Not quite: it is the civil/judicial and some ceremonial laws that had penology attached. And all violations of these laws were violations of the moral law as applied to the OT covenantal context.

__________________
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

[quote=timmopussycat;343944][quote=Amazing Grace;343911]

OK.

So can I conclude the following.

The moral law which equals the decalogue, the 2 stones were commands with no penology immediately connected to the breaking of them by God. Yet a civil law/judicial law, or ceremonial, based on one of the 10 words did have penology attached to them.

SO for instance, Thou shall not steal is one of the 10 words, but a civil/judicial law would be a distinction upon what was stolen and attach a penalty to that exact case. So every civil/judicial law had a penalty attached to it, but not every ceremonial law. So the ceremonial law of offering 2 doves may have a penalty attached to it if the person only offered one. Just as if someone stole a cow, the penalty is based on what was stolen and may differ if a goat was stolen.


Where can I find civil judicial laws in leviticus or deuteronomy.

__________________
N. Robert; Trinity Reformed Church RCA, Holland MI

Once in a while you can get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right."

This is not simple, something acknowledge by at least two of the members of the Westminster Assembly, writing some time before the Assembly, though published during.
Daniel Cawdrey and Herbert Palmer, Sabbatum Redivivum: or, the Christian Sabbath vindicated (Robert White for Thomas Underhill, 1645) 3–4.

… the whole of God’s Laws recorded in Scripture, may well be divided (as it is usual) into three ranks, ceremonial, judicial, and moral: of which the two former are commonly called Judaical, or Mosaical Laws; though divers of the ceremonials were not first given by Moses, nor to the Jews only, but in ages before them: for sacrifices were as ancient as Cain and Abel (Gen. 4), and no doubt, from a divine command or inspiration to their father. And 2. The prohibition of eating blood was given to Noah and all his posterity, immediately after the Flood (Gen. 9). Also 3. Circumcision was given to Abraham and all his posterity (and their families) which were to grow into divers Nations (Gen. 17). And perhaps some others besides these may be found, which were given as laws before Israel became a People, the People of God. But however, because it is certain, that whatever of this kind was given a law to the posterities, was renewed to Israel by the ministry of Moses, when God took them to be his people peculiarly; therefore these, and all other peculiarly given to them, whether Ceremonial or Judicial (which are not esteemed perpetual), are termed Judaical, or Mosaical Laws.

The nature of which, that we may briefly dispatch, we are to conceive, that the Nation of the Jews, taken to be God’s peculiar people, was both a Church, the only Visible Church that God then had upon Earth, as also a Body Politick, or Civil Society. And in both those considerations, Godhimself was pleased to be their Lawgiver; and besides the Moral Laws, which concerned them as men (together with all the rest of Mankind, both towards God, and one another), He vouchsafed to ordain them other laws as they were a Church, but a Church in infancy, and under age, till the Messiah, the promised Seed, should come: and these are usually called Ceremonials: And others also, as they were a Commonwealth, to whom the Land of Canaan was allotted for an inheritance, and from among whom that promised Messiah was to be born: And these Civil Laws are they that are usually called judicials. But for as much as these two considerations, of their being a Church, and a Civil State, had both of them (as we have intimated) special relation unto Christ to come, and so their very Land was a Typical Land, and their Nation a Typical Nation; it is hard to give any such exact description either of ceremonial or judicial laws, as shall neither be too scanty, so as to leave out none of that kind, nor yet interfere with the other kind: And harder perhaps to find any judicial (proper to the Jews) which had not somewhat of ceremoniality in it. But we will endeavour to difference them as distinctly as we can; and that we do in the manner following:…

__________________
Chris Coldwell
Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian, A Journal for Discussion of Presbyterian Doctrine & Practice
• The Blue Banner Archive

When heresy rises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open. It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise. Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the ‘old dead orthodoxy,’ and on having left behind many of its antiquated errors: but when taxed with deviations from the received faith, they complain of the unreasonableness of their accusers, as they ‘differ from it only in words.’ This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age. Samuel Miller, Introductory essay, The Articles of the Synod of Dort (1841).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

[quote=Amazing Grace;343964]By analyzing each teaching and determining the subclass to which it belongs. NB this is not always easy to do and there is room for disagreement over subclass assignments.

__________________
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

[quote=timmopussycat;344035]timcat; this is a reason I fnd this teaching of Theonomists disturbing. I believe this is also the reason the those who show the error of them are constantly accused of misrepresenting their position. IT is a position of a chameleon. The one thing I am certain is that scripture always speaks of all or nothing. There is no picking or choosing when it comes to Law or even grace for that matter. The pharisse and saducce did just what you said above and mingled to comands of God with their commands of men. How rabbi greg or gary or rush find in scripture that we must have a NEw Covenant Talmud is not only wrong, but impossible. More on this later...

__________________
N. Robert; Trinity Reformed Church RCA, Holland MI

Once in a while you can get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right."

SInce I am not 'master' of the WCF, my question appears easy to me, but perhaps it is not.

We read:

To them also, as a body politic, he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

I have seen some attempt to use this to show theonomy is correct. My question is what theonomist in their right mind would write it as such? NONE!!!! what has happened is a shift from the power of the words expired and not obliging as the driving force of this phrase, to the gray area of general equity. The gray has become the barometer over the clear. If we did this with all our theological thinking, we would be most miserable. It is as if that last unintelligable phrase is out their to soften the first clear part!!!! It is like using James 2 to prove salvation by works over the overwhelming evidence it is not by works but grace.

__________________
N. Robert; Trinity Reformed Church RCA, Holland MI

Once in a while you can get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right."

Moderator ruling. No; I think that is enough.

__________________
Chris Coldwell
Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian, A Journal for Discussion of Presbyterian Doctrine & Practice
• The Blue Banner Archive

When heresy rises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open. It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise. Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the ‘old dead orthodoxy,’ and on having left behind many of its antiquated errors: but when taxed with deviations from the received faith, they complain of the unreasonableness of their accusers, as they ‘differ from it only in words.’ This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age. Samuel Miller, Introductory essay, The Articles of the Synod of Dort (1841).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

***Moderator Note***


I don't know what you guys are doing but you guys are messing up the Bulletin Board Code for quotes.

Just hit the quote button and make your comments after the quote.

Thanks.

__________________

(Norseman Moderator)

R. Martin Snyder
1689er
Harmony Baptist Church (Member)
PuritanCovenanter MSN Blog
PuritanCovenanter's MySpace Page

"Our object should not be to have scripture on our side but to be on the side of scripture; and however dear any sentiment may have become by being long entertained, so soon as it is seen to be contrary to the Bible, we must be prepared to abandon it without hesitation."
William Symington

Click to get:Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Theonomists interpret "sundy judicial laws" as referring to parts of the judicial law which were circumstantial to the nation of Israel that have "expired together with the state of that people". As these cannot be fully applied today, then only the general equity remains binding. An example is the laws concerning cities of refugee. We are not bound to have cities of refuge in the land of Canaan, but the general equity obliges us to establish such cities in our own nations.

BTW Martin Foulner's book Theonomy and the Westminster Confession has forever settled the question of Theonomy being compatible with the WCF. Despite the fact that it has been in print for 10 years, it has never been fully answered (a dismissal does not count as an answer).

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

Nicholas has made the following apology. Please send any acknowledgments and/or appreciation by PM to him. I have closed this thread. That's two in not so many weeks. I think this suggests we give Theonomic threads a rest for a while.

__________________
Chris Coldwell
Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian, A Journal for Discussion of Presbyterian Doctrine & Practice
• The Blue Banner Archive

When heresy rises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open. It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise. Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the ‘old dead orthodoxy,’ and on having left behind many of its antiquated errors: but when taxed with deviations from the received faith, they complain of the unreasonableness of their accusers, as they ‘differ from it only in words.’ This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age. Samuel Miller, Introductory essay, The Articles of the Synod of Dort (1841).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?