Cultural Progress and the Gospel

Many years ago Herman Bavinck wrote that as culture is cultured there will inevitably bring a realization that the progress of culture making cannot resolve man’s fundamental problems. In fact, he writes, as culture develops the problems of the human heart are left unresolved and ever more exposed. “For while all culture satisfies needs,” he writes, “it also creates and arouses needs.” Of course this cultural regress in the midst of assumed cultural progress sets the stage for the advance of the gospel. I think this is an apt idea that is worthy of further consideration. Here’s the relevant section from Reformed Dogmatics 3:32­7–328:

…human beings have at their disposal many means to maintain themselves in the struggle of existence and to protect themselves against the forces of violence. They are not alone but live in communities. They can combine forces with others and seek strength in union. They have brains to think with, hands to work with, and can by labor and struggle conquer, establish, and expand a place for themselves in the world.

It is noteworthy, however, that all theses aids and supports are not enough for them. However much people may have achieved culturally, they are never satisfied with it and do not attain the redemption for which they are thirsting. For while all culture satisfies needs, it also creates and arouses needs. While, on the one hand, culture prompts them to take pride in the great progress they have made, on the other, it gives them a progressively clearer sense of the long road they still have to travel. To the degree people subdue the world under their feet, to that degree they feel more and more dependent on those heavenly forces against which, with their limited power and puny means, they avail nothing. To the extent they solve problems, to that extent they see the riddles of the world and of life multiply and increase in complexity.

As they dream of progress and civilization, they at the same time see opening up before them the instability and futility of the existing world. Culture has great, even incalculable, advantages but also brings with it its own peculiar drawbacks and dangers. “The more abundantly the benefits of civilization come streaming our way, the emptier our life becomes.”

This is why, in addition to culture, there has always been religion. Rather, religion preceded culture, and culture everywhere came to birth and maturity under the influence of religion. If the ills of humanity were caused by culture, they could certainly be cured in no way other than by culture. But the ills we have in mind are native to the human heart, which always remains the same, and culture only brings them out. With all its wealth and power, it only shows that the human heart, in which God has put eternity [Eccles. 3:11], is so huge that all the world is too small to satisfy it.

Human beings are in search of another and better redemption than culture can give them. They are looking for lasting happiness, an enduring eternal good. They are thirsting for a redemption that saves them physically as well as spiritually, for time but also for eternity. And this only religion, and nothing else, can give them. God alone can give it to them, not science or art, civilization or culture. For that reason redemption is a religious concept, is found in all religions, and is almost always coupled with the idea of reconciliation. For the redemption that humans seek and need is one in which they are lifted up above the whole world into communion with God. [text boldness is mine]

Evolution

As a fan of Bible scholar Bruce Waltke, and especially his commentary on Genesis, I was surprised to see a new video online where Waltke says, “If the data is overwhelming in favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us [the Church] a cult.”

Here’s the full video clip that appears on the YouTubes:

Now, my little brain can come up with at least two definitions of “evolution.”

A: Evolution as in the gradual changes and mutations occurring in the world since creation. In this definition I see no contradiction between the creation account and changes within species of animals since the creation. Changes have happened and will continue to happen even among humans. Read about the Philistine “descendants of giants” (2 Sam 21:15–22) and picture a nation of Shaquille O’Neals.

B: Or evolution as in explaining how man marched from cell to worm to fish to lizard to monkey and finally to man over the course of three billion years. This is a different topic and it’s one that raises a host of theological problems.

A good place to read is Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck (1854–1921). Bavinck was clearly open to A and admitted that the number of animal species has surely increased since creation. He had no problems admitting to gradual changes and mutations in creation.

However, Bavinck saw key theological problems with B, none of which were more important than how B undermines the unity of mankind. Here’s how Bavinck explains it in Reformed Dogmatics:

The unity of the human race is a certainty in Holy Scripture (Gen. 1:26; 6:3; 7:21; 10:32; Matt. 19:4; Acts 17:26; Rom. 5:12ff; 1 Cor. 15:21f., 45f.) but has almost never been acknowledged by the peoples who lived outside the circle of revelation. The Greeks considered themselves autochthonous and proudly looked down on ‘barbarians.’ This contrast is found in virtually all nations. In India there gradually came into being even a sharp division between four castes of people, for each of which a distinct origin was assumed. … On the position of Darwinism, however, the question concerning the origin and age of humanity cannot be answered; the transition from animal to man occurred so slowly that there really was no first man.” (2:523, 525)

And that is the key problem with B. Who was the first man? Evolution cannot answer this. But the Church must have an answer.

Bavinck concludes:

The unity of the human race, as Scripture teaches it … [is] not a matter of indifference, as is sometimes claimed, but on the contrary of the utmost importance: it is the presupposition of religion and morality. The solidarity of the human race, original sin, the atonement in Christ, the universality of the kingdom of God, the catholicity of the church, and the love of neighbor—these are all grounded in the unity of humankind. (2:526)

You can see the problems with B. Scripture makes it clear that the whole of the Christian faith is tied back to the historicity of a single man—Adam—who is the first man, the head of fallen man, and the universal and original ancestor of all people.

For Bavinck, to deny this unity is a theological tragedy. To resist B is not to marginalize the Church into a cult, it is to free the Church to breathe the fresh air of revelation. All while making it possible to embrace A.

Upcoming Bavinck Conference

Announced:

New College [University of Edinburgh] and the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam invite you to a two-day symposium on the Dutch Neo-Calvinist theologian Herman Bavinck (1854-1921).

Following the pattern of Bavinck’s work, the conference will first explore issues related to Bavinck’s theology before examining wider cultural and ethical applications of this doctrine.

The Conference will take place in New College 1-2nd September 2010.

More info here. Download the PDF flier here. The conference organizers welcome proposals for papers from graduate students.

For my Logos peeps

If you use Logos Bible Software here are three notes from the week:

• I’m told that work to finish Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics (4 vols) has been slower than expected. The work is now set to be released in 6 to 8 weeks (mid April / early May). This is bad news for those who ordered early. But it’s good news for slackers because you can still get in on the pre-pub price of $99.95 (the price will jump to $150 once it’s released).

• This week The Works of John Newton (6 vols) was offered as a pre-pub ($99.95). This is a set to seriously consider. See here for details.

• Also this week, The Whole Works of John Flavel (6 vols) was offered as a pre-pub (also for $99.95). This is another set worth a look. See here for details.

Sin, the Menace to Certainty

Today in the articles section of HermanBavinckManCrush.com I added a new paper: “Sin, the Menace to Certainty” by Joel Heflin, a paper presented at ETS, Nov. 2009. View the PDF here.

“…This paper will present and evaluate Bavinck’s theology of sin and the donum superadditum. This paper will show that Bavinck’s doctrine of sin and salvation takes the federalist position from confessional theology as a solution to the subjective approach of positivism and the Neoplatonic duality of supernaturalism. To achieve these goals this paper will first address a few key themes in Bavinck’s prolegomena followed by analysis of the superadded gift within his doctrines of sin and salvation. We close with an assessment of Bavinck’s theology and his claim to certainty in the Reformed expression of the donum.”

Thanks Joel!

On General Revelation

bavinck-rdIMHO: The most careful and thoughtful statements on the value of general revelation have come from the pen of Dutch reformed scholar Herman Bavinck. Here, for example, are few of his thoughts taken from the first volume of his magnum opus, Reformed Dogmatics:

—–

“… To deny that natural religion and natural theology are sufficient and have an autonomous existence of their own is not in any way to do an injustice to the fact that from the creation, from nature and history, from the human heart and conscience, there comes divine speech to every human.

No one escapes the power of general revelation. Religion belongs to the essence of a human. The idea and existence of God, the spiritual independence and eternal destiny of the world, the moral world order and its ultimate triumph—all these are problems that never cease to engage the human mind. Metaphysical need cannot be suppressed. Philosophy perennially seeks to satisfy that need. It is general revelation that keeps that need alive. It keeps human beings from degrading themselves into animals. It binds them to a supersensible world. It maintains in them the awareness that they have been created in God’s image and can only find rest in God. General revelation preserves humankind in order that it can be found and healed by Christ and until it is. To that extent natural theology used to be correctly denominated a “preamble of faith,” a divine preparation and education for Christianity. General revelation is the foundation on which special revelation builds itself up.

Finally, the rich significance of general revelation comes out in the fact that it keeps nature and grace, creation and re-creation, the world of reality and the world of values, inseparably connected. Without general revelation, special revelation loses its connectedness with the whole cosmic existence and life. The link that unites the kingdom of nature and the kingdom of heaven then disappears. Those who, along with critical philosophy, deny general revelation exert themselves in vain when via the way of practical reason or of the imagination they try to recover what they have lost. They have then lost a support for their faith. In that case the religious life exists in detachment from and alongside of ordinary human existence. The image of God then becomes a “superadded gift” (donum superadditum). As in the case of the Socinians, religion becomes alien to human nature. Christianity becomes a sectarian phenomenon and is robbed of its catholicity. In a word, grace is then opposed to nature. In that case it is consistent, along with the ethical modems, to assume a radical break between the power of the good and the power of nature. Ethos [morality] and φύσις [nature], are then totally separated. The world of reality and the world of values have nothing to do with each other. In that scenario we at bottom face a revival of Parsism or Manichaeism. By contrast, general revelation maintains the unity of nature and grace, of the world and the kingdom of God, of the natural order and the moral order, of creation and re-creation, of φύσις and ethos, of virtue and happiness, of holiness and blessedness, and in all these things the unity of the divine being. It is one and the same God who in general revelation does not leave himself without a witness to anyone and who in special revelation makes himself known as a God of grace. Hence general and special revelation interact with each other. “God first sent forth nature as a teacher, intending also to send prophecy next, so that you, a disciple of nature, might more easily believe prophecy” (Tertullian). Nature precedes grace; grace perfects nature. Reason is perfected by faith, faith presupposes nature.”

—Herman Bavinck
, Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena (Baker Academic, 2003), 1:321—322.