Howdy All,

I'm brand-spankin new, and this is my first post.

As mentioned above, Bahnsen was a true gentleman, a scholar, and strong confessionalist. His debating skill was unparalleled, his research thorough, and his presentation inviting. In my estimation, he was head-and-shoulders above his peers.

As to the "theonomic" question, I don't think that his basic conclusions were contrary to the confession and catechism's usages of the Law (for instance, invoking Mosaic Judicials in explaining the requirements of / sins forbidden in the 10 commandments). His method of arguing those points was quite different from theirs, but the conclusions were very similar. Gillespie, for instance, would have seen many of the "judicial" laws as merely moral laws, applied to the civil sphere. In that way, resembling Rutherford's arguments in favor of executing idolaters, adulterers, etc.

Besides the controversial aspects of Bahnsen's views of the Confession, I think he is seen by Presbyterians and Reformed folk as a stalwart of the true Reformed Religion, and a devoted disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ. He has now gone to his rest, and is rejoicing in Christ, his only Savior and Master. In this way, I pray he is an example to all of us who, though disagreeing in some points of understanding, can yet profit one another, and be a blessing to all; even those with whom we may sincerely disagree.

Cheers,

Adam

__________________
Adam Brink, Grace Church of Pleasanton, PCA, Pleasanton, California

"Mark you this, Bassanio, The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart: O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!"

Antonio - The Merchant of Venice (Act 1, Scene 3)