But perhaps I should not yet be over enthusiastic. It might also be they do not deplore Luther as much when they think of this as Luther against Catholic Church, only when they see the fruits centuries later.
Here is the passage:*
A dichotomy is what occurs when a whole unit is split into two universal, non-overlapping parts. The two parts are universal, in the sense that both together make up the whole, but are also non-overlapping in the sense that the material in each part is entirely separate from the other, with no intermingling between. This is precisely the system of reality that most Christians have adapted today, with devastating consequences.
Modern Christianity tends to treat the world, all of reality, as being comprised of two entirely different realms: The sacred realm, consisting of the things which are holy and spiritual, and to which a Christian ought to pay most attention, and the secular realm, those areas to which the Bible does not speak, and which are much less important for a Christian to engage. The sacred realm generally includes things such as theological beliefs, personal morality, family dynamics, church government, and perhaps ethical behavior. These are the areas to which pastors and church leaders consistently teach, and which are emphasized as having preeminent importance for the Christian. The other half of reality is entirely different, and does not overlap with holy or sacred things at all, it is considered secular. This generally includes areas such as law, government, science, philosophy, psychology, economics, and sociology. In these areas, Christians are rarely equipped with a biblical view, because in most church’s estimations, they are simply unimportant or, worse, a distraction, from the sacred things, such as prayer, or evangelism.
Well, in this sense, the founder of Modern Christianity was Martin Luther.**
He was well aware that divorce and remarriage was against the law of God. Nevertheless he argued that the state should recognise it, since he argued the laws of the state need have nothing to do with the laws of God.
That is ONE of the reasons why I found Martin Luther insatisfactory in my teens. I had already suffered at school from a secular law divorced from the laws of God.
So, which is it, CMI?
Will you reject Luther and reaccept Catholicism, because Luther founded the Modern Christianity whose view you deplore?
Or will you cling to Reformers and say this essay of yours was a mistake, because it logically attacks Martin Luther?
Or, third option, will you say "never mind about logic"?
You are generally doing a good work about Creation Science, and on my own Creationist blog I often refer to you.***
And what you are saying today in the article I cited, the one by Rachael J. Denhollander, you are saying something really good.
There is, of course, alas, a fourth option : going covenanter. Opposite end from dichotomy is celebrating a total immersion of all societal aspects under the direct supervision of pastors of Reformed Churches, like Calvin basically did. And Knox. And Cromwell. But this has not been your style so far.
Hans Georg Lundahl
St Ignatius of Loyola
* On : CMI : If the foundations be destroyed
by Rachael J. Denhollander
** Exactly as the founder of Modern Judaism was Kaiaphas.
*** Creation vs. Evolution