Postmillennialism and the Law

Status
Not open for further replies.
Edm said:
beastiality is ok now because it was under the civil law?
Click to expand...

Beastiality is a sexual sin which would fall under the 7th commandment. Moral, not civil. It's not particular to Israel but rather applies to all of mankind.
 
Andrew P.C. said:
Beastiality is a sexual sin which would fall under the 7th commandment. Moral, not civil. It's not particular to Israel but rather applies to all of mankind.
Click to expand...
agreed, but thought that the main question was so that person caught in the be stoned/killed off?
 
Dachaser said:
That would be the just penalty under the Mosaic Law, but the Lord also allowed for them not to have death penalty imposed, see David and the woman caught in adultery and taken to Jesus.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm getting at. You said the Lord REQUIRED death in these cases. I also see no cases of Homosexuals being stoned...except by God.
 
Clark-Tillian said:
Ok. Kangaroo court, then. But the essential point is that an adulteress needs, ipso facto, an accomplice. He wasn't there.
Click to expand...
Rev. Bowen,
I want to make my intention for my previous post plain--it's hard to capture the tone of voice one intends using a keyboard!

My post was intended to give strength to your argument, and was meant in a 100% friendly way. It wasn't my intention to scrutinize your post, as I had no doubt that you didn't consider the event to be a legitimate civil trial.

Please accept my apologies if I came across as censorious.
 
Dachaser said:
There would be though no biblical support for even having the Law in all of its OT aspects be enforced over Christians today, for we are still under its moral aspects, but not he ceremonial and civil aspects.
And I thought that reconstructionists and others wanted to have the law imposed and set up as the governing standards for all in the society?
Click to expand...

I prefer "judicial" over "civil" as it makes finer distinction. But that aside, like any other group, Christian Reconstructionists aren't a monolithic entity; you'll find variations of degree and variations of kind within the group. As for the "ceremonial aspects", rare is the Christian Recon who would dissent--although I've known some who've advocated that the dietary laws aren't ceremonial so much as they are moral. And so they assert that the dietary laws are still in place. But they're not actually advocating ceremonial observance; in their view they're advocating continued adherence to the moral law.

The issue with theonomy is the judicial aspects of the law, especially their public administration and enforcement.
Here are some general questions to answer:

1. Are all the case laws universally binding? That is, for every civil gov't, in any time period, and in any location.
This is the first and most important question. If this can be proven then the match is over, checkmate has occurred. It cannot be proven, therefore, the game is afoot. Confessionally WCF 19.4 rules against this.

WCF 19.IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

N.B.--since Question 1 receives a negative answer the remaining questions deal with particularity. One's definition of the "general equity" is crucial.

2. Are some particular case laws universally binding? That is, for every civil gov't, in any time period, and in any location.
2a. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision on a particular case law?

3. Are some particular case laws binding in particular historical situations?
3a. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision on a particular case law?
3b. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision regarding a particular historical situation?

4. Must a civil society acknowledge Christ as King over its particular jurisdiction before any decision on particular case laws may be made?

N.B. If Question 4 is answered positively then we must move onto an entirely different set of questions. If Question 4 is answered negatively, then the following questions bear some weight and require reflection. I will proceed on the grounds that Question 4 has been answered negatively.

5. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, how may the civil magistrate determine guilt?
5a. If by jury, what's the quorum?
5b. If via the bench, how many graded courts may a society have for review and control?

6. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, is a Christian civil magistrate duty bound to enforce the exact penalties?

7. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, is a non-Christian civil magistrate duty bound to enforce the exact penalties?

8. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, then may the civil magistrate alter the penalty? E. g. firing squad over and above stoning, hanging over and above burning.

9. Since the Sabbath is filed under the "Moral Law", are the Mosaic penalties for Sabbath infractions binding?
9a. Are so called "Blue Laws" sinful or non-sinful?

10. In WCF 19.4 does the phrase "the State of that people" include the current "State of Israel"? Have fun!

Other fun and interesting questions to ponder
Is the Adultery Test of Number 5:11-31 filed strictly under the "ceremonial aspect" heading because a priest is involved?
May a civil society devise other trials by ordeal based on the "general equity" of the Adultery Test of Number 5:11-31?
Did our Christian ancestors sin by inflicting torture and death upon convicted heretics?
If they didn't, then should we follow their example?

Please note---I've not produced answers, just offered questions for consideration. I was once a theonomist, but am no more. My understanding of "general equity" has altered.
 
TylerRay said:
Rev. Bowen,
I want to make my intention for my previous post plain--it's hard to capture the tone of voice one intends using a keyboard!

My post was intended to give strength to your argument, and was meant in a 100% friendly way. It wasn't my intention to scrutinize your post, as I had no doubt that you didn't consider the event to be a legitimate civil trial.

Please accept my apologies if I came across as censorious.
Click to expand...

Well, thank you. Apology accepted. I believe I did misinterpret your tone. That's why I tell my parishioners not to debate via text message!
 
Dachaser said:
Prison would be appropriate for their crime.
Click to expand...

So, as their punishment, I am required to pay for their housing, education, food etc? How long is an appropriate time for me to pay for their crimes?

I am not trying to single you out on here, I just had a few min to get on here and quoted your post. I am enjoying the conversation. I have had the same questions before myself.
 
Andrew P.C. said:
Beastiality is a sexual sin which would fall under the 7th commandment. Moral, not civil. It's not particular to Israel but rather applies to all of mankind.
Click to expand...
Granted. But what is the penalty in the civil realm, if any? There are 3 levels of judgment: 1) God will judge the person, 2) A Session/Consistory may suspend the person from the Table or excommunicate, 3) the civil magistrate. Any discussion of theonomy centers around Number 3.
 
Last edited:
Edm said:
That's what I'm getting at. You said the Lord REQUIRED death in these cases. I also see no cases of Homosexuals being stoned...except by God.
Click to expand...
Those who committed Homosexual acts were stoned under the Mosaic law.
 
Clark-Tillian said:
I prefer "judicial" over "civil" as it makes finer distinction. But that aside, like any other group, Christian Reconstructionists aren't a monolithic entity; you'll find variations of degree and variations of kind within the group. As for the "ceremonial aspects", rare is the Christian Recon who would dissent--although I've known some who've advocated that the dietary laws aren't ceremonial so much as they are moral. And so they assert that the dietary laws are still in place. But they're not actually advocating ceremonial observance; in their view they're advocating continued adherence to the moral law.

The issue with theonomy is the judicial aspects of the law, especially their public administration and enforcement.
Here are some general questions to answer:

1. Are all the case laws universally binding? That is, for every civil gov't, in any time period, and in any location.
This is the first and most important question. If this can be proven then the match is over, checkmate has occurred. It cannot be proven, therefore, the game is afoot. Confessionally WCF 19.4 rules against this.

WCF 19.IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.

N.B.--since Question 1 receives a negative answer the remaining questions deal with particularity. One's definition of the "general equity" is crucial.

2. Are some particular case laws universally binding? That is, for every civil gov't, in any time period, and in any location.
2a. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision on a particular case law?

3. Are some particular case laws binding in particular historical situations?
3a. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision on a particular case law?
3b. If so, what are the determinative factors to be considered before making a decision regarding a particular historical situation?

4. Must a civil society acknowledge Christ as King over its particular jurisdiction before any decision on particular case laws may be made?

N.B. If Question 4 is answered positively then we must move onto an entirely different set of questions. If Question 4 is answered negatively, then the following questions bear some weight and require reflection. I will proceed on the grounds that Question 4 has been answered negatively.

5. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, how may the civil magistrate determine guilt?
5a. If by jury, what's the quorum?
5b. If via the bench, how many graded courts may a society have for review and control?

6. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, is a Christian civil magistrate duty bound to enforce the exact penalties?

7. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, is a non-Christian civil magistrate duty bound to enforce the exact penalties?

8. If some particular case laws are binding, either universally or particularly, then may the civil magistrate alter the penalty? E. g. firing squad over and above stoning, hanging over and above burning.

9. Since the Sabbath is filed under the "Moral Law", are the Mosaic penalties for Sabbath infractions binding?
9a. Are so called "Blue Laws" sinful or non-sinful?

10. In WCF 19.4 does the phrase "the State of that people" include the current "State of Israel"? Have fun!

Other fun and interesting questions to ponder
Is the Adultery Test of Number 5:11-31 filed strictly under the "ceremonial aspect" heading because a priest is involved?
May a civil society devise other trials by ordeal based on the "general equity" of the Adultery Test of Number 5:11-31?
Did our Christian ancestors sin by inflicting torture and death upon convicted heretics?
If they didn't, then should we follow their example?

Please note---I've not produced answers, just offered questions for consideration. I was once a theonomist, but am no more. My understanding of "general equity" has altered.
Click to expand...
Very thought provoking! I am still drawn to concluding that what God had set up and commanded for israel to do under the administration of the Mosaic Law was meant specific unto them at that time. Again, does NOT mean the we are still not obligated to keep the Moral Law of our Lord, but do not think that God intended say the United states to have all laws set up directly under the Mosaic Law of the Lord, as some Islamic nations have their Law applied as under Sharia law.
 
Dachaser said:
I am still drawn to concluding that what God had set up and commanded for israel to do under the administration of the Mosaic Law was meant specific unto them at that time.
Click to expand...

That's why we say that the laws as a *body politic* have expired. But the moral elements of the case laws do not expire.
 
Dachaser said:
Those who committed Homosexual acts were stoned under the Mosaic law.
Click to expand...

Again, please point me to the verse where the homosexuals WERE stoned. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. But I am asking for scripture showing where it happened.

OP: I also apologize for the hijack. I am enjoying this thread but more what it has become. And that probably deserves a seperate thread.
 
Edm said:
Again, please point me to the verse where the homosexuals WERE stoned. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. But I am asking for scripture showing where it happened.

OP: I also apologize for the hijack. I am enjoying this thread but more what it has become. And that probably deserves a seperate thread.
Click to expand...

Indeed, in 1 Kings it talks about Asa removing the sodomites from the land, which sounds like exile.
 
Clark-Tillian said:
what is the penalty in the civil realm
Click to expand...


I don't think there is one set penalty. I do think we should (if we were in a Covenanted nation) take the death penalty into consideration (Ex. 22). However, with a pagan (or other) nation, I do think the penalty should fit the crime.

I'm not a theonomist, so I don't take their view of the judicial laws (which is not confessional either).
 
Dachaser said:
Has the application though of the death penalty changed from the Old to the New Covenant?
Click to expand...
David,
It is not an issue of Old Covenant/New Covenant. It's an issue of justice. Was it a just penalty, or was it not? The Westminster Confession puts it this way:
To them [i.e., Israel] also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.
Click to expand...

"General equity" refers to general principles of justice that were behind many of the judicial laws.
 
TylerRay said:
David,
It is not an issue of Old Covenant/New Covenant. It's an issue of justice. Was it a just penalty, or was it not? The Westminster Confession puts it this way:


"General equity" refers to general principles of justice that were behind many of the judicial laws.
Click to expand...
Were those laws meant to be enforced the same way in Israel under the Old Covenant the same way as now under the New one, in nations not under that same relationship with God though?
 
Dachaser said:
Were those laws meant to be enforced the same way in Israel under the Old Covenant the same way as now under the New one, in nations not under that same relationship with God though?
Click to expand...
Again, it's an issue of justice. All civil magistrates are to exercise justice. Inasmuch as the judicial laws display principles of justice, they are to be followed by all governments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Beards
Col 1:20 and Postmillennialism
2 3
Replies
72
Views
4K
Jerusalem Blade
Jerusalem Blade
P
  • Locked
Postmillennialism and the seed of the serpent
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Peairtach
Peairtach
M
  • Locked
Postmillenialism: An Eschatology of Hope
2
Replies
58
Views
11K
Jerusalem Blade
Jerusalem Blade
P
  • Locked
Historicist Postmillennialism and the "when" of the millennium
2
Replies
32
Views
8K
Dachaser
D
C
Differentiating Amillennialism and Postmillenialism
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Sovereign Grace
Sovereign Grace
Back
Top