The Error of Theonomy in a Nutshell

Although it has some roots in New England Puritanism and historic Covenant Theology, Theonomy, or Christian Reconstruction, is a distorted version of both and may perhaps be classified as "hyper-Puritanism." Its adherents often will claim that they hold to the classic three-fold division of the Mosaic law into ceremonial, judicial, and moral categories, but they actually collapse the judicial into the moral and therefore think in terms of only a two-fold division. This presupposition may be seen in their frequent reference to the "moral case laws" found in the Old Testament, which they insist were binding on the nations outside of Israel and remain perpetually binding. However, this division is much different than in conventional Reformed thought, amounting to a radical separation of "the ceremonial law" from "the moral-judicial law" so that the one may be abolished while the other remains intact.

As a result, Theonomists are forced to redefine Covenant Theology and posit a continuity where Reformed commentators generally have not. For example, the traditional Reformed position sees a continuous unfolding of redemptive history in various administrations of the one Covenant of Grace, beginning with the promise of the Redeemer in Genesis 3:15, continuing with the establishment of the Noahic, Abrahamic, and Davidic covenants, and finding its clearest pre-Christian expression in God's promise of the "New Covenant" in Ezekiel 37:36 and Jeremiah 31:31-34. The Mosaic covenant, or "Old Covenant," is seen as a temporary "parenthesis" period existing from its establishment at Mount Sinai 430 years after Abraham until its judicial termination on Calvary and its actual termination with the expiration of the nation of Israel in A.D. 70. It was "added because of transgression" (Galatians 3:19) — the rebellious and "stiff-necked" nature of the Israelites (Exodus 32:9-10; Acts 7:51) — and served to "shut [them] up unto the faith" (Galatians 3:23) which was foreshadowed in the various sacrifices and ceremonies and would later be fully revealed in Christ Himself. It was the Mosaic covenant itself that separated the Jews from the Gentile nations of the world and made them a distinct people, and it was this covenant which has now passed away.

This is clearly the doctrine of the New Testament, particularly the Pauline epistles. However, Theonomists deny the provisional character of the Mosaic economy and instead view it as one of the two administrations of the Covenant of Grace. The terms "Older Covenant" and "Newer Covenant" were coined by Greg Bahnsen in Theonomy in Christian Ethics, and have been used by other writers such as Brian Schwertley, in order to distinguish between the previous administration of Moses and the new administration of Christ without implying discontinuity between them. Consequently, Theonomists have two different things in mind when they speak of "the law," depending on the context. When Scripture speaks of "the law" as having been "established," as in Romans 3:31, or "fulfilled," as in Matthew 5:17-19, they interpret this to mean "the moral-judicial law." However, whenever Scripture speaks of the Mosaic law as having been "done away" (2 Corinthians 3:7-11) or "abolished" (Ephesians 2:15), Theonomists invariably interpret this to refer to "the ceremonial law." They wrongly identify only "the ceremonial law" as the covenantal barrier between Jew and Gentile which was "added" at Mount Sinai and later "nailed to the cross" (Colossians 2:14), thus ending forever the covenantal separation of Jew and Gentile (Ephesians 2:14-15). Consequently, they cannot see Paul's cogent argument in his epistle to the Galatians that any attempt to carry the Mosaic economy over into the New Covenant era is a denial of the very Gospel itself, and instead read this epistle as a diatribe against the use of "the ceremonial law," and circumcision in particular, as a means of justification.

This underlying error leads to other errors, some of which are quite serious. Chief among these is their concept of "taking dominion" using "God's law-word" (the "moral judicial law") — a novel version of Postmillennialism which arises from R.J. Rushdoony's theory of "restitution." Briefly stated, Reconstructionists view themselves as having been restored to the covenantal relationship which Israel forfeited by disobedience, together with its mission to make restitution to God for Adam's rebellion by subduing the world, or reconstructing the nations of the earth in God's image. They believe that this covenantal restoration, or "justification," is through faith alone, but that the dominion mandate, or "sanctification," is fulfilled individually through the application of "moral judicial law" to "every area of life," and nationally through the application of that same law to society by the civil magistrate. When a five-fold restitution has been paid to God by the Christian Church, according to the principle of Exodus 22:1, her mission will be complete and Christ will return to consummate history. To reject this "restitution gospel" in favor of the mainstream eschatologies such as either historic Postmillennialism or Amillennialism, or even Dispensationalism, is to be "antinomian" and thus an enemy of the true covenant people of God. Thus, no more subtle re-packaging of the ancient Judaizing heresy may be found than in the modern Reconstruction movement.