Some time back I wondered about the lack of support for 2k among Vossians. Recently over at Reformed Forum Jared Oliphint seemed to give some eschatological encouragement to 2kers when he wondered about the possibility of redeeming the stuff of creation:
What about the rest of creation? Is it being redeemed? Did Christ accomplish redemption for the rest of creation when he died and was raised?
For those who believe that all of creation is currently being “redeemed” in the eschatological sense, there’s a very simple test to see whether that is in fact the case. As a friend of mine puts it, you are tasked to find a single atom, molecule, object, anything that has the permanence of the everlasting, eternal new heavens and new earth. Such a thing would be indestructible, and would most likely exhibit characteristics that literally indicate an other-world. That would be quite a find.
Or take the language we sometimes find within evangelical circles of “redeeming the city”, for example. Is this appropriate language given what we know of the biblical use of redemption? That depends. People are redeemed by the Holy Spirit regenerating their hearts, having faith in Christ, repenting of their sins, and receiving Christ and his saving and renovating benefits from his accomplished work in history. Christ did not directly accomplish redemption for buildings, neighborhoods, cities, towns, or any other particular group or entity whatsoever. Christ’s benefits do not apply to a local diner or run-down gym. They do not apply to capitalism, to philosophy, to Wal-Mart, to the Icelandic courts of law, or any other non-human not made in the image of God.
Oliphint backs away from some of the implications of this point, but his assertion is one that should prompt the critics of 2k (it is dispensationalist, it is Lutheran, it is defeatist, it doesn’t lead to rallies in the nation’s capital) to pause and reflect. The powers that redemption and its means opposes are not poor working conditions, undrinkable water, economic inequality, or unimaginative artworks. The powers of this age that Christ continues to subdue are those of Satan and his kingdom.
Luther himself deflates any hope for transformationalism in a sermon from 1544:
For [the devil] seeks at all times to take possession of the Kingdom of God and to become lord of Christendom. He will to be seated and to rule, in the pure and holy Temple of God.
What, then, shall we do to him? This we, and especially those who preach the Word of God, should joyfully consider, that we must hope for no peace here, but should recollect that we are Christ’s warriors, in the field, always equipped and ready, for when one war ends another immediately begins.
For we are called by christ and already enroldled (in Baptism) in the army which shall fight under Christ against the devil. For He is the God who is a Prince of war and a true Duke who leads His regiment in battle, not in heaven above among the holy spirits where there is no need of battle, but here on earth in His Church. Yes (even though He is seated at the right hand of the Father) He is Himself with His warriors leading them against the enemy, whom no human power and weapons can withstand, resisting and restraining him with His Word, which He has given to His men.
If culture warriors (i.e., neo-Calvinists, theonomists, and social conservatives) think that reforming society or teaching a biblical w-w of botany are a part of the kingdom coming, then they have forgotten how powerful the enemy is that they battle and they have lost sight of who is responsible for winning the battle.
256 Comments
Jed thanks for your thoughtful post
I agree that as Christians we must have respect, and honor for our leaders, after all, theonomists believe in the sovereignty of God
Who foreordained that Obama would be our President? God did, therefore as Christians we submit, knowing that God has an overarching reason for Obama to be where he is.
Proverbs 21:1 says:
The king’s heart is a steam of water in the hand of the LORD” and he turns it wherever he will.
Every decision the king makes has been foreordained by God. So if we fear God, we *know* that God is the author of history, and even the evil actions of men will wind up working out for the ultimate *good* of those who love God, and are called according to his purposes. Even though, not all decisions a king (or magistrate) makes are good. Sometimes, they make evil decisions. Can we submit to the Magistrate, while calling the Magistrate to account from God’s law? I say, yes we can! And there is no contradiction.
And no, as a theonomist, I don’t think the Church needs to be necessarily embroiled into every political argument. Although when it comes to core moral imperatives like, murder, rape, kidnapping, child molesting, abortion, the Bible has much to say. And no, I don’t want to re-create Israel. The Mosaic economy, with its ordinances, moons, festivals, and Sabbaths, has expired with the State of Israel. The Mosaic Law has lost its force, except for the general equity.
Which simply means laws that are intrinsically moral, laws that applied to both Jew and Gentile. You know laws with their corresponding penal sanctions for rape, murder, sodomy, child molestation, blasphemy and theft. That is what are reformers meant by general equity.
As Christians we can submit to authority, and still call our leaders to account. These concepts are not mutually exclusive. This seems to be you all’s main concern. At least we have that right in America. While saying Jesus is Lord would have gotten your head cut off back in Rome, now through the triumph of the gospel, we have the liberty to proclaim the full counsel of God’s Word to our leaders, as God gives us the strength and wisdom. Our President calls himself a Christian!
I have had some heated debates, with other believers, that we shouldn’t disrespect our President by making fun of his name. Even though we *should* and *must* oppose some of his policies, like abortion, and same sex marriage. Theonomy asks a more fundamental question, when does the punishment fit the crime? Can the punishment be a crime? I would say yes! So if we love our neighbor, we should pray for, and put pressure on our leaders to account with God’s law.
Or, are we to sit by silently and watch millions of our unborn get slaughtered, and say nothing? R2K doesn’t know what to say, to our leaders, because as a world view it has divorced itself from the Bible. Therefore, R2K has no objective standard from which to argue any point. Autonomy is R2K’s default position. God’s written law gives us moral imperatives for the life of the unborn, where as Zrim says he *might* vote *for* sodomites to legally marry… why? Because Zrim has no standard by which he can judge.
The Bible tells us that *we* are the light of the world. But when it comes to the Magistrate, R2K wants to hide our light under a bushel. I say, the Bible has something to say, to both his covenant people, and the Nations. Both should abide by the written revealed word of the Lord. To think otherwise is to walk in a conceptual contradiction.
Jon, and that’s why it’s called neo-Calvinism. But instead of appealing to the modern doctrine of worldview to say that Christianity applies to all of life, paleo-Calvinism would rather appeal to an older Protestant doctrine of vocation and say that Christians are called to all of life.
Doug, is there a gas leak in here? You keep peering into my voting heart and doing second rate ventriloquism. When will you listen to my mouth (and fingers) and see that I have both naturally and biblically derived standards and that they actually cause political consternation in the worldly arena? Or do you think God’s revelation is supposed to make life easy? I thought being a Christian meant being at loggerheads with the world’s system?
Speaking of which, is it really progress to think that saying Jesus is Lord won’t set our heads rolling? Could it be that the alleged “triumph of the gospel” in the west is a form of cultural Christianity where the upshot is suffering for Christ is meaningless? So much so that theonomists and other culturalists have to manufacture a false sense of persecution, which really ends up sounding whiny, especially when believers in other parts of the world where the gospel isn’t so “triumphant” actually suffer more than having a President they don’t much like but who also lets them live freely and unencumbered ?
Doug,
First, thanks for the response. Since I am on vacation, I might not get much chance to respond further.
R2K doesn’t know what to say, to our leaders, because as a world view it has divorced itself from the Bible.
I suppose I could squabble over a few of the issues you bring up here, but this statement is the one I will hone in on, because I think it is where you are truly misunderstanding 2k. This is not what 2kers think at all, we would claim that our view is grounded in Scripture, and that 2k is the default position of the NT. Now, as a theonomist I know you are probably bound to disagree, but as a good example of how 2kers ground their position in Scripture I’d recommend Van Drunen’s article in Themelios a few years back – Bearing the Sword in the State, Turning the Cheek in the Church: A Reformed Two-Kingdoms Interpretation of Matthew 5:38-42. There’s more literature on how 2k argumentation is grounded in Scripture, but this is a good place to start. Check out the article, and let me know what you think and I’ll respond where I can. But I think many of your issues with 2k and some of our proponents like DGH may be coming from a basis of misunderstanding some foundational issues about 2k – namely that we would argue that it is biblical.
Hi Jed, I hope your vacation is going swimmingly
I will check out Van Drunen’s article, but just off the top my head, let me respond: When President Obama came out *for* same sex marriage, I didn’t hear anyone on you’re (Escondido’s) version of 2K, give a Biblical argument for why they were against same sex marriage. They came up with every reason, BUT a Biblically based moral objection to this issue. Jed, I realize, you believe the Bible told you not to look to the Bible, for standards in the civil realm, but your arguments are from silence. And my head is spinning for even having to write that
Your view doesn’t take into account that God would deal with Rome just like he promised in the second chapter of the book of Daniel, in his *perfect* time, and in His own sovereign way. Remember seventy sevens? It’s not up to the church to conquer by the physical sword. No, are weapons are nothing so puny as that. We conquer by the Sword of the Spirit. Jesus Christ has already defeated sin and death, and our task is to conquer by trusting in God to work, and move through us. We use the full counsel of God’s Word in all areas!
Sadly, I didn’t hear anyone on your side of the pond; give a Biblical answer, as to why they were against same sex marriage. Why is that Jed? What was their standard? Their *hunches*, that’s all. Darryl said as much, when I asked him if he would vote *for* same sex marriage, and he said, “It’s my *hunch* that wouldn’t be a good thing”. But is that good enough? Should we only rely on our *hunches*? I think not. Darryl Hart’s core beliefs, “in the civil realm” are based on his own autonomous, subjective, opinions.
Where with me, while I’m certainly not perfect, I look to God’s revealed Word, and base my opinions accordingly, as God gives me wisdom and insight. It doesn’t matter what *I* think. My task is to see what God has already revealed, and go from there. But were I to divorce myself from God’s revealed Word, *in the civil realm* like Hart and Zrim, I would quickly get in line, with the rest of you. But let everyman be a liar, and God’s Word be true. God’s revealed law is still good for reproof, and correction.
Doug, how selective are you about biblical law? In addition to my hunch about gay marriage being bad for society I also said I’d vote against it because I should not support sin. So you leave out my full answer in violation of what the ninth commandment requires. Who’s autonomous now?