# Can a good prince be a good christian?



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Feb 1, 2005)

I have to write a paper on this question, at least 2 and a half pages. I decided that the answer would clearly be yes, due to past rulings in the OT and such examples of this through David and Solomon. Machaville didn't seem to think this possible because by being a good christian the prince would be too gentle and vulnerable. Of course he was ignorant to scripture and theonomy. He based his view of ethics on the lousy Catholic church and mainstream view of society on the subject. 

I don't want anyone to do my homework for me, but does anyone know where I can find some good references on this subject, a clear easy read of thenomy. He hasn't given us much time to write this and I am ignorant with theonomy.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Feb 1, 2005)

Well, if you don't mind me jumping in here (I love writing), define good. Sounds like Machaville equated good with sweet-tempered rather than good as in just, stable, etc.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 1, 2005)

http://www.cmfnow.com/page.asp?id=8

Bahnsen and Gentry have some articles there. Also check out some of Bahnsen's MP3s on the same site - they're only $1.99 per file, and most files are over an hour.

Also, while I am convinced that the doctrine of theonomy is Scriptural, I must note that one does _not_ have to be a theonomist by any means to show that biblically, one can be a good prince and Christian at once. Non-theonomists (those who do not believe the specific principles seen in the judicial laws to be binding today) can point to the Old Testament king system just as well and simply appeal to the fact that God ordained princes and kings, and God cannot contradict Himself.


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Feb 2, 2005)

Thanks Chris!


----------



## Ianterrell (Feb 2, 2005)

Machiavelli is also basing his standard of good on his own worthless opinion. He's pragmatic.


----------



## ChristianasJourney (Feb 2, 2005)

I think you should look also at Josiah's reign.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Feb 2, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> Also, while I am convinced that the doctrine of theonomy is Scriptural, I must note that one does _not_ have to be a theonomist by any means to show that biblically, one can be a good prince and Christian at once. Non-theonomists (those who do not believe the specific principles seen in the judicial laws to be binding today) can point to the Old Testament king system just as well and simply appeal to the fact that God ordained princes and kings, and God cannot contradict Himself.





As a non-theonomist, I too would point to the godly kings, judges and other rulers in the OT such as David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah, Joseph, Daniel, etc. They were men like us and that means they were sinners, but they were also godly in their office and did not believe in the foolish, modern doctrine of setting aside one's religious convictions while serving as a civil magistrate. 

The Westminster Confession (see Chap. XXIII) certainly doesn't lend any support to the idea that Christians can't serve in government _per se_. The temptation to compromise grows with the responsibility of the office, so many men are led astray by pragmatism, but that is true of any Christian who faces temptation in life. God is able to give grace and wisdom to do what is right in all circumstances. 

Besides the OT examples, there was King Edward VI of England, Prince William of Orange of the Netherlands, King William III of England, as well as the men who governed in the Council of Geneva or the Puritans who governed the New England colonies. The point being, there are historical examples of godly civil magistrates if one looks hard enough. 

God gives grace to us all, even civil magistrates, which is in part why we are commanded to pray for our leaders (cf. Rom. 13; I Tim. 2.1-4).

[Edited on 3-2-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 2, 2005)

Can I get an


----------



## LadyFlynt (Feb 2, 2005)




----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Feb 5, 2005)

Here is my paper....

I don't really feel that confident about it, considering the amount of time I had to do it, and the sheer ignornace I had of it at the start. Go ahead and butcher this thing to a piece if you want. I need to learn. 


Can a good prince be a good Christian?

This entire question revolves around the meaning behind the terminology of the word good. In this postmodern world everything seems to be relevant. The majority of people both Christians and pagans define “good” outside of the boundaries of scripture. When this is done all they can do is pull their subjective ideas of good out of the air, because there is no standard or foundation for their definition. In fact according to most peoples definition of good, God would not be good! Therefore a true exegesis of scriptures is necessary to define what good is. After giving certain scriptures (Isaiah 45:7, Mark 10:17,18, 1 Jonah 1:5, to name a few) a thorough exegesis one can assert that God himself is the definition and standard of good. Good is whatever conforms to His holy character which can be defined through his holy law. A good ruler would be one who governs a nation with God’s law. This is because absolute justice is found through God’s law. Therefore since good and God’s law for ruling are synonymous, only a good Christian can be a good prince! To declare that a good prince cannot be a good Christian is to claim that God’s law is not sufficient, that God’s contradicts himself in his ordination, and basically that God isn’t God. To declare this is antithetical to Christianity, and blasphemous, no matter whom the asserter is. 

A prince can only rule by autonomy or theonomy. The former is ruling originated from man the latter from God. With an accurate application of the theonomy format the very nature of God is reflected and justice in its purest form fulfilled. The law “clicks,” so to speak, with nature and true love and peace is radiated among the nation. While in autonomy the foolish wisdom of man’s depraved logic is the creator of the law and standard for justice and morality. In this format much justice is deprived and many innocent victims are hurt as primarily misery and the weakness of the flesh is radiated among the nation. The late Dr. Greg Bahnsen worded this autonomy debacle best when he said, 

“Such then is the graveyard of autonomous ethics; each gravestone reads the satanic temptation, ‘Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.’ When man turns away from covenantal theonomy to autonomy, when he despises God's law in favor of humanistic self-law, the inevitable result is spiritual death for man and the loss of any hope for ethics.”

God is not just the God of the Christians; this assertion is blasphemous. God is completely sovereign, and the King of the world. As it says in 1 Timothy 6:15, Jesus is the “ruler of the kings of the earth.” Psalms 2:6-12 exalts Christ as the King of Kings and commands all authority “to be wise, and be warned,” and to “serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with trembling.” Then in Romans 13:1-10 all magistrates Christian and pagan are required to carry out their offices as “ministers of God” to “avenge God’s wrath” against evildoers, and that they would be accountable to God for their rule. Other verses’ supporting that Christ is King over every soul in the world can be found in Revelations 1:5, Matthew 28:18, and Mathew 6:10. Therefore all creatures no matter what religious preference are bound to his holy law. 

Many Christians and non ignorantly argue that a theonomy is ineffective for today because it dealt with a different culture in a different time, that Jesus radically did away with it in the New Testament when he established a brand new covenant. “The Old Testament laws were inhumane, Jesus replaced them with love.” Can be commonly heard. This is yet another blasphemous statement that belittles God. Such a dispensationalist view claims that the law is not always adequate and in need for editing to be moral, and that the covenant from the Old Testament is completely different and vain in today’s time. In doing this they state that God’s holy law, and nature are mutable and indirectly state that he is not the God of the scriptures. The dispensationalist precious New Testament (this sarcasm is not towards the New Testament as it is just as inspired and to be cherished as the old, but towards the neglecting of half of inspired scripture.) even puts them to shame, as it supports theonomy and exalts God’s immutable character and law. The author of Hebrews proclaims the inspiration of theonomy principles stating, “For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution (2:2). The Apostle Paul supports theonomy principles in 1 Timothy 1:8-10 through its use for retraining criminal behavior. Then one can see Theonomy’s most controversial aspect, the penal sanctions, being supported from the words of the incarnation of God himself in Matthew 15:4-6 when Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for making void the Law through their Oral traditions. 

This defense of a theonomy is to stress that a prince can either rule based on God’s law or man’s law. A prince must develop a consistent Christian worldview to live by, and this consists of loving God’s law. Like every Christian he should seek holiness and love God with all of his being. However, for the sake of ruling he must have a sufficient understanding of at least three things: who he is and who God is, covenant theology, and his God given ordination. 

First the prince should have a proper view of who he is and who God is. An exhaustive study of who we are and who God is should reveal how depraved and helpless we are and how holy, sovereign and gracious God is. 

The prince should have a proper view of covenant theology. Proper covenant theology and theonomy are very intimately related. The prince must know the two covenants that God has made through his people (the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace) and that after Adam failed the covenant of works that all throughout the Bible to this very day that all mankind has been subjected to the covenant of grace, and rather than believing the New Covenant as a different covenant he should view it by taking the literal Hebrew wording of a refreshed covenant and adhering to it. The Abrahamic covenant was the skeleton, the Mosaic the scaffold, and the Gospel the completed skyscraper. From the Old Testament to the New it is still the same skyscraper, the same covenant. Therefore all of the laws derived from the Old Testament that were not omitted shadows of the new refreshed Covenant (such as animal sacrifices, dietary laws, etc.) is still rightful and applicable in the New Covenant. The Prince must understand the progression of God’s law so that he will omit the expired laws and uphold everything else. 

Finally, the prince must realize the significance of his office. By being a magistrate he has been ordained by God to uphold the law and keep justice. While he is worth no more than anyone else, his place is. Therefore he must handle his responsibility as a something precious and fragile and remember he is bound to God for his rule. 

Therefore my advice to a prince is to be a good Christian! Live, eat, and breathe in God’s word. Love and cherish God by loving and cherishing the law, as it is the reflection of who God is. Then seek to conform every aspect of your personal life to it, as you will be seeking holiness. Use this sacred eternal immutable law as the standard of your rule. Remember who you are and who God is. While your worth is no more than others your place is, you are ordained by God and responsible to him for your reign. So do everything, absolutely everything for His glory alone and enjoy him forever.


----------



## Puritanhead (Mar 2, 2005)

I think David and Solomon's stumbling and usurpations--- only vindicate the maxim "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" as well as Samuel's warning to the Israelites who wanted their monarchy. There is much wisdom amongst David and Solomon--- but both men had some serious flaws and erred into sin. Solomon was building altars to pagan Baals for example. The united monarchy was short-lived and collapsed into divided kingdom. Eventual Assyrian attacks and conquest meant captivity and subjugation for the northern kingdom.

I think the "absolute power corrupts" maxim is the problem of the American Presidency, which as an institution has aggrandized power so thoroughly in recent years, we can scarcely discern the nature of the federal polity of original intent--based on sphere sovereignty and Congress being the dominant branch of the national government. With so much power, and those who lust power, we always find leaders wanting in character and all to willing to abuse their power.


[Edited on 3-3-2005 by Puritanhead]


----------

