The Influence of the Dutch

"The Dutch?" you might ask. Did they have an influence on any thing? Aren't the Dutch those people from that tiny country, who live in windmills, and grow tulips? What is that country even called? isn't it Holland?
Well let me start off by addressing your questions, yes the country of the Dutch is very small. It is actually smaller than Nebraska. Now as to the Dutch living in windmills, windmills were actually workplaces, not residences, and today they are more of a national symbol than anything else. It is also true that the Dutch are known for their tulips, but those too, serve in a large part as a national icon. Lastly Holland is merely a province in the Netherlands. To equate the Netherlands with Holland, would be as offensive to the Dutch as a foreigner equating the U.S. with California.
So today I would like to discuss three areas of world culture that the Dutch significantly influenced.
The exploration and settlement of countries,
Philosophy,
and some of their most influential individuals.

Now historically, in the realm of exploring, discovering, and settling countries the Netherlands had a major role. In the 16-17 hundreds it was a major sea power. During that period, it did a lot of colonization, most of the result of which can still be seen. For example, the first Europeans to settle South Africa were Dutch protestants. In addition, the most spoken, and one of the several offical languages there is Afrikaans, a mixture of Dutch and African. Also because of their sea power, the Dutch participated in the exploration and discovery several well known landmasses, New Zealand, which is named after a Dutch province, and Australia, which for over a hundred years was known as New Holland.
Perhaps most important of all, the Dutch had a hand to play in the settling of America.
Albany, New York was started as a Dutch settlement and New York City itself was formerly known as New Amsterdam, after the largest city in the Netherlands. In fact, New Netherlands in the Hudson River Valley, New York was first settled by the Dutch. To this day, many names in and around New York, are derived from Dutch. Who knows whether New York city would ever have become the World landmark and American icon, it is today had it not been for the Dutch.
My second point is perhaps a little more recent. Within the past century, several Christian Dutch Philosophers and their heirs have made huge impacts not only in philosophy and Christian apologetics, but in every area of life. The first of these philosophers was Abraham Kuyper, a man who taught that Christianity concerns more than a man's salvation, but his entire life. Whether it is work Business, Politics, Farming, or Engineering we should never forget that every action must and will be influenced by our worldview.
Cornelius Van Til, Kuyper's intellectual heir, was born and raised in Holland, Netherlands. He became the philosophical Father of Van Tillian Apologetics. Now I suspect most of you know what apologetics is, but I will briefly define it for those who don't. Christian Apologetics is the defense of the Christian faith. Van Til definitely didn't make up a whole new argument for Christianity, rather his apologetic method masterfully follows the commands of scripture, to argue for the truth of scripture and the existence of God.
The work of these men has led to great reformation in the realms of Christian Education, Worldview, and Philosophy.
Now you might feel that this speech is really hopping around, from nation building, to apologetics, to important individuals, but I felt it would be important while dealing with the influence of the Netherlands, to deal with one of their great artists, and one of their great missionaries. Both men who are very famous individuals. Rembrandt Van Rijn was a protestant artist in the sixteen hundreds. His works are some of the most acclaimed of that period. He especially excelled in his portraits of Biblical events. His biographer Visser't Hooft compliments him saying, "Rembrandt is the painter whose art seeks to express a faith exclusively rooted in the gospel."
While not related or a contemporary of Rembrandt, Andrew van der Bijl, also had a faith rooted in the gospel. Now while Mr. Van der Bijl is a famous Missionary you probably do not know who I am talking about. That's because in America he is known simply as Brother Andrew. Now you might remember him. During the time of the Iron curtain and the Soviet Union, Brother Andrew would deliver Bibles to believers in Communist held countries. Now with the collapse of the Iron Curtain, he mainly ministers in Muslim countries. 54 years ago he became the founder of Open Doors Mission,(not the poverty outreach.) a worldwide ministry to the persecuted church.

"Wow!" you might say. How did we start with the Netherlands, and go on to windmills, philosophy, art and missions?! Would you agree now that the Dutch have had a little more influence than you previously might have thought? Indeed this tiny tulip growing nation has influenced world nations, languages, philosophies, art, and missions. Even a little country has more to it than meets the eyes.

Ehud, Resistance Leader.

Carefully planned assassination attempts... Militia resistance... the overthrow of military occupation... Sounds like a war documentary, doesn’t it? Often we do not visualize Bible stories as documented fact but rather almost as just a good story.
When it comes to Ehud one of the first judges in Israel, it's no different. We rarely consider him as a undercover agent or a general. Sometimes we almost forget he was an actual historical figure. So today, I would like to help you put the "story" in it's real perspective, I would like to dig a little deeper into the brilliant execution of his plot to assassinate Eglon king of Moab and overthrow the occupation forces in Israel.
Now as a background, in that day, the Moabites, in an alliance with Ammon and Amalek had penetrated Israel, set a garrison in Jericho, the City of Palms, and demanded tribute. This continued 18 years, till Israel called to God, and he raised up a leader.

Judges describes Ehud as "a left-handed man. By whom the children of Israel sent tribute to Eglon."
God's chosen judge, was a man of high regard, as it was he who was chosen to present Israel's tribute to Eglon.
Ehud was suited perfectly for the job of leading Israel, and he was a perfect assassin. He had access to the King and he was a man of resource, as he made his own weapons. he was also left handed. Now you might ask why being left-handed is a benefit to an assassin, or is even an important fact to document? I'll get there.
First he designed his weapon. Scripture says "(it was double-edged and a cubit in length)" The described weapon was a dagger approximately this long maybe a little longer (show 14 inch dagger.). His dagger really was a deadly weapon. It was double edged like this one. It was long enough to do a lot of damage, and yet small enough to conceal.
Now according to scripture, Ehud "fastened it under his clothes on his right thigh."
Why is this mentioned? Well as a left handed man, the side he drew his weapon from, was the opposite side of most men. The importance of this is that if King Eglon's security guards conducted quick searches on the tribute bearers, there was much less of a chance that the dagger be discovered. You might ask if the security could be that stupid, to search only the most probable side. I honestly believe so. The example I think of, to illustrate laid back security, is the Iowa State Capitol. Whenever people visit the capitol they are required to go through a metal detector, but there are many security loopholes. The deadly flaw in the system, is the laziness of the guards. I have literally walked through the machine with metal on me, all I had to do was explain to them that it was steel brackets on my shoes setting it off. My point is, lax security does the almost the bare minimum to check for weapons. Such is what I suspect was the case for Ehud. He was able, because of his left handedness, to put his weapon in an unsearched place, without compromising accessibility or speed.
So he brought the tribute to Eglon king of Moab. And when he had finished presenting the tribute, he went to Gilgal and he sent away the people who had carried it. But he himself turned back from the stone images that were at Gilgal. The most interesting thing about how Ehud acted in this situation is that he waited for the opportune moment to strike. Not only by waiting did he give himself a chance to "case the joint" so to speak, but also time to plan his escape route in relation to where ever the king was staying. Now if you consider a map of Israel in his day, you will realize he had some several miles between Jericho and Gilgal (and back) to do his planning.
When he came back to the King he said “I have a secret message for you, O king.”
Eglon said, “Keep silence!” And all who attended him went out from him."
Ehud's choice for the subterfuge was really the only way that he could ask the attendants to leave without actually doing so.
Now he must have been a good actor too, because he grabbed Eglon's attention with his words.
In fact the King stands up to meet him.
"So Ehud came to him and said, “I have a message from God for you.” So he arose from his seat. Then Ehud reached with his left hand, took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. Even the hilt went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not draw the dagger out of his belly; and his entrails came out."
Eglon was obviously a very fat man for the entire knife to be absorbed in his stomach... But let's move on.
"Then Ehud went out and shut the doors of the upper room behind him and locked them."
He was careful enough, to exit the dead king's chamber and not arouse suspicion as he locked the door behind him. Now the servant's realized he had left but must not have seen him lock the door because they assumed Eglon is using the restroom. "When he had gone out, Eglon’s servants came to look, and to their surprise, the doors of the upper room were locked. So they said, “He is probably attending to his needs in the cool chamber.” So they waited till they were embarrassed, and still he had not opened the doors of the upper room."
Meanwhile Ehud headed Northeast to Gilgal and from there he headed Northwest to the Mountains of Ephraim. There he blew the trumpet, rallying Israel. Whether or not they were waiting for the signal is untold, but whatever the case, he was able to quickly mobilize the militia, and give them orders that strategically and effectively sealed the border. His battle plan was not an offensive one were he attacked Moabite garrisons, rather he took control of the fords of the Jordan, so that for the enemy to return to their country, or for their country to send reinforcements, with out the Israelites first being defeated was impossible. Because of these actions, Moab was routed, and every one of the 10,000 occupation forces were killed. So the land had rest.

This indeed was an astonishing feat. Ehud, a general and an assassin, almost single-left-handedly, overthrew the rule of a nation. A plot, as dangerous and complicated, as any other more modern wartime assassinations, was executed flawlessly. When you get home, re-read the tale of Ehud, read it not just as a Bible story but as history.

Disclaimer: I am not advocating all assassinations, only ones which are done in the right circumstances and right ways.

IceBreaker

Mr. (or Madam) Toastmaster, Ladies and Gentlemen. My name for those who don't remember is David Dykstra. It is a great privilege today to speak a little about myself. I pray that this speech will edify you, and I hope that you will evaluate me honestly, by giving me lots of suggestions for how to improve.
There's a tip I'd like to give you to help you remember my name. If you ever forget who I am and can only think of the "tall" guy, it's ok don't panic. One of my friends has told me that to him I'm both David and Goliath.
While I thought about what aspects of myself to share in this speech, I considered numerous possibilities, including but not limited to my birth in a blizzard, my former occupation in a hog confinement, and time I punched my sister over a UNO game. All this these juicy topics and more have been forgone, and in their place has been substituted something hopefully alittle more substantial, my life's purpose.
Now I don't care what our Toastmaster booklet says, but the Icebreaker is not really an easy speech for me. I can assure you, that while an Icebreaker can be relatively simple for someone to compile, and even though they know the topic better than any other human, it is not what I call easy. The reason for this is that in the Icebreaker, I have to make my life and what I see as important in life, interesting to others. Since I save all the speeches I give, I was able to dig into the past to find my first speech ever. It too was an Icebreaker given at another homeschool Toastmasters. Talk about too much boring information. Have you ever read a birth certificate or an obituary? That is probably what my first speech sounded like. Oh and I even brought my birth certificate along to read out loud, just so you could get a feel for what I mean. Name: David Lee Dykstra, Date of Birth: November 1, 1991, Sex: Male, Well I don't think that was included in my first Icebreaker speech... I could go on... Who's interested in hearing my birthplace? Do you really want me to list all my siblings, their names and ages? Will you even remember a thing I've said about myself?... I think you get the picture. As near and dear the nitty gritty details of my life may be to me,in reality, it is tough for others who don't know me to listen or relate. Partially this maybe due to the uninterest of the audience, but a large chunk is due directly to the insignificance of the subject matter which can be presented in present-oriented type way. For example if I were to give an Icebreaker, on my dream career, or dream retirement, it is likely that 50 years from now, the majority of the people in this room would not remember my speech. In addition they would probably not even remember me. 100 years from now, it is probable that only my children and grandchildren will remember me. After the last of my grandchildren have died, the life I lived will have been all but lost. The friends I had, gone. The hot geo metro I drove, the memory disappeared. Even the house I lived in and my hometown, will either be completely changed or demolished. Most likely even those descended from me will have no clue to the details of my life and many of them will not even remember my name. Think about it, how many of you know who all eight of your great-grandparents are? Much less your 16 great-great grandparents? My point is, in the perspective of eternity, the present is drastically over rated. Am I saying that my life, the things I've done, and my goals in life are meaningless? Actually, yes!... If. If I live my life, and base my actions on present-oriented prioritys it is a worthless life from an eternal perspective. Let's listen to a man who experienced this purposelessness first hand.
Solomon in the book of Ecclesiastes relates to us the futility of a life lived for oneself. He eloquently ends the book in Ecclesiastes 12:13-14

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:

"Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil."

The world will forget me, my life, and my work, but there is another who does not forget, nor leave a life unjudged. Now, I'm not a good model of my motto, but here it is "Only one life, 'twill soon be past, Only what's done for Christ will last."
Fittingly enough, the author of that phrase is unknown.
Mr. (or Madam) Toastmaster