This morning, I want to refer you to a most helpful blog post by Matt Tuininga, which you can find here.
This is why I think it is so helpful.
Matt clarifies an important distinction between representative neo-Calvinism and radical forms of neo-Calvinism. This distinction is so important, because it enables all of us to acknowledge that the former has always operated with an understanding of two kingdoms that seeks to uphold Scripture, honor the church, and respect the tension between this age and the age to come. Many criticisms of neo-Calvinism from some of today’s two-kingdom advocates apply only to radical forms of neo-Calvinism. Representative neo-Calvinism, by contrast, enjoys an international reputation for Scriptural fidelity, for historical rootedness, and for responsible churchmanship.
Matt is right: many of the goals and cautions envisioned in today’s advocacy of two kingdoms are shared by representative neo-Calvinism.
I want to thank Matt personally and publicly for this clarification, and want to commend his blog to our readers.
