|
T N T |
The Native Tourist reformed/biblical observations on Christianity and culture |
 |
|
|
blog by Dave Hegeman author of Plowing in Hope
Dave is:
email: house1870 -at- hotmail 
Subscribe to August 2002 September 2002 October 2002 November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 |
Monday, October 15, 2007
This Should Be Interesting
Doug Wilson has begun a series of posts critiquing D.G. Hart's book A Secular Faith. Hart's book argues not only for the separation of church and state (which Wilson and I heartily agree), but also the separation of religious belief and state (which I find baffling for a reformed thinker). For Hart, culture is first and foremost a secular actity. While we are on this topic, it is worth looking at this quote from an amicable review of Meridith Kline which recently appeared in the Ordained Servant: Dr. Kline argues that, since the work of God during the six days of creation was a "holy kingdom-establishing activity," the work of Israelites during the six days must be the same. "This means that sabbath observance requires a theocratic as well as a covenantal setting, that is, a setting in which culture as well as cult is holy kingdom activity" (190). And we see only two historical situations that would fall into that category: Eden and Sinai. "In the New Covenant era ...in which the common grace principle is uniformly operative, the theocratic context prerequisite to the six-work-days component of the sabbath ordinance is missing" (190). Thus, the cultural activities of God's people in the New Covenant are not holy kingdom activities, they are common grace activities (194). So now "only one day then has a special significance in the covenant week under the New Covenant" (194). The covenant week under the New Covenant is "no longer a cultural-cultic sabbatical week" (196). Thus we cannot identify the sabbath with the Lord's Day. "And this means that contrary to traditional Sabbatarianism the distinctive first day of the new, dominical week is not a modified residue of the sabbath day of the fourth commandment, governed by the rules for sabbath observance, such as the prohibition of various non-cultic activities" (196). Thus the first day of the week is not the Lord's Day, as in the whole day set apart for us, but "simply the set time for believers to come together to meet with the Lord" (194). It seems to me that if cultural activities are merely "common", they will never be taken really seriously. Kline and Hart and all other Two-Kingdom takes on culture will always gradually lead to cultural impoverishment. |
