Our favorite theonomic pastor in the Christian Reformed Church has ranted yet again on the infection he diagnoses as the “radical 2k virus.†The good pastor’s comments are useful for showing what the two-kingdom view actually says and does not say, and also for showing the inherent weakness of those who overrealize Christ’s Lordship in this life.
The pastor in question is responding specifically to the claim made here that the teaching of history should differ little if taught in a class at a secular university or a Christian college. The point being that the standards governing historical scholarship do not come from Scripture – since the Bible as little to say about the use of primary and secondary sources or about the polity of nation-states and the relations among them – but from organizations like the American Historical Association.
The really right reverend comments:
Can Darryl be so thick as to miss the decided difference between the Marxists Charles and Mary Beard teaching a survey of American History and a R. L. Dabney teaching a survey of American History? Darryl assumes his position and then goes on to act as if the standards of “secular†history proves his position. Talk about circular reasoning! What Darryl has forgotten is that Theology is the Queen of the Sciences. Biblical Christians would insist that History is but Theology clothed in a different discipline, but this is not the way Darryl reasons. For Darryl, Theology resides in the Church and each compartmentalized discipline is Lord over its own realm. Talk about creating sacred and profane realms. By Darryl’s standards a student could become a Marxist historian, complete with all that implies, and still be a Christian as long as he could navigate the gross contradiction.
A couple of points show how convoluted this reaction is. First, hello! Robert Louis Dabney was not a historian and simply being a theologian does not grant proficiency or expertise in every single academic discipline, secular vocation, or square inch (Kuyper even knew this). If it did, then theologians would function in western society the way Imams do in Islamic societies – that is, as interpreters of God’s word they have authority over everything. So, I would likely trust the Beard over Dabney on interpreting American history – though I might give Dabney extra credit on the South.
Second, why does being a Marxist invalidate one’s credentials as a historian? Why even some very good Christian historians such as Carl Trueman have been known to have affection for Marx and the usefulness of Marxist analysis not only for secular but also church history. Our CRC pastor is apparently aware that sometimes Christian historians apply the insights of Marx but rejects outright the compatibility of Christianity and Marxism.
So as in all good circular reasoning, what goes around comes around. We trust the Pastor will not become so dizzy about two-kingdom theology that his mind explodes. Here’s the trick: take two aspirin (get it?) and keep your theology in the appropriate kingdom.
Old Life 
Who can argue with the insight of religion being the opiate of the masses? Maybe only those who realize they’re in the cross-hairs, what with all that theonomic Kool-aid (watered down and not-so-watered down).
But what’s with all this “pastor” and “right reverend” stuff? I thought it was Rabboni?
LikeLike
If one assumes that Christian education has its place, should all classes within a Christian school be taught like those at secular schools, excluding those classes that are explicitly religious (such as Bible or doctrine class)?
It was a Dutch Kuyperian prof of mine who told me that the Bible is not a tool with which we can determine what historical events are evidence of God’s pleasure or displeasure.
This has been on my mind, as I am history teacher at a Christian high school and graduate student in the history department of a secular university.
LikeLike
Just wanted to put a plug in for Beard and the revisionists:
http://mises.org/story/3434
Neocalvinists agree that “standards” for historical scholarship are not given in Scripture. But we would like to say that if there is a norm for historical study, it is not a man made norm. History is something created, so we must look at “general revelation” to see what is at question. And of course the way we look at created reality, so as to discern and differentiate something about it named “history,” this is looking at the created “general revelation” concerning ways of “looking.”
A Christian standard for historical scholarship will be Christian in the sense of how it approaches general revelation. There are meaningful differences about how Christians can and should read nature –different from non-Christians, and it doesn’t have to do with deriving “standards for [any field] of scholarship” from the Bible.
LikeLike
Here’s a good audio program on historical revisionism:
[audio src="http://lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2009-05-21_124_be_a_revisionist.mp3" /]
LikeLike
Baus,
OK, I’ll bite:
What do the meaningful differences between Christian and non-Christian approaches to general revelation disciplines (if you’ll allow the term) look like? Would you give a concrete example of how this neocalvinist theory works out in practice?
LikeLike
Neoz: I’d say from the best liberal education perspective, the arts and sciences at a Christian school should look a lot like the way those disciplines are taught at secular schools. Of course, in a Christian setting a prof. may appeal to the categories of providence and theology in ways that may be helpful. But often those appeals can be as wrongheaded — America is a city on a hill — as the social engineering at secular schools.
LikeLike
Barks, if you really want to bite, you have to open wide, have sharp teeth, and take a big chew:
http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Religious-Neutrality-Theories-Revised/dp/0268023662
It’s there for your tasting, if you’re genuinely curious.
Here are a number of reviews to sample:
http://www.cpjustice.org/stories/storyReader$982
http://stevebishop.blogspot.com/2007/10/reviews-of-roy-clousers-myth-of.html
Concrete examples given in the book include are from Physics, Psychology, Math, and Political Science.
LikeLike
Barks, I replied a while ago, but it had a few links and hasn’t appeared yet. I think they were having trouble with their server, etc. If I don’t see it appear this weekend, I’ll repost it.
LikeLike