Saturday, May 2, 2015

Does theonomy really cause Federal Vision?

The answer is "kind of."   True, there is no explicit connection between theonomy and federal vision theology.  However, in both you see a marginalization of Reformed theological sources.  If you see theonomists quote older theologians like Warfield or whomever, it is mainly for Warfield's postmillennialism or some comment on civil ethics.  Rarely is it on the gospel.

But if you push a theonomist in the corner, they will affirm (usually) justification by free grace.  But why did it take so long to get there?

It comes down to this: both are suspicious of post-Calvin sources of Reformed theology.  Both see the period from Beza until Kuyper as one of philosophical compromise.  Ironically, this is Karl Barth's thesis.  Both accidentally erode the foundations of Reformed thought.


  1. So it is Calvin vs. the Calvinist position that causes Federal Vision and only indirectly Theonomy?

    1. Maybe. It's hard to prove a 1:1 correlation on that, but that's how it usually played out. The more left wing Calvin vs Calvinism guys became Barthians. The right wing became theonomists. I suppose RT Kendall is the main exception.