Theonomy: A Debate
Closing Argument FOR
Theonomy
![]()
Jay Rogers
In
my defense of theonomy so far, I have alluded to the interviews with
over a dozen of the leaders of theonomy in the video I produced, God’s
Law and Society. I would greatly encourage readers wanting to know more
about theonomyto check out this video:
MAN’S
LAW OR GOD’S LAW
The
scriptures are clear that it is God and not man who ordains civil
government. Both the Old and the New Testament speak of civil offices as
being chosen of God. The civil ruler is God’s minister. The civil
ruler is commanded to punish evil (Romans
13:4). By what standard will the civil ruler punish evil? Will he use
“common sense” -- his own idea of what is right and wrong -- or will
he turn to God’s Word?
A
Republic is a society ruled by law rather than by men. A Christian
Republic is a society ruled specifically by the Law of God. I would much
rather be judged by God’s Law than by any man. I would much rather
bejudged by the merciful, loving Creator of heaven and earth than by any
man, however wise he may be.
Whenever
we have established man as the ultimate standard, we are ultimately
vulnerable to whoever is in power. That puts us in a very precarious
state. To negate God's law in favor of politics is absolutely
frightening. What we are
saying is that we would prefer man-made law over God’s Law.
In
the history of the world, societies that adhere to biblical law are
always the most free -- economically, socially, culturally, and
racially. If we want freedom, then we should affirm the freedom-giving
standards of Almighty God.
If
on the other hand, you like the standards of Stalinism, Leninism,
Nazism, or Maoism, then you should defer to the wisdom of the 51
percent, or the wisdom that flows out of the barrel of a gun.
THE
MYTH OF NEUTRALITY
The
greatest stumbling block to the antinomian is the myth of neutrality.
One of the most common objections tobringing the morality of the Bible
into politics is the idea that somehow there ought to be a public square
that is neither secular nor Christian, but “neutral.”
Jesus addressed the issue of neutrality when He told His
disciples in Matthew 12:30: “He who is not for Me is against me, and
he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad.”
The very idea that we, as followers of Christ can peacefully
coexist with a pagan world system is refuted by the Lord himself, “Do
not think that I have come to bring peace on earth, I did not come to
bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew
10:34).
Many
Christian leaders prop up the idea of “neutrality in the public
square.” This viewpoint expresses the essence of antinomianism: that
the righteousness of one’s conduct can be divorced from the moral Law
of God— or that one’s political views can be divorced from one’s
theology. In truth, the only option besides a biblically based society
ruled by the Law of God is a pagan society ruled by lawlessness. There
is no neutral ground.
The
Word of God is clear on one thing: the moral Law of God is the standard,
not natural law, not pluralism, not what man thinks is right in his own
eyes. The Bible provides the vast majority of laws needed to govern a
society. Those it does not directly define, it addresses in principle.
Although we may not always agree on interpretation, we should agree on
the Law of God as the standard. We must stand for the Lordship of Jesus
Christ in the totality of life.
Is
there any “middle way” or neutral ground between man’s law and
God’s Law? Every law is an attempt to legislate someone’s morality.
Civil law must have some standard: either it is God’s Law or it is
man’s law. There are no other options.
Opponents
of theonomy have offered an argument which can be summarized as follows:
“Jesus said, Just love God and love your neighbor.” Yet this misses
the point made by Jesus. Love is the summation of the Law, not its
replacement. We don’t know how to love our neighbor or love God unless
we look to God’s Word to define it.
A
COVENANTAL BATTLE
God
has a covenantal strategy for His people to advance His kingdom on earth
as it is in heaven. In any war, first you need a worthy cause. Then you
need to find worthy allies who willbe loyal in the fight for the long
term. Then you need a workable strategy which will result in success.
The
battle is a covenantal battle. It is a battle between two allegiances:
those who would build a Christian Republic under the Lordship of Jesus
Christ and the liberal humanists who believe man is sovereign. It’s a
battle between those who stand for the Law of God and those who do not.
It's a battle between Neo-Puritans and Neo-Pagans.
The
battle in the Church is also a covenantal battle. It’s a battle
between orthodox covenantal theology and heterodox dispensational
theology. It is a battle between those who hold to a victorious
ecclesiology, the Lordship ofJesus Christ over the totality of human
life — and those who believe we are predestined for defeat, that the
earth belongs to the devil and the Antichrist. It’s a battle between
the “Confessing Church,” those
who believe Jesus is Lord over all the earth in time and history — and
the antinomians and liberals, those who will not confess that Jesus is
Lord over all.
There
are many fronts in each battle. The enemies of Christ will fight us.
Others in the church will try to remain “neutral.” But we must
realize from the outset that there is no neutrality.
Only when we take this stance, that Christ not man is king, will
we win in time and history.
Theonomy
can be summarized as “rebuilding civilization upon the principles of
the Bible.” Our vision is to see Christians everywhere doing all they
can to take every sphere of society captive to the obedience of Christ
(2 Cor. 10:5).