Comments on: More Vossians and Neo-Calvinists Together?

By: Anar

Anar — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:59:55 +0000

I think that one’s internal manifestation of their Christianity can justify why they do what they do, and often seeps out into how they do it too.

In the other post you mentioned these vocations:

dentistry: why do we need healthy teeth, why relieve pain, how do I help patients enjoy food?
computer repair: what is it being repaired from, why does order work, how is the computer used?
athletics: why is it entertaining for image-bearers to be in competition under a law? What metaphor is this?
bridge engineering: why do we subdue the earth?
the office of mayor: what is the Biblical role of the government, where is there liberty?
pool cleaner: what distinguishes the clean from the unclean? what is this a metaphor for?
etc.

By: David

David — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:31:16 +0000

It should go without saying that parts of 2K are compatible with Vos and other parts are not …

Why should this “go without saying”? I don’t know of any 2Kers who think that parts of 2K are incompatible with Vos. It would be helpful if you would explain this.

Cassidy is not, I believe, saying we need to point out the difference in every cultural engagement. What he sought to demonstrate were the principles behind these cultural engagements that will hopefully inform conversations with unbelievers …

It’s not clear that 2Kers would disagree with Cassidy about these principles.

By: Keith Giles

Keith Giles — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:11:18 +0000

Forgive me, but I’m not sure what you are arguing for/against. If we are seeking to correct where the unbelievers are ultimately wrong – is that not witness and/or evangelism? – and to that the Church must be engaged with the culture. But if we are to correct the culture, then to what do we encourage them to change? Just to be better or to have a more Christian society? (Has that not already been tried without success here in the UK?)

If an unbeliever is married, bringing up children and working legitimately etc., they are not ‘wrong’ on earth – is this not a ‘good’ thing? Surely unbelievers are wrong ultimately because they do not love God with all of their heart, soul, strength and mind nor their neighbour as themselves. They need the gospel, not cultural transformation.

We, too, are wrong because of the same reason and even more culpable because we know the Lord and do not love Him as we should, never mind our neighbours! We are ‘right’ only because of the transforming power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the imputation of Christ and forgiveness of sins by His blood through faith.

If you do not want to transform culture (automatically), then do you just want a seat at the cultural table, so to speak, to inform of the Christian way? (There would need to be a lot of chairs for the various Christian viewpoints.)

Ah..but what do I know? After all, my Monarch for 60 years has been the ‘head’ of the Church of England and the Prime Minister, David Cameron, is about to select the ‘second in command’ the next Archbishop of Canterbury, the Primate of the Anglican communion. Separation,anybody?