Read. Reflect. Write.

I have been working through the freshly translated, three-volume English edition of John Calvin’s sermons on Job published by Banner of Truth. It is 2200 pages long, comprised of 159 sermons. Calvin took up preaching through Job for his daily sermons on February 26, 1554. While there is no date recorded as to when he finished, it is assumed he finished in a year because it was recorded that he began preaching through Deuteronomy for his daily sermons on March 20, 1555. It is a mind-boggling feat, to say the least. I am on Sermon 35, and I have to say I find these sermons to be his most lucid and pastorally thoughtful expositions of Scripture. My wife was astounded when I shared some of his insights because she could not believe that I was reading Calvin. She had always regarded him as a theological heavyweight who was very hard to read. That is not to say my wife is theologically inept—far from it! I think most people only know Calvin as the polemicist. Calvin the

  Zanchi : Natural Law The introduction in Part 1 of this series provided a brief historical background on Girolamo Zanchi and his contribution to the Protestant Reformed Tradition’s view of Natural Law. Part 1 introduced and structured this 2-part series, so please read it before reading Part 2. I will summarize Zanchi’s Natural Law theory from On the Law in General in this essay. As noted in Part 1, On the Law is a chapter from his extensive work, Theological Writings . All page references from On the Law are parenthetically notated in the essay. In the first chapter of On the Law , Zanchi provides seven theses setting forth the Law and its classifications. I will only summarize the theses pertinent to understanding the grounding principle of Zanchi’s Natural Law theory. On the Law through which Comes Knowledge of Sin Thesis 1 : “For all good laws, there are two chief functions: Teaching human beings what should be done or what should

  Introduction In the Twitter world (actually, the “X” world), Christian Nationalism is a controversial topic. Those critical of it end up putting theonomy under the crosshairs. I am a recent convert (almost a year) to postmillennialism (PM), and theonomy has a close relationship with it. The relationship is not essential ; postmillennialism does not necessarily entail theonomy, nor vice-versa (I sound like a philosopher). Before moving to a PM perspective, I had only heard negative remarks about theonomy, such as, “theonomists believe the entire Mosaic law is binding on Christians, even stoning your children.” Or “theonomists believe we should have a theocracy like OT Israel.” And that “theonomists seek to impose the kingdom of God through use of the sword, by having a state enforced religion.” Or “theonomists see America as God’s chosen nation.” Theonomy sounds intense. Theonomy sounds extreme. Theonomy sounds un-Christian.   In the spring of 2023, I immersed myself in the wr