As we seek to learn how the ten commandments are to be applied to civil government, is it likely that we will find that many of the policies theonomist promote for today’s governments may turn out to be proper applications of the ten commandments for modern civil governments even though theonomist are looking to the civil law directly?

Regards,
Tony

A “chastened post-theonomist” is someone who a) recognizes the hermeneutical complexities of applying the Old Testament law to modern societies, but b) still thinks that the church should make the effort to work out these applications.

James Jordan has done the best work in this vein, particularly in his *Law of the Covenant,* available online at freebooks.com. Though he was never a theonomist, Vern Poythress has a similar approach to the Law in his *Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses.*

With no technical knowledge of theonomy, may I suggest that the natural desire for justice, that is, giving due rightly, seems hard-wired? And that the revelation of the “dueness” of worshipping the True God and not bowing down to idols is glorious revealed explanatory Footnote? That is, Natural Law as topic sentence, revelation (especially the ethical) as fleshing out the paragraph with instruction as a “user’s manual” toward regaining the reopened Paradise.

Natural Law as something like low-decibel instinct, revelation constituting directions for the “culture” harmonious to the inner Law, living in harmony with and increasingly susceptible to grace. Nature and nurture in coooperation, to take a parallel from ordinary human development.

Of course, Natural Law is not particularly helpful in winnowing out the competing claims of revelation, thus is only a blunt tool for much of theological discourse. And the scope of the discussion here may be more focused than is assisted by these comments.

Good wishes on the new blog.

What is a ‘chastised post theonomist’? Where should I look to find out what ‘chastised post theonomists’ believe. I am a ‘late-comer’into this field, I have read a lot of Rushdoony and North, and not much else on the matter.

Regards,
Tony

If expanded (maybe even shifted) the definition of “theonomy,” would it not be easy to use this to describe Knox, Rutherford, and other Westminster Divines in the sense that they were quick to go to Scriptures to justify activities in the saeculum? I’m thinking especially of Knox’s and Rutherford’s biblical side references, as well as the “proof texts” for the WCF 23:3 (1646). They didn’t seem to perceive a need to argue their points from natural law. And at least in Knox’s Trumpet Blast, it doesn’t look like he was arguing intramurally.