Dominion Theology: Strengths and Weaknesses of the Movement

.
Part III on Dominion Theology

Continued from Part II: Theological Distinctives of the Movement


Strengths of Dominion Theology:

In many ways, the Christian Reconstructionist movement is similar to most conservative evangelical churches. The understanding of the unalterableness of God, for example, is essential, foundational awareness. The theology of regeneration is also standard, well grounded theology and critical to man's relationship with God.

Theonomy, while not a standard doctrine, has comforted many Christians who are troubled by the state of our fallen society, giving them a promise of a calmer, saner world under Biblical standards. Chilton also explains Postmillennialism this way;

"before the Second Coming of Christ, the world will be successfully evangelized and discipled to Christianity…our view of the future is inescapably bound up with our view of Jesus Christ. The fact that Jesus is now King of kings and Lord of lords means that His Gospel must be victorious: The Holy Spirit will bring the water of life to the ends of the earth. The Christian message is one of Hope: Pentecost was just the beginning."

Although the Assemblies of God denounced postmillennialism as heresy in response to Dominion Theology in 1988, many Christians from various corners still debate premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism and will probably continue to do so until Christ comes again. Postmillennialism is simply an area in which Christians must agree to disagree.


Weakness of Dominion Theology:

The normal translation of "πληρόω" is "fulfill" not "confirm," and Scripture that teaches that Christians are no longer under the Law include Romans 6:14; 7:6; 8:2-4; and Galatians 3:24,25; 5:18. Also, while most Christian theologians see the purpose of regeneration to be for the Glorification of God, Theonomists believe it to be for the work of God's dominion over all the earth.

Theonomists also don't stick as close to literal translations as other Christian groups do. They see a system of patterns and associations within symbolic Biblical terms and state that the Bible is to be read "visually," meaning to take a term used in the Bible and see it for not only what it is, but also what associations are made with it. When it comes to numbers, Theonomists are more likely to see them symbolically then literally as well. The numbers 40 and 1000, in particular, can simply mean periods of time rather than actual time.

However, in the matter of Biblical, Mosaic Law, Theonomists take Scripture quite literally.

Concerning the division of Mosaic Law into three parts: John Calvin was the first to divide Old Testament law this way. But he believed that the judicial law, which provided for fairness in the civil government of Israel, was for Israel alone. To Calvin, only the moral law was eternally applicable, but even so, its application might vary in case law from culture to culture. However, Scripture does not seem to break the law into three sections. Whenever the Law is mentioned, it seems to be in reference to the whole Law.
Some would say that either the believer has been released from the whole law (Rom. 7:4, 6) or none of it.

Most importantly, Reconstructionists confuse Mosaic Law with eternal law. It is not outward signs or ceremonial purity that insures our place with God; it is the inward circumcision of the heart. No one can uphold the law perfectly, but that doesn't matter to God because He looks at the heart. Paul, a man fully regenerated and filled with the Holy Spirit, remarked in Acts 15:10 that the law had been too difficult for anyone to bear. If man was unable to keep the law during Old Testament times, how will man do it now?

Paul also says that the law was a learning tool to lead us to Christ, while the book of Acts indicates that Mosaic Law was not binding on Gentiles. The Apostles only required that Gentiles obey the instructions given by God to Noah (Acts 15:20). Would a theocracy then have two different sets of laws; one set for believers and another set, more relaxed, for non-believers?

Peter and Paul also very clearly considered the non-Christian Roman government as God's instrument on earth. This was believed even during persecution. If the New Testament teaches that a non-Christian government can be part of God's rule on the earth, then establishing a Christian Theocracy is not mandated in Scripture. Whether the State submits to God or not, God still rules.

Finally, history is filled with failed theocracies. Rome, London, Geneva, and Saxony, confused secular power with divine mandate. Because of the experience of history and the pain such governments had caused, our Forefathers wrote wording within the Constitution specifically meant to prevent state religion. While Reconstructionists advocate decentralization consisting of family, church, schools, and local government as a way to prevent the totalitarianism of previous governments, what could develop is a system of checkerboard law with punishments varying from community to community with the potential for dictatorship and unaccountable cruelty in any one community. If apostasy and idolatry are determined to be capitol crimes, as both Rushdoony and Bahnsen have said they would be, how would it be established which interpretation of Scripture determines apostasy? It was not outcasts who persecuted Polycarp, Hus or Wycliffe and crucified
Jesus, but religious leaders who claimed to be serving God.

A last thought concerns the State of Israel. While Reconstructionists do believe that individual Jews will be converted to Christ in the future, few of them believe that national Israel has a future. This theology has been termed by some as "replacement theology;" replacing Israel completely with the modern church. This is an area of divided thought among Christians. Some outside of the Christian church see it as anti-Semitism.


Conclusion

Does Dominion Theology offer a dangerous shift from "Gospel and the Kingdom of God" to "law and the kingdom of man?"

Dominion Theology is not a cult. It is a part of the conservative, evangelical movement occurring throughout society. However, while focusing on legalism, they are ignoring the sanctifying purpose and loving gift of the life and death of Jesus Christ. Jesus has already done the work. All that is left to do is to abide in Him and listen to the Holy Spirit's guiding direction. He will do the rest through us. There is nothing more than that.

Therefore, it is the opinion of this writer that Dominion Theology, in its focus toward man and law, does pose a dangerous shift of attention away from the Gospel of grace and the circumcision of the heart. There is also concern that large numbers of well-respected people have been seduced by faulty exegesis.



Bibliography

Smith, David L. A Handbook of Contemporary Theology: Tracing trends & Discerning
Directions in Today's Theological Landscape. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992.

Economics America, Inc. The Right Guide. 4th ed. Ed. Derk Arend Wilcox. Ann Arbor:
Economics America, Inc. 2000.

Biblical Discernment Ministries. Dominion Theology/Kingdom Now/Reconstructionism
Blessing or Curse? Valparaiso, Indiana. 1997. Online. 12 April, 2005.
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/cor/dominion.htm

Peterson, Jefferis Kent. Reconstructionist Theology - A Flaw in the Foundation of Dominion
Theology. 2004. Online. 12 April, 2005. .

David Chilton. Paradise Restored; a Biblical Theology of Dominion. ICE free Books, 1996.
Online. 13 April, 2005. .

Dominion Theology: Theological Distinctives of the Movement

.
Part II on Dominion Theology

Continued from Part I: Introduction to Dominion Theology

Three basic concepts held by Dominionists are:
1. the unalterableness of God,
2. God's Character as perfectly reflected in His law, and
3. because of the first two concepts, God's laws are eternal and are binding on all peoples of all times.

Along with these three concepts are three foundational doctrines within Dominion Theology:
1. Personal Regeneration,
2. the application of Biblical law to all areas of life (theonomy), and
3. The advance of the already present kingdom of God in history (postmillennialism).


Dominionism and Theonomy

Christian Reconstructionists believe all the basic doctrinal truths of the Christian faith, including inerrancy of the Bible, personal regeneration, and the truth of heaven and hell and that Old Testament Israel, according to Paul in the book of Romans, has been replaced with the modern Church of Jesus Christ. Thus, the Church has taken over the covenant promises God made to Israel.

But Theonomists also see the New Testament clearly showing that the Word of God, "all Scripture," should be legally applied to all areas of life and God intended for government is to be a theocracy. By theocracy, it is meant that God would govern the nation through the moral and legal code already revealed in the laws of the Bible. The legal code referred to by Apostle Paul in the New Testament was the Old Testament, Mosaic Law alone because the New Testament hadn't yet been complied, but does not include the Mosaic ceremonial law.

The Mosaic Law has been divided into three parts: moral, ceremonial and judicial. The ceremonial law foreshadowed Christ and was fulfilled by Christ's death and resurrection while both the moral and civil parts of the law as still relevant. Therefore, Reconstructionists believe that Christians are obligated to keep Old Testament law, with the exception of that which the New Testament clearly cancels, such as with the sacrificial system.

It is also believed that civil servants are required to be God's ministers just as much as priests and pastors. This concept is based on an understanding of Romans 13:1-4. Matthew 5:17-19, concerning Christ's intention for the law, is also a foundational scripture. Bahnsen believed that the word "πληρόω" in Matt. 5:17-19 is best translated "confirm" rather than fulfill, and thus Jesus' statement really means that he is here to restore the Mosaic Law. Bahnsen uses the word "theonomy" and defines it as the responsibility of the Christian to "keep the whole law of God as a pattern for sanctification, and that this law is to be enforced by the civil magistrate where and how the stipulations of God so designate."

Rushdoony agrees, stating that apart from Biblical law no standard of law exists. Fallen creation is incapable of forming a moral code to govern the nations. Supporting Scripture includes Gen. 1:28, where God commands Adam to subdue the earth. However, because Adam lost his ability to do so as a result of sin, Theonomists believe the church needs to now reclaim from Satan what Adam had lost.

Finally, because the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20) commands the followers of Christ to disciple all the nations, Theonomists believe that along with personal salvation and sanctification, the legal and political reformation of society is necessary. Their goal, therefore, is to establish a theocracy by a democratic action in the United States and all nations. Government would be decentralized and would not administer business, education, or social welfare any longer. Society would also be patriarchal with strong property rights. To aid the poor, voluntary slavery would be allowed along with gleaning on private farms after harvest. According to Rushdoony, crimes such as robbery, embezzlement and vandalism would require restitution and indentured servitude. Crimes such as homosexuality, abortion, heresy, blasphemy and adultery would receive the death penalty. Christian Reconstructionists expect that with faithful application of the law, God will bless the nation.

Postmillennialism and Regeneration

Just as many other conservative Christians, Dominionists know the Kingdom of God is already here, growing, and on course to fulfillment. But the Kingdom won't be complete until every nation is under God's law and can only be entered in to through individual regeneration. Christians are now living in the Kingdom of God as Sons and Daughters of the Lord, while non-Christians are living in it as rebels. With Romans 8:3-4 in mind, Theonomists know that society can not be transformed until individuals within it are transformed. In order for people to have the will to change, evangelism is necessary. Regeneration is a process of God's work in us and can not be completed through politics or war. Thus, regeneration of the individual is very important. Just as mainline Christians, Theonomists believe that regeneration, or being "born again," restores a person to his original purpose in God and works toward the reestablishment of His dominion over all the earth. This was the reason for God creating man in His image. According to Rushdoony, "the key to remedying the situation is not revolution…the key is regeneration, propagation of the Gospel, and the conversion of men and nations to God's law-word." When this happens, Christ will return.

Dominionists, therefore, are also postmillennial, believing we are already experiencing the Millennium. The Millennium began when Christ entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (Matt. 21:5). Christ was enthroned in heaven at his Ascension (Acts 2:30-36). During this time of utopia before Christ's Second Coming, believers are to reclaim nations for Christ, beginning with the United States.

Part III - Strengths and Weaknesses of the Movement

.

Walking the Walk and..What?? "Fulfill what Law?"

.
Continued from Part II - "Does That Include Mosaic Law?"

Part III of V: Are we supposed to kill Chickens or what?


To fulfill the law...to fulfill the law...What did Jesus mean by that? Well, here are some other verses that mention fulfilling the law...

[ Love, for the Day is Near ] "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law." Romans 13:8

"Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." Romans 13:10

"Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ." Galatians 6:2

Wait, now we're right back to something about "loving others" again. Loving others...right...that would mean ...it's all about the heart! There is a Fulfillment to all that detailed law, and Fulfilling the law has something to do with the heart - loving others as God has loved us...

Okay, then. As God has loved us; but ...how did God Love us?

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16

Oh, Right! Jesus, our scape goat, suffered and died so that we would live... he gave His life for us; that's how he loved us...That's the Gospel!

AND we are to love God and others as He loved us - we are to so love the world, that we are willing to give all that is important to us, that others will live. We are to love others to the point that their needs are more important than our own.

So is that what following the Law in Leviticus and Deuteronomy boils down to? Is that what those rules were all about? 'Loving God and Others - as God has loved us' is the fulfilment of the Mosaic law?

Much of Mosaic law had to do with showing respect to God and the community.

Including the Ten Commandments?

Five Parts: Part IV, The Ten Commandments, June 7, 2010
.

Walking the Walk, Part II - Does that include Mosaic law?

.
Continued from Part I; Walking the Walk, ...and Why

Part II of V:  So ...what exactly are God's instructions....


Well, there are the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as well as the Ten commandments...for starters.

Hmmm...but...do we really have to follow Mosaic Law in order to please God?

Well, Yes and No.

Yes, definitely we are to "Love the Lord our God with all our heart, with all our soul and with all our strength." (Deuteronomy 6:5). That's a pretty clear Mosaic instruction, repeated in one form or another throughout the Old and New Testament. But are we supposed to be sacrificing live animals at specified times of the year? The answer to that might be confusing, but ...

Watchman Nee, a Chinese Evangelist, once explained that the purpose of Mosaic Law wasn't in the details of the law itself. The details were just a means to an end. Those detailed rules were needed to show us the impossibility of being "perfect" in our own strength, and our need for a Savior in the form of Jesus Christ. He said -

"...let it be settled at the outset that the fault does not lie with the Law. Paul says, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good" (Rom. 7:12). No, there is nothing wrong with the Law, but there is something decidedly wrong with me. The demands of the Law are righteous, but the person upon whom the demands are made is unrighteous. The trouble is not that the Law's demands are unjust, but that I am unable to meet them...

"I am a man "sold under sin" (Rom. 7:14). Sin has dominion over me. As long as you leave me alone I seem to be rather a fine type of man. It is when you ask me to do something that my sinfulness comes to light.

"If you have a very clumsy servant and he just sits still and does nothing, then his clumsiness does not appear. If he does nothing all day he will be of little use to you, it is true, but at least he will do no damage that way. But if you say to him: 'Now come along, don't idle away your time; get up and do something', then immediately the trouble begins. He knocks the chair over as he gets up, stumbles over a footstool a few paces further on, then smashes some precious dish as soon as he handles it. If you make no demands upon him his clumsiness is never noticed, but as soon as you ask him to do anything his awkwardness is seen at once. ...He was as clumsy a man when he was sitting still as when he was working, but it was your demands that made manifest the clumsiness that was all the time in his make-up, whether he was active or inactive.

We are all sinners by nature. If God asks nothing of us, all seems to go well, but as soon as He demands something of us the occasion is provided for a grand display of our sinfulness. The Law makes our weakness manifest. ...When a holy law is applied to a sinful man, then his sinfulness comes out in full display.

God knows who I am...He knows that I am weakness incarnate; that I can do nothing. The trouble is that I do not know it. I admit that all men are sinners and that therefore I am a sinner; but I imagine that I am not such a hopeless sinner as some. God must bring us all to the place where we see that we are utterly weak and helpless. ...Had it not been for the Law we should never have known how weak we are. Paul had reached that point. He makes this clear when he says in Romans 7:7: "I had not known sin, except through the law: for I had not known coveting, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet". Whatever might be his experience with the rest of the Law, it was the tenth commandment, which literally translated is: "Thou shalt not desire ..." that found him out. There his total failure and incapacity stared him in the face!

The detailed Law had it's purpose; the goal being an understanding of our need for a savior as well as teaching us a context in which we will understand said Savior. The "Scape Goat," for example, in Leviticus 16 was an illustration of how our Savior would atone for us, only, the Israelites didn't know that at the time.

Jesus himself didn't condemn Mosaic law or deem it unimportant. He said in Matthew 5:17, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

To fulfill the law...to fulfill the law...What did he mean by that?


Five Parts: Part III, Fulfilling the Law - June 4, 2010
.

Walking the Walk...and Why, Part I

.
Many non-believers see hypocrisy in the Christian church and delight in pointing it out.

True. Being perfect isn't easy.

Of course, the expectations non-believers put on Christians, as well as the expectations Christians put on other Christians, are silly. Out of the hundreds of people mentioned in the Bible, only one of them is perfect. The rest are just like us. Fundamentally flawed.

For example, despite being a man after God's own heart, David bedded another man's wife, got her pregnant, and then tried to selfishly hide what he had done by arranging for her husband to be killed.

The only thing I can figure about what is meant by David being "a man after God's own heart" is that despite his selfish decisions, David had a heart that, deep down, cared. Every time he made one of his multiple bad, hurtful, decisions, his heart ached over the things he had done, even as he sometimes continued making bad decisions, digging himself deeper in attempt to clean up the initial mess. He paid for those hateful decisions with the loss of people he loved, and when those loses came, he knew why.

He had a conscience. Not everyone does.

He loved God, and despite appearances, he did love others. Not everyone does.

The difference between David and people that are far from God's heart - I figure - is the heart. Some people really don't care when or how they hurt others and they certainly don't care about God. All they really care about is themselves. The Bible mentions again and again how someone's heart was hardened, or how someone's heart was evil, or how the heart needs to be guarded. And how God knows the heart. There is no fooling him with feigned compassion.

So while we will never be perfect in our Christian walk, and it's inevitable that - despite intentions and vows not to - we will end up making some selfish decisions that will hurt others. But we will do even worse if we don't commit ourselves to follow God's instruction, care about His Will, and care how others feel (ie: loving God and others). Only by following his Word and praying that our hearts will become like His can we take noticeable steps away from our selfish nature.

So ...what exactly are God's instructions....

Well, there are the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as well as the Ten commandments...for starters.

Hmmm...but...do we really have to follow Mosaic Law in order to please God?
 
Five Parts:  Part II  Does Walking the Walk and following God's instructions mean following Mosaic Law? - June 1, 2010
.

Theology of Atonement - Part II, the History

.
History, Continued from Part I:

Fifty days later, at Mount Sinai, God gave His law as the foundation of His covenant. (Exodus chapters 19-24). The early animal sacrifices were always symbolic, and blood was always known to be sacred and necessary for atonement and forgiveness. This was true of all bloody sacrifices from the beginning, but now, with Mosaic Law, it was especially true. Burnt offerings, originally from the primeval and patriarchal age, were now joined by other forms of sacrifice. With the previous burnt offerings, the worshipper had not yet broken the Covenant God was to have with Israel, and the offering was meant to cover the general sin attached to every man. The new "sin offering" expressed that covenant WAS broken through the offense, and the offering was meant to restore relationship with God.

There are several Old Testament words for sin. The primary ones being looked at here are Chataah, Chattath, Chata, and Chet. They all refer to an offense, a sacrifice for sin, or a sin offering. Chata is a deeper word, and can also refer to the offender himself, to a habitual sin, to forfeit, repent, lead astray, condemn, bear the blame, or purify. Also used in Lev. 4:3b is the word "Ashmah," which means guiltiness, a fault, or the presentation of a sin offering. It is translated as "offend," "cause of sin," and "trespass." "Shagah," used in Lev. 4:13, means to stray, transgress, be encaptured, and is translated as to "err," "be ravished," "sin through ignorance," and "wander." "Peri Amartia" from Lev. 4:35, 5:6, and 6:17 of the Septuagint, meant "sin-offering."

These offerings were not for the sake of man or the state, but for God. (Lev. 4:1-32, 5:1-8). In addition, the law now divided sacrifices into different classes for different purposes and kept them before the eyes of Israel. God demonstrated the importance of the blood at the consecration of the priests, birth of a child, and even high festivals. (Ex. 23:14-18, 29; Lev. 1-4:1-32, 5:1-19, 6:1-37, and 16:33).

After the covenant was read and accepted by the people of Israel, it needed to be established with blood. Several bulls were killed, and their blood was sprinkled on the altar, the book of the covenant, and the people. This event was the first recorded time of blood being sprinkled directly on people, and therefore, intimates greater accountability.

Immediately after this sacrificial rite, the Lord announced that he wanted a sanctuary built and He would dwell among them. (Exodus chapters 25-30.) He gave strict directions for the building of the tabernacle and it was functionally designed for blood sacrifice. God's blueprint included the necessary furniture designed for the purification of worshippers and the killing of animals, as well as the Most Holy Place, where only the high priest could enter - carrying blood.

Later, the fact that the sanctuary furniture was sprinkled with blood during certain sacrifices reminds the Israelites that the sanctuary was an symbol for the way God inhabits His church and dwells among His people. (Lev. 16:16) It wasn't the building itself that was unworthy; the sins of the people made the sanctuary unworthy as a dwelling place for God. However, God could continue to dwell there if He beheld the blood of atonement. That the people needed the reconciliation and not the place is evidenced in the fact the ceremonies were for the transgressions of Israel (Lev. 16:16) and made atonement for the people and the priests (Lev. 16:33)

The importance of the Blood is further illustrated through the description of the Day of Atonement. On the Day of Atonement, the high priest brought the Blood of the sin offering, which had been collected in front of the people, into the Most Holy Place, where no one but himself was allowed. This illustrates that the Blood offering was for God alone, and the transaction was to take place between only God and His representative. Lev. 17:11.

ALL Bloody sacrifices were atoning. Number one, blood sacrifice was shocking in its character; satisfaction came only through a victim's death. But they also pointed out to the worshipper that he had offended God and God was forced to separate from him. God could not sacrifice His holiness for the sake of His love for the worshipper. So while estranged from God for having broken the covenant, the Israelite was very aware that not only did he have ceremonial guilt and was separated from God's presence, but that death must ensue because the wages of sin is death. The main thought under Mosaic Law was that transgressions violated the order of the universe and had to be punished. No regrets could remove the guilt, so death is the only recourse.

Interestingly, the sins that the Mosaic sacrifices atoned for were not moral sins, such as murder, adultery or idolatry, but offenses against ceremonial law and theocratic purity, including involuntary oversights and sins of ignorance. (Lev. 12:7-8, Num. 6:11). The Law was an external, arbitrary law, and external, arbitrary atonements could cover the resulting offenses to the Law. The Law and its atonement had come into being at the same time, in order to relieve the worshipper, to develop the idea of sin, and awaken consciences to the fact of sin. The same authority that instituted the ceremonial rites could cancel the offenses.

This was not mere penitence. The mediating priest and the laying of his hands on the worshipper's head indicates that the guilt was transferred vividly. The effect of the sacrifices was remission of the penalty, independent of contrition and remorse. Nor was it renewal of homage. It had nothing to do with a friendly feast, but was intended to transfer the sinner's guilt on to a victim. It was meant to prevent penalty that had been earned, and to secure remission of sin (Lev. 4:20)

Continued Part III - The Ritual

.