The Cultural Way of being - Geoff Hall

The Cultural Way of Being
(Spiritual Direction in a Postmodern Landscape)
Geoff Hall
Bristol: Upptackka Press, 2011
ISBN
pbk, 82pp

Available in kindle, pdf, print and iBook here.

How does the institutional church treat artists? By and large it doesn't! Art becomes a means of propoganda for evangelistic or advertising purposes, or it becomes a means of self-expression. Hall writes, in part, to try and alleviate this disdain for the artists' cultural calling.

Hall pleads for a collaboration between artists and angels:

It is interesting that Jesus' last days in the Wilderness involved being looked after by angels before His return to the public sphere. So if you are an angel investor, this may well be your service to the artist.

It is in this collaboration that artists can make art, art that becomes culturally formative, rather than mere personal expression. But it is not just with investors that this creative collaboration can take place, it can be also with gallery owners, publishers and educationalists. Primarily, though the collaboration must be with God: 'The life of the artist is an intimate walk with God' (p. 33). Through this walk with God artists can be 'sensitised to what is going on "around Christ"' (p. 34).

All in all this book is a vigorous and articulate call for artists to take their place in God's kingdom and for kingdom people to support them, so that art can be 'a communal expression for the public domain'. The church can then be transformed from a 'culturally reclusive institution'.  

It needs to be read by all who long for the artist to take their place in God's good creation.

Contents

Introduction                                   10
The spiritual direction of a calling (David) 15
Free design & propoganda            21
Cultural power and direction        29
Intimacy                                        33
Cultural evacuation                       41
Art & prophetic imagination         47
We are not alone                            53
Reference                                       56
Also in this series                           58
About the author                            61
Notebook                                        70

Hell, Rob Bell and What Happens When People Die

Hell, Rob Bell and What Happens When People Die
Bobby Conway
Multnomah Books: Colorado, 2011
ISBN: 9781601424075
eBook

Rob Bell has started a small cottage industry in the number of books that have responded to him. Tim Challies and Kevin DeYoung were among the first full reviews, we then had the first book response by Mike Wittmer and now this by Bobby Conway. Others recently released include God Wins by Mark Galli and Erasing Hell by Francis Chan.

Many of the responses on blogs and twitter were knee-jerk responses. This brief book is more nuanced. Bobby Conway, the One Minute Apologist, realises that Bell is not a full-blown universalist. He describes him as holding a 'postmortem, nuanced purgatorial, inclusivist view of eternal destiny'. Such a view is also held by Clark Pinnock, John Polkinghorne, Gabriel Fackre - who prefers the term 'Divine perseverance' - and Donald Bloesch (at least according to Fackre) and by Marcion and Schliermacher; some have even suggested that Augustine held this view.

Conway provides a helpful critique of Bell's view of hell, but falls into the trap of polarising the many views of hell into two camps:  what he calls the traditional view - that unbelievers will suffer eternal conscious torment -  and Bell's more liberal view. He doesn't seem to realise that there are others biblical views, or if he does, does not consider them. Annihiliationism is never mentioned, for example.

The 'whatever happens when people die' - is only a discussion of the final fate, there is no discussion of what an intermediate state, if indeed one exists, might look like. His view of heaven is rather platonic. At least Bell avoids that. Conway writes: 'time does not exist in eternity. Eternity is a timeless reality that knows no end' (kindle loc 293).

Bell's approach is a soft target. His version of evangelical universalism is not well thought out. A more rigorous approach has been taken by Brad Jersak, Thomas Talbott, Jan Bonda and Gregory MacDonald (aka Robin Parry). Those who are unhappy with evangelical universalism would do better to look those views rather than Bell's popularisations; however, that might not sell as many books!

The book is accessible and well written and it is written with a passion. Conway sees hell as God's idea, it is no laughing matter, he sees it as an eternal lodging place, a place of conscious torment, he is certainly not embarrassed by the doctrine of hell and is not intimidated by 'a tolerance-based society' that has infiltrated the church. He understands Bell's position and provides a good defence of the so-called traditional view of hell. He writes with the heart and motivation of an evangelist. Watchman-like he warns the unwary of the unfortunate consequences of accepting Bell's argument if Bell is wrong.



Disclosure: this book was supplied by the Waterbrook Multnomah blogging for books program. The views are my own.

1 Cor 1:10-17 division part 3: stew

Recognise that differences need not be divisive

Church is not like Stepford wives or about producing clones where we all think and act the same.

We need to glory in our differences!

There can be unity without uniformity.

Two models for unity are a bowl of soup and a bowl of stew.

Soup is all the same – there is no variety, no difference, it is all blended together; but a bowl of stew has separate parts, yet it makes a whole. There are carrots and meat but together they make a whole, each mouthful is different but still a whole. We can see the different kinds, there is a boundary between carrot and meat. The carrot is not trying to be a piece of meat! But they work together.

We are not all the same and neither should we be!

God’s creation has many different aspects and yet it is still his creation. Why should the church be any different? Black and white is boring!

Unity within diversity – this theme is picked up late by Paul in this letter – the body is a whole but many different parts.

The danger comes when we take one aspect of creation and make it the whole. Partial truth becomes the whole truth. That’s what idolatry is. We don’t always have the whole truth.

Let’s learn the lessons of Corinth:

Let’s avoid divisions by thinking of boundaries, nuts and stews.

Let our desire be to bring glory to Jesus and not ourselves, or a particular Christian stream.
Be boundaried – but make the boundaries with fences with gates not with divisive walls.
Celebrate diversity – be a stew!
Be nuts for Jesus!
See that in him the whole thing holds together!

1 Cor 1:10-17 division part 2: nuts

Let’s go back to Corinth.

How did Paul deal with the factions? He brought them back to Christ. He asks a question: "Is Christ divided?" (Sometimes a key question can unlock situations.)

Recognise that we are one in Christ.

Christ is not split. He is the centre of all things

Lesslie Newbigin had a great phrase that sums it up: "Christ is the clue to the whole creation."

Jesus is the one that unlocks the whole creation. It is in him that everything has meaning.

Apparently, helicopters have one single nut that holds the rotors to the craft and holds the whole thing together. If that nut fails the helicopter fails. That nut is called the Jesus nut. The Jesus nut holds the whole thing together.

In Jesus the whole thing holds together. In Jesus is the whole meaning of creation.

1 Cor 1:10-17 division part 2: boundaries

One important word is boundaries

It’s a word we will need to look at again and again.

Susie and I have been reading this book on Boundaries by Cloud and Townsend – it is very insightful and helpful.

Boundaries are good – but not if they divide us.

Here in this passage boundaries became walls to divide.

But boundaries are also God-given. When God created he created different kinds. Each developed according to their own kind. If we look at creation we have a rich variety and diversity. That rich diversity and variety is what makes creation so great. So too in the church.

Each of us has a calling – that calling forms a boundary. It shows us where our limits, roles, authority, responsibilities and reach lies.

Boundaries are important – we need to know when to say No and when to say yes – boundaries can provide focus to what we do. It prevents us stretching beyond our responsibilities, going beyond what God has called us to do. We need to ask God where are our boundaries.

Boundaries are not meant to be walls to keep us in, or others out; boundaries can be fences with gates. To let the bad out and the good in. Boundaries provide freedom. The fall was the crossing of a boundary – God told Adam and Eve they could eat of any fruit but not one particular one, they were boundaried. But what did they do? Crossed the boundary – and the result was the fall.

Boundaries are important, but they should not be used to divide us.

A lot of people I’ve spoken to recently have mentioned boundary problems; though they haven’t expressed it in those terms; it might be work-home life balance, parent-child issues, job roles, the list could go on. I’ve a few boundary problems at work – I have two part-time jobs at which there is some overlap, I’m also a personal tutor for some students; the boundaries can become challenged. Everywhere I turn at the moment the question of boundaries comes up.

Another book I have been reading recently also dealt with boundaries. Richard Mouw’s brilliant book on Abraham Kuyper. Have I mentioned Kuyper before?

Anyway – as I read one section it made much sense to me and made some issues clear. I hope for some of you it will do the same – it may for some be a word in season, as it was for me, or it may be something to ponder, or it may be something you can disregard with the response He follows Kuyper!

Quote from page 25:

The way in which a parent exercises authority over a child should be different from the way a manager exercises authority over staff, or a professor over students, or a coach over team players. This means too that the skills associated with a specific mode of authority do not automatically transfer to other spheres.

Imagine a woman and a man who are related in three different ways. She is the young man's mother. She is also an elder in the church where their family worships. And she is the academic dean at the university where her son serves on the faculty. Suppose, though, that the young man commits a serious crime — using, for example, a university computer for illicit sexual purposes. As his dean she will be required to fire him. As his church elder she might participate in a decision to place him under some form of ecclesiastical discipline — requiring, say, some special expression of penitence to God and to the community as a part of a process of spiritual restoration, and if he is not repentant, she may have to agree to a decision to excommunicate him from church membership. But as his mother she continues to love him unconditionally as a member of the family; she never entertains thoughts of "disowning" him as a son.

In each case her authority role is a different one, as is also the basis for her acceptance of him within each relationship. In the university she judges his fitness to remain a member of the community by some straightforwardly formal standards of vocational performance. In the church, she also enforces certain norms, but here with a pastoral openness to repentance and spiritual renewal. In the family, the ties go much deeper — so much so that the bond is not easily broken by either bad performance or unrepentant sin. In short, the authority exercised by a dean is different from that of an elder, and each differs from the parental role. And this is because families are families, churches are churches, and the academy is the academy. So if the young man were to complain to his mother, "How can you fire me from my teaching job? — I'm your son," he would be blurring the boundaries of the spheres.

Other important word is perspectives. We all see things from our own perspective, we can’t help but!

But we need to see that we don’t see it all.

We need to try and spend time in other people’s shoes.

Proverbs 17:18

The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him.

Our view of things is only partial – as this advert for the Guardian newspaper shows.

1 Cor 1:10-17 division part 1: Introduction

The section we are looking at chapter 1: 10-17 is about division in the church – when we think of division three images come to mind: boundaries, nuts and stews! So, I want to look at this passage with those three images in mind.

As you all know Paul was a prolific letter writer. Here’s a story about another letter and letter writer:

A father was amazed to see that his son’s bed was made and everything was tidy, no discarded socks or clothes anywhere. Something was obviously very wrong!

Then he saw an envelope, on the pillow. It was simply addressed: ‘Dad.’

The father opened the envelope fearing the worst. He read:

Dear Dad:

It is with great regret and sorrow that I’m writing you. I had to elope with my new girlfriend because I wanted to avoid a scene with Mum and you. I have been finding real passion with Stacy and she is so nice.

But I knew you would not approve of her because of all her piercings, tattoos, tight motorcycle clothes and the fact that she is much older than me and works as a lap dancer.

But it’s not only the passion…Dad she’s pregnant.

 Stacy said that we will be very happy. She thinks that it could well be my child. She owns a trailer in the woods and has a stack of firewood for the whole winter. We share a dream of having many more children. We hope to get married as soon as her divorce comes through.

In the meantime we are praying that science will find a cure for AIDS so Stacy can get better. She deserves it.

Don’t worry Dad. I’m 14 and I can take care of myself. Someday I’m sure that we will be back to visit so that you can get to know your grandchildren.

Your loving son John

P.S..Dad, none of the above is true. I’m over at Andrew’s house. I just wanted to remind you that there are worse things in life than the report card that’s in my desk drawer.

I love you. 
Call me when it’s safe to come home.

Paul wrote at least four letters to Corinthians. 1 Corinthians is actually the second letter.

Paul evangelised Corinth on his second missionary journey – he stayed there for about 18 months. The story is told in Acts 18.

Corinth is a major Greek city and it was a major trade city. It was a Roman colony in Greece and so Roman laws and customs were important.

It was mainly a non-Jewish church, most had a background in paganism. This letter was written in response to a letter written to him and some issues raised by others.

We can see the outline of the letter here: all beginning (sort of) with the letter D:

introDuctio, Division, Discipline, Difficulties, Division, Doctrine and enDings. (See slides)

It was written by Paul around 53-55AD at the end of his time in Ephesus.

The passage we are looking at this evening looks at some of the divisions that seem to have split the Corinthian church.

This time the outline if bought to us by the letter P:

Plea for unity,
Parties of division,
Principle of being one in Christ and the
Priority of preaching.

It seems they had split into different factions or cliques: Paul, Apollos, Cephas and Christ followers

The first group: I follow Paul

If I was Paul I’d be pretty chuffed at that – I could probably justify why they should follow me (for example, I’m always right! Ask my wife!!)

But Paul isn’t – he has more in view than self-glorification; his desire is for the glory of the risen Lord (a theme he picks up later in the letter)

What is it that motivates us? Who are we seeking to glorify in what we do?

I follow Apollos

I follow Cephas

I follow Christ – here are the 'super-spirituals' – but it’s said in a way that is condescending, they follow Christ because they can get one over on the others! It’s like playing the trump card.

But Paul is not having it – even such an attitude is divisive.

That was first century Corinth – what about 21^st century Bristol? What has that to do with us? There are just as many factions today – if not more:

What about I’m for Rob Bell, or I’m for Tom Wright?

Or even I’m for Spring Harvest, I’m for Greenbelt or I’m for New Wine?

Or dare I say it. I’m 9.00, I’m 10.30 I’m 6.30 service?

We have a tendency to compartmentalise or label people to put them in boxes! We should label jars not people!

Now diversity is good – but if those diversities divide us then that’s sin. And sin needs to be repented of.

Whose church is it? Is it the 9 o’clock’s, the 10.30’s or the 6.30’s? No – it’s Jesus’! let’s not forget that!

Dealing with division in Church: 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 slides

1 cor 1:10-17 division

View more presentations from Steve Bishop.

J Oliver Buswell on Dooyeweer's Transcendental Problems of Philosophic Thought 1949.

Here, taken from The Continuing Story - a blog of the director of the PCA Historical Center, is an early review of one of the first translation in to English of Dooyeweerd's work. Buswell's review was originally published in The Bible Today 42 (7) (1949).

Transcendental Problems of Philosophic Thought : An Inquiry into the Transcendental Conditions of Philosophy, by Dr. H. Dooyeweerd, Professor of Philosophy, The Free University of Amsterdam. Eerdmans, 1948, 80 pages, $1.50.

The philosophy of Professor Dooyeweerd is called, “Philosophy of the Idea of Law.” The author explains that the words “idea of Law” are not an adequate translation of the Dutch word Wetsidee. The phrase is used, however, for lack of a better English term. The author has been noted for his writings in the field of jurisprudence. The list of his chief works, (page 79f), includes such titles as “The Cabinet in Dutch Constitutional Law” 1917, “The Struggle for Christian Politics” 1924, “The Structure of Juridical Principles and the Method of Jurisprudence” 1930, etc. This sounds interesting. I read the book very carefully, looking for the notion of the “idea of law,” hoping to find something corresponding to the thought which the words naturally convey to the reader. I thought I was to be entirely disappointed until I came to the next to the last page of the text. There I learned that “every concept of the different aspects” is founded upon three types of ideas, those which have to do with (1) “mutual relations,” (2) “radical unity,” and (3) “Origin.” Then the author gives this explanatory statement . . . these three ideas are bound together as a coherent complex and this complex we call “the idea of law” of a philosophical system. (Page 76)

Well, if that is what Professor Dooyeweerd calls “the idea of law,” then that is what he calls it.

The author has much to say against “the autonomy of human reason.” He regards those who believe in such autonomy as not among his “congenial spirits” (page viii). He says that “… the autonomy of scientific thought is self-refuted.” (Page 49) Nowhere does the reader find a clear definition of the word “autonomy” as Professor Dooyeweerd uses it. If “the autonomy of human thought” means that human thought is independent of God, human minds not created by God, and human thinking capable of proving God in error, then of course the autonomy of human thought must be rejected by all who believe in God.

However, such a definition of the term “autonomy” would be unjustifiable. The Kantian use of the notion of autonomy certainly does not exclude external standards of truth and right, or the grace of God. See, for example, Book IV, Apotome II, Section IV, of Kant’s Religion Within the Boundary of Pure Reason. The title of the section referred to is “That conscience is at all times her own guide,” and the title of the Scholion which follows it is “Of means of Grace.”

If Professor Dooyeweerd has in mind some group of writers or teachers who have used the words “autonomy of reason” in the sense which I have described above, or in some sense inconsistent with the Calvinistic doctrine of the Sovereignty of God our Creator, then he should certainly give references for the guidance of his readers. The ordinary student who looks things up in encyclopedias, dictionaries, and works of writers with whom he is familiar, finds the phrase “autonomy of reason” to mean simply that God has created human reason with real but limited powers, just as He has given dogs and cats the power to walk alone.

The notion that human reason is not autonomous, in the sense that God has created it so, is, in this little book from Amsterdam, quite suggestive of a basically pantheistic attitude. In fact the denial of the autonomy of reason seems to imply that God has not created anything which is not actually a part, or an aspect, or an emanation of His own substance. The impression of pantheism is increased by such statements as the following

What is structure? It is an architectonic plan according to which a diversity of “moments” is united in totality. . . . Thi6 structure has a modal character, because the different aspects are not reality itself, but are only modalities of being. There does not exist a purely “physical” or “biotical” or “psychical” or “historical” or “economic” or “juridical” reality. There exist only physical, biotical, psychical, historical, etc. aspects of reality. (Page 41)

But if there does not exist a purely physical reality as such, how can the doctrine of creation be anything but a myth?

This little book contains a vast amount of generalization, as of course might be expected in a brief condensation of a “new philosophy which has been developing during the last twenty years.” (Page 15) A considerable number of the historical generalizations seem to me unjustifiable. Many are clearly erroneous, and some are fanciful. Some of the flourishes
seem very frothy. For example, in the last chapter which is entitled, “The Religious Motives of Western Thought and the Idea of Law,” we read

The fourth fundamental motive is that of “Nature and Liberty,” introduced by modern Humanism . . . The dialectical character of this humanist motive is clear. “Liberty” and “nature” are opposite motives, which in their religious roots cannot be reconciled. (Page 73)

Very exciting, but I cannot quite figure out whether this was written for the drums or for the flutes. Certainly it was never intended to be intelligible to an ordinary sensible born-again child of God who believes that the doctrine of creation is really true. My Bible does not harmonize with the notion that liberty and nature are irreconcilable. It teaches quite the opposite.

I say, Professor Dooyeweerd, if you can hear my voice from across the Atlantic, some of us Calvinists over here really mean business when we say that God created the world, and that He created man in His own image. We do not object to orchestration in its proper place, but when we make statements, our subjects and predicates are distinguishable. God is One, and the world which He has created is other than He. The tiny creatures which He has made to inhabit the world are endowed by Him with certain autonomous functions, sustained always by His power, and enabled by His common grace, or by His special grace, as
the case may be.

Even the brutes He has endowed with a certain kind of intelligence suitable for their natural state. Man, created in His image, is endowed with reason, through which in part God has chosen to work, in His sovereign grace, to accomplish the salvation of a people for the glory of His name.

With the background of Hodge and Warfield on this side of the Atlantic, we have learned much from Abraham Kuyper and Bavinck, the great Calvinists of your noble tradition. We prefer their straight-forward appeal to objective facts in the created world, and we regret that some of you younger scholars who have inherited great things from them, have failed
to build upon the four-square foundations of their rugged, consecrated scholarship.

J. Oliver Buswell

Resources for a Christian approach to law - updated

Herman Dooyeweerd, the pioneer of reformational philosophy, was a legal scholar. He wrote a number of books on a Christian approach to law. However, they may not be the best place to start!

Encyclopedia of Legal Science (Collected Works of Herman Dooyeweerd) Edwin Mellen, 1997-1998.
More details and excerpts are available here:


Others who have utilized many of Dooyeweerd’s ideas include:

E. L. Hebden Taylor
The New legality in the Light of the Christian Philosophy of Law. Philadelphia, Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co., 1967

The Christian Philosophy of Law, Politics and the State: A Study of the Political and Legal Thought of Herman Dooyeweerd of the Free University of Amsterdam, Holland and the Basis for Christian Action in the English-Speaking World.  Nutley, N.J.: Craig Press, 1966.



Alan Cameron, recently retired from Victoria University has written a number of articles available on www.allofliferedeemed.co.uk:

1995. Coase on law and economics (previously unpublished) [pdf]
1997. Implications of Dooyeweerd's legal philosophy for political theory. Nuances [electronic] 5 (August) Pt 5. (offsite)
1997. 'A Reformational Perspective on Law and Justice', Chapter 13 in Signposts of God's Liberating Kingdom: Perspectives for the 21st Century Vol. 1, 1997 (Potchefstroom: IRS.) , pp 189-204
1998. Dooyeweerd's jurisprudential method: legal causality as a case study. ALTA 1998 Conference Proceedings vol 2: 595-634.
1998. Dooyeweerd on law and morality: legal ethics - a test case. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 28 (1): 263-281. [pdf]
1998. 'Law, justice and ethics'
2000. 'Implications of Dooyeweerd's encyclopedia of legal science' in D F M Strauss and M Botting (ed.) Contemporary Reflections of the Philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd (Edwin Mellen, NY)
2000. Between norm and fact: the jurisprudence of Herman Dooyeweerd.
This article is an edited version of a paper delivered at the Annual Conference of the Australian Society of Legal Philosophy, Australian National University, Canberra, 2000 under the conference theme of “dissenting jurisprudence.”
2004. The Encyclopedia of the Science of Law: a provisional assessment of the Legal Philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd
A paper prepared for presentation as a public lecture at Redeemer University College, Ancaster, Ontario, 27 September 2004.
2006. 'Integrity as a jural concept'. Journal for Christian Scholarship 42 (Special Issue No.1) 37-48


Philosophia Reformata
http://www.philosophia-reformata.org/
Van Eikema Hommes, H J “The Functions of Law and the Role of Legal Principles” 1974 39 77-81
Van Eikema Hommes, H J “The Limits of the Legal Competence of the State”.1976 41 39,714

Journal of Christian Scholarship
DFM Strauss 2005 Can Legal Rights be Assigned to "Natural Objects" such as (Plants and) Animals J. Chr Schol
S. de Freitas 2006 Religion, Legal Scholarship, and a Christian Response
S A de Freitas 2001 The fragility of life within the secular law sphere
Prof A W G Raath 2004 The Idea of the State Subject to Law: Lessons from the German Experience 1840 – 1940.
Prof AWG Raath 2005 Divine Law, Natural Law and Reason in Dutch Jurisprudence: The Rise of Moral Relativism in the Jurisprudence of the Dutch "Golden Age"

John Witte Jr
Christianity and Law: An Introduction Cambridge University Press, 2008
The Teachings of Modern Christianity on Law, Politics, and Human Nature: vols 1 and 2. Columbia University Press 2006
The Teachings of Modern Protestantism on Law, Politics, and Human Nature. Columbia University Press 2006


David McIroy A Biblical View of Law and Justice (Paternoster, 2004)

David S. Caudill:
http://works.bepress.com/david_caudill/
"Christian Legal Theory: The Example of Dooyeweerd's Critique of Romanist Individualism and Germanic Communitarianism in Property Law" Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy 5 (2007): 33
"A Calvinist perspective on faith in legal scholarship" Journal of Legal Ed. (1997)
"Law and belief: critical legal studies and the philosophy of the law-idea" in Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought ed. M. W. Connell et al. (Yale University Press, 2002).
Property: Cases, Documents, and Lawyering Strategies (with David Crump and David Charles Hricik) (2008)
Radical Philosophy of Law: Contemporary Challenges to Mainstream Legal Theory and Practice (1995)

Updates:

Michael P. Schutt 2007. Redeeming Law: Christian Calling and the Legal Profession. InterVarsity Press

Redeeming law blog

Cross and Gravel bibliography 

Journal of Christian Legal Thought vol 1 (1) - edited by Michael P. Scutt


C. Scott Pryor 2000. "Mission Possible: A Paradigm for Analysis of Contractual Impossibility at Regent University," St. John's Law Review 74. 

C. Scott Pryor 2005-06. "Consideration in the Common Law of Contracts: A Biblical-Theological Critique," Regent University Law Review 18:1.

C. Scott Pryor on integrating faith and law:

via regent.edu

Resources for a Christian approach to history - updated

These titles deal specifically with a reformational approach to history.
I have not included titles on a history of X, or biblical history or specific periods - that is a task for another time (and probably another person).
My thanks to Paul Otto for helpful suggestions.

There are several reformational scholars who have worked in the area of history. These include:

• George Harinck
• C. Thomas McIntire
• Paul Otto
• M. C. Smit
• Keith Sewell
• Harry van Dyke

See also the resources at  reformational cliosophy



Herman Dooyeweerd 1996. Christian Philosophy and the Meaning of History. Lewiston NY USA: Edwin Mellen Press. A compilation of four articles:

• 1956 Christian philosophy: an exploration. Scientia
• 1942 The meaning of history. De Zin der Geschieden
• 1958 The Criteria of Progressive and Reactionary Tendencies in History. First delivered in 1958 to the Dutch Royal Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
• 1957 The dangers of the intellectual disarmament of Christianity in science. Geestelijk Weerloos of Weerbaar?

Harry J. Groenewold 2000. A vision of history for students. Pro Rege. 28 (4)

Harry J. Groenewold 2010. A Christian View of History: From Antiquity To The Reformation PageMaster

Kenn Hermann (nd) The Pedagogical Strengths of Teaching History Backward. 

Ben House 2008. Punic Wars & Culture Wars: Christian Essays on History and Teaching.  Covent Media Press.

Robert Knudsen 1976. History: The Encounter of Christianity with Secular Science. Cherry Hill, NJ: Mack Publishing Co.

C. Thomas McIntire
1985 Dooyeweerd's philosophy of history. In McIntire (ed.) The Legacy of Herman Dooyeweerd: Critical Philosophy in the Christian Tradition (University Press of America, 1985)
2004.   Herbert Butterfield: Historian as Dissenter (Yale University Press)
1992    "History". In Encyclopedia of the Reformed Faith (Westminster/John Knox,)
1977. The Renewal of Christian Views of History in an Age of Catastrophe. In McIntire (ed), God, History and Historians: Modern Christian Views of History. Oxford University Press.
1974. The Ongoing Task of Christian Historiography (Institute for Christian Studies, distributed by Wedge Press)
1976.  Historical Study: A Christian Approach. Institute for Christian Studies Perspective, Supplement.
1975.  God's Work in History:  The Post-Biblical Epoch. Association for the Advancement of Christian Scholarship Papers)
1981. The Focus of Historical Study: A Christian View. Fides et Historia 14 (1): 6-20
1984.  Historical study and the historical dimension of our world,” in History and Historical Understanding, ed. C.T. McIntire and Ronald Wells (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984)
1987.  Christian Views of History. In Encyclopedia of Religion, Mircea Eliade (ed.) (Macmillan Free Press)

Paul Otto 2006. The Dutch-Munsee Encounter in America: The Struggle for Sovereignty in the Hudson Valley. New York: Berghahn Books.
2004. Teaching history as creational development. Fides et Historia 36, no. 1 (Winter/Spring): 118-124.
2005. Historical studies and creational development: constructing a history program in light of a Reformed perspective. Pro Rege 34, no. 1 (Sept): 6-15.
2000. (editor) Global history or Western civilization: a symposium Pro Rege 28 (4)

Willem Ouweneel 2016. Probing the Past: An Introduction to Christian History. Paideia Press. 

K. J. Popma 2020. Scriptural Reflections on History. Translated and Edited by Harry Van Dyke.  Wordbridge.

Keith Sewell
The Eclipse of History and the Crisis in the Humanities
2004. Fortunes of history: Historical inquiry from Herder to Huizinga. Pro Rege. 32. March 2004. 43-44.
2000. "History wars" - "Holy wars" or, history in contention. Pro Rege. 28 (4). 2-10.
2005. Herbert Butterfield and the Interpretation of History. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Calvin Seerveld 1975. The pedagogical strength of a Christian methodology in philosophical historiography. Koers 40: 269-313

Calvin Seerveld 1991. Footprints in the Snow. Philosophia Reformata 56: 1-34

M. C. Smit 2002. Toward a Christian Conception of History.  Edited and translated by Herbert Donald Morton and Harry Van Dyke

M. C. Smit 2021 (2nd edn) Writings on God and History. Edited and translated by Herbert Donals Morton and Harry Van Dyke. Dordt Press.

Harry Van Dyke 2000. Defining moments in western-global history. Pro Rege. 28 (4)

Louis J. Voskuil 2000. Western civilization or world history: a true dilemma? Pro Rege. 28 (4)

Bernard Zylstra 1970. The Christian teacher and history: can history be approached normatively?



More general evangelical / Reformed books/ resources on history include the following

The Conference on Faith and History

The Conference on Faith and History is a community of scholars exploring the relationship between Christian faith and history. We welcome members from a variety of Christian traditions around the world. We also seek to learn from scholars outside the Christian tradition. Our primary goal is to encourage excellence in the theory and practice of history from the perspective of historic Christianity.

Fides et Historia

is a refereed journal of history that appears twice a year. Submissions are welcomed on a wide variety of topics and themes related to the intersection of Christian faith and historical inquiry. It should be stressed that FIDES ET HISTORIA does not deal only with religious or church history; the editors welcome scholarly research that is relevant to the journal’s core readership of historians who teach at Christian colleges, universities, and secondary schools. The journal also publishes reflections on theories and methods of history from a Christian perspective.

David Bebbington Patterns in History Leicester: IVP.

Maxie Burch 1996. The Evangelical Historians: The Historiography of George Marsden, Nathan Hatch and Mark Noll. University Press of America.

Ian Clary 2015. Evangelical Historiography: The Debate over Christian History Evangelical Quarterly 87(3)

John Fea, Jay Green and Eric Miller (ed.) 2010. Confessing History: Explorations in Christian Faith and The Historian's Vocation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

John Fea 2013. Why Study History? Reflecting on the Importance of the Past. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic

Jay D. Green 2015. Christian Historiography: Five Rival Versions. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.

Mark Noll, George Marsden and Frank Roberts (ed.) 1975. A Christian View of History? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Contents

Part I.
"Why study history?" Mused Clio / Dirk W. Jellema
A Christian perspective for the teaching of history / George M. Marsden
The ongoing task of Christian historiography / C.T. McIntire -
The muse meets the master : Clio and Christ / Donald A. MacPhee
History as a social science : a Christian's response / Edwin J. Van Kley

Part II.
Herbert Butterfield : the legacy of a Christian historian / William A. Speck
Kenneth Scott Latourette's vocation as Christian historian / William A. Speck -
Dooyeweerd as historian / Dale K. Van Kley
Christianity and history : a bibliographical essay / M. Howard Rienstra.

C.T. McIntire and Ronald Wells (editors) 1984. History and Historical Understanding, ed. C.T. McIntire and Ronald Wells (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984)

Scripture, history, and the quest for meaning / Langdon Gilkey --
Historical study and the historical dimension of our world / C.T. McIntire --
The difference in being a Christian and the difference it makes--for history / Martin E. Marty --
Common sense and the spiritual vision of history / George Marsden --
History, objectivity, and the Christian scholar / M. Howard Rienstra --
Christian faith and historical method : contradiction, compromise, or tension? / Robert T. Handy --
Social science history : an appreciative critique / Robert P. Swierenga --
Christianity, Christian interpretation, and the origins of the French Revolution / Dale Van Kley.

W. Standford Reid 1973. The problem of Christian interpretation of history Fides et Historia 5: 96-106
W. Standford Reid 1980. Is there a Christian approach to the writing of history? Fides et Historia 12:104-113.
Ronald Wells (ed.) 1999. History and the Christian Historian. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans
Ronald Wells 1989. History Through the Eyes of Faith. HarperOne

Perspectives on Dooyeweerd's view of history

Earl William Kennedy, 1973. Herman Dooyeweerd on History: An attempt to Understand Him. Fides et Historia 6

Nick van Til 1973. Dooyeweerd’s ‘History’ and the Historian. Pro Rege 2 (1): 7-15

Dale K. Van Kley 1975. Dooyeweerd as historian in Marsden and Roberts (ed.)

The story of everything

[HT jonny baker CMS Pioneer mission blog]