Good stuff! I've taught, as a Lutheran pastor, that God rules with His left hand via the Law written upon the consciences of all hearts, yet in His church, His Right Hand (Jesus) rules without rules, but via His grace! Not that I'm an antinomian, by any stretch, since the Law is very much needed in the church to smack down the old Adam and slay the flesh daily so that the new man may arise.
Good video. As an Old School Presbyterian and 2k advocate, I'd take issue with your comments about Calvin and the Two Kingdoms, two realms. Professor David VanDrunen points out Natural Law and The Two Kingdoms, Calvin stuck by Luther, soundly. Calvin elaborated on the distinctions between the two realms, more than Luther. Important to understand, both Luther and Calvin were men of their time; alas, both saw a broader fusion of religion and the civil magistrate, I.e., certain Geneva rules, and Luther allowing the civil magistrate ruling over church polity issues, as Luther saw ecclesial matters, polity-wise, as part of the left hand Kingdom. Calvin said very clearly, a conflation of the two realms would be a Jewish vanity. However, given the time these men lived, their theology in terms of the two kingdoms was not always consistent.
Also, Dr Vandrunen points out there has been a consistent voice on 2k theology (and natural law) in reformed circles-it has been an elaborated view of the two kingdoms. In Presbyterian circles, it is more often than not seen as the spirituality of the church. This has been a long standing doctrine since the beginning of reformed circles. Recent notions of "Neo-Calvinism" and the brutal nonsense of theonomy are "excesses" - exotic reactions, foreign to most of reformed historical theology.
I'd like to know more about radical 2k teaching you seem to suggest coming out of some reformed circles. I'm in a pronounced 2k Presbyterian church I can say we confess exactly what you laid out in terms of your belief of the two kingdoms. Several well known Presbyterian 2k folks would never say you cannot preach against abortion for example - what they would say is you cannot impress upon the believers conscious one way of dealing with the sin of abortion politically, speaking. If one believer feels a federal law banning and abortion is the right way to approach the issue, and other believer feels removing the federal statute on abortion so individual states can ban abortion; Presbyterian 2k folks would say you cannot preach a certain political solution on the congregation. You can certainly preach abortion is a sin. The best way of remedying that situation politically, however, would fall under the doctrine of Christian Liberty - as the minister is confined to the preaching of the law-gospel.
3 comments:
Good stuff! I've taught, as a Lutheran pastor, that God rules with His left hand via the Law written upon the consciences of all hearts, yet in His church, His Right Hand (Jesus) rules without rules, but via His grace!
Not that I'm an antinomian, by any stretch, since the Law is very much needed in the church to smack down the old Adam and slay the flesh daily so that the new man may arise.
Good stuff!
Jordan
Good video. As an Old School Presbyterian and 2k advocate, I'd take issue with your comments about Calvin and the Two Kingdoms, two realms. Professor David VanDrunen points out Natural Law and The Two Kingdoms, Calvin stuck by Luther, soundly. Calvin elaborated on the distinctions between the two realms, more than Luther. Important to understand, both Luther and Calvin were men of their time; alas, both saw a broader fusion of religion and the civil magistrate, I.e., certain Geneva rules, and Luther allowing the civil magistrate ruling over church polity issues, as Luther saw ecclesial matters, polity-wise, as part of the left hand Kingdom. Calvin said very clearly, a conflation of the two realms would be a Jewish vanity. However, given the time these men lived, their theology in terms of the two kingdoms was not always consistent.
Also, Dr Vandrunen points out there has been a consistent voice on 2k theology (and natural law) in reformed circles-it has been an elaborated view of the two kingdoms. In Presbyterian circles, it is more often than not seen as the spirituality of the church. This has been a long standing doctrine since the beginning of reformed circles. Recent notions of "Neo-Calvinism" and the brutal nonsense of theonomy are "excesses" - exotic reactions, foreign to most of reformed historical theology.
I'd like to know more about radical 2k teaching you seem to suggest coming out of some reformed circles. I'm in a pronounced 2k Presbyterian church I can say we confess exactly what you laid out in terms of your belief of the two kingdoms. Several well known Presbyterian 2k folks would never say you cannot preach against abortion for example - what they would say is you cannot impress upon the believers conscious one way of dealing with the sin of abortion politically, speaking. If one believer feels a federal law banning and abortion is the right way to approach the issue, and other believer feels removing the federal statute on abortion so individual states can ban abortion; Presbyterian 2k folks would say you cannot preach a certain political solution on the congregation. You can certainly preach abortion is a sin. The best way of remedying that situation politically, however, would fall under the doctrine of Christian Liberty - as the minister is confined to the preaching of the law-gospel.
Hope that makes some sense. Love your blog
Blessings,
Djb
Post a Comment