{"id":26080,"date":"2016-11-16T06:00:22","date_gmt":"2016-11-16T11:00:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/geneveith\/?p=26080"},"modified":"2016-11-16T03:54:28","modified_gmt":"2016-11-16T08:54:28","slug":"a-lutheran-critique-of-escondido-theology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/geneveith\/2016\/11\/a-lutheran-critique-of-escondido-theology\/","title":{"rendered":"A Lutheran critique of Escondido theology"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

Westminster Seminary in Escondido, California,<\/a> has some impressive theologians\u2013Michael Horton, David Van Drunen, and other Calvinists of the sort who appear on White Horse Inn.<\/a>\u00a0 I know some of these guys, think highly of them, and appreciate how some of them are being influenced by Luther and Lutheran theology. \u00a0But though they speak of the distinction between Law and Gospel, have a stronger influence on the Sacraments, and teach about vocation, they are still Calvinists and their use of Luther is still within a Calvinist context.<\/p>\n

A controversy has broken out in Reformed circles about the doctrine of the Two Kingdoms, as formulated by these Escondido theologians, particularly David Van Drunen in his book Living in Two Kingdoms: \u00a0A Biblical Vision of Christ and Culture.<\/a>\u00a0 He is developing an alternative to the \u201cone kingdom\u201d model of the Dominionists and to the Abraham Kuyper\u2019s \u201cneocalvinism\u201d with its notion of \u201csphere sovereignty\u201d over every dimension of life.<\/p>\n

\n

This is a worthy project, but Van Drunen\u2019s version of the Two Kingdoms is NOT the same as the Lutheran view. \u00a0Yet the two are being confused. \u00a0As other Reformed theologians push back against this so-called \u201cEscondido theology,\u201d they are saying that Van Drunen\u2019s view is the official position of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. \u00a0I\u2019ve heard that Dr. Van Drunen\u2019s book is being taught in courses on Lutheran theology. \u00a0And, to top it off, I\u2019m told that I am even mentioned in at least one book on the subject as advocating this Escondido theology!<\/p>\n

At that Two Kingdoms conference <\/a>I participated in, Jordan Cooper gave an important presentation entitled\u00a0\u201cEscondido Theology: An Evaluation and Critique.\u201d<\/p>\n

After the jump, I\u2019ll sum up some of the differences and post the video of Jordan\u2019s presentation.<\/p>\n

The Escondido theologians, Calvinists that they are, develop their view in terms of covenant theology. \u00a0They distinguish between the Noahic covenant after the flood, which applies to the whole human race, and the covenants of salvation. \u00a0They also work with the distinction between \u201ccommon grace\u201d\u2013God\u2019s kindness to his whole creation\u2013and \u201cparticular grace,\u201d the saving grace that applies only to the elect. \u00a0As a result, the Escondido version tends to see the Kingdom of the Left as the realm of the lost, with the Kingdom of the Right referring to the church.<\/p>\n

Luther\u2019s view, in contrast, derives from the distinction\u00a0between Law and Gospel. \u00a0He also speaks of the distinction between God\u2019s temporal kingdom and His eternal kingdom, the realm of His physical creation and the realm of His spiritual redemption.<\/p>\n

Thus, God\u2019s moral law is<\/em> applicable to the\u00a0secular sphere, while\u00a0Christians, strictly speaking, are governed solely by the Gospel. \u00a0The visible church, as a temporal, physical institution, is part of the Kingdom of the Left\u2013subject to ethical standards, the laws of the state, and the operations of reason\u2013while the invisible church is kept by God forever. \u00a0The Lutheran view sees the Kingdom of the Left as a good<\/em> place, where God is present\u2013in vocation, for one thing\u2013and where He is hidden, being revealed only in His spiritual kingdom by His word.<\/p>\n

The Escondido version, by contrast, is mostly negative towards the Kingdom of the Left. \u00a0Yes, Christians must live out their faith in this hostile environment, but the church itself has little to do with the world. \u00a0It has no agenda to try to improve the culture. \u00a0Some go so far as to say that good works done by the church\u2013as opposed to those by individual Christians\u2013(for example, disaster relief and other works of mercy) should be for the benefit of other Christians, rather than the world outside.<\/p>\n

The upshot is that the Escondido theology of the two kingdoms is essentially dualistic, whereas the Lutheran theology brings the two very different realms of existence together, insofar as they are ruled by the same King, who governs them in different ways. \u00a0Calvinism teaches the doctrine of the limited atonement, that Christ died only for the elect, so that everyone is separated into absolute\u00a0categories of the saved and the lost. \u00a0But because Lutherans believe that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, the whole world, even in its secularity, is a domain for Christians, who participate in God\u2019s providential care as they love and serve their neighbors in their vocations.<\/p>\n

This is my take on the major differences, though I might be missing something. \u00a0But listen to Jordan\u2019s presentation for the details.<\/p>\n

Source: A Critique of Escondido Two Kingdom Theology<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n