1
The Transformationist, Counterculturalist, Relevance, and Two Kingdoms Models The transformationist model is rooted in how Christians can transform the world as mandated by God in the creation story ( Genesis 1:28). The second model of counterculturalists emphasizes a community that does not adopt and embrace cultural values but embraces alternative practices. This approach focuses on enhancing spiritual purity by overriding existing cultural practices, yet with a risk of creating isolation in a pluralistic community (VanDrunen, 2010). The Relevance model supports focus on the culturalization of the gospel and spreading the good news in a way that people from different cultural orientations understand. The twokingdom model recognizes the dual citizenship that Christians subscribe to. Whereas Christians must live to the principles of the Kingdom of God, they, too, are a part of the world. They are thus responsible for participating in secular and cultural affairs while adhering to the principles of God's kingdom.
2
Given the above summary of Kelly’s models, counterculturalism would be perceived as the least biblical model. As aforementioned, the model advocates for Christians to stand apart from the mainstream culture and uphold exclusive spiritual purity (Hambleton, 2013). The model stresses that engaging in mainstream culture compromises the Christian ability to maintain purity and spirituality. While this may be validated by Apostle Paul’s call to Christians "not to be of this world" (John 17:16), the model risks failing to engage constructively with culture and the global community. This may be perceived as a compromise of the biblical call to love one's neighbor (Mark 12:31) and to spread the gospel to all nations, including Christians and non-Christians (Galatians 6:9). The two kingdoms model is the least effective model assuming a highly pluralistic, technologically advanced, and interconnected context, such as the contemporary world. It distinguishes the kingdom of God from the earthly kingdom and encourages Christians to live within both realms but keep their expectations and actions within each distinct (Snyder, 2001). This distinction and allowance to belong to the two kingdoms can be challenging in navigating public engagement, societal contribution, and personal faith in a way consistent with the scripture. It is also arguable that belonging to the two kingdoms may dilute the impact of Christians in the larger society and hurt their potential to spread the news of God to the cultural discourse community. The criticism of the Two Kingdoms model in the contemporary world context lies in its potential to create a dichotomy between personal faith and public and social-cultural engagement. Nestingen (1999) argues that embracing the Two Kingdoms model could hinder Christians from fully embodying their faith in all aspects of life. The model may discourage Christians from engaging in social justice, environmental stewardship, and other areas where
3
their faith could offer a transformative perspective. This contradicts the transformationist model that encourages more integrated approaches to engage with culture, perceive culture as a field for God's redemptive work, and Christians as active agents of positive change as advocated for by Jesus Christ and Apostle Paul's teachings (Mark 10:49, Galatians 6:9). References Hambleton, A. M. 2013. Proclaiming Christ in a Post-Christian Culture (Doctoral dissertation, Reformed Theological Seminary, Global Campus, Charlotte, NC). VanDrunen, D. (2010). Living in God's two kingdoms: A biblical vision for Christianity and culture. Crossway.