From a recent post at oldlife.org: “After all, the only biblical alternative to 2k is theonomy, and even theonomists have not yet revolted against the American regime.”

And one of its comments: “Terry, the only biblical models for politics are Israel of the OT, or “my kingdom is not of this world” of the NT. What am I missing?”

I believe we need to make a distinction between a separation of church and state, for instance and a particular formulation of 2K theology. Again, any competent Vossian or Kuyperian ought to be able to account for Christ’s declaration that his kingdom is not of this world. But does that make them 2K? It is highly suspect that the genitive “of this world [ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου]” is meant to entail particular views of nature/grace and general/special revelation as found in certain varieties of 2K theology. To define 2K in the broadest Jn 18:36 category is to lump many different Reformed camps together so as to risk making the label meaningless.

Most of this comes down to, then, what the kingdom of God is. It is possible to distinguish between God’s rule over creation and his special gracious rule over the church, as in WCF 25 — the visible church is the kingdom of Christ. But you would not believe how many contemporary Reformed believers — even Vossians, who veered neo-Calvinist in his book on the Kingdom — object to the specificity of the Confession.

And once the kingdom of Christ becomes fuzzy, the keys of the kingdom blur into redeeming the culture.

Thus ends today’s exhortation.