This is my tenth and final response to what has to be one of the dumbest critiques of theonomy ever written by a Seminary Prof. In this final response Walker outdoes himself in incredible rhetorical flights of fancy.
AW wrote,
The irony of Theonomy is that its proponents, in theory, promote strict free-market capitalism as the logical result of its tenets. In practice, however, Theonomy relies on a subsidy of the state’s backing. It practices a form of welfare assistance by looking to the state for the legitimacy of its enactments. A theological system that seems incapable of existing apart from state sanction is not a system confident in the church’s structure or mission as laid out in the New Testament. It might demand free-market economics, but what results is statist theology.
BLMc responds,
Here we reach the crescendo of stupid. Honestly, the stupidity of this is breath-taking. I’m tempted to say only a Baptist could come up with this level of stupidity but the existence of WestCal Seminary in Escondido prevents me from saying that.
1.) Theonomy looks for the State to define justice as consistent with God’s word and this is equal to a “state subsidy?” If that is the case then every law-order in existence is guilty of taking subsidies from the State. Indeed, Walker plea for Natural law to be the law that the State enforces is likewise guilty of the very same thing he is now accusing Theonomy of.
2.) Walker likewise looks to the State for the legitimacy of the enactments of Natural law. By all that is right, this man cannot be this stupid.
3.) Theonomy has existed now for nigh unto fifty years without state sanction. It’s not going anywhere.
4.) I do hope that Dr. Walker has found in my responses that this theonomist remains plenty confident in the church’s structure and mission as laid out in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. The church’s structure guarantees godly dominion and the Church’s mission is to glorify God and to fully enjoy him forever. Now, I’m wondering what is the Anabaptist church structure and mission? Let me guess… the Church’s structure per Walker is to guarantee defeat in space and time and the Church’s mission is begging people to invite Jesus into their hearts.
5.) The idea that theonomy advocates statist theology is just so off the reservation that the only response it deserves is to say, “only a dumb-ass could say such a thing.”
AW wrote,
If we reject the Theonomic approach to Scripture and culture, does that mean we have less reverence for Scripture’s inspiration, authority, and sufficiency? By no means. The dispute is over how those concepts are applied in this redemptive-historical era—an era marked by unbelief. God’s Word is indeed all-sufficient and the final authority against all counterfeits. The question we have to contend with, though, is how to understand the task of cultural apologetics when the Bible itself is rejected.
Bret L. McAtee responds,
1.) Clearly, in Walker’s appeal to Natural Law and the idea of a common realm that is not to be shaped by Biblical Christianity or God’s Law Word we are witnessing a man who has significantly less reverence for Scripture’s inspiration, authority, and sufficiency. Walker’s constant appeals to the “New Testament,” as well as his insistence that Natural Law has always been superior to covenant law testifies that the man has less reverence for the inspiration, authority and sufficiency of the Old Testament. Indeed, Walker is so bad that it would not be errant to say that Walker believes in Sola Naturalis legis instead of Sola Scriptura.
2.) Once again Walker’s eschatology comes shining through when he talks about the era after the Cross being characterized as one of “unbelief.” It is clear that Walker believes that the era after the Cross will always be one of unbelief. That is more pessimillennialism. Theonomic postmillennialists don’t by that pessimist because it is not taught in Scripture. Scripture teaches that the knowledge of the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the water’s cover the sea. Though we may well in a time of unbelief now, the time is coming when belief in the ascended Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be the norm. Christ’s Spirit will make it so. The Christ who was crucified by His enemies in space and time will be seen to be triumphant by his enemies in space and time.
3.) Walker’s “cultural apologetics” guarantees that the Bible will always be rejected.
I have now completed my fisking of Dr. Andrew Walker in his attempt to denigrate theonomy. This is at least the 2nd time I’ve done this kind of thing on Iron Ink. There is a previous entry on Iron Ink where I had the same kind of go with Dr. J. Ligon Duncan and a hit piece he had written against theonomy.
Some day there is going to arise someone who can provide a challenging critique to theonomy and theonomists but to date, we await that challenge.
