Mike Huckabee and the Two Kingdoms
Monday, January 7, 2008 at 03:52PM 
Now that Mike Huckabee is surging in the polls--quite a surprise to me--his candidacy raises very important issues regarding the two kingdoms (the "kingdom of God" and the "city of man"). Huckabee was governor of Arkansas for more than ten years, so one might assume that Huckabee no longer sees himself as called to the gospel ministry. Not so. Click here: Huckabee Steps Back Into the Pulpit at Evangelical Church in N.H.
Here's why Huckabee and so many on the Christian Right make me nervous--they often confuse the two kingdoms. Here's an example of what I mean. On January 6, while campaigning in New Hampshire for president of the United States, Mike Huckabee preached a sermon at a church called the Crossing. In his sermon, Huckabee stated "When we become believers, it's as if we have signed up to be part of God's Army, to be soldiers for Christ." This raises a number of red-flags.
First, if Huckabee is called to public service (a legitimate and noble calling), then he should resign his office as minister. That would clarify things greatly. In effect, Huckabee should do what the minister in the movie the Patriot did when he took up arms against the Tories--he took off his clerical collar before going to war. This made things very clear. Ministers don't wage war. Citizens can if the cause is just.
Second, it makes me very, very, nervous when a presidential candidate gets in a pulpit and preaches a sermon during the midst of an election in which he is running for office, especially when the church service seems much like an election rally. It makes me even more nervous when candidate Huckabee speaks of God's army and being a soldier for Christ in that same sermon.
In all fairness, Huckabee made an effort to preach a sermon and not give a political speech. But why does a candidate who feels he is called to be president of the United States, also feel called to preach a sermon using militaristic metaphors, if not to whip up potential voters? If not confusing the kingdoms (which I think Huckabee did), it certainly muddies the waters. Not good.
Third, since evangelicals often don't evaluate things theologically, they tend not to see a man confused about what God has called him to do (either be a public servant or a minister), and instead see value in having a "man of God" as president. This, many think, will ensure that the traditional values agenda is duly addressed from the right perspective. After all, it is argued, America is a "Christian nation" and must maintain these values. Huckabee, it is believed, will do this.
When viewed from the perspective of the two kingdoms, every Christian is simultaneously a citizen of both kingdoms and our theological beliefs should inform how we behave as citizens. But there's no distinction of kingdoms with Huckabee in a pulpit, and Huckabee's "soldiers in God's army" are people who will serve his political cause. In other words, they'll vote for him and encourage others to do the same. Fine for a political rally. Not fine for a church service.
Let say that as for me and my house, we'll have nothing to do with Mike Huckabee. I don't like his populist rhetoric. I want to hear talk about budget cuts, tax cuts, size of government cuts, etc. I want to hear a candidate tell me how he will protect my civil liberties and not mortgage the future of my children by taxing and spending. Furthermore, I will not support a candidate for president who wants the nanny state to protect me by keeping me from smoking--Huckabee supported a national "no smoking" initiative. By the way, other than a very occasional cigar, I don't smoke. I happen to think the nanny state can be as dangerous to my health as a two-pack a day habit.
Reader Comments (86)
Good stuff. Your nervousness is my soothing. I'd rather read posts like this than turn to Xanax these days.
Carolyn,
Careful.
One gripe I have with Thompson is that he has absolutely no executive experience. I don't think being in the senate for a term and a half is sufficient preparation and proper qualification for President. I much prefer someone who has been a governor or who has some executive branch experience.
I like Fred's "take me or leave me" attitude, but he sure has no fire in his belly for this job, which is the most demanding job on the planet.
Being a Christian does not guarantee that you will be a good president. Remember the last southern baptist president, Jimmy Carter?
While I certainly would love to see laws against abortion enacted in this country, there are other issues that are also of considerable importance. For example, terrorism!?! Illegal immigration,health care, taxes?
Huckabee in my opinion has nothing but doom planned for this country with his fiscal views. That is enough for me to not vote for him, regardless of what his two kingdom views are.
By the way, I am a two-kingdom guy.
I was reared in a dispy Baptist church with all that it entails. I am fairly well-read and have rejected some of this theological inheritance. (Still a Baptist, just covenantal in approach.)
I must now confess & expose my ignorance, but I thought Reformed believers approached the civil government as a means to advance the Kingdom? Isn't it the fundamentalist heritage to separate civil and religious worlds? I'm truly interested...
Good question. And here's a very brief answer.
There's a huge difference between the Reformed approach to the two kingdoms and the old fundamentalist antipathy toward civil government. Like the old fundamentalists, the Reformed two kingdom approach distinguishes between the city of man and the kingdom of God. But the two kingdom approach does not deprecate the city of man as irrelevant or inferior. The city of man has been ordained by God, it is the realm where all of us live, work, and raise our families. The appeal here is not to Scripture, but to natural law and the public square.
In this kingdom, Christian citizens will behave like Christians and work out their faith in the day to day grind of life. But they will do so in the midst of pagans, secularists and false religion. They will seek to out live, out think, and persuade others, but will also see that what takes place in this kingdom is tied to common grace and will pass away at the eschaton.
The kingdom of God on the other hand, is more specifically connected to the preaching of the word, the administration of the sacraments and the discipline of the church. This refers to Christ's spiritual rule over his church and the hearts of his people (sanctification) as well and to the relentless advance of his kingdom into all the earth (missions and evangelism). The focus here is the preaching of the gospel.
My gripe is not that Huckabee sees the civil sphere as important--good on him. My gripe is that he is confusing the two by preaching a sermon in a church, using militaristic metaphors, while he is running for office in the city of man. If he's called to public service, then he should resign from the ministry.
Appropriating Joshua's confession is quite fitting, as candidate M.H. promotes the modern equivalent of "the Temple of the Lord! the Temple of the Lord!" and appeals to Messianic Americanism.
Too many USA Christians place a premium on their "Roman citizenship" instead of their Kingdom of God citizenship. They seem to think they're better off tied real tight to the man who gets phone calls from God, for political chuckles.
Not me. Lord, don't associate me or mine with this man. We reject him, and cleave to You.
You are correct in assuming politicians are corrupt, self serving and bought by the world..If you would pay more respect the Dispensational viewpoint you would see that the "Prince that Shall Come" will be a product of government. Which one I am not sure, but it very likely will be one who is the backed by the world system.
Are you not muddying the same waters as a minister of the Gospel by expressing your own political views so publicly here on the internet? Are you not concerned that you might be hindering the effectiveness of your calling by potentially alienating those in your congregation or federation who might be more politically liberal than you or who might have a strong affinity for Huckabee?
I'm not making a value judgment against you...that's not for me to do...but I am curious about how you'd answer these questions. I think my questions are fair. Please don't take them personally. I hope to learn from your answers.
Blessings,
Brad
You are way off base. In Amil theology the millenium represents the reign of the kingdom of God on earth discussed here as one of the two kingdoms. It is the age of the church, where Christ grows his church on the earth.
Christ ushered in the millenium by overcoming sin and death. Christ will also terminate the millenium by unexpectedly coming to judge the quick and the dead.
Kim's "Man of Sin" convincingly proposes that the man of sin (the final beast and antichrist) will come to wage war on the church, internally through false teaching and externally through state-sponsored persecution.
If YOU would pay more respect to Dispensational theology, you would study it in enough detail to realize that its logical outworkings are incapable of producing anything other than heresy. Disp. Theology seems reasonable only if it isn't scrutinized. But for anyone that holds to Biblical inerrancy, systematic dispensationalism distorts the gospel.
Is he preaching this from the pulpit? Are their anti-Huckabee pamphlets at his church?
Another good question. Here are a few points to consider.
First, I have not endorsed any candidate, or any political party in my office as minister. I have expressed my personal opinion as to why I don't like Huckabee's candidacy (on both theological and personal grounds), and why I haven't come to any conclusion about for whom I will vote. I'm still undecided.
Second, my goal with this post is to get people to think and wrestle with some of these issues. Looks like I've done that.
Third, since I write as a citizen, I am not preaching a sermon in my capacity as a minister of the gospel. My readers (and church members) know the difference between what I do on my blog, and what I do in the pulpit. If they don't, I would ask them to read one of the many sermons I post here. When I put on my robe and get in the pulpit, I'm preaching law and gospel to Huckabee supporters and Huckabee foes, to democrats and to republicans.
Fourth, I think it my job as a minister of the gospel to instruct people as to how the two kingdoms work and why it is important to keep them distinct. I hope that my theology informs my citizenship so that I know where the limits are and when it is proper to have a discussion such as this. On my blog, I often pontificate. In the pulpit, it is a sin to pontificate.
Last (and related to the previous), remember, ministers are citizens too. In keeping the two kingdoms distinct, I am entitled to my political views as is any member of our church. They know that I will engage them in the give and take of political discussion. But they also know that I am aware of an important boundary, which I can't and won't cross. The line is my office as minister of word and sacrament.
Does that help?
The issue is one of office. If the devil himself(not to disparage kim) is properly administering the word and sacraments in the ministerial office of the church, then God's kingdom is preserved.
2 Kingdom's folk view the minister as acting on behalf of God, effectively taking on the roll of God to lead the order of worship. They get annoyed when people interrupt the order of worship for things like anouncements, because it seems irreverent that the announcements should be delivered out of God's mouth. So for example, in my church the pastor says good morning to the church PRIOR to greeting the church in the name of the Lord, and he reads the announcements AFTER giving us a benediction in the name of the Father. All of the time in between is revered as God's sacred time to administer word and sacrament and conduct orderly worship to God.
So when we get annoyed with politicians preaching sermons (ordained or not), it is because they have hijacked God's orderly worship and shanghaied the office of the holy minister of God to further their own political agendas, and we consider it egregiously blasphemous.
If Kim conducted an order of worship where instead of upholding the office of God, he pushed a personal agenda (political or otherwise) everyone would be calling for reproval. However, as a member of 2 kingdoms, Kim can hold and declare his political views outside of his duties as an officer of the church without raising eyebrows. Even so, it is likely that he would shy away from a public personal endorsement of a candidate since it might be misconstrued as an endorsement by the church.
I think discussing this candidate's blurring of the two kingdoms is completely reasonable. I'm just wondering specifically about the last paragraph of the Reverend's post.
I have benefited tremendously from this blog and this two kingdoms discussion. My questions were not attacks. I think they are fair.
Brad
careful?
I think it is the church that had better be very careful about rejecting the fact that we were meant to be a republic, under the rule of law, not a democracy (mob vote).
I see RP as one last final gracious gift of God to the nation in this crucial hour, to return to the rule of law.
I am not one of those people who thinks the constitution is canon.(they do exist). We had to add an anti-slavery amendment among other changes.
But Ron Paul states so well that
".....the Founding Fathers, whose "political philosophy -- the wisdom of the Constitution, the Declaration, and our Revolution itself -- is not just a primitive cultural relic," .
"By what superior wisdom have we now declared Jefferson, Washington, and Madison to be 'unrealistic and dangerous'?" Paul asks. "Why do we insist on throwing away their most considered warnings?"
There was a moment in my life when I suddenly saw with clarity that I had to sumit my thinking to the confessions and the wisdom of those who wrote them. I was arrogant to hold my interpretations above theirs.I look back on that as my truly defining moment in embracing Reformed theology. I already had long before embraced inerrancy and suffiency, but the outworkings of that had not been submitted by my mind to the great Reformers.
Ron Paul to me represents, for government, what the confessions represent to me for doctrine and the church. A return to the wisdom of those who came more than two hundred years before us, and in wisdom wrote out the laws for a republic that became the greatest nation on earth.
It is those who depart from the founding fathers who I think need to be very careful, not me. This is not about Ron Paul, it is about the constitution and the founding fathers. The church can either embrace that, or reject it. If we corporately reject it, I honestly think that we will reap a sorry harvest from our foolishness.
Just my opinion. And like some have posted, what we really need is another great awakening,a revival, on the national level. No president can save us.
As I mentioned in my comment above, it was only the last paragraph that you wrote which prompted my questions.
I just tried to put myself in the shoes of someone reading who could be Christian, who might be liberal concerning taxes and the role (and size) of government in society. As I thought about your post (especially the last paragraph) from that vantage point I could envision someone being turned off to Christ URC and your sermons.
While someone within your congregation may rightly understand your views...someone outside may not. (Having said that, I'm not automatically assuming that you are in the wrong to express your views in this post!)
How would you respond to someone I just described?
I know that you are super busy so I won't press my question any further. If you have time to answer that'd be wonderful but I'll understand if you don't.
In the love of Christ,
Brad
Plus as to tax cuts and small goverment , I'm unconvinced that will benefit no one but the well to do . Just a "hosers" 2 cents worth ...EH!!. Reg
If people come to a blog like this, read my post and all of the great discussion offered by the readers (expressing diverse and thoughtful opinions), and are still turned off, then they came here looking to be turned off.