Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Henry,
In a day and age where the word Theonomy is considered (the boogeyman) unbiblical or radical, one should consider the documents attached to the Westminster standards (I.E. The solemn League and Covenant). Also, one should consider the "establishment principle" in the Westminster Confession chapter on the Civil Magistrate, the "general equity" clause, and even the Belgic confession. I believe the covenanters had it right in understanding that God's Law, particularly the Judicial Laws and their punishments, were meant to be used and executed by the civil magistrate, which is God's deacon of justice.
Belgic Confession Article 36:
We believe that, because of the depravity of mankind, our gracious God has ordained kings, princes, and civil officers.1 He wants the world to be governed by laws and policies,2 in order that the licentiousness of men be restrained and that everything be conducted among them in good order.3 For that purpose He has placed the sword in the hand of the government to punish wrongdoers and to protect those who do what is good (Rom 13:4). Their task of restraining and sustaining is not limited to the public order but includes the protection of the church and its ministry in order that the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere,4 and God may be honored and served by everyone, as He requires in His Word.
Westminster Confession Ch.23:
Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; yet he has authority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordainances of God duly settled, administrated, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he has power to call synods, to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.
The Scottish Confession of Faith, Ch. 24:
We further confess and acknowledge, that such persons as are placed in authority are to be loved, honoured, feared, and held in most reverent estimation because they are the lieutenants of God, in whose sessions God himself does sit and judge (yea even the judges and princes themselves), to whom by God is given the sword, to the praise and defense of good men, and to revenge and punish all open malefactors. Moreover, to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever: as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.
Henry,
In a day and age where the word Theonomy is considered (the boogeyman) unbiblical or radical, one should consider the documents attached to the Westminster standards (I.E. The solemn League and Covenant). Also, one should consider the "establishment principle" in the Westminster Confession chapter on the Civil Magistrate, the "general equity" clause, and even the Belgic confession. I believe the covenanters had it right in understanding that God's Law, particularly the Judicial Laws and their punishments, were meant to be used and executed by the civil magistrate, which is God's deacon of justice.
Belgic Confession Article 36:
We believe that, because of the depravity of mankind, our gracious God has ordained kings, princes, and civil officers.1 He wants the world to be governed by laws and policies,2 in order that the licentiousness of men be restrained and that everything be conducted among them in good order.3 For that purpose He has placed the sword in the hand of the government to punish wrongdoers and to protect those who do what is good (Rom 13:4). Their task of restraining and sustaining is not limited to the public order but includes the protection of the church and its ministry in order that the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere,4 and God may be honored and served by everyone, as He requires in His Word.
Westminster Confession Ch.23:
Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; yet he has authority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordainances of God duly settled, administrated, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he has power to call synods, to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.
The Scottish Confession of Faith, Ch. 24:
We further confess and acknowledge, that such persons as are placed in authority are to be loved, honoured, feared, and held in most reverent estimation because they are the lieutenants of God, in whose sessions God himself does sit and judge (yea even the judges and princes themselves), to whom by God is given the sword, to the praise and defense of good men, and to revenge and punish all open malefactors. Moreover, to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever: as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.
Henry,
In a day and age where the word Theonomy is considered (the boogeyman) unbiblical or radical, one should consider the documents attached to the Westminster standards (I.E. The solemn League and Covenant). Also, one should consider the "establishment principle" in the Westminster Confession chapter on the Civil Magistrate, the "general equity" clause, and even the Belgic confession. I believe the covenanters had it right in understanding that God's Law, particularly the Judicial Laws and their punishments, were meant to be used and executed by the civil magistrate, which is God's deacon of justice.
Belgic Confession Article 36:
We believe that, because of the depravity of mankind, our gracious God has ordained kings, princes, and civil officers.1 He wants the world to be governed by laws and policies,2 in order that the licentiousness of men be restrained and that everything be conducted among them in good order.3 For that purpose He has placed the sword in the hand of the government to punish wrongdoers and to protect those who do what is good (Rom 13:4). Their task of restraining and sustaining is not limited to the public order but includes the protection of the church and its ministry in order that the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere,4 and God may be honored and served by everyone, as He requires in His Word.
Westminster Confession Ch.23:
Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; yet he has authority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordainances of God duly settled, administrated, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he has power to call synods, to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.
The Scottish Confession of Faith, Ch. 24:
We further confess and acknowledge, that such persons as are placed in authority are to be loved, honoured, feared, and held in most reverent estimation because they are the lieutenants of God, in whose sessions God himself does sit and judge (yea even the judges and princes themselves), to whom by God is given the sword, to the praise and defense of good men, and to revenge and punish all open malefactors. Moreover, to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever: as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.
The Westminster divines didn't subscribe to a theonomic approach to the judicials which approach they called Brownism. This was clearly shown in a study by Puritanboard's Chris Coldwell and Rev. Matthew Winzer which was published in The Confessional Presbyterian journal (Volume 5 ?). I believe the study of the views of the Westminster divines on this important subject may still be online.
Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
Henry,
In a day and age where the word Theonomy is considered (the boogeyman) unbiblical or radical, one should consider the documents attached to the Westminster standards (I.E. The solemn League and Covenant). Also, one should consider the "establishment principle" in the Westminster Confession chapter on the Civil Magistrate, the "general equity" clause, and even the Belgic confession. I believe the covenanters had it right in understanding that God's Law, particularly the Judicial Laws and their punishments, were meant to be used and executed by the civil magistrate, which is God's deacon of justice.
Belgic Confession Article 36:
We believe that, because of the depravity of mankind, our gracious God has ordained kings, princes, and civil officers.1 He wants the world to be governed by laws and policies,2 in order that the licentiousness of men be restrained and that everything be conducted among them in good order.3 For that purpose He has placed the sword in the hand of the government to punish wrongdoers and to protect those who do what is good (Rom 13:4). Their task of restraining and sustaining is not limited to the public order but includes the protection of the church and its ministry in order that the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere,4 and God may be honored and served by everyone, as He requires in His Word.
Westminster Confession Ch.23:
Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; yet he has authority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire, that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordainances of God duly settled, administrated, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he has power to call synods, to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.
The Scottish Confession of Faith, Ch. 24:
We further confess and acknowledge, that such persons as are placed in authority are to be loved, honoured, feared, and held in most reverent estimation because they are the lieutenants of God, in whose sessions God himself does sit and judge (yea even the judges and princes themselves), to whom by God is given the sword, to the praise and defense of good men, and to revenge and punish all open malefactors. Moreover, to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever: as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.
The Westminster divines didn't subscribe to a theonomic approach to the judicials which approach they called Brownism. This was clearly shown in a study by Puritanboard's Chris Coldwell and Rev. Matthew Winzer which was published in The Confessional Presbyterian journal (Volume 5 ?). I believe the study of the views of the Westminster divines on this important subject may still be online.
Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
Yes and I've read the study, which I disagree with. Also, there is many things as to which I feel Rev. Winzer did not address. There are a few studies that counter his approach. Yet I would rather not get into that discussion at the moment.
Also, this statement "The Westminster divines didn't subscribe to a theonomic approach" is debatable since I am not sure what you mean by "theonomic". The covenanters were theonomic and the Divines subscribed to the Solemn League and Covenant.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
Jacob,
Reformed writers seem to have historically used "theocracy" to describe a government which is prescriptively regulated by God. That is why it may be applied only to the OT civil institutions and to the Church in all ages.
It does not teach that the civil powers may assume the spiritual functions of the church or seek to do what only the church can do for the spiritual benefit of society.
The covenanters were not Theonomists.
Read the first few lines of the Solemn League and Covenant.
The covenant was framed on the understanding that "by the providence of God" the civil and ecclesiastical powers were "under one king" and "of one reformed religion."
The conflict with the civil powers related to the Christian constitution of the three kingdoms, not with civil magistracy itself.
Reformed writers seem to have historically used "theocracy" to describe a government which is prescriptively regulated by God.
That is why it may be applied only to the OT civil institutions and to the Church in all ages.
Reformed writers seem to have historically used "theocracy" to describe a government which is prescriptively regulated by God.
So applying God's Law to a society is not being regulated by God? Also, why is it that someone like John Cotton and the Mass. Bay Colon would NOT be considered a theocracy based on this definition?
That is why it may be applied only to the OT civil institutions and to the Church in all ages.
That still needs to be demonstrated.
This is such a horrible misrepresentation of theonomy. One would have to close their eyes and plug their ears to conclude that men like Bahnsen, Rushdoony, or even McDurmon teach such things. I don't agree with many things of the "theonomist" movement, but this is a misrepresentation. The magistrate was never to hold the keys, which is Erastianism, not theonomy.
Right... So men like Knox, Melville, or Buchanan did not think that the magistrate should uphold the Judicial case laws?
I don't think I need to point out the ridiculousness of this statement.
This is such a horrible misrepresentation of theonomy. One would have to close their eyes and plug their ears to conclude that men like Bahnsen, Rushdoony, or even McDurmon teach such things. I don't agree with many things of the "theonomist" movement, but this is a misrepresentation. The magistrate was never to hold the keys, which is Erastianism, not theonomy.
There is no misrepresentation. If the civil magistrate derives its authority to use the sword from Christ, and Christ sends His ministers to make disciples of all nations, it naturally follows that the civil magistrate has a duty to make disciples of all nations by means of the sword.
In my paper there are quotations
The only thing I can say after this is you need to re-read Theonomy in Christian Ethics since you are in fact misrepresenting the position. Your logic doesn't follow.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
There has to be some human mediation. God does not speak to us like He did to Adam and Eve.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
There has to be some human mediation. God does not speak to us like He did to Adam and Eve.
God doesn't speak to His priests and elders as He did during the theocracy, nor does he present the same basic rationale for the death penalty.
A tangential point that has to do with definitions: many advocates of a Christian "theocracy" will say it is ruled by God and not the priest-class. Fair enough. But rulership implies civil mediation. So, you might say "We are ruled by God," and that is your prerogative, but unless this is a libertarian paradise, this "ruled by God" will have some form of human mediation.
There has to be some human mediation. God does not speak to us like He did to Adam and Eve.
God doesn't speak to His priests and elders as He did during the theocracy, nor does he present the same basic rationale for the death penalty.
He spoke to Samuel, Gideon, Nathan, sometimes David, Solomon.
The only thing I can say after this is you need to re-read Theonomy in Christian Ethics since you are in fact misrepresenting the position.
I should also add that I do not consider myself a full-fledged capital "T" Theonomist but I am sympathetic with some to many of their beliefs.
Nations will come to Christ through the preaching of the gospel. The natural conclusion from this is that they will obey God's Law and establish a civil government based upon God's Law. Your lack of representing the position correctly is border line 9th commandment violation.