# What is neo-Calvinism?



## Ajay (May 8, 2018)

I am hearing first time about neo-Calvinism? How to identify it. New Calvinism and Neo Calvinism are same? Is there any difference 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Shanny01 (May 8, 2018)

Neo-Calvinism is the school of thought that originated with Abraham Kuyper in the early 1900's stressing pietism (in a Reformed way), Christ's sovereignty over all of life, engaging the public, among other things. 
New Calvinism is the resurgent predestinarianism among evangelicals especially in the United States. Think John Piper, Matt Chandler, Albert Mohler, Tim Keller, DA Carson, Gospel Coalition, and such. Open to continuing gifts and other ideas historically not associated within reformed orthodoxy.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 8, 2018)

New Calvinism is the set S of [beer, beards, and Spurgeon].

Neo-Calvinism is the Dutch theological response to modernity which includes disparate figures such as Kuyper, Bavinck, and Schilder.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Andrew P.C. (May 8, 2018)

http://www.westminsterconfession.org/the-doctrines-of-grace/historic-calvinism-and-neo-calvinism.php


----------



## Dachaser (May 8, 2018)

Shanny01 said:


> Neo-Calvinism is the school of thought that originated with Abraham Kuyper in the early 1900's stressing pietism (in a Reformed way), Christ's sovereignty over all of life, engaging the public, among other things.
> New Calvinism is the resurgent predestinarianism among evangelicals especially in the United States. Think John Piper, Matt Chandler, Albert Mohler, Tim Keller, DA Carson, Gospel Coalition, and such. Open to continuing gifts and other ideas historically not associated within reformed orthodoxy.


Yes, many of those espousing this are open to current Charismatic gifts still operating, contemporary worship songs and styles, and more into be open towards culture and other Christian groups. Not so much as into practicing separation.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 9, 2018)

Andrew P.C. said:


> http://www.westminsterconfession.org/the-doctrines-of-grace/historic-calvinism-and-neo-calvinism.php



The main difficulty with that article is that Young collapses all of Neo-Calvinism, not only into Kuyper, but into Kuyper's more bizarre beliefs. On his reading, it's hard to see how Klaas Schilder could be a neo-calvinist, which he clearly was.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser (May 9, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> The main difficulty with that article is that Young collapses all of Neo-Calvinism, not only into Kuyper, but into Kuyper's more bizarre beliefs. On his reading, it's hard to see how Klaas Schilder could be a neo-calvinist, which he clearly was.


Would neo-calvinism be the system that wanted to have culture transformed also, in addition to individual salvation?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 9, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Would neo-calvinism be the system that wanted to have culture transformed also, in addition to individual salvation?



Yes. New-Calvinists, by contrast, may or may not be interested in cultural transformation.


----------



## Dachaser (May 9, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Yes. New-Calvinists, by contrast, may or may not be interested in cultural transformation.


The Neos then would be part of the PostMil branch?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 9, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> The Neos then would be part of the PostMil branch?



No. All of them are hard-core Amillennialists.


----------



## Dachaser (May 9, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> No. All of them are hard-core Amillennialists.


Which is strange to me, as PostMils would see Christianity affecting culture directly...


----------



## RamistThomist (May 9, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Which is strange to me, as PostMils would see Christianity affecting culture directly...



One can positively affect a sub-culture yet the larger world still go to hell.


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> One can positively affect a sub-culture yet the larger world still go to hell.


I realize that both Amil and preMil would affirm that, but doesn't aggressive PostMil hold for the culture/society itself experience a radical transformation before the Second Coming of Christ?


----------



## R. Andrew Compton (May 10, 2018)

One thing to keep in mind that within the Kuyperian tradition, there are various strands. Though the term "neo-Calvinism" is often one used of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck, there is considerable debate about how closely they relate to later figures like Herman Dooyewerd and Dirk Vollenhoven and those who follow them. 

David VanDrunen, for example, posits more discontinuity between Kuyper and Neo-Calvinism than continuity (see his _Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms: A Study in the Development of Reformed Social Thought _[Eerdmans, 2010], 348-85). Others however within the Kuyperian tradition who identify as "Neo-Calvinists" posit more continuity. (See, for example, Albert M. Wolters, _Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview_, 2d ed [Eerdmans, 2005]; Craig G. Bartholomew, _Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition: A Systematic Introduction _[IVP Academic, 2017]; James K.A. Smith, _Awaiting the King: Reforming Public Theology _[Baker Academic, 2017].)

All this to say, the label "Neo-Calvinism" is somewhat ambiguous. Some use it simply to identify with Kuyper and Bavinck, though they do not follow the further developments of Dooyewerd, Vollenhoven, et al. Others use it as a term that encomapsses Kuyper and all those who work in his trajectory. What can be said with certainty, however, is that the label does traffic specifically in Kuyperian circles.

My colleague, Cornel Venema, has written on some of these topics of late, and though he speaks appreciatevly of the label "Neo Calvinism," even affirming some of the positive developments achieved among some of the Dooyewerdians, he articulates a number of places where the two-kingdoms approach as articulated by Van Drunen is very useful. (For these points of overlap, see Cornelis P. Venema, "One Kingdom or Two? An Evaluation of the 'Two-Kingdoms' Doctrine as an Alternative to Neo-Calvinism," _Mid-America Journal of Theology _23 [2012]: 93-101. While this article is largely critical of the two-kingdom approach, I do think these pages in particular model a type of Neo-Calvinism that is oriented around common grace and not overly triumphalistic.) This helps to show some of the theological dynamics at play and hopefully helps to show some of the breadth of the labels.

I hope this helps a bit!

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

R. Andrew Compton said:


> One thing to keep in mind that within the Kuyperian tradition, there are various strands. Though the term "neo-Calvinism" is often one used of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck, there is considerable debate about how closely they relate to later figures like Herman Dooyewerd and Dirk Vollenhoven and those who follow them.
> 
> David VanDrunen, for example, posits more discontinuity between Kuyper and Neo-Calvinism than continuity (see his _Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms: A Study in the Development of Reformed Social Thought _[Eerdmans, 2010], 348-85). Others however within the Kuyperian tradition who identify as "Neo-Calvinists" posit more continuity. (See, for example, Albert M. Wolters, _Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview_, 2d ed [Eerdmans, 2005]; Craig G. Bartholomew, _Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition: A Systematic Introduction _[IVP Academic, 2017]; James K.A. Smith, _Awaiting the King: Reforming Public Theology _[Baker Academic, 2017].)
> 
> ...


Is the 2 Kingdom approach something akin to the Kingdom being here, and yet not here in its fullest extant, as that awaits the Second Coming proper?


----------



## R. Andrew Compton (May 10, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Is the 2 Kingdom approach something akin to the Kingdom being here, and yet not here in its fullest extant, as that awaits the Second Coming proper?



I believe that is how a two-kingdoms advocate would articulate it. The adherents that I know do hold to the already/not-yet dynamic.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 10, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> I realize that both Amil and preMil would affirm that, but doesn't aggressive PostMil hold for the culture/society itself experience a radical transformation before the Second Coming of Christ?



Perhaps, perhaps not. But none of these guys are postmil, so that's red herring.


----------



## RamistThomist (May 10, 2018)

Two Kingdom Approach:

1. King Jesus rules his church by word and spirit.
2. The magistrate rules the civil sphere.

That's standard biblical theology, but the danger is when the R2K guys draw further inferences


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

R. Andrew Compton said:


> I believe that is how a two-kingdoms advocate would articulate it. The adherents that I know do hold to the already/not-yet dynamic.


This position is what I was taught while in School, as our text book was the NT theology of GE Ladd, and he made popular the Here, but not yet here in full reasoning.


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Two Kingdom Approach:
> 
> 1. King Jesus rules his church by word and spirit.
> 2. The magistrate rules the civil sphere.
> ...


Pardon my dunce cap being put on, but what is R2K?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 10, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Pardon my dunce cap being put on, but what is R2K?



Radical two kingdoms. It takes the original truth behind 2 Kingdoms and says we shouldn't try to have Christian influence in govt. Everything is common grace ethic. Applied consistently it means:

1. No Christian opposite to abortion, LGBT, etc.
2. No need for Christian education.
3. No need for Christian politicians.

All of this because we don't see the Apostle Paul trying to "Christianize" the world.


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Radical two kingdoms. It takes the original truth behind 2 Kingdoms and says we shouldn't try to have Christian influence in govt. Everything is common grace ethic. Applied consistently it means:
> 
> 1. No Christian opposite to abortion, LGBT, etc.
> 2. No need for Christian education.
> ...


That makes little sense to me though, for did not Jesus Himself tell us to be lights and salt, to spread his grace in and among society?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 10, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> That makes little sense to me though, for did not Jesus Himself tell us to be lights and salt, to spread his grace in and among society?



But don't you always say that we shouldn't do _x _because we never see the apostles doing that?


----------



## Dachaser (May 10, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> But don't you always say that we shouldn't do _x _because we never see the apostles doing that?


Any examples come to mind?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 10, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> Any examples come to mind?



You bring that line up during every theonomy thread.


----------



## Dachaser (May 11, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> You bring that line up during every theonomy thread.


I would not see God demanded all nations right now to be set up under His Law and moral standards as Israel once was, is that what you are referring too?


----------



## RamistThomist (May 11, 2018)

Dachaser said:


> I would not see God demanded all nations right now to be set up under His Law and moral standards as Israel once was, is that what you are referring too?



Yes.


----------



## Dachaser (May 11, 2018)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Yes.


Thanks, wasn't sure what you were pointing towards.


----------

