G.I. Williamson on the Theonomy Conundrum
Doug Phillips writes:
OPC Pastor G.I. Williamson has provided some honest, inciteful questions, and some friendly advice concerning the theonomy ("law of God") conundrum. The following are exerpts from his article published in New Horizons in 1994:
You can read more of Pastor G.I. Williamson's insights on Doug's blog.
To these, I'd like to add the basic question that the Christian non-theonomist need answer honestly. If not theonomy, then what? The only answer is autonomy (law-of-man), for any mixture of the two places authority in man to decide who is to compromise on what; the result of which is, in the end, autonomy.
If final authority rests in finite, subjective man then it will rest in either individualistic man (which leads to total anarchy as each man is his own god) or in collective man in the form of the state (which leads to totalitarianism). Both forms of autonomy are a death to freedom and liberty and both deny the God of the Bible.
OPC Pastor G.I. Williamson has provided some honest, inciteful questions, and some friendly advice concerning the theonomy ("law of God") conundrum. The following are exerpts from his article published in New Horizons in 1994:
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2Tim. 3:16, NASB). By "all Scripture," Paul meant the Old Testament, including the whole Law of Moses. It follows, therefore, that Old Testament laws have permanent value. It was for this reason that Calvin, in his commentary on the five books of Moses, showed how every "case law" taught an abiding principle. He did this by arranging all of these laws under one or another of the Ten Commandments. He showed how each of them helps us understand the intent and meaning -- and proper application -- of the ten central commandments.
I remain convinced that the Reformer was essentially right. I don't think he was always right, or that he necessarily organized every case law under its proper heading (some could arguably be placed under a different commandment). But he has convinced me that there is an abiding principle in every Old Testament case law. In my opinion, the theonomists deserve credit here. They are trying to do in our generation what John Calvin did in his.
You can read more of Pastor G.I. Williamson's insights on Doug's blog.
To these, I'd like to add the basic question that the Christian non-theonomist need answer honestly. If not theonomy, then what? The only answer is autonomy (law-of-man), for any mixture of the two places authority in man to decide who is to compromise on what; the result of which is, in the end, autonomy.
If final authority rests in finite, subjective man then it will rest in either individualistic man (which leads to total anarchy as each man is his own god) or in collective man in the form of the state (which leads to totalitarianism). Both forms of autonomy are a death to freedom and liberty and both deny the God of the Bible.
"Those who denounce God's authority as the ground of coercion and tyranny always end up with a social order which, in the name of reason, institutes the most drastic tyranny and coercion men can force upon society." (R.J. Rushdoony, Salvation and Godly Rule, p. 47.)
