THE ONE AND THE MANY, STUDIES IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF ORDER AND ULTIMACY by Rousas John Rushdoony. Craig Press, Box 13, Nutley, N. J. 07110, 1971 , pp. 388, $6.50. Reviewed by Rev. Johan O. Tangelder of Wellandport, Ontario.
Modern man faces the complete collapse of his culture. Meaning has gone. “The era of humanism Of modernity, the belief in the present moment as its own troth and in man as his own ultimate, is rapidly facing radical collapse” (p. 363).
The heart of our modern dilemma is the “presupposition of the AUTONOMY of the mind of man. This A PRIORITY characterizes modern philosophy” (p. 296). Our age is strongly influenced by humanism, “a religious belief in the sufficiency of man as his own lord, his own source of law, his own savior. Instead of God and His law-word as the measure of all things, humanism has made man the measure of reality” (p. 372). This humanism has placed its stamp upon religious thought. The basic aspect of modernism is “humanism” (p. 350).
Rushdoony, who belongs to the school of the presuppositionalists along with H. Dooreweerd, D. H. Th. Vollenhoven, Cornelius Van Til, and others, examines the philosophies underlying the phenomena of our time and their failures. The One and the Many is in a sense a critique of theoretical thought. The basic problem we witness is the failure to solve the question of the one and the many, of the individual and society. “Whether recognized or not, every argument and every theological, philosophical, political, or any other exposition is based on a presupposition about man, God, and society—about reality. This presupposition rules and determines the conclusion; the effect is the result of a cause. And one such basic presupposition is with reference to the one and the many” (p. 2). What is the answer to this problem? The doctrine of the ontological trinity brings to an end the tension between the one and the many (p. 356, cf. pp. 9f.) Rushdoony as a Christian involved in apologetics has as his basic working premise the Triune God as revealed in the infallible Scriptures. The Word of God is his appeal and authority.
Rushdoony has a message for us that we cannot lay aside. He is prophetic and lays bare the weaknesses we have as evangelical. Christians He states that “Christianity, in its biblical declaration a world religion calling for world dominion in terms of Jesus Christ, is now unwilling to think in terms of dominion” (p. 373). We have become “crumb-pickers,” who are content to let the devil attempt to establish a culture but refuse to believe that God requires it of His people” (pp. 373f).
Though I have much appreciation for the general tenets of the book, I do have a question about Rushdoony’s kingdom concept. There seems to be an over-emphasis on the here and the now. Should we bring about the new heaven and earth through our own efforts? Are we able to do so? I fail to see this in Scripture. Rushdoony says: “Christianity has ceased to be the motive force of society. Not only has Christianity been opposed by humanism, but, from within its ranks, false eschatologies—premillenialism and amillenialism—have led to a retreat from the world and a denial of victory therein. This is a surrender of culture to the enemy” (p. 373). This is certainly an overstatement and rather sweeping. We must see the kingdom as the now and the not yet. We must occupy until Jesus comes again.
The author has not written for the “ordinary” layman. A basic understanding of the history of philosophy is presumed. Rushdoony tries to do too much in his book. Therefore, he becomes too abrupt here and there. The One and the Many should be in the library of every minister and student as it stimulates the mind, offers a sound critique on the underlying problems we face, and gives us new visions of the work we have to do in our age which is at the end of its rope.
Modern man faces the complete collapse of his culture. Meaning has gone. “The era of humanism Of modernity, the belief in the present moment as its own troth and in man as his own ultimate, is rapidly facing radical collapse” (p. 363).
The heart of our modern dilemma is the “presupposition of the AUTONOMY of the mind of man. This A PRIORITY characterizes modern philosophy” (p. 296). Our age is strongly influenced by humanism, “a religious belief in the sufficiency of man as his own lord, his own source of law, his own savior. Instead of God and His law-word as the measure of all things, humanism has made man the measure of reality” (p. 372). This humanism has placed its stamp upon religious thought. The basic aspect of modernism is “humanism” (p. 350).
Rushdoony, who belongs to the school of the presuppositionalists along with H. Dooreweerd, D. H. Th. Vollenhoven, Cornelius Van Til, and others, examines the philosophies underlying the phenomena of our time and their failures. The One and the Many is in a sense a critique of theoretical thought. The basic problem we witness is the failure to solve the question of the one and the many, of the individual and society. “Whether recognized or not, every argument and every theological, philosophical, political, or any other exposition is based on a presupposition about man, God, and society—about reality. This presupposition rules and determines the conclusion; the effect is the result of a cause. And one such basic presupposition is with reference to the one and the many” (p. 2). What is the answer to this problem? The doctrine of the ontological trinity brings to an end the tension between the one and the many (p. 356, cf. pp. 9f.) Rushdoony as a Christian involved in apologetics has as his basic working premise the Triune God as revealed in the infallible Scriptures. The Word of God is his appeal and authority.
Rushdoony has a message for us that we cannot lay aside. He is prophetic and lays bare the weaknesses we have as evangelical. Christians He states that “Christianity, in its biblical declaration a world religion calling for world dominion in terms of Jesus Christ, is now unwilling to think in terms of dominion” (p. 373). We have become “crumb-pickers,” who are content to let the devil attempt to establish a culture but refuse to believe that God requires it of His people” (pp. 373f).
Though I have much appreciation for the general tenets of the book, I do have a question about Rushdoony’s kingdom concept. There seems to be an over-emphasis on the here and the now. Should we bring about the new heaven and earth through our own efforts? Are we able to do so? I fail to see this in Scripture. Rushdoony says: “Christianity has ceased to be the motive force of society. Not only has Christianity been opposed by humanism, but, from within its ranks, false eschatologies—premillenialism and amillenialism—have led to a retreat from the world and a denial of victory therein. This is a surrender of culture to the enemy” (p. 373). This is certainly an overstatement and rather sweeping. We must see the kingdom as the now and the not yet. We must occupy until Jesus comes again.
The author has not written for the “ordinary” layman. A basic understanding of the history of philosophy is presumed. Rushdoony tries to do too much in his book. Therefore, he becomes too abrupt here and there. The One and the Many should be in the library of every minister and student as it stimulates the mind, offers a sound critique on the underlying problems we face, and gives us new visions of the work we have to do in our age which is at the end of its rope.