Click here to prepare for the study of God's word.

Galatians 5:16-23 teaches that at any moment we are either walking by the Holy Spirit or according to the sin nature. Walking by the Spirit, enjoying fellowship with God, walking in the light are virtually synonymous. During these times, the Holy Spirit is working in us to illuminate our minds to the truth of Scripture and to challenge us to apply what we learn. But when we sin, we begin to live based on the sin nature. Our works do not count for eternity. The only way to recover is to confess (admit, acknowledge) our sin to God the Father and we are instantly forgiven, cleansed, and recover our spiritual walk (1 John 1:9). Please make sure you are walking by the Spirit before you begin your Bible study, so it will be spiritually profitable.

Messages with tag - Theonomics

2014 Chafer Theological Seminary Bible Conference
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
by Bruce Baker
Series: 2014 Chafer Theological Seminary Bible Conference
Duration: 1 hr 21 mins 51 secs

Theonomy and Progressive Dispensationalism

Currently, it seems only those who see any religious activity in the public square as evidence of an impending theocracy would link any form of dispensationalism with reconstructionism. Douthat observes,

When the evidence for Rusdoonian infiltration of the Religious Right grows thin for even the most diligent decoder, the subject is usually changed to the Rapture, another supposed pillar of the emerging theocratic edifice. Premillennarian dispensationalism’s emphasis on the imminent collapse of all institutions, foreign and domestic, would seem an odd fit with Reconstructionism’s idea of hastening Christ’s coming by building his (political) kingdom on Earth. But every 1950s conspiracist knew that when Communists seemed to differ—Tito and Stalin, Stalin and Mao—it only concealed a deeper concord. Similarly, everyone on the Christian Right is understood to be on the same side, no matter their superficial disagreements.

While it is certainly true that “everyone…is on the same side” and that some disagreements between dispensationalists and reconstructionists are “superficial,” it must also be stressed that there are vast differences between the two, admittedly Christian and fundamental, camps. Yet recent movements in dispensationalism have made the association of these two groups less alarmist than it first appears. The fundamental shift in underlying assumptions that took place in the formation of progressive dispensationalism has now made such a linkage, not only possible, but logically necessary. Indeed, an examination of the changing relationship between theonomy and progressive dispensationalism is prudent for several reasons.