RE: Agreeable to the Natural Law W.H. Chellis Ok… now to finish that but. Here are the three main reasons why a Reformed approach to natural law is superior to a theonomic ethic. First, natural law recognizes that its usage of biblical precedent is analogical rather than univocal. That is to say that no geo-political [...]
Archive for February, 2007
RE: Agreeable to the Natural LawW.H. ChellisOk….
Posted in Natural Law on February 9, 2007 | 11 Comments »
RE: Agreeable to the Natural LawW.H. ChellisI h…
Posted in Natural Law on February 6, 2007 | 10 Comments »
RE: Agreeable to the Natural Law W.H. Chellis I hear the sound of distant drums. They are coming from Peter and I am appreciative of his comments. I admit that, in reality, I am also a “chastened theonomist”. My earliest incarnation as a Reformed believer was as a frustrated law student who preferred Bahnsen and [...]
Welcome to Dr. R. Scott Clark W.H. Chellis While …
Posted in Corporate Confession on February 5, 2007 | Leave a Comment »
Welcome to Dr. R. Scott Clark W.H. Chellis While De Regno is sad to see some friends go, we are excited that some new friends will be joining the conversation. This morning we are proud to announce that Dr. R. Scott Clark, Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary California, has joined [...]
Fond Farewells W.H. Chellis Contributing to De Re…
Posted in Corporate Confession on February 5, 2007 | Leave a Comment »
Fond Farewells W.H. Chellis Contributing to De Regno is not a life sentence. Contributors are invited to come and go as they are able. We are thankful for all of the men who have been willing to be a part of the conversation. Therefore, this morning I would like to say thank you and farewell [...]
Agreeable to the Natural LawPeter J. LeithartAt…
Posted in Natural Law on February 3, 2007 | 3 Comments »
Agreeable to the Natural Law Peter J. Leithart At considerable risk of beating a monotonous drum, I offer a respond to Bill Chellis’s most recent post regarding theonomy. Bill Chellis’s call to biblical casuistry is welcome. I agree that working out the continuing application of Old Testament case laws is sometimes difficult, and I appreciate [...]
Rehabilitating Theonomy (II)W.H. ChellisA furt…
Posted in Natural Law on February 2, 2007 | 3 Comments »
Rehabilitating Theonomy (II) W.H. Chellis A further note about the use of Israel’s case law. Laws of particular equity carried a typological burden by (like the ceremonial laws) pointing to the spiritual realities of the Kingdom of God. Laws of general equity represented ethical applications of the moral law to the Israelite Theocracy as an [...]
Nature and Grace RedivivusW.H. ChellisDr. R. Sc…
Posted in Corporate Confession, Natural Law, Nature and Grace on February 1, 2007 | 9 Comments »
Nature and Grace Redivivus W.H. Chellis Dr. R. Scott Clark from the Heidelblog commented on re: Rehabilitating Theonomy: This is an interesting and significant discussion for which we’re all grateful. At the end of your post you say, however, that grace both restores and “perfects” nature. Did you mean to say the latter? Didn’t the [...]
re: Rehabilitating TheonomyW.H. ChellisPeter Le…
Posted in Natural Law on February 1, 2007 | 5 Comments »
re: Rehabilitating Theonomy W.H. Chellis Peter Leithart’s post has raised some very helpful questions. Let me begin on an agnostic note. I do not know whether theonomists can be won over by the natural law approach of the Reformed scholastics. I do know that I meet a good deal more post-theonomists than theonomists lately. In [...]