A Two Kingdoms Primer
Thursday, September 2, 2010 at 11:11AM 
Here's a brief primer on the basics of the Reformed doctrine of the two kingdoms.
As you consider the distinctions between these two kingdoms, please keep in mind the following presuppositions upon which the distinctions are based:
1). Christ is Lord of both kingdoms. He rules the kingdom of Christ (regnum gratiae) as the mediator of the covenant of grace, and he rules the civil kingdom (regnum potentiae) as sovereign Lord.
2). Every Christian is simultaneously a citizen of both kingdoms (Philippians 3:20; Romans 13:1-7).
3). The state is a post-fall, common grace institution given by God for the administration of justice and to restrain evil (Genesis 4:18 ff; Romans 13:1-7).
4). Non-Christians do not accept or acknowledge Christ's Lordship over the civil kingdom. This is the basis for the antithesis between Christian and non-Christian ways of thinking and doing. The failure to acknowledge Christ's Lordship renders one guilty before God (Romans 1:18-25), but does not invalidate the civil kingdom or the non-Christian's place in it.
5). While Paul calls Rome a minister of God (Romans 13:4), a generation later John describes that same empire as the beast, empowered by the dragon to persecute the people of God (Revelation 13). The Christian's confession that "Jesus is Lord," is likewise a confession that Caesar isn't. Christians must be cognizant that the kingdom of Christ can be seen as a threat to the power of the state. In fact, throughout Scripture, the state is the dragon's weapon of last resort against Christ and his kingdom.
6). From the time Adam was cast from Eden, God has intended the kingdom of Christ (the church) to dwell and advance in the midst of the civil kingdom (the world). This is the foundation for the missionary endeavors of the church, as well as a hedge against either utopianism (an over-realized eschatology) or escapism (i.e., monasticism).
The Distinction Between the Two Kingdoms
Christ's Kingdom
This is a spiritual kingdom and is ruled by Christ in his mediatorial office, in and through the historical manifestation of the covenant of grace (the church)
The Civil Kingdom
Here we speak of human government (the state) and Christ's rule over the earth and its creatures (the kingdom of power), according to God’s divine purpose for humanity (his eternal decree)
__________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
The charter of Christ’s kingdom is the “Great Commission” (cf. Matthew 28:16-20)
The Civil Kingdom
The foundation of the civil kingdom is the “Cultural Mandate” (Genesis 1:28' Genesis 9:6-7)
___________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
The church is given the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16:19). The kingdom is closed to the unrepentant and heretics through church discipline
The Civil Kingdom
The state is given the sword (Romans 13:4). Those who break the law are subject to civil and criminal justice
___________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
Requires “spiritual discernment” (1 Corinthians 1:13 ff; 2:14)
The Civil Kingdom
Requires the light of nature (i.e., general revelation--Romans 2:14-15)
____________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
Christ’s kingdom is manifest on earth through the ordinary means of grace and through those biblically mandated activities of the church (i.e., evangelism, discipleship, and diaconal ministries)
The Civil Kingdom
The civil kingdom is manifest in all human cultural endeavors and governing institutions. In the civil kingdom, Christian citizens seek to be salt and light as they fulfill their callings and vocations along with their non-Christian neighbors
____________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
The focus is upon our heavenly citizenship (Philippians 3:20-21)–which is realized in our membership in Christ’s church. The church is the assembly of Christian believers
The Civil Kingdom
The focus is upon our national citizenship (i.e., the country of our birth, or of which we are presently citizens). As such, this kingdom includes all people (Christians and non-Christians alike) who are citizens of a given nation/society
____________________________________
Christ Kingdom
Entrance is granted into this kingdom only by virtue of regeneration. The focus is upon redemptive grace–God saving his people from the guilt and power of sin
The Civil Kingdom
Entrance into the civil kingdom is granted by virtue of birth (or naturalization). The focus here is upon common grace–God providing for all of his creatures
____________________________________
Christ's Kingdom
As citizens of Christ’s kingdom, we live under the authority of Christ as revealed in Scripture (special revelation)
The Civil Kingdom
In the civil kingdom, we live under the authority of the laws of the land (i.e., general revelation and natural law)
____________________________________
Consequences of Confusing the Two Kingdoms or Denying our Dual Citizenship
When these two kingdoms are confused or conflated, we see the rise of the "social gospel" of Protestant liberalism, American civil religion of the Christian right and the liberal left, as well as the rise of Constantianism (Christendom). The church must never take up the sword and Caesar must never enter the pulpit.
When the Christian's dual citizenship is denied (or ignored), we see the rise of asceticism, pietism, radical pacifism and Anabaptism.
Therefore, a Christian is free to work with non-Christians in the civil kingdom to promote the common good and preserve a just society. But the kingdom of Christ is tied to word and sacrament and the church (and its officers and members) must speak to the pressing moral issues of the day in terms of law and gospel, not in terms of the political activism found in the civil kingdom. Yes, the church must address moral issues as they are found and framed in Scripture (through the preaching and catechetical function of the church), but the church is not to engage in partisan politics, nor endorse any political party or candidate.
Reader Comments (55)
We do need pastors preaching the gospel, we also need wise Christian men to be called to a vocation in government. Although these men may not always apply the bible perfectly to this calling, we still press on. Just as we apply the bible to our sanctification, and sometimes get it wrong, yet we repent and keep moving forward.
dlzr, one of the problems is specificity. When I am told to love my wife and not to lord over her or exasperate my children that still doesn’t help me with the specifics beyond baptizing and catechizing my kids; often I have to consult wisdom from others, including unbelievers.
For another, and this more importantly, the Bible is no more a handbook for family relations than it is for statecraft, both of which are temporal and not eternal projects. If you think family life is eternal then what do you make of the fact that our marriages will be dissolved in the age to come? I mean, whatever else can be said on this point, how conducive to family life is a book that tells us to hate and forsake our family if we are to follow Jesus (Luke 9, 12, 14 & 20)? Funny how the “family values” crowd forgets these verses.
As for the Luke 14:26 passage, you should know that the Semitic expression for loving less is hating. And Jesus in these passages is simply illustrating the cost of following him, the cost of being a disciple. Our love for Jesus must be so great that nothing compares not even our own families.
Ok, Matt S. Holst, I will bite, give me one issue, and I will attempt to apply the principles of the bible to it. I'm not real smart, but I will try to illustrate how the bible speaks to it and how as a Christian in the Political sphere should apply himself to it.
Theh Bible isn't a handbook for navigating through this age, it's a revelation on how to get into the next age. That may be a crude way of putting it, but it sure beats any idea that would have us believe that Jesus had his fingers crossed when he said his kingdom is not of this world.
by looking at Church history through the confessions, you will see these confession state that the Bible calls Christians to a duty before God. Earlier in this thread I cited the Westminster Standards, the Belgic Confession, and the Heidelberg Catechism all stating that we have a duty before God.
What did Jesus say in Matt 5:19, and Paul teaches us that we were saved unto good works Eph 2:10.
Read the Westminster Shorter Catechism questions 41-81 on the Law. And please don't forget 2 Tim 3:16 which teaches us that all scripture profitable for training in righteousness.
The Bible is indeed a redemptive historic narrative about the person and work of Jesus Christ, and his Lordship over all creation. So in this redemptive historic narrative the Bible tells us of the great plan and accomplishment of redemption by Christ, and this same narrative gives us instruction on how we are to live our life Coram Deo.
And what 2k says is that the Christian life can be summed up in one word: obedience. That includes political life. And it says along with Paul that Christians have a duty to obey the civil magistrate because to obey him is to obey God (contrariwise, to disobey him is to disobey God). The only qualification to civil obedience is not "unless you disagree with him" (that's the American qualification). The Christian qualification is when he wants us to be silent about the gospel, in which case we are to actually hold out our tongues for cutting if the option is between that and swallowing our own tongues, so to speak. In other words, the Bible knows nothing of the American virtue called civil disobedience, but it does of the virtue of cultic disobedience.
I agree with that side of it, as Christians we are to be obedient and respectful to our government leaders. But as Christians we should engage the political culture by having the Bible as the foundation for our political ethic. The Bible is the foundation for every political decision we make, who we vote for and if we are called to a political vocation, how we are to perform that task. A city councilman has something unique to say about property-taxes and why homeowners ought to have fences around their swimming pools. (just 2 examples)
The Bible guides us in both areas, how to be a godly obedient subject to the governing authorities, and how to be godly in governing.
The 2K position is inconsistent and arbitrary to the latter, it does not speak with authority from the Bible how to Govern. The 2K approach to political-ethics does not provide the man who is called to be a Governor, Judge, or a Legislature the fundamental principals to fulfill that role to the glory of God.
I think Matt asked you to back up your claim that 2k is “inconsistent and arbitrary,” but I haven’t seen you do that. But I think the missing puzzle piece for you is that you have a blind spot for general revelation, thus you think 2k is just throwing darts in the dark. But when we say special revelation is insufficient for civil tasks it’s because general revelation is. All we need to order this temporal age is in general revelation, it doesn’t need special revelation’s help anymore than ecclesiastical tasks need general revelation, as in sola scripura.
What unique insights would a Christian citycouncilman have on property rights? Would he/she require that I open my farm so that anyone who needs the food could "glean" from my fields? Do I have the right, biblically, to put up a fence around my farm. Can I pick up the extras that the workers dropped or go back over my fields a second time, or am I obligated to keep that for the poor? And, if that is my obligation, do I as a city councilman enforce that even on those who do not accept the authority of Scripture?
Well said on your last post (and the other ones too)
Does General Revelation (GR) reveal something different than Special Revelation (SR). Does God say one thing to us in GR and something different to us in SR. Paul teachs us that every fact in the universe reveals God, and not just any god, but true and living Triune God. And since all men are created in the image of God, they know God (Rom 1:19-21). All men know God and his Law which Paul makes clear to the church in the first 2 chapters of Romans. General Revelation ought to be enough for men to know God and to live a holy life pleasing to Him. But since man represses the truth and rebels against this God he knows, man cannot live in harmony with his Creator. But praise be to God through grace (common grace) he does not allow men to be as rebellious as he would be. So man apart from saving grace by function of God’s common grace is able to do all kinds of wonderful things, such cure disease, produce great art, and even govern well to a certain degree. But apart from saving grace man will not be able to do these things to the glory of God and apart from saving grace man will not submit to God and his Law and have a motivation to govern according to God’s Law found in his word.
Often times it is sad to see non-believers have a better idea on how to govern than some of our dear Christian brothers, but this will happen when Christians have as there foundation in governing something other than the Bible. If the foundation of your reasoning is not based on the Bible, you are left with using your own or someone else's autonomous reasoning. So it is very sad to see an atheist use autonomous reasoning and coming closer to the truth than when Christians use autonomous reasoning.
And this is the case on your position on abortion. There are few things more disturbing than to hear Christians appeal to States Rights on this issue. Is it a states right to sanction rape and child molestation. When it comes to the taking of innocent life, Christian have to say that is wrong. The state does not have the authority to allow the innocent to be killed. The Bible is very clear on this, and it is sad when an atheist can understand this and a Christian cannot.
2K is inconsistent and arbitrary because it appeals to man’s autonomous reason as he understands the natural world around him. Any thinking that is not centered on Christ is arbitrary. For instance, why should abortion be illegal, if the answer is something other than because the Bible teaches us such, then you are reasoning on a foundation other than Christ. Again any reasoning that is doesn’t have God and His word as the foundation, the non-negotiable, the root of all thinking, is ARBITRARY.
And one final note, Special Revelation always provides greater light then General Revelation. Your comment “we say special revelation is insufficient for civil tasks it’s because general revelation” is ridiculous.
Concerning a city councilman regarding property rights, put simply, the city councilman should argue before the city-council itself to do away with property taxes. The government has no authority to tax property , as if the land is owned by the government and is simply being leased by the citizens. The earth belongs to the Lord, not the state. So as a city councilman I would argue for the right of land owners to do anything they want with their land as far as it does not endanger innocent human life. If I was in the minority I would continue the battle, but be submissive and obedient to the rule of the city council.
As for your inferences to Lev 19:9 and Deut 24:19-21, you will notice there is no penal sanction in those passages, so therefore the state does not have authority to dictate the laws about gleaning and leaving the extra’s for the sojourner and the fatherless. What is being taught in these passages is covetousness. The farmer should not rape the field and keep every ear of corn, every sheaf of wheat for himself. The farmer rather should see the good harvest as blessing from God, and remember those in need, making a portion for those in need. And this is how we are to see our own vocations today. As God blesses us in our work, we should not take the whole paycheck for ourselves, or even after our tithe keep it all for ourselves, but to remember the poor.
The fact that the earth belongs to the Lord does not automatically lead to the government having no right to tax property. I'm no expert on Roman taxes, but when Paul said that we are to pay taxes to whom taxes are due, do you think he meant to only pay taxes to those who are governing biblically? Or, do we have to conclude that we pay taxes to those whom God has sovereingly placed in authority over us, even if those taxes go to support things that we would strongly and even biblically disagree with? I am sure that Christians paid taxes in Rome that supported horrific violence in the Colloseum.
While I have no problem with you as a councilman speaking against the taxation of private property (I'd probably agree with you), I don't see how this is distinctly Christian.