Reformed Baptists and Theonomy

There is a lot of discussion in Reformed circles about Theonomy. I am personally against this teaching, and have my own arguments/reasons why. However, since we've interacted a great deal with the 1689 London Baptist Confession, I thought it would be appropriate to share some resources from Reformed Baptist sources on the topic of Theonomy.

What sort of Theonomy are we talking about?

There are two main types of Theonomy. 'Covenanter' and 'Reconstructionist'. Covenanter Theonomy is not really a Reformed Baptist concern. This form is based on the broader Westminster Standards which existed in Scotland in the 1600s. They have additional documents to the WCF and the Westminster Catechisms that Reformed Baptists have never adopted. Meeting a Covenanter 1689 adherent would be a strange sight, indeed. 

As for the Reconstructionists, one of their leading adherents is actually one of my favorite philosophers. Greg Bahnsen (September 17, 1948 – December 11, 1995), a powerful Christian apologist, was extremely adamant about the view. He wrote several books on the subject, the most notable of which is probably By This Standard: the Authority of God's Law Today. I share the link because, while I disagree with Theonomy, I do not want anyone to think I don't have tremendous respect fro some of the men who hold it, and their arguments deserve to be read, first hand, by someone who is coming to conclusions about Theonomy. 

A further synopsis is given by non-Theonomist RC Sproul, here: http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-reconstructionism-what-theonomy/?mobile=on

Reformed Baptist reactions:

Sam Waldron, who wrote the exposition of the 1689 that we have dealt with, wrote a very thorough article on the subject of Theonomy, you can find that here:  http://www.reformedreader.org/rbs/tarba.htm

For an older source, I would suggest 1700s Baptist apologist Abraham Booth, and his essay entitled "An Essay on the Kingdom of Christ." You can get a $.99 ebook version of the text on Kindle, and you can read a review of it, here: http://www.1689federalism.com/the-kingdom-of-christ-abraham-booth/

Many of those familiar with Reformed Baptist thought will know about a view of Covenant Theology known as 1689 Federalism. The primary website that supports this view is www.1689federalism.com. On that site, they have the following article:  http://www.1689federalism.com/1689-federalism-theonomy/

The Confession:

Here is the relevant chapter from the 1689 Confession of Faith:

Chapter 24: Of the Civil Magistrate

1._____ God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for his own glory and the public good; and to this end hath armed them with the power of the sword, for defense and encouragement of them that do good, and for the punishment of evil doers.
( Romans 13:1-4 )

2._____ It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate when called there unto; in the management whereof, as they ought especially to maintain justice and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each kingdom and commonwealth, so for that end they may lawfully now, under the New Testament wage war upon just and necessary occasions.
( 2 Samuel 23:3; Psalms 82:3, 4; Luke 3:14 )

3._____ Civil magistrates being set up by God for the ends aforesaid; subjection, in all lawful things commanded by them, ought to be yielded by us in the Lord, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake; and we ought to make supplications and prayers for kings and all that are in authority, that under them we may live a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty.
( Romans 13:5-7; 1 Peter 2:17; 1 Timothy 2:1, 2 )

One might notice a couple of interesting points, here. First, 24.2 seems to assume that each kingdom and commonwealth is going to have its own unique set of laws, and it refers to them as 'wholesome', not 'Biblical' or 'Divine'. Further, Taking points 2 and 3 together suggests a relationship to the government where we participate when we are asked to do so, but otherwise we live in quiet and peaceable submission. This last note of 'quiet and peaceable life' is not found in the Westminster Confession, and indeed, the Baptist confession differs from its older cousin quite a bit in this chapter. Even starker contrast is seen between the 1689 and its congregationally political cousin, the Savoy Declaration. (The latter is, in this author's opinion, is the confession with the strongest theonomic implications.)

Other Reformed voices against Theonomy who are not necessarily Baptists:

Lee Irons (OPC): http://www.upper-register.com/papers/commonargs_print.html

G.I. Williamson (OPC): http://www.reformed.org/ethics/index.html?mainframe=/ethics/GI.html

John Frame (PCA): http://www.frame-poythress.org/penultimate-thoughts-on-theonomy/

T. David Gordon (PCA): http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gordon_theonomy.pdf