The Reformed Two-Kingdom project has generated a great deal of literature. However, this literature is often characterized by inflamed rhetoric. Further, though it is standard fare to assume that Kline was the architect of the project, in reality, there has been very little scholarly examination of this point. In response, Kline's system is analyzed through the means of a dialectical discourse with three differing models within the Reformed tradition--the Theonomist, Perspectivalist, and Dooyeweerdian schools. Through this means, the study keeps away from surface-level polemics and instead directs readers to the critically important substructural level of current discussions. While clarifying some of the key differences between Kline and his interlocutors, often-overlooked points of nuance are also highlighted. These points are shown to be important in that they present the potential to lessen frustration and impasse in the ongoing dialogue.
The Reformed Two-Kingdom project has generated a great deal of literature. However, this literature is often characterized by inflamed rhetoric. Further, though it is standard fare to assume that Kline was the architect of the project, in reality, there has been very little scholarly examination of this point. In response, Kline's system is analyzed through the means of a dialectical discourse with three differing models within the Reformed tradition--the Theonomist, Perspectivalist, and Dooyeweerdian schools. Through this means, the study keeps away from surface-level polemics and instead directs readers to the critically important substructural level of current discussions. While clarifying some of the key differences between Kline and his interlocutors, often-overlooked points of nuance are also highlighted. These points are shown to be important in that they present the potential to lessen frustration and impasse in the ongoing dialogue.
