AN EXCITING ANNOUNCEMENT! RIGHT RESPONSE CONFERENCE: “Theonomy & Postmillennialism” | May 5-7, 2023 | Georgetown, TX. REGISTER HERE! rightresponseconference.com/ SPEAKERS: Dr. James White Gary DeMar Dr. Joe Boot Joel Webbon PURPOSE: “As Christians, we have been called by the Lord Jesus to disciple the nations. And this discipleship includes teaching the nations obedience to all of Christ’s commandments. This is the charge, and the Lord will grant us victory. Jesus Christ has promised to build his Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it!” Mark your calendars and join us! rightresponseconference.com/
Brother Joel, you're a clear thinking, articulate spokesman for the reformed Baptist fellowship and I very much appreciate your work. I'm opti-A mill but with you and Dr White along with others making an excellent scriptural basis for post mill, it won't be long till I jump over, by God's grace! Soli Deo Gloria!
@@wishuhadmyname Thanks for the reminder (but you do assume that Reformed Baptists have the same theological understanding as the disciples in your response - it was that to which I was referring). It is just that most Jewish believers view much of reformed theology to be anti-Semitic (that "replacement theology" perjorative). From my perspective it is adoption theology that is discussed in the book of Romans. The gentiles are grafted in (adopted). There are two Israels, national (the one of the flesh) and spiritual (the spiritual one being the true church composed of believing Jews and Gentiles). As to which of the prophetic versus in scripture belong to which I will say only this; Romans 11:26 MUST refer to the church as the bible makes very clear that not all Israel is descended from Israel (Romans 9:6-9) and the children of the flesh are not children of God, but the children of the promise are. And so it is not possible that every national Jew will be saved.
I think that many oppose theonomy because of Acts 15, Galatians 5:1-5, Colossians 2:13-19, Galatians 3:19-25 & other epistles where Christians were being led astray by judaizers.
@@ranbran2948 I'm not a dispy. The lost submit through Christ's Lordship over the earth, the demons are already in submission and death is already defeated but the saying comes about at the resurrection when the last enemy is defeated. Hint: Death isn't God's enemy, it's ours.
@@effobama1992 thank you brother. What does that mean, “The lost submit through Christ’s lordship over the earth”. I can understand if you don’t want to take the time, if you wouldn’t mind, would you unpack that statement a little bit?
I don't agree that the logical step after believing the gospel is not going back to the Law, or imposing it in a secular nation-state. The commands we follow are the teachings of Christ and his Apostles. They, not the Confessions, or a 'method' taking one teaching out of Pauls authoritative Scripture to give us freedom to do the same with OT laws, reveal the continuity/discontinuity between the old and new covenants. We follow those teachings not our autonomous determinations of what love is as was stated. I think much of theonomy is an overreaction to anti-nomianism.
@@toddstevens9667 The abiding Law of God is not only a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path, it is the perfect representation of God's character to which every true believer is being conformed in Christ. If you reject the abiding validity of the Moral Law of God (Ten Commandments), you grossly misunderstand the Scriptures.
@@Eric_Lichtenberg ummmm … you might need to read the NT epistles. They have a very different perspective than you do. And, out of curiosity, why do you separate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Mosaic Law? What verse gives you the notion that we can separate the Decalogue from the Mosaic food laws, which we are specifically told that we do not need to follow? Or separating the Ten Commandments from the sacrificial laws of Moses, which we certainly don’t need to complete, having been completed for us by our Lord Jesus Christ? Gotta say that this whole theonomy movement is incomprehensible biblically. I worship Jesus Christ, not the law of Moses. But whatever floats your boat.
@@Eric_Lichtenberg Knowing full well that I’m walking into some devious trap 🤪, I’ll persevere anyway. Yes, I still sin. Go ahead. I know you’re about to lower the boom on me.
By definition, faith is neither logical nor illogical. It is non-logical. And there is a HUGE difference between "A is true." and "A is to be actualized (in the existent world)." I contend, even if theonomy is true, it should not be actualized. Further, I contend it is no longer possible to actualize theonomy. The culture that would allowed theonomy to occur has collapsed and has been destroyed (this is he meaning of 'post-modern'). And we are a better world without it.
Joel, I appreciate this channel and always look forward to enlightening discussions. I think the concern over theonomy lies in the idea of mere human beings exercising God's law on others. We can surely agree that God's law is perfect, and that God is perfectly just, and He alone perfectly implements His law. This side of being glorified, we Christians are still flawed, and are more than capable of error and sin. These are the starting points from which we must view the concept of theonomy. Currently, murder (with the exception of abortion, but that's improving), rape, and theft are illegal. This is right and good; these should be illegal. Once we bring abortion into its rightful place under the umbrella of murder, these laws are well on their way to being theonomy realized. Again, I think that is good. What is next? If God's law is written on the hearts of the elect, what else needs to be added to the civil laws of the nation that wouldn't be best handled by church discipline? (I'm keeping the discussion focused on theonomy in the U.S.) I'm asking because I don't know what should come next. Certainly, the "woke stuff" in law and in court cases needs to be repealed and overturned. Anything outside of "Have you not read that at the beginning, God made them male and female, and for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife" needs to go. But what would the penalty be for violating this? Would getting caught with pornography land a man in jail? Or would it land him in a discussion with his elders? As the nation becomes more Christian (I am leaning towards a postmillennial view), people will start doing less overtly sinful things, like getting drunk, taking the Lord's name in vain, and dishonoring their father and mother. Do we need to go through the process of altering our civil laws to come into alignment with God's law, or will the Holy Spirit simply continue the work of sanctification, regardless of the nation's laws? The more the nation becomes like Christ, the less something like the Constitution will matter. Then Christ will appear and we'll be glorified, and the Constitution will be but a distant memory.
Because a lot of "Christians" don't like the idea of God telling them what to do or how to live any more than the average atheist. It is as Paul taught in Rom. 8:7 where he says that the unconverted mind is inherently hostile against God, His laws, and His authority. They want all of the perks of claiming Christianity with none of the obligations.
Collapsing? I do not see "everything around is collapsing" at all. In fact, I contend we have had a much better world since the the old "Christendom 1.0" world collapsed and destroyed itself (just as Nietzsche predicted it would). This is the same Towne Crier I have been hearing since Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth. It was a con job then, it is a con job now.
@@RightResponseMinistries Collapsing? I do not see "everything around is collapsing" at all. In fact, I contend we have had a much better world since the the old "Christendom 1.0" world collapsed and destroyed itself (just as Nietzsche predicted it would). This is the same Towne Crier I have been hearing since Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth. It was a con job then, it is a con job now.
Wonderful conversation. What do we mean when we say “Jesus is Lord”, except that He sovereignly reigns and blesses us with His law? What do we mean when we pray “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” but that the will of God revealed by His law-Word is practiced and enforced. The problem with evangelicals is they do not recognize the second and third use of the law. Their embrace of antinomianism is just supplanting the law of God with the law of man. They don’t believe that the law of God provides the greatest possible blessing for both the regenerate and unregenerate. They view the law as oppressive rather than as liberty, they libertinism over true liberty from sin. God is both just and love. He covenants with us by law and grace, neither exists without the other.
You are forgetting, most theonomists are Calvinists. This means they believe the "elect" was chosen from the foundation of the world to be redeemed, and the rest will be condemned. Which necessarily means, whether we pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" matters not. His will WILL be done, regardless of what we pray, or teach (or any other Christian activity, or inactivity), the result is the same. The elect will be redeemed, the rest will be condemned. This renders ALL Christian activity (and inactivity) meaningless and valueless.
@manager 01 Your strawman representation is not only an error, but reflects a hubris, both in theology but specifically in humanity's relationship toward God. A worse characterization of the doctrines of grace and sovereignty is difficult to imagine. I recommend to you Luther's Bondage of the Will as a good place to dispel your stated misunderstanding and grow in love and praise toward the sovereignty of Christ.
@@davebuehner4307 I read and studied Luther and Calvin long ago, Zwingli too. You call my presentation "strawman representation" .and an error. Please feel free to expose all my errors. I can justify all of my assertions from The Canons of Dordt and the Westminister Confession. We can dialog more on this and i hope we can.
Read the Commandments. If you love the Lord your God, would you violate them willingly? If you love your neighbor as yourself, would you ignore the Comandments? We are free from the curse of the Law, not from obeying them. I speak of the moral Laws, not the ceremonial or the Jewish civil laws of the time.
The two objections against theonomy that come to mind to me are: 1.) European history from circa 500-1800 AD. Romish church applied God's Law in many different ways to the people of Europe. Ideas like the divine right of kings was argued as a theonomic principal. They wouldn't have used that term but the cited source of authority was God's Word (God's Law). 2.) We can't get Christians to agree on application of God's Word on numerous issues. We have the recent curfuffle over the Cross-Politic episode where "American Baptist theology" was accused of being the source trans-genderism in the USA. You recently made a post about whether or not John Piper is still qualified to be an elder/pastor. I read the comments of that post and saw many different points of view, and yet it seems everyone neglected God's Law in Deu 24:16 which instructed Israel that every man is judged for their own sin. Fathers should not be punished because of their sons, and vice versa. That doesn't mean Piper isn't disqualified necessarily. I point out that in our discussion/argument over an important topic key scripture can be left out of the debate. In the end, who is final arbiter of what is theonomos and how is it applied? If you say that each Christian has to reach his own conclusion than the whole argument is neutered. We're back where we started. Each person reading the Word and doing their best to apply it to their lives. If you say there is a person or persons who can tell us exactly how to interpret theonomic issues then you are only a slight gap away from papacy.
Your first point is addressed at length in Boot’s recent book, “Ruler of Kings.” He gets into a detailed discussion of the conflation between the ekklesia (church) and the basileia (kingdom) by the medieval church and the after the Enlightenment (“Endarkenment”) the rise of what is called caeseropapism (Caesar being Lord over all, including the church). Both are errors in ditches in opposing directions. The solution is a correct understanding and application of what is meant by “the kingdom of God.” This will be long, hard work, certainly not easy and will take a long time.
@@apxsports5904 Yeah, unfortunately, but I've gotten used to it. I think there are some serious concerns that go unaddressed in the whole post-mil/theonomic camp. Normally my inquiries get waved off or ignored. I would genuinely like to hear some questions addressed. However they feel quite confident in their "small but rapidly growing" position.
The bottom line of establishing a Christian government, man is too corrupt to do so, our nature would have to be changed, and that will only be when Christ returns to establish His kingdom. Sounds good in theory, but in practice unobtainable in reality.
Yes, we definitely see God’s law as harmful. I have struggled with figuring this out in my own walk. I love parts of God’s law but not other parts because in my foolishness and probably idolatrous covetousness, I do not understand why some of God’s laws are good, at least not fully. Not even in my day to day life. Chores, accepting correction, not being on my phone constantly, living my family and enemy, etc.
It is a presumptive error to say every word God speaks is law. I have heard others (all cessationists) say similar things and it is simply not true. It is indiciative of someone who simply does not know God, or the New Covenant. Knowing God is not the same as believing in God.
Question: how do you handle the objection that Jesus did not always follow the Old Testament case law? Prime example is John 8 with the woman caught in adultery; Jesus did not advocate for stoning the woman as the law demanded. I think theonomy is a Biblically sound position, but this has been used against me as a proof text that Jesus' coming changed the role or application of the OT law, and I'm not sure how to answer it.
@mandelbrot set He was actually using the law. The fight laugh feast magazine had an article in it that explained it in a way I hadn't thought about it before. Jesus asked the woman after the accusers left, where are you're accusers? Nobody was left for fear of suffering the consequences of making a false testimony (punishment of crime they were accusing off, stoning in this case) Conviction of their own sin would not deter the accusers as the teachers of the law and pharisees would think themselves to be sinless before the law. So Jesus was applying the the old testament law.
Another thing to consider would be that this particular text may be considered a textual variant, or, a later addition to the Gospel account not found in the original autograph, as I recall.
That block of verses is first found in a 5th century manuscript (Codex D) known for frequent singular readings, at best it was the Amplified Bible of its day. Ircc, it's found there in Luke, not John. I know several manuscripts later than Codex D also have it in Luke and some also have it in a different part John. This is a story people liked and were trying to find a place for it, but neither John nor Luke wrote it
This is perhaps a new term to me. Or. -. Pray John Macarthur Recovers Quickly - so I can let you Know what I think - thanks for posting. I have reading to get to
The lost and dying world lives as if there is a God (THE God), when it comes to His providence and beneficence... so why not theonomy? "Am I a theonomist?" "Oh, no! I hate God's law!" (lol)
I associate theonomy with the abuses that took place at Geneva. Sabastian Castellio, one of Calvin’s accomplices, urged Calvin to repent of his intolerance, and made the shocking remark, “If Christ himself came to Geneva, he would be crucified. For Geneva is not a place of Christian liberty. It is ruled by a new pope [John Calvin], but one who burns men alive while the pope at Rome strangles them first.” Castellio also said, “Can we imagine Christ ordering a man to be burned alive for advocating adult baptism? The Mosaic laws calling for the death of a heretic were superceded by the law of Christ, which is one of mercy not of despotism and terror.”
America has murdered a million babies a year for the past half century. Geneva would be a massive improvement. Of course Geneva wasn’t perfect, but secular humanism isn’t the solution. It’s not whether, but which. Every nation is theonomic. Every nation enforces the laws of their deity. The only question is this: Which god?
John A how do you interpret Psalm 24:1? What is the meaning of the words there? Of course this is the theme of the whole counsel of God! See also Daniel 4 and many other places.
@@RG-lc1qx I’m guessing you would have stoned the woman caught in adultery? How were there former homosexuals, fornicators, etc at the church in Corinth? Should not they have been stoned too?
I would like to know what a society would look like under theonomy. For example: how would we deal with Muslims, or athiests, or homosexuality, not as the church, but from a governmental perspective 🤔
Certainly, we would be like the Huguenots and defend ourselves from offensive violent attacks. Or like the English Civil Wars under Cromwell, defend the truth of God's authority as Theocratic ruler when men' tyrannically usurp His place then oppress freedom to worship! There are many more examples such as Hebrews 11:32-40 whereby those who are said to be justified by faith killed or were killed for the kingdom while believing the promise of the One to come! To love your neighbor as yourself may mean to defend them with your life as Jesus taught. John 15:13 and many other places. When Muslims are the aggressors we can and must defend against their aggression. This we are called to do, to execute justice and defend the defenseless. First, by civil gov't, but when they fail to execute their instituted purpose they negate their biblical authority.
We already know. The 30 years war, the 80 years war, the 100 years war, the German Peasants War. Millions upon millions of Christians killing each other over infant baptism, where to put the pulpit in the sanctuary, and the color of the pews. That is what a Christian theonomist society looks like.
Pastor, good discussion. I do side with Paul, however, who was given by our Lord to the new mystery church. He says that by keeping the law will no flesh be justified. We all are saved through Christ alone. The church of Jews at Jeruselm agree and did lay nothing on the mystery church. My question remains, to whom was Jesus originally sent, and to whom was the 4 gospels and one half of Acts written? All know the answer.
Jesus said if you love me you will obey me. We obey Jesus. The Law came through Moses, Grace and Truth through Jesus Christ. We obey what Jesus tells us to do. Jesus tells us to make disciples who are in all nations, not to disciple nations. The Law of Moses, is a unit and must be obeyed perfectly. Acts 15 and Galatians explains that only Jesus obeyed the Law of Moses perfectly and gives those who believe in Him, his perfect righteousness. If you break 1 of the Laws you are guilty of breaking them all. You can try to keep the Law of Moses or you can trust the one who kept the Law in your place for reconciliation to God through Jesus for eternal life
I regret to inform you that " μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη" (Matthew 28.19) does not mean "make disciples who are in all nations" but rather, "disciple [instruct] the nations".
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
@@Terror1Void Blessed 2023! A parallel passage in the Last Chapter of Luke to the Great Commission Chapter Matthew 28 makes clear that we are to make disciples believers of the Lord Jesus Christ in the Nations. That Repentance and remission of sin should be preached in His Name (Jesus) to all nations beginning at Jerusalem. The Rest of the New Testament also supports the view that the Gospel is proclaimed to people, not nations. God Bless
Commenting before watching (and I will watch), but probably my biggest concern is at the edges--where are the limits, and what specifically does it look like in the reasonably-near term (say, within the next few decades). Most Christians, I hope, would agree that murder and theft should be illegal. But few, I think, would agree with execution as the penalty for taking God's name in vain, and I'd add that that would be stretching the "general equity" of the civil law way beyond anything the drafters of the 1689 (i.e., the Westminster Assembly) would have intended. IMO, at least, that's the biggest issue.
I'd point you to Rushdoony's institutes of Biblical Law and Gary North's Victims Rights if you want to get into the specifics of application. These questions have been dealt with before in depth.
@@jwtrain That's good to know (and hardly surprising), and I'm sure those would be worthwhile resources. But as noted in the opening minutes of this video, there seems to be a pretty broad range of opinions on these questions, even among those who would call themselves theonomists. Reading Rushdoony won't tell me where Joel (or AD, or Doug, or...) would draw the line.
@@danbrown586 that's a very good observation and I will expound on it a bit more. What you need to be concerned with more than what others think on a biblical subject is what the results are of your own study. Study to show yourself approved a workman unto God. I have found, over many years, that there is no substitute for personal convictions that come out of personal study. Why? Because when I have confidence that the Word of God has spoken to me it is only then that I am willing to die to defend what I believe. Whatever other men believe about Scripture, I am NOT willing to die for that! For example, when I was a younger believer, I asked leadership what is my role and responsibility, if at all, concerning taking up arms against tyrannical oppressive gov't. I never got a lucid reply. The question was nearly always side stepped or the subject changed or masked in some way. Why? Because they themselves did not have an answer or conviction since they failed to study the subject themselves. This is the case with many, so called Shepherds. They do not know what the bible teaches on the subject so they side step or deflect from answering. Worse yet is they kowtow to what the culture teaches on any given subject since they do not study for themselves! Indeed a very sad state of affairs.
@@jwtrain "Let's get into the text" does nothing to answer, "what exactly does Joel mean when he endorses theonomy?" And that, in short, was the question I posed--which I thought was pretty clear, but your responses (and R G's) suggest this was not the case. The question posed, and proposed to be answered, by this video is why many fiercely oppose theonomy. And, of course, a great deal of the reason is the overall spirit of antinomialism in the evangelical church today--but another large part is the issue I raised: given the wide range of positions advanced as "theonomy", what, exactly, is the position being advanced by this person? "Read Rushdoony" doesn't answer that question (unless "this person" is Rushdoony, or perhaps if "this person" has explicitly stated that he takes Rushdoony's position). "Read scripture" doesn't answer that question. The latter is certainly good advice, and the former likely is as well, but neither answers (or even begins to answer) the question I posed.
nah God says his all laws is FOREVER through david,forever is forever,whoever told us its abolished is a false teacher and false prophet,Christ says he didnt come TO destroy the law,why would Christ do something he claim he didnt come TO?
@@ManlyServant In Old Testament Hebrew the word forever is Olam... Which can be translated forever or long period of time.... We understand and know through the book of Hebrews and Galatians That the old covenant law was abrogated and fulfilled by Christ Jesus. You are correct and saying he did not come to destroy the law But fulfill it... Many christians get confused at This point because they don't have a biblical understanding but rather they are taught a theological scheme of the law. Deut 4:13 tells us that the old covenant is the 10 commandments. That covenant found its fulfillment in what Christ Jesus Christ did and in the destruction of the temple.
You teachers seem to be setting up a straw man. You present those who disagree with Nationalism as operating as loose cannon Christians who make up their own ideas of what it means to love God with all your heart, soul, and mind and what it means to love your neighbor as yourself. The gospels and all the letters to the churches don't leave the reader thereof with any questions regarding these commands. You seem to be mixing up law and grace. The law of God is our tutor. Grace is how we live.
There was one and only one theocracy and we all know where it ended up. 722 BC 586 BC 70 AD anyone? If theonomy is meant to be a standard for all nations as nation states then then theonomy is a false faith and false gospel! Post millenialism is a false doctrine but of itself does not constitute a false faith or false gospel. Although it appeals to many who desire to live a full life in this cursed world which God has only decreed to redeem a small part relatively speaking. Matthew 7:13,14,21-23 Luke 13:22-30. Salvation of the Elect, the FEW described in Matthew who make it throufgh the straight and narroe gate, is the great work of the Triune God. Revelation 5:10. Out of etc... But post millenials continue to dream to the contrary. May the Spirit give them eyes to see and ears to hear what the scriptures plainly teach about grace and its connection to truthful eschatology. That is my prayer for my Post Mill Brothers!
AN EXCITING ANNOUNCEMENT! RIGHT RESPONSE CONFERENCE: “Theonomy & Postmillennialism” | May 5-7, 2023 | Georgetown, TX. REGISTER HERE! rightresponseconference.com/
SPEAKERS:
Dr. James White
Gary DeMar
Dr. Joe Boot
Joel Webbon
PURPOSE:
“As Christians, we have been called by the Lord Jesus to disciple the nations. And this discipleship includes teaching the nations obedience to all of Christ’s commandments. This is the charge, and the Lord will grant us victory. Jesus Christ has promised to build his Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it!”
Mark your calendars and join us! rightresponseconference.com/
Over many years and by God’s Grace I’ve learned God’s Law is His Love or a practical expression & application of His Love 🙂✌️❤️
Brother Joel, you're a clear thinking, articulate spokesman for the reformed Baptist fellowship and I very much appreciate your work. I'm opti-A mill but with you and Dr White along with others making an excellent scriptural basis for post mill, it won't be long till I jump over, by God's grace! Soli Deo Gloria!
We gladly welcome you!
Come on over; we have cookies
@@wishuhadmyname What web site doesn't these days? P.S. I am a Reformed Baptist from a Jewish family. Wrap your head around that one!
@@MikeHammer1 So was Paul. And Peter and the other Apostles
@@wishuhadmyname Thanks for the reminder (but you do assume that Reformed Baptists have the same theological understanding as the disciples in your response - it was that to which I was referring). It is just that most Jewish believers view much of reformed theology to be anti-Semitic (that "replacement theology" perjorative). From my perspective it is adoption theology that is discussed in the book of Romans. The gentiles are grafted in (adopted). There are two Israels, national (the one of the flesh) and spiritual (the spiritual one being the true church composed of believing Jews and Gentiles). As to which of the prophetic versus in scripture belong to which I will say only this; Romans 11:26 MUST refer to the church as the bible makes very clear that not all Israel is descended from Israel (Romans 9:6-9) and the children of the flesh are not children of God, but the children of the promise are. And so it is not possible that every national Jew will be saved.
Enjoying every interview I find about this subject, esp when it includes learning more from Dr Boot. Thank you!!
I think that many oppose theonomy because of Acts 15, Galatians 5:1-5, Colossians 2:13-19, Galatians 3:19-25 & other epistles where Christians were being led astray by judaizers.
Great show gentlemen. Please give us more.
Who else likes how Dr. Boot says Law? :)
Lawr
@@MatthewSmith-be7mj makes it more authoritative! Love it!
I noticed that too
Amill here, I'm convinced every crevice of the world is called to submit to Christ as Lord in all parts of life.
And will it; really -will They?
@@Chirhopher Yes but not through a gradual redemption.
@@effobama1992 how will it submit brother?
@@ranbran2948 I'm not a dispy.
The lost submit through Christ's Lordship over the earth, the demons are already in submission and death is already defeated but the saying comes about at the resurrection when the last enemy is defeated.
Hint: Death isn't God's enemy, it's ours.
@@effobama1992 thank you brother. What does that mean, “The lost submit through Christ’s lordship over the earth”. I can understand if you don’t want to take the time, if you wouldn’t mind, would you unpack that statement a little bit?
Oooh, can’t wait! 🤤
That passage in Thessalonians really blew my mind. It’s amazing what the Bible will show you when you set aside your own presuppositions.
This channel is pure fire. Post Mill is on the move for sure. Many of tired of premill dispy junk and want the red meat. Well done sir!!
Not exactly sure how postmillenialism could be considered red meat …
I don't agree that the logical step after believing the gospel is not going back to the Law, or imposing it in a secular nation-state. The commands we follow are the teachings of Christ and his Apostles. They, not the Confessions, or a 'method' taking one teaching out of Pauls authoritative Scripture to give us freedom to do the same with OT laws, reveal the continuity/discontinuity between the old and new covenants. We follow those teachings not our autonomous determinations of what love is as was stated. I think much of theonomy is an overreaction to anti-nomianism.
Where the glory and presence of God dwells, so also does His Law.
Are you referring to the Mosaic law? Surely not! Maybe … the Law of Christ? They are different after all.
@@toddstevens9667 The abiding Law of God is not only a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path, it is the perfect representation of God's character to which every true believer is being conformed in Christ. If you reject the abiding validity of the Moral Law of God (Ten Commandments), you grossly misunderstand the Scriptures.
@@Eric_Lichtenberg ummmm … you might need to read the NT epistles. They have a very different perspective than you do. And, out of curiosity, why do you separate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Mosaic Law? What verse gives you the notion that we can separate the Decalogue from the Mosaic food laws, which we are specifically told that we do not need to follow? Or separating the Ten Commandments from the sacrificial laws of Moses, which we certainly don’t need to complete, having been completed for us by our Lord Jesus Christ? Gotta say that this whole theonomy movement is incomprehensible biblically. I worship Jesus Christ, not the law of Moses. But whatever floats your boat.
@@toddstevens9667 Do you still sin as a regenerate believer?
@@Eric_Lichtenberg Knowing full well that I’m walking into some devious trap 🤪, I’ll persevere anyway. Yes, I still sin. Go ahead. I know you’re about to lower the boom on me.
James B. Jordan’s critique of theonomy is good (& he’s a theonomist).
Love Dr Joe Boot! Fellow Canadian here 🇨🇦
Trying to decide if I’ll keep reading the book in my hand or go pick up the Mission of God and start on that one while I’m waiting . . .
I’m reading the Mission of God right now!!
Such a good book. I’m only about half way done.
@@sarahd5341 I’m almost done with chapter 4. I’m NOT a fast reader so it’s going to be a while before I’m done. Lol
Illogical and impotent to think that men who love the LORD would have no impact on their society... Absolutely.
By definition, faith is neither logical nor illogical. It is non-logical. And there is a HUGE difference between "A is true." and "A is to be actualized (in the existent world)." I contend, even if theonomy is true, it should not be actualized. Further, I contend it is no longer possible to actualize theonomy. The culture that would allowed theonomy to occur has collapsed and has been destroyed (this is he meaning of 'post-modern'). And we are a better world without it.
Joe Boot have my vote God blessed brother boot
Joel, I appreciate this channel and always look forward to enlightening discussions.
I think the concern over theonomy lies in the idea of mere human beings exercising God's law on others.
We can surely agree that God's law is perfect, and that God is perfectly just, and He alone perfectly implements His law. This side of being glorified, we Christians are still flawed, and are more than capable of error and sin. These are the starting points from which we must view the concept of theonomy.
Currently, murder (with the exception of abortion, but that's improving), rape, and theft are illegal. This is right and good; these should be illegal. Once we bring abortion into its rightful place under the umbrella of murder, these laws are well on their way to being theonomy realized. Again, I think that is good.
What is next? If God's law is written on the hearts of the elect, what else needs to be added to the civil laws of the nation that wouldn't be best handled by church discipline? (I'm keeping the discussion focused on theonomy in the U.S.)
I'm asking because I don't know what should come next.
Certainly, the "woke stuff" in law and in court cases needs to be repealed and overturned. Anything outside of "Have you not read that at the beginning, God made them male and female, and for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife" needs to go. But what would the penalty be for violating this? Would getting caught with pornography land a man in jail? Or would it land him in a discussion with his elders?
As the nation becomes more Christian (I am leaning towards a postmillennial view), people will start doing less overtly sinful things, like getting drunk, taking the Lord's name in vain, and dishonoring their father and mother. Do we need to go through the process of altering our civil laws to come into alignment with God's law, or will the Holy Spirit simply continue the work of sanctification, regardless of the nation's laws?
The more the nation becomes like Christ, the less something like the Constitution will matter. Then Christ will appear and we'll be glorified, and the Constitution will be but a distant memory.
These are the exact questions that I grapple about
The thing I don’t get… is when everything around is collapsing… some Christians exclusively state that “thEonOMy iSn’T pRaCtIcAl.”
Yep. I really don’t get it.
Because a lot of "Christians" don't like the idea of God telling them what to do or how to live any more than the average atheist. It is as Paul taught in Rom. 8:7 where he says that the unconverted mind is inherently hostile against God, His laws, and His authority. They want all of the perks of claiming Christianity with none of the obligations.
Collapsing? I do not see "everything around is collapsing" at all. In fact, I contend we have had a much better world since the the old "Christendom 1.0" world collapsed and destroyed itself (just as Nietzsche predicted it would). This is the same Towne Crier I have been hearing since Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth. It was a con job then, it is a con job now.
@@RightResponseMinistries Collapsing? I do not see "everything around is collapsing" at all. In fact, I contend we have had a much better world since the the old "Christendom 1.0" world collapsed and destroyed itself (just as Nietzsche predicted it would). This is the same Towne Crier I have been hearing since Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth. It was a con job then, it is a con job now.
Yes!
Wonderful conversation.
What do we mean when we say “Jesus is Lord”, except that He sovereignly reigns and blesses us with His law? What do we mean when we pray “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” but that the will of God revealed by His law-Word is practiced and enforced.
The problem with evangelicals is they do not recognize the second and third use of the law. Their embrace of antinomianism is just supplanting the law of God with the law of man. They don’t believe that the law of God provides the greatest possible blessing for both the regenerate and unregenerate. They view the law as oppressive rather than as liberty, they libertinism over true liberty from sin.
God is both just and love. He covenants with us by law and grace, neither exists without the other.
You are forgetting, most theonomists are Calvinists. This means they believe the "elect" was chosen from the foundation of the world to be redeemed, and the rest will be condemned. Which necessarily means, whether we pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" matters not. His will WILL be done, regardless of what we pray, or teach (or any other Christian activity, or inactivity), the result is the same. The elect will be redeemed, the rest will be condemned. This renders ALL Christian activity (and inactivity) meaningless and valueless.
@manager 01 Your strawman representation is not only an error, but reflects a hubris, both in theology but specifically in humanity's relationship toward God. A worse characterization of the doctrines of grace and sovereignty is difficult to imagine.
I recommend to you Luther's Bondage of the Will as a good place to dispel your stated misunderstanding and grow in love and praise toward the sovereignty of Christ.
@@davebuehner4307 I read and studied Luther and Calvin long ago, Zwingli too. You call my presentation "strawman representation" .and an error. Please feel free to expose all my errors. I can justify all of my assertions from The Canons of Dordt and the Westminister Confession. We can dialog more on this and i hope we can.
Read the Commandments. If you love the Lord your God, would you violate them willingly? If you love your neighbor as yourself, would you ignore the Comandments? We are free from the curse of the Law, not from obeying them. I speak of the moral Laws, not the ceremonial or the Jewish civil laws of the time.
The two objections against theonomy that come to mind to me are:
1.) European history from circa 500-1800 AD. Romish church applied God's Law in many different ways to the people of Europe. Ideas like the divine right of kings was argued as a theonomic principal. They wouldn't have used that term but the cited source of authority was God's Word (God's Law).
2.) We can't get Christians to agree on application of God's Word on numerous issues. We have the recent curfuffle over the Cross-Politic episode where "American Baptist theology" was accused of being the source trans-genderism in the USA. You recently made a post about whether or not John Piper is still qualified to be an elder/pastor. I read the comments of that post and saw many different points of view, and yet it seems everyone neglected God's Law in Deu 24:16 which instructed Israel that every man is judged for their own sin. Fathers should not be punished because of their sons, and vice versa. That doesn't mean Piper isn't disqualified necessarily. I point out that in our discussion/argument over an important topic key scripture can be left out of the debate.
In the end, who is final arbiter of what is theonomos and how is it applied? If you say that each Christian has to reach his own conclusion than the whole argument is neutered. We're back where we started. Each person reading the Word and doing their best to apply it to their lives. If you say there is a person or persons who can tell us exactly how to interpret theonomic issues then you are only a slight gap away from papacy.
Your first point is addressed at length in Boot’s recent book, “Ruler of Kings.” He gets into a detailed discussion of the conflation between the ekklesia (church) and the basileia (kingdom) by the medieval church and the after the Enlightenment (“Endarkenment”) the rise of what is called caeseropapism (Caesar being Lord over all, including the church). Both are errors in ditches in opposing directions. The solution is a correct understanding and application of what is meant by “the kingdom of God.” This will be long, hard work, certainly not easy and will take a long time.
I can see how your very valid deductive conclusions and questions will be avoided.
@@apxsports5904
Yeah, unfortunately, but I've gotten used to it. I think there are some serious concerns that go unaddressed in the whole post-mil/theonomic camp. Normally my inquiries get waved off or ignored. I would genuinely like to hear some questions addressed. However they feel quite confident in their "small but rapidly growing" position.
The bottom line of establishing a Christian government, man is too corrupt to do so, our nature would have to be changed, and that will only be when Christ returns to establish His kingdom. Sounds good in theory, but in practice unobtainable in reality.
Yes, we definitely see God’s law as harmful. I have struggled with figuring this out in my own walk. I love parts of God’s law but not other parts because in my foolishness and probably idolatrous covetousness, I do not understand why some of God’s laws are good, at least not fully. Not even in my day to day life. Chores, accepting correction, not being on my phone constantly, living my family and enemy, etc.
It is a presumptive error to say every word God speaks is law.
I have heard others (all cessationists) say similar things and it is simply not true.
It is indiciative of someone who simply does not know God, or the New Covenant.
Knowing God is not the same as believing in God.
Question: how do you handle the objection that Jesus did not always follow the Old Testament case law? Prime example is John 8 with the woman caught in adultery; Jesus did not advocate for stoning the woman as the law demanded. I think theonomy is a Biblically sound position, but this has been used against me as a proof text that Jesus' coming changed the role or application of the OT law, and I'm not sure how to answer it.
@mandelbrot set
He was actually using the law. The fight laugh feast magazine had an article in it that explained it in a way I hadn't thought about it before.
Jesus asked the woman after the accusers left, where are you're accusers? Nobody was left for fear of suffering the consequences of making a false testimony (punishment of crime they were accusing off, stoning in this case)
Conviction of their own sin would not deter the accusers as the teachers of the law and pharisees would think themselves to be sinless before the law.
So Jesus was applying the the old testament law.
Another thing to consider would be that this particular text may be considered a textual variant, or, a later addition to the Gospel account not found in the original autograph, as I recall.
That block of verses is first found in a 5th century manuscript (Codex D) known for frequent singular readings, at best it was the Amplified Bible of its day. Ircc, it's found there in Luke, not John. I know several manuscripts later than Codex D also have it in Luke and some also have it in a different part John. This is a story people liked and were trying to find a place for it, but neither John nor Luke wrote it
@@jentpostma337 This is interesting. I have to think through this some more. Thanks for the reference Jent. I'll try to find it.
@@wishuhadmyname what's the implication and significance of this? do you think Jesus would have actually advocated for stoning? genuinely asking
Lord willing I will attend the conference...
This is perhaps a new term to me. Or. -. Pray John Macarthur Recovers Quickly - so I can let you Know what I think - thanks for posting. I have reading to get to
Bahnsen and North are in complete agreement now.
If theonomy is God's law, it sounds like a theonomist is someone who follows God's law?
Actually in this context, I think the "theonomist" is the one not just FOLLOWING God's law, but also ENFORCING God's law.
The lost and dying world lives as if there is a God (THE God), when it comes to His providence and beneficence... so why not theonomy? "Am I a theonomist?" "Oh, no! I hate God's law!" (lol)
I associate theonomy with the abuses that took place at Geneva.
Sabastian Castellio, one of Calvin’s accomplices, urged Calvin to repent of his intolerance, and made the shocking remark, “If Christ himself came to Geneva, he would be crucified. For Geneva is not a place of Christian liberty. It is ruled by a new pope [John Calvin], but one who burns men alive while the pope at Rome strangles them first.”
Castellio also said, “Can we imagine Christ ordering a man to be burned alive for advocating adult baptism? The Mosaic laws calling for the death of a heretic were superceded by the law of Christ, which is one of mercy not of despotism and terror.”
America has murdered a million babies a year for the past half century. Geneva would be a massive improvement. Of course Geneva wasn’t perfect, but secular humanism isn’t the solution. It’s not whether, but which. Every nation is theonomic. Every nation enforces the laws of their deity. The only question is this: Which god?
@@RightResponseMinistries BOOM.
John A how do you interpret Psalm 24:1? What is the meaning of the words there? Of course this is the theme of the whole counsel of God! See also Daniel 4 and many other places.
If you have to go back 450 years to find a poor application of a Biblical premise or 3, then I think it's safe to say we've learned the lesson
@@RG-lc1qx
I’m guessing you would have stoned the woman caught in adultery?
How were there former homosexuals, fornicators, etc at the church in Corinth? Should not they have been stoned too?
I would like to know what a society would look like under theonomy.
For example: how would we deal with Muslims, or athiests, or homosexuality, not as the church, but from a governmental perspective 🤔
Certainly, we would be like the Huguenots and defend ourselves from offensive violent attacks. Or like the English Civil Wars under Cromwell, defend the truth of God's authority as Theocratic ruler when men' tyrannically usurp His place then oppress freedom to worship! There are many more examples such as Hebrews 11:32-40 whereby those who are said to be justified by faith killed or were killed for the kingdom while believing the promise of the One to come!
To love your neighbor as yourself may mean to defend them with your life as Jesus taught. John 15:13 and many other places. When Muslims are the aggressors we can and must defend against their aggression. This we are called to do, to execute justice and defend the defenseless. First, by civil gov't, but when they fail to execute their instituted purpose they negate their biblical authority.
America has sodomy laws until 2003. So some of what is "theonomy" isn't entirely new.
Those you publicly entice people into serving a false god would be executed.
The real question is: would it return to the old sacral society that the founders of our nation ran from to escape?
We already know. The 30 years war, the 80 years war, the 100 years war, the German Peasants War. Millions upon millions of Christians killing each other over infant baptism, where to put the pulpit in the sanctuary, and the color of the pews. That is what a Christian theonomist society looks like.
Pastor, good discussion. I do side with Paul, however, who was given by our Lord to the new mystery church. He says that by keeping the law will no flesh be justified. We all are saved through Christ alone. The church of Jews at Jeruselm agree and did lay nothing on the mystery church. My question remains, to whom was Jesus originally sent, and to whom was the 4 gospels and one half of Acts written? All know the answer.
Theonomy, like other prosperity gospels (which are no gospels at all), is Christian mythology for the restless
Jesus said if you love me you will obey me. We obey Jesus. The Law came through Moses, Grace and Truth through Jesus Christ. We obey what Jesus tells us to do. Jesus tells us to make disciples who are in all nations, not to disciple nations. The Law of Moses, is a unit and must be obeyed perfectly. Acts 15 and Galatians explains that only Jesus obeyed the Law of Moses perfectly and gives those who believe in Him, his perfect righteousness. If you break 1 of the Laws you are guilty of breaking them all. You can try to keep the Law of Moses or you can trust the one who kept the Law in your place for reconciliation to God through Jesus for eternal life
I regret to inform you that " μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη" (Matthew 28.19) does not mean "make disciples who are in all nations" but rather, "disciple [instruct] the nations".
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
@@Terror1Void Blessed 2023! A parallel passage in the Last Chapter of Luke to the Great Commission Chapter Matthew 28 makes clear that we are to make disciples believers of the Lord Jesus Christ in the Nations. That Repentance and remission of sin should be preached in His Name (Jesus) to all nations beginning at Jerusalem. The Rest of the New Testament also supports the view that the Gospel is proclaimed to people, not nations. God Bless
It's not the "law of God." It's the law of people posing as God.
Commenting before watching (and I will watch), but probably my biggest concern is at the edges--where are the limits, and what specifically does it look like in the reasonably-near term (say, within the next few decades). Most Christians, I hope, would agree that murder and theft should be illegal. But few, I think, would agree with execution as the penalty for taking God's name in vain, and I'd add that that would be stretching the "general equity" of the civil law way beyond anything the drafters of the 1689 (i.e., the Westminster Assembly) would have intended. IMO, at least, that's the biggest issue.
I'd point you to Rushdoony's institutes of Biblical Law and Gary North's Victims Rights if you want to get into the specifics of application. These questions have been dealt with before in depth.
@@jwtrain That's good to know (and hardly surprising), and I'm sure those would be worthwhile resources. But as noted in the opening minutes of this video, there seems to be a pretty broad range of opinions on these questions, even among those who would call themselves theonomists. Reading Rushdoony won't tell me where Joel (or AD, or Doug, or...) would draw the line.
@@danbrown586 that's a very good observation and I will expound on it a bit more. What you need to be concerned with more than what others think on a biblical subject is what the results are of your own study. Study to show yourself approved a workman unto God.
I have found, over many years, that there is no substitute for personal convictions that come out of personal study. Why? Because when I have confidence that the Word of God has spoken to me it is only then that I am willing to die to defend what I believe. Whatever other men believe about Scripture, I am NOT willing to die for that!
For example, when I was a younger believer, I asked leadership what is my role and responsibility, if at all, concerning taking up arms against tyrannical oppressive gov't. I never got a lucid reply. The question was nearly always side stepped or the subject changed or masked in some way. Why? Because they themselves did not have an answer or conviction since they failed to study the subject themselves. This is the case with many, so called Shepherds. They do not know what the bible teaches on the subject so they side step or deflect from answering. Worse yet is they kowtow to what the culture teaches on any given subject since they do not study for themselves! Indeed a very sad state of affairs.
@@danbrown586 Let's get into the text instead of proclaiming it to be too difficult to find answers. That's the basic idea.
@@jwtrain "Let's get into the text" does nothing to answer, "what exactly does Joel mean when he endorses theonomy?" And that, in short, was the question I posed--which I thought was pretty clear, but your responses (and R G's) suggest this was not the case.
The question posed, and proposed to be answered, by this video is why many fiercely oppose theonomy. And, of course, a great deal of the reason is the overall spirit of antinomialism in the evangelical church today--but another large part is the issue I raised: given the wide range of positions advanced as "theonomy", what, exactly, is the position being advanced by this person? "Read Rushdoony" doesn't answer that question (unless "this person" is Rushdoony, or perhaps if "this person" has explicitly stated that he takes Rushdoony's position). "Read scripture" doesn't answer that question. The latter is certainly good advice, and the former likely is as well, but neither answers (or even begins to answer) the question I posed.
We are under the law of Christ not under 1/3 of the law of Moses
Did a different god give the law to Moses?
@@oracleoftroy certainly not, God is one being, Yet 3 CO equal CO eternal persons.
nah God says his all laws is FOREVER through david,forever is forever,whoever told us its abolished is a false teacher and false prophet,Christ says he didnt come TO destroy the law,why would Christ do something he claim he didnt come TO?
@@ManlyServant In Old Testament Hebrew the word forever is Olam... Which can be translated forever or long period of time.... We understand and know through the book of Hebrews and Galatians That the old covenant law was abrogated and fulfilled by Christ Jesus.
You are correct and saying he did not come to destroy the law But fulfill it... Many christians get confused at This point because they don't have a biblical understanding but rather they are taught a theological scheme of the law.
Deut 4:13 tells us that the old covenant is the 10 commandments. That covenant found its fulfillment in what Christ Jesus Christ did and in the destruction of the temple.
@@cscutler nah FOREVER means FOREVER,whenever this word forever is used it means FOREVER
I'd love to come but your government won't let me enter the country. I guess I could go via Mexico!
You teachers seem to be setting up a straw man. You present those who disagree with Nationalism as operating as loose cannon Christians who make up their own ideas of what it means to love God with all your heart, soul, and mind and what it means to love your neighbor as yourself. The gospels and all the letters to the churches don't leave the reader thereof with any questions regarding these commands. You seem to be mixing up law and grace. The law of God is our tutor. Grace is how we live.
Missed this episode... How the gospel is an offense.
Bloody Tenent Washed and Made White In the Blood of the Lamb by John Cotton (Author)
There was one and only one theocracy and we all know where it ended up. 722 BC 586 BC 70 AD anyone? If theonomy is meant to be a standard for all nations as nation states then then theonomy is a false faith and false gospel! Post millenialism is a false doctrine but of itself does not constitute a false faith or false gospel. Although it appeals to many who desire to live a full life in this cursed world which God has only decreed to redeem a small part relatively speaking. Matthew 7:13,14,21-23
Luke 13:22-30. Salvation of the Elect, the FEW described in Matthew who make it throufgh the straight and narroe gate, is the great work of the Triune God. Revelation 5:10. Out of etc... But post millenials continue to dream to the contrary. May the Spirit give them eyes to see and ears to hear what the scriptures plainly teach about grace and its connection to truthful eschatology.
That is my prayer for my Post Mill Brothers!
You need to fix your blatant ignorance.
the bait and switch gospel...its a doozy
Detail?