Theonoyou Theonomy

1. Brief Overview of Theonomy

Definition of Theonomy

• In simple terms, “Theonomy” teaches that the civil (judicial) laws of the Old Testament remain abidingly valid and ought to be enforced by modern governments, except where clearly set aside or modified in the New Testament.

• Proponents of Theonomy, such as Greg Bahnsen and R.J. Rushdoony, believe that the moral principles embedded in Mosaic civil laws are universally binding—thus they should be the standard for contemporary jurisprudence.

Key Theonomic Assertions

1. Continuity of the Law: All Old Testament laws (moral and civil) retain their authority unless explicitly abrogated or fulfilled by the New Testament.

2. Normativity of Mosaic Civil Penalties: The penal sanctions commanded in the Mosaic Law (for sins such as adultery, Sabbath-breaking, blasphemy, etc.) retain their normative force as an ideal for state law.

3. Postmillennial Eschatology: A belief that the kingdom of God will gradually expand to influence the world’s political, social, and economic structures, often used to support the notion that societies should align with Old Testament laws as they come under Christ’s lordship.

4. Presuppositional Apologetics Link: Following Cornelius Van Til, Theonomy builds on a consistently “biblical worldview,” insisting that there is no neutrality in law or politics; every system is grounded in religious presuppositions.

2. Major Critiques of Modern Theonomy

A. Theonomy’s Hermeneutical Shortcomings

1. Overemphasis on the Old Covenant’s Civil Aspect

• Critics argue that Theonomists blur the distinction between the moral law (which remains universally binding) and the civil/ceremonial laws given to ancient Israel under theocratic conditions (Hebrews 8:6–13).

• The Westminster Confession of Faith (19.3–4) indicates that while the moral law abides, the civil and ceremonial laws served for a specific time and a specific people. Critics see Theonomy as failing to honor this distinction.

2. Ignoring the Fulfillment Principle in Christ

• The New Testament often views Old Testament laws through the lens of Christ’s redemptive work (Galatians 3:23–25; Romans 10:4).

• Many Reformed theologians point out that the civil laws of Israel served not only as moral imperatives but also as part of the typological system pointing to Christ. Once Christ came, these types were fulfilled (Colossians 2:16–17), and the church did not continue enforcing temple or national laws (Acts 15).

3. Proof-Texting Matthew 5:17–19

• Theonomists commonly cite Matthew 5:17–19 (“I did not come to abolish but to fulfill the law…until heaven and earth pass away…”) as proof for civil law continuity.

• Critics respond that “fulfillment” (πληρόω) refers to Christ’s fulfilling the law’s prophetic, ceremonial, and moral dimensions, rather than perpetuating a national legal code for all time.

B. Misreading the Old Testament Theocratic Context

1. The Law Given to a Covenantal Nation

• Israel was unique: a covenant people under God’s direct rulership. Civil laws were part of Yahweh’s covenant arrangement (Deuteronomy 4:5–8).

• Post-exilic Judaism and the early church no longer functioned as a sovereign theocracy. Critics claim Theonomy fails to adequately recognize the historically conditioned nature of Israel’s legal code.

2. Ignoring Redemptive-Historical Developments

• Passages such as Hebrews 7:11–12 and Hebrews 8:13 indicate a shift or change in the law’s application under the new covenant era.

• The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 did not impose the totality of the Mosaic judicial laws on Gentile believers, suggesting that those laws were not universally binding for all times and cultures.

C. Sociopolitical and Ethical Concerns

1. Risk of Legalism

• Some worry that strict adherence to Mosaic civil laws leads to an externalized faith, overshadowing the gospel of grace.

• Paul warns against returning to the “yoke of slavery” in Galatians 5:1–4, using strong language for imposing Mosaic ceremonial or civic regulations on Gentile believers.

2. Practical Enforcement of Mosaic Penalties

• The call to reintroduce punishments like execution for adultery, blasphemy, or Sabbath-breaking is troubling to many Christians who see no warrant in the New Testament for the church to function as a civil enforcement agency (John 8:1–11).

• Critics argue this leads to a distortion of the mission of the church (Matthew 28:19–20) and misconstrues the role of civil government in the New Testament (Romans 13:1–7).

3. Tension with Religious Liberty

• Theonomic proposals imply that civil government be governed by specifically Mosaic civil laws, which can raise concerns about how non-Christian citizens would be treated.

• The question arises whether Theonomy’s vision conflicts with the New Testament’s emphasis on voluntary faith and the call to win converts through the gospel rather than through external compulsion (2 Corinthians 10:4).

D. Theonomic Postmillennialism and Escatological Misuse

1. Kingdom Expansion and Political Power

• Many Theonomists hold to a robust postmillennial eschatology in which the kingdom of God gradually transforms earthly institutions. This can lead to an over-realized eschatology, critics argue, where the promises of the future age (the new heavens and new earth) are presumed to be fully realizable through the Mosaic code in the present.

2. Misapplication of Dominion Mandate

• Genesis 1:28 and other “dominion” texts are read as political injunctions. Critics counter that the “dominion mandate” does not necessitate a Mosaic form of government but rather wise stewardship of God’s creation in all spheres, under the New Covenant’s ethic of love and service.

3. Summary of Unbiblical Aspects According to Critics

1. Failure to Distinguish Old Covenant Typology: Modern Theonomy, critics say, neglects the redemptive-historical context in which Israel’s civil laws operated.

2. Neglect of Apostolic Precedent: The New Testament epistles and the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) do not attempt to impose Mosaic judicial code on Gentile believers.

3. Selective Literalism: Critics point out that Theonomy often picks certain civil laws (e.g., capital punishment for certain sins) while downplaying other theocratic and ceremonial regulations.

4. Confusion of Church and State Roles: The fusion of churchly functions (proclamation of the gospel, shepherding the flock) with the enforcement of penal laws can overshadow New Testament teachings on evangelism, discipleship, and love as the fulfillment of the law (Romans 13:8–10).

4. Recommended Sources

Below are key resources that either defend Theonomy or critique it, along with more general theological works discussing covenant theology, redemptive history, and the role of law in the Christian life.

Primary Theonomic Works

1. Greg L. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1977).

2. Greg L. Bahnsen, By This Standard: The Authority of God’s Law Today (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1985).

3. Greg L. Bahnsen, No Other Standard: Theonomy and Its Critics (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1991).

4. Rousas John Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (Nutley, NJ: Craig Press, 1973).

Critical Evaluations of Theonomy

1. Meredith G. Kline, “Comments on an Old-New Error,” in Westminster Theological Journal 41 (1978): 172–189.

2. John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2008), esp. sections critiquing Theonomy.

3. Michael Horton, Putting Amazing Back into Grace (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002), chapter(s) addressing law and gospel distinctions.

4. R. Scott Clark, Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2008), which critiques confessional departures, including Theonomy.

5. Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1996); see discussions on law and new covenant ethics.

Broader Works on Law and Gospel / Covenantal Theology

1. O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980).

2. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, repr. 1975).

3. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2, chapters 7–11 (on the uses and abrogation of Mosaic law).

4. Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 19 (“Of the Law of God”), in particular.

5. Thomas R. Schreiner, 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2010).

5. Conclusion

Modern Theonomy’s insistence that Old Testament civil codes remain binding for contemporary governments represents a significant departure from mainstream Reformed and evangelical interpretations of Scripture. Critics argue that Theonomy does not adequately account for the ways in which the new covenant fulfills and transforms Israel’s national and theocratic aspects, nor does it deal carefully enough with explicit New Testament teaching that reorients believers away from old covenant legal structures to Christ’s completed work and the global mission of the church.

While Theonomists rightly emphasize the abiding moral relevance of God’s law, the primary critiques focus on whether the civil-judicial regulations given to ancient Israel should be considered the universal norm for all civil governments. Most non-Theonomic Reformed theologians and evangelical scholars maintain that these regulations were specifically tied to Israel’s unique theocratic context and that, through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ—and the guidance of the Holy Spirit—the church is now governed by the law of Christ rather than the full corpus of the Mosaic code. To assert otherwise is to join the camp of the Judaizers.

The result is a view that affirms God’s moral absolutes and the continuity of moral principles but denies that the specific judicial penalties of the Mosaic Law are required in a post-resurrection era. This tension—how exactly the Old Testament law and the New Testament relate—remains a central theological debate within Reformed circles, and Theonomy continues to provoke vigorous discussion on biblical hermeneutics, covenant theology, and Christian political ethics.