As I have said, I have started Bahnsen's
Van Til's Apologetic and I am finding it an excellent read.
I am, however, having some difficulty with the use of the term theonomy in various contexts.
My understanding was this:
Quote:
|
Theonomy is derived from the two Greek words, (theos) meaning "God" and (nomo) meaning "law." Theonomy is the belief that all laws, civil, economic, and social, should be patterned after the particulars of the Sinaitic covenant which God gave to Israel in the wilderness for her politico-civil government including in the punishment of criminals.
|
Which I have not fully embraced in this context and would not consider myself a "theonomist" in general.
However I am finding the term used in terms of presuppositional apologetics in contrast with
autonomy.
In this context, I believe that I
would be a theonomist.
Am I misunderstanding the distinction?