Living in God's Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture. By DAVID VANDRUNEN.

Abstract

Is God redeeming culture and are Christians called to transform culture, building God’s kingdom through cultural work? While many Christians today answer ‘yes’ to such a question, David VanDrunen answers with an emphatic ‘no’ in his new book, Living in God’s Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture. In contrast to a transformationalist approach to Christianity and culture, VanDrunen proposes that Scripture actually teaches a two-kingdom approach, a view affirmed by some of the best Augustinian, Lutheran, and Reformed theologians in ages past. VanDrunen’s two-kingdom doctrine argues that while Christians should be pro-active in human culture, nevertheless ‘God is not redeeming the cultural activities and institutions of this world, but is preserving them through the covenant he made with all living creatures through Noah in Genesis 8:20–9:17’ (p. 15). VanDrunen titles this kingdom the ‘common kingdom’, which consists of all human honourable institutions and activities, though these cultural institutions are temporary and provisional. On the other hand, there is also a ‘redemptive kingdom’, which is founded upon God’s covenant with Abraham. In this redemptive kingdom ‘God is redeeming a people for himself, by virtue of the covenant made with Abraham and brought to glorious fulfillment in the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, who has completed Adam’s original task once and for all’ (ibid.). The redemptive kingdom is most readily seen in the Church and will finally be consummated in the new earth at the return of Christ. The contrast between these two kingdoms has major implications for Christians here and now. ‘They rejoice to be citizens of heaven through membership in the church, but also recognize that for the time being they are living in Babylon, striving for justice and excellence in their cultural labors, out of love for Christ and their neighbor, as sojourners and exiles in a land that is not their lasting home’ (ibid.).