tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50063492024-02-06T22:09:47.772-05:00HONEST TO BLOGBaushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.comBlogger306125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-10060172839470749652024-02-05T13:22:00.001-05:002024-02-05T13:22:39.835-05:00Reflective / Critical Thinking Course<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">check it out and register thru the end of <b>Friday 16 Feb 2024</b><br /><a href="https://mereliberty.com/membership/courses/" target="_blank">https://mereliberty.com/membership/courses/</a></span><br /></p><p> </p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="358" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m-1Q4XrcNr8" width="483" youtube-src-id="m-1Q4XrcNr8"></iframe></div><p></p><p style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://youtube.com/watch?v=m-1Q4XrcNr8" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: x-small;">https://youtube.com/watch?v=m-1Q4XrcNr8</span></a></p><p><br /> Empowering people to connect their thoughts with their actions through
simple tools and fun practices that will cultivate a free and
flourishing society.</p><p>There's a <b>self-directed course</b> for $97 or a <b>live-guided course</b> for $297. <br /></p><p><a href="https://mereliberty.com/membership/courses/" target="_blank">The Liberty Seminar</a> is grounded in "Socratic" practice, which is a
time-tested way of learning to think well. It is a method developed over time into a form of pedagogy, inquiry
and dialogue have proven useful in improving critical thinking skills. <span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-size: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-size ); font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );">The
Liberty Seminar promotes productive dialogue, civil discourse, and
discovery. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-size: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-size ); font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );">See R.C. Sproul on the Socratic Method here:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-size: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-size ); font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="362" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aOdjpByHLEQ" width="482" youtube-src-id="aOdjpByHLEQ"></iframe></div><p></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-size: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-size ); font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );"> </span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://youtube.com/watch?v=aOdjpByHLEQ" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );">https://youtube.com/watch?v=aOdjpByHLEQ</span><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );"><br /></span></a></span></p><p><span style="font-family: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-family ), Sans-serif; font-size: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-size ); font-weight: var( --e-global-typography-text-font-weight ); word-spacing: var( --e-global-typography-text-word-spacing );"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqQIFSQOVlthpthy9BkwYIq8toSneG0a5uaRsrKkZON5n-Mi-Ea7TLOH425X8xCKHGo5uT7miMSkaqzgL8XZzNL3GQU_N1_-jz-o97uueRYrtaFUupI-at8V11N6vGKmNcKClk9rrpM8emgUPsLGMgkJ1_J4mlPRr9ZP8H1G4EG-X8ldFNrIt6/s799/KerryBaldwin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="799" data-original-width="799" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqQIFSQOVlthpthy9BkwYIq8toSneG0a5uaRsrKkZON5n-Mi-Ea7TLOH425X8xCKHGo5uT7miMSkaqzgL8XZzNL3GQU_N1_-jz-o97uueRYrtaFUupI-at8V11N6vGKmNcKClk9rrpM8emgUPsLGMgkJ1_J4mlPRr9ZP8H1G4EG-X8ldFNrIt6/w213-h213/KerryBaldwin.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>Liberty Seminar course guide, Kerry Baldwin, is an independent researcher and writer with a B.A. in
Philosophy from Arizona State University. In addition to her content and
courses on her website, <a data-lynx-mode="asynclazy" href="https://mereliberty.com/membership/monthly/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="">MereLiberty.com</a>, she’s also a regular contributor for the <a href="https://libertarianchristians.com/author/kerry-baldwin/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Libertarian Christian Institute</a>.<p></p><p>She's a veteran homeschool parent, teaching critical
thought using the Socratic method and dialoguing about the principles of
a free society. Find out more: <a href="https://mereliberty.com/about/kerry-baldwin/" target="_blank">https://mereliberty.com/about/kerry-baldwin/</a></p><p>Also see her fb page here: <a href="https://facebook.com/mereliberty" target="_blank">https://facebook.com/mereliberty</a></p><p> </p><p><br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-63545368907986666902022-11-12T01:50:00.004-05:002022-12-05T20:48:26.591-05:00The Reformed Libertarians Podcast<p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiOML52xQVfXHTiRSxyUQXS2L0gYIxjtVcgWFZVagKJ2E7oBSYP4NUj_HvH1nF-tj_VPmsIzAZvWJAyAA8idcbKJsnZ78RdlOmfhOeQfGXGki5P77iB6Ict8w92_B0PjqenfUUBD6fFPzS2Yaf7Or2xKK-Syet5ZRVSYBwACP9fBwJ61VDZg/s800/RLP.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiOML52xQVfXHTiRSxyUQXS2L0gYIxjtVcgWFZVagKJ2E7oBSYP4NUj_HvH1nF-tj_VPmsIzAZvWJAyAA8idcbKJsnZ78RdlOmfhOeQfGXGki5P77iB6Ict8w92_B0PjqenfUUBD6fFPzS2Yaf7Or2xKK-Syet5ZRVSYBwACP9fBwJ61VDZg/s320/RLP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>Kerry Baldwin of <a href="https://mereliberty.com/about/kerry-baldwin/" target="_blank">Mere Liberty</a> and I are now hosts of a podcast produced by the <a href="https://libertarianchristians.com" target="_blank"><span class="style-scope yt-formatted-string" dir="auto">Libertarian Christian Institute</span></a><span class="style-scope yt-formatted-string" dir="auto"> (along with several other podcasts) in the <a href="https://christiansforliberty.net" target="_blank">Christians for Liberty Network</a></span>.<p></p><p> Go to <b><a href="https://reformedlibertarians.com" target="_blank">https://reformedlibertarians.com</a></b> to find out more. </p><p>We aim to educate and inspire listeners to intelligently embrace and passionately promote libertarianism as grounded in the Reformed Faith, and informed by a Reformed worldview.</p><p>In brief, the politics are what neocalvinist politics are meant to be (viz, thoroughly libertarian and grounded in the orthodox and confessional Reformed Faith).</p><p>For now, Lord willing, new episodes will be released every other Thursday. Episodes that include interviewed guests might be a bit longer, but usually episodes will be between 20-40 minutes (I think). I'd love your feedback (even if unfavorable). If you don't find it on your preferred podcatcher, let me know. We intend to add alternative social media availability too. </p><p>You might find this a helpful intro: <span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs x1xmvt09 x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x1f6kntn xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u x1yc453h" dir="auto"><span><a class="x1i10hfl xjbqb8w x6umtig x1b1mbwd xaqea5y xav7gou x9f619 x1ypdohk xt0psk2 xe8uvvx xdj266r x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r xexx8yu x4uap5 x18d9i69 xkhd6sd x16tdsg8 x1hl2dhg xggy1nq x1a2a7pz xt0b8zv x1fey0fg" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrT9GcCCRbA" rel="nofollow noopener" role="link" tabindex="0" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrT9GcCCRbA</a></span></span></p><p><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs x1xmvt09 x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x1f6kntn xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u x1yc453h" dir="auto"><span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="367" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BrT9GcCCRbA" width="482" youtube-src-id="BrT9GcCCRbA"></iframe></div><br /> <p></p><div style="text-align: left;"><p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: courier;">Also posted here: <a href="https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/the-reformed-libertarians-podcast" target="_blank">https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/the-reformed-libertarians-podcast</a></span></span></p></div><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-90267901074920264742022-10-11T17:11:00.003-04:002022-10-11T17:36:45.185-04:00More on Disestablishment (with Hodge)<p><i><b>An addendum</b></i> (<a href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/09/hodge-on-disestablishment.html" target="_blank">to previous post</a>): concerning establishment of 'religion'</p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5fRyLU3fckIh4Gn439v0qQY6H3kATSIKBGgHLdOVMXGsIw2YwZN-dE2cye6ALHAzlIf7j-Uyqh8XX3d_SUKi1icMifXiDDwuwVrTYHObzOC3sCEhUYaaf91NKkVmFnZeuHZPxu2BLi0PL6a2vby6OPNvtd3wYAMlHPkc8IJUWVsHUj-anMg/s800/Charles%20Hodge3b.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="704" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5fRyLU3fckIh4Gn439v0qQY6H3kATSIKBGgHLdOVMXGsIw2YwZN-dE2cye6ALHAzlIf7j-Uyqh8XX3d_SUKi1icMifXiDDwuwVrTYHObzOC3sCEhUYaaf91NKkVmFnZeuHZPxu2BLi0PL6a2vby6OPNvtd3wYAMlHPkc8IJUWVsHUj-anMg/s320/Charles%20Hodge3b.jpg" width="282" /></a>In whatever way the English Dissenters/Nonconformists in the 1600s, the American Presbyterians in the 1700s, and Neocalvinists in the 1800s might have presented a Scriptural case against civil establishment of the church, I think Charles Hodge's argument is a sound one. <br /><br />Some Reformed establishmentarians, however, try to argue for --not the civil establishment of a single church institution/denomination, but rather-- the civil establishment of 'religion,' whether that is conceived in broader Nicean orthodox Christian terms, or in relatively more narrow Protestant, or specific Reformed terms.<br /><br />While I have highlighted the implied concern of Hodge's argument regarding faith and worship, I take one of the main concerns of establishment of 'religion' to be <b>ethics</b>.<br /><br />If we characterize part of Hodge's argument as a sort of "exclusion" or "regulative principle" argument (viz, discipline in faith and worship are assigned the church, not to civil government, and therefore forbidden to civil government), and this is accepted<i> arguendo</i>, this nevertheless seems to leave open the question regarding ethics. The issue might be put this way: isn't discipline regarding ethics assigned to both church and civil government, although the means of discipline differ?<br /><br />For example, theft is a matter of ethics, the discipline of which is assigned to the church, and yet discipline regarding theft is also assigned to civil government. So, why does this not extend to some, if not all, other ethical matters, even including those that overlap with matters of faith/heresy and worship/idolatry, such as blasphemy? In light of this, we can raise this fundamental question:<br />Is there any Scriptural criterion by which we can discern which ethical matters are assigned to civil government for discipline (if the set of ethical matters is not simply identical to those assigned to the church)?<br /><br />As I understand it, many advocates of civil establishment of 'religion' employ a criterion of "public-ness". So, for example, one may hold private blasphemous opinions and even privately worship in a blasphemous manner, but one should be civilly prohibited from "publicly" blaspheming, say, by publishing a book that says belief in God is stupid, dangerous, and evil.<br /><br />The following is how Hodge's Scriptural argument addresses this issue.<br /><br />First, as an aside, notice that Hodge includes an initial 4th point (which may be said to concern sphere sovereignty) that I do not include in <a href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/09/hodge-on-disestablishment.html" target="_blank">my quotation</a> because it seems to me its character as a Scriptural point is not made explicit by Hodge. It focuses on the point of different particular ends ordained by God for these distinct institutions, so that the fact of their having the same general end does not permit the inference that they are assigned to identical matters.<br /><br />I think that point can be argued in an explicitly Scriptural way. Although, I don't suppose 'religion' establishmentarians necessarily disagree with that point. What I think there is disagreement about is the criterion by which we should discern the respective assignments (to church and to civil government, concerning ethics), and what those assignments are.<br /><br />Second, I think Hodge's last point about <b>the coercive means instituted for civil government is the key</b> to recognizing the criterion by which we can discern which ethical matters are assigned to civil government. (This is so, even if Hodge does not himself draw this out explicitly, but restricts himself to how we discern what is <i>not</i> assigned to civil government.)<br /><br />Briefly stated, we may reason from Scripture on the issue like this: given the explicit institution of civil government in Genesis 9 by way of affirming the principle of proportionality in retributive justice, we must infer that the authorization of responsive coercion repeated in Romans 13 is restricted to the wrongdoing of prior initiation of coercion (aggressions) against persons and property. In other words, proportionality entails not only to what degree/extent coercion is used, but whether it is used <i>at all</i>. And to use coercion against non-aggressive immorality is disproportionate and violates the sword power authorized by God for civil government.<br /><br />That, then, is the Scriptural criterion by which we can discern which ethical matters are assigned to civil government, and it's the way Hodge's argument, although requiring that elaboration, applies to not only establishment of a single church institution, but also to establishment of 'religion' concerning civil enforcement of ethics, or a public morality.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: courier;">Also posted here: <a href="https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/more-on-disestablishment-with-hodge">https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/more-on-disestablishment-with-hodge</a></span></span><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-74829789815293122912022-09-29T16:53:00.004-04:002022-12-09T01:18:40.751-05:00Hodge on Disestablishment<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCOxuZU425y-xEcgfI3lZ3qB3wka_ICjDSJ_Aq90fecpysvvVm6G8d_trys6grxJ9e8UjX3I4kNraqH6l9J5uhv8qka715sf54zezzo9Z5s6d29azuh8ha9GL0Hz_W4aAPdBOv1zzs64JD0bPj6-7N2o_3CHDMFDmJOZ8VANfIkGQ1Ew_WbQ/s303/hodge4.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="303" data-original-width="260" height="303" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCOxuZU425y-xEcgfI3lZ3qB3wka_ICjDSJ_Aq90fecpysvvVm6G8d_trys6grxJ9e8UjX3I4kNraqH6l9J5uhv8qka715sf54zezzo9Z5s6d29azuh8ha9GL0Hz_W4aAPdBOv1zzs64JD0bPj6-7N2o_3CHDMFDmJOZ8VANfIkGQ1Ew_WbQ/s1600/hodge4.jpg" width="260" /></a></div>In <a href="https://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=92" target="_blank">1863 Charles Hodge summarized</a> how we Scripturally argue against civil "establishment" of the church in 3 points.<p></p><p><b>First</b>, he says the proper task or duties of the church and civil governance “must be determined from the Word of God.
And when reasoning from the Word of God [on these points], we are not authorized to argue from the Old Testament [old Mosaic covenant] economy [or administration] because that was avowedly temporary and has been abolished,
[instead, we] must derive our conclusions from the New Testament. We find it there taught:
</p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(a) That Christ did institute a church separate from [civil governance], giving it separate laws and officers.</p><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">
</div><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(b) That [Christ] laid down the qualifications of those officers and enjoined on the church, not on [civil governance], to judge [which men in the church meet those qualifications].</p><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">
</div><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">(c) That [Christ] prescribed the terms of admission to, and the grounds of exclusion from, the church, and left with the church its officers to administer these rules.”</p>
<p><b>Second</b>, Hodge says “the New Testament, when speaking of the immediate design of [civil governance] and the official duties of the magistrate, never [suggests] that [magistrates have] those functions [related to religious belief or practice that establishmentarianism proposes].
This silence, together with the fact that those functions are assigned to the church and church
officers, is proof that it is not the will of God that they should be assumed by [civil governance].”</p>
<p><b>Third</b>, Hodge says “the only means which [civil governance] can employ to accomplish many [duties proposed by establishmentarians, such as suppressing heresy and preventing false worship], [namely, by coercion],
are inconsistent with the example and commands of Christ [concerning faith and worship];
[and inconsistent] with the [liberty] of Christians, guaranteed in the Word of God (i.e., to serve God according to the dictates of one’s conscience);
[as well as] ineffectual to the true end of religion, which is voluntary obedience to the truth;
and [are] productive of incalculable evil.
…By enjoining [duties concerning faith and worship] upon the church, as an institution distinct
from [civil governance], [the New Testament] teaches positively that they do not belong to the magistrate, but to the church.”</p><p><br /></p><span style="font-family: courier;">Also posted here: <a href="https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/hodge-on-disestablishment" target="_blank">https://gregorybaus.substack.com/p/hodge-on-disestablishment</a></span><p><br /></p><p> </p>
<script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-80701590876671209822022-08-10T20:03:00.000-04:002022-08-10T20:03:27.162-04:00Now Also At Substack<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSX43IPB2_Xv6vnWLqCuYRHcndC8ZJR_idmPB6s7aJwC9ux-WOtNapXdg4JzE4OAZH42o4y9x0nQqMKRDKfS20ccc-VkumM_DAB6OPt_bIrcsFO96QOFPMPyCMAYsgoTPF-NndqOt1b3XqjWslrAUiD9SVr8tp17gmsknB_dje47o7uxc2ug/s884/substackICON.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="884" data-original-width="800" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSX43IPB2_Xv6vnWLqCuYRHcndC8ZJR_idmPB6s7aJwC9ux-WOtNapXdg4JzE4OAZH42o4y9x0nQqMKRDKfS20ccc-VkumM_DAB6OPt_bIrcsFO96QOFPMPyCMAYsgoTPF-NndqOt1b3XqjWslrAUiD9SVr8tp17gmsknB_dje47o7uxc2ug/w181-h200/substackICON.jpg" width="181" /></a></div><br />I don't really have a large audience for my occasional posts, as far as I know. But blogger/blogspot doesn't really have good subscription options. Various widgets have been discontinued and/or are at best only semi-functional.<p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I will be cross-posting here: <a href="https://gregorybaus.substack.com/" target="_blank">https://gregorybaus.substack.com/</a></span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;">So, if substack is something you use or might try out, please subscribe to my blog there. <br />Thanks!</span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-87789372841760253022022-08-03T23:20:00.003-04:002022-08-04T00:31:41.085-04:00Recovering the Reformed Confession on Resistance<p>Here's my discussion with pastor Aldo Leon of <a href="https://www.pinelandspresbyterian.org/" target="_blank">Pinelands PCA</a> (southeast Miami area) on the <a href="https://reformationmiami.org/podcasts/podcasts-got" target="_blank">Gospel On Tap podcast</a>, episode 95. We talk about the historical, confessional Reformed view of Romans 13 (the "prescriptive office" view), and its meaning for the proper role and strictly limited jurisdiction of civil governance, and <b>The Right Of Political Resistance</b> (even when the government is not requiring us to sin).</p><p>See the timestamp outline below the video.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="358" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_UcwN0x5tvY" width="480" youtube-src-id="_UcwN0x5tvY"></iframe><br /></div><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UcwN0x5tvY" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UcwN0x5tvY</a></span></p><p>00:14 Pastor Aldo general intro<br /><br />01:32 Topic intro<br />Discussed on Presbycast: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC95p88UzKg" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC95p88UzKg</a><br /><br />03:07 Gregory's bio <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/" target="_blank">https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/</a><br /><br />04:57 Gregory learned about the Reformed view of the role and limit of civil governance, and the Right of Political Resistance in F.A. Schaeffer's <i>A Christian Manifesto</i><br />book: <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1581346921" target="_blank">https://www.amazon.com/dp/1581346921</a><br />video: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwLDP8pocwo" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwLDP8pocwo</a><br /><br />06:21 Singleness <a href="https://thelaymenslounge.com/an-open-letter-to-christian-singles/" target="_blank">https://thelaymenslounge.com/an-open-letter-to-christian-singles/</a><br /><br />07:28 F.A. Schaeffer & R.C. Sproul on statism: <a href="https://www.ligonier.org/posts/statism-biggest-concern-future-church-america" target="_blank">https://www.ligonier.org/posts/statism-biggest-concern-future-church-america</a><br /> <br />08:12 <b>The Main Question</b>: Are we obligated by God to submit to everything civil government requires, unless it is requiring sin?<br />Why not?<br /><br />09:48 Everything that happens is in God's providence. But the providential fact of someone in power is not God's "ordinance" in Romans 13.<br /><br />13:50 Romans 13 says there is a God-ordained role/office of punishing actual civil wrongdoing; using coercion (the sword) against injustices (eg, murder and theft). This is the strict God-given limit on civil authority; civil government's actions outside that limited jurisdiction are illegitimate and sinful.<br /><br />17:37 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 forbids taking civil disputes between Christians to unjust judges. If Romans 13 required submitting to the judgment of those who claimed civil power at the time, this would be a contradiction.<br /><br />19:20 Reading Romans 13:1-7 from ESV<br /><br />21:03 Clearly contrasting the wrong view and the right view:<br />The common wrong view is that we must submit to everything that is not sin required by whoever is, providentially, in power.<br />The right (Reformed) view is that we are only obligated to submit to what God prescriptively (morally) ordains: specifically, the lawful administration of civil justice. We are not prohibited from resisting tyranny or unjust laws, etc.<br /><br />24:31 A "providential" view of the passage makes all civil power arbitrary; it amounts to nothing more than "might-makes-right".<br /><br />26:40 When the false view is applied to and consistently worked-out in other spheres of God-ordained authority, such as home and church, then it would absurdly entail that abusive husbands and fathers are legitimate, and that false teachers could not be deposed from office. <br />But God does not give us such unqualified "blank check" authority in any sphere.<br /><br />31:32 Hosea 8:4 clearly teaches that existing civil governments can be contrary to God's will.<br /><br />37:32 Hebrews 13:17 also speaks like Romans 13, in an indicative way (stating a fact), and it is understood as referring to a moral prescription for church office.<br /><br />39:24 Question: How should we understand exhortations in 1 Peter about suffering? Or the appeal to Jeremiah 29 about promoting Babylon's peace, etc?<br /><br />43:51 <b>Correction!</b><br />Gregory meant to say John Milton wrote <i>Paradise Lost</i> (not, 'Divine Comedy' by Dante). But see Milton's entry in the bibliography.<br /><br />44:09 The New Testament exhortations concerning suffering are about how to suffer in Christ (when it's unavoidable). We are not commanded to suffer, or prohibited from seeking to avoid suffering.<br /><br />48:02 The Reformed Political Resistance Theology annotated bibliography - <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKRKYfGezycEhE79LHBK5ZKTpifdFzrrDKGgYxBJulA/preview" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib</a><br /><br />50:42 Providence cannot be the basis for moral duty, because everything that occurs, even sin, is God's providence. If we shouldn't resist the government because of God's providence, wouldn't resistance to government be equally God's providence? So how can the duty to submit be coherently based on the fact of a government existing by God's providence? (It cannot).<br /><br />55:17 Saying that any human authority, when they aren't requiring sin, has an otherwise unqualified or unlimited jurisdiction and scope of authority --such a view is idolatrous.<br /><br />58:40 Question: Why have so many <a href="https://www.naparc.org/icr-contacts/" target="_blank">NAPARC</a> (conservative, confessionally Reformed) churches neglected the historical, confessional Reformed "prescriptive office" view?<br />It is not taught in most Reformed seminaries. Why?<br />Possible contributing factors: pietistic "personal experience" focus, progressive/liberal accommodationist/syncretist identifying God's kingdom with the state, scholastic nature-grace dualism.<br />See Gregory's related post: <a href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/01/reformed-biblical-theological.html" target="_blank">https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/01/reformed-biblical-theological.html</a><br /><br />1:18:33 Elements of feminizing men and feminizing worship also contribute<br /><br />1:27:23 Gregory's closing thoughts:<br /></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><b>a.</b> Westminster Confession 20.4 affirms the prescriptive office view in speaking of "lawful" power. (And the other Reformed confessions have similar language.)<br /><b>b.</b> see forthcoming info at Gregory's blog on authors from the bibliography about the Reformed View of The Right of Political Resistance. Preface here: <a href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/08/the-right-of-political-resistance.html" target="_blank">https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2022/08/the-right-of-political-resistance.html</a><br /></p><p><br />1:31:18 Pastor Aldo's closing thoughts:<br />God's Word tells us what the proper role and limited jurisdiction of civil governance is. The church's role is to declare and minister that Word in witness to the world. And believers individually may testify before those who claim power to the truth of His Word.<br />Also, if a believer votes for a candidate to civil office, they should discern whether the candidate has a commitment to actual limited government, especially locally where local officers can serve to oppose higher levels of tyranny.<br /><br />*<i>Important caveat</i>: while some Reformed authors did teach an erroneous 'providential' view, that view was rejected by the Reformed churches in their confessions.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-54528355205015237552022-08-02T23:01:00.002-04:002022-11-02T02:14:48.807-04:00The Right Of Political Resistance - preface<p>[audio/video <i>forthcoming</i>]<br /><br />There is a prominent need for not only Reformed church laity, but also officers to gain greater familiarity with the historical, confessional Reformed teaching on The Right of Political Resistance. Shamefully, this teaching is largely ignored and contradicted in numerous <a href="https://www.naparc.org/icr-contacts/" target="_blank">NAPARC</a> churches.<br /><br />This topic is important for several reasons:<br /></p><blockquote>1. It is an ethical matter of “<b>non-indifference</b>.” It is a matter positively moral or immoral, addressed in Scripture and in our doctrinal standards.<br /><br />2. As such an ethical matter, it is not something about which the officers of the church must remain silent, but something about which they are obligated to <b>teach and administer discipline</b>.<br /><br />3. It is a <b>frequently encountered</b> ethical matter. Christians must make choices nearly on a daily basis that may be informed by one’s beliefs on the matter.<br /><br />4. It is a matter of the church’s faithful witness to the truth of God’s Word; and misrepresentations can be a major, <b>unwarranted stumbling block</b> before unbelievers to the call of the gospel, and to the consciences of believers.</blockquote><br />Given the great need for this teaching, and its importance, I hope to make it more accessible by presenting vignettes of several Reformed authors and their statements from an <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKRKYfGezycEhE79LHBK5ZKTpifdFzrrDKGgYxBJulA/preview" target="_blank">annotated bibliography</a> on the topic. If you find this edifying, please consider sharing and discussing the bibliography and forthcoming posts, especially with your elders and other believers.<br /><br />In summary, the historical, confessional Reformed teaching on The Right of Political Resistance is: <br /><p></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Since, according to Scripture, God prescriptively ordains the administration of civil justice, and civil governance is strictly limited to this task, we are only obligated to submit to actual civil justice. The claim to civil power or exercise of power that violates civil justice is <i><b>not</b></i> ordained by God, and may be legitimately resisted. It is not only orders to sin that must be refused, but any civil requirement beyond the God-ordained sphere of civil justice may, when not otherwise sinful, be justly ignored.<br /></p><p>The doctrinal standards of the Reformed churches affirm that unlawful power and unjust exercise of power is tyranny, and may be legitimately resisted because it is not ordained by God, and so no one can be obligated to submit to it. The <a href="https://opc.org/wcf.html" target="_blank">Westminster Confession of Faith</a> 20.4 specifies that those who “oppose any <i>lawful</i> power, or the <i>lawful</i> exercise of it... resist the ordinance of God.” The <a href="https://www.monergism.com/second-helvetic-confession" target="_blank">Second Helvetic Confession of Faith</a> 30 similarly specifies obedience only to “<i>just and fair</i> commands.” The <a href="https://threeforms.org/the-belgic-confession/" target="_blank">Belgic Confession of Faith</a> 36 specifies obedience only to “things that <i>are not in conflict</i> with God’s Word,” and denounces all, even civil powers, who would “subvert <i>justice</i>.” <br />[See also the Congregationalists' 1658 <u>Savoy Declaration</u> 24.4, and the Baptists' 1689 <u>London Confession</u> 24.3 similar use of the term <i>lawful</i> to WCF 23.4 <a href="https://www.proginosko.com/docs/wcf_sdfo_lbcf.html" target="_blank">in this comparison chart</a>.]<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;"><br />Some prospective vignettes:<br />1. John Chrysostom (c.347-407) <br /><span> </span>: one of the most important Nicene era pastors (and a martyr) in Antioch and Constantinople<br /></p><p>2. Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575) <br /><span> </span>: Reformed pastor in Zurich and author of the Helvetic Confessions<br /></p><p>3. Theodore Beza (1519-1605)<br /><span> </span>: Reformed pastor in Geneva and founder of the university law school<br /></p><p>4. Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583)<br /><span> </span>: Reformed theologian in Heidelberg and author of the Heidelberg Catechism<br /></p><p>5. Johannes Althusius (1563-1638)<br /><span> </span>: Reformed legal scholar in Emden and author of <i>Politica</i><br /></p><p><b>and many more...</b></p><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-42920507507573143522022-03-22T18:39:00.001-04:002022-03-23T16:19:34.267-04:00Honest To Pod podcast links<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2113/100/1600/mic.gif" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="312" data-original-width="312" height="103" src="https://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2113/100/1600/mic.gif" width="103" /></a></div>Here are various and sundry podcast aggregator (or podcatcher) links for <b>Honest To Pod</b> - Gregory Baus talks about stuff. (For now, no apple/itunes). <p></p><p>It's only "occasional," whenever I happen to record something. Topics are my usual: Reformed theology, Reformational philosophy, and Reformed/neocalvinist libertarian-anarchist politics (and economics).</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/honest2pod" target="_blank">Podomatic</a> (native host) / <a href="https://rss.podomatic.net/rss/honest2pod.podomatic.com/rss2.xml" target="_blank">RSS</a> feed</p><p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwrDNUO5MDu9d_R2_fQ9GdoxPigNIiTQg" target="_blank">Youtube</a> </p><p><a href="https://soundcloud.com/gregory-baus" target="_blank">Soundcloud</a><br /></p><p><a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9ob25lc3QycG9kLnBvZG9tYXRpYy5jb20vcnNzMi54bWw" target="_blank">Google</a></p><p><a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/2Ywrb4ejyUQu9bzRRql6GT" target="_blank">Spotify</a></p><p><a href="https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/e6bdee5e-ff06-4cfa-9235-e66a5b47660a/honest-to-pod" target="_blank">Amazon</a> Music / <a href="https://www.audible.com/pd/Honest-To-Pod-Podcast/B08K56HP45" target="_blank">Audible</a></p><p><a href="https://american-podcasts.com/podcast/honest-to-pod-1" target="_blank">American Podcasts</a> <br /></p><p><a href="https://www.audacy.com/podcasts/honest-to-pod-89160" target="_blank">Audacy</a></p><p><a href="https://castbox.fm/channel/id4821895" target="_blank">Castbox</a> </p><p><a href="https://curiocaster.com/podcast/pi2293659" target="_blank">CurioCaster</a></p><p><a href="https://www.deezer.com/us/show/3520917" target="_blank">Deezer</a> </p><p><a href="https://www.learnoutloud.com/Catalog/Philosophy/Political-Philosophy/Honest-To-Pod/118885" target="_blank">Learn Out Loud</a></p><p><a href="https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/honest-to-pod-gregory-baus-VD2CWHLZvKJ/" target="_blank">Listen Notes</a></p><p><a href="https://playapod.com/feed/946d1181bf23ee27291932b4603779c4" target="_blank">Playapod</a></p><p><a href="https://player.fm/series/honest-to-pod-2863692" target="_blank">PlayerFM</a> </p><p><a href="https://pca.st/nhznm3yq" target="_blank">Pocket Casts</a> <br /></p><p><a href="https://podcastaddict.com/podcast/honest-to-pod/3752117" target="_blank">Podcast Addict</a></p><p><a href="https://podcastindex.org/podcast/2293659" target="_blank">Podcast Index</a></p><p><a href="https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/honest-to-pod-4268807" target="_blank">Podchaser</a> </p><p><a href="https://web.podfriend.com/podcast/honest-to-pod2" target="_blank">PodFriend</a> <br /></p><p><a href="https://podtail.com/en/podcast/honest-to-pod-1/" target="_blank">Podtail</a></p><p><a href="https://podverse.fm/podcast/uq9HoNWWrc" target="_blank">Podverse</a></p><p><a href="https://radiopublic.com/honest-to-pod-6L1xm2" target="_blank">Radio Public</a></p><p><a href="https://www.stitcher.com/show/honest-to-pod-2" target="_blank">Stitcher</a> <br /></p><p><a href="https://tunein.com/podcasts/Education-Podcasts/Honest-To-Pod-p1640462/" target="_blank">Tune In</a></p><p><a href="https://play.anghami.com/podcast/1018093935" target="_blank">Anghami</a> (Middle Eastern)</p><p><a href="https://fyyd.de/podcast/honest-to-pod/0" target="_blank">Fyyd</a> (German)</p><p><a href="https://www.jiosaavn.com/shows/honest-to-pod/1/MF7jOgwt6U8_" target="_blank">JioSaavn</a> (Indian) <br /></p><p><br />If you see it elsewhere, or use an application not listed here, let me know! Pandora and iheart, possibly forthcoming.</p><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-2139873807572595482022-03-18T15:09:00.000-04:002022-03-18T15:09:45.685-04:00more on Reformed Anarchism<p>Kerry Baldwin, of <a href="https://mereliberty.com/podcasts/" target="_blank">Dare To Think</a> / Mere Liberty podcast, and I begin to discuss the statement on <a href="https://sites.google.com/view/reformed-anarchism" target="_blank">Reformed Anarchism</a>. The first section deals with <b><i>What Is Culture?</i></b>, and we chat about the first subsection in two episodes.</p><p><b>Part 1 : </b>Rethinking Culture<b><br /></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="359" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/byB-A5sGJ1E" width="480" youtube-src-id="byB-A5sGJ1E"></iframe></div><p></p><p style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byB-A5sGJ1E" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: x-small;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byB-A5sGJ1E</span></a></p><p><b>Part 2 : </b>Mistaken Views<b><br /></b></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mEBHz8i4XKQ" width="480" youtube-src-id="mEBHz8i4XKQ"></iframe></div><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEBHz8i4XKQ" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEBHz8i4XKQ</a></span><br /></p><p> </p><p>Also see <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwrDNUO5MDu-56FIiArhzVisvc1TayOFS" target="_blank">a series of 18 videos</a> in which Pastor Nate Xanders and I give an introductory overview of some issues involved in understanding some basic points of Reformed anarchism.<br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwrDNUO5MDu-56FIiArhzVisvc1TayOFS" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;" target="_blank"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="1280" height="252" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj3HFApRFqNkLdhZrkxGbI31VpE33HWZVvm9iSTVCaPXVxFgsVt5JjT0hCpuD4CQGjOC5CIC0z_Tqp2edwhw1DpYBV4R95C8ZGkqco7uHT50AZTtV9B97SkjO2QuhqAiCZd1eACU0rD2H8zR4lbL6pOXTzGqy9Hn__4clEwB0FA5AKPPD5TOA=w448-h252" width="448" /></a></div><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-61263692912258478072022-01-27T13:58:00.009-05:002022-02-03T03:21:35.568-05:00Reformed Biblical-theological foundations for Christian cultural activity<p style="text-align: left;"></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="349" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CAnsoqLbrng" width="484" youtube-src-id="CAnsoqLbrng"></iframe></i></span></div><p></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAnsoqLbrng" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAnsoqLbrng</a><i><br /></i></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>Preface</i>: To give credit where it’s due, as I recall, the criticism that Irons raises was similarly raised to me by Dr. William D. Dennison (<a href="https://www.eopckent.org/about-us" target="_blank">Pastor of Emmanuel OPC in Kent, WA</a>; Professor Emeritus of Interdisciplinary Studies at Covenant College) sometime around 1994-1996 during one of his private Geerhardus Vos seminars (from which I benefited immensely, personally and academically). Although not very articulately, I attempted to raise the issue with <a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/wolters.htm" target="_blank">Dr. Albert M. Wolters</a> around 2002. I hope the main point of criticism is clearer in this article.</span></p></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>ZH-CN</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">By Reformed “Biblical
theology” is meant not only Reformed theology that is according to the teaching
of the Bible, but particularly a sub-discipline of exegetical theology that
studies Scripture in terms of the historical, ‘organic’ progress of God’s
special revelation. The understanding of the teaching of Scripture that results
from such study has foundational significance for Christian cultural activity,
that is, for the question of how Christians can do cultural activity in a
distinctly Christian way.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">One of the foundational
teachings highlighted by a Reformed Biblical theology is what may be called
pre-redemptive (or creational) eschatology. This has significance for Christian
cultural activity because the cultural mandate was initially given by God
before the fall in the context of this eschatology. After the fall, when
redemption is established and eschatology is set in that redemptive context,
the cultural task is also set within that new context. Our understanding of
cultural activity must take proper account of the important changes God introduced
in the context of the fall and redemption.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="https://upper-register.com/about.html" target="_blank">Dr. Charles Lee Irons</a> offers superb introductory material on various topics related to Reformed Biblical
theology in his <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Upper Register</i> </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrwX5fZ8WwYDTDPNXEZxyrA" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">videos</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">/</span><a href="https://upperregister.podbean.com/" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">podcast</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">.
Before presenting a few notes of clarification on his piece about ethics and a
view of cultural activity, I summarize what he explained
about Reformed Biblical-theological teaching on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Adam’s Probation and the Priority of Eschatology</i>. I recommend
listening to his full piece here: </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_NJwB_f1P4" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_NJwB_f1P4</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> .</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In summary, our “first
parents” were created in God’s image with a prospect of advancement to a
consummated, glorified existence. This may be seen by the two special trees in
Eden (Gen 2:9): the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, symbolizing Adam’s
probationary testing in the Covenant of Works (Gen 2:15-17), and the Tree of
[Eternal] Life, symbolizing confirmation of successfully passing the test, and
the reward of advancement (Gen 3:22-24).</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In Eden, God gave humanity a
mandate to be fruitful, to multiply, fill, and subdue the earth, to have
dominion over it, to work and guard it (Gen 1:26-28; 2:15). This involved both
kingly and priestly elements together. In a unique theocratic arrangement,
humans were to protect, extend, and populate the holy sanctuary throughout the
world, and so obtain the eschatological fulfillment of God's kingdom. This work
was to occur in a condition of confirmed righteousness, having successfully
passed the probation. And as a sign of the prospective completion of their
labor, God established the Sabbath, symbolizing the consummate and glorified
eternal rest (Gen 2:1-3; Heb 4:1-10).</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In Adam’s having failed the
test and breaking the Covenant of Works, our first parents and their natural
posterity became liable to eternal death/damnation. However, God had mercy and in
Gen 3:15 made the first promise of the gospel, establishing the Covenant of
Grace. Christ would defeat Satan as Adam failed to do. The eschatological
judgement would be postponed, and there would be a temporal common curse,
frustrating cultural labors in pain and temporal death.</span></p><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">
</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Now, Christ successfully
passed the test for His people, took their eschatological curse, obtained the
eschatological advancement, fulfills the cultural mandate (fruitfully, bringing
many sons to glory, Heb 2; 1Cor 15:20-28), and will bring the consummate
kingdom of God. After Gen 3:15, everything in Scripture unfolds that first
gospel promise, and this gospel must be understood in terms of Christ
fulfilling what Adam did not, and achieving that advancement to consummate
glory for those redeemed in Him.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">With that in view, the following is a summary
of what Irons explained about Reformed Biblical-theological teaching on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ethics</i> (and Christian cultural
activity). I recommend listening to his full piece here: </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVkJMD3U7vQ" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVkJMD3U7vQ</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In summary, the misuse of
Scripture in ethics can be either libertine, permitting immorality (such as
theologically liberal attempts to erroneously define sexual immorality as
non-sinful), or legalistic, imposing extra-Scriptural duties (such as
unorthodox ‘neocalvinist’ attempts to erroneously define the cultural mandate as
imperative <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in the same way it was
pre-fall</i>). Irons does not criticize neocalvinism as developed by Kuyper and
Dooyeweerd, but rather he addresses a specific, partial distortion of
neocalvinism, for example as articulated by Dr. Albert M. Wolters in certain
statements from his book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0802829694" target="_blank"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Creation Regained</i></a> (CR).</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">While even a distorted
neocalvinism recognizes the historical development of Scripture in terms of
creation, fall, redemption, and consummation, it nevertheless does not treat
the cultural mandate properly in that context. A proper Reformed
Biblical-theological view can help correct the distortions. <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The key issue is this</b>: after the fall
into sin, are believers now able in Christ to <i>eschatologically fulfill</i> the
cultural mandate <i>as it was given before the fall in order to bring the
consummation of God’s kingdom</i>? Wolters says we are (eg, “the kingdom of God
will not come in its fullness without the ‘redemption’ [by Christians’
activity] of this area of human [life]” [CR, p.95, 2nd ed. p.114]), but such a claim is a Biblical-theological error.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">The distorted view
incorrectly argues that Christians may re-direct their cultural activity <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">to its original pre-fall purpose</i> since
the fall did not affect the ‘Structure’ (law order) given in creation, but only
negatively affected the ‘Direction’ of (viz, mis-directed) our use of creation,
for example in cultural activity, and that therefore Christians have a duty to
redeem every area of life, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">thereby
contributing to the consummation</i>.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">It is, however, a
Biblical-theological error to suppose that the fall has not altered the meaning
of the cultural mandate in relation to the consummation, and to suppose that
Christians have a duty to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">fulfill</i> the
cultural mandate <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in order to bring-in the
consummate kingdom of God, eschatologically</i>.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Rather, a proper Reformed
Biblical-theological view recognizes that in response to the fall and in
establishing redemption, God separated the objectively holy and priestly ‘cult’
tasks and the (possibly subjectively holy) common and kingly ‘cultural’ tasks. Prior
to the fall, these tasks were entirely integrated as one. In the Edenic
theocracy, kingly tasks of cultural dominion would extend the objectively holy
realm throughout the earth and had a priestly-cultic goal of resulting in the
consummate cosmic temple.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">However, after the fall, God
introduces a particular differentiation into human societal life. God
establishes a structural dualism or separation between a.) the objectively holy
kingdom of God in a special/redemptive grace covenant community of the
institutional church, and b.) the common grace order, in which reality, though
under a temporal common curse, is preserved, and the eschatological judgement
is postponed, as a context for the objectively holy kingdom to operate
alongside those outside the institutional church, and as a context in which
both believers and unbelievers participate in cultural activity.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In the non-theocratic
context, after the fall, the cultural mandate properly has only this refracted
or differentiated form, such that cultural activity is no longer a means of
bringing-in the consummate kingdom of God. The fact of the temporal curse in
the pains of birth and ground -labors and the ultimate frustration of human
temporal death testifies to this significant change. The redemptive kingdom of
God is accomplished and obtained by Christ’s work as the second/last Adam, in
His calling the elect, and it is finally consummated by Him, not through
believers’ cultural activities. </span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Christians have a duty to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">subjectively</i> sanctify their cultural
activity in their doing it to the glory of God, witnessing to their heavenly
hope obtained by Christ. But this does not <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">objectively</i>
transform common cultural activity into the holy kingdom, nor contribute to the
eschatological consummation of that objectively holy kingdom.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">With the foregoing in mind,
what follows are <b>four points of clarification</b> about how this foundational Reformed
Biblical-theological understanding of the priority of eschatology and the
changes concerning cultural activity after the fall relate to a proper view of
how Christians can do cultural activity in a distinctly Christian way.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">First</span></b><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">,
while after the fall God separated 'cult' and 'culture’, establishing the
Covenant of Grace and the institutional church, as well as a common grace
order, this did not involve creating any kind of "religious
neutrality" in life or in any area of life. Reformed Biblical-theologian
<a href="https://meredithkline.com/kline-biography/" target="_blank">Meredith G. Kline</a> affirms with orthodox neocalvinism that after the fall, every
person and everyone's life in every area, including one's cultural life,
whether believer or unbeliever, remains religious. After the fall, believers
should recognize that all their cultural activities "are to be carried out
under God’s mandate as service to Him for His glory and thus are thoroughly
religious" (Kline, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1597525642" target="_blank">Kingdom Prologue</a> </i>[KP],
p.67).</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">As there has been a
distortion of neocalvinism, there has also been a distortion of Kline's views
in a sort of scholasticism. This distortion falsely interprets God's post-fall
separation of 'cult' and 'culture' in terms of a supposed religious realm of
grace and a supposed non-religious realm of nature, which then has consequences
for how, for example, the relationship between faith and reason is
(erroneously) conceived and a Christian’s cultural activity is (erroneously)
understood. </span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Some who have such a
distorted view deny that cultural activity can be done in a Christian way. I
begin to address that here: </span><a href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2012/04/sanctifying-common-2.html" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2012/04/sanctifying-common-2.html</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In chapter 5 of Roy
Clouser’s <a href="https://undpress.nd.edu/9780268023669/the-myth-of-religious-neutrality-revised-edition/" target="_blank"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Myth of Religious Neutrality</i></a>, he summarizes the scholastic view.</span>
</p><div style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">Clouser speaks of scholasticism as a view holding that "the proper understanding of [most of] culture does not differ depending on what one’s religion is." It [scholasticism] is "the general relation of divinity [religious] beliefs to theories as corresponding to two very different kinds of information: beliefs which are the deliverances of reason, and beliefs which are the deliverances of [special] revelation accepted by faith, where faith is understood to be a distinct mental faculty from reason. <br /> <br />Scholasticism "emphasizes the need to harmonize [the authoritative] deliverances [of faith and reason] so as to avoid contradiction between them." It appeals "to the biblical teaching that there are two dimensions of creation, which the Bible calls 'heaven' and 'earth'. The proposal [is] that each of these dimensions be taken as known in a different way, one by reason and the other by faith. The dimension of earth [nature] ...was held to be the dimension of reality known by perception and reason. Such knowledge was held to be the same for all people. Concerning nature, reason ...is [religiously] neutral, and the final authority for all ['natural'] truth. <br /> <br />"The heavenly dimension of reality [supernature] ...was [mostly] taken to be known only by [special] revelation from God which must be accepted on faith. These revealed truths conveyed knowledge not provable by reason, such as information about God, the nature of the human soul, angels, and life after death. These truths are therefore not available to all people but only those to whom God’s grace has given the gift of faith. For without faith to accept revelation, reason is relatively helpless to discover truth about the supernatural realm [other than the fact of the existence of God and of human souls]. In this way, each [reason and faith, respectively] is the supreme authority in its own realm. <br /> <br />Nevertheless, the scholastic view is that ..."there is a two-way interaction between faith and reason. [They] each have duties toward one another; each has its own proper domain, but each also affects the other. For example, reason not only discovers truth about nature and proves the existence of a supernatural realm, but also systematizes revealed doctrines and checks all rational theories for their compatibility with those doctrines. This is the task of theology. In case a theory of philosophy or science is found to be irreconcilably in contradiction with revealed truth, that theory is then to be discarded as false [but can sometimes be adequately modified, in this view, by adding God to it].<br /> <br />The duty of faith toward reason is thus to supply an external check on whether reason has fallen into error, and it is seen as an advantage for reason to have such infallible truths by which to test its hypotheses. In the final analysis, therefore, the authority of revelation taken on faith is superior to that of reason alone. ...The guidance that faith offers to reason is a largely negative and external check on what reason may accept. It is not seen as an internally regulating influence."</div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">So, if
one held to this scholastic view of the relation of faith and reason, and one associated
culture and common grace with the "realm of nature" understood
primarily by reason, then it could be supposed that the only significant
Christian distinction in cultural activity might be the (partial) contribution
of Christian morals/morality. It could be supposed that while it would be
advantageous to have special revelation, such an addition wouldn't involve
anything distinctively Christian (or otherwise necessarily religious) about
cultural activity per se.</span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Furthermore,
if one held to this scholastic view of the relation of faith and reason, and
restricted the kingdom of God exclusively to the "supernatural" and
its institutional expression in the institutional church, then it could be
supposed that expressions of the subjective recognition of the reign of God in
a believer's cultural activity were not expressions of the kingdom of God (or,
as above, simply not a matter of cultural activity per se).</span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">This
response from <a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Clouser/RC-R&BiG.pdf" target="_blank">Clouser to a Thomist</a>'s</span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> views might shed further light. In any case, Kline’s
views are distorted if interpreted through such scholastic assumptions.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Second</span></b><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">, we
should understand, as Kline says: “The Scriptures compel us to distinguish
between the kingdom of God as realm and reign and to recognize that though everything
is embraced under the reign of God, not everything can be identified as part of
the kingdom of God viewed as a holy realm” (KP, p.170). ...“The cultural
activity of God’s people is common grace activity ...[yet] it is an expression
of the reign of God in their lives, [although] it is not a building of the
kingdom of God as institution or realm” (KP, p.201). ...“The kingdom was already
present in the reign of God through his re-creating Spirit within [the
regenerate]” (KP, p.382). </span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">This is in agreement with
Reformed Biblical-theologian Geerhardus Vos, who in his book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="https://www.wtsbooks.com/products/teaching-jesus-concerning-kingdom-god-geerhardus-vos-9781948048026" target="_blank">The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church</a></i> [TKGC], says: "To [Jesus] the kingdom exists
there, where not merely God is supreme, for that is true at all times and under
all circumstances, but where God supernaturally carries through his supremacy
against all opposing powers and brings man to the willing recognition of the
same [through regeneration] (TKGC, p.85-86). ...Undoubtedly the kingship
[reign] of God, as his recognized and applied supremacy, is intended to pervade
and control the whole of human life in all its forms of existence. ...Whenever
one of these spheres [of activity] comes under the controlling influence of the
principle of the divine supremacy and glory, and this outwardly reveals itself,
there we can truly say that the kingdom of God has become manifest" (TKGC,
p.162-163).<br />[<a href="https://archive.org/details/teachingofjesusc02vosg" target="_blank">free online version here.</a>] </span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">So while a Christian's
cultural activity is not, and does not become, the objective holy realm of
God's kingdom, it can be, nevertheless, a true manifestation of God's kingdom
as believers’ subjective recognition of God's reign in their cultural
activities, wrought in them by Christ's redemption applied in their
regeneration.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Third</span></b><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">, we
should be clear about the "structure" to which Kline’s term
"structural dualism" refers. We must distinguish "Structure"
in the sense of "Structure <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">for</b>",
that is, the laws and norms God has established for reality and human life in
creation (and preserved in God's providence and common grace), from
"structure" in the sense of "structures <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">of</b>" human society, such as the objectively holy institutional
church, and the various common kinds of societal communities (or spheres of
cultural activity).</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">That is, when someone refers
to an "institution" such as the institutional church, or another
distinct kind of societal community (such as the family, or civil governance),
as "structures", this doesn't refer to Structure (namely, God's
abiding laws and norms) in the Structure and Direction distinction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Rather, to call a societal community, such as
the institutional church a "structure" is to say an institution OF
society, that is, a societal institution/community; a "structure" OF
society, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not a law or a norm</i>, but
something that is subject to God-given laws and norms.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">It is true that "the
fall does not affect the 'Structure' given in creation." After the fall,
physical laws, such gravity, are not changed; nor does God change His moral law
or other norms. However, God <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">did</i>
change the forms that human societal life would take in the fallen world. Apart
from a typologically theocratic, old (Mosaic) covenant Israel, the objectively
holy special grace community of the institutional church would be distinct from
common cultural activity; even while a believer's redemption would entail their
subjective sanctification of such cultural activity.</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Fourth</span></b><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">, in
addition to conforming to the standards of Christian morality in our cultural
activities, so that we follow God's moral commands from a regenerate heart of faith,
in the ways He requires in His Word (eg, in loving service and witness to our
neighbor), and doing all things to the ultimate purpose of God’s glory, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">how else might Christians subjectively
sanctify their cultural activities?</i> How else in their cultural activities
and each area of life might believers consciously recognize God's reign? One
way, is to grow in our understanding of the various areas of life as thoroughly
religious and in relation to the preeminence of Christ. For more on that see
here: </span><a href="https://sites.google.com/site/christianviewofeverything/" target="_blank"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">https://sites.google.com/site/christianviewofeverything/</span></a><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"></span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Again, the issue is: after the fall, are believers
now able in Christ to <u>eschatologically fulfill</u> the cultural mandate </span><i><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">as it was given before the fall in
order to bring the consummation of God's kingdom</span></i><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">?</span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The answer to that question from an orthodox, proper
neocalvinist perspective is: absolutely NOT.</span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The further question is then: after the
fall, what does the <u>subjective sanctification</u> of a believer's cultural
activity <i>actually mean</i>?</span></span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">An orthodox neocalvinist answer to that further question
elaborates Kline's stated view. </span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>i.
Kline's view is that, by the application of Christ's accomplishment of
redemption in regeneration, Christians are able to (subjectively) rightly
recognize the reign of God in all areas of life, and in all those areas perform
those activities to the ultimate end of God's glory.</span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ii. The
orthodox neocalvinist view elaborates on what that involves more particularly,
saying that such subjective recognition and ultimate end in a believer's
cultural activity (which constitutes subjective sanctification) includes
(however imperfect in this life) Christian good works (increasingly according
to the moral normativity of God's abiding moral will), <b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">and</i></b> increasing conformity to whatever other abiding norms God
has established for human action generally, and for cultural activity.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; text-align: left;"><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span face=""Arial","sans-serif"" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"></span></p><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-29441655796671269842021-11-24T15:05:00.001-05:002021-11-24T15:08:26.318-05:00Dooyeweerd Against Vax Mandates<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Originally published at <a href="https://thelaymenslounge.com/herman-dooyeweerd-against-vaccine-mandates/" target="_blank">The Laymen's Lounge</a>.<br />German translation: <a href="https://www.libertaerechristen.de/?p=1840" target="_blank">https://www.libertaerechristen.de/?p=1840</a></span><br /></div><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXJjS0zjkneAEQftOsj6UNPLT2uQSnoz0VSJWE_23cT7dYbMOf4SLYCi__Ufiwtu3s359jX3nb2e4L-kGKNOdDDoMOEfzh_dQb98Q-wIsS4Bzxnmmmse6jcft2mYFhMd48mgS_/s250/herman-dooyeweerd+small.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="250" data-original-width="236" height="250" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXJjS0zjkneAEQftOsj6UNPLT2uQSnoz0VSJWE_23cT7dYbMOf4SLYCi__Ufiwtu3s359jX3nb2e4L-kGKNOdDDoMOEfzh_dQb98Q-wIsS4Bzxnmmmse6jcft2mYFhMd48mgS_/s0/herman-dooyeweerd+small.jpg" width="236" /></a></div>Herman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977) was a Reformed Christian philosopher
and legal scholar from the Netherlands. For more about his life and
work, see <a href="https://thelaymenslounge.com/you-should-know-dooyeweerd/" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">this article</a>.<p></p>
<p>Before the bulk of his career as professor at the Vrije Universiteit
Amsterdam from 1926-1965, Dooyeweerd spent about 5 years as director of
the Kuyper Foundation, the policy institute of the Anti-Revolutionary
Party. From 1922-1926 he produced several reports, including one in 1923
concerning <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NSbaX6Oz-hE47csst5j32rhDIqP6dAal/view" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">compulsory or mandated vaccination</a> by the civil government.</p>
<p>The report begins by saying that while some members of the political
party are opposed to taking vaccinations, and others are themselves in
favor of it, as a party they strongly oppose all civil government
coercion of vaccination.
Particularly, the party consistently opposes all mandates of
vaccination for government school attendance when the civil government
requires schooling.</p><p>Dooyeweerd then lays out 5 main reasons all civil government coercion of vaccinations must be resisted and opposed.
</p><ol><li><i>Compulsory vaccination violates God-given liberty of conscience.</i></li><li><i>Only each person, and not civil government, has a God-given right as steward over one’s own body.</i></li><li><i>Civil government has no God-given competence or jurisdiction to rule on medical/health issues.</i></li><li><i>Native or endemic illnesses are never rightly treated by means of any coercion.</i></li><li><i>Medical science can be flawed, and vaccinations can be more harmful than the illnesses they are intended to prevent.</i></li></ol>
<p>The bulk of the report deals with the second main reason that
coercive vaccination must be resisted and opposed. Dooyeweerd puts it
this way: Civil “<b>government does not have free disposition of the human
body, <i>even if it is convinced that such disposition is only for the benefit of that body.</i></b>”</p>
<p>The term ‘disposition’ here refers to legitimate power or
determination over something according to one’s own decision. In Matthew
20:15 where Jesus gives the parable about a generous employer, He
illustrates “free disposition” asking rhetorically “Am I not allowed to
do what I choose with what belongs to me?”</p>
<p>Dooyeweerd explains that <i>responsive</i> coercion is legitimate, of course, against anyone who is conclusively proved to be <i>initiating</i>
coercion upon others. But simply being unvaccinated is not coercive in
any way. Moreover, even if civil government officers were angelic
geniuses who had infallible knowledge of what is best for you, and were
entirely motivated by your best interest, even then they could never
have the right to initiate coercion against you, because you don’t
belong to them.</p>
<p>The issue here is not a matter of whether just laws should be
enforced, but of what kind of legislation is actually just. And whether
something is actually just or unjust is not ordained by civil
government, but by God. Of course, the God-ordained principles of civil
justice don’t enact legislation by themselves, but rather show the
proper boundaries and provide guidance for legislation.</p>
<p>The main principle to which Dooyeweerd points is the Christian
understanding of human beings as created by God as persons. (What he
refers to as “ethical” personhood, he would soon, in the development of
his philosophy, come to call the full “religious” personhood of every
human). The first thing Dooyeweerd emphasizes is that this principle is
in diametric opposition to slavery. Even though it might seem like an
extreme comparison, vaccine compulsion is an expression of the same root
as the evil of slavery (namely, the claim of owning, and/or having a
right to control other people).</p>
<p>Most commonly, in the 'classical liberal' or libertarian European
political tradition that appreciates the inseparable connection between
liberty and justice (the tradition of which the American founders, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csaa029" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">as well as Kuyper and Groen</a>, were a part), this principle has come to be known as 'self-ownership'.</p>
<p>But Dooyeweerd is concerned to describe it in terms of its
fundamental, true religious grounding. While with respect to other
people, it may be said you are indeed the proper 'owner' of yourself
(the alternative being slavery), in relation to our Creator to Whom we
are ultimately accountable, we are only the respective stewards, the
keepers and caretakers, each of our own lives. This is doubly so for
those redeemed by Christ (1 Corinthians 6:19-20).</p>
<p>The political bottom line of this, Dooyeweerd insists, is the fact
that civil “government may not, according to God’s ordinances, force the
ethically free man to accept physical treatment in any form.”</p>
<p>We must entirely resist all such government injustice from the start,
without hesitation or compromise, or else it will inevitably grow like a
cancer. This is the principle of <b><a href="https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2018/09/27/obsta-principiis-nip-the-shoots-of-arbitrary-power-in-the-bud/" target="_blank"><i>obsta principiis</i></a></b>. You must have a
zero-tolerance policy towards tyranny. “Whoever accepts compulsory
vaccination in principle,” Dooyeweerd warns, “has deprived himself of
the moral ground for opposing [any] such usurpation by government of
individual liberty.”</p><p><b>For a statement of principles influenced by Dooyeweerd’s philosophy that seeks to develop opposition to tyranny more fully, <a href="https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism">see here</a>.</b></p><p><b> </b></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-57535049211125323802021-10-10T23:28:00.004-04:002021-10-11T01:37:43.470-04:00more on Romans 13<p><span style="font-size: large;"> and political resistance</span></p><p>Here I am discussing with <a href="https://presbycast.libsyn.com/what-does-romans-13-mean-in-2021-wgreg-baus" target="_blank">PresbyCast</a> the historical Reformed view that we are <b><i>not</i></b> obligated to "submit to civil rulers unless they require sin." <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC95p88UzKg" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC95p88UzKg</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="362" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hC95p88UzKg" width="482" youtube-src-id="hC95p88UzKg"></iframe></div><br /><p style="margin-left: 120px; text-align: left;"> 0:14 music intro<br /> 1:30 Wresby's intro<br /> 2:28 Chortles intros guest<br /> 8:17 topic intro<br /> 10:30 recent events<br /> 12:40 clip from NY governor statement<br /> 17:30 Rom13 often misunderstood<br /> 25:28 why Reformed view not taught<br /> 28:19 lesser magistrates<br /> 30:28 Paul's example<br /> 37:57 wrong view deeply ingrained<br /> 39:30 helpful bibliography<br /> 43:35 defining 'tyranny'<br /> 55:14 affirmed in Reformed Confessions<br />1:02:29 Scotland's tyranny<br />1:11:55 confessional summary<br />1:15:06 what to do<br />1:22:52 the Boetie strategy<br />1:27:01 final remarks<br />1:35:38 Wresby's outro</p><p><br />0:14 <b>music intro</b><br /><br />1:30 <b>Wresby's intro</b><br /><br />2:28 <b>Chortles intros guest</b><br />+ about Gregory: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/&source=gmail&ust=1634007528307000&usg=AFQjCNEvATiBxv7qlOBuo1NMjW2isiUYeQ" href="https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/" target="_blank">https://sites.google.com/site/<wbr></wbr>ideolog/</a><br /><br />+ Reformed 'mongrel': 1 Cor 3:21-23 "whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas... all are yours"<br /><br />8:17 <b>topic intro</b><br />+
any ostensibly confessional Reformed church that teaches "people are
obligated to obey the (providential) de facto powers that claim civil
authority, unless they require sin" are contradicting the historical
Reformed teaching promulgated in the Reformed doctrinal standards (on
the teaching of Scripture)<br /><br />+central point is not political theory, but exegesis and the teaching of Scripture<br /><br />10:30 <b>recent events</b><br />+
regrettably, some Reformed churches have enacted policies with the
rationale that in these things they must "obey govt requirements"<br /><br />12:40 <b>clip from NY governor statement</b><br />+ "I need you to be my apostles [to promote the vax]"<br /><a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/tag/Kathy%2BHochul&source=gmail&ust=1634007528307000&usg=AFQjCNFgsB2nL9p6K_DjLzWILuc94BOqzw" href="https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/tag/Kathy+Hochul" target="_blank">https://www.getreligion.org/<wbr></wbr>getreligion/tag/Kathy+Hochul</a><br /><br />17:30
Why shouldn't NAPARC (or other orthodox Reformed) congregations do
whatever a civil governor says? <b>How has Rom 13 been misunderstood?</b><br />+ some indulge in false piety<br /><br />+
important difference between policy based on church-determined
prudential considerations vs. supposed obligation to civil edicts (even
if 'constitutional')<br /><br />+ historical Reformed teaching is that
Scripture, in such passages as Rom 13, does not require anyone to
acknowledge de facto (providential) powers/persons that claim civil
authority as actually ordained by God<br /><br />+ rather, we should know
that what God actually ordains (prescriptively, not providentially)
specified in verses 3-4 is the legitimate (office) use of responsive
coercion (the sword) to punish wrongdoers (those who commit civil
injustice)<br /><br />+ any de facto power that oversteps this limited
God-ordained jurisdiction is unlawful or exercising unlawful power (so,
themselves wrongdoers), and no one's conscience should be bound to obey
in such matters<br /><br />25:28 <b>Why hasn't this been taught</b> in churches and seminaries in America?<br />+ influence of theological liberalism<br /><br />+ particular influence of govt propaganda in recruiting churches to promote (unlawful) war efforts (at least since WWI)<br /><br />+ heretical groups were more faithful in opposing unjust wars than otherwise true churches; this is a shame<br /><br />28:19 <b>What about doctrine of 'lesser magistrates'</b> (eg, Magdeburg Confession)?<br />+
certainly, while all magistrates have obligation to oppose tyranny, in
this case Reformers were addressing a particular civil constitutional
arrangement, and resisting tyrants is not only for lesser magistrates<br /><br />30:28 <b>Scriptural example</b> of disobeying civil rulers when not an issue of sin<br />+ 2 Cor 11:32-33; Acts 9:25<br /><br />+
submitting to arrest is not a sin, but Paul evades arrest, and so he
resists rulers when they weren't requiring him to sin, and Paul's
actions are not condemned<br /><br />+ this confirms that Paul isn't teaching in Rom 13 that we are obligated to submit to rulers only unless they require sin<br /><br />37:57
<b>this is important</b> because the erroneous [edit] "providential" view is
so ingrained in our minds and in the popular consciousness<br /><br />39:30 <b>Reformed Political Resistance Theology Annotated Bibliography</b><br /><a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGb5HSEBK5qRRf3SxkZbxKgLYD0_Q" href="https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>RefoPoliResistBib</a><br /><br />+ a Scriptural teaching also found in Patristic era<br /><br />+ explained in Francis Schaeffer's 1981 book <i>A Christian Manifesto</i><br /><a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amazon.com/dp/1581346921&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNFJSZfhVdLRUvBkXGlbWlM8jutp0A" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1581346921" target="_blank">https://www.amazon.com/dp/<wbr></wbr>1581346921</a><br /><br />43:35 <b>How do we define 'tyranny'?</b><br />+ Reformed anarchism on this point: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGjSCOeuue2B-D4Io28o76udATUWQ" href="https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>refoanarchism</a><br />(monopolization of civil governance functions, ie the 'state', is inherently, systemically unjust/tyrannical)<br /><br />+ basic principle: what God prescriptively ordains as civil govt is limited to punishment of wrongdoers<br /><br />+
Scripture teaches no political theory as such, and particulars of what
is involved (and what is outside the God-ordained limit) must be
discerned (from creation or general revelation) by believers<br /><br />+
C.Hodge (1835) says "the right of deciding on all these points, and
determining where the obligation to obedience ceases, and the duty of
resistance begins, must, from the nature of the case, rest with the
subject, and not with the ruler"<br /><br />+ if taxes are properly due for
limited function, it follows that taxes for other things are not due.
Also, no Scripture teaches we owe taxes, but only that if we owe, we
should pay what we owe<br /><br />+ Reformers advised we should understand
'tyranny' generally as not simply a single act of civil injustice by a would-be
ruler (tho that is tyrannous, may be resisted, and should be punished), but habitual or systemic civil
injustice (including among other things, failure to punish wrongdoers
and violations of the God-ordained limited 'jurisdiction')<br /><br />55:14 <b>A view taught by the Reformed Confessions</b><br />+ not invented by Rutherford<br /><br />+ separable from 'establishmentarianism'<br />(credit due to Savoy congregationalists and London baptists for getting this correct before most Presbies)<br /><br />+ WCF 20.4 "lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it"<br /><br />1:02:29 <b>clip from London Calling podcast.</b> Why is Scotland presently so authoritarian/tyrannical?<br />+
while there are other sources of authoritarianism and its stockholm-ish
internalization, certainly secularized "puritanism"/pietism and
millennialism/millenarianism immanentizes zeal for God and the
consummation into statist idolatry.<br />See "the secularization of postmillennialism": <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2711630&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNELPM8QiRP--n1G1VuuTFzGcawBoA" href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2711630" target="_blank">https://www.jstor.org/stable/<wbr></wbr>2711630</a><br /><br />+ one distortion of a "two kingdoms" view also erroneously tends to give civil government carte blanche<br /><br />1:11:55 <b>summary of Reformed Confessional statements</b><br /><a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGjSCOeuue2B-D4Io28o76udATUWQ" href="https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>refoanarchism</a><br />(See 3.g.)<br /><br />1:15:06 <b>What can Reformed church officers and other members do?</b><br />+
many Reformed pastors and elders may have never learned or even heard
about the historical "prescriptive" (non-providential) view<br /><br />+ if you cannot bear the policies in your congregation, leave peaceably and find a congregation with better policies if possible<br /><br />+ you can also have a peaceable and pragmatic discussion about policies without raising the exegetical issues<br /><br />+
however, if you want to discuss with church officers about their view
of whether they think Scripture obligates us "to submit to those who
claim civil authority unless they require sin", then the bibliography is
a great place to start<br /><br />1:22:52 <b>So then what, violent revolt?</b><br />+
1553 work <i>Discourse on Voluntary Servitude</i> by Etienne de la Boetie (friend of
Montaigne) presents our strategy, namely, <i>ignore </i>the tyrants.<br />a. <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://mises.org/library/political-thought-etienne-de-la-boetie&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGQ2uD7sVupF3LnJmGJf1k47McDiQ" href="https://mises.org/library/political-thought-etienne-de-la-boetie" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/<wbr></wbr>political-thought-etienne-de-<wbr></wbr>la-boetie</a><br />b. <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNE-qz4kWpXVrvmJAyy5NrazQiowSw" href="https://mises.org/library/politics-obedience-discourse-voluntary-servitude" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/<wbr></wbr>politics-obedience-discourse-<wbr></wbr>voluntary-servitude</a><br /><br />+
Ignoring them (also practiced in "nullification" and "secession") is
our first line of defense, and it is in keeping with the Bible's exhortation
to "live peaceably with all, so far as it depends on you"<br /><br />1:27:01 <b>final remarks</b><br />+ will address other objections in future blog post: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNFJrqpM7jorQoS37rndhpEKChvBkQ" href="https://honest2blog.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">https://honest2blog.blogspot.<wbr></wbr>com/</a><br /><br />+ key links<span class="im"><br />a. Reformed political resistance theology bibliography: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGb5HSEBK5qRRf3SxkZbxKgLYD0_Q" href="https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>RefoPoliResistBib</a><br /></span>b. Baus article on Romans 13: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/r13civgov&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNF9vMGa86hpkthTSsAIYgdTg96Yfw" href="https://tinyurl.com/r13civgov" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/r13civgov</a><span class="im"><br />c. audio (on which the article is based): <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/r13anarchism&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGWJ3hIrITu0VJhM3MWC2Ox8WmZvA" href="https://tinyurl.com/r13anarchism" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>r13anarchism</a><br />d. What is Reformed anarchism? : <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNGjSCOeuue2B-D4Io28o76udATUWQ" href="https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/<wbr></wbr>refoanarchism</a><br />e. further resources: <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://mereliberty.com/romans13&source=gmail&ust=1634007528308000&usg=AFQjCNFM_eOmCaG9Vv8riM2B4wgH3jTM2g" href="https://mereliberty.com/romans13" target="_blank">https://mereliberty.com/<wbr></wbr>romans13</a><br /><br /></span>+ no one minds extra hand sanitizer<br /><br />+ 'zero C19' will never be<br /><br />+ build back better theology (with the historical Reformed view of Rom 13)<br /><br />1:35:38 <b>Wresby's outro</b><br />+ don't be an Erdman</p><p> </p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-1473036356685390062021-10-05T14:33:00.004-04:002021-10-12T23:39:12.349-04:00more on sphere sovereignty<p>Here I am discussing societal <i>sphere sovereignty</i> with Jacob Winograd of the <a href="https://daniel318.com/" target="_blank">Daniel 3: Biblical Anarchy</a> podcast. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCDyfRIH-_c" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCDyfRIH-_c</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="361" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vCDyfRIH-_c" width="483" youtube-src-id="vCDyfRIH-_c"></iframe></div><div style="margin-left: 40px;"><br /></div><p style="margin-left: 80px; text-align: left;"> 1:05 beginning <br /> 3:10 about Gregory<br /> 6:40 becoming anarchist<br /> 13:36 helpful arguments<br /> 17:03 sphere sovereignty intro<br /> 18:44 historical background<br /> 30:45 sphere sovereignty explained<br /> 55:31 Summary<br />1:03:44 What is civil governance?<br />1:32:12 sphere sovereignty related to 'spontaneous order'<br />1:44:03 Can we <i>know </i>God is real?<br /><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">1:05 <b>beginning</b><span><span><span><br /><span></span></span></span></span><a href="https://daniel318.com/" target="_blank">https://daniel318.com/</a><br /></p><p>3:10 <b>about Gregory</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>profile: <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/" target="_blank">https://sites.google.com/site/ideolog/</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>previous appearance: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm_wh1ndsxw" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm_wh1ndsxw</a><br /><br />6:40 <b>becoming anarchist</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>Foundations of Libertarian Ethics: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZo7TOFxgEMP4iRDHidY_PR7AKwwfQO4g" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZo7TOFxgEMP4iRDHidY_PR7AKwwfQO4g</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>and <a href="https://mises.org/library/foundations-libertarian-ethics" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/foundations-libertarian-ethics</a><br /><br />13:36 <b>helpful arguments<br /></b><a href="https://mereliberty.com/romans13" target="_blank"><span></span><span></span><span> </span>https://mereliberty.com/romans13</a><br /><a href="https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/02/21/anarchism-minarchism-legitimacy-civil-governance/" target="_blank">https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/02/21/anarchism-minarchism-legitimacy-civil-governance/</a><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemo_iudex_in_causa_sua" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemo_iudex_in_causa_sua</a><br /><br />17:03 <b>sphere sovereignty intro</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Christian theory, not exegesis<br /><br />18:44 <b>historical background</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ basic definition: a view of the normative arrangement among and relations between different kinds of societal communities<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer (1801 - 1876) introduced the phrase 'sovereignty within one's own sphere/circle'<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillaume_Groen_van_Prinsterer" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillaume_Groen_van_Prinsterer</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>part of the European Calvinist revival (Réveil) of 1820s<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Abraham Kuyper (1837 - 1920) developed the idea further <br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Kuyper" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Kuyper</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>1880 lecture on Sphere Sovereignty: <a href="https://sources.neocalvinism.org/kuyper/?ka_num=1993.02" target="_blank">https://sources.neocalvinism.org/kuyper/?ka_num=1993.02</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Herman Dooyeweerd (1894 - 1977) refined it philosophically<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Dooyeweerd" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Dooyeweerd</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>More on Dooyeweerd and his philosophy: <a href="https://thelaymenslounge.com/you-should-know-dooyeweerd/" target="_blank">https://thelaymenslounge.com/you-should-know-dooyeweerd/</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>other predecessors<br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Althusius (1557 - 1638)<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Althusius" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Althusius</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Alsted (1588 - 1638)<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Heinrich_Alsted" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Heinrich_Alsted</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ arose in terms of the questions of the relation between church and state (and properly defining and limiting their respective powers) after the medieval period<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Reformed political resistance theology<br /><a href="https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/RefoPoliResistBib</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ like a kind of 'division of labor' among communities<br /><br />30:45 <b>sphere sovereignty explained</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ What Is Reformed Anarchism statement: <b><a href="https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/refoanarchism</a></b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>See especially part 2 on What is society?<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Scriptural teaching about basic diversity of created reality ('each according to its own kind')<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Kuyper's 1869 article "Uniformity: the curse of modern life"; about the dreary artificial sameness imposed on things in the statist/collectivistic mindset: <a href="https://sources.neocalvinism.org/kuyper/?ka_num=1869.14" target="_blank">https://sources.neocalvinism.org/kuyper/?ka_num=1869.14</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Scriptural 'organic' metaphor about differentiated functions coordinated variously<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ society is not a single whole, rather it is several different kinds of relations involving both individuals and groups; neither is more basic or has their origin in the other<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ community is not just individuals (or inter-individual relation), rather it is relatively more enduring and involves authority arrangements<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ individuals are not mere parts of communities, but wholes in themselves<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ each kind of community is distinguished from other kinds by its own intrinsic nature, differently characterized in its organization and purpose, governed by its own God-given norms<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ no single kind of community properly encompasses or regulates all the others. Nor does any particular community of a given kind properly encompass or regulate all the others of that same kind<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ not a collectivistic view of so-called ‘subsidiarity,’ which, while seeking to be bottom-up, affirming that the lowest level of organization has original jurisdiction, nevertheless subsumes all societal communities (as so-called ‘mediating institutions’) under an all-encompassing state<br /><br />55:31 <b>Summary:</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>1. real communities; distinct kinds<br /><span> </span><span> </span>2. each kind of community (sphere) has its own directly God-normed intrinsic nature, scope of activity, competence, and limited authority<br /><span> </span><span> </span>3. society not a single whole merely decentralized or bottom-up (not hierarchically arranged 'subsidiarity')<br /><span> </span><span> </span>4. within a given sphere, no particular community encompasses or regulates others of the same kind<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ a state’s monopoly is in principle totalitarian, and always increasingly tends toward totalitarianism in practice<br /><br />1:03:44 <b>What is civil governance?</b><span><br /><span> <span> </span></span></span><span></span><span></span>(see part 3 of What is Reformed Anarchism statement)<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Only God in Christ is absolutely sovereign; this biblical teaching entails that no mere human authority is properly total (and so the monopoly state is inherently antinormative)<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Gregory's paper on sphere sovereignty: <a href="https://www.academia.edu/32356017" target="_blank">https://www.academia.edu/32356017</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>2008 conference presentation: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL083BD24DE7A4559E" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL083BD24DE7A4559E</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ even Christians are sinners who might sinfully seek to justify abuse by appeal to authority; total depravity is REAL<br /><a href="https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/03/28/sinful-nature-question-states-necessity/" target="_blank">https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/03/28/sinful-nature-question-states-necessity/</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>Sproul on 'total depravity':<br /><span> </span><span> </span>a. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvUpyxnqAow" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvUpyxnqAow</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>b. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPVkhssUv5I" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPVkhssUv5I</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ response to theonomy<br /><span> </span><span> </span>Kline's article on theocracy: <a href="https://meredithkline.com/klines-works/articles-and-essays/the-relevance-of-the-theocracy/" target="_blank">https://meredithkline.com/klines-works/articles-and-essays/the-relevance-of-the-theocracy/</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>Lee Irons' article: <a href="https://www.the-highway.com/theonomy-hermeneutic_Irons.html" target="_blank">https://www.the-highway.com/theonomy-hermeneutic_Irons.html</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>Lane Tipton's article: <a href="https://www.kerux.com/doc/1501A1.asp" target="_blank">https://www.kerux.com/doc/1501A1.asp</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>T. David Gordon's article: <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200718055717/http://tdgordon.net/theology/theonomy.pdf" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20200718055717/http://tdgordon.net/theology/theonomy.pdf</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Upper Register podcast<br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/IronsLee" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/user/IronsLee</a><br /><a href="https://upperregister.podbean.com/" target="_blank">https://upperregister.podbean.com/</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>Lee Irons' website: <a href="https://upper-register.com" target="_blank">https://upper-register.com</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>series on covenantal history: <a href="https://upper-register.com/mp3s.html#unfolding" target="_blank">https://upper-register.com/mp3s.html#unfolding</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ seeking to coercively enforce moral law (beyond proper civil-justicial rights) outside the old covenant is a usurping of God's sole prerogative, and amounts to statist pagan idolatry<br /><br />1:32:12 <b>sphere sovereignty related to 'spontaneous order'</b><br /><span> </span><span> </span>See Reformed Anarchism statement, especially 2.c (and following) on Polycentric and Emergent Order<br /><a href="https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/liggio-literature-of-liberty-summer-1982-vol-5-no-2/" target="_blank">https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/liggio-literature-of-liberty-summer-1982-vol-5-no-2/</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ the broader 'polycentric societal complex' is coordinated emergently, through the self-governance of each instance of the varieties of relations and each particular community of the several distinct kinds<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+by God’s creational design, a dynamic societal harmonization comes about cumulatively through the varieties of normative human action, but apart from any human individual’s or community’s specific intention or attempt at comprehensive coercive regulation<br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ Also see a summary of spontaneous order in this 9th vid: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQhkrYqA7S4&list=PLwrDNUO5MDu95jfsFdfN2oe8vXQ6Cma-h&index=9" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQhkrYqA7S4&list=PLwrDNUO5MDu95jfsFdfN2oe8vXQ6Cma-h&index=9</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ particular endeavors require planning, but society overall, and any sphere, is far too complex to be planned or coercively regulated; any attempt at such coercive regulation is inherently antinormative resulting in severe distortion<br /><br />1:44:03 <b>Can we <i>know</i> God is real?</b><br /><a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Clouser/CanWeKnow.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Clouser/CanWeKnow.pdf</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>See also "Knowing With The Heart": <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/1556354320" target="_blank">https://www.amazon.com/dp/1556354320</a><br /><span> </span><span> </span>and "The Myth Of Religious Neutrality" (which also deals with sphere sovereignty): <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0268023662" target="_blank">https://www.amazon.com/dp/0268023662</a><br /><br /><span> </span><span> </span>+ teaser: "proof" (inference) is not the only means of rationally justifying a belief <br /></p><p><br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-18008155091374119712021-07-07T23:43:00.002-04:002021-11-24T14:37:37.060-05:00Audio / Video Gregory Baus<p><b><span style="font-size: medium;"> Some youtube video / audio recordings of me talking about stuff</span></b></p><p>1. Discussion with Michael Beck of <i><a href="https://twoagesojourner.com/" target="_blank">Two-Age Sojourner</a></i> podcast about <a href="https://meredithkline.com/" target="_blank">Meredith G. Kline</a>'s criticisms of post/modern-influenced 'monistic' views, Kline as a neocalvinist, and the resonance of Kline's theology with the philosophy of <a href="https://herman-dooyeweerd.blogspot.com" target="_blank">Herman Dooyeweerd</a>.<br />(March 2021) <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JksFJK6rqUs" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JksFJK6rqUs</a></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="358" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JksFJK6rqUs" width="481" youtube-src-id="JksFJK6rqUs"></iframe></div><br /> <p></p><p><br />2. Answering objections to libertarian anarchism from a Reformed (Christian) perspective with fellow members of <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/reformedlibertarianism/" target="_blank">Reformed libertarianism</a> & <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/ReformedAnarchism/" target="_blank">Reformed anarchism</a> fb discussion groups. <a href="https://ctktn.org/preacher/nate-xanders/" target="_blank">Nate Xanders</a>, <a href="https://mereliberty.com/" target="_blank">Kerry Baldwin</a>, and Aaron Cuevas.<br />(September 2020) <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaoJ8qEH6bg" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaoJ8qEH6bg</a><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="365" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eaoJ8qEH6bg" width="480" youtube-src-id="eaoJ8qEH6bg"></iframe></div><p></p><p><br /></p><p><br />3. Discussion with Jacob Winograd of <a href="https://redcircle.com/shows/daniel-3-biblical-anarchy" target="_blank"><i>Daniel 3 : Biblical Anarchy</i></a> podcast about Reformed (Christian libertarian) anarchism and Romans 13.<br />(November 2020) <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm_wh1ndsxw" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm_wh1ndsxw</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="361" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xm_wh1ndsxw" width="481" youtube-src-id="xm_wh1ndsxw"></iframe></div><br /><p><br /></p><p>4. Discussion with Craig Harguess of <a href="https://www.thebadroman.com/" target="_blank"><i>The Bad Roman</i></a> podcast about a Reformed view of Romans 13 and stateless civil governance (aka libertarian anarchism).<br />(March 2021) <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAE1DyQIVLQ" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAE1DyQIVLQ</a></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="370" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AAE1DyQIVLQ" width="484" youtube-src-id="AAE1DyQIVLQ"></iframe></div><br /><p><br /></p><p>5. Here's my own youtube channel: <a href="https://youtube.com/c/reformational" target="_blank">https://youtube.com/c/reformational</a> where I have posted (among other things):<br /></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;">a. (2008) a presentation on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL083BD24DE7A4559E" target="_blank">Dooyeweerd's societal sphere sovereignty</a><br />b. (March 2019) a presentation on a Reformed view of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycC8RFrNv2Y" target="_blank">libertarian anarchism and Romans 13</a><br />c. (December 2020) a book review of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40lxGrCNAFY" target="_blank"><i>Faith Seeking Freedom</i></a>: libertarian Christian answers to tough questions<br />d. (December 2020) an audio recording of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubp6DtiLLIE" target="_blank">What Is Reformed libertarianism/anarchism?</a><br />e. (April 2021) an audio recording of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b22xXRsCU9E" target="_blank"><i>You Should Know Herman Dooyeweerd</i></a><br /></p><p>See respective video descriptions at youtube site for further info relevant to each vid.<br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-37685577674721315812021-06-29T17:42:00.008-04:002021-07-18T23:31:21.840-04:00Notes on Fesko's poor attempt to interact with Dooyeweerd<p dir="auto"><span>[These notes were originally written in May/Nov 2019] <br /></span></p><p dir="auto"><span>I got a copy of </span><a class="oajrlxb2 g5ia77u1 qu0x051f esr5mh6w e9989ue4 r7d6kgcz rq0escxv nhd2j8a9 nc684nl6 p7hjln8o kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x jb3vyjys rz4wbd8a qt6c0cv9 a8nywdso i1ao9s8h esuyzwwr f1sip0of lzcic4wl q66pz984 gpro0wi8" href="https://rts.edu/people/dr-john-v-fesko/" rel="nofollow noopener" role="link" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span>John V. Fesko</span></a><span>’s recent book </span><a class="oajrlxb2 g5ia77u1 qu0x051f esr5mh6w e9989ue4 r7d6kgcz rq0escxv nhd2j8a9 nc684nl6 p7hjln8o kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x jb3vyjys rz4wbd8a qt6c0cv9 a8nywdso i1ao9s8h esuyzwwr f1sip0of lzcic4wl q66pz984 gpro0wi8" href="http://www.bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/reforming-apologetics/386631" rel="nofollow noopener" role="link" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span>Reforming Apologetics</span></a><span>. I jumped to chapter 7 on “Dualisms” because he was supposed to interact with </span><a class="oajrlxb2 g5ia77u1 qu0x051f esr5mh6w e9989ue4 r7d6kgcz rq0escxv nhd2j8a9 nc684nl6 p7hjln8o kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x jb3vyjys rz4wbd8a qt6c0cv9 a8nywdso i1ao9s8h esuyzwwr f1sip0of lzcic4wl q66pz984 gpro0wi8 lrazzd5p" href="https://herman-dooyeweerd.blogspot.com" role="link" tabindex="0" target="_blank"><span>Herman Dooyeweerd</span></a><span>’s views. Fesko's criticisms are sloppy, unsound and erroneous. </span><span>Here are a few off-the-cuff comments.<br /><br />p.164 <br />Fesko cites Arvin Vos, but A.V. (in </span><i><span>Aquinas, Calvin and contemporary Protestant Thought</span></i><span>) largely exonerates Dooyeweerd's analysis. Vos called him “one of the most careful among Protestant critics”(p.131). He says “There is no denying the relevance of this account; Dooyeweerd is pointing to factors that are clearly present in Aquinas’s position” (p.132).<br /><br />p.168<br />Fesko erroneously thinks Dooyeweerd rejects the distinction between body and soul! The fact is Dooyeweerd defines body and soul in a non-scholastic, non-substance, non-form&matter way. Fesko seems totally unacquainted with Dooyeweerd's views.<br /><br />p.172<br />Fesko misinterprets Dooyeweerd where he says "it can never become a theoretical object", by "it" meaning the non- or supra-theoretical knowledge of God in Christ (by regeneration), Fesko erroneously takes Dooyeweerd by "it" to mean "the Bible".<br /><br />p.172<br />Fesko erroneously thinks Dooyeweerd must have rejected the Heidelberg where it speaks of body and soul, but Dooyeweerd explicitly affirms it.<br /><br /></span>p.173<br />Fesko erroneously takes Dooyeweerd's mention of "the key of knowledge" (again, meaning the non-theoretical knowledge of God in Christ, by regeneration, per Luke 11:52) to mean, rather, the "supratemporal origin [sic] of the heart". But that is not Dooyeweerd's view. Fesko may have picked this up from relying on, or himself misinterpreting (the sometimes dubious) interpretations of Glenn Friesen.<span><br /></span></p><p style="margin-left: 40px; text-align: left;"><span>Fesko also seems to have adopted the erroneous position of John Frame that Dooyeweerd, somehow, does not believe in exegesis. This is a terribly infelicitous move on Fesko's part. (One of the burdens of those who are familiar with Dooyeweerd's writings must be to show this is incorrect; something I will touch on in my master's thesis, </span><i><span>DV</span></i><span>.) So far, however, Fesko's fundamental misreading of Dooyeweerd's work (or, more probably of his misreading of secondary source material) is less sweeping than Frame's mischaracterizing rants.</span><br /><span></span><br /><span>Fesko goes on next, to try to defend Aquinas' view of body & soul as non-dualistic, by saying his view was Aristotelian, not Platonic. This entirely fails to engage Dooyeweerd's criticism of the form-matter and nature-grace motives, substance ontology, and of a scholastic view of the relation between faith and reason. Ironically, it also contradicts Fesko's suggestion that scholasticism is simply method and not theoretical content.</span><br /><span></span><br /><span><a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Clouser/Facets%20of%20faith%20and%20Science%20ch%203.PDF" target="_blank">This essay</a> is helpful in getting at a main point of Dooyeweerd's distinction (and relation) between "supratheoretical" religious assumptions and (theoretical) philosophical & various 'scientific' assumptions and positions. </span><span>If Fesko had understood this about Dooyeweerd, Fesko's engagement with Dooyeweerd's views might have had a chance of being on point.</span><br /><span><a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/Clouser/RC-R&BiG.pdf" target="_blank">This Dooyeweerdian reply</a> to a Thomist critique may also be helpful.</span><br /></p><p dir="auto"><span></span><span><br />p.177 <br />Fesko seems to be saying since Prot scholastics reject donum superadditum, that is sufficient for rejecting the nature-grace motive (ergo, Dooyeweerd's critique is a strawman, claims Fesko). But this is simply to miss entirely what Dooyeweerd means by the nature-grace motive.<br /><br />Fesko, in fact, goes on to define and deal with <i>his own view</i> of a nature-grace "construct"... so he abandons dealing with Dooyeweerd's view altogether, but speaks as though he's still criticizing Dooyeweerd's view!<br /><br />p.177<br />Fesko then says "Dooyeweerd's analysis falters on two counts: (1) he rarely, if ever, supports his claims with primary-source documentation; and (2) he erroneously defines scholasticism." [viz, as involving content, rather than 'just a method'] <br /></span><br /><span><span>Fesko only cites 7 pages of Dooyeweerd's <b>3 </b></span><b><span>volume</span></b><span> treatment in <i>Reformation and Scholasticism</i>. </span><a href="http://vcho.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Reformation-and-Scholasticism-in-Philosophy-A-Vol-5-2.pdf" target="_blank"><span>Here’s volume 2</span></a><span>. You can scroll on from </span><a href="http://vcho.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Reformation-and-Scholasticism-in-Philosophy-A-Vol-5-2.pdf#page=171" target="_blank"><span>page 147</span></a><span>
and see for yourself if Dooyeweerd is interacting with primary sources
or not. One gets the impression that Fesko is less acquainted with
Dooyeweerd than the average Protestant-in-the-pew is with Aquinas.<br /><br /></span>After several pages of trying to defend scholastic content, are we really supposed to take Fesko's 2nd objection seriously?</span><span> This is laughable.<br /><br /></span><span>p.177<br />Fesko says Dooyeweerd pitted Calvin against the Calvinists, but doesn't show that the sense in which Dooyeweerd held to a specific discontinuity between Calvin and those after him is the same sense argued against by Muller.<br /><br />p.178<br />Fesko says Dooyeweerd calls Calvin's (partially scholastic) theology "pure". Maybe. I haven't seen that. But Dooyeweerd is famous for rejecting application of the term 'pure' to almost everything, and Fesko doesn't offer a citation.<br /><br />p.179<br />Fesko says Dooyeweerd “vilifies” moving from self-knowledge to knowledge of God. But Fesko only reveals his ignorance of Dooyeweerd's transcendental criticism (in which Dooyeweerd moves from self-knowledge to knowledge of God).<br /></span><br />p.179<br />Fesko implies that Dooyeweerd rejects the distinction between law & gospel, and between common & special grace. This just isn't so. Dooyeweerd criticizes certain specific views of those distinctions, but does not reject the distinctions themselves.<br /></p><p dir="auto"></p><p dir="auto"></p><p dir="auto">p.182<br />Fesko claims that Dooyeweerd's philosophy is "Kantian" because he supposedly deduces a system of thought from a central dogma. Whether such a thing is actually characteristic of Kantianism, Fesko never considers. And Fesko offers no argument from Dooyeweerd's writing that this was Dooyeweerd's approach, but simply makes the bogus charge. One only need read Dooyeweerd's writing to find out otherwise.<br /><br />p.187<br />(without a single reference to Dooyeweerd's own writing) Fesko says that Dooyeweerd repeats Harnack's "Hellenization" thesis. In brief, Harnack rejects parts of the New Testament (eg, The Gospel of John) because he believed it employed pagan Greek metaphysical concepts. Further, Harnack's "gospel" is simply modern humanism in a thin veneer of religious language.<br /><br />In diametric opposition to Harnack, Dooyeweerd subscribed to the Three Forms of Unity, and accordingly held to the full authority and infallibility of Scripture, and to an orthodox Calvinist understanding of the gospel --all about which Dooyeweerd is explicit.<br /><br />Dooyeweerd rejects the idea that the New Testament writers imported pagan metaphysical ideas. As for theology, Dooyeweerd holds that the issue is not whether terms used in Greek philosophy (eg, logos, ousia) are also used in Christian theology (or in a creedal/confessional statement), but how those terms are defined or redefined. Where Dooyeweerd argues that specific antiChristian pagan ideas are to some extent accepted in any given theology, he makes explicit arguments, and these are nowhere cited or addressed by Fesko. </p><p dir="auto"></p><p dir="auto"><br /><b>See further</b>, Rudi Hayward's article that documents Fesko's (spectacularly) hypocritical failure to actually read Dooyeweerd's own writing: <span class="d2edcug0 hpfvmrgz qv66sw1b c1et5uql lr9zc1uh a8c37x1j keod5gw0 nxhoafnm aigsh9s9 d3f4x2em fe6kdd0r mau55g9w c8b282yb mdeji52x jagab5yi g1cxx5fr knj5qynh oo9gr5id" dir="auto"><span><span><a href="https://reformationalintermezzo.blogspot.com/2019/11/dooyeweed-among-reformed-thomists.html" target="_blank">https://reformationalintermezzo.blogspot.com/2019/11/dooyeweed-among-reformed-thomists.html<br /></a></span></span></span><br />Also see these helpful comments (tho neither has read or understands Dooyeweerd's views):<br />1. <a href="https://www.proginosko.com/2021/07/reforming-apologetics-wrap-up/" target="_blank">https://www.proginosko.com/2021/07/reforming-apologetics-wrap-up/</a><br />2. <a href="https://yinkahdinay.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/book-review-reformed-apologetics-4/" target="_blank">https://yinkahdinay.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/book-review-reformed-apologetics-4/</a><br /><br /></p><p dir="auto"><br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-40768921402729019712021-05-20T14:55:00.007-04:002021-08-19T01:50:18.590-04:00Five Different Versions of "Two Kingdoms"<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8csnJUBUKlqTjB5RE7DeLDGwqPa4lAsl-SozTZIT47kpLYI9L_WCpLlOBYJaexe941JnRj8C_y4a-8b4FH6Mt2BqS2RsjykIRhce1i0Bfzyc6OjQD9XR4zHcJEy3RJ1Es_CXs/s800/TwoKingdoms.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="689" data-original-width="800" height="345" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh8csnJUBUKlqTjB5RE7DeLDGwqPa4lAsl-SozTZIT47kpLYI9L_WCpLlOBYJaexe941JnRj8C_y4a-8b4FH6Mt2BqS2RsjykIRhce1i0Bfzyc6OjQD9XR4zHcJEy3RJ1Es_CXs/w400-h345/TwoKingdoms.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>1. One version of "two kingdoms" views it in terms of the <b>kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God</b>.<br />This is also the sense in which <b>Augustine</b> spoke of the city of God and the city of earth (or sometimes others say the city of man). It is a distinction between salvation and damnation; good and evil; faith and love toward God in Christ vs. unbelief, apostasy, and idolatry.<br /><br />2. Another version of two kingdoms (while not denying the first) is in terms of two kingdoms of God. One is "<b>internal</b>" and "invisible/spiritual", the other is "<b>external</b>" and "visible/material".<br />The first applies to God's "immediate" reign/rule over the consciences of believers; the reign of Christ in the hearts of believers. The other applies to "mediated" rule through delegated human authorities in church government and civil government.<br />This has been held by establishmentarians (theocrats or 'state church' advocates like <b>Luther, Calvin</b>, and most of the early Reformers), but isn't necessarily tied to that.<br /><br />3. Yet another version of two kingdoms of God is in terms of the two external/"mediated" kingdoms in the institutional <b>church and civil government</b>.<br />In the church, Christ is the only head/king, and rules through His Word, ministered by church officers. In the civil government, earthly kings or magistrates rule by the (physical) sword.<br />This can also be held by those who also hold (1. and/or 2.), with or without establishmentarianism.<br /><br />4. And yet another version of two kingdoms, sometimes held in combination or overlap with any of the above views, is a kingdom of "<b>common grace</b>" and a kingdom of "<b>special grace</b>".<br />There are several different versions of this view, but in general, common grace is understood to involve that dimension or those areas of life that are common to believers and unbelievers, while special grace is understood to involve salvation and that dimension or those areas of life that are related to believers.<br /><br />5. And finally, another version of two kingdoms, are the salvific (or special grace) kingdom of God now presently inaugurated as the <b>kingdom of Grace</b> and the future not yet (or yet to be) consummated <b>kingdom of Glory</b> (in the new heavens and earth).<br />This language is used, for example, in the Westminster Shorter Catechism, and is also compatible with the above views.<br /><br /><p></p><p> </p><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-39574936852663978962021-01-28T15:41:00.004-05:002022-04-06T01:30:25.861-04:00Notes on Danie Strauss’ and Roy Clouser’s misunderstanding of Herman Dooyeweerd’s transcendental critique<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>ZH-CN</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">In response </span><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> to <a href="http://herman-dooyeweerd.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Herman Dooyeweerd</a>'s transcendental critique of theoretical thought, </span><a href="http://daniestrauss.com/" target="_blank">Danie Strauss</a> and <a href="https://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/clouser.htm" target="_blank">Roy Clouser</a> have offered objections to and reformulations of it. It seems to me that their main objections are based on misunderstanding Dooyeweerd's view on several points. I don't cite where they explain their objections or document my counter-position with citations from Dooyeweerd here, but hope to do so eventually.<br /></span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p><p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Strauss</span></b><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">1. he mistakes (what is really Dooyeweerd’s)
distinction between the operations of antithetic abstraction and synthetic
conceptualization for two <i>separate</i> ‘steps’.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">While some infelicitous
expressions of Dooyeweerd lend to that misunderstanding, these operations actually take
place together in Dooyeweerd's view, as other expressions of Dooyeweerd make clearer. The former
operation is performed ‘in’ the latter.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">2. he mistakes Dooyeweerd’s
formulation of the 2<sup>nd</sup> transcendental problem about synthesis to be
concerned with how one might go about synthesizing(conceptualizing) after one
has already abstracted.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Dooyeweerd clarifies that the 2<sup>nd</sup>
problem rather concerns the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">basis</i>
upon which the synthesizing occurs, although again, certain unclear expressions
by Dooyeweerd lend to the misunderstanding.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">3. he mistakes Dooyeweerd’s view
of 'Gegenstand' (object of theoretical analysis) to be exclusively
non-logical.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">While Dooyeweerd does refer to abstracted non-logical aspects as Gegenstand, he also makes clear that the
logical (abstracted in contrast with the non-logical) may be
a Gegenstand – as any non-logical may be – as a field of
theoretical/scientific investigation/analysis. Moreover, he also uses Gegenstand in reference to things that aren't aspects.<br /></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Clouser</span></b><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> (agrees with Strauss’ misunderstandings and adds two others)</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">4. he mistakes Dooyeweerd’s view
of the ‘isolating’ abstraction of one/each modal aspect from the rest to
involve its abstractive isolation from the intermodal coherence of meaning,
which is tantamount to absolutization.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Dooyeweerd clarifies that, rather, a
modal aspect is abstractively isolated, not from the coherence of meaning with
the rest, but only from its concrete <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">temporal
continuity</i>.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">The difference may be further
clarified in terms of a <a href="http://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2019/02/abstraction-precisive-and-nonprecisive.html" target="_blank">supposed precisive and an actual nonprecisive</a>
abstraction.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">5. he mistakes Dooyeweerd’s view
of absolutization as thinking that successfully abstracts a modal aspect from
the coherence.</span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Dooyeweerd clarifies that such
(precisive) abstractive ‘seclusion’ or being ‘torn’ from the coherence is only
supposed and not actual, because impossible.</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p><p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p><p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: black; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></p>
<script src="moz-extension://89cbc19c-b803-4259-937b-87a811140173/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-4345744222251545482020-12-17T14:47:00.004-05:002021-01-16T14:03:37.764-05:00Statement on Reformed libertarian anarchism<p><b>What is Reformed anarchism?</b></p><p>1. <i>What Is Culture?</i><br /> a. Human production<br /> b. Reciprocal layers<br /> c. Based in religion<br /> d. Structural norms, directional conformity<br /> e. Fall, redemption, and common grace<br /><br />2. <i>What Is Society?</i><br /> a. Neither individualistic, nor collectivistic<br /> b. Societal sphere sovereignty<br /> c. Polycentric and emergent societal order<br /> d. Economics<br /><br />3. <i>What Is Civil Governance?</i><br /> a. Civil justice distinguished from morality<br /> b. Self-ownership and property right<br /> c. Civil justicial norm of non-aggression<br /> d. God’s ordination of civil governance<br /> e. Taxation<br /> f. War<br /> g. Our Confessions<br /> h. The state’s Monopoly<br /></p><p><br />This
statement was composed by Gregory Baus and Kerry Baldwin in
collaboration with members of the Reformed libertarianism and Reformed
anarchism discussion groups in 2020.<br />Also available here: <a href="https://sites.google.com/view/reformed-anarchism">https://sites.google.com/view/reformed-anarchism</a><br />audio version here: <a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ubp6DtiLLIE" target="_blank">http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ubp6DtiLLIE </a><br /></p><p style="text-align: center;">*****</p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" style="background-color: transparent; border-color: currentcolor; border-style: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><b>What is Reformed anarchism?</b></span></span> <br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Reformed
anarchism is a view of politics, or civil governance, informed by a
Reformed theology (a view of Scriptural teaching expressed in the
historical Reformed confessions) and a Reformed philosophy (a view of
created reality directed by Scriptural teaching). Based on a Reformed
theology and philosophy, the following summarizes a Reformed view of 1.)
</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>culture</b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">, and 2.) </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>society</b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">, as the broader context within which our view of politics is set, followed by 3.) </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>civil governance</b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">, and [</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>forthcoming</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">] 4.) some implications for </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>action</b></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b> </b></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>1. What Is Culture?</b></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">1.a. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Human production</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Culture
is the human activity of having dominion over the earth; being
fruitful, filling, ruling, and subduing the world, cultivating and
keeping it. Culture is also the result of that labor, the secondary
environment of human production within the natural environment. Being
made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:15; 9:1-7), designed to exercise
dominion, human beings, even fallen in sin, cannot help but act
purposely, labor, and cultivate the creation, including ourselves.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Henry R. Van Til, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The Calvinistic Concept of Culture</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1959; rep., 2001), p.xvii, 25ff.</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.contra-mundum.org%2Fbooks%2FConcept.pdf&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGlMojv16y9sTVSyni63MZNt8Wg_g" target="_blank">https://www.contra-mundum.org/books/Concept.pdf</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">1.b. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Reciprocal layers</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Human
cultivative labor and its results can be understood in terms of various
layers. On the surface, as it were, people manifest observable
behaviors, some of which can be called customs, and produce material
artifacts of all kinds. At a deeper layer communities and institutions
are developed for numerous ends, and these often reflect, at a deeper
layer still, the numerous values according to which people discern what
concrete activities to do and how to go about them. And at a base layer
people embrace what may be called worldviews; basic understandings of
what the world is and diverse purposes within it. And these various
cultural layers exist in a dynamic of reciprocal influence. Human
technologies, practices, and communities affect values and beliefs, and
vice versa.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: G. Linwood Barney, “The Supracultural and the Cultural: Implications for Frontier Missions,” in </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The Gospel and Frontier Peoples: a report of a consultation</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">, December 1972 , ed. Robert Pierce Beaver (1973), p.48-55.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Partially quoted here:<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://books.google.com/books?id=raf6uV74x4AC&pg=PA102" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://books.google.com/books?id=raf6uV74x4AC&pg=PA102" target="_blank">https://books.google.com/books?id=raf6uV74x4AC&pg=PA102</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">1.c. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Based in religion</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">The
activities within all these layers are all cultural activity. Both
Christians and non-Christians participate in all these sorts of
activities. By them we form the histories of our individual lives and of
civilizations alike. As an expression of our being God’s image, all
human action is fundamentally grounded in ‘religion,’ which is our
central orientation either towards the true God revealed in the Christ
of Scripture, or away from Him towards a false idol. (Romans 1:18-25;
Matthew 15:18-19)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">1.d. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Structural norms, directional conformity</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">The
image of God in human beings can be understood as having two
dimensions. There is a ‘structural’ or official dimension, and there is a
‘directional’ or normative dimension. By structural, we refer to God’s
creational laws or ordinances that are in force for created things,
constituting such things as the kind of creatures they are. (In this
sense we mean structure </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>for</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">
creation and cultural activity, not structures of creation and culture;
that is, not things or cultural products themselves). As there are
different kinds of created things, so there are also different kinds of
creational laws. Some laws are directly compelling, such as physical
laws, for example the law of gravity. Other laws, while always in force,
are appealing. That is to say, they can be violated. These appealing
sorts of normative laws especially apply to cultural activity and human
action generally, and may be referred to as norms (oughts/shoulds), for
example logical norms, such as the “law of (non-)contradiction”. By
directional, we refer to negative deviation from and positive conformity
to God-given norms. </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Albert M. Wolters, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Creation Regained</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1985; rep., 2005), p.59, 88, 97.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Anthony A. Hoekema, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Created In God’s Image</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1986), p.68-73<br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">1.e. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Fall, redemption, and common grace</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">After
the fall into sin, humanity retains the structural dimension,
continuing by God’s common grace to be His image as those who have an
office of authority, called to exercise dominion (epitomized in making
judgments). Yet by the fall into sin unregenerate humanity loses the
deepest positive directional dimension of that image, no longer judging </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>rightly</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">.
In the regenerate person the image of God is renewed in Christ, in true
righteousness, holiness, and knowledge. While Christians are centrally
re-directed towards God, they can still sin, suffer the effects of sin,
and deviate from God’s norms, including those for cultural activity.
Nevertheless, the renewal of the image in Christ by redemption provides
the possibility for Christians, in some measure, to discern and live in
positive accordance with God-ordained cultural norms. Conversely, while
the unregenerate are in a basic condition of mis-direction away from
God, by God’s common grace, they can in some measure act in external
accordance with certain norms. </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Meredith G. Kline, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Images of the Spirit</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1980; rep., 1999).</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">The first chapter is based on this article:<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmeredithkline.com%2Fklines-works%2Farticles-and-essays%2Fcreation-in-the-image-of-the-glory-spirit%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEPZQBfWgFbHOq-c_VVU77Z0uSRKw" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmeredithkline.com%2Fklines-works%2Farticles-and-essays%2Fcreation-in-the-image-of-the-glory-spirit%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEPZQBfWgFbHOq-c_VVU77Z0uSRKw" target="_blank">https://meredithkline.com/klines-works/articles-and-essays/creation-in-the-image-of-the-glory-spirit/</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See also:<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fopc.org%2Fwcf.html%23Chapter_16&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGpsENiWCFsksK1DPlim5RHVujC7w" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fopc.org%2Fwcf.html%23Chapter_16&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGpsENiWCFsksK1DPlim5RHVujC7w" target="_blank">WCF 16.7</a></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> on good works by the unregenerate.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>2. What Is Society?</b></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">2.a. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Neither individualistic, nor collectivistic</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Society
is not a single whole. Rather, by society we mean the numerous
individual and communal relations of several varieties. There are
inter-individual relations, communal relations, and inter-communal
relations. While only individuals act, neither society, nor any communal
relation can be properly reduced to only inter-individual relations.
And an individual is never a mere part of a given community of which
they are a member. Communal relations differ from inter-individual
relations in being comparatively more enduring and involving authority
arrangements. Neither individuals, nor communities are more basic than,
or have their origin in, the other. Individuals and various communities
are themselves wholes, ultimately structured or normed by God in
creation. In this sense, we reject both an individualistic and a
collectivistic view of society.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Roy Clouser, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The Myth of Religious Neutrality</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1991; rev., 2005), chapter 12.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Herman Dooyeweerd, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>A Christian Theory of Social Institutions</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1947)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ftinyurl.com%2FDooyTheorySocInst&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHkGPIq6KLFe2ncMVKvkUrxZOWTRA" target="_blank">https://tinyurl.com/DooyTheorySocInst</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">2.b. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Societal sphere sovereignty</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">There
are distinct communal spheres, or kinds of communities. Each kind of
community is distinguished from other kinds by its own intrinsic nature,
differently characterized in its organization and purpose, governed by
its own God-given norms. For example, there are familial,
ecclesial/faith, political/civil, commercial, social, charitable,
medical, educational, and aesthetic/arts kinds of communities among
others. No single kind of community properly encompasses or regulates
all the others. Nor does any particular community of a given kind
properly encompass or regulate all the others of that same kind. Each
kind of community has its own particular function and its own kind of
limited authority and competence directly ordained by God, not mediated
by any other kind. This has been called ‘sphere sovereignty.’ We reject
the collectivistic view of so-called ‘subsidiarity,’ which, while
seeking to be bottom-up, affirming that the lowest level of organization
has original jurisdiction, nevertheless subsumes all societal
communities (as so-called ‘mediating institutions’) under an
all-encompassing state.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Gregory Baus, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Dooyeweerd’s Societal Sphere Sovereignty</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2006, rev. 2017)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.academia.edu%2F32356017%2FDooyeweerds_Societal_Sphere_Sovereignty_2017_revision_&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFY1gU4yuBNgOzkWwguv1q3d_nAyw" target="_blank">https://www.academia.edu/32356017/Dooyeweerds_Societal_Sphere_Sovereignty_2017_revision_</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Kerry Baldwin, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Economics, Hierarchy, and the Question of the State’s Inevitability</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2018)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flibertarianchristians.com%2F2018%2F04%2F11%2Feconomics-hierarchy-states-inevitability%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHTGE95PH4EetFceQY34koaj4rlIg" target="_blank">https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/04/11/economics-hierarchy-states-inevitability/</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">and </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Inconceivable! The Plausibility of a Stateless Society</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2018)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flibertarianchristians.com%2F2018%2F05%2F07%2Fplausibility-of-a-stateless-society%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFLabNDj0am6gEPXOIBV8d-vxMC_w" target="_blank">https://libertarianchristians.com/2018/05/07/plausibility-of-a-stateless-society/</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">2.c.</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i> Polycentric and emergent societal order</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Society
is normatively ordered and governed polycentrically, that is, within a
variety of relations and particular communities of different kinds. A
political order, or communities/institutions of civil governance, does
not have a task of comprehensively regulating society. Rather, the
God-given task of civil governance is exclusively limited to
administration of civil justice. The broader polycentric societal
complex is coordinated emergently, through the self-governance of each
instance of the varieties of relations and each particular community of
the several distinct kinds. By God’s creational design, a dynamic
societal harmonization comes about cumulatively through the varieties of
normative human action, but apart from any human individual’s or
community’s specific intention or attempt at comprehensive coercive
regulation. Any attempt at coercive regulation of society overall
violates the nature of society, the various norms and relations, and the
distinct kinds of community with differentiated and limited authority
ordained by God, and so introduces wide-ranging distortions and
disorder.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Norman Barry, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The Tradition of Spontaneous Order</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1982)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Foll.libertyfund.org%2Ftitles%2Fliggio-literature-of-liberty-summer-1982-vol-5-no-2%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFEcmn005y0pRGFd8XaNDxVdET3Cw" target="_blank">https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/liggio-literature-of-liberty-summer-1982-vol-5-no-2/</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see:<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ffee.org%2Flearning-center%2Fconcepts%2Fspontaneous-order%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEAGdoMJZJUdBfLmod32AMpkoRYZA" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ffee.org%2Flearning-center%2Fconcepts%2Fspontaneous-order%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEAGdoMJZJUdBfLmod32AMpkoRYZA" target="_blank">https://fee.org/learning-center/concepts/spontaneous-order/</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">2.d. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Economics</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Commercial
or economic inter-individual and inter-communal relations and
communities in society are normed by God to properly function in terms
of a ‘free market,’ that is, according to the God-given norms for the
acquisition and use of scarce resources and voluntary exchange. Any
coercive government restrictions or regulations, going beyond
administration of actual civil justice, on the acquisition, ownership,
or use of resources, no matter what the intention or pretense (whether
this involves money, credit, investment, production, products,
distribution, consumption, buying, selling, renting, speculation,
saving, labor, employment, services, wages, prices, etc) are all
reprehensible violations of economic, moral, and civil justicial
God-given norms, and is ultimately destructive to proper societal
functioning and well-being.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Shawn Ritenour, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Foundations of Economics: A Christian View</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2010)<br /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; white-space: pre;">Also see: Per Bylund, </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; white-space: pre;">The Seen, the Unseen, and the Unrealized: How Regulations Affect Our Everyday Lives</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; white-space: pre;"> (2016)</span><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>3. What Is Civil Governance?</b></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.a. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Civil justice distinguished from morality</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Civil
governance is the administration of civil justice, that is, the
adjudication of disputes over ‘civil’/political rights according to the
God-given norms of civil justice, with the rules and enforcement that
accompany it. Civil (or political) justice and rights concern
legitimately coercively-enforceable normative claims on one’s person or
property. In this sense, civil justice (concerning civil rights and
obligations) is distinguished from the sense of what is due to others
regarding properly non-civil/non-political claims. For example, that
which is properly moral concerns what is loving. Violations of civil
justice may always be immoral, but not vice versa. Lying and coveting
are immoral, but do not necessarily involve ‘crime’, that is, the
violation of civil/political right.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Lysander Spooner, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Vices Are Not Crimes</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1875)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fvices-are-not-crimes&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNECzQltuUsIiGTGJebw_DiHnBbefA" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/vices-are-not-crimes</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.b. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Self-ownership and property right</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">All
humans are created by God, and so He is every person’s Owner. God in
Christ is the Creator and Owner of all things (Colossians 1:15-17). At
the same time, having created humans in His image, God has given each
person a stewardship over themselves and their property. In relation to
other humans, we call each person’s stewardship their self-ownership.
And this self-ownership can be extended to acquisition of ownership in
scarce resources. Ownership is the right to exclusive control, use, or
disposal of a resource. We call this ‘property rights’ (in one’s person
and things; cf. Exodus 21:16; Matthew 20:15; Acts 5:4); one’s
civil/political right.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Stephan Kinsella, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>What Libertarianism Is</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2009)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fwhat-libertarianism&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGaXPolAFhPdD7P1HZ8Nv5-W9CBSg" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/what-libertarianism</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Stephan Kinsella, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>How We Come To Own Ourselves</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2006)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fhow-we-come-own-ourselves&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGZZhh4QfNeZc69SalaTei7_buQoQ" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/how-we-come-own-ourselves</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.c. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Civil justicial norm of non-aggression</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Necessarily
corresponding to property rights is the obligation to never initiate
(or to never employ first use of) coercion against another’s person or
property. We call such initiation of coercion ‘aggression’. The only
legitimate use of coercion against another’s person or property is in
proportional response to prior aggression. Legitimate coercion is
exclusively responsive. Aggression against another’s person or property
(whether murder, rape, assault, theft, kidnapping, fraud, or the
credible threatening of these things) is never legitimate. This norm
concerning the legitimate use of responsive coercion and the
illegitimacy of initiatory coercion or aggression is often called the
‘non-aggression principle’. It is a God-given moral norm insofar as it
is expressed in the Biblical prohibition of murder and theft (cf, Exodus
20; Deuteronomy 5). It is also a God-given norm for civil justice,
expressed in the Biblical affirmation of the law of proportionate
retribution (lex talionis), as self-ownership/property rights delineate
that which is properly coercively-enforceable (cf, Genesis 9:5-6;
Proverbs 3:30; 1 Peter 4:15).</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.d. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>God’s ordination of civil governance</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Romans
13:1-7 specifies that God ordains the administration of civil justice.
This involves the legitimate use of coercive retribution against
aggressors (those who commit aggression against another’s person or
property), enforcing restitution by aggressors to their victims.
According to God’s ordination, civil governance is strictly limited to
this task. The civil rulers to which all should submit (also, 1 Peter
2:13-14; Titus 3:1) are those that administer actual civil justice. The
claim to civil power or exercise of power or coercion on any pretense
that violates civil justice is not ordained by God according to
Scripture, and may be legitimately resisted. It is not only orders to
sin that must be refused, but any would-be civil regulation beyond the
God-ordained sphere of civil justice may be justly ignored. Those who
are unjust are not legitimate authorities to whom believers should
submit civil disputes among themselves (1 Corinthians 6:1-8). </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Gregory Baus, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Romans 13 and Stateless Civil Governance: A Reformed View</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2019)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flibertarianchristians.com%2F2019%2F05%2F31%2Fromans-13-and-stateless-civil-governance-a-reformed-view%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHkz8sc2WmKfPRZG7KF8zjg1ROUYg" target="_blank">https://libertarianchristians.com/2019/05/31/romans-13-and-stateless-civil-governance-a-reformed-view/</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">And<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmereliberty.com%2Fromans13%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGev6t0glRIYXOi1JuRdul7G_Eg7w" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmereliberty.com%2Fromans13%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGev6t0glRIYXOi1JuRdul7G_Eg7w" target="_blank">https://mereliberty.com/romans13/</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.e. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Taxation</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Scripture
does not say that anyone in fact owes taxes. Rather, Scripture requires
us to pay to others what is actually owed to them (Romans 13:7), that
is, to give others what they rightly own. In Matthew 22:15-22 (also Mark
12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26), our Lord affirms that only Caesar’s own
property belongs to Caesar, and should be given to him. The Lord Jesus
neither condones taxation, nor obligates anyone to submit to theft.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Jeff Barr, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Render Unto Caesar</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2010)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Fwire%2Frender-unto-caesar-most-misunderstood-new-testament-passage&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNF1OlpbMWraxmZjUhMQTTa02WO00w" target="_blank">https://mises.org/wire/render-unto-caesar-most-misunderstood-new-testament-passage</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Rocco Stanzione, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Render Unto Caesar</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2016)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ftruthandliberty.me%2F2019%2F08%2F22%2Frender-unto-caesar%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNFoZiwjZnEs4zGEJlYnGk5RbJLO1Q" target="_blank">https://truthandliberty.me/2019/08/22/render-unto-caesar/ </a></span><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.f. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>War</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">An
individual or a community may legitimately defend themselves and their
property or that of others, consensually on others’ behalf, using
proportional responsive coercion against aggressors. This may include
lethal coercion and enforcing restitution by aggressors to their
victims. However, what is known as ‘war’ as conducted by states is never
moral or just. We condemn and reject war in the strongest terms as a
great evil. Christians should never participate in a state’s military
that engages in any non-defensive actions, and/or coercive actions that
are disproportionate, and/or actions that knowingly injure or murder any
non-aggressors. Nor should Christians take employment with any
contractors that supply such a state military’s war-making. (Romans
12:18; Proverbs 1:10-16) </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Murray Rothbard, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>War, Peace, and the State</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1963)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fwar-peace-and-state&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEV2lJWbXcBdNF668S4DD4PWkSiUQ" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/war-peace-and-state</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Wendy McElroy, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Libertarian Just War Theory</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2010)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wendymcelroy.com%2Farticles%2Fjustwar.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGBVJvUnOVSNU7Q5UY_OHrNosPWTQ" target="_blank">http://www.wendymcelroy.com/articles/justwar.html</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">And </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The Libertarian Antithesis: War</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2016)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2Fwendy_mcelroy%2F2016%2F09%2F04%2Flibertarianism-antithesis-war%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHX_DI_y-LJt895-r1rVeJUdfOVpA" target="_blank">https://original.antiwar.com/wendy_mcelroy/2016/09/04/libertarianism-antithesis-war/</a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.g. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Our Confessions</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">The
historical confessions (and other doctrinal standards) of the Reformed
churches do not oppose resistance to powers that violate civil justice. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">The Westminster Confession of Faith</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> 20.4 specifies that those who “oppose any </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>lawful</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> power, or the </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>lawful</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> exercise of it... resist the ordinance of God.” Tyranny is unlawful, not the ordinance of God, and may be lawfully opposed. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">The London Baptist Confession of Faith</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> 24.3 specifies that submission is only required to “</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>lawful</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> things commanded.” </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">The Second Helvetic Confession of Faith</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> 30 similarly specifies obedience only to “</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>just and fair</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> commands.” </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;">The Belgic Confession of Faith</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">
36 specifies obedience only to “things that are not in conflict with
God’s Word,” and denounces all, even civil powers, who would “subvert </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>justice</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">.” </span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">3.h. </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>The state’s Monopoly</i></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">A
state is a monopoly on the use of coercion and supreme decision-making
(or ‘final say’) within a territory. This monopoly involves enforcing a
claim to exclusive control or prerogative over persons and property that
belong to others, and that the state does not own. As such, all states
are aggressors, inherently unjust, and antinormative. Every state is an
unlawful usurpation of civil power; a tyranny. States are neither
legitimate, nor necessary for civil governance. Legitimate civil
governance is non-monopolistic because God has strictly limited civil
governance to the administration of civil justice (adjudicating disputes
over ‘civil’/political rights according to the God-given norms of civil
justice) by coercive retribution against aggressors, enforcing
restitution by aggressors to their victims. A state’s monopoly is in
principle totalitarian, and always increasingly tends toward
totalitarianism in practice.</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><br /></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">See: Murray Rothbard, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Anatomy of the state</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (1974)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fanatomy-state&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEpkVwvXWvcfGgxpTIXqh_AtAJScA" target="_blank">https://mises.org/library/anatomy-state</a></span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Also see: Gerard Casey, </span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"><i>Libertarian Anarchy</i></span><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;"> (2012)</span></p><p class="CDt4Ke zfr3Q" dir="ltr" style="background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; border-color: currentcolor; border-left: none; border-right: none; border-style: none; border-top: none; border-width: medium; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; margin-top: 0; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding: 0px; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: normal; vertical-align: baseline;">Partially summarized here:<a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ftinyurl.com%2FDiscoverAnarchism%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR25OYzpofP_Mn419MHfMqHtpgWFWd3ax6k7GGHYaoWCTSvc6B5qtx1t88U&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNE8ZDaPy_2TkkfUClZ_Bc0dkFjg_w" target="_blank"> </a></span><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-size: 8pt; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="XqQF9c rXJpyf" href="http://tinyurl.com/CaseForAnarchy" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/CaseForAnarchy</a></span></p><br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-35454104109782101882020-02-03T14:49:00.004-05:002021-06-23T16:10:45.551-04:00The Trinity Psalter Hymnal One-Year Plan<div><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/tphyearplan/">http://sites.google.com/site/tphyearplan/</a><br />
<br />
This is a guide to singing through the Psalms in one year.<br />
<br />
The following plan (in 52 weeks) groups together, according to length, the full Psalm settings as evenly as possible. In weeks with five or six Psalms, you can sing one each day of the week, Monday through Friday or Saturday, then on the following Sunday you can re-sing two or three in the morning, and two or three in the evening. In weeks with fewer but longer Psalms, you can divide the total number of stanzas (e.g., by 5 or 6) and sing a portion each day of the week (and re-sing them all on Sunday). In this way, you'll sing through the entire Psalms <i>twice</i> each year.<br />
<br />
Links to <a href="https://hymnary.org/hymnal/TPH2018">Hymnary</a> for texts, sheet music, tunes audio, and videos at <a href="https://urcpsalmody.wordpress.com/trinity-psalter-hymnal-resources/">URCpsalmody</a>.<br />Links to tunes audio also at <a href="https://www.christreformeddc.org/trinity-psalter-hymnal-tunes" target="_blank">ChristReformedDC</a>.<br /><br />
See also <a href="http://trinitypsalterhymnal.org/">http://trinitypsalterhymnal.org</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
week 1 : Psalms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5<br />
<br />
week 2 : Psalms 6, 7, 8, 9<br />
<br />
week 3 : Psalms 10, 11, 12, 13<br />
<br />
week 4 : Psalms 14, 15, 16, 17<br />
<br />
week 5 : Psalm 18<br />
<br />
week 6 : Psalms 19, 20, 21<br />
<br />
week 7 : Psalms 22, 23, 24<br />
<br />
week 8 : Psalms 25, 26, 27<br />
<br />
week 9 : Psalms 28, 29, 30<br />
<br />
week 10 : Psalms 31, 32, 33<br />
<br />
week 11 : Psalms 34, 35<br />
<br />
week 12 : Psalms 36, 37<br />
<br />
week 13 : Psalms 38, 39, 40<br />
<br />
week 14 : Psalms 41, 42, 43, 44<br />
<br />
week 15 : Psalms 45, 46, 47, 48, 49<br />
<br />
week 16 : Psalms 50, 51, 52<br />
<br />
week 17 : Psalms 53, 54, 55, 56, 57<br />
<br />
week 18 : Psalms 58, 59, 60, 61<br />
<br />
week 19 : Psalms 62, 63, 64, 65<br />
<br />
week 20 : Psalms 66, 67, 68<br />
<br />
week 21 : Psalms 69, 70<br />
<br />
week 22 : Psalms 71, 72<br />
<br />
week 23 : Psalms 73, 74<br />
<br />
week 24 : Psalms 75, 76, 77<br />
<br />
week 25 : Psalm 78<br />
<br />
week 26 : Psalms 79, 80, 81, 82<br />
<br />
week 27 : Psalms 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88<br />
<br />
week 28 : Psalm 89<br />
<br />
week 29 : Psalms 90, 91, 92<br />
<br />
week 30 : Psalms 93, 94, 95, 96<br />
<br />
week 31 : Psalms 97, 98, 99, 100, 101<br />
<br />
week 32 : Psalms 102, 103<br />
<br />
week 33 : Psalm 104<br />
<br />
week 34 : Psalm 105<br />
<br />
week 35 : Psalm 106<br />
<br />
week 36 : Psalms 107, 108<br />
<br />
week 37 : Psalms 109, 110, 111<br />
<br />
week 38 : Psalms 112, 113, 114, 115<br />
<br />
week 39 : Psalms 116, 117, 118<br />
<br />
week 40 : Psalm 119 A, B, C, D, E, F<br />
<br />
week 41 : Psalm 119 G, H, I, J, K, L<br />
<br />
week 42 : Psalm 119 M, N, O, P, Q, R<br />
<br />
week 43 : Psalms 119 S, T, U, V, 120, 121<br />
<br />
week 44 : Psalms 122, 123, 124, 125, 126<br />
<br />
week 45 : Psalms 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132<br />
<br />
week 46 : Psalms 133, 134, 135<br />
<br />
week 47 : Psalms 136, 137<br />
<br />
week 48 : Psalms 138, 139, 140<br />
<br />
week 49 : Psalms 141, 142, 143<br />
<br />
week 50 : Psalms 144, 145<br />
<br />
week 51 : Psalms 146, 147<br />
<br />
week 52 : Psalms 148, 149, 150</blockquote>
<br />
In the <i>Trinity Psalter Hymnal</i>, some of the Psalms have only one
setting (e.g., Psalm 3), and have no additional designation. For those
Psalms with more than one setting, the first setting is a full Psalm,
designated as “A” (e.g., Psalm 1A); additional settings may also be
full. However, Psalm 119 is an exception. It has 22 distinct sections,
and the alphabetical designations (A through V) correspond to those
sections. Full Psalm settings include verse numbers with the text. The
partial or paraphrased Psalms are indicated at the end of the setting.
Including the 22 sections of Psalm 119, there are at least 171 full
settings in the Trinity Psalter Hymnal.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
*******<br />
<br />
<b>Additional Resources</b><br />
</div><div></div><div><br /><i>Why Sing All 150 Psalms?</i> by Peter Wallace<br /><a href="https://www.opc.org/nh.html?article_id=809">https://www.opc.org/nh.html?article_id=809</a><br />
<br />
Bible Project Intro to The Psalms:<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpny22k_7uk">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpny22k_7uk</a><br />
<br />
Bible Project (more detailed) Overview of The Psalms:<br />
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9phNEaPrv8">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9phNEaPrv8</a><br />
<br />
<i>Learning to Love The Psalms</i> by W. Robert Godfrey:<br />
[<a href="https://www.wscal.edu/resources/wsc-bookstore/details/learning-to-love-the-psalms">wscal</a>] [<a href="https://www.heritagebooks.org/products/learning-to-love-the-psalms-godfrey.html">rhbooks</a>] [<a href="http://amazon.com/dp/1567698352">amzn</a>]<br />
Interview with author (audio): <a href="https://wscal.edu/resource-center/learning-to-love-the-psalms">Office Hours</a><br />
Conference presentation (video): <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_7WNwTG-dg">Ligonier</a><br />
12-part series (video): <a href="https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/learning-love-psalms/introduction-part-1-attractions-difficulties/">Ligonier</a><br />
<br />
<i>Eschatology of the Psalter</i> by Geerhardus Vos:<br />
[<a href="http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/19-Psalms/Text/Articles/Vos-EschatologyPs-PTR.htm">html</a>] [<a href="http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/19-Psalms/Text/Articles/Vos-EschatologyPs-PTR.pdf">pdf</a>]<br />
<br />
<i>1650 Psalter with notes</i> by John Brown of Haddington:<br />
<a href="https://thewestminsterstandard.org/1650-scottish-metrical-psalter">https://thewestminsterstandard.org/1650-scottish-metrical-psalter</a><br />
<br />
1650 Psalter congregational recordings:<br />
<a href="https://www.christcovenantrpc.org/audio/psalm-singing">https://www.christcovenantrpc.org/audio/psalm-singing</a><br />
<br />
Genevan Psalter (c. 1562) text and tunes:<br />
<a href="https://www.genevanpsalter.com/music-a-lyrics">https://www.genevanpsalter.com/music-a-lyrics</a><br />
<br /><br />a note on the use of imprecation / imprecatory psalms in the new covenant:<br /><br />" We believe that Christ is present in all Scripture and certainly in the Psalms, even the imprecatory psalms. In those, our Lord Jesus Christ in his own person, particularly at the cross, receives God’s wrath against us for our sin and, <i>in and by the gospel, makes many former enemies to be friends</i>. (In this way, his enemies are vanquished even as Israel often pleaded for their defeat.) "<br />~Alan Strange<br /><br />" 'Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord’ ' (Rom. 12:19). In other words, Christians should never seek to do anything to curse their enemies, but we should pray that God will bring His vengeance —as in Psalm 94. "<br />~Peter Wallace<br /><br /> This (imprecation) is also what we pray in the 2nd petition of the Lord's Prayer:<br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">WSC 102. Q. What do we pray for in the second petition?<br />A. In the second petition, which is, <i>Thy kingdom come</i>, <b>we pray that Satan's kingdom may be destroyed</b>; and that the kingdom of grace may be advanced, ourselves and others brought into it, and kept in it; and that the kingdom of glory may be hastened.</div></div><p></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><div>
<br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-77594194017486146502020-02-03T14:27:00.002-05:002020-04-12T02:12:30.691-04:00Praying The Lord's Prayer<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:RelyOnVML/>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>ZH-CN</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 14.0pt;">The Lord’s Prayer, <b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">elaborated</i></b>
in 8 parts</span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
based on the
<a href="https://opc.org/lc.html" target="_blank">Westminster Larger Catechism</a> #178-196</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">1.<i> Our Father who is in heaven</i></span><br />
<br />
Heavenly Father, we draw near to You our God with confidence of Your
fatherly goodness towards us in Your Son Jesus Christ. With reverence and
affection, we express our total dependence on You. Acknowledging Your sovereign
power and majesty, by Your Holy Spirit, we are grateful for Your condescending
to hear and answer us as we pray according to Your will.<br />
<br />
2. <i>Hallowed be Your name</i><br />
<br />
We confess our utter inability and unwillingness of ourselves to honor You rightly.
So we pray that You would, by Your grace, enable and incline us to know, love,
and glorify You as You have revealed Yourself in Your Word and all Your works.
And in all our thinking, speaking, and doing, we pray that by Your Spirit You
would prevent and remove our unbelief, ignorance, and disobedience. We pray
that by Your providence You would continue to direct all things to Your own
glory.<br />
<br />
3.<i> May Your kingdom come</i><br />
<br />
We confess that through our own fault we are by nature under the dominion of
sin and Satan. So we pray that You would destroy the kingdom of darkness,
conquering all Your and our spiritual enemies. We pray that You would advance
Your kingdom in this age by the propagation of the gospel everywhere, saving
the full number of those You have chosen from among all peoples. Equip Your
church with qualified officers, we pray, that Christ’s ordinances would be
purely administered and effective in converting unbelievers and strengthening
Your people. We pray that You would enable Your church to live peaceably and to
patiently endure through all hardships. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Come
again soon, we pray, to consummate Your kingdom in the resurrection and new
creation, having us reign with You forever.<br />
<br />
4. <i>May Your will be done in earth, as it is in heaven</i><br />
<br />
We confess that of ourselves we are prone to rebel against Your Word, to complain
against Your providence, and wholly inclined to our own sinful will. So we pray
that You would take away all our sinful unwillingness, ignorance, weakness, and
our heart’s corruption. We pray that by Your grace You would make us able and
willing to know and do Your revealed will in all things. As holy angels obey
You, enable us, we pray, to walk according to Your Spirit in all the good works
You have prepared for us in a manner that pleases You.<br />
<br />
5. <i>Give us this day our daily bread</i><br />
<br />
We confess that because of our sinfulness we do not deserve and cannot earn
any of the outward blessings You give in this life. We acknowledge that of
themselves they cannot sustain us, and that of ourselves we are prone to use
them unlawfully. So we pray that by Your wisdom and tender care, You would
provide for our temporal needs. Enable us each day, we pray, in the use of
lawful means to enjoy Your free and generous gifts with contentment and
gratitude to Your glory.<br />
<br />
6. <i>Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors</i><br />
<br />
We confess that we are guilty both of original and actual sin, and are
debtors to Your justice. We acknowledge that we cannot make the least
satisfaction for that debt. So we pray that of Your free grace, through the
obedience and satisfaction of Christ, applied by faith alone, You would acquit
us from our guilt and due punishment, and accept us in Your Beloved Son. Continue
Your grace to us we pray, grant us repentance, pardon our daily sins, and fill
us with peace and joy, giving us each day more and more assurance of Your
forgiveness. We pray that You would embolden us to ask for, and encourage us to
expect Your forgiveness, while You enable us sincerely to forgive others their
offenses.<br />
<br />
7. <i>And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil</i><br />
<br />
We confess that of ourselves we would seek temptation, and are unable and
unwilling to resist or be delivered. Even after Your renewing our hearts, and
pardoning our sins, we are still subject to temptations of every sort. So we
pray that You would strengthen us against temptation through all means of
grace; in Your providence keep us from being tempted to sin; when we are
tempted, enable us to resist by Your Spirit; and if we sin, bring us quickly to
repentance and greater sanctification. Give us assurance, we pray, of Your guidance
and Your promise to soon crush Satan under our feet, perfecting in everlasting glory our deliverance
from sin, death, and all evil.<br />
<br />
8. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>For Yours is the kingdom, and
the power, and the glory, forever</i><br />
<br />
We acknowledge, our God, that all sovereignty, glorious excellence, and all
highest praise is eternally Yours alone. So we are emboldened by Your Holy
Spirit to ask these things of You in faith, trusting that You are willing and
able to help us. We offer our requests, relying on Your grace to us in the Lord
Jesus Christ, praying in His name.<br />
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Amen.</i></b><br />
<br />
<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-5658276137142070012019-09-13T00:27:00.000-04:002019-09-13T01:30:06.246-04:00concept vs. 'limiting idea'<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>On the difference between</b></span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>concept and limiting idea</b> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: small;">from Roy Clouser's <i>The Myth of Religious Neutrality </i>[<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Myth-Religious-Neutrality-Theories-Revised/dp/0268023662" target="_blank">amzn</a>] [<a href="https://undpress.nd.edu/9780268023669/the-myth-of-religious-neutrality-revised-edition/" target="_blank">ndp</a>]</span></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Chapter 10, section 6, p.224-227 <span style="font-size: x-small;">(with minor edits)</span></span></div>
<br />
Since our view is that God’s being can’t be conceived, perhaps some have mistakenly supposed this means we can't frame the idea of unconditional reality. Here's an explanation of the difference between a <b>concept</b> and a <b>limiting idea</b> that should help clarify.<br />
<br />
When we form a concept we <u>combine in thought a number of properties</u> of whatever it is we’re conceiving. This is why the contents of a concept can be parsed, analyzed, and made specific. A concept, of course, also includes the relation(s) in which its content (properties) are taken to stand to one another, which is why a definition is the linguistic statement of the contents of a concept.<br />
<br />
By contrast, a/n (limiting) idea of something is not a combination of its properties, but is our <u>awareness of something that comes about via the relations</u> in which it stands to other things. For example, the property 'red' is not able to be analyzed into any constituent elements because there aren’t any. That’s also why it can’t be defined in a so-called <i>real</i> definition.<br />
<br />
A real definition of red would be one by which you could
know its color quality from the definition alone. It will not do
to offer a circumscription such as “the hue we see when our eyesight is
normal and we are exposed to light of such and such wavelength.” We
would already have to know what red looks like to be able to set its
wavelength parameters. The same holds for other attempts such as “the
color of blood or of a ruby” etc.<br />
<br />
We know red by contrasting it to other colors, not by combining its constituent elements into a concept. The meta-properties that qualify the various aspects (spacial, physical, sensory, biotic, etc.) are similar in this regard to colors. We have limiting ideas of them, not concepts of them. We come to know them by encountering specific properties of things as further qualified by such meta-properties.<br />
<br />
For example, we experience a particular shape as spatial, or a particular instance of hardness as physical, or a particular case of ingestion as biotic, etc. And we distinguish the meta-properties by comparing them to one another, unable as we are of forming even a limiting idea of any of them in isolation from all the others. We also need to keep in mind that limiting ideas can have more or less content; some can be formed by stripping away part of the contents and relations found in concepts. When we form an idea in that way we often use the same term for both the concept and for the idea derived from it, so it becomes important not to shift back and forth between the two sorts of knowledge without realizing it.*<br />
<br />
If there is doubt about whether there really is such idea-knowledge as distinguished from concept-knowledge, consider the following example of a limiting idea: numbers no one ever has or will ever conceive of. Since the series of natural numbers is infinite, it is necessarily true that there will always be some numbers no human ever conceives of. But did we just conceive of such numbers by saying that? Surely not. It’s impossible to conceive of any of them, for any number we conceive of is thereby excluded from the class picked out by this limiting idea.<br />
<br />
Here, then, is a case of a limiting idea, not a concept. We have the idea that there are such numbers, but no concept of exactly what any of them are. This idea has less content than ideas of, say, colors or the aspectual qualifiers I called meta-properties, but there is still <i>some</i> content to it. All unconceived numbers would still be quantities of some sort and stand in various mathematical relations to other quantities. (This fits with the earlier part of my account when I said that the content of an idea is known via the relations it has to other things of which we have concepts or ideas.) In this same way, yet other ideas can be formed that have even less content than these examples. But they are made possible by the fact that their contents stand in relations to the contents of concepts or ideas which have more content than they do.<br />
<br />
Our awareness of existence is, I contend, one of these ideas. Now the idea of existence is a notoriously difficult one, and I will not pretend to resolve here the knotty debates that surround it. I will only try to make clear why I say that it is a limiting idea. No one doubts that we derive our awareness of existence from our experience of the world around us. The term “exist” literally means “to stand out from,” or be distinct from. It reflects the fact that we come to recognize that something 'is' by distinguishing it from other things.<br />
<br />
But the existence of something cannot be <i>defined</i> as its ability to be picked out; that is at best a circumscription of it. The fact that we can distinguish a thing is made possible by the fact that it exists, not the other way round. As a result, even the literal meaning of the word “exist” does not name what we are really after when we use it, but points beyond its own meaning to the fact of existence which lies behind it and makes it possible.<br />
<br />
To complicate things further, it seems that the existence of each thing we confront in experience is uniquely individual to that thing. It is not a quality a thing possesses alongside its other qualities, because a thing would have to exist in order to possess qualities. And it certainly is not a universal quality shared by more than one thing; two or more things do not have the same existence. (The distinguishability of things which forms the literal meaning of “exist” may be shared, but not the fact of their existence which makes them distinguishable.)<br />
<br />
For these reasons, I think that existence is not something we ever really conceptualize. It is an unanalyzable, indefinable, basic factor of creation which we confront in our experience, which we are unable to grasp in a concept, and of which we have only a limiting idea.<br />
<br />
When we speak of God’s self-existence, then, we are applying to God our limiting idea of existence which is thereby stripped even further of content: it is existence which does not depend on anything in any way, is outside time, and is not governed by any law that holds for creatures. It is thus a limiting idea that is almost entirely negative, for even the property of being “distinguishable” is true of God only in His relation to creation, since aside from what He has created there would be nothing for Him to be distinguished from.<br />
<br />
What is left of the idea is only this: God’s unconditional being is what all else depends on for existence; God can be no matter what, while without God nothing else can be at all. Thus while it is beyond us to grasp conceptually <i>what</i> that being is, we can have the idea <i>that</i> there is ultimate, unconditional being upon which all else stands in the relation of total dependence. As a result, we are brought back to the statement of St. Basil that “We do not know what God is, but only what he is not and how he relates to creatures.”<br />
<br />
The upshot is that we do have both conceptual knowledge and idea knowledge of God with respect to His creaturely adaptations to us, while we have only the barest limiting idea of His being aside from those adaptations. And that limiting idea is not of a primordial nature of His being, but only of the relation in which everything else stands to it. Its content, again, is only that God is the unconditional, ultimate source of the existence of everything else. Put the old-time way: God is the reality whose essence is existence. <br />
<br />
To this it must be immediately added that (while the distinction between concept and limiting idea involves abstraction) we come to this idea-knowledge of God’s being not through philosophical speculation but by revelation. The idea of God’s transcendent being comes about because in the course of revealing His accommodated nature, God has also revealed that every feature of creation (visible or invisible) has been brought into existence by Him out of nothing.<br />
<br />
<i>That revelation</i>, not theorizing, is the basis of the view that His unaccommodated, uncreated being is something we cannot conceptualize at all. Thus our view that we can’t have a concept of <i>what </i>God’s being is but only the idea <i>that</i> it is, is derived entirely from the revelation of His accommodations to us of which we have both concepts and ideas with definite content.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
* For example, when we use the term “cause” to express that God is the creator of the world, it is as a limiting idea rather than a concept. No concept we have of causality corresponds to God’s creatorship: it is neither formal, nor final, nor material, nor efficient; neither is it any of the causal relations that are qualified physically, biotically, sensorily, historically, or economically, etc., since God is the creator of all the kinds of causality found in the cosmos.<br />
<br />
But stripped of these and every other conceptual specification (time, and all laws), all that is left is the limiting idea of one thing bringing about another in an unspecifiable sense. Only in that way, by designating a limiting idea, can the term “cause” be used for the dependency of everything other than God on God.<br />
<br />
Another example is the term “could” when applied to God. When we ask whether God could have created the world other than the way He did, or whether He could have made the laws governing possibility different from what they are for our experience, we are using “could” as a limiting idea, not a concept. Our concepts of “could” are all senses of possibility delimited by laws that hold in the cosmos—laws that God created. (Hence God didn’t create by choosing from among antecedently existing possibilities, but created every sense of possibility we can conceptualize.) Stripped of all aspectual (and other) specifications, however, we can use the limiting idea that God “could” have created other laws of possibility which we can’t now even form an idea of, since our knowing is governed by the laws He in fact did create.<br />
<br />
This is why asking whether God could have made different laws does not amount to asking whether it’s <i>logically</i> possible that the laws of logic be other than they are. An affirmative answer to that question yields a contradiction. But that is not the right way to understand the question. Rather, the question uses “could” to refer to the limiting idea of the ontological basis of every kind of possibility found in the cosmos. That basis is, of course, the unknowable, originating being of God. The same goes for the idea that God “assumes” relations and properties to Himself. That, too, is a limiting idea meaning that He brings it about that they are true of Him in a way unspecifiable by us.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-82057536592016101262019-02-20T23:52:00.000-05:002019-10-17T17:58:28.566-04:00Abstraction: precisive and nonprecisive<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">On the distinction between</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><i>precisive</i> and <i>nonprecisive</i> abstraction</span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>3 excerpts from <a href="http://praxeology.net/" target="_blank">Roderick T. Long</a> <a href="https://cla.auburn.edu/philosophy/people/professorial-faculty/roderick-long/" target="_blank">*</a></b> </div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #666666;"><b><span style="color: #444444;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">From “Review: The Benefits and Hazards of Dialectical
Libertarianism.” <span style="font-size: x-small;">(Reviewing <u>Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical
Libertarianism</u> by Chris Matthew Sciabarra)</span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies </i>Vol. 2, No. 2, The Aesthetics
Symposium (Spring 2001): p.408-418 [<a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/41560160" target="_blank">JSTOR</a>]</span></span></b></span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Aristotle's theory of abstraction was formed in response
to that of Plato, who, like the Hegelians, had thought that abstractions do not
strictly apply to concrete reality. Unlike the Hegelians, however, Plato had
concluded, not that abstraction falsifies, but rather that the reality to which
abstractions apply is itself an abstract reality, a realm of Platonic Forms.
Aristotle rejects Platonic Forms; only concrete particulars are real. But for
Aristotle, abstraction applies perfectly adequately to concrete particulars.
Plato had maintained that mathematics deals with immaterial entities apart from
the physical world; Aristotle, by contrast, maintains that mathematics deals
with the same objects that physics does-it simply deals with them qua
mathematical rather than qua physical (Physics 409 193b22-36; Metaphysics
1076a33-1078b6).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">The medieval Aristotelians drew a helpful distinction
between precisive and non-precisive abstraction:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">" Precision is a mode of abstraction by which we cut off
or exclude something from a notion. Abstraction is the consideration of
something without either including or excluding from its notion characteristics
joined to it in reality. Abstraction without precision does not exclude anything
from what it abstracts, but includes the whole thing, though implicitly and
indeterminately. "</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">(Armand Maurer note to Aquinas 1968, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=J5fA9s_8dFMC&lpg=PA39&vq=%22Abstraction%20without%20precision%22&pg=PA39" target="_blank">39n</a>) </span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">On the medieval view, the concept <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">soul</i> and the concept <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">angel</i>
are both formed by focusing on the psychological characteristics of human
beings in abstraction from their physical characteristics. But angel is a
precisive abstraction from which physical characteristics are expressly
excluded, while soul is a non-precisive abstraction in which physical
characteristics are simply not specified one way or the other. In forming the
concept soul we do not thereby commit ourselves to the soul's separability from
the body. The scholastics of course believed in the separability of the soul,
but they thought this separability has to be argued for; it is not inherent in
the very concept of soul. By contrast, separability from matter <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is</i> inherent in the concept of angel An
angel is conceived of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">as not</i>
physical; a soul is conceived of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not as</i>
physical. In Objectivist terms, the distinction can be seen as one between
measurement-<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">omission</i> and measurement-<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">exclusion</i>. Aquinas writes:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Abstraction may occur in two ways. First . . . we may
under-stand that one thing does not exist in some other, or that it is separate
from it. Secondly . . . we understand one thing without considering another.
Thus, for the intellect to abstract one from another things which are not
really abstract from one another, does, in the first mode of abstraction, imply
falsehood. But, in the second mode of abstraction, for the intellect to
abstract things which are not really abstract from one another, does not
involve falsehood. . . . If, therefore, the intellect is said to be false when
it understands a thing otherwise than as it is, that is so, if the word <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">otherwise</i> refers to the thing
understood.... Hence, the intellect would be false if it abstracted the species
of a stone its matter in such a way as to think that the species did not exist
in matter, as Plato held. But it is not so, if <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">otherwise</i> be taken as referring to the one who understands.
(Aquinas 1999, 157; Summa Theologia I. 85.1 ad 1)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">When we form the concepts <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">angel</i> and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">soul</i>, we are
considering psychological characteristics otherwise than as we find them in
reality, but in two different ways. In the case of angel we are considering psychological
characteristics as though they themselves existed differently from the way we
find them to exist in our experience, namely, in matter, this is what Aquinas
means by "otherwise" referring to the thing understood. But in the
case of soul we are not considering the psychological characteristics to exist
without matter: rather, we are considering them without considering matter;
this is what Aquinas means by "otherwise" referring to the one who understands.
The process by which the concept soul is formed guarantees that the concept
applies to reality, for there is no conflict between the concept and the
concretes from which it was formed; for the concept angel this is not so, and hence
the applicability of this concept to reality requires further proof.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">One can now see that the Hegelians, in treating all
abstraction as falsification, were failing to grasp the distinction between
precisive and non-precisive abstraction. There is nothing
"provisional" or "approximate" about non-precisive
abstraction; it is perfectly accurate. It may not express the entire truth, but
what it does express is entirely true. In fact, the Aristotelian approach can
be seen as- what else? <span class="ilfuvd">—</span>a dialectical transcendence
of the false alternatives of Platonism and Hegelianism:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"> Hegelianism:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">1. Precisive abstraction always
falsifies.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">2. But all abstraction is precisive
abstraction.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">3. Therefore, abstraction always
falsifies.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"> Platonism:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">1. Abstraction does not always
falsify.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">2. But all abstraction is precisive
abstraction.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">3. Therefore, precisive abstraction
does not always falsify.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"> Aristotelianism:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">1. Abstraction does not always
falsify.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">2. But precisive abstraction always
falsifies.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">3. Therefore, not all abstraction is
precisive abstraction.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">The crucial premise that unites Platonism and
Hegelianism is the premise that all abstraction is precisive. That is not to
say that either side formulated that premise explicitly; to do that, they would
have had to grasp the difference between precisive and non-precisive abstraction,
and grasping that difference is the solution to the problem. Aristotelianism
grasps it, and so is in a position to reject the mistaken assumption that lies
at the root of the false dichotomy Another way of making the distinction clear
is to recall the criticisms leveled by economists of the Austrian School
against the idealized models of neoclassical economics, such as "perfect
competition" and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">homo economicus</i>.
The criticism is not simply that these models abstract from what human beings
are like in their full concreteness; after all, Austrian theory does that too.
(Austrian praxeology, for example, considers the logical features of human action
in abstraction from their psychological causes.) The criticism is rather that
the neoclassical models distort and falsify reality by <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">prescinding</i> (precisively abstracting) from, and thus treating human
beings as <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">lacking</i>, certain features
(ignorance, non-monetary goals) that they actually possess. Of course, idealizations</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">when they are not too inaccurate<span class="ilfuvd">— </span>can
sometimes be useful, but only if we keep in mind that they are merely
provisional approximations. By contrast, praxeological principles</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">e.g, that voluntary action always involves an exchange of
what the agent wants less for what the agent wants more</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">— </span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">are not "provisional" or "approximate,"
for although they abstract from concrete human reality, they do so <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">non-precisively</i>, and so do not
"idealize" or "falsify" the concretes from which they were formed.
Hegelian internalism treats all abstractions as though they were idealizations.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">On this issue, Hayek and Rand are both squarely in the
Aristotelian rather than the Hegelian camp. Both believe that, metaphysically, only
concretes exist; thus they reject Platonism. But both are also concerned to
defend the validity of abstraction. . . . Hayek sees the internalist cult of
concreteness as implicitly totalitarian, and explicitly identifies Hegel as his
antagonist on this issue:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">[A]bstract concepts are a means to cope with the
complexity of the concrete which our mind is not capable of fully mastering. .
. . Abstractness [is] the basis of man's capacity to move successfully in a
world very imperfectly known to him</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
</span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">— </span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">an adaption
to his ignorance of most of the particular facts of his surroundings. . . . We
never act, and never could act, in full consideration of all the facts of a
particular situation, but always by singling out as relevant only some aspects
of it. . . . The rationalist revolt against reason, if we may so call it, is
usually directed against the abstractness of thought. . . . Although the use of
abstraction extends the scope of phenomena which we can master intellectually,
it does so by limiting the degree to which we can foresee the effects of our actions,
and therefore also by limiting to certain general features the degree to which
we can shape the world to our liking. . . . Perhaps nobody has seen this connection
between [classical] liberalism and the insight into the limited powers of
abstract thinking more clearly than that ultra-rationalist who has become the
fountain head of most modern irrationalism and totalitarianism, G. W. F. Hegel.
. . . It is the over-estimation of the powers of reason to the revolt against
the submission to abstract rules. Constructivist rationalism . . . deceives
itself that reason can directly master all the particulars; and it is thereby
led to a preference for the concrete over the abstract, the particular over the
general. . . . [T]he very over-estimation of those powers of reason of which
man is conscious has led him to hold in contempt what has made reason as
powerful as it is: its abstract character. It was the failure to recognize that
abstractions help our reason go further than it could if it tried to master all
the particulars which produced a host of schools of philosophy inimical to
abstract reason</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—philosophies</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"> of the concrete, of life' and of
'existence' which extol emotion, the particular and the instinctive, and which
are only too ready to support such emotions as those of race, nation, and
class. (Hayek 1973, 29-34; cf. Hayek 1976, ch 7)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Discussing Comte, whom he regards as Hegel's spiritual
sibling, Hayek writes:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Comte and many others regard social phenomena as given
wholes... contending that concrete social phenomena can be understood <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">only</i> by considering the totality of
everything that can be found within certain spatio-temporal boundaries, that
any attempt to select parts or aspects as systematically connected is bound to
fail.... Having been led [to] the view that the individual is "a pure
abstraction" and society as a whole a single collective being, [Comte] is
of necessity led to... a totalitarian view of society. (Hayek 1979a, 103, 354)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">In short, Hayek recognizes the connection between
totalitarian concreteness-worship, metaphysical internalism, and the tendency
to treat all abstraction as precisive and therefore falsifying.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Rand, like Hayek, sees abstraction as a means of
reducing cognitive complexity: "[T]he range of what man can hold in the focus
of his conscious awareness at any given moment, is limited. The essence,
therefore, of man's incomparable cognitive power is the ability to reduce a
vast amount of information to a minimal number of units</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">which is the task performed by his conceptual faculty" (Rand
1990, 63).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Of course, the Hegelians too can claim to endorse
abstract aids to cognitive economy</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
</span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">but only
as precisive idealizations and provisional approximations. For Rand, however,
abstraction is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">non- precisive</i> and
therefore <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does not falsify</i>: "If
a child considers a match, a pencil and a stick, he observes that length is the
attribute they have in common, but their specific lengths differ. . . . In
order to form the concept 'length,' the child's mind retains the attribute and
omits its particular measurements. . . . Bear firmly in mind that the term ‘measurements
omitted’ does not mean, in this context, that measurements are regarded as
non-existent; it means that measurements exist, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">but are not specified</i>. . . . The principle is: the relevant
measurements must exist in some quantity, but may exist in any quantity"
(11-12).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Rand regards abstraction as contextual, but by this
she does not mean that it is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">provisional</i>,
to be overturned as one's context of knowledge broadens. On the contrary:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">[A]ll conceptualization is a contextual process; the
context is the entire field of a mind's awareness or knowledge at any level of
its cognitive development. . . . If [a person's] grasp is non-contradictory,
then even if the scope of his knowledge is modest and the content of his
concepts is primitive, it will not contradict the content of the same concepts
in the mind of the most advanced scientists.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">The same is true of definitions. All definitions are
contextual, and a more primitive definition does not contradict a more advanced
one; the latter merely expands the former. (43)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Rand was not always on the opposite side of the fence
from Hegel on this issue. In keeping, perhaps, with her dialectically oriented
education, Rand had an early suspicion of abstraction and a preference for
concreteness; in a journal entry for 15 May 1934, she writes:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">There have been too many philosophical abstractions,
too much intellectual "algebra". . . . What we need is an
"arithmetic" of the spirit. . . . [It] is only the individual and the
particular, concrete problem that counts. Algebraic constructions are only a
convenience. In practice, they have no use, unless the proper arithmetical
content is inserted into the formula. . . . This... has to be the cornerstone
of my philosophy-proving the supremacy of actual living over all other
considerations. . . . [M]y "arithmetic" of philosophy has to be
philosophy brought up to the realm of actual living. (I say intentionally
brought <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">up</i> to it, not down.) . . . That
philosophical "algebra" is, to my mind, the greatest crime of metaphysics.
. . . It is the result of that underlying error of human thinking<span class="ilfuvd">—</span>which forgets the distinction between abstraction and
reality, thus denying reality. For abstractions are only a convenience, not a fact.
(Rand 1997, 71-72)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">This attitude toward abstraction is almost
diametrically opposed to Rand's mature views. Two decades later, in a journal
entry for 6 January 1952, she would write that "the root of all
philosophical errors" is "to substitute for an abstraction one of the
concrete applications of that abstraction, and at the same time make that concrete
contradict and invalidate the abstraction" (640). Whereas before, the
great mistake was to substitute the abstract for the concrete, now the great mistake
is to substitute the concrete for the abstract. This is because the mature Rand
no longer regards abstractions as a mere “convenience," but rather as
indispensable to all knowledge: "[W]ithout abstract ideas you would not be
able to deal with concrete, particular, real-life problems. You would be in the
position of a newborn infant, to whom every object is a unique, unprecedented
phenomenon" (Rand 1984, 5). In 1934, Rand was saying that the validity of
abstractions depends on which concretes you plug into them, which
"arithmetical content is inserted" into the algebraic formula. But
her mature view is that an abstraction, if it is valid at all, is valid <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">regardless</i> of which concretes one plugs
into it. Employing the algebraic metaphor once again but to an opposite purpose,
she explains: "The relationship of concepts to their constituent
particulars is the same as the relation of algebraic symbols In the equation <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2a<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>=<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>a +
a</i>, any number may be substituted for the symbol '<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">a</i>' without affecting the truth of the equation. Let those who try
to invalidate concepts by declaring that they cannot find 'manness' in men, try
to invalidate algebra by declaring that they cannot find '<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">a</i>-ness' in 5 or in 5,000,000” (Rand 1990, 18).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">This is not to say that Rand gave up her earlier view
that one must always be able to relate one's abstractions to the concrete; by
no means. But her mature view is that if you can't relate your abstraction to
the concrete, you haven't successfully formed the abstraction in the first
place. In a journal entry for 4 May 1946, she writes:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">In order to think at all, man must be able to perform
this cycle: he must know how to see an abstraction in the concrete and the
concrete in an abstraction, and always relate one to the other. He must be able
to derive an abstraction from the concrete [and] then be able to apply the
abstraction. . . . Example: a man who has understood and accepted the abstract
principle of unalienable individual rights cannot then go about advocating
compulsory labor conscription. . . . Those who do have not performed either
part of the cycle: neither the abstraction nor the translating of the
abstraction into the concrete. The cycle is unbreakable; no part of it can be
of any use, until and unless the cycle is completed. . . . A broken electric
circuit does not function in the separate parts; it must be unbroken or there
is no current. (Rand 1997, 481)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">We don't have the abstraction and then see if we can
apply it to the concrete; rather, the ability to apply it to the concrete is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">part</i> of having the abstraction. It
follows as a corollary that “floating abstractions” are not really
abstractions, just as counterfeit money is not a kind of money. Hence we never
have to worry about having an abstraction we don't know how to apply (though we
may have to worry about thinking we have an abstraction when we don't).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">For Hegel, Comte, and Marx, the two good things</span><span class="Heading1Char"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><span class="ilfuvd"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">—</span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">concreteness and the collective<span class="ilfuvd">—</span> go
together, as do the two bad things <span class="ilfuvd">—</span>abstraction and
the individual. Those individualist thinkers who were influenced by Hegel <span class="ilfuvd">—</span>e.g., Kierkegaard, Stirner, Nietzsche<span class="ilfuvd">— </span>accepted
his preference for the concrete over the abstract, while reversing his
preference for the collective over the individual; and so their views about
what goes with what altered accordingly. Whereas the Hegelians had dismissed
the individual as abstract and extolled the collective as concrete, these
proto-existentialists dismissed the collective as abstract and extolled the
individual as concrete. It is perhaps a testimony to Rand's early Nietzschean
phase that she initially found herself in this camp. In 1934, Rand associated abstraction
with collectivism and concreteness with individualism: "Algebra <span class="ilfuvd">—</span>spiritually<span class="ilfuvd">— </span>is too much of the
mob, of the masses, the collective, being too general. The individual is the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">arithmetical</i> quantity of the
spirit" (71). But in the 1970s, she was making precisely the opposite
association: to the "concrete-bound, anti-conceptual mentality," the
chief imperative is "<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">loyalty to the
group</i>," and its consequent manifestations are tribalism, racism, and
xenophobia (Rand 1982, 39-45). Rand ended up reversing both of Hegel's evaluations,
whereas the proto-existentialists had reversed only one, and so now
concreteness and collectivism went together again, but as partners in sin
rather than partners in virtue. In liberating herself from both the Hegelian
and the proto-existentialist versions of the cult of concreteness, Rand had
migrated firmly from the proto-existentialist to the Aristotelian camp.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"><br /></span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">We've seen that Hegel and the dialectical tradition he
inspired regard all abstraction as precisive and therefore as falsification,
and recognize its utility only as a provisional idealization. Hence they believe
that nothing is real or comprehensible apart from the whole and so are
committed to a metaphysics of internal relations. Aristotle, Hayek, and Rand,
by contrast, all recognize the possibility of non-precisive abstraction, and so
have no inherent bias toward internalism.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="color: #666666;"><b><span style="color: #444444;"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">From
“Rejoinder to Bissell, Register, and Sciabarra: Keeping Context in Context: The
Limits of Dialectics.”<i> The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies</i></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> Vol. 3,
No. 2 (Spring 2002): </span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;">p.413-415 [<a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/41560197" target="_blank">JSTOR</a>]</span></span></b></span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .7pt; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Register
challenges my critique of precisive abstraction by offering the example of a
historian constructing an abstract model of the Battle of Gettysburg. But is
this historian engaged in precisive or in non-precisive abstraction? Register
assumes it must be the former, but this is not so clear. The fact that the
model "ignores the overwhelming majority of the facts" does <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> render it precisive; it need not
stipulate the presence of such facts, so long as it does not stipulate their
absence. What about the fact that the model treats the average starting time of
Pickett's Charge as <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">the</i> starting
time? Well, it depends to how many significant figures the starting time is
specified. Suppose the earliest soldier to start did so at 2:00:08, and the
last soldier to start did so at 2:00:15. In that case, it would not be
precisive to say that the charge started at 2:00, but it would be precisive to
say that the charge started at 2:00:00. The historian may find a precisive model
useful; they often are, so long as they are used with care. But the alternative
to a precisive model is a non-precisive one, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> "an array of unintegrable facts" (Register 2002,
361).</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Register (2002, 364) writes: "In order to
understand society and history, it's necessary to abstract parts of a society
or historical events from the social or historical whole of which they are
parts and then study them in relation to one another. But this is precisive
abstraction." Well, it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">can</i> be;
but it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">needn't</i> be. There is nothing inherently
precisive about abstracting parts from wholes; it depends whether the part's
connection to the whole is specified as absent, or just not specified as
present.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Register also states that precisively abstracting X
from Y will falsify only if X is internally related to Y. I disagree. So long
as X is related (albeit externally) to Y, if a precisive abstraction treats X <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">as not</i> (rather than merely <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not as</i>) related to Y, then falsification
has occurred.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Since non-precisive abstraction (in Objectivist terms,
measurement-omission) is the process by which we form concepts, Register concludes
that the product of a non-precisive abstraction is always a concept, but I
don't see why. An abstract model of the Battle of Gettysburg is not a concept;
but if it leaves features out by failing to specify their presence, rather than
by specifying their absence, then it clearly is a product of non-precisive
abstraction. Likewise, (not just the concepts but) the assertions of Austrian
praxeology are the products of non-precisive abstraction. I'm puzzled at
Register's insistence that the products of non-precisive abstraction can never have
truth-values, when in the previous paragraph he seems to have granted the
status of my "sample praxeological claim" as a "conceptual truth"
reached by non-precisive abstraction. I likewise cannot accept Register's
assumption that precisive abstraction abstracts parts from wholes, while
non-precisive abstraction abstracts features from their bearers. Precisive and
non-precisive abstraction are distinguished by <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">how</i>, rather than <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">what</i>,
they abstract.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Here is how I understand the distinction. Consider any
two relata X and Y. (Their relation might be that of part to whole, that of feature
to bearer, or something else.) Consider, further, some way of viewing X that
does not include X's relation to Y. (This "way of viewing" might be a
concept, a proposition, a model, a theory, or anything else.) If this way of
viewing X specifies the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">absence</i> of
X's relation to Y, then it is precisive; if it merely fails to specify the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">presence</i> of X's relation to Y, then it
is non-precisive. Hence, I strongly disagree with Register's claim that
whenever we consider parts in abstraction from their social whole we are
engaged in precisive abstraction. </span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #666666;"><b><span style="color: #444444;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">From "Realism and Abstraction in Economics:
Aristotle and Mises </span><i><span style="border: medium none; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 104%;"><span style="border: none;">versus</span></span></i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;"> </span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Friedman."
</span><i><span style="border: medium none; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 104%;"><span style="border: none;">The Quarterly Journal of
Austrian Economics</span></span></i><i><span style="border: none; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%; mso-fareast-font-family: SimHei; mso-fareast-theme-font: major-fareast;"><span style="border: none;"> <span style="border: none;">Vol.</span></span></span></i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">9, No. 3 (Fall 2006): p.5-9 [<a href="https://mises.org/library/realism-and-abstraction-economics-aristotle-and-mises-versus-friedman" target="_blank">here</a>]</span></span></b></span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Aristotle’s theory of abstraction may be seen as a
response to the following worry. It can easily seem that abstract concepts do
not strictly apply to reality. The concept horse, for example, is supposed to
apply to all horses, of whatever color. But obviously it could not do so if it
had as its content a horse of any one definite color; if it were the concept of
a brown horse, for example, it could not apply to a black one. In order to
apply to all horses, then, the concept horse must have as its content a horse
of no determinate color. But in that case the concept still does not apply
strictly to any actual horse; for every actual horse has some determinate
color. Either the concept horse somehow falsifies reality, then, or else—as
Aristotle’s teacher Plato had argued—its actual referent is not any physical
horse but the transcendent, immaterial Form of Horse, which indeed has no
determinate color, and of which our familiar physical horses are merely an
inadequate reflection. Hence abstractions have either mysterious otherworldly
referents or no referents at all; in either case, they cannot refer to the
familiar objects of ordinary experience.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .7pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Aristotle’s
solution to this puzzle is to reconceive abstraction as a matter of attending
to some aspects of a thing and ignoring others. To think the concept horse, for
example, we focus on an ordinary horse—whether a real horse before us or an
imagined horse before our mind’s eye—and then attend to the features it shares
with other horses while ignoring its distinguishing features, such as its
particular color.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .7pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 17.9pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">In making
[geometrical] diagrams . . . although we make no use of the fact that the
triangle is determinate in quantity, we nonetheless draw it as determinate in
quantity. Likewise also one who thinks, even if what he thinks is not
quantitative, sets up before his eyes something quantitative but thinks of it
not as quantitative; and if what he thinks is of a quantitative nature but
indeterminate, he sets up something determinately quantitative but thinks of it
merely as quantitative. (On Memory450a1–7)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .7pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .7pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Accordingly,
Aristotle disagrees with Plato’s view that physics and geometry study different
sorts of objects, physical and nonphysical respectively. For Aristotle,
geometry studies physical objects just as much as physics does, but it studies
them in a nonphysical way; the two sciences deal with the same familiar
spatially extended objects, but geometry attends to their shape and position
while abstracting from their physical embodiment:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .7pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.1pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">We must
consider how the mathematician differs from the physicist; for physical bodies
have surfaces and volumes, lengths and points, all of which fall within the
mathematician’s purview. . . . Now the mathematician too is concerned with such
things, but not qua boundaries of physical bodies. . . . For they are separable
in thought from motion, though from this separation no distinction or falsity
arises. (Physics193b22–36)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 32.5pt; margin-right: 32.65pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 32.5pt; margin-right: 32.65pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Just as there
are many statements characterizing things qua movable only, apart from what
each of them is and apart from their accidents, and it does not necessarily
follow from this that there is something movable apart from perceptible things,
nor yet that there is some distinct nature within them, so too there will be
statements and sciences that apply to movable things not qua movable but qua
corporeal only, and again qua planes only, and qua lines only, and qua divisible,
and qua indivisible but having position, and qua indivisible only. . . . For a
human being is indivisible, qua human being. Now the arithmetician treats him
as one indivisible thing, and considers what belongs to him qua human, while
the geometer considers him neither qua human nor qua indivisible, but rather
qua solid; for it’s clear that whatever would hold true of him even if he were
somehow not indivisible can hold true of him irrespective of these
characteristics. Accordingly, geometers are right in saying that the objects
they discuss are real existents. (Metaphysics1077b23–1078a29)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">This Aristotelian conception of abstraction was revived by the medieval Scholastics.
Pierre Abelard (1079–1142), for example, undertook to “explain why thoughts
gained through abstraction are not erroneous . . . even though they conceive
things other than they are.” John Marenbon summarizes Abelard’s solution:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.1pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">When I regard
a man only as substance or only as a body, he explains, I am not conceiving
anything in his nature which is not there, but I am not attending to all which
he has. My thought would be erroneous if I regarded his nature as being only substance
or only body. There is nothing erroneous, however, in regarding him only as
substance or body; the “only” must apply to the regarding, not to the way in
which the man exists. (Marenbon 1997, pp. 166–7)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.1pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Essentially the same position was
held a century later by Thomas Aquinas (1224/5–1274), who wrote:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Abstraction may occur in two ways.
First . . . we may understand that one thing does not exist in some other, or
that it is separate from it. Secondly . . . we understand one thing without
considering another. Thus, for the intellect to abstract one from another
things which are not really abstract from one another, does, in the first mode
of abstraction, imply falsehood. But, in the second mode of abstraction, for
the intellect to abstract things which are not really abstract from one
another, does not involve falsehood. . . . If, therefore, the intellect is said
to be false when it understands a thing otherwise than as it is, that is so, if
the word otherwise refers to the thing understood. . . . Hence, the intellect
would be false if it abstracted the species of a stone from its matter in such
a way as to think that the species did not exist in matter, as Plato held. But
it is not so, if otherwise be taken as referring to the one who understands.
(Summa Theologia I. 85. 1 ad 1; Aquinas 1999, p. 157)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .5in; margin-right: .5in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Aquinas is here distinguishing between two different
ways in which we might consider, say, a horse in abstraction from its color. We
may consider the horse as not having a determinate color, or else we may
consider the horse not as having a determinate color. To consider the horse as
not having a determinate color is to hold, or attempt to hold, as the object of
our thought a horse that simply has no determinate color—a creature never
encountered in physical reality, and having its home either in Platonic heaven
or nowhere. This sort of abstraction falsifies and contradicts the concretes on
which it is based. But to consider the horse not as having a determinate color
is simply to consider the horse as a horse without considering its color one
way or the other; and here no falsification is involved.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">These two types of abstraction are often referred to
as precisive and nonprecisive. As Armand Maurer explains:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.05pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Precision is
a mode of abstraction by which we cut off or exclude something from a notion.
Abstraction is the consideration of something without either including or
excluding from its notion characteristics joined to it in reality. Abstraction
without precision does not exclude anything from what it abstracts, but
includes the whole thing, though implicitly and indeterminately. (Note to
Aquinas 1968, p. 39n)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">In short, a precisive abstraction is one in which
certain actual characteristics are specified as absent, while a nonprecisive
abstraction is one in which certain actual characteristics are absent from
specification. Plato failed to see how abstract concepts could apply strictly
to physical reality because he failed to see that abstraction could be
nonprecisive; one might say that he mistook an indeterminate way of thinking
about something for a way of thinking about something indeterminate.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">This is very much how the Austrian Aristotelian Franz
Brentano (18381917) describes the contrast between Plato and Aristotle:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.05pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Plato thought
that we recognize flesh and the being of flesh by apprehending two different
things. . . . Aristotle teaches the exact opposite of this. . . . For it would
obviously be a ridiculous assertion that someone who wanted to know something
and instead apprehended something else with his intellect thereby reached the
knowledge he desired. For example, a scientist wants to come to know the
crystals and the plants and the other bodies that he finds here on earth; hence
if he apprehended the concepts of tetrahedrons and octahedrons, and of trees
and grasses belonging to another world, he would not reach his aim in any way.
(Brentano 1977, pp. 86–88)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.05pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Brentano thus endorses the
Aristotelian solution:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 33.1pt; margin-right: 34.1pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">Whatever <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is</i> is fully determinate. . . . But a
thing that is completely determinate may yet be thought of without its complete
determination. . . . It is an error, then, to affirm that there are universals
in the strict sense. But it is also an error to deny that anything real can
correspond to a universal idea . . . because a multiplicity of things can correspond
to them. . . . When we think of the object as stone and when we think of it as this
particular stone, we have the same object of thought in each case; but what we
are thinking of it as differs in the two cases. (Brentano 1981, pp. 25–26, 39)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">In recent
years, this Aristotelian approach to abstraction has been revived by Ayn Rand.
On the issue of universals Abelard was a nominalist and Aquinas a realist,
while Rand attempted to transcend the nominalist/realist dichotomy altogether;
all three thinkers, however, stand in the Aristotelian tradition, and all three
appealed to nonprecisive abstraction to explain how concepts apply to reality.
Rand does not employ the Scholastic terminology, but her approach follows that
of her Aristotelian predecessors. (It’s not clear how far Rand was drawing
specifically on the Aristotelian tradition, rather than being led by her
generally Aristotelian approach to develop the same solution independently; the
same question, for that matter, applies as well to Abelard, who had access to
only a fraction of the Aristotelian corpus.) In Introduction to Objectivist
Epistemology, Rand writes:</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: -.05pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 32.5pt; margin-right: 34.1pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left; text-indent: .1pt;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">If a child
considers a match, a pencil and a stick, he observes that length is the
attribute they have in common, but their specific lengths differ. . . . In
order to form the concept “length,” the child’s mind retains the attribute and
omits its particular measurements. Or, more precisely, if the process were
identified in words, it would consist of the following: “Length must exist in
some quantity, but may exist in any quantity. I shall identify as ‘length’ that
attribute of any existent possessing it which can be quantitatively related to
a unit of length, without specifying the quantity. . . . Bear firmly in mind
that the term “measurements omitted” does not mean, in this context, that
measurements are regarded as non-existent; it means that measurements exist,
but are not specified. (Rand 1990, pp. 11–12)</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 104%;">To regard the measurements as nonexistent would be to
abstract precisively; to regard the measurements as existent without specifying
them is, by contrast, to abstract nonprecisively. If all abstraction were
precisive, then “every advance of knowledge” would be “a setback, a
demonstration of man’s ignorance.” Since “the savages knew that man possesses a
head, a torso, two legs and two arms,” it follows that if absence of
specification meant specification of absence, then “when the scientists of the
Renaissance began to dissect corpses and discovered the nature of man’s
internal organs,” we would have to say that their discoveries “invalidated the
savages’ concept ‘man’,” and likewise that “when modern scientists discovered
that man possesses internal glands, they invalidated the Renaissance concept
‘man’” (pp. 67–8). On a proper understanding of abstraction, however, so long
as whatever one fails to include in one’s concepts is merely unspecified,
rather than specified as absent, then “even if the scope of [one’s] knowledge
is modest and the content of his concepts is primitive, it will not contradict
the content of the same concepts in the mind of the most advanced scientists”
(p. 43). Like Abelard, Aquinas, and Brentano before her, Rand thus employs the
concept of nonprecisive abstraction to reply to the charge that abstraction
falsifies reality.</span></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div align="left" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .2pt; margin-left: .45pt; margin-right: .95pt; margin-top: 0in; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-53843874602331205272012-04-26T03:40:00.000-04:002020-02-26T01:55:21.973-05:00Sanctifying The Common (2)<b>the structure/direction distinction and Christian cultural activity </b><br />
<br />
In <a href="http://honest2blog.blogspot.com/2010/12/sanctifying-common.html" target="_blank">my last post</a>, almost a year & a half ago, I explained that neotwokingdomism erroneously rejects the possibility of doing culture in a distinctively Christian way. The neotwokingdom position significantly depends on the view that since the institutional church and its activity are holy, cultural activity cannot be holy, or done Christianly, since culture is common. Michael Horton writes that “when God chose His people and instituted a form of worship, a clear distinction was made between “holy” and “common.” As Israel was “holy” and the nations were “common,” so God drew a line all the way down to pots and pans. Vessels used in the temple were holy; those used at home were common.” <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Michael S. Horton, Where in the World is the Church?: A Christian View of Culture and Your Role in It (1995; rep., Phillipsburg, 2002), 85. </span><br />
<br />
According to neotwokingdomism, the upshot for Christians today is that only the institutional church and its activities can be done Christianly. Advocates of this view hold that while a Christian's cultural activity can be good, it simply can't be holy in any way. <br />
<br />
I pointed out how neotwokingdomism is contrary to the Reformers' (particularly Calvin's) views despite many of its adherents being fellow Reformed confessionalists, and how Calvin's view is in line with the view of neocalvinism. Here I elaborate further on this and what we mean in holding to a redemptive view of culture; that a Christian's cultural activities may be done Christianly, in a distinctively Christian way. <br />
<br />
<i>Cultural Activity </i><br />
It’s important to keep in mind what we mean by “cultural activity.” We understand culture to be the secondary environment of human production within our natural environment. Being made in God’s image, designed to exercise dominion, humanity cannot help but act purposely, labor, and cultivate the creation (including ourselves) in some fashion and to some extent or other. <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Henry R. Van Til, The Calvinistic Concept of Culture (1959; rep., Grand Rapids, 2001), xvii. </span><br />
<br />
Our cultivative labor can be understood in terms of various layers. On the surface, as it were, we manifest observable behaviors, some of which we call customs, and we produce material artifacts of all kinds. At a deeper layer we develop communities and institutions for numerous ends, and these often reflect, at a deeper layer still, the numerous values according to which we discern what concrete activities to do and how to go about them. And at a base layer we embrace what may be called worldviews; basic understandings of what the world is and our different purposes within it. And these various layers exist in a dynamic of reciprocal influence. Our technologies and practices affect our beliefs and orientations, and vice versa. <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">G.Linwood Barney, “The Supracultural and the Cultural: Implications for Frontier Missions,” in The Gospel and Frontier Peoples: a report of a consultation, December 1972 , ed. Robert Pierce Beaver (South Pasadena, 1973), 48-55. </span><br />
<br />
The activities within all these layers are all cultural activity. Both Christians and non-Christians participate in all these sorts of activities. By them we form the histories of our individual lives and of civilizations alike. <br />
<br />
We might seem to beg the question if we admit that religion directs culture at the deepest layer. For, this very point, it seems, is at issue in the differences between neocalvinism and neotwokingdomism. While neotwokingdom'ers are sometimes loath to say they affirm the religious neutrality of culture, VanDrunen (for example) has spoken of rejecting “moral neutrality or autonomy,” which is not an identical matter. <br />
<br />
<i>Finer Distinctions </i><br />
In distinction from the church and its sphere of activity, not only is there a civil or political sphere, but there are also other distinct sorts of common spheres, or kingdoms, if you will. For example, there are media, family, commerce, arts, school, medicine, social clubs, and various mutual aid societies. These are all distinct kinds of activity. Not only is each a legitimate area of God’s calling, but each area is a calling to something different. Each sphere has its own role to play and operates according to its own kind of rules in God’s design for societal division of labor, as it were. Of course the Lord calls one and the same person to activity in multiple spheres, but the proper character of the various responsibilities, in significant respects, remains distinctive in each case. <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">See my paper “<a href="https://sites.google.com/site/spheresovereignty/" target="_blank">Dooyeweerd's Conception of Societal Sphere Sovereignty</a>.”</span><br />
<br />
While there are hardly only two kingdoms in this sense, since there are several different common ones, neocalvinism recognizes that the church is distinguished and set apart from other spheres by its own distinct character which indeed has a special holiness. The neocalvinist view of “societal sphere sovereignty,” described in general terms above, should therefore be understood to be in precise harmony with and directly supporting, if not containing, the fundamental ideas of the Presbyterian doctrine of “the spirituality of the church.” <br />
<br />
However, it is of crucial importance here to see that holiness has distinguishable senses. John Muether and Darryl Hart write that “sometimes Scripture describes this holiness in an objective or ceremonial sense (such as the tabernacle and the priests, who were holy because they were set apart for the worship of God), and sometimes in a subjective or ethical sense (such as the infusion of holiness through God's work of sanctification).” <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">D.G. Hart and John Muether, With Reverence and Awe: Returning to the Basics of Reformed Worship (Phillipsburg, 2002), 30. </span><br />
<br />
Louis Berkhof explains of <i>hagios</i>, the primary New Testament word for ‘holy,’ that “the word does not always have the same meaning in the New Testament. (a) It is used to designate an external official relation, a being set aside from ordinary purposes for the service of God, as for instance, when we read of "holy prophets," Luke 1:70, "holy apostles," Eph. 3:5, and "holy men of God" II Pet. 1:21. (b) More often, however, it is employed in an ethical sense to describe the quality that is necessary to stand in close relation to God and to serve Him acceptably, Eph. 1:4; 5:27; Col. 1:22: I Pet. 1:15,16.” <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (1938; rep. Grand Rapids, 1996), 528. </span><br />
<br />
<i>Structure and Direction </i><br />
These two senses of holiness relate to neocalvinism’s basic distinction between “structure” and “direction.” <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Albert M. Wolters, Creation Regained (1985; rep., Grand Rapids, 2005), 59, 88, 97.</span><br />
By the term structure, we refer to God’s creational laws or ordinances that are in force for other created things, constituting such things as the kind of creatures they are. Wolters helpfully clarifies that he reserves the term structure to refer to the law order for creation and cultural activity, rather than also using the term to refer to structures of creation and culture (that is, cultural products themselves). <br />
<br />
<div>
As there are different kinds of created things, so there are also different kinds of creational laws. Some laws are directly <i>compelling</i>, such as physical laws, for instance the law of gravity. Other laws, while always in force, are <i>appealing</i>. That is to say, they can be disobeyed. These appealing sorts of laws especially apply to cultural activity and are frequently referred to as norms, such as logical norms, for instance the law of non-contradiction or principle of contradiction. <br />
<br />
By the term direction, we refer to negative deviation from and positive conformity to the normative ordinances. In the deepest sense, the unregenerate are in a condition of mis-direction away from God in the fallen natures of their hearts through sin, and the regenerate are in a condition of re-direction toward God in the renewed natures of their hearts through Christ. Of course, this is not at all to say that regenerated persons are set back in the position of Adam’s pre-fall probationary condition, but rather that when they are united to Christ in his eschatological blessedness, they are turned from idols unto God. However, as the regenerate still sin, they can also deviate from creational norms; their cultural activity can be done antinormatively. Conversely, the regenerate may also, by their redemption in Christ, discern and act in accordance with the norms God ordained for culture. <br />
<br />
The structure/direction distinction relates to the two senses of holiness in that what has been called the objective, ceremonial, or official sense of holiness is a matter of structure, and what has been called the subjective or ethical sense of holiness is a matter of direction. The distinct holiness of the church and its sphere of activity is official or structural. For instance, the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is not a common meal. It is a specially set apart sort of meal. It has a holiness, by virtue of Christ’s appointment, that any given meal outside the institutional church does not and cannot posses. However, in the ethical or directional sense there can be holiness, or conformity to God’s norms, in cultural activity. This re-direction toward God that enables the regenerate person to discern and act in accordance with God-ordained norms for cultural activity is accomplished by redemption in Christ. <br />
<br />
Noticing a relation between the structure/direction distinction and <a href="http://www.meredithkline.com/klines-works/articles-and-essays/creation-in-the-image-of-the-glory-spirit/" target="_blank">Meredith G. Kline’s categories concerning the image of God</a> may be of further help in understanding the position that cultural activity can be done Christianly since cultural activity is cultivative labor grounded in humanity’s being made in God’s image. Kline exegetes from Scripture what he calls the official and the ethical dimensions of the image of God. <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Meredith G. Kline, Images of the Spirit (1980; rep., Eugene, 1999). Kline also writes about an important physical component to the image that he describes as an expression of the official dimension. </span></div>
<div>
<br />
After the fall into sin, humanity retains the official dimension, continuing by God’s common grace to be his image as those who have an office of authority and exercise dominion (epitomized in making judgments). Yet by the fall into sin unregenerate humanity loses the positive ethical dimension of that image, no longer judging rightly. In the regenerate person the image of God is renewed in Christ, in true righteousness, holiness, and knowledge. In a biblical theological fashion, Kline has pointed out the structural (official) and the directional (ethical) in the imago itself. And for regenerate humanity, the renewal of the image in Christ provides for the possibility of holiness in cultural activity in positive accordance with God-ordained cultural norms. <br />
<br />
Kline affirms this conclusion when he writes that the sanctification of culture by believers entails that their cultural activity “is done as a service rendered unto God. All their cultural activity... they are to dedicate to the glory of God. This sanctification of culture is <i>subjective</i>... [but] does not result in a change from common to holy status in a culture <i>objectively</i> considered. [emphasis added]” <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Meredith G. Kline, Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview (1993; rep., Eugene, 2000), 201. </span><br />
<br />
So there is a structural distinction between that which is, in an official sense, holy and that which is, in an official sense, common. But there is also a directional distinction between that which is, in a normative sense, holy, and that which is, in a normative (or rather, antinormative) sense, profane. Culture as a sphere of activity is structurally common, and that cultural activity may be done, directionally, either in a holy or profane way. <br />
<br />
It should be noted that advocates of neotwokingdomism and neocalvinism alike affirm that while the institutional church as a sphere of activity is structurally holy, that ecclesial activity may be done, directionally, either in a holy or profane way. For example, the Lord’s Supper, though as to its structure, is a holy meal, may be eaten in an unworthy (profane) manner, contrary to the Lord’s prescription. <br />
<br />
<i>Calvin's View </i><br />
In 1 Timothy 4:3-5 Paul writes that some will depart from the faith, forbid marriage, and require abstinence from foods “that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.” Calvin's comments on this passage offer insight into how Christians can do their cultural activity in a Christian way. <br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (22 vols., Grand Rapids, 1993), 21: 100-106.</span> <br />
<br />
Calvin asks why the passage states that the recipients of created things are those who believe and know the truth. What about common grace to unbelievers and the commonality of creation itself? Among Reformed confessionalists, neocalvinists have developed and articulated a more robust view of common grace than others. But common grace is not in conflict with the fact that, ultimately, the world belongs to Christians. This is the direct teaching of Scripture. See especially 1 Corinthians 3:21-23: “So let no one boast in men. For all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, and you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.” <br />
<br />
Calvin observes that God gave dominion to Adam and his posterity on the condition of obedience, and that unregenerate humanity has lost the right to use the gifts of God and defiles or profanes all things they use. However, Calvin says, the lawful use of created things is, through faith, fully restored to regenerate humanity in Christ. <br />
<br />
Calvin highlights the structure/direction distinction in the passage. He distinguishes between the purity and goodness of created things because God created them (structure), and the <i>use of</i> created things (direction) that is consecrated, sanctified, or made holy to us by faith in God's Word and by prayer. Calvin emphasizes that Paul's argument is drawn from the (directional) contrast between holy and profane, and writes that the world “is unclean to us, till God graciously come to our aid, and by ingrafting us into his Son, constitutes us anew to be lords of the world, that we may lawfully use as our own all the wealth with which he supplies us... the use of all the gifts of God is unclean, unless it be accompanied by true knowledge and calling on the name of God.” <br />
<br />
Moreover, Calvin notes that the normative use of food must be judged not only from the person who eats it, but also, he says, “partly from its substance.” This means that a Christian’s discernment of the sanctified use of culture involves discerning from <i>creation </i>or<i> natural revelation</i>, the norms that God ordained for cultural activity. See <span style="font-size: x-small;">Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (1976; rep., Phillipsburg, 2003), 55-82., </span>especially Van Til's section concerning the necessity, authority, sufficiency, and perspicuity of natural revelation. See also <span style="font-size: x-small;">Hendrik G. Stoker's “special problem” in “Reconnoitering The Theory of Knowledge of Prof. Dr. Cornelius Van Til” in Jerusalem & Athens: Critical Discussions on the Philosophy and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til, ed. E.R. Geehan (Phillipsburg, 1993), 25-73.,</span> especially page 47.<br />
<br />
<i>Conclusion </i><br />
Neotwokingdomers base their erroneous denial that a Christian can do cultural activity in a Christian way significantly upon the distinction between holy and common. Especially considering their understanding of this distinction, it is apparent how the idea of cultural activity being done Christianly would seem to them both absurd and highly injurious to the distinct character of the institutional church and its mission. In brief, upon neotwokingdom assumptions, to say that cultural activity can be done Christianly is effectively to deny the distinction between holy and common and thus deny the distinctiveness of the institutional church and the church’s mission and to illegitimately extend that mission to include cultural activity. <br />
<br />
Regrettably, neotwokingdomers have not raised objections to such injuries out of a mere misconstrual from within their own suppositions. While a more consistent understanding and more rigorous application of societal sphere sovereignty and the structure/direction distinction would prevent it, some who have claimed support from or adherence to neocalvinism have in fact illegitimately promoted an extension of the institutional church’s mission into cultural activity. As certain neocalvinist notions have been variously co-opted by those who do not hold to confessional Reformed faith or practice, these notions have been weakened and distorted. As a more thorough analysis of the history and ideas involved would reveal, the culprit is not neocalvinism, but rather the so-called “Contextualist” missiology to which some have unhappily accommodated neocalvinist ideas. <br />
<br />
Roy Clouser presents <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/christianviewofeverything/" target="_blank">a more detailed case</a> for how Christians can have a Christian view of culture and the creational/providenital order (also see his <a href="http://www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk/clouser.htm" target="_blank">various essays</a>, and book <span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://undpress.nd.edu/book/P01009" target="_blank">The Myth Of Religious Neutrality</a></span>). Neotwokingdomers, such as Horton, Van Drunen, Hart and others, will have to deal with actual neocalvinist arguments if they want to make objections to something other than distortions and strawmen.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com22tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-67457942049817336022010-12-01T02:55:00.008-05:002010-12-01T05:19:50.419-05:00Sanctifying The Common<b>distinctively Christian cultural activity contra the <i>neo</i>twokingdoms view</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjksNQTej6SSilu1W-c162EPEVlfQjld7SjhElSQB-K1SsoKpUkLD-lI18FEP-UKcn5diF3brnSI9kccM20NTmof1EBX2EEsAtQg00fnliq4AC-o9OTr66f-RO4c3woYE3N0t5V/s1600/NeoTwoKingdoms.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjksNQTej6SSilu1W-c162EPEVlfQjld7SjhElSQB-K1SsoKpUkLD-lI18FEP-UKcn5diF3brnSI9kccM20NTmof1EBX2EEsAtQg00fnliq4AC-o9OTr66f-RO4c3woYE3N0t5V/s320/NeoTwoKingdoms.jpg" width="220" /></a></div>The earlier (or <i>paleo-</i>) "two kingdoms" view held by Reformation thinkers (Lutheran and Calvinist) is, in brief, that God rules people both immediately or directly by His Spirit (in the regenerate), and mediately or indirectly by authority delegated to human offices. At least among the Reformed (Calvinists) who held this view, it was affirmed that Christians' activities in whatever area of cultural vocation can and should be done in a genuinely Christian manner, for the only alternative would be to do such things in a way at odds with the Christian faith. This conviction is shared by neocalvinism.<br />
<br />
The contemporary (or <i>neo-</i>) two kingdoms view of the relationship between Christianity and culture takes the distinction of kingdoms to be between the institutional church (conceived as the holy spiritual kingdom) and the state with all other non-ecclesial societal institutions (conceived as the common civil kingdom). Creation or the providential order is correlated exclusively with the latter; and Redemption is correlated exclusively with the former. This position holds that activities in non-ecclesial areas can in no way be holy; a Christian's cultural activity, while good, can never be done in a redemptive or Christian way.<br />
<br />
Despite a shared commitment to the confessionally Reformed faith and covenantal redemptive-historical hermeneutic of Scripture, there are several significant points of disagreement between neotwokingdomism and neocalvinism regarding the relation of Christianity to culture. It seems to me that the question of whether a Christian's cultural activity can be properly Christian is at the root of the disagreement. I'm not interested in defending every view that has gone by the name neocalvinism or that has invoked a quotation of Kuyper for support. And not every so-called "transformationalist" view of culture is neocalvinist. But it is my hope that fellow confessionally Reformed believers will be persuaded of a genuine neocalvinist position. Perhaps the following considerations will be helpful.<br />
<br />
To my knowledge the first expression in print of neotwokingdomism was Michael Horton's 1995 book <i>Where In The World Is The Church?</i> Horton writes:<br />
<blockquote><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<span style="color: #444444;">Because God has created this world and upholds it by His gracious providence, there is no secular activity that is barred from Christians, unless that activity is specifically forbidden by God in Scripture. It does not have to be “Christianized” or “spiritualized.” For instance, we do not need to write </span><i style="color: #444444;">Christian</i><span style="color: #444444;"> philosophy or </span><i style="color: #444444;">Christian</i><span style="color: #444444;"> music, </span><i style="color: #444444;">Christian</i><span style="color: #444444;"> poetry or </span><i style="color: #444444;">Christian</i><span style="color: #444444;"> fiction, although we do need Christian theology, worship, evangelism, and ethics.</span>”<br />
(p.70) </div></blockquote>and<br />
<blockquote><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<span style="color: #444444;">All of life is not sacred, but that which is simply common (ie, “secular”) is nevertheless valuable and honorable because it is part of God's creation. He is as much the Lord of the secular as He is of the sacred. Political activity is not “kingdom work,” but the advance of earthly cities was the original task given to Adam and his posterity in the cultural mandate... These are secular callings that have God's blessing by virtue of creation, not “kingdom activities” that have God's blessing by virtue of redemption.</span>”</div>(p.193)</blockquote><br />
More recently, in his 2010 book <i>Living In God's Two Kingdoms</i>, David VanDrunen writes that he hopes the neotwokingdoms vision will liberate his readers "from well-meaning but nonbiblical pressure... to find uniquely "Christian" ways of doing ordinary tasks" (p.27). Most interestingly, VanDrunen affirms that Christians "should take up cultural tasks with joy and express their Christian faith through them.... [T]he effects of sin penetrate all aspects of life. Christians must therefore be vigilant in their cultural pursuits, perceiving and rejecting the sinful patterns in cultural life and striving after obedience to God’s will in everything.... Christians should seek to live out the implications of their faith in their daily vocations" (p.13-15). And yet VanDrunen maintains that a Christian "does <i>not</i> have to adopt a redemptive vision of culture" to do so.<br />
<br />
One might wonder how, given the ubiquity of sin and its effects in all areas of life, Christians can perceive and reject sinful patterns in their cultural activities and, moreover, express and live out the implications of their faith in and through such cultural activities entirely apart from any effect of redemption on their view of or actual participation in cultural tasks. Neotwokingdomism may seem equivocal in holding that Christians should somehow express their faith through cultural activities, and maintaining, nevertheless, that faith makes no difference at all in how one does such activities. VanDrunen even affirms "that Christians should transform culture in the sense that they seek to have a beneficial influence on this world as they perform cultural activities with excellence and interpret them rightly" (p.13 fn) But, according to the neotwokingdoms view, it must always be kept in mind that the benefit, excellence, and right interpretation wrought by Christians in cultural activities has no distinct Christian character, and is not in any way a result of redemption.<br />
<br />
Contrary to neotwokingdomism, Calvin's comments on <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%204:3-5&version=ESV">1 Timothy 4:3-5</a> may shed some light on the redemptive view taken up by neocalvinism.<br />
<blockquote style="color: #444444; font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlWODw4l36IdU7Bgs0gOx_6oUhW6T0sr88o7-ClCu2-LJEOwiWJwAiA_DFSE0ZzME6ybxDBp7zDjPC4rUPQSKaQdWKK0sD1kbadT2tjIoVVY7UIRwP01hKJqjgreg7s-zsFNFA/s1600/johncalvinwriting.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="229" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlWODw4l36IdU7Bgs0gOx_6oUhW6T0sr88o7-ClCu2-LJEOwiWJwAiA_DFSE0ZzME6ybxDBp7zDjPC4rUPQSKaQdWKK0sD1kbadT2tjIoVVY7UIRwP01hKJqjgreg7s-zsFNFA/s320/johncalvinwriting.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-size: x-small;">vs.3 "<i>by believers</i>"</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">What then? Does not God make his sun to rise daily on the good and the bad? (Mat 5:45) Does not the earth, by his command, yield bread to the wicked? Are not the very worst of men fed by his blessing? When David says, “He causeth the herb to grow for the service of men, that he may bring forth food out of the earth,” (Ps 104:14) the kindness which he describes is universal. I reply, Paul speaks here of the lawful use, of which we are assured before God. Wicked men are in no degree partakers of it, on account of their impure conscience, which, as is said, “defileth all things.” (Titus 1:15)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">And indeed, properly speaking, God has appointed to his children alone the whole world and all that is in the world. For this reason, they are also called the heirs of the world; for at the beginning Adam was appointed to be lord of all, on this condition, that he should continue in obedience to God. Accordingly, his rebellion against God deprived of the right, which had been bestowed on him, not only himself but his posterity. And since all things are subject to Christ, we are fully restored by His mediation, and that through faith; and therefore all that unbelievers enjoy may be regarded as the property of others, which they rob or steal....</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">vs.4 "<i>every creature of God is good</i>"</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">The use of food must be judged, partly from its substance, and partly from the person of him who eats it. The Apostle therefore avails himself of both arguments. So far as relates to food, he asserts that it is pure, because God has created it; and that the use of it is consecrated to us by faith and prayer. The goodness of the creatures, which he mentions, has relation to men, and that not with regard to the body or to health, but to the consciences. I make this remark, that none may enter into curious speculations unconnected with the scope of the passage; for, in a single word, Paul means, that those things which come from the hand of God, and are intended for our use, are not unclean or polluted before God, but that we may freely eat them with regard to conscience.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">If it be objected, that many animals were formerly pronounced to be unclean under the Law, and that fruit, which was yielded by the tree of knowledge of good and evil, was destructive to man; the answer is, that creatures are not called pure, merely because they are the works of God, but because, through his kindness, they have been given to us; for we must always look at the appointment of God, both what he commands and what he forbids.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">vs.5 "<i>it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer</i>"</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">This is the confirmation of the preceding clause, "if it be received with thanksgiving." And it is an argument drawn from contrast; for “holy” and “profane” are things contrary to each other. Let us now see what is the sanctification of all good things, which belong to the sustenance of the present life. Paul testifies that it consists of “the word of God and prayer.” But it ought to be observed, that this word must be embraced by faith, in order that it may be advantageous; for, although God himself sanctifies all things by the Spirit of his mouth, yet we do not obtain that benefit but by faith. To this is added “prayer;” for, on the one hand, we ask from God our daily bread, according to the commandment of Christ (Mat 6:11) and, on the other hand we offer thanksgiving to Him for His goodness.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Now Paul’s doctrine proceeds on this principle, that there is no good thing, the possession of which is lawful, unless conscience testify that it is lawfully our own. And which of us would venture to claim for himself a single grain of wheat, if he were not taught by the word of God that he is the heir of the world? Common sense, indeed, pronounces, that the wealth of the world is naturally intended for our use; but, since dominion over the world was taken from us in Adam, everything that we touch of the gifts of God is defiled by our pollution; and, on the other hand, it is unclean to us, till God graciously come to our aid, and by ingrafting us into his Son, constitutes us anew to be lords of the world, that we may lawfully use as our own all the wealth with which he supplies us.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Justly, therefore, does Paul connect lawful enjoyment with “the word”, by which alone we regain what was lost in Adam; for we must acknowledge God as our Father, that we may be his heirs, and Christ as our Head, that those things which are his may become ours. Hence it ought to be inferred that the use of all the gifts of God is unclean, unless it be accompanied by true knowledge and calling on the name of God; and that it is a beastly way of eating, when we sit down at table without any prayer; and, when we have eaten to the full, depart in utter forgetfulness of God.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">And if such sanctification is demanded in regard to common food, which, together with the belly, is subject to corruption, what must we think about spiritual sacraments? If “the word,” and calling on God through faith, be not there, what remains that is not profane? Here we must attend to the distinction between the blessing of the sacramental table and the blessing of a common table; for, as to the food which we eat for the nourishment of our body, we bless it for this purpose, that we may receive it in a pure and lawful manner; but we consecrate, in a more solemn manner, the bread and wine in the Lord’s Supper, that they may be pledges to us of the body and blood of Christ.</span></blockquote><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEp807X2TTtoZaKIIj_LldM0beEmaooDzl9YcwnBWoLWhgb0hUNoNZEOuJT69DIQMj6ReUHBIvZWsi_ddVlHMbXRI4IhxO1aDbhlB1xCjlMX_mG4tmhKn9w63qcYhY2rS597Vz/s1600/HouseClean.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="250" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEp807X2TTtoZaKIIj_LldM0beEmaooDzl9YcwnBWoLWhgb0hUNoNZEOuJT69DIQMj6ReUHBIvZWsi_ddVlHMbXRI4IhxO1aDbhlB1xCjlMX_mG4tmhKn9w63qcYhY2rS597Vz/s320/HouseClean.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>So, just as neocalvinism holds, and contrary to neotwokingdomism, while the things of this life are common to believers and unbelievers, the lawful use of them is distinctively Christian. Although good in themselves, by sin all cultural activities have been defiled, polluted and become unclean, profane. Yet through redemption by Christ and the Spirit's gift of true knowledge of God, in faith and prayer, a Christian's cultural activities may be sanctified, made holy and Christian.<br />
<br />
This does not eradicate the distinction between holy and common, but we will have to leave further elaboration to a future post. We will also address the distinction between "structure" and "direction" that is key to understanding what neocalvinism means in holding to a redemptive view of culture; that a Christian's cultural activities may be done <i>Christianly</i>, in a distinctively Christian way.<div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5006349.post-90388619766650937172010-10-10T10:10:00.016-04:002010-10-11T03:19:54.923-04:00Lot o' TensSo it is the tenth of October two-thousand ten, at ten minutes after ten o'clock in the morning.<br />
<b>10/10/10 10:10</b>am<div class="blogger-post-footer">-- Baus</div>Baushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15081376115291852909noreply@blogger.com1