This past week or two the question of a Christian’s involvement in politics has come up once or twice. For example, Dr. Clark wrote an article (found here) in support of the California Proposition 8, which added just a few words to our State’s constitution: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California.”
My friend RubeRad wrote in support of Prop 8 using the WCF (found here). In this thread, you see Christians here wondering if it is okay to vote yes. There is mention of the opposing side’s rhetoric that voting yes would be “taking away a right” that homosexuals had (for a few short months. The prop was successfull.)
I’ll admit, I’m frustrated. These two particular blogs are home to proponents of a “2 Kingdom” theology that basically says Christians are citizens of a spiritual kingdom (Christ’s) and of a worldly kingdom (man’s). It further states that when we are acting in the sphere of man’s kingdom, like politics, that we must come to our conclusions of what is right and what is wrong by using the “Natural Law Theory.” I am still studying Dr. Clark’s particular flavor of this theory, since intellectual honesty is important to me, and knowing the truth is even more important to me. But, for now, I think I can give a basic explanation.
Dr. Clark’s Natural Law Theory basically seems to be saying that since all men are bearers of God’s image and have the moral law written on their heart, man can discover or at least ‘knows’ what is right and what is wrong through reason or general revelation. (Dr. Clark, feel free to correct me if I’m not correct). A Christian, therefore, doesn’t need to appeal to natural revelation when dealing in this civil sphere. He or she can reason with the unbeliever on common ground.
Anyway, all of this has got me to thinking about the following verse:
How is this verse interpreted from a “2 Kingdom” theology? What significance, if any, does it have for the Christian and the Church today? Why does Christ immediately after these words tell his followers NOT to think that He came to destroy the law? What did they think of when they heard Him say “law?” Why does he go on to give application with imperatives to them?
So, if you’re a 2 Kingdom guy out there, please, have at it. Explain it to me (and my two readers) please.
Kazoo
Posted by kazooless 