What do you think?
Rate this book
By This Standard
"Back in print after several years, this is the best layman's guide to the application of God's Law to our society available." - Gary DeMar
God's Law is Christianity's tool of dominion. This is where any discussion of God's law ultimately arrives: the issue of dominion. Ask yourself: Who is to rule on earth, Christ or Satan? Whose followers have the ethically acceptable tool of dominion, Christ's or Satan's? What is this tool of dominion, the Biblically revealed law of God, or the law of self-proclaimed autonomous man? Whose word is sovereign, God's or man's?
Millions of Christians, sadly, have not recognized the continuing authority of God's law or its many applications to modern society. They have thereby reaped the whirlwind of cultural and intellectual impotence. They implicitly denied the power of the death and resurrection of Christ. They have served as footstools for the enemies of God. But humanism's free ride is coming to an end. This book serves as an introduction to this woefully neglected topic.
God's Law or Chaos
God's Law or Tyranny
God's Law or God's Judgment
For over a century, most conservative Christian social thinkers have denied all three of these assertions. Some of them have even gone so far as to argue that God's law is inherently tyrannical. But God's law is not only just and sufficient, it is obtainable and ideal for civilization. Christianity has the opportunity to overcome all evil with good, and the basis for all good is in the richness of God's law.
God's Law is Christianity's tool of dominion. This is where any discussion of God's law ultimately arrives: the issue of dominion. Ask yourself: Who is to rule on earth, Christ or Satan? Whose followers have the ethically acceptable tool of dominion, Christ's or Satan's? What is this tool of dominion, the Biblically revealed law of God, or the law of self-proclaimed autonomous man? Whose word is sovereign, God's or man's?
Millions of Christians, sadly, have not recognized the continuing authority of God's law or its many applications to modern society. They have thereby reaped the whirlwind of cultural and intellectual impotence. They implicitly denied the power of the death and resurrection of Christ. They have served as footstools for the enemies of God. But humanism's free ride is coming to an end. This book serves as an introduction to this woefully neglected topic.
God's Law or Chaos
God's Law or Tyranny
God's Law or God's Judgment
For over a century, most conservative Christian social thinkers have denied all three of these assertions. Some of them have even gone so far as to argue that God's law is inherently tyrannical. But God's law is not only just and sufficient, it is obtainable and ideal for civilization. Christianity has the opportunity to overcome all evil with good, and the basis for all good is in the richness of God's law.
195 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1991
113 people are currently reading
555 people want to read
About the author
Greg L. Bahnsen
77 books145 followersGreg L. Bahnsen was an influential Calvinist Christian philosopher, apologist, and debater. He was an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and a full time Scholar in Residence for the Southern California Center for Christian Studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 98 reviews
December 2, 2022
This is one of those paradigm shifting books. You read it, and tell everyone else to read it. I very clearly remember my Father reading this book to us when I was around 14 or 15…. Not sure I understood much at the time, but I knew it was very important for my dad, now I can say the same!
Bahnsen shows throughout his book how it makes sense that the humanist rejects the Law of God for all matters of life and practice for they are at enmity with Him and his ways, however, there are millions of Christians around the world that sadly come to the issues of God’s Law as a humanist as well. There is such slander and gross misinterpretation towards God’s commandments and statutes amongst many churches, we need to repent of that.
The Sovereign King of the Universe who was given all authority in heaven and on earth to call all nations to be disciples unto an obedience of the faith, has given his unchanging, unwavering, perfect judicial standards for personal AND societal holiness. God’s Covenantal Law is to be obeyed amongst all spheres of life. Bahnsen logically, coherently, and biblically refutes any argumentation coming against the continuing validity of God’s Law for today. If you have questions about the Law’s validity for the New Covenant, this is your book, if you have questions about the Law’s validity in socio-political spheres, this if your book, if there are passages here and there that seem to be conflicting with a positive outlook towards God’s Law, this is your book, and if you don’t know why it’s important to understand the goodness and continuing validity of the Law of God for today, this is your book!
Bahnsen throughout the book also reveals to the average Christian how dispensational we are at times at reading the covenantal flow of Scripture from beginning to end. Most of the arguments coming against the Law of God and it’s validity in the New Covenant stem from a misunderstanding of how God’s covenant of grace is one unified plan that is developed from Old to New. This working presupposition prevents the Christian disciple from making outrageous claims about the “God of the Old versus the God of the New” or “the Old Testament is completely opposite to the New Testament in its nature; law vs. grace” The Triune God of Scripture is not schizophrenic, having just laws today and unjust tomorrow, He does not coincide with secular humanist thinking which promotes a situational or cultural relativist ethic. “The word of the Lord is the sole, supreme, and unchallengeable standard for the actions and attitudes of all men in all areas of life; this word naturally includes God’s moral directives (law).” Thus, we must wrestle with the thesis question: By what standard are moral judgements to be made? How do we determine in any particular case what godliness requires of me or my society? There have always been and always will be only two answers: “God's Law is Christianity's tool of dominion. This is where any discussion of God's law ultimately arrives: the issue of dominion. Ask yourself: Who is to rule on earth, Christ or Satan? Whose followers have the ethically acceptable tool of dominion, Christ's or Satan's? What is this tool of dominion, the Biblically revealed law of God, or the law of self-proclaimed autonomous man? Whose word is sovereign, God's or man’s?” I commend this to you reader!
Bahnsen shows throughout his book how it makes sense that the humanist rejects the Law of God for all matters of life and practice for they are at enmity with Him and his ways, however, there are millions of Christians around the world that sadly come to the issues of God’s Law as a humanist as well. There is such slander and gross misinterpretation towards God’s commandments and statutes amongst many churches, we need to repent of that.
The Sovereign King of the Universe who was given all authority in heaven and on earth to call all nations to be disciples unto an obedience of the faith, has given his unchanging, unwavering, perfect judicial standards for personal AND societal holiness. God’s Covenantal Law is to be obeyed amongst all spheres of life. Bahnsen logically, coherently, and biblically refutes any argumentation coming against the continuing validity of God’s Law for today. If you have questions about the Law’s validity for the New Covenant, this is your book, if you have questions about the Law’s validity in socio-political spheres, this if your book, if there are passages here and there that seem to be conflicting with a positive outlook towards God’s Law, this is your book, and if you don’t know why it’s important to understand the goodness and continuing validity of the Law of God for today, this is your book!
Bahnsen throughout the book also reveals to the average Christian how dispensational we are at times at reading the covenantal flow of Scripture from beginning to end. Most of the arguments coming against the Law of God and it’s validity in the New Covenant stem from a misunderstanding of how God’s covenant of grace is one unified plan that is developed from Old to New. This working presupposition prevents the Christian disciple from making outrageous claims about the “God of the Old versus the God of the New” or “the Old Testament is completely opposite to the New Testament in its nature; law vs. grace” The Triune God of Scripture is not schizophrenic, having just laws today and unjust tomorrow, He does not coincide with secular humanist thinking which promotes a situational or cultural relativist ethic. “The word of the Lord is the sole, supreme, and unchallengeable standard for the actions and attitudes of all men in all areas of life; this word naturally includes God’s moral directives (law).” Thus, we must wrestle with the thesis question: By what standard are moral judgements to be made? How do we determine in any particular case what godliness requires of me or my society? There have always been and always will be only two answers: “God's Law is Christianity's tool of dominion. This is where any discussion of God's law ultimately arrives: the issue of dominion. Ask yourself: Who is to rule on earth, Christ or Satan? Whose followers have the ethically acceptable tool of dominion, Christ's or Satan's? What is this tool of dominion, the Biblically revealed law of God, or the law of self-proclaimed autonomous man? Whose word is sovereign, God's or man’s?” I commend this to you reader!
August 8, 2021
Regardless of where one ends up on this subject, this is an excellent, succinct, and well-reasoned statement of the position. Bahnsen doesn't have (or claim to have) all the answers, but he raises some excellent questions:
Does God have two standards? One a natural law or general revelation, and the other the written revelation?
Why would we assume that God's punishments are too harsh or not just?
We can't change the laws of the land and force people to obey and that shouldn't be our goal, but by what standard is the magistrate to rule? An arbitrary one, or a revealed one?
What parts of the law apply today, and what has passed away with the unique situation Israel was in? (hint: It's probably not either "all" or "none").
Yes, there will be difficulties, but far less than if we just argue about what general revelation or natural law teaches. The question really is, "by what standard"? And if you don't accept God's standard, and carefully consider it, then you'll be left with an arbitrary, man-made, tyrannical standard that is not just or equitable, or even merciful.
Note that I'm still pondering the ceremonial/judicial/moral distinction of the law, and whether that traditional view is helpful or not. Bahnsen would see it as more complicated than that and he's probably right, but smarter men than I have put the law in those three categories. Regardless, this book deserves careful consideration and interaction, not instant dismissal or straw man arguments. Many of the objections I've seen raised against Bahnsen are anticipated or dealt with in this book. Bahnsen may not be always right, and there may be some areas that need to be worked out for sure, but he is intellectually honest enough that he deserves better treatment at the hands of his opponents than he has received.
And above all, we as Christians should carefully consider what standard the civil government ought to govern by. We have ourselves grown to too easily dismiss large portions of the Old Testament law because we don't think it applies, and in many ways I think we have dangerously become antinomian without realizing it.
I would be interested in an actual well-reasoned and Reformed critical perspective of Bahnsen's book, but so far the responses I have seen to it have been brutally disappointing from an academic and Reformed perspective.
Does God have two standards? One a natural law or general revelation, and the other the written revelation?
Why would we assume that God's punishments are too harsh or not just?
We can't change the laws of the land and force people to obey and that shouldn't be our goal, but by what standard is the magistrate to rule? An arbitrary one, or a revealed one?
What parts of the law apply today, and what has passed away with the unique situation Israel was in? (hint: It's probably not either "all" or "none").
Yes, there will be difficulties, but far less than if we just argue about what general revelation or natural law teaches. The question really is, "by what standard"? And if you don't accept God's standard, and carefully consider it, then you'll be left with an arbitrary, man-made, tyrannical standard that is not just or equitable, or even merciful.
Note that I'm still pondering the ceremonial/judicial/moral distinction of the law, and whether that traditional view is helpful or not. Bahnsen would see it as more complicated than that and he's probably right, but smarter men than I have put the law in those three categories. Regardless, this book deserves careful consideration and interaction, not instant dismissal or straw man arguments. Many of the objections I've seen raised against Bahnsen are anticipated or dealt with in this book. Bahnsen may not be always right, and there may be some areas that need to be worked out for sure, but he is intellectually honest enough that he deserves better treatment at the hands of his opponents than he has received.
And above all, we as Christians should carefully consider what standard the civil government ought to govern by. We have ourselves grown to too easily dismiss large portions of the Old Testament law because we don't think it applies, and in many ways I think we have dangerously become antinomian without realizing it.
I would be interested in an actual well-reasoned and Reformed critical perspective of Bahnsen's book, but so far the responses I have seen to it have been brutally disappointing from an academic and Reformed perspective.
January 19, 2016
First the housekeeping complaints: this is one of the most poorly edited books I've read. I'm fairly sure it was self-published or just not read by the editor. I would recommend reading this book but not this version, or just be prepared for random periods and hyphens to break up the flow of your reading.
Now, am I converted to Theonomy? No. I am more aware of the difficulties associated with both sides of the argument. Most of the book is leveled at those who outright reject the Law which I think is an unfair characterization of "non-theonomic" reformed folk. The Holy Spirit teaches us to love the law and it guides us in obedience and righteousness. The rub comes with the application of the political use of the law and its penal sanctions. To make a compelling argument for Theonomy one needs to define the applicable laws (moral vs. religious vs. ceremonial) without grey zones. Is blaspheme a moral offense? Yes a thousand times! Do we put to death blasphemers as was prescribed in the OT? No, nor should we. Do we put to death adulterers? No, and if adultery is lust in the heart then we would all be guilty. It turns a bit Pharisaical because it deals with the letter of the law (some laws) and neglects the bigger purpose of the law (to drive us to Christ).
I see the problem that civil laws then become arbitrarily legislated. I do believe that civil law is founded only on the immutable Word of God. How I can reconcile all this I haven't quite worked out.
Now, am I converted to Theonomy? No. I am more aware of the difficulties associated with both sides of the argument. Most of the book is leveled at those who outright reject the Law which I think is an unfair characterization of "non-theonomic" reformed folk. The Holy Spirit teaches us to love the law and it guides us in obedience and righteousness. The rub comes with the application of the political use of the law and its penal sanctions. To make a compelling argument for Theonomy one needs to define the applicable laws (moral vs. religious vs. ceremonial) without grey zones. Is blaspheme a moral offense? Yes a thousand times! Do we put to death blasphemers as was prescribed in the OT? No, nor should we. Do we put to death adulterers? No, and if adultery is lust in the heart then we would all be guilty. It turns a bit Pharisaical because it deals with the letter of the law (some laws) and neglects the bigger purpose of the law (to drive us to Christ).
I see the problem that civil laws then become arbitrarily legislated. I do believe that civil law is founded only on the immutable Word of God. How I can reconcile all this I haven't quite worked out.
September 13, 2021
It is refreshing to be able to say with the psalmist "your law is my delight" (Psalm 119:174) and to have a Biblical definition of sin: "sin is lawlessness" (1 John 3:4).
June 6, 2023
Excellent book, and recommended for all Christians.
July 24, 2012
This is an outstanding book arguing for the validity of Old Testament law today. Bahnsen argues that the civil law ordained by God for Israel was and remains God's standard. It was a gracious gift to Israel that it be given to them; and God judged both Israel and Gentile nations according to it. God does not change, hence his law remains unchanged today. His standards for right living remain.
Today, many dismiss the validity of OT law using many gimmicks, but Bahnsen argues that none of the dismissive arguments can stand. Christ did not come to abolish the law--Scripture is clear on this point. Attempts to do so are antinomian and ultimately fail exegetically.
If not God's law--then what law? How can man judge according to any law but God's? Are we to do what is right in our own eyes? Bahnsen's argument is persuasive--for if we abandon God's law we are left with chaos or autonomy. Both fail the demands of Scripture. Let us therefore embrace the law of God--not for righteousness, but to be obedient to God's Word.
Today, many dismiss the validity of OT law using many gimmicks, but Bahnsen argues that none of the dismissive arguments can stand. Christ did not come to abolish the law--Scripture is clear on this point. Attempts to do so are antinomian and ultimately fail exegetically.
If not God's law--then what law? How can man judge according to any law but God's? Are we to do what is right in our own eyes? Bahnsen's argument is persuasive--for if we abandon God's law we are left with chaos or autonomy. Both fail the demands of Scripture. Let us therefore embrace the law of God--not for righteousness, but to be obedient to God's Word.
February 20, 2014
I give it five stars because it convinced me of the authority of God's law today. I had previously held a vague, negative view of the law, but by the time I read this book I had heard some statements from men I admired that challenged that attitude. Until this point I had heard statements but not arguments, and I hoped that Bahnsen's book would show whether it was possible to methodically answer all the objections to God's law that I had heard. He did, and when I was finished, I had no objections left. In this book he is thorough and convincing, and that is exactly what is needed in a topic as foundational as this.
August 25, 2023
I agree with a good deal of what he says, but found the style quite tedious, and very repetitive. In the main his opponents are antinomians and lite evangelicals, and so he doesn't really interact at all with previous Reformed works and thinking (specifically Beza, Junius, the Puritans, etc.). As a consequence, he is rather simplistic, limited in his categories, and over-confident in his own arguments.
Liked it somewhat.
Liked it somewhat.
August 14, 2023
Greg Bahnsen's By This Standard (aka BTS, not to be confused with the Korean boy band) is a well thought-out defense of theonomy. On the one hand, the basic premise is (mostly) non-controversial: "God has rules that He expects His people to obey." The question is whether the rules (law) set down in the Old Testament are still applicable today.
Bahnsen methodologically lays out his case that as God Himself is always perfectly just and good, His morals and justice are therefore never-changing. Through use of various ethical frameworks, New Testament passages and Biblical themes, Bahnsen argues that the Law continues to be valid today. He rightfully gives exception to those laws which the New Testament changes or abolishes (such as the sacrificial laws which were fully realized in Christ), but maintains that our modern standard of right living today ought to be the Scriptures in their entirety, both Old and New Testaments.
Bahnsen gives special attention to the role of the civil magistrate, as a significant portion of the Old Testament law is given to that topic. While not arguing for a theocracy (he actually argues for a proper separation between church and state), he argues that the Old Testament is a proper framework for understanding true justice - punishment for crimes that is neither too harsh or too lenient, but fits the crime with perfect justice - which modern civic leaders would do well to heed.
In the latter chapters, Bahnsen addresses some of the common arguments to his position, giving them a fair voice while pointing out the ways that these opposing views lack the robustness for a full Christian ethic.
Personally, this book questioned some my assumptions and drove me back to the Scriptures to see if what Bahnsen says is true; for this, I'm grateful. While I'm not fully convinced of his conclusions, he has sparked my thinking on this topic and caused me to re-evaluate my presuppositions regarding the role of the Law in the life of a Christian.
While the content was engaging, I must bring up two meta-issues with the book itself. First, many of the early chapters seem to be repetitive. The chapters of the book were originally independent articles in a monthly newsletter, but some time should have been spent editing the content for book form. Secondly, grammar and editing mistakes abound, creating distractions for the reading process and decreasing the overall quality of the book. However, if you can get past these two issues, it is well worth your read.
Bahnsen methodologically lays out his case that as God Himself is always perfectly just and good, His morals and justice are therefore never-changing. Through use of various ethical frameworks, New Testament passages and Biblical themes, Bahnsen argues that the Law continues to be valid today. He rightfully gives exception to those laws which the New Testament changes or abolishes (such as the sacrificial laws which were fully realized in Christ), but maintains that our modern standard of right living today ought to be the Scriptures in their entirety, both Old and New Testaments.
Bahnsen gives special attention to the role of the civil magistrate, as a significant portion of the Old Testament law is given to that topic. While not arguing for a theocracy (he actually argues for a proper separation between church and state), he argues that the Old Testament is a proper framework for understanding true justice - punishment for crimes that is neither too harsh or too lenient, but fits the crime with perfect justice - which modern civic leaders would do well to heed.
In the latter chapters, Bahnsen addresses some of the common arguments to his position, giving them a fair voice while pointing out the ways that these opposing views lack the robustness for a full Christian ethic.
Personally, this book questioned some my assumptions and drove me back to the Scriptures to see if what Bahnsen says is true; for this, I'm grateful. While I'm not fully convinced of his conclusions, he has sparked my thinking on this topic and caused me to re-evaluate my presuppositions regarding the role of the Law in the life of a Christian.
While the content was engaging, I must bring up two meta-issues with the book itself. First, many of the early chapters seem to be repetitive. The chapters of the book were originally independent articles in a monthly newsletter, but some time should have been spent editing the content for book form. Secondly, grammar and editing mistakes abound, creating distractions for the reading process and decreasing the overall quality of the book. However, if you can get past these two issues, it is well worth your read.
August 18, 2025
This was a hefty book, but so helpful in understanding the law in the Old and New Testament and how it should function in our lives today. God’s law is perfect and holy and we shouldn’t pretend like we can come up with a more just and more perfect law than God! God’s law is not limited to just the church and individual believer, but has authority even over magisterial powers. Christ is King over all he has created, whether they acknowledge it or not. I’m not on board with all aspects of theonomy, namely, covenant theology, however, the bulk of this book is absolute gold.
“Not one of God’s stipulations is unjust, being too lenient or too harsh. And God does not unjustly have a double-standard of morality, one of Justice for some and another standard of justice for others. Everyone single dictate of God’s word, then, is intended to provide moral instruction for us today, so that we can demonstrate justice, holiness, and truth in our lives. Pg 17
“Not one of God’s stipulations is unjust, being too lenient or too harsh. And God does not unjustly have a double-standard of morality, one of Justice for some and another standard of justice for others. Everyone single dictate of God’s word, then, is intended to provide moral instruction for us today, so that we can demonstrate justice, holiness, and truth in our lives. Pg 17
Want to read
November 1, 2023Mentioned positively here.
June 1, 2020
This is Bahnsen’s systematic work on defending theonomy. The goal of this book was to provide laymen readers a synopsis of his bigger work “Theonomy in Christian Ethics”. The first half of the book lays out his thesis of the validity of God’s Law today. The second half goes into the meat of what how this looks in every area of life. Definitely the book to start with when entering the Theonomy discussion.
March 11, 2021
This was the first book by Greg Bahnsen (and the first book on the subject of theonomy) that I have ever read. For many years now I have seen people criticizing theonomy in general in rather harsh and uncharitable ways. So when I saw that this book was available to read for free because it was included in Amazon Unlimited on my new Kindle, I figured it was probably about time I did some reading on the subject.
This book is a kind of brief, popular-level introduction to the subject of theonomy in Christian ethics. If you want a brief summary of what that entails, Bahnsen actually includes a bullet-point summary of the basics toward the very end of the book.
I must say that while I do not think that he answered every possible question/objection in this book, he makes his overall case quite well. I found it very compelling and persuasive.
Frankly, I found that I already believed/agreed with much of what he says here; I just hadn't ever seen before now some of these things articulated and argued for in such a plain way as he does here. Upon finishing the book, I couldn't help but wonder why any sincere, thoughtful Christian would have any serious objection to the author's overall points. Questions of application? Certainly. But his main points generally seemed well-grounded in Scripture.
There was a good bit of repetition in this book, but that is OK. The Kindle/e-book version had a number of typos throughout (clauses or other parts of sentences accidentally duplicated, causing awkward or incomplete sentences, etc.), but this did not prevent me from understanding what was being said.
If you are looking for an basic intro into the subject of theonomy, whether you are a critic or just someone who wants to learn for yourself what it is (and is not) about, this book would be a very good place to start. It will make you think; it will make you re-examine various parts of Scripture in ways that may not have considered previously; and it will most likely give you a new appreciation for the actual teachings of theonomy, free from some of the caricatures that at times seem much too common in some of its more vocal critiques.
This book is a kind of brief, popular-level introduction to the subject of theonomy in Christian ethics. If you want a brief summary of what that entails, Bahnsen actually includes a bullet-point summary of the basics toward the very end of the book.
I must say that while I do not think that he answered every possible question/objection in this book, he makes his overall case quite well. I found it very compelling and persuasive.
Frankly, I found that I already believed/agreed with much of what he says here; I just hadn't ever seen before now some of these things articulated and argued for in such a plain way as he does here. Upon finishing the book, I couldn't help but wonder why any sincere, thoughtful Christian would have any serious objection to the author's overall points. Questions of application? Certainly. But his main points generally seemed well-grounded in Scripture.
There was a good bit of repetition in this book, but that is OK. The Kindle/e-book version had a number of typos throughout (clauses or other parts of sentences accidentally duplicated, causing awkward or incomplete sentences, etc.), but this did not prevent me from understanding what was being said.
If you are looking for an basic intro into the subject of theonomy, whether you are a critic or just someone who wants to learn for yourself what it is (and is not) about, this book would be a very good place to start. It will make you think; it will make you re-examine various parts of Scripture in ways that may not have considered previously; and it will most likely give you a new appreciation for the actual teachings of theonomy, free from some of the caricatures that at times seem much too common in some of its more vocal critiques.
January 7, 2013
A terrific condensed book from his much larger work Theonomy in Christian Ethics. (If you're comparing page numbers it might be hard to see that since it goes from TiCE 476 pages to BTS 350 pages. But TiCE has 476 - 6"x9" pages - while BTS has 350 - 4"x6.75" pages. This makes a huge difference.)
By This Standard is in many ways better than Theonomy in Christian Ethics in that it doesn't read like a master's thesis, is more digestible in its chapter lengths, is aimed at a broader audience and so is more accessible for the layman, and has a great succinct section at the end refuting criticisms of his previous work.
The main point of this book though is still the same: by what standard shall nations decide what is just in socio-political laws? By the standard God has revealed in Scripture.
For a review of that main point, see my review of Theonomy in Christian Ethics.
As for this book, Bahnsen applies the same principles of argumentation and clear exegesis but presents it in an easier tone. Of course this means his argument is not as exhaustive in this book; but it still carries the same weight. Chapter by chapter he uses Scripture over and over again to present the case. And just as before, while it is hard psychologically and emotionally sometimes to reach the conclusions he does. There doesn't seem to be any Biblical or logical reason not to come to the same conclusion.
I hope every Christian interested in the Christian life, the Christian's role in social responsibility, or the nature of law, justice, and/or crime and punishment will read this book - if nothing else to at least see a view presented from Scripture that is not advocated that much today but is very hard to combat (Acts. 26:14).
By This Standard is in many ways better than Theonomy in Christian Ethics in that it doesn't read like a master's thesis, is more digestible in its chapter lengths, is aimed at a broader audience and so is more accessible for the layman, and has a great succinct section at the end refuting criticisms of his previous work.
The main point of this book though is still the same: by what standard shall nations decide what is just in socio-political laws? By the standard God has revealed in Scripture.
For a review of that main point, see my review of Theonomy in Christian Ethics.
As for this book, Bahnsen applies the same principles of argumentation and clear exegesis but presents it in an easier tone. Of course this means his argument is not as exhaustive in this book; but it still carries the same weight. Chapter by chapter he uses Scripture over and over again to present the case. And just as before, while it is hard psychologically and emotionally sometimes to reach the conclusions he does. There doesn't seem to be any Biblical or logical reason not to come to the same conclusion.
I hope every Christian interested in the Christian life, the Christian's role in social responsibility, or the nature of law, justice, and/or crime and punishment will read this book - if nothing else to at least see a view presented from Scripture that is not advocated that much today but is very hard to combat (Acts. 26:14).
March 7, 2014
EXCELLENT!
I read this the first time in the mid 90's and it made a significant impact. It is even better second time around. There is much to be gleaned from this work, which is a basic introduction to Bahnsen's seminal work Theonomy In Christian Ethics. You will find much of Bahnsen's thesis presented in this book almost 30 years ago has become quite common in modern Christian scholarship.
I read this the first time in the mid 90's and it made a significant impact. It is even better second time around. There is much to be gleaned from this work, which is a basic introduction to Bahnsen's seminal work Theonomy In Christian Ethics. You will find much of Bahnsen's thesis presented in this book almost 30 years ago has become quite common in modern Christian scholarship.
April 5, 2020
Though not congenial to our modern feelings, God’s laws provide a guide and standard for society— both the church and society at large. This work outlines the basic arguments and addresses the common misconceptions and arguments against God’s good law. Recommended for any Christian who wants to engage in politics or political discussion.
July 3, 2019
Excellent.
February 8, 2022
A thorough defense of theonomy. I can't think of any stone he left unturned. God's law is applicable and is the only basis for a just society.
June 12, 2025
2/5. If the average believer reads this book they are likely to agree with nearly everything on the page. However, it is clear from the way Bahnsen uses his words that he intends to do a bit of a bait and switch. It deserves 2 stars because it is, at minimum, intentionally unclear if not intentionally deceptive. He tries to level the field with any and every Christian, making agreeable claims about our standard for ethics, the nature of true obedience, the sufficiency of Scripture, etc. Then at the moment that he’s established what the reader perceives as common ground he inserts his claim: “God’s law is central to his one covenant of grace” (105).
Although Bahnsen would deny it, he is advocating monocovenantalism. He effectively flattens the biblical distinctions between the covenants and therefore is able to make an artificial, one-to-one application of the Mosaic Law to new covenant believers. But even he doesn’t practically do this! One side of his mouth says, “The establishment of the New Covenant does not imply the abrogation of the Mosaic law or its depreciation IN ANY SENSE.” (31) While the other says the ceremonial law is “not kept in its shadow-form by New Testament believers”(98). Instances of upholding covenantal distinctions and criticizing those who uphold them are numerous.
I can at least applaud him for trying to ground this concept in the character of God, “God does not change His mind or alter His standards of righteousness.” And “The coming of God’s righteous Son surely could do nothing to change the righteous character of God’s laws” Amen! Every Christian for all of time agrees that the Son would not disagree with the Father. But here’s the bait and switch, “for then they would be exposed as unjust and less than eternal in their uprightness.” (27) As if the mere transformation (or in his mind, “abolishing”) of a law of Moses necessarily implies its injustice.
Bahnsen’s own scheme is unable to fully escape this implicit judgement since he would never say that we need to keep the levitical cult laws. He simultaneously and arbitrarily upholds covenantal distinctions while arguing that there are no covenantal distinctions. While I don’t fully agree with the tripartite division of the Law, I think Bahnsen and others like him make a terrible mistake when they use that distinction against federalists who are consistent in its application.
Apart from his covenant stuff he just writes so broadly and makes grandiose leaps from one point to another. His characterization of some evangelical groups are either inaccurate or get applied in ways that are far more nuanced and specific than he makes it seem (see ch.21-23 for examples).
My synopsis of Bahnsen’s positive claim is this: The Christian who upholds covenantal distinctions in the observation of selected OT laws, practically denies God’s justice, immutability, eternity, purity, and simplicity.
Loved his debate with Stein but I can’t get behind this.
Although Bahnsen would deny it, he is advocating monocovenantalism. He effectively flattens the biblical distinctions between the covenants and therefore is able to make an artificial, one-to-one application of the Mosaic Law to new covenant believers. But even he doesn’t practically do this! One side of his mouth says, “The establishment of the New Covenant does not imply the abrogation of the Mosaic law or its depreciation IN ANY SENSE.” (31) While the other says the ceremonial law is “not kept in its shadow-form by New Testament believers”(98). Instances of upholding covenantal distinctions and criticizing those who uphold them are numerous.
I can at least applaud him for trying to ground this concept in the character of God, “God does not change His mind or alter His standards of righteousness.” And “The coming of God’s righteous Son surely could do nothing to change the righteous character of God’s laws” Amen! Every Christian for all of time agrees that the Son would not disagree with the Father. But here’s the bait and switch, “for then they would be exposed as unjust and less than eternal in their uprightness.” (27) As if the mere transformation (or in his mind, “abolishing”) of a law of Moses necessarily implies its injustice.
Bahnsen’s own scheme is unable to fully escape this implicit judgement since he would never say that we need to keep the levitical cult laws. He simultaneously and arbitrarily upholds covenantal distinctions while arguing that there are no covenantal distinctions. While I don’t fully agree with the tripartite division of the Law, I think Bahnsen and others like him make a terrible mistake when they use that distinction against federalists who are consistent in its application.
Apart from his covenant stuff he just writes so broadly and makes grandiose leaps from one point to another. His characterization of some evangelical groups are either inaccurate or get applied in ways that are far more nuanced and specific than he makes it seem (see ch.21-23 for examples).
My synopsis of Bahnsen’s positive claim is this: The Christian who upholds covenantal distinctions in the observation of selected OT laws, practically denies God’s justice, immutability, eternity, purity, and simplicity.
Loved his debate with Stein but I can’t get behind this.
August 16, 2023
Excellent content. This book does a great job of taking a sometimes over-complicated subject (the Law of God) and presenting it in a simple way without losing any key concepts. Bahnsen thoroughly shows his thesis that the Old Testament Law applies to us today, except where the New Testament specifically says it does not (i.e. the ceremonial laws of Israel). This is true not only for personal sanctification in following the moral laws, but also for the guidance of society by following the civil laws and sanctions. The author is careful to define his terms well and does not assume that his readers all have PhD's in theology; in other words, he (for the most part) uses plain English rather than a bunch of complicated theological lingo. Bahnsen's argumentation logically and Biblically proves that the Old Testament Law has not been done away with but is rather foundational for Christian ethics. Bahnsen does employ one bad argument from Presbyterian covenant theology that, if he were consistent in applying, leads to the conclusion that God's Law only applies to Christians, which is directly contradictory to the rest of his argumentation (thank goodness he was not consistent!).
I especially appreciate the extensive presentation of all the passages where the New Testament writers endorse the Law of God, either explicitly or implicitly. Before reading this, I had not realized how consistently the New Testament (and the entirety of the Old Testament) praises and extols the Law. I would have given this book five stars, but I am not sure I have ever read a book that needs an editor as much as this one. Typos are everywhere. A solid 50% of them could have been caught on the first read through by a 5th grader. Not even a homeschooled 5th grader. Like your average public schooled 10-year-old would probably have asked, "Uh Mr. Bahnsen, why do you have like 7 random dashes on page 14?" It is honestly kind of embarrassing, especially given how valuable I think the content is. Overall, Bahnsen's view of the Law is sorely needed in modern Christianity, and I would recommend this book to any Christian who challenges that Old Testament Biblical Law is not needed for a consistent ethical standard (but I would much rather recommend a version without all the careless grammatical errors).
I especially appreciate the extensive presentation of all the passages where the New Testament writers endorse the Law of God, either explicitly or implicitly. Before reading this, I had not realized how consistently the New Testament (and the entirety of the Old Testament) praises and extols the Law. I would have given this book five stars, but I am not sure I have ever read a book that needs an editor as much as this one. Typos are everywhere. A solid 50% of them could have been caught on the first read through by a 5th grader. Not even a homeschooled 5th grader. Like your average public schooled 10-year-old would probably have asked, "Uh Mr. Bahnsen, why do you have like 7 random dashes on page 14?" It is honestly kind of embarrassing, especially given how valuable I think the content is. Overall, Bahnsen's view of the Law is sorely needed in modern Christianity, and I would recommend this book to any Christian who challenges that Old Testament Biblical Law is not needed for a consistent ethical standard (but I would much rather recommend a version without all the careless grammatical errors).
February 20, 2024
This book is a layman's version of Bahnsen's more technical Theonomy in Christian Ethics, which is still the best book on the subject I have ever read. So, I was predisposed to agree with this going in, and Bahnsen does not disappoint.
Is God's law the standard for our morality today? Yes. Is God's law the standard to which all laws of every nation everywhere need to conform? Yes. Even the prescribed punishments? Yes. All of the Old Testament needs to be viewed as binding unless specifically negated by the New. And, far from negating the law or the penal code, the New Testament upholds them. Anyone who wishes to do away with the Bible's clear penal code is implicitly or explicitly saying that they know better than God and His King.
So, are we to take up the sword and storm the government buildings to enforce our morality? Of course not. The Kingdom of Heaven advances by the preaching of the Word and the power of the Spirit. Christ's church is to faithfully proclaim the whole counsel of God, both law and gospel, and trust the Lord to bring revival. It may not come in our lifetime, it may be long after America is a long forgotten memory in the annals of history, but the Eternal One will be faithful to His promises.
Is God's law the standard for our morality today? Yes. Is God's law the standard to which all laws of every nation everywhere need to conform? Yes. Even the prescribed punishments? Yes. All of the Old Testament needs to be viewed as binding unless specifically negated by the New. And, far from negating the law or the penal code, the New Testament upholds them. Anyone who wishes to do away with the Bible's clear penal code is implicitly or explicitly saying that they know better than God and His King.
So, are we to take up the sword and storm the government buildings to enforce our morality? Of course not. The Kingdom of Heaven advances by the preaching of the Word and the power of the Spirit. Christ's church is to faithfully proclaim the whole counsel of God, both law and gospel, and trust the Lord to bring revival. It may not come in our lifetime, it may be long after America is a long forgotten memory in the annals of history, but the Eternal One will be faithful to His promises.
June 15, 2020
Good points throughout, but like always, Bahnsen endlessly repeats the same things. I way rather hear him debate than read his books.
BLUF: I am not a theonomist in the sense that I think God's law should be the "standard" for government. This plain and simple is theocracy and the government compelling religion. Government by nature operates as legal force. The gospel does not. That in a nutshell is the error of theonomy. It represents an excessive and an overly simplistic form of assumed continuity between the OT and NT. Government has its God-given role, but it is never to compel belief.
There are also very good reasons why history, reason and the Bible would urge against theonomy. It would be helpful to read this book to be aware of extreme viewpoints that still exist in various corners of the evangelical landscape. I think this viewpoint has caused much more confusion and problems than it has helped.
BLUF: I am not a theonomist in the sense that I think God's law should be the "standard" for government. This plain and simple is theocracy and the government compelling religion. Government by nature operates as legal force. The gospel does not. That in a nutshell is the error of theonomy. It represents an excessive and an overly simplistic form of assumed continuity between the OT and NT. Government has its God-given role, but it is never to compel belief.
There are also very good reasons why history, reason and the Bible would urge against theonomy. It would be helpful to read this book to be aware of extreme viewpoints that still exist in various corners of the evangelical landscape. I think this viewpoint has caused much more confusion and problems than it has helped.
November 29, 2023
4.5 ⭐️
Truly a worth while study! Christians must reckon with God’s law. There’s no arbitrary picking and choosing of which parts of Scripture we like, affirm and apply. Bahnsen clearly and thoroughly deals with the law of God in light of both Old and New Covenant. He addresses abuses, misunderstandings and false teachings on the topic. This is an important read for today. Thankful this was written!
Truly a worth while study! Christians must reckon with God’s law. There’s no arbitrary picking and choosing of which parts of Scripture we like, affirm and apply. Bahnsen clearly and thoroughly deals with the law of God in light of both Old and New Covenant. He addresses abuses, misunderstandings and false teachings on the topic. This is an important read for today. Thankful this was written!
March 19, 2024
A must-read for rightly understanding the ongoing function of God's law in the new covenant era. Buy a copy for all your antinomian friends.
November 4, 2025
Great book!
October 2, 2024
The New Testament requires us to take the Old Testament as ethically normative for today as the New Testament (2 Timothy 3:16-17, Psalm 119:116, Matthew 4:4 a quotation of Deuteronomy 8:1-3). The entire Bible is our ethical standard and always should be (Deuteronomy 12:32). Jesus was clear on the old testament law’s binding ethical authority (Matthew 5:17-19, Luke 16:17) and so were Paul and James.
“We must presume continuity of binding authority in all parts of God’s law unless stated clearly in the New Testament (example Hebrews writes on the end of ceremonial law and the Leviticus priesthood). This would logically then include the continuing obligation of the civil magistrates to obey and enforce the revenant laws of the Old Testament”.
The morality of the OT and the NT are identical, as taught by Paul and Christ.
Rejection of God’s law is the first step in rejecting God, because God is a moral being.
What is of permanent moral authority is the principle illustrated in the law, not the culture detail used to illustrate it.
This spread of God’s word into government is never to be done by force but by means of the great commission.
Those who believe that God’s law for society ought be obeyed, should be concerned with how God’s law for society be obeyed. Not worried just about the punishment of offenders, but their just treatment upon conviction as well.
Throughout scripture we see the sin of replacing God as principal law giver, from Adam to the Pharisees. Instead of learning from God’s law, man tends to use personal moral principles and experience to replace God as the supreme law giver, and this is a sin.
Caesar was lord over all in the time of Rome including civil moral rule, against this the early church answered the civil magistrate (as mentioned in Romans 13:1) saying that all authority on heaven and on earth resided in the resurrected messiah (Matthew 28:18). We see this also in Revelation with the mark of the beast signifying a submission to Nero’s authority rather than Christ authority (which should be written on our foreheads and hands Deuteronomy 6:8). That is why those in opposition to the beast are described as those who keep the commands of God and faith in Jesus (Revelation 14:1 and 12).
Will our country’s morals and laws be founded on the sure rock of God’s word, or the ruinous sands of “democratic” human opinion?
Obedience, if it is genuine biblical obedience, cannot be restricted to our own personal conduct. Full obedience embraces an interest in the obedience of those around you (psalm 51:13, Matthew 28:18-20).
“The least of God’s commandments, if they bind us, bind others. We must resist the virulent poison of individualism which tolerates in others the indifference and disobedience which we cannot justify in ourselves. The moment we become complacent to the sins of others, then we have begun to relax our on grip on the sanctity of the commandments of God. And we are on the way to condoning the same sin in ourselves.”
-John Murray
Support being Psalm 119:53, psalm 50:18, Ephesians 5:11
Normative reason to obey God’s law:
Motivational reason to obey God’s law in love:
Love is the fulfillment of the law. “Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”
Romans 13:10 it does not abrogate or obliterate the law, but obeys it (John 14:15)
Consequential reason to obey God’s law:
Galatians 6:7
Evil living will not bring about happiness and joyous living, for then the holiness and justice of God would be a mockery.
All bring us to the conclusion that God’s law is authoritative in contemporary ethics.
Threefold use of the law according to the reformers:
Political use for restraining the ungodly behavior of unregenerate man (1 Timothy 1:9-10, the law was made to restrain the sinfulness of man)⬇️
“Even where there is no saving faith, the law serves to restrain sin and to preserve the order of creation, by proclaiming the will of God. But its judgements and threats of condemnation and punishment, the written law along with the law of conscience hinders sin among the unregenerate.”
-Carl FH Henry
Pedagogical use of the law to bring light on the sin of man to help drive a man to the promise of grace through the conviction of sin.
Didactic use where the law supplies a rule for life of the believers, helping them know God’s will.
Political implications
If we are to honor God in all we do, then voting should be included in that, as well as who we verbalize support for in elections.
If our rulers will also one day answer to God for their personal actions and political leadership. It is loving that we encourage them to seek God’s face and will.
Law and politics in the Gentile nations
Many arguments against theocracy in Christian ethics state the law was given only to Israel in the Old Testament, and not to the surrounding gentile nations. This is flawed thinking, as all moral law, we understand to apply to all people, and not Christians alone. If moral applies to all, how can civil law not? is any delineation made between universal law and local law in the Tech scripture? Then how has this become the popularized view of today?
All people are under the standards of God’s law in every form, whether written in the law or their hearts (see Romans)
If all children are to honor their mother and father, as we see in Ephesians, then are not all government officials morally obligated to enforce God’s law and just punishment as specified by God‘s word.
God blessed his people with explicit teachings on civil government, and set a standard for the gentiles to follow as they are Christianized. (Deuteronomy 4:5-8, Leviticus 24:22, Isaiah 51:4, Isaiah 2:2-3)
The Old Testament perspective was that God’s law had international and civic relevance. Binding character was not confined to the borders of Israel.
Gentile rulers of the Old Testament are often referred to as the rod and staff of the most high God, as God use them thereby Ives to punish the law breakers (Isaiah 10:1)
When they failed in this duty, the nations were punished (Isaiah 1:12-13). His was viewed as enthroned over all nations, making gentile rulers the deputies of God (psalm 47:2,7-9; psalm 93:1-2, proverbs 16:12, proverbs 29:4, psalm 97:2). It was an abomination if any ruler justified the wicked or condemned the righteous (proverbs 17:15).
Thus civil magistrates must deter evil by appealing to God’s law (Roman 13:3). How could this be the case if the magistrates do not justly appeal to God’s written law? To be truly, just they must appeal to the one true moral standard, which is God’s law.
In Leviticus 18:24-27 we see that there is one moral standard for all societies.
If not God’s law but autonomous laws made by made rule a society, then the sword is surely to be wielded in vain in contradiction to Romans 13. It becomes the brute force of some men’s will against the will of other men, and justice becomes whatever serves the strong men in a society (“strong” through physicality or media manipulation).
Crime and punishment
Genesis 18:25, if the civil magistrate are to punish evil doers by God standards, then who better to prescribe the righteous implementation of justice than God Himself?
Martin Luther said, “If God will have wrath what business do you have being merciful? What a fine mercy to me it would be to have mercy on the thief and murderer and let him kill, abuse and rob me.”
Without an appeal to God‘s law in the civil realm, men can have no objective reasoning to call unjust punishment unjust. If stealing two pennies was worthy of the death penalty, but killing an innocent child was only penalized two pennies, then we need an objective standard to appeal against this.
⬆️and what are the alternatives? Arbitrary tyranny? Complete Anarchy?
Arguments against God’s law in the civil realm..
Argument: Imposing God’s civil law on those not converted would be to overlook the proper context for the use of such a law (example: Israel in the OT).
Response: First, we would not be forcibly implementing this on an unwilling society. We pray that citizens would adopt God’s standards as the law of the land. As secularist campaign for their view of justice to be law, so Christians should also argue that God’s law be used for the law. Second, We are also only concerned with moral laws that stand in the new covenant. Do we see that in the Old Testament, God’s moral law was only to be implemented in the government of Israel? No (see above)
“We must presume continuity of binding authority in all parts of God’s law unless stated clearly in the New Testament (example Hebrews writes on the end of ceremonial law and the Leviticus priesthood). This would logically then include the continuing obligation of the civil magistrates to obey and enforce the revenant laws of the Old Testament”.
The morality of the OT and the NT are identical, as taught by Paul and Christ.
Rejection of God’s law is the first step in rejecting God, because God is a moral being.
What is of permanent moral authority is the principle illustrated in the law, not the culture detail used to illustrate it.
This spread of God’s word into government is never to be done by force but by means of the great commission.
Those who believe that God’s law for society ought be obeyed, should be concerned with how God’s law for society be obeyed. Not worried just about the punishment of offenders, but their just treatment upon conviction as well.
Throughout scripture we see the sin of replacing God as principal law giver, from Adam to the Pharisees. Instead of learning from God’s law, man tends to use personal moral principles and experience to replace God as the supreme law giver, and this is a sin.
Caesar was lord over all in the time of Rome including civil moral rule, against this the early church answered the civil magistrate (as mentioned in Romans 13:1) saying that all authority on heaven and on earth resided in the resurrected messiah (Matthew 28:18). We see this also in Revelation with the mark of the beast signifying a submission to Nero’s authority rather than Christ authority (which should be written on our foreheads and hands Deuteronomy 6:8). That is why those in opposition to the beast are described as those who keep the commands of God and faith in Jesus (Revelation 14:1 and 12).
Will our country’s morals and laws be founded on the sure rock of God’s word, or the ruinous sands of “democratic” human opinion?
Obedience, if it is genuine biblical obedience, cannot be restricted to our own personal conduct. Full obedience embraces an interest in the obedience of those around you (psalm 51:13, Matthew 28:18-20).
“The least of God’s commandments, if they bind us, bind others. We must resist the virulent poison of individualism which tolerates in others the indifference and disobedience which we cannot justify in ourselves. The moment we become complacent to the sins of others, then we have begun to relax our on grip on the sanctity of the commandments of God. And we are on the way to condoning the same sin in ourselves.”
-John Murray
Support being Psalm 119:53, psalm 50:18, Ephesians 5:11
Normative reason to obey God’s law:
Motivational reason to obey God’s law in love:
Love is the fulfillment of the law. “Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”
Romans 13:10 it does not abrogate or obliterate the law, but obeys it (John 14:15)
Consequential reason to obey God’s law:
Galatians 6:7
Evil living will not bring about happiness and joyous living, for then the holiness and justice of God would be a mockery.
All bring us to the conclusion that God’s law is authoritative in contemporary ethics.
Threefold use of the law according to the reformers:
Political use for restraining the ungodly behavior of unregenerate man (1 Timothy 1:9-10, the law was made to restrain the sinfulness of man)⬇️
“Even where there is no saving faith, the law serves to restrain sin and to preserve the order of creation, by proclaiming the will of God. But its judgements and threats of condemnation and punishment, the written law along with the law of conscience hinders sin among the unregenerate.”
-Carl FH Henry
Pedagogical use of the law to bring light on the sin of man to help drive a man to the promise of grace through the conviction of sin.
Didactic use where the law supplies a rule for life of the believers, helping them know God’s will.
Political implications
If we are to honor God in all we do, then voting should be included in that, as well as who we verbalize support for in elections.
If our rulers will also one day answer to God for their personal actions and political leadership. It is loving that we encourage them to seek God’s face and will.
Law and politics in the Gentile nations
Many arguments against theocracy in Christian ethics state the law was given only to Israel in the Old Testament, and not to the surrounding gentile nations. This is flawed thinking, as all moral law, we understand to apply to all people, and not Christians alone. If moral applies to all, how can civil law not? is any delineation made between universal law and local law in the Tech scripture? Then how has this become the popularized view of today?
All people are under the standards of God’s law in every form, whether written in the law or their hearts (see Romans)
If all children are to honor their mother and father, as we see in Ephesians, then are not all government officials morally obligated to enforce God’s law and just punishment as specified by God‘s word.
God blessed his people with explicit teachings on civil government, and set a standard for the gentiles to follow as they are Christianized. (Deuteronomy 4:5-8, Leviticus 24:22, Isaiah 51:4, Isaiah 2:2-3)
The Old Testament perspective was that God’s law had international and civic relevance. Binding character was not confined to the borders of Israel.
Gentile rulers of the Old Testament are often referred to as the rod and staff of the most high God, as God use them thereby Ives to punish the law breakers (Isaiah 10:1)
When they failed in this duty, the nations were punished (Isaiah 1:12-13). His was viewed as enthroned over all nations, making gentile rulers the deputies of God (psalm 47:2,7-9; psalm 93:1-2, proverbs 16:12, proverbs 29:4, psalm 97:2). It was an abomination if any ruler justified the wicked or condemned the righteous (proverbs 17:15).
Thus civil magistrates must deter evil by appealing to God’s law (Roman 13:3). How could this be the case if the magistrates do not justly appeal to God’s written law? To be truly, just they must appeal to the one true moral standard, which is God’s law.
In Leviticus 18:24-27 we see that there is one moral standard for all societies.
If not God’s law but autonomous laws made by made rule a society, then the sword is surely to be wielded in vain in contradiction to Romans 13. It becomes the brute force of some men’s will against the will of other men, and justice becomes whatever serves the strong men in a society (“strong” through physicality or media manipulation).
Crime and punishment
Genesis 18:25, if the civil magistrate are to punish evil doers by God standards, then who better to prescribe the righteous implementation of justice than God Himself?
Martin Luther said, “If God will have wrath what business do you have being merciful? What a fine mercy to me it would be to have mercy on the thief and murderer and let him kill, abuse and rob me.”
Without an appeal to God‘s law in the civil realm, men can have no objective reasoning to call unjust punishment unjust. If stealing two pennies was worthy of the death penalty, but killing an innocent child was only penalized two pennies, then we need an objective standard to appeal against this.
⬆️and what are the alternatives? Arbitrary tyranny? Complete Anarchy?
Arguments against God’s law in the civil realm..
Argument: Imposing God’s civil law on those not converted would be to overlook the proper context for the use of such a law (example: Israel in the OT).
Response: First, we would not be forcibly implementing this on an unwilling society. We pray that citizens would adopt God’s standards as the law of the land. As secularist campaign for their view of justice to be law, so Christians should also argue that God’s law be used for the law. Second, We are also only concerned with moral laws that stand in the new covenant. Do we see that in the Old Testament, God’s moral law was only to be implemented in the government of Israel? No (see above)
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 19, 2017
I can't fault this book for what I thought it was going to be, but ended up not being; but I can for what it actually was.
I thought this book was about Theonomy, and my interest in this topic sparked the read; but this actually turned out to be a giant critique of Antinomianism. Yes, Bahnsen did lay out some principles for the general validity of the law, but failed to discuss the implementation of them in today's culture, other than to say how it shouldn't be done. the writing was well done and gave me new appreciation for the Law of God, but didn't make me a theonomist.
A good majority of his arguments were presuppositional, which just was Scripture bombing his arguments, which at face value is great, but actually really isn't, because, just citing 20 scriptures per assertion and bouncing away isn't good way to
back up your argument.
Other than those things, I really enjoyed finally reading some banhsen.
He is definitely intelligent, but has trouble backing up his claims.
I thought this book was about Theonomy, and my interest in this topic sparked the read; but this actually turned out to be a giant critique of Antinomianism. Yes, Bahnsen did lay out some principles for the general validity of the law, but failed to discuss the implementation of them in today's culture, other than to say how it shouldn't be done. the writing was well done and gave me new appreciation for the Law of God, but didn't make me a theonomist.
A good majority of his arguments were presuppositional, which just was Scripture bombing his arguments, which at face value is great, but actually really isn't, because, just citing 20 scriptures per assertion and bouncing away isn't good way to
back up your argument.
Other than those things, I really enjoyed finally reading some banhsen.
He is definitely intelligent, but has trouble backing up his claims.
February 25, 2022
Greg Bahnsen received a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Southern California. He also earned a Th.M. and M.Div. from Westminster Theological Seminary along with other degrees. Bahnsen was employed as a Full Time Scholar in Residence for the Southern California Center for Christian Studies. Some of his most famous works include By This Standard, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, and Always Ready. Bahnsen wrote By This Standard to convince Christians of the remaining validity of God’s law. He organizes the book into three sections: The Authority of God’s Law, Application of God’s Law to Political Ethics, and Antagonism to God’s Law. In these three sections Bahnsen argues that civil governments, families, churches, and individuals should live according to the law of God. This book is recommended for those who want a deeper understanding of how the Old Testament applies to believers today.
Reviewed for Eleutheria, Liberty divinity journal (Volume 5, Issue 2).
Reviewed for Eleutheria, Liberty divinity journal (Volume 5, Issue 2).
April 15, 2022
The clearest Explanation
This is the clearest, most Biblically based exposition I have ever read of our relationship to God’s laws today in our lives and society. I will return to this book again and again for reference and encouragement to obey God’s Word, both the Old and New Testaments. The concepts are simple to understand, but the arguments are irrefutable. I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
That being said, the Kindle copy I read was very poorly edited and transcribed for Kindle. Words and letters out of place and/or left out altogether. I had a pdf copy to compare it to and the Kindle Unlimited copy definitely needs to be redone.
This is the clearest, most Biblically based exposition I have ever read of our relationship to God’s laws today in our lives and society. I will return to this book again and again for reference and encouragement to obey God’s Word, both the Old and New Testaments. The concepts are simple to understand, but the arguments are irrefutable. I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
That being said, the Kindle copy I read was very poorly edited and transcribed for Kindle. Words and letters out of place and/or left out altogether. I had a pdf copy to compare it to and the Kindle Unlimited copy definitely needs to be redone.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 98 reviews