Gavin Ortlund has written another response to my last rejoinder. I agree with him that this has been a great discussion, and I also feel that we should draw it to a close. I think we have painted a clear distinction, and hopefully I can bring more clarity with this response. Much of the question under debate here revolves around the terms continuity, overlap, and identity. These are all possible ways of describing the relationship between the old pre-Christ covenants and the New Covenant. Development of redemptive history is another key component. Gavin has acknowledged overlap between the covenants, but he is wary of pressing to the point of identity. He is wary of over-spiritualizing the Old Covenant to the point that redemptive history is “flattened”, having minimal real development. Let me see if I can summarize my perspective here, then try to answer some of Gavin’s specific questions in a follow up blog post. Continue reading
These thoughts come primarily from insights given by Jeff Meyers in lectures on the book of Acts at Cornerstone Reformed Church, March 22-23, and a follow up conversation with my pastor, Burke Shade and friend Nathan Brunaugh. These men would likely credit their insights back to the work of James Jordan.
What should a Christian’s involvement with the state be (at any level of government)? It is certainly not wrong for a Christian to enter public service and work within the system to bring about positive change. However, the Bible presents a slightly different role, that of an advisor to the king or any other authority. One that councils the leaders of the community, state, or nation in matters of justice, equity, wisdom, and righteousness in accordance with God’s law. This could even go down to the family government level, with faithful Christians counseling and advising those who comes to them with questions about their different way of life. This is the role of a prophet. Continue reading