THEONOMY
The word Theonomy is a
compound word made up of the two Greek words Theos (“God”) and Nomos
(“law”). It literally means “God’s
Law.” The term is used in theological
circles today to refer to the teaching that says we ought to attempt to
legislate all of the Mosaic Law into the governmental laws of our land. This normally does not include the
ceremonial laws, but does include all of the civil laws that were given to
Israel.
Much of modern Theonomic
thought seems to have come about as a reaction to certain trends within
American Evangelicalism such as the neglect of the Old Testament regarding
ethics and a lack of involvement in social issues. Some of the most outspoken Theonomists have been Rousas J.
Rushdoony (The Chalcedon Foundation), Gary North (Institute for Christian
Economics) and Greg Bahnsen (Southern California Centre for Christian Studies).
To be fair, Calvin taught
that each of the “case laws” of the Mosaic Law taught some abiding principle
which could have an appropriate application under the New Covenant. But the Theonomic view of the Old Testament
Laws is much more forceful than this.
The commandment, “Thou
shalt have no other gods before me,” means also “Thou shalt have no other
powers before me,” independent of me or having priority over me. The
commandment can also read, “Thou shalt have no other law before me.” (R.J. Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law,
Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973, p. 61).
Statements like this could be construed to mean that Christians ought
not to obey the laws of the nations in which they live.
When Paul quoted Old
Testament laws and applied them to situations within the church, he often did
so by appealing to the principle behind the law rather than as a legal
enforcement. An example of this is seen
in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 where Paul deals with the situation of a man who is sleeping
with his father’s wife. In such an
instance, Leviticus 20:11 mandated that they should both be put to death. This punishment is not enforced by
Paul. Instead he calls for the
offenders to be put out of the church.
This punishment is at the same time more severe than in the Old
Testament (handed over to Satan) and yet it is also more gracious than
that which is found in the Old Testament as it makes way for future restoration
(in order that his spirit may be saved). It may therefore be concluded that the proper application of the
Old Testament principle is New Testament Excommunication.
The following chart may help
to portray the differences in thought regarding the proper use and
understanding of the Law.
|
Dispensationalism |
Covenant Theology |
Theonomy |
|
The Mosaic Law has no
bearing upon the world today. |
The Principles of the Mosaic
Law have application to the church. |
The Law of Moses is to be
applied to nations today as the means in which they are to govern. |
|
Stresses the “literal
interpretation” of the Bible. |
Accepts both literal as
well as figurative (spiritual) interpretations of Biblical principles. |
Stresses the literal
application of the Mosaic Law to modern governments. |
|
Premillannial in
eschatology. |
Usually Amillennial, but
sometimes Historical Premillennial |
Postmillennial in
eschatology. |
|
The Old Testament animal
sacrifices shall be restored in the future millennium as a memorial only. |
The Old Testament is
fulfilled in Christ, never to return, though the principles behind the Law
continue. |
The Old Testament Laws are
to be applied to governments today and forever. |
It is interesting to note from
the above chart that there are several areas in which Theonomy is more closely aligned
to Dispensationalism than with Covenant Theology.
The larger problem with most
Theonomists seems to be not so much their beliefs but rather the attitude in which
they have historically attempted to propagate those beliefs. They have regularly been divisive in their
polemics.
If you are a pastor, and you
don’t think your congregation wants to hear this kind of message, think about
forming a new congregation. It won’t be difficult. Just start preaching like a
prophet of God, and the losers will leave, or toss you out. Your income as a
pastor is going to wipe you out anyway; better seek alternative income now,
while you have the opportunity. If you
are a layman, and your pastor refuses to preach like a prophet, find a new
church, or do what you can to get a new pastor. Being surrounded by Christian
lemmings (grasshoppers, in Aesop’s fable) when the crisis hits will be
unpleasant. You will need friends who are better prepared than lemmings in that
dark day. (Gary North, Backward Christian Soldiers? An Action Manual For
Christian Reconstruction; Tyler, Texas; Institute for Christian Economics,
1984, p. 14).
The militance with which the
Theonomist holds to his position is reflected in the following statement of
Rushdoony.
All who are content with a
humanistic law system and do not strive to replace it with Biblical law are
guilty of idolatry. They have forsaken the covenant of their God, and they are
asking us to serve other gods. They are thus idolaters, and are, in our
generation, when our world is idolatrous and our states also, to be objects of
missionary activity. They must be called out of their idolatry into the service
of the living God. (R. J. Rushdoony, Law and Society: Volume II of the
Institutes of Biblical Law; Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 1982, pp.
468).
That is quite different from
the attitude of Paul toward the human legal systems of his day when he told his
readers in Rome: Let every person be
in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except
from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore he who
resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed
will receive condemnation upon themselves. (Romans 13:1‑2).
In 1 Timothy 1:8 Paul says
that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully. The Theonomist takes this verse as giving free reign to his view
of establishing the Law as that which ought to be imposed upon nations and governments
today. In doing so, they have turned
aside to fruitless discussion, 7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they
do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they
make confident assertions (1 Timothy
1:6-7). The point is clear. Just because one wishes to be a teacher of
the Law is no guarantee that such assertions are in keeping with healthy
teaching.
Jesus is the best argument
against theonomy. He did not do
ANYTHING or say ANYTHING to change the political leaders of the world of His
day. He was in the presence of Pilate, the governor and representative of
Caesar, and did not say a single thing to him about this law or that practice.
He testified to Who He was! He came to seek and save the lost, not transform
governments.
