelievers in such things as sports, works of mercy.

In evaluating Kuyper, several things should be noted. Firstly, his doctrine of common grace should not be abused by making it the foundation for an uncritical appreciation of the neutral culture of unbelievers.

Kuyper placed common grace under the sway of Christ. Secondly, Kuyper places more weight on common grace than it will bear according to the Scriptures. He seems to have fallen into a kind of dualism between nature and grace.

Various corrections of Kuyper have been proposed, e. Schilder is the greatest Reformed cultural theologian since Kuyper. He replaced Kuypers common grace with the common cultural mandate. Against the Neo-orthodox theologians, Schilder taught that there is no antithesis between God and man, God and history, and grace and nature, but between grace and sin, and Christ and the anti-Christ.

History is the framework for Gods redemptive work in Christ and thus God does not condemn history and nature but through Christ, He condemns sin and restores nature and history to its original purpose. Christ is the secret of culture for He takes Adams place and fulfills the cultural mandate. Adam was to serve as Gods co-worker in cultivating the good earth for Gods glory but because of his sin, he became an ally of the devil and enemy of God and was unable to perform his task.

Fallen men seek to develop culture for themselves rather than for God. Sin brings disintegration into the cosmos and disruption to all the relationships of creation. However, sin did not abolish the creative ordinance of God and the common obligation of all men in the covenant of works.

As such, the existence of culture in a sinful world should not be ascribed to common grace but to common obligation. Schilder saw that the development of nature is not due to grace but is part of the natural process and the result of an inherent power in man given by God in creation. For him, one should not talk about common grace without its corollary, namely, common curse.

Schilder rejected both the term common grace and the idea of common terrain where unbelievers and believers are said to posses mutually. At best, they have a common workshop, i. Schilder places Christ as the key to culture for in order to return to true religion and true culture, Gods wrath has to be appeased and obedience to God must be rendered. Christ alone fulfills these two requirements. According to Schilder, Christ restores culture by producing the true, whole man, who is once again able to fulfill their cultural calling in this world.

Christianity brought about the greatest cultural reformation of history and the Protestant reformation was a resurgence of it. Positive cultural construction is accomplished only when Gods will is obeyed. In Gods providence, He restrains the effects of sin so that godless culture never truly ripens or reaches consummation. Several consequences from Schilders position may be listed. Firstly, there is, strictly speaking, no such thing as pure culture in a world of sin. Secondly, in our discussion of the Christian and culture, we may not proceed on the fiction of culture as such since this is an abstraction.

Thirdly, Christians must not abstain from culture since the cultural mandate comes to all men. Fourthly, it is uncritical to speak of the cultural question as that of common grace since we are commanded to cultivate the earth. Fifthly, the church must be held in great reverence culturally. The church may never become a centre of culture but it must be the greatest indirect cultural force. Finally, the Christian should neither be intoxicated with cultural optimism or stupefied with cultural asceticism.

Schilder evaluates the cultural process in terms of its eschatological- pedagogical worth. The latter has to do with the process of training in which Gods co-workers undergo in their labour. Schilder repudiated Kuypers view that the glory of the nations shall enter the New Jerusalem. The crucial concept in Schilders view of history is the catastrophic point of time in which the world will be suddenly renewed. Schilder was right in viewing mans original relationship to God as one of covenantal responsibility and that mans restoration to God through Christ enables him to be a co-worker with God in every sphere of cultural activity.

Schilder is to be applauded in rejecting Kuypers basis for culture, namely, common grace. Schilder warned against the idea of common grace terrain which offered a neutral field of operation between Christians and non-Christians.

This idea has the tendency of breaking down the antithesis and producing a false nature-grace duality. Culture is the expression of a peoples religion in the conquest of nature and religion is dependent on revelation. Calvinism accepts the Bible as Gods special revelation, and as His word, it has final and absolute authority, and is clear and sufficient in all matters of faith and conduct.

Without Gods revelation, man is unable to find the true meaning and purpose of his existence and culture. Non-Christian philosophy rejects God and His word as its starting point, and deifies some aspect of reality. In contemporary culture, mans reasoning power is the starting point.

Calvinists view the Bible as their source-book for culture. This does not mean that the Bible is to be used as a textbook for science, art etc. Nevertheless, all the facts of created reality cannot be properly understood and interpreted without the spectacles of Gods word. Calvinists seek integration in all areas of life and will not accept a two-level theory of truth.

The Bible has both historical and normative authority for the Calvinist. In contrast to the liberals, he accepts the historical records of the Bible as true facts and he recognizes that without the objective revelation from God, men would be in darkness concerning the meaning of history and his true destiny. The Calvinist views the Bible as Gods word and that without it, man cannot produce a culture that reflects the glory of God. Christianity maintains that man cannot come to God without faith and that all that is not of faith is sin.

It denies that there are two ways to God, i. Faith is not the result of rationalization or experimentation, but it is the subjective response of man to objective divine testimony. Man is a religious being and cannot live apart from faith. Thus, it is wrong to view faith and reason as antithetical, for both faith and reason are aspects of man as creature. All men live by faith, whether true or false. Neutrality and a neutral terrain for culture apart from faith is an impossibility.

Usually, when the true faith is denied, a mechanistic, materialistic view of reality is substituted. Faith is the religious a priori of mans whole cultural enterprise and the conflict in culture is between divergent faiths. The Biblical view of man is that he has fallen away from God and is in need of restoration through Christ. All who participate in Christ by faith are restored to their office of prophet, priest and king, and enabled to fulfill their cultural calling. In contrast to the liberals who place mans reason and autonomy above Gods revelation, the Calvinists submit unequivocally to the sovereignty of God in all things.

The despair and sense of frustration of modern man is the result of his alienation from God. Only Gods word gives meaning to all things and this meaning is to be expressed in mans culture. Calvinists reject the existential view of the antithesis, namely, that it is between God and man, as creature. They also reject the idea of the eternal dualism between God and Satan. The biblical concept of the antithesis begins in Genesis where God sets enmity between the two seeds.

The enmity is seen throughout sacred history from the time of Cain onwards and into the New Testament. One of Satans tactics is to soften this antithesis and to make the world look innocuous to Gods people. This results in the idea of synthesis and neutrality.

The doctrine of the antithesis teaches that all Christians are to be involved in this spiritual warfare and that not a single aspect of life lies outside this antithesis between godliness and godlessness. This antithesis is absolute and it is expressed in both religion and culture.

Nevertheless, this doctrine does not deny the unity of the human race in terms of creation, the image of God, sin, and the need for redemption. But it does teach that in Christ, the Second Adam, a relationship has been established that supersedes the first.

Through Gods grace, men are made new creatures and this leads to a distinctively Christian way of living. Note that absolute antithesis does not imply perfection for the Christian still sins in this life. Also, we must not conceive of the antithesis only in terms of principles and not persons for both go together. Finally, this antithesis will only be abolished at the end. Meanwhile, Christians are to fight both inwardly in their own hearts and outwardly in the world of men and events.

Christians have proposed various attitudes to the world. Some hold to a pilgrim mind, pure and simple, and view this world as an evil to be endured, and thus do not concern themselves at all with culture.