Give Me that Old Time Theonomy Theonomy

[Andrew P.C.]

I was curious if anyone knows of a place where I can get Give Me that Old Time Theonomy by George Gillespie?

 

[toddpedlar]

That's an odd title for the 17th century. What exactly do you mean?
If you're looking for Aaron's Rod Blossoming, you can get that from any Sprinkle
distributor.

 

[VaughanRSmith]

That was in Gillespie's cabaret days.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

That's an odd title for the 17th century. What exactly do you mean?
If you're looking for Aaron's Rod Blossoming, you can get that from any Sprinkle
distributor.

Actually, its a paper on John Knox's view of Theonomy. I'm looking for something with Knox's view on theonomy.

 

[RamistThomist]

I got this from Cambridge scholars. I did not "selectively read" John Knox through the spectacles of Gary North, David Chilton, or whover is the arrow of a genetic fallacy. So writes Oliver and Joan O'Donovan:

Knox reads "the Old Testament as a legal casebook, a catalouge of juridical precedents, with two striking results. The first is the binding authority for all Christian commonwealths of the Mosaic "judicial" requiring the capital punishment of idolaters--a future English Puritan theme..."

(O'Donovans, 687).
From Irenaus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thought

end of discussion.

And O'Donovan is not a theonomist. That makes this all the more striking an admission. O'Donovan is THE top political ethicist in Christendom (my humble 2 cents).

 

[toddpedlar]

That's an odd title for the 17th century. What exactly do you mean?
If you're looking for Aaron's Rod Blossoming, you can get that from any Sprinkle
distributor.

Actually, its a paper on John Knox's view of Theonomy. I'm looking for something with Knox's view on theonomy.

Sure, okay... but clearly it's got a new title.

So did it go something like this?

Give me that old time theonomy
Give me that old time theonomy
Give me that old time theonomy
It’s good enough for me

It was good for the Bahnsen children
It was good for the Bahnsen children
It was good for the Bahnsen children
And it’s good enough for me

It will cause folks to be outraged
It will cause folks to be outraged
It will cause folks to be outraged
And it’s good enough for me

It'll make adulterers perspire
And the same to gay men's choirs
And cause hookers to retire
And it’s good enough for me

 

[Andrew P.C.]

That's an odd title for the 17th century. What exactly do you mean?
If you're looking for Aaron's Rod Blossoming, you can get that from any Sprinkle
distributor.

Actually, its a paper on John Knox's view of Theonomy. I'm looking for something with Knox's view on theonomy.

Sure, okay... but clearly it's got a new title.

So did it go something like this?

Give me that old time theonomy
Give me that old time theonomy
Give me that old time theonomy
It’s good enough for me

It was good for the Bahnsen children
It was good for the Bahnsen children
It was good for the Bahnsen children
And it’s good enough for me

It will cause folks to be outraged
It will cause folks to be outraged
It will cause folks to be outraged
And it’s good enough for me

It'll make adulterers perspire
And the same to gay men's choirs
And cause hookers to retire
And it’s good enough for me

Something like that...

 

[RamistThomist]

This next move is called The Clothesline. If executed properly, it is stunning to watch.

Knox was no democrat. He always remembered that Mary Tudor ascended the throne amid the cheers of the people, and that vox populi, vox dei had been the voice of the day.

Knox stood not for democracy, but for the Law of God. And it was just because of this stand that he upheld the right of the godly commoner to rebel against an ungodly ruler. Knox was "no man of the people," nor did he wish to be. His desire was to be a man of God. Thus, for God's sake, he opposed all who would play God in any area.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

I was curious if anyone knows of a place where I can get Give Me that Old Time Theonomy by George Gillespie?

Gillespie. Not likely. That was by Reg Barrow, in his Theonomy days. Reg wrote, “That Gillespie was a ‘theonomist’ can be further attested to by his work, A [sic] Wholesome Severity Reconciled With Christian Liberty” Revival Review Still Waters Revival Books Nov. 1991/Feb. 92) 18-19. “Give Me That Old Time Theonomy” Revival Review (Still Waters Revival Books 1992/3) 26-27.

 

[Kevin]

I was curious if anyone knows of a place where I can get Give Me that Old Time Theonomy by George Gillespie?

Gillespie. Not likely. That was by Reg Barrow, in his Theonomy days. Reg wrote, “That Gillespie was a ‘theonomist’ can be further attested to by his work, A [sic] Wholesome Severity Reconciled With Christian Liberty” Revival Review Still Waters Revival Books Nov. 1991/Feb. 92) 18-19. “Give Me That Old Time Theonomy” Revival Review (Still Waters Revival Books 1992/3) 26-27.

I knew you would be the one who could find the citation for that!

 

[Andrew P.C.]

I was curious if anyone knows of a place where I can get Give Me that Old Time Theonomy by George Gillespie?

Gillespie. Not likely. That was by Reg Barrow, in his Theonomy days. Reg wrote, “That Gillespie was a ‘theonomist’ can be further attested to by his work, A [sic] Wholesome Severity Reconciled With Christian Liberty” Revival Review Still Waters Revival Books Nov. 1991/Feb. 92) 18-19. “Give Me That Old Time Theonomy” Revival Review (Still Waters Revival Books 1992/3) 26-27.

I see I got my people mixed up.