What do you think?
Rate this book
Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses
In this tour de force of Reformed political ethics, Johannes Piscator discusses the relevance of the Judicial Laws of Moses for Christian magistrates. This series of arguments originally appeared as an Appendix to his commentary on Exodus, and was recommended by George Gillespie (Scottish delegate to the Westminster Assembly) as helping to resolve scruples regarding the Judicial Laws of Moses.
- GenresTheology
213 pages, Unknown Binding
First published July 17, 2012
About the author
Johannes Piscator
11 books1 followerJohannes Piscator (German: Fischer) was a German Reformed theologian, known as a Bible translator and textbook writer.
He was born at Strasbourg, and educated at the University of Tübingen. He became professor of theology at Strasbourg in 1573. Elector Frederick III experienced some resistance when he attempted to appoint him to the arts faculty at the University of Heidelberg in 1574, and Piscator eventually took a post at the preparatory Latin Paedagogium in Heidelberg.
After a confessional change in Heidelberg, he briefly served as deputy rector at the court school in Dillenburg in 1577 before being appointed professor of theology at the Casimirianum in Neustadt in 1578. He later served as rector at Moers in 1581 before settling into a productive career as professor at the Herborn Academy, from 1584 to 1625, where he was able to advance his Ramist pedagogy fully. He died at Herborn.
Piscator prepared Latin commentaries collectively of the New Testament (Herborn, 1595–1609) and the Old Testament (1612, 1618), and a German translation of the Bible (1605–19). He followed with Anhang des herbonischen biblischen Wercks (1610), noted for its wealth of archeological, historical, and theological material.
He left a multitude of text-books in philosophy, philology, and theology, of which Aphorismi doctrinæ christianæ (1596) was much used.
In 2010 Piscator's Appendix to his Commentary on Exodus 21 - 23 has been translated and published under the title of Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses.
His significance for theology was his opposition to the doctrine of the active obedience of Christ. "Whoever denies that Christ was subject to the law, denies that he was man." If the imputation of the active obedience were sufficient man would be free from obedience as well as from the curse. From being an advocate of supralapsarianism in the most extreme form, as in his controversy with Conrad Vorstius, Piscator became a pronounced Arminian.
He was born at Strasbourg, and educated at the University of Tübingen. He became professor of theology at Strasbourg in 1573. Elector Frederick III experienced some resistance when he attempted to appoint him to the arts faculty at the University of Heidelberg in 1574, and Piscator eventually took a post at the preparatory Latin Paedagogium in Heidelberg.
After a confessional change in Heidelberg, he briefly served as deputy rector at the court school in Dillenburg in 1577 before being appointed professor of theology at the Casimirianum in Neustadt in 1578. He later served as rector at Moers in 1581 before settling into a productive career as professor at the Herborn Academy, from 1584 to 1625, where he was able to advance his Ramist pedagogy fully. He died at Herborn.
Piscator prepared Latin commentaries collectively of the New Testament (Herborn, 1595–1609) and the Old Testament (1612, 1618), and a German translation of the Bible (1605–19). He followed with Anhang des herbonischen biblischen Wercks (1610), noted for its wealth of archeological, historical, and theological material.
He left a multitude of text-books in philosophy, philology, and theology, of which Aphorismi doctrinæ christianæ (1596) was much used.
In 2010 Piscator's Appendix to his Commentary on Exodus 21 - 23 has been translated and published under the title of Disputations on the Judicial Laws of Moses.
His significance for theology was his opposition to the doctrine of the active obedience of Christ. "Whoever denies that Christ was subject to the law, denies that he was man." If the imputation of the active obedience were sufficient man would be free from obedience as well as from the curse. From being an advocate of supralapsarianism in the most extreme form, as in his controversy with Conrad Vorstius, Piscator became a pronounced Arminian.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
December 6, 2020
Johannes Piscator (1546-1625) was a Post-Reformation German theologian who is not well known to modern evangelicals today. He translated the Bible from Latin to German, wrote a commentary on every book of the Bible and was a highly respected scholar and professor.
“Theonomy” is a dirty word that most Christians shriek at today and assume it’s a recent hermeneutic thanks to the key figures of the Reconstruction movement. Although the term was coined by Bahnsen and made its popularity from this movement, the big question I have been digging for is how far does this view of God’s Law go back? And why do many keep scoffing at it?
This book is actually the Appendix of Piscator’s commentary on Exodus. Its original title is “Observations on Chapters 21, 22, 23, namely, an explanation of controversial questions about the abrogation of the judicial laws of Moses”. The thesis of Piscator is “The magistrate is obliged to those judicial laws which teach concerning matters which are immutable and universally applicable to all nations, but not to those which teach concerning matters which are mutable and peculiar to the Jewish or Israelite nations for the times when those governments remained in existence.”
Piscator provides seven points defending his thesis as well as addressing 22 objections to this position. What shocked me is that these are literally the same 22 objections of why many reject Theonomy today (or their objections is simply misrepresenting the position).
Another great feature of this edition is that the editor puts an Appendix of Reformers and Puritans who praised Piscator’s thesis on God’s Law and quoted him when writing their treatments on the Law of God as well. Little do we realize, but men like George Gillespie, William Perkins, Francis Cheynell, and Thomas Shepherd had a huge respect for Piscator’s thesis. Samuel Rutherford, who did have some differences, quoted Piscator in a positive light about the validity of God’s Law today. John Gill was a real eye opener that wrote extensively on the theonomic position of God’s Law in his Body of Divinity and even cites Piscator 297 times in his Bible commentaries.
In conclusion, even if one still may strongly disagree with “Theonomy”, this work sheds light to this thesis on God’s Law being valid in the Reformed tradition. There are still principles of this position that I am still working through, but for those who are interested in studying this massive topic, I would strongly suggest starting with this book before reading Bahnsen, Rushdoony, North, etc. You start with a Post-Reformation scholar with extensive quotes from other 17th century Reformers that all echo a similar conclusion on the validity of God’s Law today.
“Theonomy” is a dirty word that most Christians shriek at today and assume it’s a recent hermeneutic thanks to the key figures of the Reconstruction movement. Although the term was coined by Bahnsen and made its popularity from this movement, the big question I have been digging for is how far does this view of God’s Law go back? And why do many keep scoffing at it?
This book is actually the Appendix of Piscator’s commentary on Exodus. Its original title is “Observations on Chapters 21, 22, 23, namely, an explanation of controversial questions about the abrogation of the judicial laws of Moses”. The thesis of Piscator is “The magistrate is obliged to those judicial laws which teach concerning matters which are immutable and universally applicable to all nations, but not to those which teach concerning matters which are mutable and peculiar to the Jewish or Israelite nations for the times when those governments remained in existence.”
Piscator provides seven points defending his thesis as well as addressing 22 objections to this position. What shocked me is that these are literally the same 22 objections of why many reject Theonomy today (or their objections is simply misrepresenting the position).
Another great feature of this edition is that the editor puts an Appendix of Reformers and Puritans who praised Piscator’s thesis on God’s Law and quoted him when writing their treatments on the Law of God as well. Little do we realize, but men like George Gillespie, William Perkins, Francis Cheynell, and Thomas Shepherd had a huge respect for Piscator’s thesis. Samuel Rutherford, who did have some differences, quoted Piscator in a positive light about the validity of God’s Law today. John Gill was a real eye opener that wrote extensively on the theonomic position of God’s Law in his Body of Divinity and even cites Piscator 297 times in his Bible commentaries.
In conclusion, even if one still may strongly disagree with “Theonomy”, this work sheds light to this thesis on God’s Law being valid in the Reformed tradition. There are still principles of this position that I am still working through, but for those who are interested in studying this massive topic, I would strongly suggest starting with this book before reading Bahnsen, Rushdoony, North, etc. You start with a Post-Reformation scholar with extensive quotes from other 17th century Reformers that all echo a similar conclusion on the validity of God’s Law today.
August 2, 2017
This is a solid, but short work on the importance of Old Testament law today. Piscator argues that the law does in fact apply to Christians today. Perhaps the most important thing about this work is that it demonstrates that theonomy is not a new idea, but simply a forgotten, or ignored doctrine.
The book is really just a translation of an appendix to a different book by Piscator, so his ideas are not fully developed, but left for others to expand upon.
The book is really just a translation of an appendix to a different book by Piscator, so his ideas are not fully developed, but left for others to expand upon.
September 10, 2013
I have to write a full review later, but I read this a while back and it is one of the best defenses of the judicial laws of Moses being applicable to New Testament magistrates.
Gillespie and Rutherford both rely heavily on this book for some of their theonomic ideas.
Gillespie and Rutherford both rely heavily on this book for some of their theonomic ideas.
March 24, 2019
This translation of an extract from the Continental Reformed divine, Johannes Piscator in favour of the abiding validity of the judicial laws of common equity is most useful. Piscator makes some arguments that are, to some degree at least, similar to those made by modern theonomists, though he pays greater attention to the law of nature than those theonomists influenced by Van Tillianism would do so today.
Piscator also avoided confusing arguments such as "the abiding validity of the law of God in exhaustive detail", which sometimes characterise modern theonomy. Instead, he recognised that we can divide the judicial law into laws of particular equity, which are unique to Israel, and into laws of common or general equity, which apply to all nations as they act as a judicial guard to the ten commandments. There are a few arguments here and there which I did not find entirely convincing and that I may wish to qualify to some degree, but, on the whole, Piscator's thesis is a sound one.
Piscator also makes a compelling argument for the common equity of the Mosaic punishment of theft, which was rejected by the likes of John Calvin, William Perkins, Robert Baillie, and (on one occasion) Samuel Rutherford. I think that Piscator has the better of the argument on this issue, though it is interesting to note that Reformed divines had some minor disagreements about such matters.
The translator has also provided some useful extracts from other Reformed divines (George Gillespie, Thomas Edwards, Samuel Rutherford, Francis Cheynell, Thomas Shepherd, and the Baptist John Gill) in an appendix. If you pay attention to the footnotes, you will also find brief translations from the likes of Henry Bullinger and Johann Heinrich Alting. We hope that the translator will continue to work on projects of this nature, as there is much early Reformed literature that we need to see translated from Latin into English.
Piscator also avoided confusing arguments such as "the abiding validity of the law of God in exhaustive detail", which sometimes characterise modern theonomy. Instead, he recognised that we can divide the judicial law into laws of particular equity, which are unique to Israel, and into laws of common or general equity, which apply to all nations as they act as a judicial guard to the ten commandments. There are a few arguments here and there which I did not find entirely convincing and that I may wish to qualify to some degree, but, on the whole, Piscator's thesis is a sound one.
Piscator also makes a compelling argument for the common equity of the Mosaic punishment of theft, which was rejected by the likes of John Calvin, William Perkins, Robert Baillie, and (on one occasion) Samuel Rutherford. I think that Piscator has the better of the argument on this issue, though it is interesting to note that Reformed divines had some minor disagreements about such matters.
The translator has also provided some useful extracts from other Reformed divines (George Gillespie, Thomas Edwards, Samuel Rutherford, Francis Cheynell, Thomas Shepherd, and the Baptist John Gill) in an appendix. If you pay attention to the footnotes, you will also find brief translations from the likes of Henry Bullinger and Johann Heinrich Alting. We hope that the translator will continue to work on projects of this nature, as there is much early Reformed literature that we need to see translated from Latin into English.
July 26, 2023
Hey, would you look at that! What we call theonomy is a historical, reformed understanding of the law, as evidenced by Gillespie and Rutherford.
February 25, 2016
Johannes Piscator wrote this as an appendix to his commentary to Exodus to address the issue of how the judicial laws of the Pentateuch apply to Christian magistrates. His thesis was, "the magistrate is obliged to those judicial laws which teach concerning matters which are immutable and universally applicable to all nations, but not to those which teach concerning matters which are mutable and peculiar to the Jewish or Israelites nations for the times when those governments remained in existence." He explains what he means, supports it with arguments, and defends it against twenty-two objections.
What I thought was one of his most unique arguments was built on Romans 14:23, "Whatever is not of faith is sin." He argues that the conscience needs firm knowledge that an action is pleasing to God for that action not to be sin. The only place to find what is pleasing to God is in His Word (this sounds like a "regulative principle of life"). For the magistrate, the primary place God has reveal His will for the magistrate, including just punishments for crimes, is in the judicial law. "If he will act differently, and instead of the law of God should propose some other law of man as a rule for judging, though he may profess to be a Christian judge, yet he will not be able to be certain of the justice of his own judgments, and hence he will neither be able to have a cheerful nor quiet conscience."
Many of the other arguments have been used in modern times. As Joel McDurmon says in the introduction, "In this short book, Piscatory anticipates virtually every argument outlined by modern Theonomists, except instead of painstaking volumes like Greg Bahnsen's Theonomy in Christian Ethics, Piscatory condenses it all to a brief handful of pages....Likewise, as the Table of Contents indicates, you will find that nearly every serious objection to Theonomy raised in modern times was already refuted by Piscator at the turn of the seventeenth century."
His arguments (as quotations in the appendix show) were used and referenced to around the time of the Westminster Assembly by such men as George Gillespie (Scottish commissioner to the assembly) and Francis Cheynell (English member of the assembly). Also, men like Thomas Shepherd (an American Puritan) and John Gill repeat Piscator's arguments.
What I thought was one of his most unique arguments was built on Romans 14:23, "Whatever is not of faith is sin." He argues that the conscience needs firm knowledge that an action is pleasing to God for that action not to be sin. The only place to find what is pleasing to God is in His Word (this sounds like a "regulative principle of life"). For the magistrate, the primary place God has reveal His will for the magistrate, including just punishments for crimes, is in the judicial law. "If he will act differently, and instead of the law of God should propose some other law of man as a rule for judging, though he may profess to be a Christian judge, yet he will not be able to be certain of the justice of his own judgments, and hence he will neither be able to have a cheerful nor quiet conscience."
Many of the other arguments have been used in modern times. As Joel McDurmon says in the introduction, "In this short book, Piscatory anticipates virtually every argument outlined by modern Theonomists, except instead of painstaking volumes like Greg Bahnsen's Theonomy in Christian Ethics, Piscatory condenses it all to a brief handful of pages....Likewise, as the Table of Contents indicates, you will find that nearly every serious objection to Theonomy raised in modern times was already refuted by Piscator at the turn of the seventeenth century."
His arguments (as quotations in the appendix show) were used and referenced to around the time of the Westminster Assembly by such men as George Gillespie (Scottish commissioner to the assembly) and Francis Cheynell (English member of the assembly). Also, men like Thomas Shepherd (an American Puritan) and John Gill repeat Piscator's arguments.
January 4, 2016
Terrific work on the abiding validity of the judicial laws of the Old Testament; and another clear proof that "theonomy" is not some new idea (Johannes Piscator died in 1625, and was a huge influencer on many Puritans and contributors to the Westminster Confession).
He writes seven basic proofs for the thesis and answers many would-be objections. For such a short book it certainly has a great deal to say.
He writes seven basic proofs for the thesis and answers many would-be objections. For such a short book it certainly has a great deal to say.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews