He goes by Scott; at least I have always addressed him that way since I've known him; hence my confusion.
God of the Mundane, my Heidelblog review
- Thread starter RamistThomist
- Start date
- Status
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
It’s also interesting to view God’s never changing natural order of things from today’s dim light. I’m not saying things haven’t always been dim, but today it’s a particular kind of dim mired in moral relativism, maybe not as redeemable as barbarism and the like of former times and places for example.I didn't address or say anything about any of that, so...
I've noticed that when discussions veer into hypotheticals about what governments might or might not do, the spiritual aspect of reformation and revival seems to take a back seat (possibly way back on the 30th row).
It's a spiritual matter, is all I can say. We are to pant for and long to see God's glory fill the earth, as waters cover the sea. He has promised that kings and queens will be nursing fathers and mothers to the church. We have seen glimpses of that from the Scripture and from church history. It's a matter for prayer; what is impossible for man is possible with God. Christ prayed that his church would be one, even as he and the father are one. In that, the godly magistrate has a role. We should beseech the Lord that it comes to pass.
That's about all I've got.
Presuppositional thought has its place. Calvin’s concept of natural law doesn’t resemble Jefferson’s.
Last edited:
I hear you Chris. He calls me Randy, I will call him Robert.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Can you give me a quick bullet point summary regarding the OPC-republication-covenant theology-2KT doctrines? and what exceptions you take with related thought? I know these things have been posted repeatedly, I’m just trying to tie it all together….. thanks!
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
No natural law theorist today that I am aware of agrees with Jefferson's take. Clark has an article on Aquinas, Calvin, and Natural Law. You can probably find it around.
Whether today's light is dim or not is irrelevant to the truth claims of natural law. I might start a thread on Reformed natural law.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
As to so-called "R2K" politics, read Clark's twitter account and then read the Kuyperian transformationalist Tim Keller, and then get back to me.
The problem is not that Keller is a transformationalist. The problem is that he is a bad transformationalist.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
I certainly won't dispute that point. But by parity of reasoning, we can say the same thing about Hart or Horton, if one deems them problematic.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
As to natural law, and I am working on getting my thoughts in order, this is the bare bones minimum.
tentsofshem.wordpress.com
Outline Thomas Aquinas Treatise on Law
Question 90: Of the essence of law law is a rule and measure of acts The principal and object in practical matters is the last end, beatitude. Question 91: Of the various kinds of law There is an e…
tentsofshem.wordpress.com
That makes sense, and I can respect that. My quibble would be, though, that the social non-engagement (and, in Horton's case, the advocation of social wickedness) is inherent to Escondido's system of political thought, whereas Keller's Marxist error is not at all inherent to transformationalism.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Again, I wonder why people always choose Horton's more extreme statements than Clark's conservative articles. Natural law provides me with the rationale, perhaps even the obligation of engagement.
I confess I’m speaking broadly. It's just my personal assessment, to be taken or left on its own merit, if it has any.
First off you have to define Transformationalist. Tim Keller is not a good resource nor does he look like Bavinck nor the Prime Minister. Hart, DVD, Estelle, Chris Gordan or any of the other Radical Two Kingdom guys who hold to a distinct dichotomous view of Law and Grace have serious problems Jacob. Their view of Natural Law is a descendant of their hermeneutic as other doctrines that emanate from that.
I will note that DVD's desire is to...
Van Drunen on Kuyper
In a 2002 review of a book on the life and work of Abraham Kuyper, Dr. Van Drunen stated: “Readers who do not assume that there is a distinctively "Christian" cultural-political task, or that the kingdom of God is the measure for all earthly kingdoms, or that the present social order is supposed to be transformed, or that Reformed Christianity is a Calvinism consisting of a "life-principle" or worldview, will probably come away having eaten much but not finally satisfied. The book that we still need is one that critically challenges rather than promotes the Kuyperian captivity of the church.” (Modern Reformation (November/December 2002, pages 48-49).
I will note that DVD's desire is to...
Van Drunen on Kuyper
In a 2002 review of a book on the life and work of Abraham Kuyper, Dr. Van Drunen stated: “Readers who do not assume that there is a distinctively "Christian" cultural-political task, or that the kingdom of God is the measure for all earthly kingdoms, or that the present social order is supposed to be transformed, or that Reformed Christianity is a Calvinism consisting of a "life-principle" or worldview, will probably come away having eaten much but not finally satisfied. The book that we still need is one that critically challenges rather than promotes the Kuyperian captivity of the church.” (Modern Reformation (November/December 2002, pages 48-49).
Last edited:
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
I haven't seen any ethical or social problems with DVD. Hart I'm aware of. I can't speak for the others. I've read through Thomas's Summa, outlined above. I've outlined Rutherford and Althusius. I have a fairly good working grasp of natural law theory. With the exception of the magistrate imprisoning Baptists, I'm not sure where Clark and DVD disagree
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
And here is an analysis of Book 19 of City of God. This is basically required reading for any discussion of social ethics. If you haven't read Book 19 City of God in-depth, then we are talking past each other. Background reading in Cicero probably also good.
tentsofshem.wordpress.com
City of God, Book 19
From Bonds of Imperfection A thing’s end is its perfection. The summum bonum is that object for which other objects are sought, but which is sought only for itself. Book 2 flashback: traditiona…
tentsofshem.wordpress.com
I am speaking of a hermeneutical problem Jacob. It is great you have read a lot. I admire that. We are discussing Confessional issues and I have specifically asked over and over again about that topic since their Law / Grace dichotomous view is not Reformed. It effects most of their thinking and doctrine since all passes through their grid of Law / Gospel Dichotomy.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
I understand you have asked about that topic. I've given my response. You say their view is not Reformed. I say you can find it in Reformed writers. That's about where we are at the present.
As to whether it affects *all* their thinking, I don't buy that claim. I have not seen it demonstrated in Clark's political writings. Quite the opposite, in fact. I can make the same assertion--for that's all it is--that Keller's Marxism is consistent with his transformationalism, or Joel McDurmond's wokism is tied with his theonomy.
I quit paying attention
That is a dodge. You know that. Attaching Strawmen and outcomes of bad theology to sources that don't represent their biblical counterparts is bad form.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
You don't have to read it. I'm just pointing it out so to rebut any claims that he is a liberal.
That is literally what people have been doing to Clark et al for the past four pages. I'm simply playing by the same rules.
Who accused him of being a Liberal?
Not me.
So you admit you are doing what i said. okay. Well, as an old friend please just deal honestly with me. I try my best.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Everyone who tied him in with the "Escondido" theology and then identified that with Horton's more outlandish statements.
I simply used a reductio ad absurdum. You said many times in this thread that R2K's hermeneutics leads to consequences x, y, and z. For one, that's almost always logically fallacious. Secondly, it's not true. In order to demonstrate the absurdity of the claim, I brought in Keller and McDurmon. That's a standard trope in rhetorical and logical discussions.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Is natural law a theological and spiritual concept/doctrine or an ideological and political concept? I always thought it had more do with the latter - although I recognize overlap in everything as per God’s domain obviously.
There are certain distinctions but at the end of the day all men are accountable for their deeds (and more importantly if they are covered by the blood of Jesus).
Their Law Grace hermeneutic does effect other doctrines. It has been written about quite a bit. If they land on a topic and get it correct it may be by accident. That happens. We all do that. I am not making false claims. You should know that Jacob. The hermeneutic is the problem.
Just interested.... What do you make of the following statement brother?
"The book that we still need is one that critically challenges rather than promotes the Kuyperian captivity of the church.” (Modern Reformation (November/December 2002, pages 48-49). David Van Drunen.
Just interested.... What do you make of the following statement brother?
"The book that we still need is one that critically challenges rather than promotes the Kuyperian captivity of the church.” (Modern Reformation (November/December 2002, pages 48-49). David Van Drunen.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
From my limited knowledge base, I can’t tell what Hart is….. cynic-satirist first and foremost
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
It's theological. Natural law participates in the Divine Ratio, the mind of God. I understand that makes it sound like it can't function in the "naked public square." That does not matter, though. A fully worked out natural law system can address those concerns.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
From my limited knowledge base, I can’t tell what Hart is….. cynic-satirist first and foremost
He is what he is. His refutations of Catholicism and YRR make him A-ok in my book.
What is meant by Transformationalism? Sorry, I just want to understand what others thinking. I have seen it defined differently in various ways. Strawmen arguments like Jacob made above don't help.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Oh sure, he’s ok in mine too! He’d probably take it as somewhat of a compliment but obviously he is much more thoughtful and useful than just that! I’m mostly talking about his Twitter….
Sorry guys, I gotta bail out. Joshua Caleb's Thritieth is today and we are heading out soon to eat and drink and be merry. Will check in tomorrow.
- Status
Similar threads
