Kerk en Theologie - Volume 73, Issue 2, 2022

The article deals with Kuyper’s reaction to the French law on the separation between state and church (1905). Kuyper considered this law rather harmful to the Protestants’ interests and blamed the French Protestants for having agreed with this law. His reaction gave rise to a debate with French counterparts that revealed considerable cultural differences between the Dutch and French ways of conceiving the relationship between state and church. The French insisted on religious freedom, Kuyper insisted on the independence of the church. Moreover, the French considered the church as an integral part of the democratic structure of the state, whereas Kuyper considered the church as a sovereign body that represents an autonomous structure. The neutrality of the state is of primordial importance to Kuyper, whereas the French counterpart accepts that the state is neutral when it comes to the churches, but nevertheless has its own morality when it comes to the public domain. The original debate between Kuyper and his French opponents highlights therefore a cultural difference that is still very much present in modern times. The question arises therefore which of the two approaches is the most fruitful in the modern debates about the role of religion in the public sphere.

What is whose? Ecological questions regarding the human use of space, air, precious metals and other natural resources make it necessary to reconsider the claim on property from a theological perspective. Whereas the modern mind takes a firm stand on property from an anthropocentric view, a biblically oriented approach relativizes any absolute claim on property and relates our use of resources to God as Giver and Sustainer of life.

In 2021, the General Synod of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands decided on differentiation within the one office of the minister of the Word. It is almost certain that the hitherto strict condition of a full academic training with knowledge of the Biblical languages will be abandoned for this purpose. This means nothing less than a break with centuries of reformed tradition. This article examines the considerations that have played a role in the past in setting this hard condition. Dominant was the often not explicitly articulated view that the church of the Reformation is fundamentally the church of the Word.

The renunciation of violence, that is central to Mennonite theology, is at odds with the classical interpretation of the death of Christ, that supposes that God needs this death to be reconciled to sinful humanity. This article proposes an interpretation of the death of Christ as an atonement, that tries to unite these seemingly opposing positions. Building upon the work of J. Denny Weaver, it suggests to interpret the death of Christ as a self-sacrifice that intended to change the heart of the individual towards God again and thus to accomplish reconciliation through a renewal of life.

In this article the story of the raising of Lazarus is object of study. I approach this story from Genre- und Formkritik. I begin with the delimitation, context and structure of this passage. Afterwards I treat John 10:40-11:54 as a miracle story, discuss the question to which genre it belongs and examine the different motifs, with special attention to the motif of the late coming of the miracle worker, clearing the way for discussion about life and death as the definitive end, and the motif of belief, not a condition, but goal for the miracle.