Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Defining Theonomy & Why Christians Oppose It | with Dr. Joe Boot
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 май 2023
- Dr. Joseph Boot defines General-Equity Theonomy and explains why so many Christians wrongly oppose it. @ezrainstitutecc
Register for our Fall 2023 Conference, "The Household And The War For The Cosmos." www.tickettail...
Register for our Spring 2024 Conference, "Blueprints For Christendom 2.0: Seven Doctrines For Ruling The World." www.tickettail...
Also to purchase Joel’s book they can find it on Amazon or directly from our website at:
rightresponsem...
Subscribe to our Theology Applied podcast below:
Apple podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
Spotify podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
Google Play podcast: bit.ly/theolog...
*If you live in the Austin area, Pastor Joel just started planting a brand new church called Covenant Bible Church in Hutto, Texas. He would love for you to come visit on a Sunday. Check out the church’s website for details: covenantbible....
#theonomy #postmil #christian
Dr Joe Boot is the man. His book Mission of God is a must read for all Christians.
I can tell you why, as a Christian man, I oppose theonomy. The millions upon millions
of Christians killing each other in the the 30 years war, the 80 years war,
the 100 years war, and the German peasant war (this is the short list).
Also, political leaders like Oliver Cromwell, Jean Cauvin, GW BUSH and T***p. When Christians have attained political power,
they have continually shown they are more corrupt, more incompetent, and more violent than their secular counterparts.
That's why Jams Madison said: “The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless
strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries.”
Dr. Boot knocked it out of the park as usual
Just appreciate how Joe highlighted the law being found in the Gospel. 1 Timothy 1:8-11
"But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully....according to the GLORIOUS GOSPEL OF THE BLESSED GOD which was committed to my trust."
Have you seen theocasts episodes on theonomy?
@@blank-964 Have you seen Apologia's rebuttals of their videos? Good stuff!
@@ReformedChristian96 There’s been other treatments from other ministries on the topic as well. I don’t think the rebuttals made much difference.
@@ReformedChristian96 Are you a Christian Nationalist? If so have you listened to the Mid-America Reformed Seminary Roundtable series on CN?
@@blank-964 I am indeed. Have you listened to people like Dr. Joe Boot, Doug Wilson, Joel Webbon, Jeff Durbin, James White, Andrew Isker, Stephen Wolfe, William Wolfe, and even the Founders guys on it? I understand there is a lot of debate on these topics. But I've become convinced of theonomy and CN in the past year.
The very best example of God's will that I have ever heard. Somewhere deep inside me that's 100 percent on target. To God give the glory. This broke me down and woke me up. Thank you Jesus
Excellent lecture 🔥 gonna have to re-listen a few times.
Keep up the great work!
SOLI DEO GLORIA
(To The Glory of God Alone)
Father, Son & Holy Spirit
-Ronnie
I've never heard anyone tell it like this man. 100 percent on Target
This is great. Until lately this was the subject I had not given much thought to.
The reason you have not given much thought to Theonomy, because it’s foreign to the Text of Scripture. Acts 15 states we will not put the Law of Moses on the Gentiles, Galatians says if you hold to the Law of Moses, you have fallen from grace. We are called to preach the Gospel, for reconciliation with Jesus Christ for eternal life. God bless
@@theresaread72its still the best basis for any countrys law 🙄
No its not for salvation but only because none of us are willing to follow it..
@@iacoponefurio1915 Hitler tried to bring in the Millennial Kingdom. Islam is theonomic. Boot and Webbon has said they want penalties for breaking the Sabbath Law. Romans 14 says that we do not have to keep the Sabbath, we can keep it or not, it’s a matter on conscience. So then a true Christian would oppose it, because it’s not Biblical.and forbidden by the Book of Galatians, to put the Law of Moses on nations. Hebrew roots has the same problem, they have fallen from grace, meaning they are no longer saved. That’s why Christians oppose Theonomy, keep the Law of Moses does not save, and causes people who are saved to fall from Grace, as we are called to live by the Spirit.
Of Course righteous Laws are wonderful, but Jesus called us to pray for our leaders that Christians can have peace to share the Good News of Jesus Christ for eternal life. God Bless
@@theresaread72 but did you listen to the talk at all?
@@christianmama2441 did you listen as well?
BOOOMMMMMMM!!!!! PREACH IT JOE!!!!!! YES!!!!!!
Thanks!
Thank you!!
100% the best concise definition & defence of general equity theonomy i've ever heard.
Brilliant stuff as always Dr Boot.
He’s the man.
Brilliant and wise message. Thx for posting this Joel!
Good talk.
This is fantastic!! PTL!
Really excellent. That last leg, dealing with the objections, is a must-listen.
Yes! Every born again believer, opposes Placing the Law of Moses on societies, nations because you will not find it in the New Testament. Acts 15 states that the Law of Moses will not be placed on the Gentiles, since the Jews couldn’t follow it. We are called as Christians to proclaim the Gospel for eternal life, not a more just society delivered by an iron fist. Truth and Grace came through Jesus Christ.
Perhaps researching a bit more on theonomy will help you!
Theonomy or autonomy? You either choose one or the other and by the looks of things in the US, autonomy is destroying this nation as compared to what it was before when Theonomy was so prevalent
@@spiritwarrior5367 that is a false dichotomy. According to the New Testament, Christians are Ambassadors for Jesus Christ preaching the Gospel, leading people to be reconciled to God through Jesus for eternal life.a true Christian will oppose Theonomy, placing the Law of Moses on culture, society, and governments, seeking prison time or the death penalty for adultery and not keeping the Sabbath.Galatians says if you use the Law of Moses, you have fallen from grace.
You need to compare Theonomy to the New Testament and tell me where I can find it. It’s simply not in their. Israel was not the model for Theonomy they claim it to be. Prophets kept calling repentance to God from worshipping false idols which included female, male shrine prostitution
@@theresaread72 Still not understanding the core of theonomy! Figures.
You are the kind of person that would rebuke John the Baptist for bringing old testament law and pointing out Herod's sin for taking his brother's wife.
You are aware that Paul nor Jesus ever abolished the law, right?
You have a distorted interpretation of the Biblical message regarding the law.
Tell me, In your own worldview would it be just to condemn a child rapist to death or be given a lenient sentence for destroying said child's innoce? This is a simple question, not a trick question.
@@spiritwarrior5367 John the Baptist was in a Theocracy. God’s Law, the Law of Moses was the Law of Israel. Jesus had not risen yet, the New Testament had not been written yet, the Gospel had not yet gone to the Gentiles.
Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses, obeying it perfectly, giving His righteousness to all who who believe. Jesus nailed the Law of Moses to the Cross, the Ordinance that was against us, Colossians 2. Acts 15 We will not put the Law of Moses on the Gentiles, we will require that no one commit sexual immorality or Idolatry.
Galatians states Jesus fulfills the Law, and we are to live by the Holy Spirit, we are now to keep the Law of Christ, the Law that gives liberty, to Love and obey what Jesus has told us to love Him, obey his commands in the New Testament.
The Law was given to Israel. One can no longer keep the Law Galatians says you must keep the Whole Law, if you break one Law, you would be breaking the whole Law, which is why we needed a Savior.
I understand it, and as a born again Christian I can say Theonomy is not Biblical. God Bless
To complete the discussion of Thomas Aquinas, he states in ST. Q. 104.3 Respondeo: The judicial precepts did not bind for ever, but were annulled by the coming of Christ: yet not in the same way as the ceremonial precepts. For the ceremonial precepts were annulled so far as to be not only "dead," but also deadly to those who observe them since the coming of Christ, especially since the promulgation of the Gospel. On the other hand, the judicial precepts are dead indeed, because they have no binding force: but they are not deadly. For if a sovereign were to order these judicial precepts to be observed in his kingdom, he would not sin: unless perchance they were observed, or ordered to be observed, as though they derived their binding force through being institutions of the Old Law: for it would be a deadly sin to intend to observe them thus.
If I recall, a band of men called Puritans in the Massachusetts colony had similar ideas. Keep hope alive, I suppose. We will see how things unfold in the future? Only time will tell what God has decreed to come to pass. There will never be unity of belief on this subject or eschatology, which is crucial to the theonomist position. Never a dull moment in Christianity, that is for sure. Each to their own understanding and conscience.
The proper maxim to follow:
ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda secundum verbi Dei (“the church is Reformed and always [in need of] being reformed according to the Word of God”)
Excellent message Joe Boot!
Solid exposition,accurate historical acquisition; irrefutable doctrinal application; and the brilliant dynamic of Law and Gospel May his tribe increase!
G3 who?
PS: one qualifying word -I do not support post-mill eschatology, but Joe makes a compelling case for general equity theonomy
As for the definition of theonomy he gives in 25:09, 2KT proponents also say that the general equity of the Mosaic law remains valid. So, i think more is needed to disambiguate the views.
Yes!
If there are more vocal Muslims in Minnesota relentlessly criticizing the government, what stops Islam from influencing the laws to reflect the religion?
All laws are moral. Theonomy just proposes a biblical morality as the basis for law rather than paganism or Islam. Obviously Islam would love to influence laws as well. Neutral spaces are mythical.
Profound. May God grant His Church to delight in His law. One of the great tragedies of dispensationalism is that it teaches Christ’s sheep to have an expression of disgust when they say the word “law.” King Jesus does not preside over a lawless Kingdom. Unable to overthrow the Kingdom, the enemy revels in seeing its subjects despise its constitution.
Say it with me, LAWRRRRR!
😂
Today on Empty and Irrelevant Assertions.
Amazing lecture!
Starts with old covenant law from a Psalm 119. We are now in the new covenant. Didn't theonomists get the memo? Its Christ or Moses.
Moses was a foreshadowing of Christ. Moses is a servant in Christ’s house (Heb 3:5). Moses drank from the spiritual rock of Christ (1 Cor 10:2-4). In a sense, Christ fulfilled Moses. So it’s not Christ or Moses in an antithetical sense. When you accept Christ, you get Moses thrown in for free ;)
@@hudjahulos 😂. Better Covenant. Its not both.
Have you seen theocasts episodes on theonomy? Pretty good saw part two last night. It’s on youtube.
@@blank-964 I won't come back under slavery bud. You want more straw for your bricks? That's your choice. Christ brings freedom. Run to Him. He gives rest.
@@mjack3521 The theocast episode is about the theonomy being problematic.
After listening to several hours of Boot, hoping he will give me some actual arguments, I dont think I will spend any more time hoping I will find an actual argument amidst his haystack of assertions and, frankly, name calling.
Theonomy or Autonomy.
So Christ or Chaos
@@TheChristianImperialistFreedom from law/rules or freedom from sin.
There is no having your cake and eating it too, there is nothing free no sin ever committed will ever go unpaid for.😮
1:07:31 Wow. Where can I find an actual, steel-man refutation of 2KT that gives me more than just asserting that its sophistry?
Look up the famous debate between Roger Williams and John Cotton.
I looked up but can't find it. Where did you find it?
@@jamesapt66 John Cotton and Roger Williams were Puritan ministers in colonial New England. Cotton authored Abstract of the Laws of New England (1641), an early example of American constitutionalism drawing from both scripture and English law. Cotton’s Abstract was adopted by the New Haven colony and influential in the legal systems of Massachusetts Bay and Connecticut. Cotton also became a prominent spokesman for the laws of Massachusetts Bay, and also advocated a particular style of Congregationalism significant for development of American political and legal thought. Roger Williams, once an apprentice and recording secretary for the eminent English jurist Sir Edward Coke, served briefly as a minister in Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth colonies. Exiled for his criticism of the colonial charters and the Puritan partnership of church and state, Williams eventually founded the colony of Rhode Island and served as its President. Williams argued eloquently for religious liberty, provoking Cotton to engage him in a now-famous “Bloudy Tenant” debate published in London and read on both sides of the British Atlantic. Both Cotton and Williams were articulate representatives for opposing sides of a legal question contested as much in colonial America as today, the question of church-state relations and religious liberty. John Cotton and Roger Williams Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 June 2019
@@jamessheffield4173 Thanks so much for sharing this. Roger Williams is very relevant to us today in this conversation. Baptists who know their history know this.
@@indigopumpkin I was born and raised in RI, so I am very familiar with Roger Williams. Blessings.
What is the general equity of Lev 25:44?
@RightResponseMinistries ?
Can you define "law-word" please??
THeonomy- a Taxonomy! by T.D. Gordon.
32:48 how did the early church use Lev 25:44 as a paradigmatic guide and hold it to be still in force?
Also, why is he talking up this guy as an authority on the first two centuries of Christianity when he is a byzantine scholar?
Unfortunately, an equivication of the terms "law and gospel" as its used in the view Boot opposes.
Do y’all have any connections in the Dallas/irving area? My family is looking for a good church!
Very profound! Does anyone know if this topic, what Dr. Boot just went over in this sermon, is discussed in Mission of God or Ruler of Kings? I am thinking in ordering them!
It is the main principle addressed in both book. Mission of God is a comprehensive Biblical Theology with this in mind. Ruler of Kings focuses on Government.
Wow, didn't know Stone was down like this
Maybe it's his British accent, but I'm about 40 minutes in and I officially agree with the term Theonomy, though I would not say I am a Theonomist. 😅
I'm in no way antinomian, I have always agreed we should base our laws on biblical principles and law, the reason I cannot call myself a Theonomist is because I am a Christian who has the call to preach the gospel to men. That includes the men of government which in turn should bring about a change in laws towards the Bible, but I don't believe our goal should be changing government systems lest we lose focus on the soul's of men. But if those men in government are enacting laws that go against the scripture then we should call them out on it, I agree.
Brother Joel I feel like my last point is the reason why I have not been able to accept the term Theonomy as taught by you, is that you seem to make it a gospel issue. As in, if we fail to convert the government system, that means we are not doing the great commission. I know you are not seeking the approval of men but I'm just sharing my thoughts. I'll continue listening and learning.
Hold to your view of Scripture, and don’t be swayed by these men who are teaching false doctrine. True Christians preach the Gospel as you have rightly said. They are teaching against the New Testament, Galatians to force the Law of Moses on the Gentile nations including its penalties for adultery, and not keep the Sabbath.Romans 14 says we can observe the day, or refrain from observing the day according to conscience as an example. God bless you
@@theresaread72 You don't understand theonomy because you are having trouble understanding categories.
Theonomists don't want Biblical law in order to save souls. That is impossible (as it says in Galatians and elsewhere).
Theonomists do say that Biblical law is the only standard for true (reflecting God's character) justice in the administration of civil government.
@@JustinHonaker You aren’t getting Theonomy from the Bible. The New Testament tells all Christians to be concerned with man’s souls as Ambassadors for Christ, to call people to reconciliation to God through Jesus Christ 2 Corinthians 5.
Read Galatians. The Law of Moses was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ. The whole of Law of Moses is to be obeyed, if you break one Law you are breaking them all.If you call people to follow Moses instead of Jesus, you have fallen from grace, and have lost your salvation.
Like the thumbnail sketch says Christians oppose Theonomy. I understand Theonomy, you dint understand salvation.
@@theresaread72 Did you even listen to the speech? He literally begins with the call of the gospel to believe in Christ alone. You are making accusations that he himself does not make. I don’t think you even listened to this speech which was ironically meant for people like you…
@@theresaread72 Or you can totally ignore what I said. That's your choice. But if you can't have an honest conversation, I'm done.
trouble with comunism is they haven't done it right... or--the trouble with theonomy is they haven't done it right yet... But you are the people, and wisdom dies with you. I believe we alredy have a King and he'll be here hopefully soon.
Trying to look up this "Pierre Lloret" character that Dr Boot quoted, and nothing is coming up, maybe I' spelling it wrong? Can anyone help me out?
found him, "Pierre Viret'
What is the comment he says about Law producing promise of Gospel
24:50 Peter continued not eating with gentiles in Galatians. When did Peter needing prodding ever indicate that Peter's stubborness was correct? 😂
As for this being taught elsewhere, didnt Jesus already declare all foods clean in Mark 7:19?
Are these things occurring to those in the theonomy crowd, but you're just giving him a pass because you agree with him?
I have a question: What is the proper Theonomic solution to the impending potential of nuclear holocaust? It is without question that God’s law needs to be applied to the regulation of nuclear weapons. The problem is that this application cannot afford to be an incremental change over a long period of time. We need a global consensus on the regulation of nuclear weapons according to the general equity of the law of God, and we don’t have 30,000 years to figure it out. We needed the solution yesterday. This is a serious question, and it needs to be addressed by the Theonomic community before I can make a decision on where I stand with incremental Theonomy, let alone Postmillennialism. I struggle with these concepts because when I look at modern society I see a more increasingly audacious God complex than ever before, and it appears to be spiraling completely out of control. We have designed nuclear weapons capable of destroying the entire planet, and we have a planet full of crazy people who are just crazy enough to use them. We have the technological capability to clone human beings and re-engineer their genetic code to fit our own selfish preferences. We have a rapidly expanding multi billion dollar abortion industrial complex. We are potentially on the brink of creating artificial consciousness through AI. We have scientists attempting to upload human consciousness into computer programs to achieve the next stage of “evolution”. We have the large hadron collider of which the dangerous ramifications of are yet to be remotely imagined. On top of this we are able to internationally and cross-culturally communicate our discoveries with each other at lightning speed through the internet, smart phones, and social media. What we have here is an exponentially booming Tower of Babel construction project on our hands. The question is not if God will let these things come to fruition, we know for a fact that God will put a stop to any number of these advancements before they achieve their goal. But the question becomes HOW will he stop them? Knowing God’s character, how he’s behaved with situations like these in the past, and interpreting the situation through the lense of scripture, we have to ask ourselves: is it more like God to remain this patient with these particular sins of mankind, steadily thwarting the plans of the wicked, and then use his Church to reconstruct every aspect of human life over the next 30,000 years to reflect His good nature on earth? Or is it more like God to send his Son yet again to earth, but now in his glorious wrath, and completely destroy in his wine press what I believe might be the most wicked generation that has ever walked the earth? Some might complain that this is an argument from experience, but let’s not throw out experience completely. These things are happening now, we can’t ignore them. So I believe now the question becomes: What is the current state of the heart of mankind compared to other generations described in scripture? And also: What is the character of God as described in scripture? How is he likely to respond to the current state of the heart of mankind according to what we know about Him? Which scriptures most clearly and plainly state Gods plan for the end times? Have we properly applied those scriptures taking into account everything else we know about the character of God and Man? I don’t have the answers to these questions, only hypotheses, but it makes me wonder if Theonomists might be asking the wrong questions altogether.
I suppose all I can say is that at the end of the day we don’t know God’s secret wisdom, and we don’t know which way he will achieve his Glory, weather it be Wrath and Justice, or Mercy and Grace. All we can do is interpret the most clear and plain passages about what God says he WILL do, and use them to interpret the others that are less clear. I must admit that I have a lot of Bible reading to do before I can come to a conclusion for myself.
Dr. Joe Boot's definition of Theonomy made me cringed a lot just as R. J. Rushdoony's definition also makes me cringe a lot as well. That is why I am very hesitant to call myself a agronomist. The definition of Theonomy ought to be the all sufficen't of the scriptures for all of life, and nothing more than that.
Theonomists say that God gave the law to Israel as a universal standard of political ethics for the nations but Israel herself was a rather poor representative of how the law could bring righteousness to a nation. They were more despicable than the Gentiles surrounding them. How do theonomists suggest it will work any better for America?!
God said multiple the earth and have dominion over it. To preach God's kingdom. The prayer says your will on earth as in heaven. If God has to destroy earth the devil won . It sounds right to me
show us a christian king that ruled righteously in the past.
None are perfect. A right understanding of the effects of the fall on both unbelievers and believers will explain the lack of a perfect human king and the necessity to guard against abuse of authority and duty delegated by God. Do not put your trust in chariots and horses.
The point is that a society conformed to God's law will be far better, whatever failures, than a society ruled by a law in hostile rebellion to God's law.
Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Politics, Confucius' Analects, Marx's collectives all produced far worse results than any version of Christendom regardless of how corrupt their theology.
The only options are towers of Babel or the Gospel of the Kingdom. Only fools attempt to establish wisdom apart from the fear of the LORD.
Isaiah 42
my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him;
he will bring forth justice to the nations.
He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice,
or make it heard in the street;
a bruised reed he will not break,
and a faintly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully bring forth justice.
He will not grow faint or be discouraged
till he has established justice in the earth;
and the coastlands wait for his law.
@@umaikakudo When Jesus is here we will have that kingdom. He did not say we would diy one.
43:53 Wow. Not what Deut 21:18ff says. Awefully bashful of the Mosaic law for a theonomist 😂.
This really makes the G3 guys look silly.
For the record, I don’t even know if Dr. Boot is aware of G3’s stance. I doubt he had them in mind. In other words, whatever application there might be in this lecture to the recent debate with G3 was not intentional.
@RightResponseMinistries thanks, that's quite clear from Joe's presentation and general work of course. Still, that he has done more thinking in this field than G3 is made clear by the clarity of his argumentation, even if you disagree with him.
So simply, Judea conquered Rome? Who wants judea to conquer DC today?
LOL D.C. currently is conquered by Judeans, hence our problems!!
Swing and a miss Zxuma
How so? Boot did say Rome changed its laws and then was ruled by the church.
You are conflating the church with Judea...
I’d encourage everyone to listen to the series “why every Calvinist should be a premillennialist”by John MacArthur, in my opinion is irrefutable; one thing he points out is that if you get Israel wrong you get your escathology wrong, I think he is absolutely right about that. Amills and post mills get Israel wrong that’s why they find themselves doing hermeneutical gymnastics to interpret certain verses to fit their view.
Amill and Postmill are antiSemites who are no different than Replacement Theologians!
Criticize till you rule it. - James Lindsay on criticism and power dynamics.
Now the church wants to criticize the state so pastors can fight over who then becomes the Protestant pope. Ha.
Lindsay is a atheist liberal!
Considering how the reformed have acted in history when in power, the idea of them running a nation gives me the creep.
@@theocratickingdom30 like who and what for example?
@@theocratickingdom30 what and who exactly are you referring to?
🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪
Boring from the very start
You watch Theocast? They just had two episodes on theonomy that were pretty good especially part two. Saw part two last night. It’s on youtube.
So, you all would rather try to live under a popular, and thus voted in muslim rule. Make your choice please.
Wasn’t that’s how the church out of judea(Middle East) conquered Rome(Europe)?
If there are more vocal Muslims in Minnesota, what stop Islam from influencing the laws to reflect the religion?