It depends on what you mean by Theonomy. Generally, that means God’s law. But what do you mean by God’s law? If you mean that aspects of the Mosaic Law are applicable to civil authorities in the nations, then that is patently unbiblical.

@@CaldwellApologetics You said: *"It depends on what you mean by Theonomy."* VERY true! This term has been redefined by many... The Mosaic Laws are not enforced upon the church in the New Covenant, so I cannot see how some can argue for its enforcement by the state. As I understand Theonomy, it is simply the notion that all human laws are in submission to the word of God. Civil government has a responsibility to uphold and enforce God's law in the civil sphere, while the Church has a responsibility to uphold and teach God's law in the spiritual sphere.

@@lawrencestanley8989 How does anyone submit to God’s law without regeneration? The blessing of the new covenant addresses that issue. Another critical point is no one going to submit God’s law unless they are born from above. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. (Romans 8:7-9 ESVi) Also the verses you listed in your initial comment has a context. For example, Acts 5:29 is talking Peter and the apostles. Christians are obligated to obey is the point of that verse specifically. Psalm 2 is an eschatological chapter talking about the future reign of Christ as the Davidic king on earth. His reign will challenge and surmount any nation that opposes God. Romans 13’s reference to “servant of God” is not necessarily talking about a follower of God since even the historical context of the epistle considers that people like Nero were in power. This passage speaks more about God’s providence in having civil authorities and less about the character of those authorities (1 Peter 2:18)

@@CaldwellApologetics You said: *"How does anyone submit to God’s law without regeneration?"* Well, Psalm 33:12 assumes it can be done. And, honestly, any nation who has (just as an example) a law stating that it is illegal to murder is already submitting to God's law in that aspect, so obviously it can be done. You said: *"Another critical point is no one going to submit God’s law unless they are born from above."* So only Christians obey the law where it is illegal to murder? Only Christians don't steal? We already understand from our current experience that even atheists can submit to God's law. Theonomy isn't about forced conversions, or anything like that; all that a Theonomic system would do is to ensure that there would be no ungodly laws in the civil sphere.

There is no biblical mandate to contact someone first with regard to their PUBLIC teaching. And they are false teachers.

@@akadwriter I understand that, public statements are open to public criticism, and he’s not obligated to do so. BUT if you are misrepresenting what they actually are saying, then that’s slander, and if someone claims to “love” another brother in Christ, then they should absolutely do try to reach out. One way to cause division, and disunity is continue to do what Rick is doing. It’s wrong. Give some examples of how they are false teachers?

@@kevindietrich3759 Watch the video. Their focus is NOT the gospel. And they actively promote Doug Wilson.

@@akadwriter I watched the whole video. Saying they actively promote Doug Wilson, means nothing, he has a lot of beliefs on a lot of topics. You’ll have to be more specific, because it sounds like your calling him a false teacher as well. Since you main focus is the Gospel, which I would agree, it should be, would you agree that if you boil it all the way down, would it be “to love God, love neighbor and obey Christ”? Now, there is way more too it than that, I understand, however for the sake of this conversation, I’m going to use that. Because from loving God, loving neighbor and obeying Him, how would you apply that if you were a legislator? Or would you throw your beliefs out the window and use some arbitrary, or secular standard to determine if ab0rti0n should be abolished? God’s law or man’s law? You must choose, one would actually establish justice as God demands, and the other would not, and you would be in sin. So this is way bigger than just “preaching the gospel” this is applying the gospel in our particular context. And this is what the Christian nationalist are talking about, in a sense.

@@kevindietrich3759 Hello there. I am not obligated to invite anyone on my channel. That is not how this works. How have I misrepresented these men? I am literally playing their videos, audio clips without editing, and reading entire sections on their books. All these public statements on doctrine and “Christian” methodology are fair game. I am more concerned for young men like yourself who are being influenced by them. Questions: Why is “Lord of the Rings” being referenced as a justification for “supernatural” activity by pastors? Why are these pastors so enamored with Roman Catholic traditions and myths than the word of God? Why is a “pastor of counseling” constantly engaged in incendiary rhetoric on X? Why is the gospel rarely mentioned by all these pastors on social media?

Learned a lot from the guys at Apologia Studios. There are some issues with some their associations. But I am really glad that Jeff Durbin dropped out of the conference.

Thank you 😊 sister. God bless

17:30, another Yes, and amen! I'm watching my fellow Reformed brothers suddenly discard monergism, and say *we* have to make utopia on earth a reality, that God needs us to act, or it won't happen. And I'm wondering when we gave up believing that it is God that works in us, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

While it's fine to enjoy The Lord of the Rings (or other good literature), it's not okay to get your theology from it.

Great 😊 observations. Some of the biggest CN supporters will say that they do not deny the necessity of the gospel yet their emphasis on social transformation via legal/political means appears to largely diminish if not significantly undermine any call for evangelism. We have numerous examples in history that clearly demonstrates that their approach never ends well.

Can it not be both? We do this in our own homes. You establish the law so to speak with your children so that they know right from wrong. The law is a teacher. Does that law save them....certainly not, but that doesn't mean then that we throw it out. It is a tool, and so it should be with the nation. Do you agree with the abolitionist movement? It is overtly political, with its end goal being to establish justice for the unborn legally, on a state, and hopefully federal level. Not one abolitionist thinks that a just law that functionally outlaws abortion is going to save a person's soul. Only the gospel does that. But it will deter millions from murdering their children. This is a good thing. If you are fine with this in regard to abortion, then you should be fine with it extending to other areas as well.

@@sevencrickets9258 to be honest I do think it can be both. But the conflation of working towards individual just laws and setting up a state based on biblical principles is wrong. I personally would love a biblical state. Something like Geneva or the puritan colonies but I recognise that looking for legal answers to spiritual problems will always fail. I think the earthly law can indeed be complementary to jesus kingdom on earth but never ever be primary to it. I feel that CN types have great desires but flawed implementation that will inevitably distract from Christ just as the catholic churches materialistic instincts hinder the gospel not promote it. We see this principle in trump worship very clearly but CN is just an extremely subtle form of this often I feel

I agree with your point that a legal answer to a spiritual problem will not solve it. How about a legal answer to a legal problem? I know there’s a broad spectrum in how CN advocates approach this, but imagine if there was a huge issue in your town with car accidents at a dangerous intersection. A proper solution would be to put in a stop sign/traffic light/rotary. I don’t think any Christians would oppose a believer going to the city council to propose that solution. Now let’s take it to a national level. If you see a moral, economic, and cultural decline in your state/nation, shouldn’t it be acceptable to work against that? Obviously this shouldn’t be done at the exclusion of the gospel, but the puritans, reformers, and American founders almost unanimously agreed that a state will break down regardless of its structure without piety.

@@tropicalpines4585 notice how you seemlessly move from an individual example (which I support btw) to an example of a Christian state. This is exactly the conflation I see all the time. I agree that individual laws can and should be fought for by Christians. What I disagree with is that we have the wisdom or mandate to go further and set up a government structure from scratch. Now if we followed the gospel and a majority of people wanted a Christian nation as happened in Geneva then we would have a democratic mandate to do such a thing. But they would arise out of us obeying the gospel mandate. It is not the desire or drive that I fault but the implementation that I think is wrong headed. Every single stable polity has been based on solid cultural grounds. You cannot win the culture war through legal means. But you can win the cultural war through spiritual means. Once that is done then you can establish this state on solid cultural \ biblical grounds to protect that win for future generations. Notice I am post mil and support the idea of a Christian nation but I know that this only comes from doing Gods will Gods way and I am far from convinced that a top down solution is required even though I support godly monarchy. Using the democratic process which demands that evil be represented in government to achieve Godly ends is problematic as I'm sure you can see in the current day. See I am urging caution because of structural issues in the CN thought process not because I am against a Christian based polity

Truth be told we can put the labels 🏷️ aside yet the substance of the enterprise is still unbiblical. There is no biblical mandate for the church in Scripture to pursue a socio-political agenda in order to advance the kingdom of God. We should never appeal to pragmatism or the world as the framework or strategy (“the world is doing X so we must do X”) for Christian methodology. What does not make any sense is how many professing Christians have been duped into putting down their bibles. We cannot rightly talk about worldview if we unhitch ourselves from the very grounds for a Christian worldview - the Scriptures

@@CaldwellApologetics This! Calling something "Christian" doesn't just make it so because we say it is.

@@CaldwellApologetics Do you agree or disagree with my statement above?

@@CaldwellApologetics This is a bit of a longer reply, but please bear with me. I am not necessarily advocating for the common expression of Christian Nationalism. However, do you as a citizen of your country have a right or a responsibility to engage in the socio-political realm? Now, if someone says that a professing Christian should have 0% involvement in anything to do with the civic realm, then that’s a completely different discussion. If you say that a professing Christian has the right to engage the government, should they approach government with a biblical approach or with an unbiblical approach? I don’t agree with everything that comes out of the typical CN advocates. But I will push back on the criticisms concerning “conflating” and “unbiblical precedent”. Was John the Baptist wrong for telling Herod that it was unlawful for him to take his brother’s wife? We commonly say things like “All of Christ for all of life” and “the Bible is relevant for every aspect of our lives”. Do you believe that these previous two statements are true? Or can we only be spiritual and God-honoring when we are praying, reading the Bible, preaching, and evangelizing? To be fair, I know that some people would actually answer these rhetorical questions differently than I would. I will just say that people who put Christianity in a man-made box, and verify it by a list of checks on a to-do list, and anathematize everything that isn’t on their own checklist - tend to be unbiblically legalistic about their faith. Typical Christian Nationalist advocates will base much of their reasoning on postmillenialism and a peculiar interpretation of Matthew 28:18-20. I would not necessarily argue for CN in that way. Instead, I think that any Christian that has submitted every part of their lives to Christ will end up leaning more CN by default. They may not have the same approach, and they may apply things differently, but it would be the same in principle. God instituted the family, church, and state as forms of government that are responsible to honor God. All of creation has a responsibility to submit to God. Personally, I don’t understand why any Christian would have any problem with someone like Jeff Durbin running his organization End Abortion Now, and going to city and state council meetings, and putting out legislation to combat moral evils that we would all agree are unbiblical. The only major critique that I have with CN advocates is the amount of time and energy they put into these issues - mainly because they are usually ordained ministers of the gospel. If a layperson wanted to do what they are doing, then praise God for it. I stopped watching Apologia Radio because they only put out CN content nowadays. James White has a proper approach, he says that the only way for the nations to be baptized is if they all receive the gospel. So while he may address these topics here and there, he is actually more concerned about apologetics than addressing political concerns. Concerning people like Joel Webbon, Stephen Wolfe, and Doug Wilson who have racist and sexist undertones in their rhetoric, that’s a different issue altogether. Taking Webbon for example, believing that Christians should engage the political realm for the glory of God and believing that chattel slavery was a moral good are not the same issue. Just because Webbon, Conn, and Wilson conflate perspectives like that with CN doesn’t mean that everyone who is trying to outlaw abortion on a biblical basis thinks that way.

@SowTheScripture. Thanks for your comments. You have said a lot. Let me address a few things. Firstly, I don’t paint all CN proponents with a broad brush. Though I fundamentally disagree with all forms of CN on biblical grounds, I do recognize that there is a spectrum. And I have said as much in previous videos. I primarily focus on the brand of CN espoused by Stephen Wolfe and Joel Webbon as it includes entailments that will lead to repression, the elimination of religious freedom, etc. There is an entire Anglo-Saxon superiority ethos that is prevalent in their program. These elements cannot be separated from their brand of CN. As you have also recognized a central issue is the lack of emphasis on gospel proclamation while there seems to be greater emphasis on procuring political “solutions” and political power. Lastly, I would not say that the conversion of people through proclamation of the gospel leads to CN. We should be active in public square leading souls to the gospel of repentance. While it is true that changed hearts leads to changed lives, there is no indication in Scripture that things will get better before Christ’s return.

Thanks for comment. However, there is no inconsistency in the Bible on this issue. When God ordains to use a group of people (e.g. Israel), it is not ever for their end or benefit alone. Yes, people throughout history have selectively read the Bible or twisted verses to their own detriment. However, the entire Bible as a whole, both Old and New Testaments, says otherwise. For example, the apostle Paul explains how God’s faithfulness to the patriarchs, the progenitors of the children of Israel, becomes the very grounds for redemptive hope for the Gentiles in quoting several Old Testament passages. So Christ and Paul are not outliers; they are in harmony with the entire storyline of the Bible. For I tell you that Christ became a servant 👉🏾to the circumcised👈🏾 to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, and in order that 👉🏾the Gentiles👈🏾 might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written, “Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles, and sing to your name.” And again it is said, “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with his people.” And again, “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and let all the peoples extol him.” And again Isaiah says, “The root of Jesse will come, even he who arises to rule the Gentiles; in him will the Gentiles hope.” (Romans 15:8-12 ESVi)

@@akadwriter I still think 🤔 this is a step in the right direction. Are there still issues that need to be addressed? Certainly. Let’s keep pressing forward.

@@CaldwellApologetics Not disagreeing. Just suspicious haha.

@@akadwriter I have met Jeff Durbin and found him to be extremely affable. I also admire his passion and the work he does for the unborn

@WillNelson73 That's all well and good. He needs to separate from that whole Moscow crowd. It is Durbin's associates (Cultish podcast host and LOOR producer) who defended Wilson’s use of vulgar language on fb. I have the screenshots. I don't trust a pastor who won't disconnect from evil.

Revelation 21 and 22 - the eternal state