How is the covenant applied to society? Unfortunately, most recent scholarship concerning the covenant has failed to ask this question. There are only a handful of studies that even consider the social ramifications, Edmund S. Morgan’s brilliant research on the Puritan family being one of them. Studies on the covenant suffer on two counts: lack of basic Biblical work that pushes out into critical theological matters, and failure to consider the historical and social out-workings of its theology. My book is divided into two halves. Up to this point, I have concentrated on the Biblical meaning of the term. Now we should turn our attention to its application. To begin with, covenant has enabled Christians, when they have been successful, to dominate the earth. It is the model for dominion. Why? The dominion mandates of both testaments are structured according to the covenant: the cultural mandate in Genesis, and the Great Commission in the Gospel.
The Cultural Mandate
The first dominion mandate is often called the “cultural mandate” given to Adam and Eve on the sixth day of creation.
And God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so (Gen. 1:28-30).
Francis Nigel Lee, in his helpful work, The Central Significance of Culture, calls this segment of Scripture the “dominion charter.” Definitely, the tone of dominion rings throughout the passage, and the Christian Church has generally understood these words to mean that man is to dominate culture and society for the glory of God. There are no sacred/profane categories inherent in creation. The original garden had zones that were nearer to and farther away from God, but everywhere was sacred. Corporate man, male and female, was to spread “culture” (from cultural mandate). What is “culture”? “Culture” comes from “cultus,” meaning worship. Thus, the task of dominion was to transform the world into a place of worship, and thereby create true culture. No worship, in other words, means no culture. Dominion is not secularized work. It is sanctified labor involved in making society into a proper place to worship God. In Adam’s case, he was to take the raw materials on the ground and fashion a society, not just a cathedral, in concert with God’s presence. In our case, it consists of transforming the unethical debris of society into the glorious praise of God.
Specifically, this is done by means of the application of the covenant. The original mandate falls in the context of a covenantal order. The creation account of Genesis 1 says ten times, “Then God said” (Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 29). With “ten words” God creates the world, just as He speaks the law (covenant) with ten words (Deut. 4:13). Could the parallel be any more obvious? To be clear, however, let us look at the ten words of creation to see where the cultural mandate falls.
- “Let there be light” (1:3): Transcendence. Light conveys God’s glory, probably the strongest image of transcendence in the Bible.
- “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters” (1:6): Hierarchy. Waters are arranged from the waters above to the waters below. The Noachic Flood indicated that the waters above had primary importance, representing God’s judgment.
- “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear” (1:9): Ethics. The land in the Old Testament had a central cause/effect relationship to everything else. For example, when a murder is committed, a man’s blood “cries out from the land” (Gen. 4:10). Point three also involves ethical and geographical boundaries.
- “Let the earth sprout vegetations, plants yielding seed” (1:11): Sanctions. This seed-bearing process is specifically mentioned in the sanctions section of Deuteronomy (Deut. 28:38-40).
- “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years… and to govern the day and the night” (1:14): Continuity. The great lights are the instruments of continuity from one day to the next – continuity made visible by discontinuity.
- “Let the waters teem… let the birds fly…. And God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and multiply'” (1:20-22): Transcendence. Creatures of special transcendent glory are mentioned: the birds that fly above, and the great sea monsters (Leviathan, cf. Job 3:8; 41:1; Psa. 74:14; 104:26).
- “Let the earth bring forth living creatures” (1:24): Hierarchy. Animals are part of the specific hierarchy of the earth. They are used to represent man as sacrifices (Gen. 3:21).
- “Let Us make man in Our image… and let him rule” (1:26): Ethics. Man rules over the animals by carrying out this dominion commandment. Dominion and ethics are inseparable.
- “Be fruitful, subdue, and rule” (1:28): Sanctions. All things are to be brought under and ratified in a covenant relationship.
- “I have given every plant… and every tree” (1:29): Continuity. Man is given a specific inheritance of food, the meal. Through this nourishment, man is able to lay hold of his inheritance.
The “ten words” of creation have the same double witness of the covenant, as do the Ten Commandments. This being the case, the “cultural mandate” falls on the fourth word of the second series (Gen. 1:28), in other words, the sanction point of the covenant. As it so happens, just before the mandate, we read, “God blessed them,” a sanction concept (blessing). Therefore, it would seem that the cultural mandate was intended to be a process whereby the world was shaped into a “cultus” by covenant ratification. But also notice that the fourth creation word (second series) is a virtual repetition of the one before it, “Let them rule.” Why? I have stressed throughout the book that ethics, or faithfulness to the covenant, establishes dominion. The slight variation in Genesis, however, means the stipulations must be ratified before the full dominion process is completed. Indeed, this is the first thing Adam does with the woman. He brings her under the stipulations by a special oath, “This is now bone of my bones” (Gen. 2:23).
The covenantal design of the cultural mandate is unmistakable. Had Adam obeyed, he would have completed his covenantal commission. But the Fall interrupted everything. The seventh day, the day of special blessing, again a sanction word, was turned into a day of cursing. The Day of the Lord became a day of judgment. Ironically, as we have already seen, “curse” not only judged the world’s rebellion to God’s first covenantal mandate, it also provided a means for redemption to emerge, ultimately of course in the death of Christ. His death accomplished the original cultural mandate by receiving the curse-sanction, and introduced the blessing-sanction back into the world. This appears in a special way at a final meal He conducts, just before His ascension. It is here that He gives a new cultural mandate, the Great Commission.
The Great Commission
The Great Commission is a covenant within a covenant. Looking at the life of Jesus, it falls within the continuity section. Jesus gathered His disciples to a communion meal, and prepared them for His final blessing (Luke 24:41-51). In this context, He gave the blessing in the form of a new commission, just like Moses had done with the nation. Jesus had reached the point of giving the adopted heirs their new inheritance. What was it? The content of the Great Commission tells us. The disciples were given the “nations” of the world to bring to Christ, just as Israel of old had been given the land of Palestine and surrounding territories. The New Covenant people were given the world. How? Their dominion mandate was specifically laid out in the form of the five points of covenantalism.
The Covenantal Structure of the Great Commission
True Transcendence: Matthew 28:16
Hierarchy: Matthew 28:17-18
Ethics: Matthew 28:19a
Sanctions: Matthew 28:19b
Continuity: Matthew 28:20
- True Transcendence (Matt. 28:16)
The Great Commission Covenant starts, “But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated” (Matt. 28:16). Many of the covenants begin on God’s mountain. The Adamic covenant had a mountain in Eden from which the four rivers flowed. Moses received the covenant on top of Mt. Sinai. The mountain concept implied God’s transcendence and immanence. Its shape and height pointed to a Being outside of man (transcendence). This was consistently a place where God made Himself known (immanence). The mountain became a symbol of the true Church, God’s dwelling place: “Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised, in the city of our God, His holy mountain” (Ps. 48:1).
The Book of Hebrews speaks of God’s revealing Himself on two mountains, Mt. Sinai as a symbol of the Old Covenant, and Mt. Zion as an image of Christ and the Church. The first mountain was a place where God was present and had all the characteristics of God Himself. If an animal even touched the mountain, it had to be put to death. Why? The “beast” had violated God’s presence.
For you have not come to a mountain that may be  touched and  to a blazing fire, and  to darkness and  gloom and  whirlwind, and  to the blast of a trumpet and  the sound of words which sound was such that those who heard begged that no further word should be spoken to them for they could not bear the command, “If even a beast touches the mountain, it will be stoned.” And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, “I am full of fear and trembling” (Heb. 12:18-21).
This mountain had seven characteristics, numbered above. The “sabbath,” seventh day, was a sign of the Old Covenant, a symbol that everything ended in judgment. It was on that day that Adam, Eve, and the serpent were judged. Just as the introduction to the suzerain treaties invoked fear when the suzerain was identified, so the mountain of God with its transcendent/immanent qualities drew out the same response.
The Hebrews passage goes on to speak of another mountain. It begins with the word of contrast, “but.” Its characteristics speak of a mountain that is more transcendent and immanent through the person of Christ; it is heavenly, yet present with the Church on earth.
But you have come to  Mount Zion and  to a city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and  to myriads of angels in festal assembly,  and to the church of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven and  to God, the judge of all, and  to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, and  to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and  to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel (Heb. 12:22-24).
This mountain has eight characteristics because the New Covenant was begun on the eighth day of history, the day after the Old Covenant sabbath, the day of the resurrection. It is explained from outside in, working its way to the center where the ark of the covenant would have been in the Temple. Although it is similar to Mt. Sinai, it is dramatically different. Mt. Sinai’s mountain was earthly with a heavenly presence, meaning the presence of God was limited in scope to Mt. Sinai and other special manifestations. The New Covenant mountain is heavenly with an earthly presence, meaning its immanence is broader and comprehensively covers the whole earth.
So, when Christ begins the Great Commission by taking His disciples to a mountain, He symbolizes that the New Covenant starts from a transcendent and immanent point, none other than Jesus Christ Himself. The Church is to go to this new mountain, receive Him, walk off of it with Him, and go into the world to shape it into a new “cultus.”
- Hierarchy (Matt. 28:17-18)
After coming to the mountain, “When they [the disciples] saw Him, they worshipped Him; but some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth'” (Matt. 28:17-18). The citation of “authority” follows the covenant pattern: hierarchy. Moses had final authority in the Deuteronomic covenant. Christ replaces him. Moses made the connection between worship and authority, when he warned Israel at the end of the hierarchical section not to bow down to idols (Deut. 4:15-24). The structure of the Ten Commandments confirms this pattern. The second commandment forbids idolatry.
This Christological hierarchy has an important ramification for the Church and the world. When Christ says, “All authority has been given to Me,” He means now; He has it in heaven and on earth; there is no delay! This authority is not make-believe. It is not some exclusively spiritual power, for He calls on His disciples to go out and bring the nations under this authority. Nations are real, historical entities. They are not subdued by make-believe power in some make-believe, non-historical world.
Christ’s authority is not limited to heaven. He has it on earth. He said so, on earth. He said so before His Ascension. And His Ascension accentuates His full heavenly and earthly authority even more so. It served to activate this power because it was here that He sat down at the right hand of God the Father to rule. As the familiar verse of the most popular eschatological Psalm quoted in the New Testament says, “The Lord said to My Lord, sit Thou at My right hand until I make Thine enemies a footstool under Thy feet” (Ps. 110:1). Think of the implications of this statement. We know that Jesus is the “My Lord” of this statement. He sat down at the “Lord’s” right hand at the Ascension (Col. 3:1). Thus, He cannot move from the right hand of God the Father, not even to rapture the Church, until all the enemies are defeated. Christ has and does exercise full authority because of His Resurrection. He has ascended on high where His triumphant heavenly reign now establishes His earthly rule!
- Ethics (Matt. 28:19a)
The new covenantal mandate continues next with a stipulation, “Go and make disciples of the nations” (Matt. 28:19). Christ’s command logically grows out of the previous statements on authority. A “disciple” is primarily one who is under Christ’s authority. He goes where Christ goes and does what Christ does. He did not say, “Have an experience and join the rest of us who have had a mystical experience.” Nor did He say, “learn a catechism and bask with us in the knowledge of this new catechism.” No, Christ defined discipleship in terms of authority and obedience.
Jesus’ commission has stipulations. He said, “teaching them to observe all that I commanded you” (v. 20). What were Christ’s “commandments”? At one point He summarized them for us. A lawyer asked Him, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” (Matt. 22:36). He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two hang all the Law and the Prophets” (v. 36-40). Christ did not initiate any “novel” idea of law, but these two laws summarized all law. So when given an opportunity to outline His commandments, He affirmed the old ones. He even said He did not come to destroy them (Matt. 5:17ff.).
But what about the “new commandment” which Christ gave, “to love one another, as I have loved you” (John 13:34)? What was “new” about it? It was not new in the sense that this commandment had not been around before. We just noted that the Old Testament commanded men to love their neighbors as themselves (Matt. 22:36ff.). “Loving one another” is not a new command. “Loving one another as Christ has loved the Church” is new. The newness is in terms of Christ, so the new commandment is actually a renewed commandment, a commandment that has died and been resurrected through the death of Jesus. These are the stipulations. They are the laws of the Old Covenant renewed through Christ. The program of conquest is still a process of covenanting with God.
Christ further stipulates that these commandments are to be applied to the “nations.” The scope of the Great Commission is not to be confined to the “church.” Rather it reaches out by definition to “nations,” to the political arena. And not just one nation or political scheme. It is multi-national. Every magistrate in every land is supposed to apply the stipulations of Christ, the Word of God (Rom. 13:1ff.). Every missionary in every land should be striving to apply the Great Commission commandments.
The idea of missionaries going into other countries and deliberately trying to avoid “affecting culture” is utterly absurd. Significantly, the same theory was used by the Jesuits in the seventeenth century in China. Barraclough’s observation is telling.
The Jesuit missionaries to China in the 17th century, far from attempting to impose a European pattern of Christianity, did all they could to assimilate Christianity to Chinese patterns of civilization. They were careful to dress in the robes of Chinese mandarins, and their object was to show that Christian doctrine and Confucianism were compatible and supplemented each other…. Their efforts, after some initial success, were brought to nothing, not by Chinese hostility, but by the opposition of Christians in Europe.
Eventually, the missionaries were brought home because they were converting to Confucianism – the Chinese brand of situational ethics! This type of approach has been taken in the Third World for a long time. For 150 years there has been intense missionary activity in the Third World. Today, the Marxists are kicking out the Church. How have they gained such power? Because missionaries have not evangelized, or have not been able to evangelize, with a complete Biblical world-and-life view. They have brought a gospel without law, and this “lawless gospel” has not changed the world. If anything, the resistance to Christianity has been made worse, not better. The missions and churches have allied themselves to a now-collapsing humanist status quo. The Marxists are overthrowing the status quo, and they are steadily removing the churches. They are systematically teaching the West that culture is not neutral. Although there will be distinctives of each land, and Biblical law is necessarily cast in many forms, Biblical culture is a culture based on the Word of God.
For example, clothing may be decorated differently, but there is clothing! Representative government may have a “parliament” instead of a “congress,” but there is government by representation. Homosexuality is homosexuality in any land, and its unrepentant practitioners deserve the death penalty (Rom. 1:18-32; cf. “worthy of death” in v. 32). AIDS is AIDS in any land, and it threatens whole populations. Christ says the “nations” are to be discipled by His law. The skill of the missionary is in seeing God’s law asserted over the nation he is evangelizing. This has many expressions, but it is expressed!
This is the third section of the Great Commission Covenant. Notice that there is an overlap in this part of the covenant. The specific way to disciple the “nations” is through baptism and instruction (vv. 19-20a). Making a disciple begins at baptism, which is receiving the symbolic, yet covenantally real, sanctions of Christ. Then the commandments” are taught (v. 20). Why does the Great Commission Covenant overlap the ethical and the judicial? Teaching the law of God both precedes and follows baptism. Also, Christ is instructing the disciples and at the same time telling them “how to.” The “dovetailing” of these concepts, however, makes for a perfect connection to the next section of the covenant, the sanctions.
- Sanctions (Matt. 28:19b)
Christ commissions the disciples to sanction the nations by “baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Like the Deuteronomic sanctions, baptism is a symbol of God’s self-maledictory oath. Jesus says of His own death, ”Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” (Mark 10:39). In other words, the death of Christ is a baptism. Through Christ, God fulfills His own maledictory oath to save man. When the covenant is entered by baptism, God’s oath fulfilled in Christ is consigned to the recipient.
For this reason baptism has dual sanctions. Because baptism is a symbol of Christ’s death, it represents life and death. Paul says, “Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). Baptism applies life and death to the baptized. If he perseveres, then he has life. If he falls away, he eventually dries up like a branch, is cut off, and is thrown into the fire (John 15:6).
Baptism is a real symbol. The Trinitarian formula for baptism explains the relationship between symbol and reality. God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct but not separate. To refresh our memory: This Trinitarian guide means baptism is neither an “empty” symbol, nor is it more than a symbol, meaning the substance of water has the power to save. So, faith is not to be separated from baptism, but distinguished from it. The New Testament tells people to be baptized to be saved, while at the same time it distinguishes faith. Ananias commands Paul, ”Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on His name” (Acts 22:16). Baptism is God’s claim on man and man’s entrance into the covenant. But where is faith? Baptism is the normal way of professing faith. Thus, Acts 22:16 adds, “Calling on His name.” Only this interpretation does justice to the very language of the New Testament and preserves evangelical faith at the same time.
Finally, Jesus’ language in the Great Commission says the nations are to be baptized household by household. How do we know households (infants) are to be baptized? Jesus says, “Disciple the nations (neuter gender), baptizing them (masculine gender)” (Matt. 28:19). “Nations” is the antecedent of the personal pronoun “them.” Why the discrepancy between the pronoun and its antecedent? The “nations” are not to be baptized all at once. The “nations” are to be baptized household by household. This interpretation is confirmed by the actual conversion and baptism of whole households (Acts 16). The conversion of the family, and not just the individual, is the key to the fulfillment of the Great Commission.
The spread of the Gospel is not a top-down operation. Salvation comes from above, in that it is applied through the work of the Holy Spirit. But normally, the spread of the Gospel should be from household to household, “leavening.” This is certainly what we see in the Book of Acts. The Gospel begins in the menial households of the Roman Empire, and it spreads to the greatest family, Caesar’s household, when Paul is taken captive and converts Caesar’s own bodyguards.
The household concept also reinforces the concept of the priesthood of all believers. Protestants say that they believe in this idea, but the way they baptize people does not always reflect this faith. If the head of a family accepts Christ as Savior, and therefore places himself or herself under the covenant sign of baptism, with its dual sanctions of blessing and cursing, then what about those who are under his or her authority? Do they remain outside this covenant administration? The head of the household is the representative in that household for all those under his or her authority. He or she becomes a priestly representative of Christ in the household. But Protestants radically individualize the covenant. They regard it as being no more than a symbol for the individual who is baptized. The priesthood of all believers becomes the priesthood of no believers, for the necessarily representative character of God’s priesthood is denied.
Not to baptize household units is a failure to be consistent with the Trinity, which is one and many. It is also inconsistent with the hierarchical principle of priestly representation. Just like the Deuteronomic covenant, therefore, the Great Commission has all of the aspects of sanctions’ principle. The Trinitarian Name of God is the key which unlocks all the problems surrounding baptism. God’s Name – attached through the sanction of baptism – is so powerful that it brings life to covenant-keepers and death to covenant-breakers.
- Continuity (Matt. 28:20)
The Great Commission Covenant closes with “Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:20). Christ’s presence was the new inheritance. Deuteronomy establishes that inheritance is received at the throne of God-where He is present. It is this unique throne-room presence that Christ promises. Moreover, in our study of continuity in Deuteronomy we have learned that man receives ordination (commission), food (sacred meal of communion), and anointing. If we keep the Great Commission in context, it is apparent that all of the features are here. The Great Commission is given on the eve of the arrival of the Holy Spirit, in the midst of a sacred meal.
Fifty days after Passover was the time of Pentecost, a great feast, symbolizing the coming of the harvest. It also referred to the time of the Jubilee. The year of Jubilee was every fiftieth year. During this year, the land returned to the families of the original owners. Dominion was given back to the rightful heirs. Putting these ideas together, we see that the coming of God’s Presence was the true harvest of the world. The earth started to be given back to the true owners. The movement from God’s throne to the edge of the world begins. What Jesus willed at the Sermon on the Mount – “The meek shall inherit the earth” (Matt. 5:5), meaning meek before God-actually transpires.
But first Christ had to depart in order to sit at the right hand of God. After He gives the Great Commission, He ascends into heaven. His presence is left behind through the Holy Spirit and the Lord’s Supper. The Spirit is especially present at this meal. Life, health, and healing are tied to it. If taken unlawfully, sickness and death result. Paul says, “For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep [die]” (I Cor. 11:30).
The meal itself represents the whole inheritance. What is the New Covenant inheritance? The whole world. Jesus redeemed the world, and the meal is the Church’s first claim on what rightfully belongs to it. Feeding on Christ, God’s people lay hold of the One who owns all things. As his “younger brother” (Christ being the true “first-born”) the Church receives what He has. Here, continuity is established.
Paul argues that Christ lays everything up for His Church:
He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in heaven and on earth. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestinated according to His purpose Who works all things after the counsel of His will…. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him Who fills all in all (Eph. 1:9-23).
So, the Church first encounters its inheritance at the meal of inheritance. The Church needs the food of Christ. It should eat it weekly (Acts 20:7-12). Communion should not be viewed as some insignificant ritual tacked onto the Christian faith. Jesus’ meal is the place where the Church receives its inheritance and strength to continue on. As long as the meal is taken in faith, the Church will grow and strengthen. Taken in unbelief, it will die. Why? Because Christ is really present (although not physically)! He is present everywhere in the New Covenant, but His presence is special in the meal of inheritance. Because He is everywhere, however, all of the illegitimate sons (bastards) of the earth will eventually be driven off, or else adopted into the covenant.
The Church dominates the world by means of this covenantal mandate, extending the first dominion mandate forward. Dominion began as a covenantal application. Christ stipulates that dominion is still by covenant. But now it is time to be even more specific. It would seem that if the general dominion mandate is covenantal, then the particulars will be too. How about the main institutions of society? We have already seen that the Great Commission involves nations and families: the Church goes out and conquers family by family until the Gospel reaches the upper political echelons of society.
In the next chapter, I will begin this covenantal application with the family, showing how it plays a vital role in the over-all dominion of the world. Some of the questions I will be answering are: What is a family? How does the covenantal model resolve the divorce question? How has the covenantal model been used in history to create strong family ties?
I begin first by showing that the covenant is the Biblical model by which the family is to be run.
 Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Family (New York: Harper & Row,  1966).
 Francis Nigel Lee, The Central Significance of Culture (Nutley, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1976), p. 10.
 Of course many have rejected the notion that this mandate still applies in the New Covenant age. Leo Tolstoy was militantly opposed to “culture” altogether, believing that Old Testament Law had been entirely done away with. See the book by the theological liberal, H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1951), pp. 45-82. Niebuhr, himself sympathetic to the non-transformation of culture, refers to “conversionists” of Church history who believed in only changing men “subjectively,” but not the transformation of the world “objectively” (pp. 190ff.).
 Of course, there are other views of culture, stripped of this “liturgical” orientation. Nigel Lee refers to them as “materialistic and idealistic” views of the cultural mandate: Central Significance of Culture, pp. 1-20. For an excellent presentation of a Christian view of culture, see Klaas Schilder, Christ and Culture (Winnipeg: Premier,  1977).
 We know Eden was on a mountain because there were rivers flowing off it, and water does not flow uphill (Gen. 2:9ff.)!
 See Appendix 1.
 Geoffrey Barraclough, ed., The Christian World: A Social and Cultural History (New York: Harry N. Abrams Publishers, 1981), p. 29. Barraclough’s view of history is Marxist – class struggle etc. – but he does have some interesting insights.