Abraham Kuyper: “Proto-Integrationist”?

Integrationists, Neo-Integrationists, and Proto-Integrationists

In current biblical counseling discussions, some are saying that using common grace findings, even when they are assessed by God’s all-sufficient Word, is indicative of moving from “true biblical counseling,” to “integrative counseling.” A new, extra-biblical term has been coined: “neo-integrationist.” This term is being used to characterize fellow biblical counselors as “new, modern integrationists” who are accused of using the biblical, Reformed doctrine of common grace to sneak extra-biblical information into counseling.

Since Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920) lived and died before the current counseling discussions began, he could not be a “neo-integrationist.” So, perhaps the (false) charge or (mis) characterization would be that Kuyper is a “proto-integrationist.” “Proto” is a prefix that means “first” or “original.” It comes from the Greek word prôtos. Is Abraham Kuyper the original integrationist—the proto-integrationist?

I have penned similar posts:

In those posts, like today’s post, I use primary source quotations taken in context, to show how Calvin, Van Til, and Kuyper understood and applied the biblical theology of common grace in such a way that they valued and availed themselves of extra-biblical information.

No. Kuyper Is Not a Proto-Integrationist

For the record, I do not think Calvin was an integrationist. I do not think Van Til was zombie-infected. I do not think Kuyper was a proto-integrationist.

I do believe that all three of these giants of Reformed theology help us to understand how God sovereignly, freely, according to His will and wisdom, dispenses common grace. Calvin, Kuyper, and Van Til teach us how we can use God’s all-sufficient Word to engage with, evaluate, and potentially enlist common grace information without becoming zombie-infected integrationists, proto-integrationists, or neo-integrationists.

In God’s Infinite Wisdom, He Sovereignly Dispenses Common Grace Wisdom to Unbelievers

In Volume 1 of Common Grace, after highlighting the Reformed doctrines of total depravity and the noetic effect of sin, Kuyper then emphasizes the role of the noetic effect of common grace.

“Do we not find among the pagan nations and unbelievers in our own surroundings many phenomena that show a certain inclination toward good things and a certain indignation about all kinds of crime? True, not an inclination toward anything that has to do with salvation, but an inclination toward what is virtuous and harmonious? Are there not acts of maliciousness and dishonesty, and violations of justice, against which the public conscience, also among nonbelievers, rebels? And are there not many deeds of neighborly love and mercy that can be mentioned that have been performed by unbelievers, sometimes putting believers to shame?

When Pharaoh’s daughter saved the infant Moses from the Nile, did she do evil or good? And is it therefore not clear that the absolute ruin of our nature by sin—a truth we wholeheartedly confess—is in many cases in conflict with reality? And do we then not see clearly how, in the face of such cases, we must do one of two things: either surrender our confession of the deadly character of sin or hold on to that confession with all our might, but then also confess along with it that there is a common grace at work that in many cases restrains the full, deadly effect of sin?” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, 300).

“It was not Israel who advanced the development of arts and sciences and business and trades; rather, what antiquity has bequeathed to Christian nations in this respect has come almost exclusively from the pagan peoples in Babylonia, Egypt, Persia, Greece, and Rome…. It is the story of Moses over and over again. The man of God gets his schooling from the wise men of Egypt, and it is from Egypt that Israel brings with it the knowledge of many kinds of crafts” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, 337-338).

In the quotes above, rather than remain generic, Kuyper moves to specific examples of common grace—Pharoah’s daughter, the arts and sciences of pagan people, the wisdom of the unredeemed Egyptians.

In Wisdom and Wonder, Kuyper is equally specific, this time highlighting, among others, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle as examples of philosophers who evidenced common grace insights.

“Anyone who ignores common grace can come to no other conclusion than that all science done outside the arena of the holy, lives off appearance and delusion, and necessarily results in misleading anyone listening to its voice. Yet the outcome shows that this is not the case. Among the Greeks, who were completely deprived of the light of Scripture, a science arose that continues to amaze us with the many beautiful and true things it offers.

The names of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle have always been esteemed among Christian thinkers. It is no exaggeration to insist that the thinking of Aristotle has been one of the most powerful instruments leading themselves to still deeper reflection. In modern times as well, no one can deny that in the disciplines of astronomy, botany, zoology, physics, and so on, a rich science is blossoming. Although being conducted almost exclusively by people who are stranger to the fear of the Lord, this science has nevertheless produced a treasury of knowledge that we as Christians admire and gratefully use” (Wisdom and Wonder, 52-53).

Kuyper continues in Volume 1 of Common Grace with these words about common grace throughout human history.

“The history of our human race through all these many centuries is therefore proof that on the one hand the terrible law of sin did indeed rule, but on the other a law of grace broke that power of sin…. Let us be understood clearly: this does not apply exclusively to the elect. Common grace does not treat them in a special way. What we expound here applies to our human race as such….. Common grace has operated for ages in China and India without there being any church of Christ in those countries. We still enjoy the fruits that have come from common grace in Greece and Rome in the days when even the name of Christ’s church had never yet been mentioned…. God has let the wonder of common grace operate among all peoples and in all nations, even where this had no direct connection with the salvation of the elect” (Common Grace, Vol. 1, 300-302).

In every era in every nation, Kuyper witnesses to the biblical truth of God’s common grace at work in the capacities and contributions of non-Christians.

God Sovereignly Dispenses Common Grace Scientific (Hard Sciences and Soft Sciences) Understanding to Unbelievers

In Wisdom and Wonder, Kuyper addresses common grace’s impact upon the field of science.

“We are really confronting a science that has arisen from the world, a science that lies very definitely under the dominion of sin and that nevertheless on the other hand, may boast of results from which sin’s darkening is virtually absent. We can explain this only by saying that although sin does indeed spread its corruption, nevertheless common grace has intervened in order to temper and restrain this operation of sin” (Wisdom and Wonder, 53).

What is the degree to which common grace mitigates the noetic effect of sin? According to Kuyper, “sin’s darkening is virtually absence.”

Kyper then examines science in light of the noetic effect of sin and the noetic effect of grace (common grace).

“Also as far as science is concerned, the situation we find is explicable only if we give both of these their due, on the one hand, the darkening of our understanding by sin, and on the other hand, God’s common grace that has placed a limitation on this darkening. That we very definitely may and must speak in this regard of God’s activity is immediately evident from the undeniable fact that in people like Plato and Aristotle, Kant and Darwin, stars of the first order have shined, geniuses of the highest caliber, people who expressed very profound ideas, even though they were not professing Christians. They did not have this genius from themselves, but received their talent from God who created them and equipped them for their intellectual labor” (Wisdom and Wonder, 53-54).

Notice in this quote that Kuyper includes not only the “hard sciences,” but also the “soft sciences” of philosophy—including the philosophical psychology of Plato and Aristotle. He assesses these philosophical psychologists as “stars of the first order, geniuses of the highest caliber, people who expressed very profound ideas.”

Kuyper continues, asking whether the noetic effect of sin means that non-Christians can no longer reason.

“In order to see this, we must not suffice with the general slogan, ‘darkening by sin,’ but must account for how this darkening works. Has it resulted in our inability any longer to think logically? Has sin induced in us an inability to perceive what exists and occurs around us? Does sin place a blindfold over our eyes so that we no longer see or observe? Absolutely not…. We have not ceased on account of sin to be rational creatures” (Wisdom and Wonder, 54).

Common Grace and the “Excelling” of the “Unbelieving World

In his 1898 Stone Lectures, Kuyper again examines sin and grace in the life of the unbeliever—including Plato.

“Sin places before us a riddle, which in itself is insoluble. If you view sin as a deadly poison, as enmity against God, as leading to everlasting condemnation, and if you represent a sinner as being ‘wholly incapable of doing any good, and prone to all evil,,’ and on this account salvable only if God by regeneration changes his heart, then it seems as if of necessity all unbelievers and unregenerate persons ought to be wicked and repulsive men.

But this is far from being our experience in actual life. On the contrary the unbelieving world excels in many things. Precious treasures have come down to us from the old heathen civilization.

In Plato you find pages which you devour.

Cicero fascinates you and bears you along by his noble tone and stirs up in you holy sentiments.

And if you consider . . . that which you derive from the studies and literary productions of professed infidels, how much there is which attracts you, with which you sympathize and which you admire.

It is not exclusively the spark of genius or the splendor of talent, which excites your pleasure in the words and actions of unbelievers, but it is often their beauty of character, their zeal, their devotion, their love, their candor, their faithfulness and their sense of honesty. Yea . . . not unfrequently you entertain the desire that certain believers might have more of this attractiveness. . . .” (Kuyper, 1898 Stone Lectures).

How can Kuyper justify his belief that “the unbelieving world excels in many things”? How can he support his conviction that “precious treasures have come down to us from the old heathen civilization”? Why would Kuyper devour the writings of Plato and be fascinated with Cicero? (A Christian fascinated with the secular!?) How could Kuyper be attracted to, sympathize with, and admire “the literary productions of professed infidels”? Why would Kuyper suggested that Christians should be excited by the attractive lives of unbelievers and frequently wish that believers “might have more of this attractiveness”? The answer to each of these questions:

God’s common grace.

Kuyper on General Revelation, Common Grace, and Human Government

In Volume 3 of Common Grace, Kuyper speaks of nations operating without the authority of common grace.

“Take the ancient Roman Empire or the ancient Greek colonies. No one denies that we find in these states an ordered society, nor that government in its proper sense existed in these territories. Yet it is equally certain that the government in these countries did not have any knowledge of God’s special revelation through the medium of Holy Scripture…. This leads us to a fixed conclusion. By means of the same common grace that led to the institution of government from the beginning, God also gave as much light as was necessary to enable assorted governments to fulfil their task throughout history” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 57).

“The only legitimate conclusion we may draw is that if God the Lord has ordained government for all nations, and yet has withheld the light of his Word from the vast majority of those nations, then the light for fulfilling their task must have come to these instituted governments by another means. And this is indeed the case, as long as we assume that government stands in the realm of common grace, thereby receiving from common grace any light needed to fulfill its task” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 58).

Speaking of Romans 2:14-15, general revelation, common grace, and human government, Kuyper explains,

“Here it is stated clearly that the light of God’s special revelation did not shine among Gentiles, who nevertheless did not walk in complete darkness. They were enlightened by the less clear yet holy light coming from general revelation that in common grace was imparted to these nations as well” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 58).

“Paul teaches us that the same God who instituted government also arrested the darkness of sin among the Gentiles through that same common grace. This general revelation kindled a measure of light through the participation of the conscience and public opinion (‘their thoughts accusing or excusing them’) in a manner sufficient to make possible an orderly society among people and the emergence of some form of government” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 58).

“It is clear that the ancient Romans, who did not know God’s Word and did not walk according to God’s full revelation, but only in the light of common grace, were able to raise both polity and the administration of justice to remarkably high levels. And this is precisely what demonstrates the perfection of God’s work in common grace. If God had done nothing but appoint a government and invest it with authority, while withholding the light necessary for the fulfillment of its task, the whole institution would have served no purpose. The fact that government truly is an instrument for preservation can be explained only by the fact that God did two things simultaneously: he instituted government and he granted it sufficient light. He did this both through common grace and apart from special revelation” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 59, italics in original).

According to Kuyper, God gave, “through the Noahic general covenant of grace, sufficient light to government that he has ordained—light sufficient for the fulfillment of its tasks, yet light that is apart from the administration of the Word” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 76).

Kuyper on Common Grace, Natural Revelation-Informed, Research-Informed, Experience-Informed Living

Commenting on Isaiah 28:24-29, Kuyper describes specific areas where God’s common grace instructs and informs people—His people, and those who are not His people.

“It is perfectly clear that the best way of waging war, of building roads and canals, or of promoting agriculture and industry, commerce and industry, is taught not by Scripture but by nature. Concerning agriculture, Isaiah says this emphatically in well-known, beautiful words:

‘Does he who plows for sowing plow continually? Does he continually open and harrow his ground? When he has leveled its surface, does he not scatter dill, sow cumin, and put in wheat in rows and barely in its proper place, and emmer as the border? For he is rightly instructed; his God teaches him. Dill is not threshed with a threshing sledge, nor is a cart wheel rolled over cummin, but dill is beaten out with a stick, and cumin with a rod. Does one crush grain for bread? No, he does not thresh it forever; when he drives his cart wheel over it with his horses, he does not crush it. This also comes from the Lord of hosts; he is wonderful in counsel and excellent in wisdom (Isa. 28:24-29).’

Here in Isaiah 28:24-29 we are clearly told that the way in which the land must be cultivated is shown by nature itself, and we are also told that this instruction of nature is nothing other than instruction from God himself. ‘His God teaches him.’ The same is true of war, when David says in Psalm 144:1, ‘Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle.’ And the same can be said of the development of industry and commerce. All this concerns matters that receive instruction in nature and through experience, and in all of this God himself causes the light to shine by which human beings must walk and act.

Any governing ruler fails in his duty or exceeds his authority if he either does not take the teaching of nature into account or obstructs it. Even in the part of his task that consists in taking care of his people, he is called to follow the lessons of nature and of experience with reality. And precisely for this reason, it is so necessary for him to consult with reality, with existing conditions, pay attention to what happens in other countries, and inform himself through reliable statistics about what experience teaches” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 79-80).

As the header to this section suggests, Kuyper is describing the common grace basis for general revelation/natural revelation-informed thinking/living.

Kuyper on Natural Revelation-Informed Governing

Kuyper is not just theoretical. As a prime minister himself, Kuyper’s theory/theology of government is practical, realistic.

“With humans, God’s instruction through nature occurs gradually, through trial and error via the path of experience. For human beings, therefore, effort, labor, and exertion are required. And a government that avoids this exertion or does not pay attention to the teachings of nature ends up moving the people backward instead of forward.

This also demonstrates how Christian statesmen, who perhaps are perceptive in terms of principles and spiritual interests but who neglect studying the realm of nature, considering the natural realm to be beneath them, are in the end going against God’s command. They deliberately slam shut the book of nature and experience and refuse to listen to the lessons, instructions, and teaching that God gives through nature and experience as they inform the task of governing.

It is easy to float along on speculative theory, but this is a denial of divine providence. God wills that for this part of its task, government must walk by the light that he himself has lit through nature and experience…. It is an altogether culpable neglect of an important realm of common grace” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 81).

Notice in the preceding quotes how Kuyper chastises and nouthetically confronts those who “neglect studying the realm of nature, considering the natural realm to be beneath them, are in the end going against God’s command.” Kuyper’s confrontation about “culpable neglect” reminds us of Calvin’s confrontation that Christians who do not avail themselves of common grace information are guilty of the sin of sloth (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, II.ii.16).

Kuyper on Common Grace and Civic Righteousness

In Kuyper’s theological language, common grace restrains or “arrests” sin and human depravity.

“On fallen beings, sunk in sin, common grace descends. And not simply on this person or that person, but on all people, albeit with differences in degree. Through that common grace, then, sin and human depravity are arrested. This makes the human person capable of doing good things on the civic level, receiving from God those rights and freedoms that are needed for civil society” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 87, italics in original).

Kuyper on Paul on Common Grace in Romans

Kuyper unites Romans 1 and the book or nature with Romans 2 and the book of conscience.

“The light of common grace revealed (even when imperfectly) enough of God’s will that the formation of the state and the functioning of government continued to be possible. The apostle Paul made this point especially in his epistle to the church at Rome. God’s ‘eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world’ (Rom. 1:20). And hence he points out that nonbelievers already possess the law written in their hearts under common grace, and ‘their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them’ (Rom. 2:15). The apostle’s position then, is not that these Gentiles were still in total darkness. Yes, they were in total darkness with regard to justification before God and salvation unto eternal life, but not with regard to civic life.

In that respect, they did have light—indeed, light of great significance—even to the extent that the fact that they had so often closed their eyes to that light was count against them. ‘By their unrighteousness the suppress the truth,’ for ‘what can be known about God (that is, by the light of common grace) is plain to them, because God has shown it to them’ (see Rom. 1:18-19). What God revealed was not through the prophets but in human life and in nature itself. For ‘his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature (that is, his will concerning our human life), have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made’ (Rom. 1:20). It was their fault that the light of common grace shone so dimly among them. ‘Although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools’ (Rom. 1:21-22). They fell into abhorrent idolatry. As just punishment for this, God gave them up to dishonorable passions, and from this their moral breakdown had to be explained. But this did not contradict the fact that the light of common grace always continued to shine upon them in part” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 150-151).

Kuyper on Two Means of Revelation: Special Revelation and Natural Revelation

According to the Bible, how does God reveal Himself to us?

“Divine revelation most assuredly is not limited to the Word. Our Confession states explicitly that we know God through two means: nature and Scripture. Nature encompasses a very extensive field of knowledge. Think only of Romans 1:18-120 and Romans 2:14-15. To this belongs, therefore, the knowledge of the whole of created nature; the scientific knowledge that has been discovered in nature; the knowledge of history and how God has led the peoples; the knowledge of ourselves and the human heart; the knowledge of fellow human beings and society. In short, this entails the knowledge of all creation with its development and what God has revealed about all creation in terms of his ordering of all of nature and life” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 160, italics in original).

According to Kuyper, what can we learn from the book of nature (Romans 1) and the book of conscience (Romans 2)? We can learn psychology: “the knowledge of ourselves and the human heart”. We can learn sociology: “the knowledge of fellow human beings and society.” Of course, Kuyper insists, in other places, that the ultimate authority for assessing any common grace knowledge is God’s Word.

Kuyper Nouthetically Confronts Believers Who Close Their Eyes to the Book of Nature

Again, Kuyper, like Calvin before him, chastises believers for ignoring the book of nature.

“And given our tendency as Christians to condemn the non-believers because they deliberately close their eyes to the light God has kindled in his Word, perhaps it is appropriate that we ask ourselves whether our own eyes are sufficiently open to perceive the light that issues from nature broadly construed” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 160-161, italics in original).

Believers condemn unbelievers for their blindness to natural revelation; Kuyper confronts believers for our blindness to natural revelation.

“In point of fact, it is undeniable that even among some Christians there is at times a disparaging of science and an indifference toward nature and art—a fact that would indicate how little we really do believe concerning the width and breadth of divine revelation” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 160-161, italics in original).

When we disparage science, we are disparaging God’s common grace.

Why would Kuyper express such strong confrontation? God reveals truth in natural revelation and in special revelation.

“Whether in nature or in Scripture a light shines that can allow us to know something about God. As human beings, we are bound to this light. We must catch that light, whatever its source” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 161).

Common Grace and Education

Kuyper is imminently practical and reasonable. Those who decry human learning are naïve about the source of their own most basic education.

“It is obvious that a good education in languages, in logic, in physics, and so on has been given by men who stood entirely outside the Christian faith. Individual countries show that crops can be grown, cattle can be bred, houses can be built, and rooms can be constructed without special revelation. None of this happens apart from God, and it is God himself who teaches the nations, but the point needing emphasis is that the light that facilitates all this does not proceed in the first place from Scripture” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 163).

Kuyper on Pseudo-Scriptural Interpretation (Versus “Pseudo-Science”)

Some people talk about “pseudo-science” where they use co-belligerent, negative assessments of science. Any and all science that disagrees with their preconceptions is always “pseudo-science.” One can always find support for one’s opinion—whether it is related to science or to Scripture.

Kuyper talked about pseudo-scriptural interpretation—not that Scripture is wrong, but that our interpretations are wrong, even when we think we’ve found the proof-text that supports our biased view.

“One has an opinion concerning a matter, takes the concordance, looks up a few texts under the word under consideration, and as long as one finds a text that says what one wants, one has settled the issue. But this is not a serious searching of the Scriptures, nor is it really search after God’s will. Rather, one has an opinion ready beforehand, and all that matters is finding support for one’s opinion in Scripture in order to be able to impose that opinion on others. And whether there are other texts that point in a different direction does not matter. In this way one has a text for his assertion, just as every heretic has his own text” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 183).

Co-belligerent research with science is like proof-texting with Scripture.

General Revelation and the Imago Dei

According to Kuyper, God ordered His world and designed His image bearers in such a way that we have the capacity to learn from God’s creation.

“We can and must acknowledge and confess unconditionally that all of creation in its origin, existence, and progress constitutes one rich, integrated revelation of what God in eternity thought and established in his decree. The only question is whether we human beings are gifted with a capacity to reflect that thinking of God” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 527).

For Kuyper, the answer is yes. God gifted us with the creational capacity to learn from creation.

“The great truth of what it means to be human is revealed to us, namely, that every human being is created according to the image of God. On this basis the Reformed churches confess that the human person received holiness, righteousness, and wisdom in his original nature—that is, not through supernatural grace but by virtue of his creation and the entire created order. Here, then, attention is drawn to a capacity bestowed upon human beings—a capacity enabling them to have a measure of insight into the thought of God that lies embedded and embodied in the creation, and to grasp it in such a way that from creation itself they might reflect the thought God embodied in that creation when he created it. This capacity of being ‘human’ was not added as something extra; rather, it belongs to the very foundation of human nature itself” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 528).

“We perceive three truths that are related: first, the full and rich clarity of God’s thoughts existed in God from eternity; second, in the creation God has revealed, embedded, and embodied a rich fullness of his thoughts; and, third, God created in human beings, as his image bearers, the capacity to comprehend, reflect upon, and construe as a unity these thoughts expressed in creation. Indeed, the very essence of human science rests on these three realities” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 528).

Kuyper on Common Grace and Descriptive Research

While Kuyper clearly and consistently declares that a Christian worldview is essential for developing a comprehensive understanding of life, he still taught the biblical truth that common grace enables even the unbeliever to discover amazing truths. He explains his theology in Volume 3, in wording that is very similar to his earlier statements in Volume 1.

“Anyone who is oblivious to common grace will tend to arrive at the conclusion that all science done outside the realm of the sacred, lives off appearance and delusion and that it will necessarily result in misleading anyone listening to its voice. Yet empirical evidence indicates that this is not the case.

Among the Greeks, who were completely deprived of the light of Scripture, a science arose that continues to amaze us with the many beautiful and accurate things that it offers us. The names of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle have always been esteemed among Christian thinkers. It is no exaggeration to insist that Aristotelian thought has been one of the most powerful instruments leading Christians themselves to even deeper reflection.

In the modern age as well, no one can deny that in the disciplines of astronomy, botany, zoology, physics, and so on a rich science has been blossoming. Despite being conducted almost exclusively by people who are strangers to the Christian faith, the practice of science nevertheless has produced a treasure of knowledge that we as Christians admire and gratefully use” (Kuyper, Common Grace, Vol. 3, 535).

Before we race to claim that Kuyper was only talking about “hard sciences,” do not miss who and what he included—Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle—“always esteemed among Christian thinkers.”

Later, Kuyper “double-downs,” even adding Darwin!

“As far as science is concerned, the situation we find is explicable only if we give both of these their due—namely, the darkening of our understanding by sin on the one hand, and God’s common grace that has restricted this darkening, on the other hand. That it is necessary to speak of God’s activity in this manner is immediately evident from the undeniable fact that in people like Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Darwin, stars of the first order have shined. These are geniuses of the highest caliber, people who expressed very profound ideas, even when they were not professing Christians. They did not possess such genius in and of themselves but received their talent from God, who created them and equipped them for their intellectual labor” (Kuyper, Common Grace, Vol. 3, 535-536).

Kuyper is not naïve. He realizes the questions people—you and me—will ask. So he asks and answers those questions:

“We need to account precisely for how this darkening works. Has sin made it such that we can no longer think logically? Does sin prevent us from perceiving what exists and occurs around us? And does sin blind our eyes to the extent that we no longer can perceive and observe? Absolutely not…. We have not ceased to be rational creatures on account of sin” (Kuyper, Common Grace, Vol. 3, 536).

Kuyper on Prescriptive Theory-Building of a Comprehensive Model

Now, does all of this mean that Kuyper thinks the unregenerate mind can create a comprehensive system of thought? No.

“Sin’s darkening lies in the fact that we lost the gift of grasping the true context, the proper coherence, the systematic integration of all things. Now we view everything only externally, not in its fundamental essence; we view things in a fragmented manner and not in their mutual connection and in their origin from God. That connection, that coherence of things based on their original connection with God, can be sensed only in our spirit. It can be known and reflected upon only to the extent that our spirit lives in vital relationship with God and is able to trace this coherence of divine intent proceeding from God” (Common Grace, Vol. 3, 536-537).

We might summarize Kuyper’s approach like this:

Rather than being a proto-integrationist who built his worldview from the unregenerate, Kuyper taught that the Bible systematically integrates all knowledge from all God-enlightened sources.

Kuyper systematically built his worldview on Divine Revelation—from the book of nature, from the book of conscience, and, supremely, from the book of Scripture.

Kuyper surrendered his regenerated mind to the infinite wisdom of God, studied common grace information and insights from the unregenerate, and evaluated all such insight/information using God’s all-sufficient Word.