<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bully&#039;s Blog &#187; Theonomy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/tag/theonomy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp</link>
	<description>Theology you can eat and drink</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2018 08:35:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.28</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Theonomists and the Gospel</title>
		<link>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2018/04/27/theonomists-and-the-gospel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2018/04/27/theonomists-and-the-gospel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2018 09:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Bull]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christian Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quotes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Field]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theonomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=16645</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dominion comes through service &#8230; It is idolatrous to seek dominion primarily by political means, whether by domination or anarchic revolution. From the archives of David P. Field’s blog, Thursday, August 24, 2006. Doug Wilson’s line, &#8220;True postmodernism is theonomic postmillennialism&#8221; prompts me to dig up a little heap of quotations which I extracted, in 1993, [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-16646" alt="St Stephens Cathedral interior" src="http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/St-Stephens-Cathedral-interior.jpg" width="468" height="265" /></p>
<h3>Dominion comes through service &#8230; It is idolatrous to seek dominion primarily by political means, whether by domination or anarchic revolution.</h3>
<p><span id="more-16645"></span></p>
<p>From the archives of David P. Field’s blog, Thursday, August 24, 2006.</p>
<blockquote><p><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-550" alt="davidfield" src="http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/davidfield.jpg" width="170" height="227" />Doug Wilson’s line, &#8220;True postmodernism is theonomic postmillennialism&#8221; prompts me to dig up a little heap of quotations which I extracted, in 1993, from some of the theonomist books, mostly published in the previous ten years or so. Theonomists were accused of abandoning evangelism and the church, being obsessed with politics, and seeking to ‘impose’ the kingdom and this series of quotations left me wondering whether the theonomists’ critics were being altogether fair (!).</p>
<p>That was a long time ago. You may not believe it but in those days the evangelical gate-keepers, the self-appointed guardians of the tradition were quite often guilty of not-reading, mis-reading, or mis-representing the works of those they declared a danger to the church even though the theonomists’ entire appeal was to Scripture. I don’t suppose anything like that could happen these days.</p>
<p>These are the books from which the quotations come:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>The Changing of the Guard</i> &#8211; George Grant<br />
<i>Calvinism Today </i><br />
<i>Healer of the Nations</i> &#8211; Gary North<br />
<i>House Divided</i> &#8211; Greg Bahnsen &amp; Kenneth Gentry<br />
<i>Theonomy: An Informed Response</i> &#8211; ed. Gary North<br />
<i>Inherit the Earth</i> &#8211; Gary North<br />
<i>The Institutes of Biblical Law</i> &#8211; R.J. Rushdoony<br />
<i>No Other Standard</i> &#8211; Greg Bahnsen<br />
<i>Paradise Restored</i> &#8211; David Chilton<br />
<i>Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt-Manipulators</i> &#8211; David Chilton<br />
<i>The Reduction of Christianity</i> &#8211; Peter Leithart &amp; GaryDeMar<br />
<i>Theonomy in Christian Ethics</i> &#8211; Greg Bahnsen<br />
<i>Tools of Dominion</i> &#8211; Gary North<br />
<i>Westminister&#8217;s Confession</i> &#8211; Gary North</p></blockquote>
<p>And the quotations may as well sit on blogger as on my hard disk &#8230;</p>
<ul>
<li>It must be stressed that the creation of a Christian nation could be accomplished only as a result of the widespread work of the Holy Spirit, not through some bureaucratic top-down, coercively imposed order on a non-Christian majority by a Christian minority. <i>Healer </i>p.34</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>It is the missionary &#8230; who is best equipped to begin the bottom-up process of evangelism that ultimately leads to the establishment of a covenanted confederation of Christian nations. <i>Healer </i>p.157</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>We must seek reform first in the Church, not in the State. The focus on the State as the primary institution of life is the humanist myth of the age. It must not become the myth of Christian reconstruction. <i>Healer </i>p.287</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>What is God&#8217;s historic means of making the world better ? The preaching of the gospel. <i>Reduction</i> p.xx</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>One of the distinctives of Christian reconstruction is its aversion to the use of politics as the method to bring about social change &#8230;. But why all the attention to politics in reconstructionist literature &#8230; ? The answer is very simple. Politics has become the saviour of the people. Reconstructionists write about politics and civil government in order to call Christians and non-Christians back to their only Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ. <i>Reduction </i>p.21f</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Christian reconstructionists are looking for the transformation of all of society, including families, churches, business establishments, the legal profession, education, economics, journalism, the media and civil government through personal redemption and adherence to the Bible as the standard for godly rule. <i>Reduction </i>p.23</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Dominion comes through service &#8230; It is idolatrous to seek dominion primarily by political means, whether by domination or anarchic revolution. <i>Reduction </i>p.25</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Evangelism is the starting point of social transformation. <i>Reduction </i>p.189</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The key to remedying the [present] situation is &#8230; regeneration. There is no hope for man except in regeneration &#8230; True reform begins with regeneration and then the submission of the believer to the whole law-word of God. <i>Institutes</i>, pp.113, 449, 627</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The chief blessing of the kingdom is forgiveness of sins. <i>Reduction </i>p.217</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>It is through the Spirit-filled church, proclaiming the gospel, that the kingdom of Christ extends throughout the world. <i>Reduction</i>, p.220</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The negative reaction to social reform comes from secularized attempts to do what only the gospel can do. This reaction is legitimate but it should not deter Christians from being truly evangelical in their attempts at reform. <i>Reduction</i>, p.286</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The church, not the family or the state is the central institution in history. <i>Informed</i>, p.204</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>If we really do need a graduate school in theology, let us finance one. But let us no longer fool the donors into believing that this sort of rarified academic institution is necessary or even useful for training pastors &#8230; For now, let us get on with the task at hand: the evangelization of the world. <i>Informed</i>, p.340f</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The authors of this book &#8230; know very well that Christian faith centers on the saving work of Jesus Christ. They profess to love the Savior with all their heart. They know that their new life in Him, their new status of being right with God, and their hope of eternal life have been granted to them by the grace of God. They have nothing of which to boast. With Paul they would say, &#8216;Far be it from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified unto me and I unto the world&#8217;. Having been saved from the world, their concern is to love their Lord with all their heart, soul, strength and mind. They now want to walk in those good works which God intends for them. They make a sincere effort to heed the words of Christ to &#8216;seek above all the kingdom of God and His righteousness&#8217;. They know that this kingdom, for which they pray regularly, will not be consummated until after the return of Jesus Christ and the final judgment, when all believers will then rejoice in a new heaven and earth wherein righteousness dwells. In the meantime they seek to perfect personal holiness in the fear of God and to make all the nations disciples of their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It is only in the light and context of these beliefs and practices that they see and understand their Reconstructionist position in ethics and eschatology. <i>House</i>, p.3f</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>It must be understood the Reconstructionists believe that evangelism is the absolute pre-condition to worldwide, postmillennial, theocratic success &#8230; We insist that cultural influence and change are to be promoted by God&#8217;s people &#8211; who are saved by grace alone &#8211; at large in their callings, not by the institutional Church as such. <i>House</i>, p.194</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Evangelism, leading to baptism, comes first. <i>House</i>, p.194</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Christian Reconstructionists do not believe that man can be fundamentally changed by changing the conditions of society. Instead we believe that society will be changed when men are first changed inwardly by the Gospel and then seek to apply that change to the spheres of life in which they are involved. Tony Baxter, <i>CT</i> I.4 17</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>First and foremost, our emphasis is on the proclamation of the saving power of God through Jesus Christ; and then the regenerate man applying the whole word of God to every sphere of life. Rushdoony, <i>CT</i> II.1 14</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The message of the kingdom of God rests on a concept of salvation which is supernaturally imparted, not politically imparted. <i>Tools</i>, p.38</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The primary need today, as always, is the need for widespread personal repentance before God. <i>Tools</i>, p.39</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The basis for building a Christian society is evangelism and missions that lead to a widespread Christian revival, so that the great mass of earth&#8217;s inhabitants will place themselves under Christ&#8217;s protection, and voluntarily use His covenantal laws for self-government. Christian reconstruction begins with personal conversion to Christ and self-government under God&#8217;s law, then spreads to others through revival and only later does it bring comprehensive changes in civil law, when the vast majority of voters voluntarily agree to live under Biblical blueprints. <i>Tools</i>, p.55</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The key to cultural transformation is the gospel. <i>Productive</i>, p.234</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>My slogan is &#8216;politics fourth&#8217; &#8230; it is my concern after individual salvation, church membership and family membership. <i>Westminster&#8217;s</i>, p.158</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Politics is not central. The worship of God is central. <i>Changing</i>, p.xx</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>What Christians should say in response to humanism&#8217;s political theology is that God&#8217;s Church, as the institution entrusted by God with His Word and His sacraments, is the central institution of history. <i>Changing</i>, p.xx</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Christian Reconstructionists categorically deny that politics is central to social change. The reformation of the Church is central; every other positive social change will flow from this one. <i>Changing</i>, p.xxi</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The goal of Christian political action then is not to usher in a theocracy but to acknowledge the theocracy that already exists &#8230;. Christian political action is not supposed to impose a messianic kingdom from the top down. Only God can lawfully control the hearts of men by imposing His rule &#8230;. Christian political action is therefore a bottom-up and inside-out process. <i>Changing</i>, p.11</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The orthodox Christian faith cannot be reduced to personal experiences, academic discussions, or culture-building activity &#8211; as important as all these are in varying degrees. The essence of Biblical religion is the worship of God &#8230;. True Christian reconstruction of culture is far from being simply a matter of passing Law X and electing Congressman Y. Christianity is not a political cult. It is the divinely ordained worship of the Most High God. <i>Paradise</i>, p.215</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>I forthrightly reject any reduction of the sacred message to moralism or politics &#8230; the central thrust of the bible is recognized to be the accomplishment and application of salvation to God&#8217;s people. <i>Theonomy</i>, p.33f</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>I don&#8217;t disagree that the issues taken up in <i>Theonomy</i> are of subordinate importance in the Christian life, preaching of the church, range of theological loci etc &#8230; Surely the fact that some Christians take up the question of God&#8217;s law and its relation to modern penology &#8211; and that some write on the subject &#8211; does not mean that they believe that subject is the most vital issue for all believers (or even for themselves). <i>No Other</i>, p.43</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>We may readily grant that socio-political reconstruction has less urgency than personal spirituality or the church, but this does not bear whatsoever upon the truth or error of the theonomic standard for politics. <i>No Other</i>, p.51</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<div id="facebook_like"><iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bullartistry.com.au%2Fwp%2F2018%2F04%2F27%2Ftheonomists-and-the-gospel%2F&amp;layout=standard&amp;show_faces=true&amp;width=500&amp;action=like&amp;font=segoe+ui&amp;colorscheme=light&amp;height=80" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:500px; height:80px;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2018/04/27/theonomists-and-the-gospel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pietism, Quietism, Pluralism, Theonomy and Theocracy</title>
		<link>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/12/12/pietism-quietism-pluralism-theonomy-and-theocracy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/12/12/pietism-quietism-pluralism-theonomy-and-theocracy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Bull]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Quotes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dispensationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[James Jordan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pietism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Secular humanism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theonomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=3936</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An interesting excerpt from James Jordan&#8217;s review of Wayne House and Thomas Ice&#8217;s, Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse?: An Analysis of Christian Reconstructionism The quietist is committed to inaction. The pietist, by way of contrast, is frequently active in social and charitable affairs, but what makes his position inadequate is that pietism is in general uninterested in [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--StartFragment--></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/jbjmono.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-17" title="jbjmono" src="http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/jbjmono.jpg" alt="jbjmono" width="124" height="156" /></a>An interesting excerpt from James Jordan&#8217;s review of Wayne House and Thomas Ice&#8217;s, <em>Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse?: An Analysis of Christian Reconstructionism</em></p>
<blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">The quietist is committed to inaction. The pietist, by way of contrast, is frequently active in social and charitable affairs, but what makes his position inadequate is that pietism is in general uninterested in social theory. (In general, pietist movements are not much interested in theology either.) There is no self-conscious reflection on the concerns of political philosophy in the broad sense. It is simply a matter of &#8220;doing good&#8221; here and there, without reflection. This is not bad, but it does not go far enough.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><span id="more-3936"></span>Pietism works fine in a society that is generally Christian, where the rules are agreed upon. With a background of Christian consensus, pietist movements were able to eliminate the slave trade in England, for instance. Pietism is largely impotent, however, in the face of radical secularism and demonism. Lacking both theology and social theory, it simply does not go deep enough to be able to face such problems.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Modern pietists seem to assume that modern pluralism provides the social fabric within which they can &#8220;do good&#8221; without having to reflect intensively on social theory. In reality, modern pluralism is a &#8220;naked public square.&#8221; It is not a social fabric, but the lack of one. It is the self-conscious assertion that no social fabric is necessary. Formerly, Christian society provided the social fabric, within which other religions were <span style="text-decoration: underline;">tolerated </span>or given <span style="text-decoration: underline;">sanctuary</span>, provided they did not attempt to overthrow the Christian social fabric. Pluralism is the opposite of this. It rejects the ideas of tolerance and sanctuary (which are found in the Mosaic law) in favor of the idea of social anarchy. For that reason, pluralism in practice is extremely intolerant, as we see more clearly every day.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Jesus was quite clear on the effects of such a position. He stated that when a demon is driven from a man, it wanders in dry places but eventually returns to its former house to see if the Holy Spirit has or has not been given residence. Finding it empty, the demon gets seven other demons, worse than himself, and these eight return to inhabit the man. In context, this statement was not made concerning an individual but a society: Israel (Matthew 12:43-45; cf. vv. 38ff.). It is a rule for society and it shows the long-term effects of a commitment to social neutrality or pluralism. A perfect illustration can be seen in the history of Germany. The Reformation cast the demon out, but Germany did not sustain her reception of the Spirit, and the result was the demonic octave of National Socialism. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">&#8230;contrary to dispensationalism and pluralism, the Christian social tradition has always been theocratic. Not theonomic, but theocratic &#8212; that is, committed to the belief that society cannot be neutral and should be in some sense Christian.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Available as part of the complete James Jordan collection from <a href="http://www.wordmp3.com/details.aspx?id=9806">wordmp3.com</a><br />
</span></p>
<div id="facebook_like"><iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bullartistry.com.au%2Fwp%2F2009%2F12%2F12%2Fpietism-quietism-pluralism-theonomy-and-theocracy%2F&amp;layout=standard&amp;show_faces=true&amp;width=500&amp;action=like&amp;font=segoe+ui&amp;colorscheme=light&amp;height=80" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:500px; height:80px;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/12/12/pietism-quietism-pluralism-theonomy-and-theocracy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should Murderers Be Stoned to Death?</title>
		<link>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/10/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/10/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 07:31:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Bull]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AD70]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Atonement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Haman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Herod]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joseph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mordecai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theonomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=781</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a lot of truth in theonomy. But things have changed since the time of Moses. At that point, the church and state were basically one. After the exile, things were different. The role of the Jews was to be priests within the Gentile state. They no longer had the right to administer capital punishment. When [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a lot of truth in theonomy. But things have changed since the time of Moses. At that point, the church and state were basically one.</p>
<p>After the exile, things were different. The role of the Jews was to be <em>priests</em> within the Gentile state. They no longer had the right to administer capital punishment. When they witnessed faithfully, there was a Jew at the emperor&#8217;s right hand, steering the empire for God&#8217;s people and their stand for the truth.</p>
<p>By the time of Christ, instead of a Joseph, Daniel or Mordecai, the Jews had a Haman, a Herod. Instead of being a nation of priests, they wanted a king like the Gentiles. This makes Herod even more culpable for his role in the death of Christ, standing (legally) at the right hand of the power.</p>
<p>I believe the church today is exactly the same. The church administers &#8216;inhouse&#8217; justice through excommunication. When the church is faithful in disciplining itself, and thus witnesses faithfully, it stands side by side with the state in administering capital punishment. Our failure to witness has led to &#8216;life&#8217; for murderers and death for the innocent.</p>
<p>The Bible is clear on the shedding of innocent blood. A murderer dies to atone for the blood he shed. It is judicial. Correlating capital punishment with abortion is a total misunderstanding of justice.</p>
<p>As in AD70, perhaps all the innocent blood shed in this gospel age will be atoned for by the final generation. The murderers are marked like Cain for now, but Abel&#8217;s blood will be atoned for.</p>
<div id="facebook_like"><iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bullartistry.com.au%2Fwp%2F2009%2F04%2F10%2Fshould-murderers-be-stoned-to-death-2%2F&amp;layout=standard&amp;show_faces=true&amp;width=500&amp;action=like&amp;font=segoe+ui&amp;colorscheme=light&amp;height=80" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:500px; height:80px;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/10/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should Murderers Be Stoned to Death?</title>
		<link>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death/</link>
		<comments>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Bull]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Biblical Theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AD70]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daniel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Haman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joseph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mordecai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theonomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Witness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/?p=328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a lot of truth in theonomy. But things have changed since the time of Moses. At that point, the church and state were basically one. After the exile, things were different. The role of the Jews was to be priests within the Gentile state. They no longer had the right to administer capital punishment. When [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a lot of truth in theonomy. But things have changed since the time of Moses. At that point, the church and state were basically one.</p>
<p>After the exile, things were different. The role of the Jews was to be <em>priests</em> within the Gentile state. They no longer had the right to administer capital punishment. When they witnessed faithfully, there was a Jew at the emperor&#8217;s right hand, steering the empire for God&#8217;s people and their stand for the truth.</p>
<p><span id="more-328"></span>By the time of Christ, instead of a Joseph, Daniel or Mordecai, the Jews had a Haman, a Herod. Instead of being a nation of priests, they wanted a king like the Gentiles. This makes Herod even more culpable for his role in the death of Christ, standing (legally) at the right hand of the power.</p>
<p>I believe the church today is exactly the same. The church administers &#8216;inhouse&#8217; justice through excommunication. When the church is faithful in disciplining itself, and thus witnesses faithfully, it stands side by side with the state in administering capital punishment. Our failure to witness has led to &#8216;life&#8217; for murderers and death for the innocent.</p>
<p>The Bible is clear on the shedding of innocent blood. A murderer dies to atone for the blood he shed. It is judicial. Correlating capital punishment with abortion is a total misunderstanding of justice.</p>
<p>As in AD70, perhaps all the innocent blood shed in this gospel age will be atoned for by the final generation. The murderers are marked like Cain for now, but Abel&#8217;s blood will be atoned for.</p>
<div id="facebook_like"><iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bullartistry.com.au%2Fwp%2F2009%2F04%2F08%2Fshould-murderers-be-stoned-to-death%2F&amp;layout=standard&amp;show_faces=true&amp;width=500&amp;action=like&amp;font=segoe+ui&amp;colorscheme=light&amp;height=80" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:500px; height:80px;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/should-murderers-be-stoned-to-death/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
