Over at oddlife.org Dark Gnostic Hart continues with his impotent display. In his most recent harangue he reveals his impotence by his inability to read Iron Ink. It is funny that some people keep insisting that I don’t register my disagreements with Christianity that is cloaked as cultural Marxism (whether that emanates from the CRC or from any number of other denominations) when there are repeated essays on Iron Ink disassembling expressions of Christianity that are in reality Cultural Marxism thinly disguised. Dark Hart also whines that I don’t take on cultural Marxism insisting that I spend too much time picking on poor R2K. The problem here is that R2K and Cultural Marxism work hand in glove to advance the Cultural Marxist agenda. Cultural Marxism pushes the agenda and R2K insists that the Church is not called to resist the Cultural Marxist agenda. It’s a very commodious relationship that R2K and Cultural Marxist “Christianity” has. Yes, they are distinct, but they together work to remove all competition from the field. As such to attack either R2K or Cultural Marxism is to attack each.
In good Dark Gnostic Hart style, Dark insists that I haven’t advanced the discussion. But at this point me thinketh the lady doth protest too much. Of course the argument has been advanced. It has been advanced and so far all Dark has done is to whine about it not being advanced and about how unfair I am in the opponents with whom I deal. Hardly a ringing apologetic from his end of the conversation.
It should be made clear that I have no problem with the Spirituality of the Church. What I have a problem with is the Gnosticizing of the Church. Dark can only make his complaint about me not being nice to the Spirituality of the Church in the context of making Spirituality to be a synonym with Gnosticizing. Dark’s most recent diatribe is a routine Marxist technique, right out of their playbook. “If losing argument, impugn your enemy, distort the facts, and rage against alleged inconsistencies. Do all that can be done to steer conversation away from the facts at hand.”
In keeping with that old “Red” approach Dark Gnostic Hart has,
1.) Enlisted the “Rabbi” and “Butch” impugning
2.) Distorted the facts by equating “Spirituality of the Church” with Gnosticising of the Church
3.) Raged against the alleged inconsistency that I pick on R2K but do not pick on Cultural Marxism in the CRC and elsewhere (My blog entries prove him overwhelming in error here.)
4.) Steered the conversation away from the few salient facts offered against his justification of Christians denying Christ.
As it pertains to my ordination. I asked the questions put to me. That is generally the way that ordinations work. The CRC knows who I am. They know what I believe (the Three Forms Of Unity) and they know what my convictions are. Contrary to Dark’s attempt to misdirect the issue at hand all of this is very public.
Postscript
Dark throws out the old Chestnut about “My Kingdom is not of this world” in the comment section. I have said this ad-nausea but I will “say” it again here.
B. F. Wescott speaking of John 18:36 could comment,
“Yet He did claim a sovereignty, a sovereignty of which the spring and the source was not of earth but of heaven. My Kingdom is not of this world (means it) does not derive its origin or its support from earthly sources.”
Bahnsen echoing Wescott’s work wrote,
“‘My kingdom is not of [ek: out from] this world,’” is a statement about the source — not the nature — of His reign, as the epexegetical ending of the verse makes obvious: ‘My kingdom is not from here [enteuthen].’ The teaching is not that Christ’s kingdom is wholly otherworldly, but rather that it originates with God Himself (not any power or authority found in creation.”
Dr. Greg Bahnsen
God & Politics — pg. 27
The Gospel According To John — pg. 260
John 18:36 along with Matthew 22:15-22 are two of the passages that are often put forth as defeaters for the comprehensive sovereignty of the Lord Jesus over this world. Bahnsen clearly shows here, quite in agreement with the Greek scholar B. F. Westcott, that God’s Kingdom, as it manifests itself in this world, is energized by a source outside this world. This is important to emphasize because many people read John 18:36 as proof that the Kingdom of Jesus does not and should not express itself in this world. Often this verse is appealed to in order to prove that God’s Kingdom is only “spiritual” and as such Christians shouldn’t be concerned about what are perceived as “non-spiritual” realms. Support for such thinking, if there is any, must come from passages other than John 18:36.
What we get from some contemporary Calvinists, is the quote of Christ telling Pilate that ‘His Kingdom is not of this World,’ as if that is to end all conversation on the Lordship of Christ over all cultural endeavors. What is forgotten is the way that John often uses the word ‘World.’ John often uses the word ‘World’ with a sinister significance to communicate a disordered reality in grip of the Devil set in opposition to God. If that is the way that the word ‘world’ is being used in John 18:36 then we can understand why Jesus would say that His Kingdom ‘was not of this world.’ The Kingdom of Jesus will topple the Kingdoms of this disordered world changing them to be the Kingdoms of His ordered world, but it won’t be done by the disordered methodology of this World and so Jesus can say, “My Kingdom is not of this World.” Hopefully, we can see that such a statement doesn’t mean that Christ’s Kingdom has no effect in this world or that Christ’s Kingdom can’t overcome the world.
John 18:36 is often appealed to in order to prove that the Kingdom of God is a private individual spiritual personal reality that does not impinge on public square practice(s) of peoples or nations corporately considered. Those who appeal to John 18:36 in this way are prone thus to insist that God’s Word doesn’t speak to the public square practice(s) of peoples or nations since such an appeal (according to this thinking) would be an attempt to wrongly make God’s Kingdom of this world.
The problem with this though is it that it is a misreading of the passage. When Jesus say’s “My Kingdom is not of this world,” his use of the word “world” here is not spatial. Jesus is not saying that His Kingdom does not impact planet earth. What Jesus is saying is that His Kingdom does not find its source of authority from the world as it lies in Adam.
Jesus brings a Kingdom to this world that is in antithetical opposition to the Kingdom of Satan that presently characterizes this world in this present wicked age. The Kingdom that Jesus brings has its source of authority in His Father’s Word. As a result of Christ bringing His Kingdom w/ His advent there are two Kingdoms that are vying for supremacy on planet earth. Postmillennialism teaches that the Kingdom of the “age to come” that characterizes Christ’s present Kingdom will be victorious in this present spatial world that is characterized by “this present wicked age,” precisely because, in principle, Christ’s Kingdom is already victorious in this present spatial world.
All nations will bow to Jesus and all kings will serve him and his mustard seed kingdom will grow to become the largest plant in the garden with the nation-birds finding rest in its branches. His kingdom is the stone which crushed the kingdoms of men in Daniel 2 and which is growing to become a mountain-empire which fills the whole earth, until all His enemies are made His footstool.
Because Christ’s Kingdom is victorious on this planet His Kingdom extends beyond the personal private individual realm and so impacts the public square. Another way to say that would be precisely because Christ’s Kingdom continues to be populated by a swarming host of individuals those individuals take that Kingdom that has overcome them and in turn overcome all that they touch with the Kingdom.
Dr. Geehardus Vos was not a postmillennialist but some of the things he taught captures what I am trying to communicate regarding Christ’s Kingdom while at the same time delineating Darryl’s misconceptions. Vos wrote,
“The kingdom means the renewal of the world through the introduction of supernatural forces.” (page 192)
“The thought of the kingdom of God implies the subjection of the entire range of human life in all its forms and spheres to the ends of religion. The kingdom reminds us of the absoluteness, the pervasiveness, the unrestricted dominion, which of right belong to all true religion. It proclaims that religion, and religion alone, can act as the supreme unifying, centralizing factor in the life of man, as that which binds all together and perfects all by leading it to its final goal in the service of God.” (page 194)
Geerhardus Vos
The Teaching of Jesus Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Church
