Two Kingdoms

Discussion in 'Theological Forum' started by Myshkin, Apr 20, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Myshkin

    Myshkin Puritan Board Freshman

    Excellent review of Living in God's Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture, by David VanDrunen

    Ordained Servant Online

    I think the review alone does enough to explain what 2k is and is not, at least from a basic outline standpoint.
     
  2. PuritanCovenanter

    PuritanCovenanter Moderator Staff Member

    I read this a few days ago. I think it is posted somewhere else also. It seems to me that there is a lot not said in the blog post that others seem to being seeing behind the vail (so to speak). VanDrunen is being addressed and critiqued by better minds in my estimation. Here is a thread on the PB that links to Dr. Kloosterman's 7 reviews done so far. http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/ongoing-review-van-drunens-natural-law-two-kingdoms-63558/

    You can find them all here. http://www.worldviewresourcesinternational.com/kloosterman/two_kingdoms_review.html
     
  3. discipulo

    discipulo Puritan Board Junior

    Thank you for posting the link.

    ---------- Post added at 05:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 PM ----------

    To provoke further debate I add a quote from:
    Geerhardus Vos
    The Kingdom of God and the Church

    From this [that all authority exercised within the church is Christ the King’s], however, it does not necessarily follow, that the visible church is the only outward expression of the invisible kingdom. Undoubtedly the kingship of God, as his recognized and applied supremacy, is intended to pervade and control the whole of human life in all its forms of existence. This the parable of the leaven plainly teaches. These various forms of human life have each their own sphere in which they work and embody themselves. There is a sphere of science, a sphere of art, a sphere of the family and of the state, a sphere of commerce and industry.
     
  4. PuritanCovenanter

    PuritanCovenanter Moderator Staff Member

    In the Kloosterman reviews I appreciated how he flushes out the historical figures in light of their terminology and how VanDrunnen seems to miss them.
     
  5. tcalbrecht

    tcalbrecht Puritan Board Junior

    I note that Dr. Reynolds has his D. Min. from WSC, Dr. VanDrunen's current employer. What, in your opinion, makes this an excellent review?
     
  6. Myshkin

    Myshkin Puritan Board Freshman

    Randy-

    Could you clarify what exactly you mean here?

    Tom-

    1. What is the relevance? Care to make clear what you may be implying? Or are you just stating the facts? Just asking.
    2. In my opinion, it is an excellent review because it is well written, clear, to the point, is a good example of what a review should look like, and it presents the position of the book with accuracy. Qualities that should be present regardless of the position one takes on a given issue. I happen to hold to the 2k position as presented by the review, and think that it is one of the better explanations of the position.

    I did not start the thread to attack non-2k adherents. I simply thought it was a review worth sharing.
     
  7. tcalbrecht

    tcalbrecht Puritan Board Junior

    One of the obvious shortcomings of this review is the absence of any critique of either VanDrunen's thesis or the justification in support of that thesis. Surely there must be something to criticize in his presentation. Rather, we get the likes of this:

    How do we know, for example, whether VanDrunen's 2k position is in essential harmony with the 2k position of the 16th and 17th century Reformers? Did we learn anything in the review that we could not have gotten simply from reading the book?

    The author is obviously quite sympathetic with the (Klinean) 2k position. The review appears to simply reflect that agreement.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page