Finally, I am back. So sorry this has taken so long. My family and I have been very busy moving, dealing with our sick children, etc. Finally, here is the long awaited part 2.
QUESTIONS FOR THEONOMISTS
I have decided that, instead of directly critiquing theonomy, I would be on the safer side to ask some questions of theonomists which, at this point, keep me as a non-theonomist.
*What sort of case would you make to prove that God desires that, in the New Covenant era, the civil magistrate enforce His Law, along with the Old Covenant penal sanctions? In other words, how do you know this is the case?
*How would a theonomic state not lead to a kind of outward formalism when it comes to religion? In other words, if the laws were based on the Old Covenant civil sanctions and crimes, then would one have to be a Christian? How would this relate to idolatry if you would say they would not have to be?
*In the Old Covenant, apostasy was punishable by death, as was idolatry. How would theonomy not be very similar to the kind of Muslim states that we have now? Would it be different? How?
*If you don't believe that apostasy or idolatry are applicable as civil and capital crimes in the New Covenant era, then why not?
*Would Christianity be considered the "state religion" in theonomy? Granted that most theonomic literature says this is not the case, how would it not be the case, or why not? If it should, then how would you guard against an outward formalism in religious matters?
*Granted that there is a difference between the theonomic thesis and the application of it, nonetheless, when all is said and done, and where the rubber meets the road, we must ask about application now. Having said that, can you tell me what a theonomic society would look like, with specific applications, and tell me why you think so? Can you tell me why you don't think certain other serious applications (particularly apostasy and idolatry) would not be upheld?
The above questions I recognize are not a direct critique of theonomy, but perhaps they are indirect critiques, inasmuch as I do not think theonomists have yet adequately dealt with these important concerns. These are a few of my concerns, but we can see why, at this point, I remain unconvinced of theonomy.