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:

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?

__________________
-JD
1Thess5:21
Ordained Deacon, PCA
Serving in the SBC
MS

Team blog: ChristianSkepticism.org | Personal:...a Longmire rambles | facebook

I think you have highlighted the difference between social and political theonomy, and epistemological theonomy; though in my opinion, you cannot have one without the other.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

JD,

I believe you are being confused by what I term Theonomy vs. theonomy. Those who are Theonomists often paint theonomists (or even theocrats) with being for "autonomy."

The real issue is not whether God's law is the pattern, but how exhaustive the pattern is. The best true delineation of this issue that I have seen comes from Rushdooney, who is forthright enough to state that the "Confession is guilty of nonsense" at WCF 19.4.

(However, in paragraph IV, without any confirmation from Scripture, it is held that the 'judicial laws' of the Bible 'expired' with the Old Testament. We have previously seen how impossible it is to separate any law of Scripture as the Westminster divines suggested. . . . . At this point, the Confession is guilty of nonsense." Institutes of Biblical Law, 551)

__________________
Fredrick T. Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

Rushdoony never substantiated his case here - he said something, but did not provide a shred of evidence that his interpretation was correct. I always shake my head when this is trotted out, the fact of the matter is that the Reformers, Puritans and Covenanters would not be allowed to lecture at RTS, WTS or WSC today because of their view of the civil law; and the Reformers, Puritans and Covenanters would not have allowed those who do lecture at these institutions to be ministers because of their political pluralism.

If anyone does not believe me, see Martin A. Foulner's annotated sourcebook Theonomy and the Westminster Confession or see my forthcoming sourcebook on the Puritan's Theocratic views.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

A lot of Rush's work was ground breaking, and there were some personal prejudices of the type we all have that influence him. He could hardly keep from turning any sort of talk involving perversion to Turks (they killed 99% of his family) and even returned a Turkish gold coin that someone donated to Chalcedon. Another had to do with poor treatment he received from a segment of a certain church, and code like Orthodox Pharisee Church with meaning clear to insiders can be found in his works. These things all have to be kept in mind when reading Rush. He was no enemy of the WCF, he just felt it was inconsistant in that area. He reminded me of Luther in a lot of ways. There were parts of the US Constitution that he didn't like, but he didn't want it changed because he didn't trust anyone to do a better job. He gave full membership (actually he didn't have formal membership for several reasons) to everyone who held to any of the historic Reformed confessions. I was a Reformed Baptist at the time, and I was treated just like everyone else. Which is a long way of saying not to read too much into everything he wrote.

__________________
Tim Vaughan, 48 years old, member Redeemer OPC, Santa Maria CA.

Some of his overstatements reflect his frustrations with the latent social antinomianism of the modern Reformed world - frustrations I also share; it is hard to be gracious in such situations.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

Not really. But you are not fully understanding how the word thewonomy is used in two distinct senses. As I have written elsewhere, theonomy until recently was used only as:

"a label to categorize all the differing views that see God as the source of ethics: using the word in this sense, Cornelius Van Til correctly wrote that there “is no alternative but that of theonomy or autonomy." Individual views within the category of theonomy and each called theonomy, differ, however, in their conceptions of exactly how the Bible functions as the source of civil ethics today. At one end of the spectrum is Tillich's vain thought that "God is dead" and his “theonomy” is only the existential encounter between an individual and a moral principle, an encounter that cannot be generalized to serve as the basis for state law. Next, we encounter the Dispensationalist argument that all of the Old Testament Mosaic Law (Genesis to Deuteronomy) is irrelevant today unless particular stipulations stated there are reiterated in the New Testament. Another view, put forth by Calvin and the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), sees that particular Old Testament laws may or may not apply today depending on whether or not the specific principle of justice (“general equity”) underlying them may be justly applied the same way in the New Covenant era as it was in the Old. Moving along, we come to the view best described by Greg L. Bahnsen. — that all Mosaic laws are presumed to apply today, except where Biblically amended by the Lawgiver. Bahnsen described this view as “the ethical perspective of [Christian] Reconstructionism” , but over time it has also become known as Theonomy."

So there is the older theonomy the category label and the newer Theonomy, "the ethical perspective of Christian Reconstructionism" which is one variety of theonomy as opposed to others.

Like you, I am a theonomist in Van Til's sense, but I am not a Theonomist in Bahnsen's sense.

__________________
In Christ's love and service

Mr. Tim Cunningham, Dip. CS (Regent College)
Member, First Baptist Church
Vancouver, BC

------------
"The Reformation was a time when men went blind, staggering drunk because they had discovered, in the dusty basement of late medievalism, a whole cellar of 1500-year-old, 200 proof grace—a bottle after bottle of pure distillate of Scripture, one sip of which would convince anyone that God saves us single-handedly. The word of the gospel—after all these centuries of trying to lift yourself into heaven by worrying about the perfection of your own bootstraps—suddenly turned out to be a flat announcement that the saved were home-free before they started. Grace was to be drunk neat: no water, no ice, and certainly no ginger ale." – Robert Farrar Capon

Thanks all - very insightful and helps me understand the distinction.

I am indeed a theonomist and not a Theonomist (although I do have Theonomic symapathies )

this is a lot like the whole emerging vs emergent deal...

__________________
-JD
1Thess5:21
Ordained Deacon, PCA
Serving in the SBC
MS

Team blog: ChristianSkepticism.org | Personal:...a Longmire rambles | facebook

Are you saying that Rushdoony is being misquoted or misrepresented, or just noting his failure to make his case at that point in his work?

__________________
Philip A - Member, High Desert United Reformed Church, Apple Valley, CA.

"Reason also is choice" - Milton, Paradise Lost
"And then shall every word also seem consistent to him, if he for his part diligently read the Scriptures in company with those who are presbyters in the Church, among whom is the apostolic doctrine, as I have pointed out." - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:XXXII.
"where there is text, there is hope" - Richard A. Muller

I am saying that he failed to properly make a case for what he was saying; it was a foolish statement - that I do not deny.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

But is it representative of Theonomy in general? Do you agree with it?

__________________
Philip A - Member, High Desert United Reformed Church, Apple Valley, CA.

"Reason also is choice" - Milton, Paradise Lost
"And then shall every word also seem consistent to him, if he for his part diligently read the Scriptures in company with those who are presbyters in the Church, among whom is the apostolic doctrine, as I have pointed out." - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:XXXII.
"where there is text, there is hope" - Richard A. Muller

Rush's view at this point is not representative of American Theonomists who generally followed Bahnsen's attempt to understand WCF 19:4 in a way that was consistent with Theonomy.

__________________
In Christ's love and service

Mr. Tim Cunningham, Dip. CS (Regent College)
Member, First Baptist Church
Vancouver, BC

------------
"The Reformation was a time when men went blind, staggering drunk because they had discovered, in the dusty basement of late medievalism, a whole cellar of 1500-year-old, 200 proof grace—a bottle after bottle of pure distillate of Scripture, one sip of which would convince anyone that God saves us single-handedly. The word of the gospel—after all these centuries of trying to lift yourself into heaven by worrying about the perfection of your own bootstraps—suddenly turned out to be a flat announcement that the saved were home-free before they started. Grace was to be drunk neat: no water, no ice, and certainly no ginger ale." – Robert Farrar Capon