The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Michael Horton - What is the Gospel?

Dr. Lane Tipton is a "voice in the wilderness" in today's society, IMO. Love this man..... Thanks for providing his video.

Thanks, yeah, he’s my pastor and I dialogue with him often.

I’ve been bombarding him after I found out he was chosen for the study committee on Christian Nationalism.

I finally received clarity on modern two kingdom theology and natural law and realized that the Escondido doctrine of modern two kingdom is a bait and switch that fails to acknowledge that classical natural law legal theory is passé and has been manipulated and replaced by radical theories of law. If the agenda of those (trying) to lead and influence our country is to do so in a self-defeating direction - to bring order and tyranny out of chaos - then these modern theories of “law” will undoubtedly take us there.

Lane was independently targeting modern two kingdom theology as much as the radical strains of CN independent of me before we touched base on the matter.
I told him that despite their agenda to combat the gospel-compromising strains of CN, if DG Hart (and guys like RS Clark) keep opening their mouths they are going to create an army of politics first CNs (in response), because they also trample on what it means to be a Christian in society with their double minded modern two kingdom doctrines.

Ultimately, Christianity exclusively informed our laws and morals of our classically liberal nation. And God has preserved us in this manner. But the modern two kingdom guys are not - maybe by design - acknowledging the ways that our rule of law has been and continues to be undermined.

Even the doctrine of the “spirituality of the church” was exercised to keep the Church from speaking out against slavery, so the motives of church leaders & influencers are not always what they seem.
Radical Pluralism and “going along to get along” should not be what motivates us in any sphere.


Pastor Lane has also helped me more deeply comprehend Van Til, Protestant distinctives (especially from Aquinas) and the heretical influence of false philosophies.

“ Protestant distinctives (especially from Aquinas) and the heretical influence of false philosophies.”

Or shall I say, in contrast to Aquinas, who held that fallen man maintains an ability to reason rightly, even towards matters of faith. Aquinas was not a covenant theologian.

And one doesn't have to think very much to realize the vast majority of churches in this country follow Aquinas' views, aka: semi-Pelagianism, regarding the fallen nature of man and construct their false gospels around that unbiblical view. Is it any wonder, therefore, that Billy Graham had a good relationship with the RCC and even encouraged the 'victims' of his Crusade(s) to follow up with their local RCC priest?

This is a good presentation…



Waldron also does a good job touching on similar territory regarding Aquinas….

https://content.cbtseminary.org/aquinas/

All of the modern two kingdom guys are down on VanTil and absolutely love Aquinas. Why? To elevate radical
pluralism? It makes no sense.




To hear Hart say in the video:

"I've been in Turkey twice and um I actually think it's a kind of a amazing experience to to arrive late in the afternoon, have dinner, go to bed, and around 10:00 you hear a call to prayer throughout the city of of Istanbul because that's one of the designated hours."

"What's the natural law argument from a man be, you know, becoming a woman or a woman becoming a man when we have the technology to do that?"
Hart: "Well, I mean, I I I think um I'd want to hear from the experts about adults doing it. And as much as I personally think it's kind of grotesque to think about mutilating the body that way, but if you want to give people freedom to live their lives as they can and you and adults choose to do this fully informed about the consequences of it, I can live with that."

Hart: "Um, and you know, I I it's for me it's like the drag queen story hour. What are librarians thinking doing that? Um, if you want to support drag queens in some way or Satanists in some way, don't use public institutions like that. Unless that you have actually surveyed your people and think that everyone in your community is or most people are okay with this. Otherwise, you're just being inflammatory and and that's not good."

This is kind of jarring. Reveling in false worship to a false god? Turning a blind eye to the desecration of our purpose and design? If we know better we shouldn’t talk like this. He obviously doesn’t even care about a natural law argument. He’s arguing from a place of lowest common denominator. I’m sorry. If this guy keeps talking he’s going to single handedly create an army of hyper-Christian nationalists - a whole denomination may rise up just to combat DG’s 2k.
He’s taking for granted the Christian moral foundations that made America the country it is and has allowed religious pluralism to exist in the first place. But if he thinks radical pluralism / (false) “neutrality,” including default pagan and Gnosticism schools of thought/cultural acceptance (and legal normativity) are going to enable classical liberalism to flourish, he’s exhibiting cognitive dissonance. I feel like he’s using extreme CN to justify an anything goes status-quo. I’m sure he prefers government limited the way Machen does but that’s not really what he’s espousing in these discussions, (although he does pay some lip service to building a moral consensus among the citizenry of various religions sects). At least he was (kind of) honest and said he doesn’t put much faith in natural law. I hope he gives his modern 2k friends that memo.