I once asked Gary North what he considered, of all the books he’s written, the most important one to read. If someone is only going to read one, which should it be? Having written near 40 or so books, he looked up into his cranial archives, perusing for a moment, but not for long. “Tools of Dominion,” he quoth. I am beginning to understand why. It is an exegetical tour de force covering the book of the law like it has never been done before or since.

My last article addressing the tired arguments of certain critics of theonomy received several comments, some in agreement, others skeptical, some hostile. In some of the skeptical comments I detected a willingness to hear a theonomic answer to modern problems, and this is a great thing. There seems to be, however, mixed with the thinking of every moderately interested person who has not yet read a substantial theonomic work, a bit of hesitation founded on the standard reactions to our message. These (many) typical arguments and hesitations have been given solid answers already. I do not, therefore, intend to recount them here, but to direct the interested questioners to what has already been written. And fear not! You won’t even have to buy a book, because the North, whose tome I recommend here, has placed his work online for free (free online or in pdf). Good theology for free: who can compete with that deal?

Two matters must suffice for the space of this article, and to direct those who really wish to pursue the topic into North’s more detailed literature. First, one commenter asks “How far do we go in making civil law mirror Biblical law?” and then lists the several striking situations for which the law calls for the death penalty. Are we to continue executions for rebellious sons, adulterers, occultists, Sabbath breakers, etc.?

That this question involves difficult issues is undeniable, but we know that Jesus Himself appealed to the case of capital punishment for children who “curse” (there’s a lot laden in that word) their parents (Matt. 15:4; Mark 7:10), so by Christ’s example we should not be too quick to dismiss tough Old Testament passages even if they sound uncomfortable to us. Rather, we should seek a fully Biblical understanding of Biblical law before we even try to think about applications to modern society.

As it turns out, the main issue involved with capital punishment in the Bible is the principle of Victim’s Rights. Gary North has spelled this out in Tools of Dominion, pages 278-320 (free online or in pdf) where he has shown how capital punishment is to be understood in each of several cases. Execution is not always mandatory, but is allowable in some circumstances based on the victim’s decision which the judge must honor. If we react to these Biblical passages with knee-jerk horror it says nothing but that we have not understood the Bible thoroughly. Is God a bloodthirsty tyrant, as the atheists love to deduce from OT law? Was God previously a bloodthirsty tyrant in OT times, as some liberal positions explain it away? Or do we need a deeper understanding altogether? Read North’s book if you really desire to at least begin understanding these passages.

The application of Biblical law in these tough sounding cases, I believe, is one of the greatest inhibitors to many people in accepting a fully-biblical worldview. This especially includes many pastors and scholars who do not want to have to hear the inevitable needling from their liberal and humanist peers. They don’t want to have to explain the tough passages (mainly because they’ve never sought an explanation). One commenter says that some people express fear that theonomy is a racist movement hoping to rid society of those who disagree with us. He admits this is extreme, but tags on, “the ‘fear’ is out there.” Believe me, we know this. The fear is out there. But since when do we join or spurn a movement based on someone else’s misconception of it? I, for one, am determined to expel those fears through explanation every chance I get. I hope I get a lot of chances, because a lot of people carry the misconceptions. That “fear” not only exists but runs rampant, and is only exacerbated by writers like Horton and Gordon whom I criticized in my last article. People who refuse to educate themselves beyond their surface reactionism don’t help matters much either. Asking the tough questions as honest questions is a good start.

“What about John 8?” is also a commonly recurring question. Christ had the opportunity to affirm the death penalty when the Pharisees brought the adulterous woman before him. He “prevented” or “stopped” them, and “let her go,” it is argued. Was He acting contrary to law? North addresses this question also, making it clear that Christ actually adhered closely to the law. Whatever Christ wrote on the ground (we don’t know) made the “accusers” depart, and that eliminated the case because there were left no witnesses. Yes, Christ was digging deep into the spiritual nature of the law, and calling for mercy, but He did it within the framework of the law. There were other legal infractions made by the Pharisees, also, and Christ essentially throws the case out of court. To argue that the fact that Christ did not call for capital punishment in this instance indicates that He rejected that form of punishment is an argument from silence—an argument from what He did not say, which is pure speculation. There is much more to the story.

There are many such arguments from silence out there, and they are almost all fallacious. That Jesus never criticized prison when He mentioned it is no argument that He condoned it. This is making an argument from what Jesus did not say. I expect these arguments from the atheists who love to use them also. For example, Sam Harris writes, “There is no place in the New Testament where Jesus objects to the practice of slavery.”[1] I answer, “So what?” There are so many assumptions and innuendos in Harris’ claim that I cannot take space here to refute them. The point is, he is simply basing an argument on what is not said, and thus basing an argument on nothing. Let us not imitate this desperate example.

A final question for now is that of timing and strategy. When theonomists begin to talk about a Biblical society, the radical divide between that ideal and what we all see around us in modern society forces an immediate mental halt. How will we accomplish this? How will unbelievers react to Biblical law? Imagine what would happen if this all changed overnight!

Let us be clear: no theonomist I know or have heard has ever expected or called for these changes to happen overnight or anything close to overnight. Not even “soon.” Some people for some reason envision us plotting to seize all of the seats of power (how I don’t know) and then rewriting all of the existing laws to effect an oppressive bloodthirsty desire to kill everyone who disagrees with us. (That these comments come from Christians makes them the more slanderous.) In the unlikely event, however, that in one series of elections and appointments, Christ-centered theonomic judges, governors, representatives at every level, and a president were elected, and all the laws of society changed to reflect Biblical standards, the theonomic platform would then not be advanced. Theonomy cannot be advanced from the top-down in this manner.[2] God’s law was given from above, yes, but only for a covenantal people who were to acknowledge the law from the bottom-up through the covenant.

I, along with very other theonomist I know, have felt the weight of this issue for a long time. It is one thing to have a view of an ideal society—some would scoff, “utopia”—and yet an even greater thing to have (I speak hypothetically) finally arrived at the one true Biblical ideal of society. Bearing the feelings within of having something even close to these ideals leaves theonomists standing before our Lord like the disciples asking, “When shall these things be?”

To those of us young or not so young, eager or long ready to see great change, the answer comes as convicting as Christ’s later answer, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority”(Acts 1:7). This demands patience, during which we engage in gradual persuasion, evangelism, and prayer over some time. The postmillennial answer demands even more patience: “not yet for a long time.” We believe in gradual work, through persuasion, not through imposition on an unwilling culture. Yet we strongly disagree with our critics who also emphasize “suasion,” and may even speak of “culture” once in a while, but then deny the validity of turning that persuasion towards legal, social, political and economic issues. Revival, these critics say, is only a spiritual thing, not cultural. Theonomists disagree. It is not either/or but both/and.

But there’s a catch-22 in all of this. How will theonomic revival arrive? Massive revival swept the U.S. at least twice in our history, each time to leave only a wake of pietism (anti-social reform) among the masses. The manifestations of some of these revivals involved people bent in charismatic convulsions, swooning, and barking like dogs. “Revival” so defined may redeem people, but has never looked at society seriously enough to extend God’s redemptive plan to that length. The type of revival that is needed will incorporate the type of preaching found in the prophets and the apostles: the prosecution of God’s law against a law-breaking society, and a call to repentance. This is the catch-22: Theonomy requires revival, but revival requires preaching theonomy. Christ is still the only answer for salvation to this law-breaking society, and that salvation is by grace not works; but the standard of the redeemed society that is to follow can only be the same standard by which we are sanctified as individuals: The law of God.

When shall these things be? I have no idea. A long way off, probably. But until they manifest we are not justified in disregarding social change as if the Bible does not address it. It is central to the Bible, the Bible’s plan is of freedom and glory, and we must preach that message. For those who have honest questions, there is enough already written to answer nearly every objection in a profoundly Biblical and theological way. North’s 1300 page book is a great place to start. Please do.