"Case 1 --- Frank has an oak tree near the corner of his 120 acre flat, unfenced lot. A 12 year old boy, Nick, has fallen from the tree and died of a head injury. When the local magistrates investigate to determine if restitution is to be owed the family of the boy, they find that another young climber had also fallen from the tree five years earlier, with only a minor injury.

"Yet another incident had occurred seven years before involving Frank's son, who suffered a slightly separated shoulder. Frank had been warned by a local elected civil elder, Bob, after the second accident, to take measures to prevent any further injury. So Frank grudgingly put up a warning sign, which had long since become weathered and unreadable.

"Frank is convicted of criminal negligence by a local court and an appeals court. George, Nick's father, hears a remorseful public plea by Frank for acceptance of restitution for the crime, based upon Exodus 21:30. But the young lad was his father's only son, and his oppressive grief cannot be overcome. On a prescribed date, Frank is led into a municipal plaza and beaten to death with hundreds of rocks hurled from a crowd of men. George, Bob, and another witness to the fall are there to throw the first three stones."

"Case 2 --- Marge, age 33 and a passive non-Christian, voluntarily sold herself three years ago to become the slave of Elton and his family, as restitution for totaling their only vehicle. Her job is to garden and help Elton's semi-invalid wife with the cooking. In four years she will be released from slavery at the sabbath year.

"One day, she mistakenly instructs a hired landscaper to cut the lower branches from Elton's favorite pepper tree.

"Elton, an embittered man known for a volatile and violent temper, flies into a rage when he learns of this. He picks up a three-foot-long branch from the pile of freshly cut limbs and strikes Marge several times on the head, shoulders, back and legs, causing deep welts and bruises and a badly swollen left eyelid.

"A local civil elder called by a neighbor checks on the situation and prepares release papers for Marge based upon Exodus 21:26. But two days after the beating, Marge's eye is better and she is well able to resume her routine. Elton is judged to have been penalized enough by losing Marge's work for two days. Marge remains his property and no action is taken against him." (end of quotation from "Dominion Theology").

The date is taken using David Chilton's prophetic time scale, from his book "Paradise Restored," and the complete plausibility of the scenario of these two cases is based upon the combined interpretations by Gary North ('In Defense of Stoning,' from "The Sinai Strategy" and R. J. Rushdoony's "Institutes of Biblical Law, vol. 2"). Both case 1 and case 2 are in full harmony with what Rushdoony and North teach about Deuteronomy 22:8; Exodus 21:28-32; Deuteronomy 17:7 and 21:21. Of course, these laws were basically liability laws requiring railings on rooftop porches and penalties regarding habitually dangerous oxen. Then North's argument for the perpetual use of stoning as the divinely mandated form of execution is applied.

Introduction----

1. What is Christian Reconstructionism and what do we (and they) mean by the term "Theonomy"? "Theonomy" derives from two words meaning "God" and "Law." The Reconstructionists believe that the Law of God, or Biblical Law, as codified in the Old Testament should be instituted as the law of the United States and every nation on earth before the return of Christ.

If Reconstructionists succeed, and are consistent with their own teachings, blasphemy would be a criminal offense, homosexuality a capital crime, and slavery (in some form) would be re-instituted. While nearly all Theonomists defend this position about the law, the two most significant ones are Rushdoony's "Institutes of Biblical Law" and Bahnsen's "Theonomy in Christian Ethics". These books provide the foundation for many others on social policy, by men within the movement, by such authors as North, Chilton, Sutton, DeMar, and others.

The idea of a "God ruled political set-up" has been around for many years, coming the nearest to actual practice on earth probably during the time of the rule of Moses, or the time of the rule of the Old Testament Prophets, or even during the early days of the reign of King David.

But there has never been any time in history known to me when a true and full "Theocracy" or theocratic government has ruled successfully over large numbers of people for a long period of time.

There was a time, of course, when the Dutch "Puritans" if we may call them that, had control of Holland with Abraham Kuyper as their great leader for about 10 or 12 years, but they were never very successful as political rulers.

Some say this was the aim and desire of the Puritans, both in England and in the United States, and it may have been one of their great desires. As you may remember, in fact, the "Puritans" did gain political control in England for a short period of time under the political leadership of Oliver Cromwell and others, but I doubt that any one who has really studied this period of European history would say that it was highly successful. Of course, there is no doubt in my mind that some good things did come out of that period, as well as some excesses.

I love to read the Puritan divines, and I'm sure many others also get good from reading them. They were especially good on subjects such as worship, personal and national holiness and sanctification, and on several other Biblical themes and doctrines. However, when most of them approached subjects such as baptism, the Lord's Supper, Eschatology, and the "means of grace" they nearly always went wildly out of line with Scripture, of course.

The picture of the Puritans in America was somewhat similar, except that they never did gain direct national political control, though they did have great influence in some areas of politics during their early time period in the USA.

In my opinion, some of the greatest preachers and writers who have ever lived since the New Testament Days were Puritans, both English and American, but one has to read them carefully and filter out a great deal to come up with the pure gold from their sermons and writings.

WIDE AVAILABLILITY OF THEIR WRITINGS

IF YOU LOOK IN SOME OF THE MODERN BOOK STORES, it appears that they have gone, as a country boy in Texas used to say for emphasis, "hog wild crazy" over the unscriptural rubbish being poured out in such quantities by Theonomists -Dominionists - Reconstructionists. Those to whom we refer are known by many names, for example they are sometimes called Dominionists, Reconstructionists, Theonomists, "Kingdom Now," SOGM (Sons of God Manifest), Calcedonians, Basileians. And there are several other names one could use for them. While there are various "flavors" or "varieties" of their doctrines among these named groups and others like them, they all, in a very general sense, seem more or less closely related on their teachings and tactics.

Gary North and his cohorts at Tyler, Texas, seem to be the MOST radical of all the groups, however, I would consider them all to be extreme radicals, most of them willing to go to almost any extent to attempt to "prove their points" or to advance their cause.

The well known mail order discount booksellers "Great Christian Books" of Elkton, Maryland, while they sell many worthwhile books at good discount prices, are also heavy promoters and sellers of Reconstructionist-Theonomic books, tapes, etc.

Prominent publishers of the Reconstructionist-Theonomist materials include Institute for Christian Economics, Presbyterian and Reformed, Wolgemuth and Hyatt, Dominion, Ross House, Geneva, Kingdom, Thoburn, Still Waters Revival, and several others, as well as an occasional volume published by one of the larger commercial or general publishing houses.

In spite of the fact that MANY Dominionists-Reconstructionists-Theonomists are very extreme Calvinists, yet at the same time they write and speak as if they believe that they must help God get things under control down here on earth, so that the kingdom (their version of it, which I would NOT want to live in) can be set up in order that the King Himself can reign properly (through them, of course!).

There are many prolific writers among them. Some of the outstanding examples, so far as quantity of materials they publish, would include such men as Gary North, Greg Bahnsen, R. J. Rushdoony, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Gentry, David Chilton, Ray Sutton, Steve Schlissel, George Grant, James Jordan, Peter Leithart, Robert Thoburn, Herbert Schlossberg, the Paulk Brothers of Atlanta, Georgia, etc., and several others. Then there are various others, who while not openly radical dominionists themselves, often write good reviews of theonomic reconstructionist books and generally help the Theonomists along their way. Some of their materials are recommended by such men as Jerry Bridges, John F. MacArthur, and Ernest Reisinger, as well as other well known names.

(Mr. David Chilton, one of the more prominent Theonomic writers, suffered a massive heart attack with major heart destruction and extensive brain damage a while back. Although I disagree strongly with much of what he has written or said, he and his family have my sympathy about his physical condition. According to reports, he remains in poor condition at this time, though he did finally come out of the coma he was in for a long time).

These theonomists, reconstructionists, dominionists, or whatever they may choose to use as a name for their false doctrines, since they have no substantial applicable body of scripture references to support their "peculiar" interpretations, seem to use several other methods to try and make up for lack of Biblical support for their ideas. We shall mention some of their rather "nasty and unethical" methods later.

Make no mistake, the Theonomists or Reconstructionists consider Pre-millennialists and Pre-millennialism to be their greatest enemies, and they are working all the time to destroy or weaken the standing and strength of those of us who do believe and teach the clearly Biblical teachings of the Premillennial and Pretribulational return of our glorious Redeemer. The Reconstructionist - Dominionist - Theonomist leaders often refer sarcastically to us as "pessi-millennialists," claiming we are defeatist pessimists in our teaching and beliefs.

Some of their prime efforts at promoting Theonomy and destroying or weakening their opponents are based on variations of the following things:

1. They attempt to portray all their strong supporters as brilliant scholars. (If you mean by "scholar" one who has a good academic educational background, then many of them are "scholars". But if you mean by that word a "Bible Scholar," then clearly the "Theonomic Scholars" are not scholars at all! Some of their attempts to "bend" Scripture to fit their views are ridiculous to the point of being pathetic).

2. Negatively, they generally attempt to portray all their opponents as ignorant or dishonest, preferably both. When someone writes a book, booklet or even an article exposing the weaknesses or even the downright "unscripturalness" of many of the theonomists own statements in their articles, books, tapes, etc., the Theonomists often come quite "unstuck" in their outrage. They sometimes become so angry at anyone "daring" to dispute one of their pet ideas, that they act like a spoiled child who's just been told to turn off the TV and go to bed -- They have a regular tantrum, a childish fit! Often they do not even make a reasonable attempt to answer the objections of their opponents, but instead they try to make fun of or ridicule him or his book or article, with biting sarcasm, childish remarks about his scholarship or mental ability, etc.

3. Positively, they usually try to display themselves as being of very high moral standards and superior conduct, ideals, and ethics. BUT one of their leading men is married to the daughter of one of their other leading men, and yet, according to published reports, son-in-law and father-in-law are not even on speaking terms, though both are avid Theonomists or Reconstructionists!

4. Negatively, many Theonomists constantly lie (often using the old "straw man" technique -- That is, they pretend that we who do not agree with their weird interpretations of scripture believe things that we do not and never have believed, then show how silly that belief is, but we never did believe it in the first place) about those who disagree with them, and often attempt to insinuate that opponents are "antinomians" or unethical in some form or the other. Like the Pharisees, while pretending to be "oh so (self) righteous" themselves, they cast aspersions on the ethics, morality, scholarship, and mental ability of their serious opponents.

5. They, like many who try to prove that which is unprovable by the Scriptures alone, often try to support their position by gross distortion of minor parts or short quotes from various other men, preferably those no longer around to defend themselves and deny the applications being made of their works.

Theonomists seem to prefer works, (for this purpose of quotation to support their ideas), written many years ago before anyone was even close to being a modern theonomist, or agreeing with what modern theonomists espouse.

Reconstructionist-Theonomists love to claim the Puritans were basically in agreement with them on their reconstructionist-theonomic ideas, but they cannot show a single example in history where any group of people were in large-scale agreement with their ideas and their practices, and their written proposals for the future.

Some of these fellows will even take History and make one such as Irenaeus into a Post-millennialist or an A-millennialist, which is an outright falsehood. Chilton did this very thing with his treatment of Irenaeus in his "Days of Vengeance."

I don't want to get into this very much as I may encroach on some of the other speakers here, (at Conference in 1995) but it is clear to any who read early Church history that most if not all of the earliest church fathers were pre-millennial in their beliefs and in their writings, including Irenaeus, most of his predecessors, and many of his successors also, until near the time of Augustine, when a-millennialism began to be promoted by some, while others remained clearly and strongly pre-millennial.

There was nothing even remotely comparable to modern day reconstructionism until very recent times. One of the prominent leaders of the Reconstructionists, Gary North, wrote in 1978 that the movement did not exist 20 years ago. Theonomics (or Christian Reconstructionism) has been built up as a movement primarily by Rousas Rushdoony, Greg Bahnsen, and Gary North during the last 30 some odd years.

Of course, their efforts to claim some group from history as their forerunners sometimes "backfires" on them. The few cases in history which could possibly, by stretching the imagination considerably, be pointed to as genuine attempts to "set up a theonomic political-religious system in control of a certain region or group of people in the world," have clearly been of short duration, and not very successful. And even these few examples they can go back to in history were NOT, REPEAT NOT, genuine full scale applications in practice of the modern day theonomic-reconstructionists teachings in any case known to me.

If all those individuals or political groupings (from many years ago) they claim openly or by insinuation to be supporters of their position were truly so, then it is genuinely astonishing that the moral situation in the world has continued all these hundreds of years to get worse and worse rather than for their false version of the "millennium" (which is really no "millennium" at all) to have arrived.

6. Toward anyone who attempts to oppose them, their attitude is one of nasty sarcasm, and savage attack, attack, attack! If one attempts to talk to them, or pin them down on any single point, one of their favorite defenses is to pretend that we just "didn't understand what they wrote" or that they "didn't really say what we say they said" even though we can show it in their own materials, in their own books, and in quotations from others which they give with undiluted approval in their own writings.

7. The general attitude of many theonomists to those who disagree with them seems to be one of harassment, obstruction, and a total unwillingness to engage in public dialogue or dispute unless they are allowed to monopolize or dominate the discussion. They very often show a strong determination to refuse a "fair hearing" to anyone who does not agree with them.

8. In South Africa, I was at a Bible Conference in Pretoria, at an independent Baptist Church pastored by a dear friend, and saw one of the local leaders and promoters of the Theonomic-Reconstructionist viewpoint in action. Since I am not interested in any "personal" attacks on him or by him, I will refer to this character simply as "Mr. "K" (a Theonomic Reconstructionist), and he is a real person.

This "local leader" of the theonomists-reconstructionists in the Pretoria region of South Africa visited the conference and tried to harass the principal speaker, Dr. Samuel Waldron, from the United States. From what I have seen personally in South Africa, and read (extensively), this attitude of harassment, suppression, and sarcasm, seems to be a prime example of the general attitude of many leaders and followers of the Theonomic-Reconstructionist teachings.

When he could not prove anything by Scripture, and yet felt a need to "strengthen his position by Scripture quotes," the local Theonomist leader in Pretoria always used two systems:

A. He apparently "made up" his own private "translation" of some so-called Bible verses; or

B. He constantly listed (without any attempt at verbatim quotes) Bible verse references, saying that these references say "thus and so" but when you read the verses he refers to, you find they DO NOT SAY "thus and so." Of course, this is a typical tactic of all cults and promoters of heresies which cannot be well supported by truly Biblical quotations.

SOME short excerpts or portions of the things these men write are quite acceptable, of course, but I would hesitate to promote or use ANY of their materials (except for refuting their false teachings), because so much of it is "poisoned" with their unscriptural ideas of "Theonomy-Reconstructionism-Dominionism, etc." Almost everything they write is brought around in one way or another to "prop up" their peculiar extra Biblical ideas of the "Kingdom." I have over 50 volumes of modern writings by Theonomist-Reconstructionist writers as well as several older writers which they try to claim, often falsely, as supporting their teachings. The Theonomists generally take Genesis 1:26, apply it to men today, and make it into a UNIVERSAL AND UNLIMITED "DOMINION COVENANT."

Some of their writings on subjects such as the abomination of Homosexuality, Abortion on Demand, Child Abuse, and various other current problems are well done, and even useful, if one is careful to remember and watch out for the "theonomic" poison ALWAYS worked in with the good materials.

THEY HAVEN'T A CLUE!

To my way of thinking, they haven't a clue as to what the "Kingdom" really is, nor do they have a clue as to what "The Church" is. Theonomists (and for that matter Post-Millennialists in general) have a terrible time with the Kingdom(s), the Church, the Family of God, and Israel literal and spiritual, generally getting them so mixed up and confused that it never makes any sense to anyone except themselves and their followers.

The Theonomists (and Post-Millennialists) also generally haven't a clue as to Biblical truth concerning most things dealing with "end times" or most other Bible prophecies.

They go to ridiculous extremes with their (I believe completely false) claims that John's "Revelation of Jesus Christ" (as well as ALL the rest of the New Testament) was written before AD 66 or AD 67. Then, building on this completely unjustified and absolutely unsustainable dating for the writing of the Book of Revelation, they go on to claim that all of Revelation and most other end times Bible prophecy was fulfilled at AD 70 with the fall of Jerusalem.