Appendix B
Evaluating Theonomy

American and European cultures are losing their roots in the Bible. As a result, the culture is disintegrating and terrible sins and sufferings crop up all around us. What can be done to halt this decline? The movement called "Christian reconstruction" finds the answer in the return to the Bible as our standard for all of life. Christian reconstruction is currently making a wide impact in evangelical circles and even beyond into the secular world. How shall we evaluate it?

One central aspect of Christian reconstruction is the conviction that Old Testament law in its details is still binding today. This conviction is usually called "theonomy," from the Greek words theos ("God") and nomos ("law"), because God's law is the standard for human conduct. However, in the last few years some of the advocates of Christian reconstruction have become uncomfortable with the theonomic thesis in its original form.¹ I shall concentrate on theonomy, rather than Christian reconstruction as a whole, because theonomic ideas are the most closely related to the issues raised in this book.

Major Concerns of Theonomists

What concerns motivate theonomists? In what respects does theonomy conform to biblical teaching and where if at all does it go astray? To begin with, we must recognize that theonomists do not agree with one another at every point. Disagreements and quarrels have arisen among the representatives. Moreover, theonomists are people, not just machinery in a movement. They share all that frustrating and challenging variety of sins and righteousness, weaknesses and strengths that characterize the body of Christ. But a good many deep, biblically rooted concerns make up the common core of theonomy and lead to the enthusiasm of its supporters. The supporters themselves are for the most part well aware of their core principles. But outsiders have perhaps too often heard only some passing fragment of the whole: that theonomists think we should return to the gold standard or that they think homosexuals should be executed. Whether or not we end up agreeing with all their conclusions in detail, we should appreciate that such conclusions make a good deal of sense within the total framework of principles adopted by theonomists. Viewed from inside, the conclusions are not absurd, nor it is possible to refute them by some simple appeal to a proof text or to common sense.

What then is at the heart of theonomist views? Greg L. Bahnsen provides the fullest articulation of the position in his book Theonomy in Christian Ethics and in revised form in By This Standard: The Authority of God's Law Today.² Bahnsen provides a convenient summary in the following ten theses:

1. Since the Fall, it has always been unlawful to use the law of God in hopes of establishing one's own personal merit and justification, in contrast or complement to salvation by way of promise and faith; commitment to obedience is but the lifestyle of faith, a token of gratitude for God's redeeming grace.

2. The word of the Lord is the sole, supreme, and unchallengeable standard for the actions and attitudes of all men in all areas of life; this word naturally includes God's moral directives (law).

3. Our obligation to keep the law of God cannot be judged by any extrascriptural standard, such as whether its specific requirements (when properly interpreted) are congenial to past traditions or modern feelings and practices.

4. We should presume that Old Testament standing laws continue to be morally binding in the New Testament, unless they are rescinded or modified by further revelation. [Bahnsen adds further explanation of "standing law" in a footnote.]

5. In regard to the Old Testament law, the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in glory, power, and finality (thus reinforcing former duties). The New Covenant also supercedes [sic] the Old Covenant shadows, thereby changing the application of sacrificial, purity, and "separation" principles, redefining the people of God, and altering the significance of the promised land.

6. God's revealed standing laws are a reflection of His immutable moral character and, as such, are absolute in the sense of being nonarbitrary, objective, universal, and established in advance of particular circumstances (thus applicable to general types of moral situations).

7. Christian involvement in politics calls for recognition of God's transcendent, absolute, revealed law as a standard by which to judge all social codes.

8. Civil magistrates in all ages and places are obligated to conduct their offices as ministers of God, avenging divine wrath against criminals and giving an account on the Final Day of their service before the King of kings, their Creator and Judge.

9. The general continuity which we presume with respect to the moral standards of the Old Testament applies just as legitimately to matters of socio-political ethics as it does to personal, family, or ecclesiastical ethics.

10. The civil precepts of the Old Testament (standing "judicial" laws) are a model of perfect social justice for all cultures, even in the punishment of criminals.³

At the heart of theonomy is the fundamental conviction that God's word is the only proper standard for evaluating all human action, including the actions of government officials and the laws made by civil legislators. This particular thesis deserves the support of all Christians, for a very good reason. Confessing the Lordship of God necessarily implies bowing to his will and realizing that he rather than any human being is the sovereign, all-wise judge of the world. The authority of civil government like all other human authority is wholly derivative. Human beings including officers of the state are answerable to God for their every action.

This emphasis on evaluating politics, economics, business, and social action by the Bible is sorely needed in our day, as theonomists observe. Listen to Greg Bahnsen's indictment:

It is not accidental that the glaring socio-political and criminal problems of the late twentieth century concern matters where our society has turned against the specific directives of God's law. Humanism has been taught in our schools and media; it has been practiced in economics, medicine, politics, and our courts. And the results have been a social disaster. Human life is treated as cheap. Sexual purity is an outdated concept. Truth and honesty have little place in the "real world" of business or politics. Repeat offenders and crimes which go completely unpunished belittle the criminal justice system. Prison reform is desperately needed. In short, humanism has proven its ineffectiveness in case after case. Where can we turn for socio-political wisdom which can effectively counter the degeneration and disintegration of our culture? The only acceptable answer will be to turn to God's directives for social justice, and those are (for the most part) found in the Old Testament commandments to Israel as a nation, a nation facing the same moral problems about life, sex, property, and truth which all nations must face, including our own.⁴

In short, theonomists are motivated by three deeply biblical concerns. The first is zeal for the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords (Rev. 17:14; 19:16). All of our lives must submit to him. Nothing less than thorough obedience to God in every area of life is the fitting response to his glory, perfection, and bountiful grace. Second, they are motivated by love for God's law. "Oh how I love thy law! It is my meditation all the day" (Ps. 119:97). The law reveals God in his purity and justice. It also provides precious direction for our path: "Thy word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path" (Ps. 119:105). Such sentiments cannot be dismissed as merely the inferior sentiments of the Old Testament era, for Paul too affirms the holiness and spirituality of the law (Rom. 7:12, 14). Third, theonomists have a deep concern for healing the hurts of modern society, including especially the elimination of tyrannical use of state power. Theonomists know that the ills of modern society run deep, as deep as the horrible depths of sin, and that the remedy must be equally deep and radical.

In addition, we should mention one element that has not yet come into view: postmillennialism. All of the leading representatives of theonomy are postmillennialists, that is, they believe that eventually the great bulk of humanity will come to give allegiance to Christ and a great triumph of righteousness and blessing on earth will ensue prior to the second coming of Christ. Greg Bahnsen assures us that postmillennialism is not logically essential to the fundamental theses of theonomy, and surely he is right.⁵ Bahnsen's ten theses given above nowhere require a particular view of the millennium. On the other hand, Rousas J. Rushdoony and Gary North are equally right in observing that postmillennialism and theonomy naturally go together.⁶ The postmillennialists desire most vigorously to uphold the principle that Jesus Christ is enthroned and reigning over all authorities and powers (Eph. 1:21-22). Moreover, they are motivated to reflect on the implications of the Bible for society because they think that these reflections can actually be applied in the future. As people come to acknowledge Jesus as Lord, his reign advances. When Christianity triumphs numerically, wide-scale transformations of society become not only realistic possibilities but required duties. Hence we may profitably begin now to work out what alterations bring society into conformity with biblical standards and values.

Before we venture to criticize theonomy, let us learn from some of the good emphases of theonomists. Do we have zeal for Christ's universal Lordship equal to theirs? Do we love the law of God with equal fervency? Do we show equal concern and work equally hard for healing the hurts of modern society? We must be ready to rethink our attitude toward the law. Many of us reject theonomy because we think that the Mosaic law is harsh. But the real problem is with us, not with the law (cf. Rom. 7:12, 14). We have swallowed so much of the modern humanistic thinking that our own judgments and emotional reactions are corrupted. We confuse mercy with vague good will, justice with tolerance, love with sentimentality. Like all sinners we have something in us that would like to be free from God's standards altogether. We desire to abolish God's standards rather than have the standards honored by substitutionary death of Christ in payment for their violation.

The Mosaic laws were given by God, as the Old Testament itself, Jesus, and the apostles affirm (Deut. 5:22-33; Matt. 5:17-20; Rom. 3:2; 2 Tim. 3:16-17). The Canaanite wars and the execution of rebels were not Israel's substandard ideas but obedience to God's commands. When we find ourselves disliking these things in the Old Testament, we should take opportunity to wonder not whether the Old Testament is wrong but what is wrong with us. We need to study and pray over our Bibles until God grants us an appreciation in depth of the holiness of God, his hatred of sin, and his unfathomable wisdom in the expression of his justice in the law.