Essay Compare And Contrast Kuyper And Absolutism

Over the years, generations have shared different perspectives on the idea of wealth and property. People have discussed the topic several times to explain what is right and wrong. Many agreed on the importance of wealth, while others viewed wealth as a source of evil. The population of Europe, when the Enlightenment occurred, often associated wealth with power. Therefore, the lower classes did not own any power over the government due to their lack of wealth. As the age of Enlightenment refreshed the way people thought, change was noticeable in Europe; however, people were still struggling to solve the problem that the ancient regime left behind. Many great thinkers, philosopher, and politicians were trying to define the problem and explain so people could adjust and understand each other; however, many of the philosopher, theologians did not agree on the results of the Enlightenment. Abraham Kuyper, the Dutch politician and theologian, and Russell H. Conwell, the American Baptist minister and writer, both spent a great amount of time defining and explaining the idea of wealth, poverty, and property for society. Whereas, Kuyper criticizes socialism and argues the
The reason why their perspective are different is explainable based on the environment they embrace. The outcomes of the French Revolution influenced Kuyper into a direction where he argues if the revolution was useless, whereas Conwell did not have a direct connection to the outcomes of the French Revolution due the geographical distance. Therefore, both Kuyper and Conwell have experienced differences in the outcomes of the French Revolution, which explains the contrast in their beliefs and perspectives. This does not necessarily mean that one is them is wrong or right, but they certainly have believes and values that they share, and ones that are differ from each