Great show Tom . The comments are well taken how we as Christians can serve in the political arena to bring the much needed balance with conservative values and secular values in governing.
@gregb6469
2 жыл бұрын
Civil government should not be running churches, and churches should not be running civil government, but both (as well as all areas of society) should be governing themselves according to the relevant principles and precepts of Scripture.
@johntobey1558
Жыл бұрын
Is your guest a Theonomist?
@bossfoig
2 жыл бұрын
Even though Tom and Graham do not call themselves "theonomists", their description of the use of the "general equity" of the moral law in the OT seems to align with those who call themselves "general equity theonomists". Do they believe that "general equity theonomy" is unbiblical, and if so, what differences are there between their position and "general equity theonomy"?
@tomascol8179
2 жыл бұрын
I think the difficulty is with definitions. "General equity theonomy" is a relatively new term. In the halcyon days of the modern theonomy movement (Chalcedon Journal, Rushdoony, North, Bahnsen, et al) reconstructionism was advocated as a project that went far beyond the use of "general equity" within OT civil laws (see the Second London Confession, 19.4). I have not seen a definition of what is meant by "general equity theonomy" by those who describe themselves that way. Let me also note that I believe not in the general equity of the *moral law* but in the OT *civil* law. I believe in the abiding, meticulous authority of the moral law.
@djdvize813
2 жыл бұрын
@@tomascol8179 kzitem.info/news/bejne/mpVqsXuda5ypf44 Here is a good definition for General Equity Theonomy that seems pretty reasonable
@bossfoig
2 жыл бұрын
@@tomascol8179 Oops, apologies for the accidental misrepresentation and thanks for the response! I had meant "general equity of the OT civil law" in my original comment, as I also believe in the abiding authority of the moral law. On a site note, I'm very grateful for your ministry and may it continue to be used by the Lord to edify the church of Christ, not only in the US, but also where I am (in Singapore currently).
@SMJ0hnson
2 жыл бұрын
@@tomascol8179 this was very helpful clarification, thank you.
@kimmurphy72
2 жыл бұрын
What do you all think about this definition? kzitem.info/news/bejne/mpVqsXuda5ypf44
@Mattsprankle
2 жыл бұрын
Respectfully, you did not define Theonomy, but assumed the audience both knows and agrees with your definition. General equity of the law applied today is theonomy. If not what definition are you operating on? The example that Pastor Ascol used is almost identical to theonomists like Bahnsen , Rushdoony and Demar.
@jacksonhester3121
2 жыл бұрын
Graham said that “libertarians aren’t conservative” but conservatives aren’t conservative either. Conservatives have been retreating, capitulating, and compromising for over 50 years. “Conservative” is vague in the same way that “progressive” is vague. Conserving what? Progressing towards what? At least you know what Libertarians support: liberty.
@theslimtoa4195
2 жыл бұрын
Would you say that your views on the general equity of OT civil Laws align with that of Doug Wilson and others within the Reformed Presbyterian camp?
@-RM-
2 жыл бұрын
Subject discussion begins around 7:17 (sort of).
@brittontwood
2 жыл бұрын
I’ve been following this podcast for a while, and I’ve noticed numerous times that they say “we are not theonomists”…..and then go on to talk about the general equity of the Law of God being applied to modern society…..which is exactly what Theonomy is. I can’t help but think that they don’t truly understand what Theonomy is or what Theonomists teach, because they literally sound like they are while repeatedly saying that they’re not.
@tomascol8179
2 жыл бұрын
See my comments above to WangZi. You may be correct that I don't understand what "Theonomy is or what Theonomists teach" but I have tried to take people at their word when they describe themselves as such. I adhere to the 1689 Baptist confession which teaches that the abiding value of the fully abrogated OT civil laws is found in their "general equity." That, view until recently at least, was held in distinction to the views of major proponents of theonomy in the 20th century reformed movement.
@brittontwood
2 жыл бұрын
@@tomascol8179 thank you for the response, Pastor Tom! I think it all boils down to us not having a clarified definition then. I recently asked these two questions in a Theonomy Q&A group I’m a part of: 1) What is the different between Theonomy and simply allowing scripture to guide our policy making? I got multiple responses along the lines of “nothing. That’s exactly what it is.” 2) What’s the difference between “classical” Theonomists and General Equity Theonomists? I also got multiple responses that essentially said that all Theonomists are General Equity Theonomists. As with any other subject, there are always gradations and nuances that each individual takes that aren’t necessarily universal to others who hold the same title/position. There are certainly variations on the application of the Law in certain scenarios depending on which Theonomist you ask. But from my studies the last couple years, to simplify this topic down, I do believe that if someone asserts that the principles or “spirit” of God’s Law, not the “letter” of the Law are to be applied to modern society as a means of justice, that they would qualify as being a Theonomist.
@bossfoig
2 жыл бұрын
@@brittontwood Good points. It seems that there is a branch of "general equity theonomists" today (which seems to be the most popular and consistent "form") that would match up very nicely with what was talked about in this episode. But I do agree with Tom that perhaps there still needs to be further clarification and definition since I keep seeing "older" representations or definitions of theonomy being put out there by anti-theonomy proponents (referring to Reformed Facebook groups, not Tom or Graham).
@TheMaineSurveyor
2 жыл бұрын
@@brittontwood There are a group of people calling themselves Theonomists who promote a particular political theory (though they would object to the term "political theory", it is nonetheless accurate) wherein they mean to make the Law the civil laws of their nation, namely, in the United States. They believe that the punishments of the Law--including all the capital punishments--must be instituted in order to be faithful. They, therefore, desire to execute adulterers, homosexuals, rebellious children, etc. If they do these things, they believe God will bless them. They see that the blessings and curses given to Israel are binding not only on us as believers, but also the entire world. They mean to claim those blessings for themselves, in a strange parallel to the prosperity gospel crowd. And though they may give verbal agreement to justification by faith alone, they actually mean that justification is by faithfulness, meaning they must do something to gain justification, that justification = faith + works. Ultimately, this particular camp of Theonomists desires to put you, me, and all believers back in bondage to the Law. (They'll never word it that way, but that's the implication.) Paul's letter to the Galatians is a repudiation of this kind of thinking, chapter 5 being especially pointed. And while Theonomists may say they do not wish to start requiring circumcision--which is a specific issue that Paul addresses in Galatians--they still wish to put the yoke of the Law on our shoulders, which is the broad issue that Paul calls attention to. Paul's point is that if you attempt to enact part of the Law, you have to do all of it. I think this is why Theonomists say they won't require circumcision, so it is more difficult to counter their claims. But the fact remains: they are still trying to put us under the Law. These folks will also try to "soften" their message by saying this will only work if a majority of a nation has received the gospel and joined the family of believers. They don't mean to take over a country by force, but by discipleship. Once there is a majority of Christians, then they can wipe away that nations unjust laws and institute the Law and its punishments. All of the folks I've encountered or listened to that believe these things also have a Postmillennial eschatology, believing that Christians will gradually make this world nearly perfect, and when it is virtually heaven-on-Earth, Christ will return. They believe that the Great Commission can only be successful if this happens. I believe the Great Commission will be 100% successful: exactly all of the people that God has elected for salvation will be saved, no more, no less. What percentage of the population this will be at any given time, I couldn't say, and neither can anyone else. This group of Postmillennial Political Theonomists would argue they generally know, at least, just prior to Christ's return. My understanding of General Equity is that such things as murder, theft, adultery, and bearing false witness are and always will be sins, and that these can serve as a guide when drafting civil laws while we continue to live in a fallen world.
@SMJ0hnson
2 жыл бұрын
Genuine question; is it the general takeaway that “good theonomy” is to implement equity and morality as found throughout all of god’s law, whereas “bad theonomy” is the reimplementation of old law in practice?
@someperson9536
2 жыл бұрын
Out of all the things that are morally wrong, which of those things should be crimes against the state?
@hlane4439
Жыл бұрын
So how do christian nationals or whatever their label think about the "Dictrine of Discovery", the genocide , manifest destiny?
@SpotterVideo
Жыл бұрын
Why is the term "New Covenant" not found in the confessions of Reformed Covenant Theology? It is found in the Bible. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. What brings all local churches together into one Body under the blood of Christ? The answer is found below. New Covenant Whole Gospel: Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him. He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth. Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by husband unto them, saith the LORD: Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? What did Paul say about Genesis 12:3 in Galatians 3:8? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis? Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart. Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36) We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24. 1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. 1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. 1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. Watch the KZitem videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay. ============================================================================================================ Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit) Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then the Holy Spirit came from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church? The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again) Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, (A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.) Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment) ============ Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says? What did Peter say below? Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text. Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage? Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13) “baptize” KJV Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.) Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5) Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant) How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist? Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ? Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant ((KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357 (NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation. (NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established. (YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them .
@coyoteclockworkstudios3140
2 жыл бұрын
This is coming about 30 years too late.
@michaelfalsia6062
Жыл бұрын
My how Christian nationaliam has so grabbed out undivided attention. 😮
@georgeledford5556
2 жыл бұрын
listening, my take-away is quit labeling Christianity with political views.... Nationalism, Democracy, Socialism...whatever is a wrong outlook for Christians....Democracy is nothing more than Mob Rule...so is Socialism, and Nationalism...neither is Christ-like...separate yourself from such...Politics is what hung Christ on a tree...yes you should vote for the least evil...and Man is continually evil...Wokism, CRT, any kind of Racism is evil...as we are all human race....pick it up a notch ...separate the CHURCH from politics...don't be wrapping the Church with it...nor with any other evil...
Пікірлер: 30