This series known as the “Theonomy Files” will attempt to evaluate theonomy from an objective and non-hysterical viewpoint. The modern Reformed church is utterly incapable of addressing theonomy in any real meaningful sense of the word. Unfortunately, defenders of theonomy aren’t much better. Both sides feed off of each other’s anger. Reformed institutions were unable to attack theonomy in such a way that didn’t also call to account: 1) Rutherford and Co., 2) John Knox, and 3) the Scottish Covenanters. Theonomists weren’t able to do much more than simply chant, “By What Standard?”
I was a hard core theonomist for the better part of a decade. I’ve seen where the movement horribly derailed, and I think that is what most people have seen as well. Sadly, it’s also what most people point to first. In this series I want to call attention to points where theonomists actually got it right and to correct where they got it wrong.
The Lecture Hall of Tyrannus 
I look forward to this series. Being relatively new to the issue, I am not aware of all of the ins and outs of past developments. I know that this subject generates a lot of heat.
I’ll stay tuned!
Justin,
Rev Brian Schwertely has a great sermon dealing with this
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=123061760
Thanks!
Just wanted to say “amen!” and I’m also looking forward to reading more of your thoughts on theonomy. 🙂
Hello friend. This is Jacob. It is good to hear from you again.
Hey Jacob, You are a true Covenanter and I am blessed to be counted as a friend. 🙂
Thank you. I could not ask for kinder words.
Looking forward to this as well. Especially as E2K (and the Redemptive-Historical school) is dredging up a lot of arguments against “Theonomy” to try and buttress their arguments.
There is an unwillingness to actually recognize and deal with the fact that “theonomic principles” were part and parcel of Presbyterianism long before the 1960’s and the rise of Rushdoony and the CR school.
A good example of this can be found here: http://matthewtuininga.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/why-theonomy-gets-it-wrong-nick-batzig-on-the-typological-nature-of-israels-civil-laws/
The best his argument can do is to quote Paul’s quotation of the law in Gal. 3:13, but instead of saying that civil laws are a type, I think Paul is saying that the national Israel law-code itself is being fulfilled in Christ. If he Tuininga truly wants to say those laws are done away with, then he is prey to all of Gary North’s reductios.
Well “Amen!” to Pastor Glaser! Good to see your comment here! I’ll check out the link you posted, as well as Pastor Schwertley’s sermon Jacob directed Justin to. 🙂
[…] Theonomy Files, No. 1 This series known as the “Theonomy Files” will attempt to evaluate theonomy from an objective and non-hysterical viewpoint. The modern Reformed church is utterly incapable of addressing theonomy in any real meaningful sense of the word. Unfortunately, defenders of theonomy aren’t much better. Both sides feed off of each other’s anger. Reformed institutions were unable to attack theonomy in such a way that didn’t also call to account: 1) Rutherford and Co., 2) John Knox, and 3) the Scottish Covenanters. Theonomists weren’t able to do much more than simply chant, “By What Standard?” Read more… […]