Railing against theonomy when you should be teaching Christology

It happened like this.   The class was average so far.  It wasn’t great but I figured I would still get the basics of Christology, or at least enough to pass an exam.   We got to the part about Christ’s birth, the narrative where Joseph “decided to put Mary away quietly, for he was an honorable man…”

After reading this text, the professor’s eyes had a crazed look to them.  He started shouting at us how Joseph wasn’t an evil theonomist, because theonomists, to be consistent, would have wanted to put Mary to death.

This inane rant proved that neither theonomists nor their crazed critics really understand how law works.  The professor might not have liked what he supposed the law to be, but he needs to realize that it comes from God–so take it up with Him.  Theonomists, on the other hand, do not really understand that while there is one law from God, our current situation is so varied that there will be myriads of application.  So no, theonomists do not want to put the Virgin Mary to death.

I thought it was over.   I realized that Friday was the last class day and following the Reformed outline for Christology, it ends with “Prophet, priest, andking.”  I told my roommate, “You know he is going to go bonkers again because we will be talking about the kingship of Christ.”  I was right.  He got off on another rant on how he found himself on a Theonomist Message board and Andrew Sandlin and others were talking about overthrowing the government, yada yada yada.  I leaned over to my roommate, “I thought Sandlin was radically pro-government?”

That’s when he started calling theonomists Marxists homosexuals.  I raised my hand, “Most theonomists are libertarians and believe in the free-market.  Isn’t it contradictory to call them Marxists?”  He looked at me with a blank stare.  I wondered if he knew even the basics of economics.  He said, “No, that can’t be right.  They are Marxists.”

I left RTS for good that day.   There were other things that went on as well.  I did learn Christology, though.  I learned it on my on.  I read the best books on Christology and discussed these issues.  Maybe I wasted four years dialoguing with Eastern Orthodoxy, but I learned more Christology from these guys than from RTS.   I mean, RTS spent only one week on Christology!!!  How is that even justifiable?  To be fair, Douglas Kelly’s lectures on Christology are available for free at Itunes.  I felt cheated that I had to pay to listen to how evil I was when I could have been listening to Doug Kelly.

I am really not angry.  RTS meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.


2 comments on “Railing against theonomy when you should be teaching Christology

  1. Nate says:

    Theonomists dont advocate death penalty for fornication, even under a bethrothal. And to say that the magistrate must render a certain biblical judgement is different from saying that you must bring an accusation to him, which I suspect is only sometimes true.

  2. […] The average Reformed student has no chance whatsoever of answering these challenges, if current seminary models are still valid.  There are two ways of dealing with these challenges:   1) simply pretend to be ignorant.  […]

Comments are closed.