Reconstruction: An Un-Christian Heresy?

[shomethadoor]

The following comment was made in passing on the “preterism” thread in Unorthodox Theology:

They [Reconstructionists] hope that OT Law will be recommissioned and followed by the world, putting themselves decidely out of Christianity with our Grace and Faith.

Now, I’m not a Full-Preterist yet, though I am leaning that way, and I agree with Suede and others on that thread who were arguing against the position that it should be condemned outright and lumped together with much more serious theological errors that might put those who hold them outside of the true Christian faith. I believe that it is very important, but not that grave, since it is an eschatological position that is not essential. On that much we are agreed, but here I want to talk Reconstruction.

Suede’s comment really raised my eyebrows, because as far as I understand it, yes it is true that Reconstructionists want to reinstate OT civil law, or at least pattern after them to fit the situation we have in modern society, this position does not conflict with Grace and Faith. If it does, I don’t see how. Perhaps he can explain how it does. All the Reconstructionists I know of are of the Calvinist/Reformed persuasion who believe in salvation by grace through faith alone, and would never suggest that salvation can be attained through keeping the Law or works of any kind. But they see the Law in its civil applications which God revealed to Israel as having abiding validity and being far more superior and just to anything man can conceive on his own. So, if Suede or anyone else can shed light on the matter, I would appreciate it.

 

[JVAC]

So does that mean that you think that Christ has already came a second time? Which church did you go to before you were thinking of peterism??

A person's possition on the law cannot make them unchristian, just the denial of Christ and his teachings. In fact christ taught to follow the law inasmuchas Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and love thy neighbor as thyself.

Yet as Paul says in Galatians why would anyone want to put that yoke of slavery on again??? Why would you want to go back to the law when you have christ? Galatians 5:1

I encourage you to read Galatians Deeply. Paul realy hits the nail on the head in this one about this. He talks in detail about the role of the law in our lives, the freedom of a christian, and what we should do with it.

 

[shomethadoor]

So does that mean that you think that Christ has already came a second time? Which church did you go to before you were thinking of peterism??

Hi JVAC,

Yes, I'm not an expert or anything, but I think Preterists hold that the Second Coming has already occurred, when He visited destruction on Jerusalem in 70 A.D. There are no unfulfilled eschatological prophecies of the variety that you will find in the Dispensational Pre-Mill system. I have not been a member of a particular church in a long while, but consider myself to be more or less of a Reformed Presbyterian.

A person's possition on the law cannot make them unchristian, just the denial of Christ and his teachings.

What about antinomians, who reject the idea that there is any requirement to repent and obey to be saved? However, that would take us into a whole other discussion, getting into Lordship etc. and that's not really what I want to do here.

In fact christ taught to follow the law inasmuchas Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and love thy neighbor as thyself.

Yeah, He did.

Yet as Paul says in Galatians why would anyone want to put that yoke of slavery on again??? Why would you want to go back to the law when you have christ? Galatians 5:1

True, and he was speaking of the Law as a means of salvation there, wouldn't you agree? In Reconstruction, that's not the issue. Reconstructionists don't advocate works salvation, but they do think we should adopt OT civil laws and penalties in some form.

I encourage you to read Galatians Deeply. Paul realy hits the nail on the head in this one about this. He talks in detail about the role of the law in our lives, the freedom of a christian, and what we should do with it.

Thanks for your input, JVAC. Galatians is a great book, and you're right.

 

[Old_100th]

I am new, you you'll have to bear with me.

As a reconstructionistis important to understand theonomy from a knowetic frame of reference. The Law is in place because, among other reasons, humanity is sinful. Therefore one's own speculation about how one should conduct themselves would also be similarily effected. Therefore this nessesitates the need for an eternal moral code.

Also I should note that not all theonomists want to reconstruct everything. I am a "Non-applied theonomist" which means that I don't see this coming into effect until the VAST majority of the earth is Christian.

If anyone has reason to believe theonomy contradicts the Protestant understanding of salvation, I should like to know how.

 

[Boanerge]

As long as we don't get killed for not following civil laws.

But then why go through all the trouble, since God is going to Shake both the heavens and the earth? We may be here for another 1000 years or not, i would atleast like to know if my salvation is simple and safe. And with how times are getting, it would be hard for someone in Saudia Arbia to follow Many (vain) doctrines and/or Civil laws, (anything vain is that which has nothing to do with God and his plan for Salvation the way Jesus preached it.)

 

[shomethadoor]

I am new, you you'll have to bear with me.

As a reconstructionistis important to understand theonomy from a knowetic frame of reference. The Law is in place because, among other reasons, humanity is sinful. Therefore one's own speculation about how one should conduct themselves would also be similarily effected. Therefore this nessesitates the need for an eternal moral code.

Hi there, yes I agree. We need a legal/ethical code that comes from divine revelation if possible, rather than one that merely springs from the sin-tainted mind of man, like you said, and this is just what we find God presenting to the OT Jewish nation.

Also I should note that not all theonomists want to reconstruct everything. I am a "Non-applied theonomist" which means that I don't see this coming into effect until the VAST majority of the earth is Christian.

I’m not sure exactly how I come down there. While I would agree that it is probably not practically possible to put a system like this in place until the vast majority have converted (I am Postmillennial), I’m not certain that we shouldn’t make the attempt, or that it would be wrong to coerce an unwilling majority into submission if the right circumstances for achieving it came along.

If anyone has reason to believe theonomy contradicts the Protestant understanding of salvation, I should like to know how.

Well, apparently some do. Suede does. That’s what I’m hoping he or someone else who represents the same view will come along and expound on.

 

[Old_100th]

As long as we don't get killed for not following civil laws.

But then why go through all the trouble, since God is going to Shake both the heavens and the earth? We may be here for another 1000 years or not, i would atleast like to know if my salvation is simple and safe. And with how times are getting, it would be hard for someone in Saudia Arbia to follow Many (vain) doctrines and/or Civil laws, (anything vain is that which has nothing to do with God and his plan for Salvation the way Jesus preached it.)

What do you mean "shake the heavens and the earth." If this is a premillenial inference, I'm not a premillenialist meaning that I don't think that the church is going to be marginalized until God vacuums them into heaven because they can't stand the heat.

Why is everything that is unrelated to salvation vain? This seems like an extremely reactionary statement. Are you saying that God's law is vain? The same law that is perfect reflection of God's charater? The same Law that all of the NT writers and Christ made tacit endoursements of? It doesn't seem like it.

 

[Old_100th]

So does that mean that you think that Christ has already came a second time? Which church did you go to before you were thinking of peterism??

A person's possition on the law cannot make them unchristian, just the denial of Christ and his teachings. In fact christ taught to follow the law inasmuchas Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and love thy neighbor as thyself.

Yet as Paul says in Galatians why would anyone want to put that yoke of slavery on again??? Why would you want to go back to the law when you have christ? Galatians 5:1

I encourage you to read Galatians Deeply. Paul realy hits the nail on the head in this one about this. He talks in detail about the role of the law in our lives, the freedom of a christian, and what we should do with it.

What do you think Paul meant in his treatment of the law in that book? I don't think that one could really say that he doesn't think one should not obey the civil and moral law; do you?

 

[JVAC]

What do you think Paul meant in his treatment of the law in that book? I don't think that one could really say that he doesn't think one should not obey the civil and moral law; do you?

Paul meant to clarify the laws role. As Christians, we are subject to no law, because the authority we are under is that of Christ. We are in his kingdom, where He alone is the master. The end of the law is Christ (Gal 3:24 Rom 10:4).

Now, St. Paul did not encourage the church in Galatia to continue sinning. In 5:13-15 he teaches that we shouldn't use the freedom to go astray, but to live in love, for if we did not, we would surely cause our own destruction. 5:16-26 continues to tell us to live by the Spirit, which would live by love, rather than the flesh, which lives to please the flesh.

Paul is not stating anything new, in Deuteronomy 6:1-3, Paul's message is resounded in the old Pentateuch. Here the LORD comands, decrees and laws are set forth, as guideliness for fruitful living. This in order to bring long life, many decendants, and to perpetuate life in the land of "milk and honey".

Yet, Paul says that christians don't need these laws, for they live by the Spirit, who seeks these things. Therefore, what need is the christian of law?

Knowing that we don't need it we freely submit to it, for civilities sake. Yet the Christian should not be in favour of laws over christians, instead they should be infavor of laws over the unchristian. That is why we submit to laws of civility. Not for our sake but for the sake of the evil ones, that they may not ravage the world.

So Christians have no need of the law, it is the evil that need the law, to be bounded like viscous dogs. I don't think, nor does Paul, that the Christians should be governred by law.