
Originally Posted by
ChristianTrader

Originally Posted by
Jon Peters

Originally Posted by
ChristianTrader
But the older 2kers were not trying to avoid Theocracy, so I am not sure how they are inconsistent.
Also in order to propose an alternative to something, you first need to show what was wrong with the original. I have yet to see the problem with the original 2k that necessitated the new version.
CT
Yes, you're correct, if theocracy is what they intended then they are not inconsistant (at least on that point).
I can only speak for myself in terms of what necessitated a new version: the New Testament!
Seriously though, I have had great difficulty squaring my former views (theocracy and, before that, Theonomy) with the NT teaching on our relationship to the state.
The inference from "the light of nature teaches that there is one true God", to the state will act as if there is one true God, aka a Theocracy, seems simple and overwhelming. Why is this not overwhelming to you?
CT
I don't hold (nor do Klineans to my knowledge) that men are not judged for this knowledge. They will be judged when Christ returns. You make a leap, in my estimation, from the fact that there is one God, for which men will be held accountable, and that the state must enforce this notion.
The inference you suggest is clear to someone who has a theocratic predisposition. It is not clear to those of us who do not.
Jon Peters
Member, Reformation Fellowship (OPC) (Roseville, CA)
Folsom, CA
Bookmarks