A healthy plea to theonomists

Imagine a scenario.  You and the pastor disagree on one point.  What are your options?  Split the church and have a martyr-complex, obviously.  Attack him.

Or maybe not.

I am trying to let theonomists know that it’s okay to disagree with someone and let that disagreement be just that.  What does “acting like a theonomist” in the church actually mean?  No one has given a clear answer to that.   People say, “Accepting the Word of God.”  Yeah, that means nothing.   Quakers claim they do that.  I kept asking theonomists for clear, concrete details on what this actually looks like.  I haven’t gotten any.

As I’ve told theonomists,

Bahnsen was irenic. Bahnsen was a good churchman. Unlike another prominent Reconstructionist, Bahnsen didn’t sever himself from the church for 8 years and serve himself communion. That’s because Bahnsen knew that theonomy is theonomy *in* Christian ethics, not as. That means one can disagree on theonomy and the gospel, the Reformed, witness, and Confessionalism is not threatened. Bahnsen knew that.

Advertisements

6 comments on “A healthy plea to theonomists

  1. Terry says:

    You seem to be reacting to something I am not familiar with although I would classify myself as a Presbyterian Theonomist. I may be missing your point so please clarify if I am, but if I am understanding the question, why would the way a theonomist acts be any different than anyone else that disagreed with something in their church?

  2. Terry says:

    Who are these gentlemen?

    • Guys on Facebook. I know they really don’t represent theonomists. Most theonomic pastors I know are like every other pastor: they have to worry about pastoral concerns. When I brought this up they sneered at it.

      I know it isn’t unique to theonomists.

  3. Terry says:

    I know all kinds of “christians” who split churches for all kinds of dumb reasons. Back in the 80’s I knew of churches that split due to the color of carpet and the type of pew ordered for the sanctuary. I guess I am still wondering why you think this is something unique to theonomists? I am not against negative views about theonomy, it makes me work through why I beileve things.

  4. I listened to one of Dr. Bahnsen’s sermons a few weeks back, where he addressed Joe Morecraft’s church. The lecture was meant to be a general overview of where the “Reconstructionist” movement was, and how it was doing — not well, says Bahnsen.

    He breaks down into tears when speaking about how his wife left him, and how members of the Reconstructionist community treated him because of it. Then he offers a powerful plea for Christlikeness in our personal dealings. He says knowledge of the law without the wisdom to handle it is like putting scissors in the hands of a child.

    This mean-spirited cockiness infects even 3rd and 4th generation reconstructionists, although, the movement has lost so much steam, only a few are left carrying on the unfortunate tradition.

    As a theonomist, I whole-heartedly agree with the doctrines of Reconstructionism, even though, like Dr. Bahnsen, I have (more often than not) been on the receiving end of the camp’s nastiness. They know the talking point: that we are not teaching salvation via works. Unfortunately, they forget it in practice.

Comments are closed.