What is Theonomy? 

Thanks! God bless as well.

That’s a law given in the OT.

Correct. Some of the ceremonial law was given to separate the Nation of Ancient Israel from copying well-known pagan religious ritual practices from the nations that surrounded them. The Nation of Israel in the OT was set apart as God's holy people. This is also why we get the laws on shell fish, mixed fabrics, etc that atheists try to nitpick us to death with, because they don't understand the purpose those laws held nor reasons that those laws are no longer binding on NT believers. . It's sort of like today when parent tells their kids not to hang out with "the wrong crowd." We humans are frequently influenced by the things and people with which we surround ourselves, so it's a good idea to avoid them. And as much as we might kid ourselves, "Oh, but I could be a positive influence on these people who do bad things!".... more often than not we end up being the ones who are influenced negatively.

@The Maine Surveyor Hello. I would recommend that you do a careful read of theonomists like Greg Bahnsen, Gary North and Joe Boot. They are quite precise in their language and very clear about what they believe about God's law.

@@PoliteLeader Thank you for the reading recommendations. One of my elders recommended North to me recently. I haven't read anything by him, but I've noticed several of his lectures are available here on RU-vid. I've heard Boot speak several times in his several appearances on Apologia Studio's channel. He denies the Covenant of Works and he denies the law-gospel distinction, which are key orthodox doctrines for me. If one collapses the law-gospel distinction, then I'm concerned one is preaching a different gospel.

Neither RC or John were and are respectively Theonomists.

Joel framed it in a very palatable way here. I do not doubt that was done on purpose. But one must be aware of the deeper issues. Theonomy rejects such passages as we find in Galatians and Hebrews: *Galatians 3:* 21 Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. 22 But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. *Hebrews 8:* 6 But as it is, Christ[b] has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. 8 For he finds fault with them when he says:[c] “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.” 13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. Webbon is teaming up with Joe Boot, James White, and Gary Demar for a conference on postmillennialism and theonomy next year. Listen to what Boot teaches about theonomy and see what you think of it then. Boot rejects the law-gospel distinction and he rejects the covenant of works. These are foundational biblical concepts to reformed orthodoxy, whether Baptist or Presbyterian. If orthodoxy is important to you, you may want to avoid Boot and his associates. (See Apologia Studios' video entitled "Christians Are Called to Win the World" with Jeff Durbin and Joe Boot.) Demar has said that "conversion is not enough." He says the notion of the Earth not being our home is a fallacy, in direct defiance of Scripture. (See the video entitled "The Biblical Vision of the Founders" on Canon Press's channel, wherein Demar says such things.)

Was it on Christmas?

@@PoliteLeader I sent you one on Dec. 15th and you responded Dec. 27th, then I replied on Dec. 29th.

Merry Christmas, Rodney!

Exactly.

Watch Doug Batchelor on is the sabbath sacred?

Norman, read what Paul says in Romans 14:5,6 . Clearly, the early Christians did not retain the Sabbath law.

Good questions.

What specifically in your much study led you to agree 100% with MacArthur?

@@matthewdyer2926 I suggest you do a study of the Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic covenants, and then watch the 6 part sermon series, " Why every Calvinist should be premillenial ". You might learn something. You might understand just how wrong postmillenil eschatology and Theonomy are when they create 2 different hermeneutics, one for eschatology and one for the rest of scripture. That's bad hermeneutics.

@@mariosangermano5709 I might also learn something from you, if you were willing and able to defend your own beliefs.

@@matthewdyer2926 I can defend them. Read the covenants I mentioned. I'm not going to do the homework for you.

@@matthewdyer2926 you can't defend your own beliefs because the bible doesn't teach it.

False

DANGER SDA heretic!

@@innovationhq8230 Honestly. Very dangerous indeed. SDA is a cult.

As John macarthur puts it" "The law is our joy; we are no longer condemned by it. Christ has satisfied its demand. But having it written in our hearts and our minds, we love it, we seek to obey it, to proclaim it. And for all our failures, we seek cleansing."

​@@sorrowinchrist3387, thanks for your response. The tenets, the "Ten Words" that compose the Ten Commandments, the Decalogue, are from the beginning. They are the essence of what we find central to the Second Day of creation (Genesis 1:6-8). The "firmament" (Genesis 1:6-8) that settles the "waters" by separating those below from those above has no association with the atmosphere. In Genesis 1:6-8, the "firmament" alludes to the Fifth Commandment (Exodus 20:12). This commandment highlights the family, essentially our father and mother, as the separator or "gate" between Heaven and Earth. On an ontological basis, we settle the family in this role as "dividing the waters" in that our father and mother serve as our bridge between our present and our past. By their labor, we settle the bottom five commandments, with the upper four, especially the Fourth Commandment (Exodus 20:8-11), which centers on the sabbath day. Why? It is because it is "especially so" with the sabbath day, in that when we call our ancestral fathers into remembrance on this day, we do so to unveil the LORD's face in the struggle of our fathers (Exodus 33:20). Given this, if what John MacArthur says bore any trace of truth, given how this church now seeks to seize every government mechanism to affect her "Christ" as living, we have a problem. It's a church that's dead and has yet to realize and appreciate the day of its death. Unlike what Paul teaches, who presides as this church's Lord, the law, the "Ten Words," that is, the Ten Commandments, are not expositing the knowledge of sin and death. They are to source of life for the living. They are truths that do not require the state's validation, support, or promotion to render verity in their claims. We will serve the LORD whether in darkness or light. At this hour, we struggle to find our way in the dark.

@@notofthischurch2822 Do you confer with Dr James white on this? That its not legaism your are binding yourself too but that the commandment are to address the issues of a Christian life. WHere its been attacked by woke culture? And does this distract from sharing the Gospel? DId the Apostle Paul taught this or it just was not around at his time? He was confronting the false gods?

@@notofthischurch2822 Please Pray for Perez he someone i meet online that is homosexual but hates the law but want Grace.

​@@sorrowinchrist3387, I have no idea about what Dr. James White teaches. I recognize the term "legalism" as an escapism that grants those who rely on the term "legalism" as a justification for why they do not either believe in or hold to the rite of circumcision or when they see it as advantageous, they reject one of the Ten Commandments. There's a difference between Divine immutable unmitigated law (the Ten Commandments) and customary law. Divine law does not change. Divine law is from the beginning. Customary law, laws that call us into remembrance as to how our fathers prevailed to walk in the LORD, is different for every people who are a people. How Americans come to embrace the knowledge and light that is the LORD is different from how Asians or Europeans arrive at the same end, even between countries and ethnicities within the same country. But Divine law does not change. Regarding "woke" culture, I believe you're talking about LGBTQI (if that's correct) community. If you are steady in the teachings of the Bible, what this community does should not frighten you in the least. You will serve the LORD, who is Jesus, whether you profess or deny, believe or doubt, know or stand completely ignorant. To "share" the Gospel, we must live what we preach. You cannot be an example of what you share or preach in the streets or your mega-church pulpit if your practice finds you behaving as or supporting liars, cheats, thieves, and murderers. What you preach and profess is faith; what you practice is a testament to the god you trust and believe in. When it comes to members of this church, these two measures are in conflict at this hour. As to Paul, though a great deal went into making the effects we witness as Paul, we commit the greater sin if we ignore the effects of this reprobate upon this church. Paul is who sets our face against the law. Throughout his ministry, Paul is at best ambivalent in moments and staunchly against not customary law but Divine law. No more do we witness the hallmark of his ministry than in Romans 3:19-20: "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:19-20 KJV). And such is the nascence and essence of the darkness that finds our bodies and souls cast into hell (Matthew 10:28). Though he does not have the fortune of hindsight, we have. Yet, Paul did have the teaching of Moses, the scribes, prophets, John the Baptist, and Jesus, as well as those who dwelt in Jesus's presence. And given he was a Benjaminite and a Pharisee, Paul had an overabundance to know the difference between Divine law and customary law. Paul bore the obligation to know the difference between what's from the beginning and what's susceptible to time.

You didn't listen very carefully. Was God's moral law abolished?

@@matthewdyer2926 I listened very carefully. The moral law cannot be abolished, the 10 commandments, bc it’s written on the heart. Paul clearly tells us Romans 2:14-16 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Theonomy says this is not enough, the gentiles need the civil law also, which is taught nowhere in scripture.

@@hearhisvoice4155 So moral law was not abolished, but civil law, which is grounded on God's moral law, was abolished? Am I understanding that correctly? If God's civil law is not the preferable law to govern any given culture, whose civil law would you prefer to live under instead? The civil law of the secularist? The civil law of Islam? Which civil law do you find more appealing than God's?

@@matthewdyer2926 exactly, Why do you need the civil law of Israel when the civil code is rooted in the 10 commandments?! “Have a parapet around your roof” is rooted in the 6th commandment. “Homosexuality is an abomination” is rooted in the 7th commandment. The scriptures never teach the civil laws for Israel are for all nations. Roman’s 13 deals with the subject matter entirely. All government is from God. Where exactly did Romans 13 say those governments need the help of 21st century theonomists to help correct the error of their ways? God raises up all government, even the one Jesus Christ was persecuted under…why submit to a wicked unjust government instead of trying to reform it? Why not correct the Roman’s instead of submitting to their clear injustices?! You’re completely missing the forest through the trees. The world’s problems are not the church’s problems. All that general equity he is talking about is only applied to the church in the New Testament, never to nations…ever. Theonomy is a distraction to the church and the gospel. Thenomists make theonomy a means to an end, the golden age in the post Mil frame work….when the means to any end is the gospel, not theonomy.

@@hearhisvoice4155 Interesting. Let's take a look at Romans 13. "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to *good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is *good*, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good.* But if you do *wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer* . " Mark the bolded terms. If God's law wasn't meant to be the standard for all nations, by whose standard ought we to measure what is _good conduct_ versus bad? How about the wrongdoer? Is it God's law, or, say, secular or Islamic law, which determines who is the wrongdoer and who is is the right-doer? In a culture governed by secular civil law, murdering your unborn child is _good_ . Is that the _good_ that Paul says should be rewarded? When Paul uses terms like good and bad, wrong, and evil, is he judging those based on God's law, or some other law? Have you thought much about Romans 13? Have you read any historic reformed views on it?

J Dean. Agree 100% with you.

Daniel's vision of the stone from heaven destroying all earthly kingdoms destroys every notion of dominionism.

Emmanuel, that’s a very good pint. Thx. More food for thought…

The old testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians. This is part of the problem with Theonomy and a postmillenil eschatology. It makes the heretical claim of replacement theology, the Idea that the church has replaced Israel. That God is finished with Israel and the church receives all the covenant promises that were for Israel. That shows a lack of understanding the Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants. The 10 commandments were given to show the Israelites how to please God. The sacrificial system was to show Israel how to worship and atone for sins. The ceremonial law was to distinguish Israel from other nations. None of the old testament laws are binding on Christians today. When Jesus dies on the cross He put an end to OT law. Romans 10:4, Galatians 3:23-25, Ephesians 2:15. We are under the law of Christ. Galatians 6:2. Matthew 22:37-39. If we obey those two commands, we will be fulfilling al that Christ requires of us. Matthew 22:40. The OT laws are relevant today, because most of the law has to do with loving God and loving your neighbors. But to say OT law applies to Christians today is wrong. The OT law is a unit. James 2:10. Either all of it applies or none of it applies. If Christ fulfilled some of it, fulfilled all of it. This is love for God , to obey His command's. The 10 commandments were essentially a summary of the entire old testament law. 9 of the 10 commandments are repeated in the NT. Except the command to observe the sabbath. The purpose of the old testament law is to convict people of our inability to keep the law and to point us to our need for Jesus. Romans 7:7-9, Galatians 3:24. The OT law was never intended y God to be the universal law for all people for all time. We are to love God And love our neighbors.

I have not heard those men's objections. I can only assume if you and they don't approve of GOD's law, you all prefer secular law. Hmmm. I see how the defeatist belief plays into this. Those who adhere to eschatologies other than postmillennialism seem to long for persecution and defeat, languishing in despair as long as there's breath. I agree with Pastor Webbon. The Puritan government was theonomic and HIGHLY superior to what we have now. Was it perfect? Was ancient Israel perfect? No, they were still in fleshly bodies, just as we are. No government will be absolutely perfect in this life. Of course, for theonomy to be the law of the land, we would have to experience a MASSIVE revival/reformation. But I am shocked that any Christian would object to the beautiful, biblical vision of Christian nationalism. The books of Torba and Wolfe demonstrate great courage, faith, and true LEADERSHIP, and I am deeply grateful for such godly men. I also thank the LORD for pastors and teachers like Joel Webbon.

Sunday is the Christian Sabbath. The civil magistrate should enforce it so it does not matter what antinomian Christians think.