Colin,

As is typical of your replies, you have tried to circumvent the question and offer nothing in reply but rhetoric. So, I will ask again but with more preciseness so that there can be no doubt as to what I was originally asking you, "Can you cite any historical records where the Puritans, who appear to be at least a large part of your attempt to justify your extremist use of the Israelic judicial law, practiced the execution of individuals who violated such laws as pertained to homosexuality, adultery, errant children, etc.. ?? It should have been assumed that capital punishment for murder was not intended to be included since that mandate predated Moses by thousands of years and is rarely something contested. I am more interested in the application of those laws which most biblical Christians find most abhorrent, for various reasons and which most Theonomist/Reconstructionists seem most fervent to espouse and defend.

As to Remillard's attempt to make the meaning of "General Equity" fit into the mold mould of Reconstructionism, I find it quite inadequate among other things. I also reject his attempt to make a major distinction between "abrogated" and "expired", and then use that to try and further his Reconstructionist presuppositions. The section in question is more than perspicuous when it says:
to them also, as a body politic, he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging any other now . . .
This much is understood by most to mean that the judicial law is no longer binding due to the fact that Israel as a theonomic nation is also no more. To try and then reverse what the author's have clearly stated with the exception clause is almost humorous.

And again I ask, Can you cite any records of the Puritans which show that they practiced, upon political polity, by virtue of "General Equity", the execution of homosexuals, adulterers, errant children, etc.?

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]