- Status
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
To be clear: Rushdoony didn't have "Reconstructionist tendencies;" he was the founder of the Reconstructionist movement. He was a brilliant man, and I've learned a lot from him, but he's dead wrong on certain things, including his view of the law. He taught (contrary to the Reformed confessions) that there is no distinction between moral and judicial law. So, all the judicial laws of Israel are to be built into the law codes of modern nations.
Ed Walsh
Puritan Board Senior
The moral situation in the USA is vastly worse than when this article was published. But, it seems to me, that there are many fewer percentages of Christians that are calling for a change in the Constitution. I fear very few even have that goal as even a faint hope. We've come a long way baby.
Rev. Strange, I was trying to refresh my memory regarding RR's having a weak alignment with the church, and was surprised to see he might have been admitted as a pastor to the OPC in 1958 to 1962? Does this align with what you know?
To the OP, I don't know if this can be answered yes or no in good faith. In the last election,
I honestly respected those believers who refrained from voting, those who voted third party, and those who voted essentially against Clinton.
In the 1980s, I was in the middle of the reconstructionist wing of the PCA and I seriously wonder now about those who foment discord. Divorce, moving from church to church and place to place, estrangement from colleagues -- does this sound like those who would seek God's honor above all else? I'd never say peace at any cost, but constant turmoil often points to a heart issue.
I've become much less comfortable with Christians trying to claim a nation state as I've come to grasp the enormity of God's people being found among all nations rather than inside a narrow chunk of Middle Eastern land.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Of course, absolutely. I don't endorse reconstructionist view. I just think we need to realize that our government is a hostile entity that is not for God...RJ got that. The ones who still do not? Well, they are the ones either seduced or willfully breaking bread with the enemy and his benefactors....
Anyway, here's an interesting article. Don't necessarily agree, but interesting read nonetheless.... https://chalcedon.edu/magazine/rushdoony-and-the-comprehensive-law-of-god-today
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
I barely know him, if what you say is true it is problematic. Is this truly what he promoted? Is there any overlap between the moral and the civil or judicial? Are their judicial laws that remain relevant today? Are all these distinctions so clear cut. They probably are but just asking for further clarity
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
If you “re-read” the article you referred to (https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/voting-in-the-usa-and-gods-law.96405/page-2#post-1178574), Rushdoony clearly saw significant error in the Westminster Standards handling of the law.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
But I think he misunderstood what the WC is getting at. Of course God's universal moral law should shape civil law for a healthy, ordered society... "Thou shall not kill, steal, etc." I don't think the WC denies such and expects the civil magistrates to uphold these laws... However, with abortion and socialism and marriage, many natural and universal laws are eroding. I see more overlap here...
As far as what is permissible and what is not.... Unless paganism is going to set our standards..... Then I'm not voting....
Does God's word speak to these things? Is communism wrong? Why? Is slavery wrong? Why? Is it all arbitrary? Why is sodomy wrong? Is that a moral law or/ ordinance? From what are laws derived anyway? Have we 'progressed' in such a way that what was once condemnation before God is now a human right? Or entitlement? What about pedophilia? How are these standards set?
Last edited:
Ed Walsh
Puritan Board Senior
I know, I know. I'm missing the point of the post.
I am not accurately answering your post, but I wanted to say, that although I can't lay my hands on the quote at this time, a prominent Westminster Seminary theologian once stated that we could not get rid of reconstruction or theonomy until we revise the proof-texts of the Larger and Shorter Catechisms. You need to look there for support of the validity of the civil Law of Moses.
I assume you only want USA citizens to respond and vote in your poll.
You cannot take it for "grant"ed that every member of the Puritanboard is a citizen of the USA
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
Stephen,I assume you only want USA citizensto respond and vote in your poll.
You cannot take t for "grant"ed that every member of the Puritanboard is a citizen of the USA
Don’t you know the USA is the new Jerusalem (joking).
But seriously you are free to vote/weigh in, as there was no qualifier in my original post to say “only American citizens can vote”.
I simply posed my question within the USA context because some Christians in the US would see me obstaining from all ballots as a violation of the command of Christ to love my neighbor. Also the US culture/context is the only one I am familiar with. I have been very comforted by the results of the poll on PB.
TheOldCourse
Puritan Board Sophomore
No. An anti-Christ would be wholly and completely corrupted and undeserving of the faintest of lip service. Our government is legitimate, even if leavened with amoral and anti-Christian principles and persons, and therefore still deserving of our respect, submission (where not inconsistent with our Christian profession) and in which we can participate and seek to reform in many ways with a free conscience.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Ok thanks...
Maybe I'm looking too closely ...
But I tend to get too cynical on these matters.
On a related note, some good original intent noted here http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=2556
Last edited:
Ha ha
Did you know:
1. Lord of the Rings fans know that New Zealand is middle earth
2. We are the only nation on earth to have the All Blacks (they cause Australia and Wales much sorrow
)3. We seriously obey 1 Pet 2:17 to honour the Queen
You see I did use 3 arguments. This is significant as Eccles 4:12 tells us a threefold cord is not easily broken.
It is helpful to clarify as there are people from many nations on the Puritanboard.
And yes I vote in my country.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Yes; he taught that the OT judicial laws were a system of case laws that ought to form the basis of the laws of every nation on earth.
The Westminster standards teach that the judicial laws expired with Israel; that being said, they also teach that many of those laws are founded on universal principles of justice. This is known as general equity. The Westminster standards explicitly note that the general equity of certain judicial laws still applies.
A.Joseph
Puritan Board Senior
Interesting, curious of some examples he cited... But I won't burden you with searching that out. Just wondering how applicable that would be...
I'm still trying to understand the context of this issue. How does voting or not voting relate to love for a neighbor?
I have a cousin who used to be a school principal. We lived in a smallish district and you could see the names of everyone who voted in an election.
She was supporting a bond levy for her school. I forgot to vote that time, so she called me up to shame me for my lack of civic participation.
I answered with, "how do you know I would have voted yes on your bond issue?"
It took a few months before she'd talk to me.
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
It is hard for me to agree with the connection as well.
So in your example some might say (not I) that the passing of the bond levy would really benefit the school and the children, so missing the chance to support those kids and the community is a failure to take advantage of an opportunity to love your neighbor by passing a law that would help them. Of course they assume you would vote their way.
I have been pressured from time to time be more politically active, but really I try to use my time (outside of my job) for private devotion, family worship, serving my Church (and their ministries), and looking for ways to reach the community the Lord has placed my family in to to reach out to the un-churched. My striving to maintain those priories really does not leave me with much concern, energy, or time for swimming in the political pool.
The argument also usually says that since God has placed us in a form of government where we have a voice in government (voting), that failure to use that voice is wasteful. Again, I do not agree with this.
P.s. Someone did finally vote “yes” in the poll, so you can see the belief is out there, even on PB.
Last edited:
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Philosophical observation: while we normally decry utilitarian reasoning, it does seem inevitable. I voted for Brother Trump because 1) he promised to kill and expose the Deep State, and 2) Supreme Court Justices.
I could be wrong and deep in sin for that, but that's probably how most people reasoned. I'm not saying it's right, but it can form a larger package.
I could be wrong and deep in sin for that, but that's probably how most people reasoned. I'm not saying it's right, but it can form a larger package.
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
Jacob, I understand what you are saying and see no fault in your decision.
P.S. I hope the thread will not turn into "trump or Hillary and why", but rather keep the focus on the broader idea of voting in general.
If that is the argument, it falls pretty flat. The flip side argument could be that I loved my literal, fixed-income, neighbors so much that I didn't want them to see more financial hardship to pay for new LGBT training programs in a public school.
So political questions often have plausible ethical positions on both sides. If one decides not to choose either side, how is that failing to love my neighbor?
hammondjones
Puritan Board Junior
Are we talking about Tim Keller's OpEd?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/opinion/sunday/christians-politics-belief.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/29/opinion/sunday/christians-politics-belief.html
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
That is a part of it yes indeed.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
Brother Jacob in saying "Brother Trump" you are quite charitable in that I did not vote for him because I was not as charitable as you.
Of course this may be the only issue I agree with "Brother" Obama.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
That's fair, but if we dominate the court and Roe is severely curtailed, no one will be able to thank a Never-Trumper for that.Brother Jacob in saying "Brother Trump" you are quite charitable in that I did not vote for him because I was not as charitable as you.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
I can live with that. Our Lord is of course is allowed to use sinful actions of men to push through His will.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Certainly. I didn't vote for McCain because I thought he was demon-possessed and would start WWIII with Russia. I didn't vote for Romney because he is a member of a New Age cult that believes Lucifer and Jesus are blood-brothers and that Jesus is having cosmic sex.
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
Stop being coy and just tell us what you really think, brother.
- Status
