Introduction (pp 1-6)
This introduction (pp 1-6) sets the scene for the rest of the book. The Dutch National Movement’s manifesto although sincere and earnest represented an attempt to synthesise Christian and Marxist ideas. It rejected the antithesis between Christian and humanistic views of life.
Dooyeweerd seeks to defend this Christian antithesis. One way he rejects is to place the burden of proof on the Dutch National Movement to prove that the antithesis is not a fruitful foundation to build upon. The best way is to show that the antithesis has been and is a vital force.
Dooyeweerd makes some introductory remarks about the antithesis:
• It is not the idea of men – not even Groen van Prinsterer or Abraham Kuyper
• It is all-pervading – it cuts through Christian life itself
• It is not a dividing line between Christian and non-Christian.
Dooyeweerd will look at the principle of the antithesis and seek to examine if this principle is still relevant.
He then looks at the difference between genuine and superficial dialogue. It is not the case that genuine dialogue is only open to those with academic training. Genuine dialogue is open to all those who are prepared to penetrate to the root differences.
Review questions
1. What is ‘personalistic socialism’?
2. Why does Dooyeweerd reject the ‘shift the burden of proof’ approach?
3. What is the ‘antithesis’?
4. How does genuine dialogue differ from superficial dialogue?
Discussion questions
1. Is the antithesis a fruitful principle today?
2. What threats are there today to the antithesis?
