The distinction Van Drunen tries to make between “religious” and “civil” (let’s just say “secular”) is problematic on many levels, though many have made this distinction an important feature of their theology. Post a Review You can write a book review and share your experiences. But his failure to define religious and secular makes his definitions of the respective realms problematic. But that too is universal. Certainly Jesus and the Apostles do not call believers to conquer unbelievers with the sword asIsrael conquered Canaan.11 Rather, they call us to be subject to the rulers the world ( Rom. I would not say that this suppression contradicts everything Van Drunen has said about the positive value of natural law. And Rom. If there is a natural law, but man completely suppresses it, then it does not serve as a guide at all. And certainly Adam understood his own status as the image of God and the dignity connected with it. VanDrunen presents an interesting look at natural law with consideration of the image of God, civil and spiritual kingdoms, and redemptive history. It is a very basic yet helpful look at this classic doctrine. Van Drunen’s formulation distinguishes the “civil” kingdom from the “spiritual” kingdom. In the following narratives, there is a regular pattern of divine words and human responses (in obedience or disobedience). Prov. 10:27-30, etc.). Van Drunen understands this covenant to be a “covenant of common grace” (27). Dr. VanDrunen relies heavily on this distinction between a civil covenant after the flood, and the redemptive covenant with Abraham. God’s end-verdict was, …the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Precisely the same points can be made by people who think there is only one kingdom. “Apart from” is a vague expression. And Van Drunen stresses that the Abrahamic covenant is particularistic: not dealing with all people, but separating one family from the others. For natural law is not a written text. (14). Certainly that complicates the role of natural law in providing moral knowledge to human beings. Our disagreements concern the relation of natural law to Scripture, the two-kingdoms doctrine, and the function of natural law within a biblical ethical epistemology. What can stop this course of corruption? People often say that it is difficult to argue ethical issues from Scripture in a society that does not honor Scripture’s authority. But so far as I can tell, the book does not do that in any clear way. All people at all times are obligated to believe in Christ and to trust his provision for sin. Natural law as a concept in ethics goes back to ancient Greek philosophy, particularly Aristotelian and Stoic. I think that to make this clear Van Drunen should have put a comma after “revelation.” Or, better, he should have put a period after “revelation,” then written “This moral order binds…”. But I think it remarkable that Van Drunen says nothing more in the book about the unbeliever’s suppression of the truth. In saying this, Paul teaches that there is a natural law that continues to bind all people and that people actually know something of this law. But I find nothing here to validate Van Drunen’s two kingdom focus. It is a very basic yet helpful look at this classic doctrine. To respond: The indicative-imperative structure is not the only ground of ethics in Scripture, nor the most ultimate one. One is how those in a "pagan" setting appealed to "what is right" or "what ought to be done" or "the fear of God." The two signs seem to me to be equally religious. A Neo-Calvinist Engagement of Calvin’s ‘Two Kingdoms’ Doctrine,” Pro Rege 27.3 (Mar., 2009), 1-12. These philosophers believed that there are natural laws, moral principles that can be discovered in nature (particularly human nature) by reason and conscience. On the contrary, God’s redemptive revelation teaches believers precisely to live at peace with all men (Heb. But if it means that this image instructed Adam as to what God wanted him to do, I think more argument is needed. But to the contrary see Timothy P. Palmer, “The Two-Kingdom Doctrine: A Comparative Study of Martin Luther and Abraham Kuyper,” Pro Rege 27.3 (Mar., 2009), 13-25. Van Drunen finds this doctrine in some of the church fathers, medieval theologians, Luther and Calvin. The second interpretation is the choice of a number of modern interpreters, but I think Van Drunen is right. Everything we do is either for the glory of God or it is not (1 Cor. This study is for Christians who are perplexed about the biblical standing of natural law. (Gen. 6:5). However (1) Noah’s covenant also brings ultimate blessing only to believers, those who survive the judgment. And the reference to “natural law” is legitimate only on the second alternative. Van Drunen emphasizes that this blessing is only for believing families, not for all human beings. (24), Although necessarily existing together and having some mutual interaction in this world, these two kingdoms enjoy a great measure of independence so that each can pursue the unique work entrusted to it. But these discussions, as we shall see, aggravate the problem rather than resolving it. So there is a dynamic relation between true understanding and suppression of that truth. In Chapter 8:20-22 Noah offers a sacrifice to God, and God’s promise to preserve the earth is a response to the sweet aroma. Pattern Of Sound Doctrine. My problem, therefore, is not with Van Drunen’s assertion that the human conscience provides us with moral knowledge. 3:9). The distinction between these is evident: in brief, the church does not bear the sword, and the state does not administer the sacraments. But everything that happens in nature and history is part of the story of salvation. It may take up to 1-5 minutes before you receive it. One of the best books I’ve read this year. Everyone is obligated to believe in Christ and to love as he loved us (John 13:34-35). But the phrase itself, in which God’s name appears, raises a large presumption against such an interpretation. Porém, pelo fato de se tratar de um assunto bastante debatido, cuja abrangência se extende até áreas como filosofia, exegese, apologética, etc., o leitor logo perceberá que o livro é bastante limitado (embora um ponto a favor seja o fato de que se trata de uma monografia, não de um livro no sentido específico). As indicated earlier, I do not question Van Drunen’s assertion that there is such a thing as natural law, that pagans can know important truths apart from Scripture. God can judge all people and not just those with access to biblical revelation, because God’s general revelation in nature confronts every person. In the last major section of the book, Van Drunen seeks to show how natural law operates within the spiritual kingdom—that is, how it is relevant for believers. But good art will be art that recognizes the comprehensive lordship of Jesus Christ. Van Drunen jumps too quickly, however, from this premise to the conclusion that we have a natural law within ourselves. For that matter, all of God’s covenants bring blessing to the world in general.