One Kingdom or Two?

Cornelis P. Venema’s article, “One Kingdom or Two? An Evaluation of the ‘Two Kingdoms’ Doctrine as an Alternative to Neo-Calvinism,” addresses an important question for Reformed Christians: how should believers understand their calling in the world?

The article evaluates the contemporary “two kingdoms” doctrine, especially as it has been presented as an alternative to the neo-Calvinist tradition associated with Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck. The question is not merely academic. It affects how Christians think about the church, the state, education, vocation, culture, public life, and the lordship of Christ over all things.

The Basic Issue

The two kingdoms view sharply distinguishes between Christ’s “redemptive” kingdom and his “common” kingdom.

In this framework, the redemptive kingdom is identified especially with the church, where Christ rules by his Word and Spirit through the ministry of the gospel, sacraments, and discipline. The common kingdom includes ordinary creational life: family, civil government, education, business, the arts, science, and culture. In that realm, believers and unbelievers live together under God’s providential rule and natural law.

Venema acknowledges that this view raises legitimate concerns. The church must not confuse its calling with the work of the state. The gospel must not be reduced to a political program, cultural movement, or social agenda. The church has a distinct calling to preach Christ, administer the sacraments, exercise discipline, and disciple the nations.

In that respect, the two kingdoms perspective offers a necessary warning. The church must remain the church.

What Venema Appreciates

Venema does not dismiss the two kingdoms view entirely. He identifies several commendable features.

First, it rightly emphasizes the unique calling of the institutional church. No other institution has been given the church’s commission to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Second, it helps preserve the distinction between the church and the state. The civil magistrate does not administer the sacraments or exercise church discipline, and the church does not bear the sword.

Third, it warns against triumphalism. Christians should not speak as though they can usher in the new creation by their cultural labors. Christ alone accomplishes redemption, and the final renewal of all things awaits his return.

Fourth, it reminds Christians that believers and unbelievers do share real common life in God’s world. Because of God’s providence, common grace, and natural law, unbelievers can make genuine contributions in science, medicine, government, art, and other areas of life.

These are important cautions. Venema grants that neo-Calvinists need to hear them.

Where Venema Disagrees

Venema’s central concern is that the two kingdoms paradigm creates too sharp a separation between creation and redemption.

In his judgment, Scripture does not present redemption as an escape from creation, nor as the creation of a separate spiritual realm detached from ordinary life. Rather, redemption is God’s work of restoring, renewing, and consummating his creation through Christ.

Venema argues that the kingdom of God should not be divided into two separate realms in such a way that Christ’s redemptive rule applies only to the church while the rest of life belongs to a merely common realm. Christ is not king over one part of life as Redeemer and another part only as Creator, as if these two aspects of his rule run on separate tracks.

Instead, Christ’s rule is comprehensive. The risen Christ has been given all authority in heaven and on earth. His kingship extends over the church, but not only over the church. He rules over all things for the sake of his redemptive purposes.

Scripture and the Christian Life

Another major concern is the role of Scripture.

The two kingdoms view tends to assign Scripture chiefly to the redemptive kingdom, while treating natural law as the governing norm for public and cultural life. Venema does not deny natural law. Nor does he deny that unbelievers can know moral truth from creation and conscience.

But he argues that Scripture remains necessary for a full and faithful understanding of the Christian life in every sphere. Because sin darkens human understanding, natural law by itself is not sufficient to guide believers in all matters of obedience. Christians need the light of Scripture not only in worship and church life, but also in family life, education, vocation, politics, and culture.

The Christian’s whole life is lived before God.

Christian Education

Venema also highlights the implications of the two kingdoms view for Christian education.

If education belongs only to the common kingdom, and if Scripture is not the governing norm for that realm, then the case for distinctly Christian education is weakened. The integration of faith and learning becomes unnecessary or even improper.

Venema sees this as a serious problem. Christian education is not merely a safe environment or a practical preference. It rests on the conviction that every field of study belongs before the face of God and must be understood in submission to Christ.

Creation and Redemption Belong Together

A major theme of the article is the relationship between creation and redemption.

Venema argues that Scripture presents the final hope of believers not as escape from the created order, but as resurrection and renewal. The resurrection of the body and the renewal of creation belong together. God’s purpose is not to abandon creation, but to redeem and restore it.

This means the Christian’s present life in the world matters. Our labor is not redemptive in the same sense as Christ’s work. We do not build the kingdom by our own strength. But neither is our obedience in ordinary life religiously neutral or detached from Christ’s lordship.

Christians are called to serve Christ in all lawful vocations.

The Main Takeaway

Venema concludes that the two kingdoms view contains several useful cautions, especially regarding the distinct calling of the church and the danger of confusing the gospel with cultural or political agendas.

However, he does not believe it provides the most biblically satisfying account of the Christian’s calling in the world.

His concern is that the two kingdoms paradigm divides what Scripture holds together: creation and redemption, Christ’s rule as Creator and Redeemer, natural law and Scripture, the church’s ministry and the believer’s whole-life obedience.

A better Reformed approach recognizes both distinctions and unity. The church has a distinct institutional calling. The state has its own proper authority. The family, school, workplace, and civil community are not the church. Yet all things belong to Christ, and every believer is called to live before him in every sphere of life.

Christ does not rule only over the church. He rules over all things.

And therefore, the Christian life cannot be divided into sacred and common compartments. In the church, in the home, in the classroom, in the workplace, and in the public square, believers are called to serve the one Lord Jesus Christ.