False theocracies are the rule of men; true theocracy is the rule of God’s law in men and over men. True theocracy requires a very limited church and state. Giving more power to men, either privately or institutionally, is no substitute for the rule of the triune God in the lives of men.
People told my father, Rousas John Rushdoony, that Chalcedon was a mistake when he formally began it in 1965. The problem, they said, was that it was dedicated to an idea, one so broad and sweeping that its mission would be too hard to define or inspire financial support.
For a number of years now our often ignored mission statement has read, “Biblical law cannot be imposed; it must be embraced.”5 I say “ignored” because our critics repeatedly accuse us of seeking to impose Biblical law on an unsuspecting society. However, it’s probably insufficient simply to say that Biblical law must be embraced. We are at the heart of the Christian doctrine of the New Covenant when we’re discussing the role of Biblical law in society.
When I was young, I lived in the suburbs of New Orleans. Even though our neighborhood was pretty quiet, I always knew that I had to lock the doors and not talk to strangers because New Orleans was a city with a lot of crime.
The churches of America have, by and large, entered a second childhood. Adult education classes are packaged in small bites to accommodate modern attention spans.Class content, often of an introductory nature, is taught to everyone without distinction, whether they’ve been believers for half an hour or half a century. Under this kind of teaching regime, is it any wonder that growth is redefined in numerical terms or in regard to a vague sense of spirituality, rather than the kind of growth Paul had in mind?
For regular readers of Faith for All of Life, the writings and public ministry of R. J. Rushdoony are neither eccentric nor controversial. Rushdoony is rightly respected for his prodigious authorial output, his extensive learning, and his ability to communicate sophisticated theological issues to a wide audience.
Profit has been a suspicious word for Christians for many centuries. Perhaps it seemed that in order to gain a profit from a transaction, the other person had to lose.
Does the acquisition of factual knowledge about religion lead to an understanding of religion?