Thanks for the feedback Tom! I deleted my post cause I feel like I was getting a little carried away and getting away from the main topic a little. But guys like Wilson, Keller, Piper…. I’ve written them off (I was never too influenced by them to begin with). That whole celebrity scene (outside of the late RC Sproul) has imploded.

I’ve been thinking about these somewhat related issues for a while however. I don’t want to sound like I’m buttering up the host but I think Pilgrim has the best take regarding the American history side of things (among many other things). The folks in my closest circles are similar in view and don’t get caught up in any of this natural law / 2K / common grace nonsense that is essentially a big sideshow in response to theonomists. I looked into some good reviews on David VanDrunen and they kinda exposed him as a bit of novelty. I’m not beholden to any of those listed celebrity preachers with the exception of Voddie who I really admire. But I’m pretty blessed to have Lane Tipton as my pastor. I just love the guy (but not in a putting him on a pedestal kind of way) and I’m pretty happy in my denomination so I don’t have to get too caught up in this stuff even though I do sometimes.

Im really disappointed with both sides of this 2K vs. Nationalism debate but I do think the Church should get their act together and have a unified voice against all this nonsense and propaganda from the outside. Im really disappointed in guys like RS Clark who latches himself to lesser movements that they have pretty much tweaked to their liking with some creative scriptural justification and a little revisionist history and now they are pridefully committed. It’s kind of sad seeing these internal battles while the world around us is falling apart. (At the end of the day I don’t know enough about anything to be too critical of anyone but it hasn’t stopped me before).

Side Note: Tipton has been down on the 2k/Natural Law guys too especially for their promotion of Thomism and the Great Tradition despite the fact that he shares a platform with DG Hart who is great on Machen but out there with Clark a bit. I liked following Clark’s blog and thought he was ok against theonomy but I’m not buying his peculiar view and framing/promotion of 2KT-Natural Law. Again, I think they are taking some liberties.

I like this review and a few others….

Quote
VanDrunen also argues that the state is also a common kingdom institution. Although it is not part of the redemptive kingdom, those in the redemptive kingdom still owe obedience to the civil magistrate (p. 121). VanDrunen adds: “Furthermore, the New Testament never indicates that civil authorities have any responsibility to make the social or political order conform to the redemptive kingdom of heaven. What Christians are to expect from the state is simply the enforcement of justice so that they may lead a ‘peaceful and quiet life’” (p. 121). The significant question here, however, is this: who has the authority and right to instruct the civil magistrate on the nature of true justice and call him to repentance when it is violated? Under the Old Covenant, it was the prophets, who were ministers in the redemptive kingdom, the Old Covenant church. Who has this calling under the New Covenant? Given that two kingdoms advocates have such a high view of the ministry of the Word, it seems odd that they would imply that this responsibility rests on individual Christians rather than the Church and her ministers. …


What Aspects of Education, Vocation, and Politics are Matters of Christian Liberty?

VanDrunen’s final chapter is likely to cause more consternation among most readers than anything he has said in the previous chapters. In this final chapter he draws some practical conclusions concerning education, vocation, and politics from two kingdoms theology. However, since many of his conclusions have more to do with Christian liberty than anything else, I am not convinced that all or even most of his conclusions are distinctive of two kingdoms doctrine. Many of his conclusions could be held by Reformed Christians at any place along the Christianity/Culture spectrum. …


Both vocation and politics are matters of the common kingdom according to VanDrunen. Christian political activity should not be seen as an instrument for transforming the world into Christ’s kingdom (p. 195). VanDrunen lists five truths regarding politics that are generally non-controversial among contemporary Reformed Christians: 1). The civil magistrate has been established by God; 2). The magistrate is primarily responsible for keeping order and enforcing justice; 3). Christians have many obligations toward magistrates, such as submission; 4). Christians may serve in political offices; and 5). The state’s authority is limited (p. 197). Elaborating on the fifth point, VanDrunen explains that the state does not have the authority to promote what is evil. Of course, this raises important questions: who has the authority to instruct the magistrate about what is evil if not the church? Who has the duty to tell the magistrate if it steps over the line into evil if not the church? In connection with the family, VanDrunen argues that the church, rather than parents, has the authority to minister God’s Word. Why would the same principle not hold when dealing with the magistrate? I raise this question because I have heard two kingdoms advocates say that the German church under the Nazi government, for example, did not have any mandate to condemn that government’s evil actions. Individual Christians could do so, but not the church. I don’t know if such a statement is typical of all two kingdoms advocates, but if it is, it indicates the presence of a deep-seated problem.

Conclusion

Two kingdoms theology as presented by David VanDrunen offers many helpful insights into the issue of the Christian’s relation to culture. It also raises many helpful questions that all believers should consider. VanDrunen’s presentation suffers, however, from a lack of clear biblical support for some of his most important claims and from confusion on some key theological issues. VanDrunen is right in his rejection of theonomy and in his rejection of the misguided practice of confusing Christianity with civil religion (American or otherwise). He is not always demonstrably right in the solutions he offers. I am thankful to VanDrunen for writing this highly challenging and provocative book. It has made me think, and although I cannot always agree with his conclusions, I believe that this is an important discussion among brothers in Christ. I pray that this review article is a constructive contribution in the discussion and that it is received in that way. https://www.ligonier.org/learn/arti...avid-vandrunens-living-gods-two-kingdoms

https://secundumscripturas.com/2013/03/06/a-critique-of-van-drunens-two-kingdoms/


Note: Im trying to be charitable, so when I use the term 2k, I acknowledge the fact that there are many who view the modern adherents as Radical 2kers. I think of them as conceiving a Revised 2k for our present context. I fear they are deferring/defaulting to a secular “neutral” state that is anything but….

Last edited by Anthony C.; Mon Mar 06, 2023 12:39 AM.