One of the key textual conversations that the R2K theology uses to promote their teachings is the Noahic chapters in the book of Genesis. They make a case for a non religious, neutral common/civil sphere due to their alleged claim that the Noahic covenant conveys this paradigm for the nations in general. The common realm is thus said to share common life in the supposedly neutral non religious Noahic covenant. Furthermore the R2K theology alleges that the Noahic covenant is not a part of the one administration of the covenant of grace but rather a common grace covenant. This is necessary for their claim that the world is not to be governed by distinctly Christian principles for distinct Christian ends. The logic is as follows. The Noahic covenant is with the whole world and is not particular to the church. The Noahic covenant is not religious nor part of the covenant of grace. Therefore the nations are religiously neutral and secularism is the Noahic paradigm. Therefore the Noahic covenant demands for believers and unbelievers to participate in public life in a manner that is not distinctly Christian.

Editor's Note:

This Article may be downloaded in PDF form for reading offline:

Introduction

Before responding to Dr. Clark’s article, a few qualifications must be said. Firstly and personally, I consider Dr. Clark a personal friend and highly respect him. I honestly would not be Presbyterian if it was not for his ministry. Nonetheless, I have some serious disagreements with the way he presents the Postmillennial position that I and most in church history have held (yes, I said most). Secondly, part of the reason for Dr. Clark’s article on Postmillennials was due to the recent content in my podcasts on false teacher, Doug Wilson, as well as my conversations with Scott (I verified this with him), which is to say that my ministry was specifically on his mind while writing the article. Thirdly, I believe that me addressing this article that has a personal connection to me will be of great benefit to you, reformed Christians. Fourthly, I consider Scott to be a credible Theologian and gift to the church though I find his views of Kingdom and Eschatology to be more novel than historic.

Editor's Note:

This Article has been broken into a six part blog post, you may continue to the next part in the series by using the button above or the complete document may be downloaded using the following link: