Race was not a dominant factor in neo-Calvinism. Rather, stress was laid on the universal character of Christianity, especially in the case of Herman Bavinck. While some of the South African PhD students at the Vrije Universiteit’s defended apartheid with reference to neo-Calvinism, it was B.B. Keet—who would become a noted critic of apartheid—who adopted Bavinck’s views. As a professor in Stellenbosch, Keet initially accepted apartheid for cultural and practical reasons, but he became critical when South Africa officially implemented apartheid policy in 1948. This resulted in his book Whither, South Africa?, in which he rejected the theological arguments undergirding apartheid with arguments almost literally derived from Bavinck. It is clear from this case study that neo-Calvinism was employed not only to support apartheid, but also to criticize it as well. In the Netherlands his stand was recognized and shared by two more of Bavinck’s students: J.J. Buskes and J.H. Bavinck. Keet met with opposition within his own circles but stuck to his position and inspired his student, the apartheid critic C.F. Beyers Naude.

中文翻译：

---

“消除分界线（不是区别）”

种族并不是新加尔文主义的主导因素。相反，重点放在基督教的普遍性上，特别是在赫尔曼·巴文克的情况下。虽然自由大学的一些南非博士生以新加尔文主义为由为种族隔离辩护，但 BB Keet（后来成为著名的种族隔离批评家）采纳了 Bavinck 的观点。作为斯泰伦博斯 (Stellenbosch) 的教授，基特最初出于文化和实际原因接受种族隔离，但当南非于 1948 年正式实施种族隔离政策时，他变得持批评态度。这导致了他的著作《南非往何处去？》，其中他拒绝了支持种族隔离的神学论点几乎字面上的论据来自巴文克。从这个案例研究中可以清楚地看出，新加尔文主义不仅被用来支持种族隔离，但也要批评它。在荷兰，他的立场得到了 Bavinck 的另外两名学生的认可和分享：JJ Buskes 和 JH Bavinck。基特在他自己的圈子里遇到了反对，但坚持自己的立场并激励了他的学生，种族隔离评论家 CF Beyers Naude。