Rev. Smith takes on the Gospel Coalition (The Gospel-Industrial Complex)

In the aftermath of the grand jury decision in Ferguson, Missouri and the more recent grand jury finding in New York City that police did not use excessive force to arrest Eric Garner, much has been said and written about "white privelege", racism, and the shortcomings of our legal system.

Earlier this week this issue became front and center at The Gospel Coalition. Thabiti Anyabwile posted an essay entitled 3 Reasons Why I Stand with the Protestors. I have my own opinions on this topic but will refrain from offering my own comment at this juncture.  Instead I will
point you to another essay challenging his perspective on the matter.  The Rev. William H. Smith also known as the Christian Curmudgeon, has been around long enough to see this sort of thing play out before.  Is this a topic to be addressed from the pulpit or when our churches gather in assemblies (for Presbyterians that means Presbytery and General Assembly)?   I'll allow Rev. Smith answer that question for you:

Thabiti Anyabwile Is Wrong

Quote of the Day

The correct response, however, is not to seek to re-acquire civil power over pagans and papists but to be good citizens, keep the social compact, and to point them to the King whose kingdom is not of this world but whose kingdom is most certainly in this world and is manifested by believers in their daily lives and officially represented by those divinely established embassies where his Word and covenants signs and seals are administered.

R. Scott Clark,  commenting on the idea that we need the civil magistrate to enforce Christian orthodoxy (also known as Constantinianism).  

Read the full article here.

Responding to the Election

Like many I'm mulling over the meaning of this election not just for our country but for the church.  Below are some good articles that might help provide perspective.

Dr. Rick Phillips has written a very good piece about five different ways God's people can respond to the most recent election.  Rick Phillips 

Dr. William B. Evans also has a helpful post:  William Evans

Matt Tuininga has also written about the election finding fault with Republicans for ignoring changing demographics: Here  and Here 

The Christian Curmudgeon has a nice summary:  Here.

Doug Wilson has also chimed in: Here

Darryl Hart has a reply to Wilson: Here

Hopefully these articles will you make sense of the election and what the future may look like.  

Two Kingdom Theology and the Upcoming Election

Gene Veith linked to an important article this morning that discusses the question about voting for a Mormon as the president of our country.  That article has this headline: Is There Anything Wrong With Voting for a Mormon President?  

One of the contributors to this article, Mollie Ziegler-Hemingway, is a member of the Lutheran Church  Missouri Synod.  She applies two-kingdom theology to the question and turns to Martin Luther for guidance.

I offer this article in the hope that some will begin to see the truth of Two Kingdom Theology and how it can guide God's people as they participate in both the civil realm and the spiritual realm of Christ's Kingdom.


Postcript:  If you'd like a little more of the wit and wisdom of Martin Luther go to the Lutheran Insulter.  

Are the culture warriors and the two kingdoms types talking past each other? Matthew Tuininga

Matthew Tuininga asks this important question over at his blog, Christian in America.  Its a question that I've grappled with over the last few years and I think that the answer is "Yes".

Having come up through the ranks of broad evangelicalism I was introduced and trained in reformed theology by those who are cultural warriors.  Over the last few years have I begun questioning their methods and message.

Tuininga writes:

In addition to all of these concerns about the two kingdoms doctrine, I wonder if part of the disconnect between the “two kingdoms types” and the “culture war” types boils down to a disconnect between those who are focused on ends, and those who are more concerned about means. Let me try to explain.

Culture warriors tend to have their minds fixed on one object: preserving or restoring American politics and culture on the basis of what they regard as its Christian foundation. They operate at the level of desired ends and on accomplishing those ends whatever the cost. America should protect the unborn and it is not doing that. We can offer no compromise on the issue of abortion until it is completely outlawed. Sexual immorality is tearing apart the fabric of this country. We can offer no compromise on marriage until the traditional form is wholeheartedly upheld as the law of the land. America is jettisoning its Christian foundations. We need to labor hard and long until every American understands why our prosperity is based on Christianity and on nothing else.

Two kingdoms types, on the other hand, are more worried about the manner with which Christians engage politics, and they fear that the church has become so politicized, and Christians so willing to embrace the ruthlessness of politics, that it is obscuring or bringing slander upon the gospel. They operate at the level of means, and are unwilling to pollute the function of the church or the virtue of Christians in order to achieve desired political ends. Christians should communicate a devotion to justice for both mothers and their unborn children regardless of whether or not the law permits abortion. Christians should reach out to those practicing homosexuality or other sexual sins with the gospel and a spirit of love regardless of whether or not they are able to persuade the country that homosexuality should not be promoted or marriage compromised. Christians should be more worried about whether or not America acts justly than whether or not it professes Christian truth.  

He admits that he is using generalizations and that there are exceptions and important qualifications to be made.  I grant that point.  But on the whole I think that he is on the mark.  Visit the link to read the entire piece.  

Dr. Mike Horton on the City of God and the City of Man

Recently I was preaching on the Hebrews 12:18-29 and the concept that believers are “receiving a kingdom” (v. 28) and the fact that all the kingdoms of this age will be shaken (vv. 26-27).  In his work The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims On the Way, Dr. Mike Horton offers an important and helpful insight about life in this present age.  Tucked into a section exploring biblical metaphors for the church he writes this as he discusses the metaphor of “city” as it is found in various places in Scripture:

“As the paradigmatic City of God, Eden was to expand outward from the garden itself until the glory of God filled the whole earth.  This was humanity’s commission in Adam…Eden, Like Adam and Eve themselves, was an earthly image of the heavenly reality, an analogue of God’s home and of God’s own triune communion…The fall shattered this unity of cult and culture: humanity now lived east of Eden, as the cherubim guarded the tree of life, barring reentry from all directions with a flaming sword (Gen. 3:24).  Living under a common curse, creation also shares in God’s common grace, which preserves all that God has made, even those who will not finally be preserved from God’s wrath on the last day.  The pseudo-temple of apostate civilization symbolized by Babel from Genesis 11 to Revelation 18 and 19 would be overthrown…

The goal of all biblical eschatology is that God’s dwelling would be with humanity.  After the fall, the cultural and cultic activities diverge into two distinct cities, with Cain’s line and Seth’s line, respectively.  Cain builds a city recognized for its cultural achievements (Gen. 4:17-24), while of Seth’s line we read, ‘At that time people began to call on the name of the LORD’ (v. 26).  The interaction between these two cities becomes the theater for the repeated showdowns between Yahweh and his covenant people (‘the seed of the woman’) on the one hand and Lucifer and his allies (‘the seed of the serpent’) on the other. 

Given the fact that cultural activity was part of the holy work of the cultural mandate in creation, building cities and civilizations is not inherently evil.  Rather, it is the corruption of the fallen heart that erects violent, oppressive, unrighteous, and idolatrous cities that are not only properly distinct from but rivals to the City of God.  Incapable of creating, Satan can only distort that which God makes, imitating God’s city-building while also using his antichurch as a means of destroying the true church.  We see this contest at the Tower of Babel with its sacred skyscraper attempting to conquer heaven as well as in the rivalry between Yahweh and Satan represented by Moses and Pharaoh, and in the conquest of Canaan with its holy wars in anticipation of the last judgment.  Of course, this trial reaches its apogee on Good Friday, and its outcome is secured on Easter morning, yet skirmishes continue to the end of the age.  Only on the last day will the cities of this world be made the City of God."   Pilgrims on the Way, pp. 727-728.

What I like about this quote is how Horton explains the City of Man, ruled by Satan, is a rival to the City of God.  Properly understood, this makes me wonder about common phrases like "redeeming the culture" or "redeeming the city" which are tossed around in reformed circles.  If the City of Man is at war with the City of God and is trying to supplant it, why do we go to such pains to get cozy with the culture?  Why do we look for church-planters who are good at contextualizing the Gospel instead of men who understand this tension and antithesis?  

I also like Horton's description of Satan's antichurch - false churches that wage war against the true church.  This puts into perspective the long list of churches that have gone astray.  They were infiltrated by the enemy and over time he has brought them down.  Some of them have fallen so far that they persecute those who preach God's Word.  This ought to be a stern warning for those who believe that it couldn't happen to them or to their denomination. 

Comment on "Marital Submission and Syria's First Lady: A Lesson for Christian Women"

Christianity Today has posted an article on the topic of "marital submission" and its limits using the first lady of Syria as an example.  This seems like an odd story until one recalls that the Syria's first lady grew up in the west (England) and has been looked upon as someone who could help the country become more progressive.

That dream seems to be shattered by recent political developments in Syria and the regime's bloody crackdown against dissent.  Thousands of Syrians have been killed by their own government.  In all of this many are wondering , Where is Mrs. Assad?  Why isn't she speaking out?  Why isn't she doing something to reduce the bloodshed.  


An email from Mrs. Assad to the international media provides some insight:  


"“[Bashar al-Assad] is the President of Syria, not a faction of Syrians, and the First Lady supports him in that role,” wrote Asma. “The First Lady’s very busy agenda is still focused on supporting the various charities she has long been involved with . . . [and] she listens to and comforts the families of the victims of the violence.”

CT offers this comment:  


"These are not the words of a woman who defies the stereotypes of a dictator’s wife and captured the hearts of many. This is the response of a woman who does not see a way to influence her husband’s actions and put an end to the violence."

CT attempts to answer the questions raised by this email by applying Ephesians 5 to the situation.  It writes: 


"This united front is honorable and biblical in a marriage. God clearly calls for the man and wife to become one. Many Christians would take it further, saying that a wife is called to submit to her husband’s decision-making authority in all spheres of shared life, based on Paul's description of marriage in Ephesians 5. But no matter how you interpret this passage, doesn’t a time come when a wife can and should usurp a husband’s authority if he is making sinful choices or decisions that harm others? Does unity in sin or harm qualify for biblical unity at all? Is silence in the midst of sin even biblically permissible?"


This statement is balanced by this conclusion:  


"Obviously, women and men have different perspectives and outlooks on life, so wouldn’t women have insight that is valuable to men? Husbands aren’t perfect, and neither are wives, of course. But even if wives are submitted to the authority of their husbands, a wife is not called to silence or idleness when wrongs are committed. I would argue that silence in an instance where the welfare of another is at stake is negligence of a wife’s role in marriage... In the West, we likely won't deal with the reality of husbands commanding the bloody crackdown of protests, but we might be in marriages in which the husband is making poor financial choices, creating abusive situations, risking the welfare of others for career advancement, or ignoring the needs of others around him. If your family or others are at risk of harm, will marital unity be your excuse for inaction in a time of need?"

I appreciate this attempt to answer a thorny question.  Yes there are limits to how far marital submission should go and CT gives us some good examples.  Yet applying Ephesians 5 to Mrs. Assad is a bit shaky for two reasons.

First, the writer neglects to account for the complexity of the situation.  Mrs. Assad is both a wife and a citizen of the country of Syria.  Thus her relationship to her husband is both as a wife and as a subject.  Sure, Ephesians 5 addresses marital issues but it doesn't apply to the relationship of a person to the civil magistrate.  That's where Romans 13 comes into play and the limits of obedience.  The magistrate is called to maintain law and order by punishing evil doers;  however when a government is involved in murdering its own people for political expediency citizens (including the first lady) have a right and a duty to speak up.    


Second, the principle set forth in Romans 14:23 of going against one's conscience applies in this instance.  While Mrs. Assad is not a Christian she has the law of God written on her heart and that should prompt her to intervene.  Yet she is apparently suppressing that knowledge as she continues to be involved with charity for those affected by the violence.  That is a strange way to deal with evil.   

Again, I appreciate the attempt to answer the questions related to Ephesians 5 by using a current event.  Yet using a less complicated example might make more sense to illustrate the point about marital submission.
   

Christ Redeemed Us from the Curse of the Law

The title for this post comes from Galatians 3:13 which reads: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written,  “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree…”  For many it is a familiar passage that specifically speaks of Christ’s death on the cross as an atoning sacrifice.  It was there where he bore the curse for our sins thus propitiating (quenching, satisfying) the wrath of God for us.  

Matthew Tuininga has an interesting take on this verse.  He argues that we often speak about this redemption from the curse in abstract ways - we have broken God's commands, we deserve his wrath and punishment, but Christ took that in our place.  He affirms that those things are true but he also brings clarity to the phrase" Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law."  Tuininga writes:

 "Reformed people are very good at explaining why Christians are no longer bound by the Jewish ceremonial law. We understand quite well that although its function was to point forward to Christ, we no longer need the sign now that we have the substance. What Reformed people realize less often is that Scripture talks in a similar way about the Israelite penal code. Indeed, the New Testament declares explicitly that Jesus fulfilled the curse of the law as it was represented in the civil penalties administered to those who committed various crimes. As Paul says in Galatians 3:13-14...In other words, the curse that Christ fulfilled was the curse of the Israelite penal code. The prescription of capital punishment for 30 various crimes that could be committed by Israelites – ranging from rebellion against parents to adultery, witchcraft and sabbath violation – was never designed as a model of civil government for all nations. It was not an expression of the moral law, or of natural law. On the contrary, the purpose of such capital punishment was to teach Israel about the curse that falls upon sin and injustice. It was this curse that Jesus satisfied, and his satisfaction of the curse made it possible for the wall that divided the Jews and Gentiles to be broken down (Ephesians 2), such that the gospel of faith could be preached to all nations."

Having recently preached through the book of Galatians I must confess that I did not see this point. What is so helpful about this analysis is the connection between our sins (crimes) and the specific punishment for our sins.  All of a sudden our sins look much worse than we may have thought.  Likewise, Christ’s work as our penal substitute is seen in a richer, fuller light.  Now we see him not in abstract terms as a “sin-bearer” but as a man convicted of crimes he did not commit and punished for those crimes. 

The next time I reference Galatians 3:13 in our worship service this point will be made clear for my congregation.  If you are a pastor I hope you will do the same. 

Horton on the Kingdom of God

In his book, The Christian Faith, A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way, Dr. Mike Horton comments on the Kingdom of God in a way that I'd never seen before. In the middle of his chapter on The State of Exaltation: The Servant Who Is Lord, Horton draws a parallel between Christ and the Kingdom God. In the middle of his discussion about the humiliation of Christ including his trial before Pilate Horton makes this statement:

"What a paradox: The King of kings and Lord of lords standing bound and silent before an officer of Caesar and the rulers of his own people, reigning even as he submits voluntarily to the cruelest human judgment.

"In its present phase, the kingdom is like its King before he was raised from the dead and exalted to the right hand of the Father. It can only appear weak and foolish to the world, even though this kingdom is more extensive in its global reach and more intensive in its redemptive power than any earthly empire in history. In the old covenant the kingdom was typologically concentrated in the outward glory of Israel's cultic and civil structures, but during 'this present age' its glory is hidden under the cross. It claims hearts, not geopolitical lands. It brings new birth (Jn. 3:3-7) from the future reign of the Spirit and as a prolepsis of the consummation that the 'Lord and giver of life' will bring in 'the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.'"

Source: The Christian Faith, A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way, Dr. Mike Horton, pp. 524-525.

Veith on Vocation

Over at the Gospel Coalition Gene Veith has posted a very helpful article on the doctrine of "vocation".  His article is a response to New York Times columnist, David Brooks, who has suggested that Christians should not participate in professional sports.  He argues that the "ethos" of sports which is rooted in competition which has as its goal supremacy and victory, is at odds with Christianity.  He adds...

The sports hero tries to perform great deeds in order to win glory and fame. It doesn’t really matter whether he has good intentions. His job is to beat his opponents and avoid the oblivion that goes with defeat.

The modern sports hero is competitive and ambitious. (Let’s say he’s a man, though these traits apply to female athletes as well). He is theatrical. He puts himself on display.

He is assertive, proud and intimidating. He makes himself the center of attention when the game is on the line. His identity is built around his prowess. His achievement is measured by how much he can elicit the admiration of other people — the roar of the crowd and the respect of ESPN.

His primary virtue is courage — the ability to withstand pain, remain calm under pressure and rise from nowhere to topple the greats.

Veith takes issue with that perspective, in an irenic manner, of course.  In his post What Vocations Should be Off-Limits to Christians? Veith explores the nature of vocation both historically and theologically.  At times the church barred Christians from certain vocations - Roman gladiator games - is a prime example.  But Veith shows that this question is not easily answered in every situation.

Read Veith's column.  It is a wonderful primer for those wanting to know about vocation.

The Church As a Business? Part II

Here you will find part II of the aforementioned story.

Key takeaways:

1) What it is the antidote to seeing the church as a business?  Become familiar with the book of Galatians.  Luther was deeply impacted by this epistle and it served to guide his ministry.

2) Become familiar with the Reformation doctrine of vocation (here he cites Os Guinness but others could be consulted as well).

3) Understand the culture instead of trying to "engage the culture".  Why?  The culture isn't interested in dialog with the church.  

The Church as a Business?

The idea of the church being a business or learning from business has been going on for at least the last twenty years.  At one point I was influenced by Leith Anderson's book, Dying for Change, in which he argued for a new way of doing church.  He used an analogy based on an advertising jingle:  "This is not your father's Oldsmobile."  His church, Wooddale Church, was just a few miles down the road from my church.  I saw many peers switch churches over that motto and the business model he employed which treated people like consumers.

In seminary I recall being encouraged to read The E-Myth by Michael Gerber.  The "E" in the title stands for entrepreneur.  Gerber's thesis is that non-entrepreneurs can start, initiate, and sustain all sorts of businesses.  How?  By utilizing the methodology of franchising.  Apply that to the church.  If a non-entrepreneur wants to plant a church all he needs to do is find a model that he likes and 'buy-in' to its methodology.  In the franchise model all of the problems have already been addressed, and all of the challenges have been anticipated.  All you need to do is follow the methodology and your church will prosper.  It is sad to see so many church plants following this path.    

Today I was surprised to read this story warning the church not to use the business model for ministry.  I was even more surprised about where I found the story.  Out of Ur is the blog for Leadership Journal and for years that journal encouraged churches and pastors to change the way they operated.  It argued that if the church was to be effective it needed to be relevant.  This drive for relevance led to consumerism and applying business models of management.

This is only part one of the story so I plan to follow-up with another post. 

Two Kingdom Response to the Magistrate

Gene Veith posted the address given by Rev. Matthew Harrison, President of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, to a US house sub-committee earlier in the week.  It was given in response to President Obama's policy that mandates religious institutions or their insurance providers to pay for contraception and abortion services without respect to matters of conscience.  Here are a couple of excerpts:

Mr. Chairman, it’s a pleasure to be here. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod is a body of some 6,200 congregations and 2.3 million members across the U.S. We don’t distribute voters’ lists. We don’t have a Washington office. We are studiously non-partisan, so much so that we’re often criticized for being quietistic. 

“I’d rather not be here, frankly. Our task is to proclaim, in the words of the blessed apostle St. John, the blood of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, cleanses us from all our sin. And we care for the needy. We haven’t the slightest intent to Christianize the government. Martin Luther famously quipped one time, ‘I’d rather have a smart Turk than a stupid Christian governing me.’  

“We confess that there are two realms, the church and the state. They shouldn’t be mixed – the church is governed by the Word of God, the state by natural law and reason, the Constitution. We have 1,000 grade schools and high schools, 1,300 early childhood centers, 10 colleges and universities. We are a machine which produces good citizens for this country, and at tremendous personal cost...  

“I’m here to express our deepest distress over the HHS provisions. We are religiously opposed to supporting abortion-causing drugs. That is, in part, why we maintain our own health plan. While we are grandfathered under the very narrow provisions of the HHS policy, we are deeply concerned that our consciences may soon be martyred by a few strokes on the keyboard as this administration moves us all into a single-payer … system. 

“Religious people determine what violates their consciences, not the federal government. The conscience is a sacred thing. Our church exists because overzealous governments in northern Europe made decisions which trampled the religious convictions of our forebearers... 

“We fought for a free conscience in this country, and we won’t give it up without a fight. To paraphrase Martin Luther, the heart and conscience has room only for God, not for God and the federal government. The bed is too narrow, the blanket is too short. We must obey God rather than men, and we will. Please get the federal government, Mr. Chairman, out of our consciences. Thank you.”

Read the entire address here  

Work and the Church - Veith and Witherington on Vocation

I've been following the online discussion between Gene Edward Veith and Ben Witherington moderated by Trevin Wax.  Veith is a Missouri Synod Lutheran: Witherington hails from the Methodist/Wesleyan tradition.   Veith wrote the book, God at Work.  Witherington interacted with that title in his work, Work, A Kingdom Perspective on Labor. 

The online exchange was broken up into three separate posts (see below).  The individual segments are not particularly long so don't be put off.

Work and the Church, Part I of Veith and Witherington

Cooperating with God, Part II of Veith and Witherington

Rewards, Virtue and Work, Part III of Veith and Witherington

This discussion fits hand-in-glove with yesterday's post (Horton, Chandler and Keller's discussion).  For those trying to understand the relationship between vocation, culture, and church please read and reflect. 

Chandler, Horton and Keller on the Church in Culture

Chandler, Horton, and Keller on the Church in Culture from The Gospel Coalition on Vimeo.

Over the last year or two much has been written about the Church and its role in Culture.  On one side are those who claim that the church is called to change and transform culture.  On the other side are those who state that the church is called to the Great Commission (making disciples) which is rooted in Word and Sacrament ministry.  Sadly, much of the discourse has degenerated into trench warfare with both sides dug in lobbing shells at each other.

Here is an interesting clip (about 9 minutes) that explores that tension.  Not every question is answered (nor could it) but in the end I think you will see that the two sides are not all that far apart. 

Spitting into the Wind

Fellow PCA minister William H. Smith, (who, incidentally, examined me for ordination in Pittsburgh Presbytery) has written a thoughtful piece about mercy ministry. In our denomination mercy ministry is more than a fad - it has become fashionable, yeah essential to many. Smith argues that many view it as a fourth mark of the church along with preaching of the Gospel, right administration of the sacraments and church discipline. 


I'm not against helping the poor.  I serve on the board of a local non-profit that helps those in need.  I've participated in other activities to assist and benefit the poor.  But when I see churches make it a front-and-center part of the ministries I scratch my head.  A few years back I recall reading about a PCA church-plant in a major North American city seeking to make an impact upon their city by offering hot showers to the homeless.  Say what? 

Smith writes...

“You don’t tug on Superman’s cape; you don’t spit into the wind; you don’t pull on the mask of the old Lone Ranger…”; and you don’t question mercy ministries in the PCA. Or, so it seems.

Somehow in the Presbyterian Church in America we made a decision without ever having a discussion. It surprised some of us because one of the complaints about the PCUS was its embrace of the “social gospel” and its shift from doing evangelism to doing good deeds.

This seems to fit into a pattern in the PCA. Decrying centralization at our founding, we have become more centralized. Protesting the church’s making statements on political matters, we have made our share of statements on political matters. Standing strongly against women’s ordination to all offices we have begun to discuss women’s ordination at least to the diaconate.

The matter of the propriety of the church’s engaging in all sorts of mercy ministries from feeding the poor to engaging in community development seems now to be a given. You don’t question it. If you do, you risk being looked at as a poor benighted soul (that is, if you have a soul).

But, let me spit into the wind a little.

You can read the rest here: The Christian Curmudgeon:Spitting into the Wind

Smith steps on a few toes along the way but in the end he upholds the biblical office of deacon arguing that both historically and biblically mercy ministry was chiefly expressed towards members of the church not society at large. 

What Lutherans Do with Their Beer Bottles - St. Luke's Lutheran Church , Park Ridge , Illinois

Here is an amusing video showing one creative use for beer bottles. Hat’s off to this group of Lutherans. I know that some might complain that these are not the good Lutherans (i.e. confessional) and that their witness is tainted. To me that is beside the point. Here are ordinary people using their gifts (albeit in a light and trivial way) to enjoy God’s creation. I guess the best word for this is vocation.  I read some of the comments and loved the one that said they got the beer from the Catholics.

Imagine how this story would be interpreted if a different church affiliation was represented.  For instance, if a bunch of neo-Kuyperian PCA folks were doing this all sorts of ink would be spilled defending their actions as “redeeming of culture.”  Lest you doubt me check out this post or this one.

Michael Scott Horton on The Death of Osama bin Laden

Lot's of ink has been spilled discussing and analyzing the death of Osama bin Laden. In the cacaphony of voices it's rare to find someone saying something new. Yet, that's what Dr. Horton has done.  Here's a sample:

Understandably, news of Osama bin Laden's demise at the hands of U. S. Navy Seals provoked cries of celebration. The mastermind of terror, even against civilians (indeed, against fellow Muslims) has been brought to justice. But what kind of justice?


In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, President George W. Bush authorized "Operation Infinite Justice." Especially after his comment that "this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take a while," however, the mission was renamed "Operation Enduring Freedom." Reportedly, the name-change was due at least in part to the concern raised by Muslims that only God can execute "infinite justice." One would have hoped that the change had been provoked instead by Christian reaction.


Islam, of course, is not just a religion; it's a cultural and even geo-political reality. As such, its strict adherents excoriate co-religionists like Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im who call for an "Islamic Reformation" that would make jihad into a spiritual struggle rather than an armed military conflict.


Unfortunately, Christianity has had a long and complicated history of its own on this score. On one hand, the fourth-century theologian Augustine responded to the sacking of Rome with a detailed scriptural argument for two cities: the City of Man and the City of God. Each city has its own origins, ends, and means. As citizens of both kingdoms, every believer is called to recognize the difference between them. Compared with the City of God, the City of Man is hardly a true commonwealth. It cannot ensure ultimate peace, security, justice, and love. Nevertheless, Augustine argues, it can still be considered a commonwealth in a limited, provisional, and penultimate sense. Out of these reflections (especially in the City of God) there arose a legacy of just war theory and a Christian realism about the legitimacy and limitation of human societies in this time between the times.


Nevertheless, the Middle Ages gave rise to a fusion of Christ and culture known as "Christendom." In the name of Christendom, kings and their knights rode off to crusades with papal blessing, as David and the hosts of Yahweh redivivus, cleansing the Holy Land of infidels.


In spite of its own contradictions in practice, the magisterial Reformation sought to distinguish between the kingdom of Christ, which conquers by Word and Spirit, and the kingdoms of this age that are given the divine authority to defend temporal justice. Drawing on the New Testament and church fathers, especially Augustine, the reformers realized that there was no theocracy in the new covenant; all nation-states were "secular" in the sense of being common rather than holy. With no holy land, there can be no holy war. Only just wars, based on natural law.


But ideas like "Christendom" die hard. We saw that with the memorial service after 9/11. Held in a building popularly known as the "National Cathedral," with military honor guards processing and the strains of "Onward, Christian Soldiers," announcements of a resolve to secure infinite justice in an open-ended "crusade" provided fodder for Islamic extremists in their effort to replay ancient battles. A romantic patriotism has always seethed beneath the professed separation of church and state, as in the famous "Battle Hymn of the Republic." Written by a Unitarian, the hymn confuses Union victory with Christ's final judgment. Something very close to "infinite justice."

Read the rest at the following link:

The Death of Osama bin Laden: What Kind of Justice Has Been Done? Christianity Today A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction

Two Kingdom Confusion

The first half of this video, while kind of humorous, is a good illustration of confusing life in the City of Man with life in the City of God.  The second half partially redeems the entire thing. 

Paul Helm Reflecting on VanDrunen and Two Kingdom Theology

Theologian Paul Helm has written a couple of helpful essays on Two Kingdom Theology.  The title reveals that he is interacting with David VanDrunen's recent work, Living in God's Two Kingdoms. 

Helm's Deep: From Hippo to Escondido - I

Helm's Deep: From Hippo to Escondido - II

The second essay includes a discussion of Dooyeword, Van Til, Gary North and Meredith Kline.  It includes this quote...

There is something similar about Van Til, as is witnessed by the fact that two of his disciples, Greg Bahnsen and Meredith Kline, ‘develop’ his ideas in entirely different direction. Bahnsen heard Van Til say ’no natural ethics’, so he developed a scheme under which Christians are obliged to keep the whole law of God ‘as a pattern of sanctification’. Revealed law swallows up natural law. Christ’s kingship may be affirmed, but it is not the two-fold kingship of the two kingdoms. Yet not quite, since according to Bahnsen, it is the state, and not the church, which bears the sword.

On the other hand Meredith Kline, who ended his career as a teacher at Westminster West, Escondido, ‘develops’, if that is the word, Van Til’s thoughts back in the direction of the classic position, while being (so it seems) largely ignorant of that position. He did this by the way in which the covenant comes to play a crucial part in his thought. Common grace, though antithetical to God and his redemptive kingdom, has beneficial purposes ordained by God. Behind this lies the covenant of works, and the covenant of common grace made with Noah for the benefit of failed humanity, which legitimizes the state and culture more generally, but has a temporal and provisional character. This then approaches the conceptuality of the two kingdoms without (apparently) Kline being aware of this.

There is a lot packed into these two paragraphs and I am by no means an expert in this area.  But sometimes a view from 30,000 feet is the best way to understand your surroundings.