Quote
Charles Raleigh said in regard to J_Edwards' reply:
There's a distinction between positive law and eternal law. Eternal law is God-made law. It exists everywhere, at all times, inescapably. Positive law is law that human beings impose upon other human beings. Scripture may not spell out this distinction explicitly, but an inductive reading of it makes the distinction undeniable. Given that this is the case, it looks to me like you might want to give due consideration to the following:

I agree that the law against murder is eternal law that existed from the beginning. Even so, [*]The first time in the biblical chronology that positive law is overtly prescribed or mandated by God is in the Noachian Covenant. This is a fact. I dare you to disprove it.
1) In the second paragraph I perceive a possible contradiction within your own use of the 2 terms, "Eternal Law" and "Positive Law". Gen 9:6 iterates the "Eternal Law" prohibiting the shedding of another man's blood with the sanction of capital punishment to those who violate it. Noah didn't impose this law upon his progeny; God did. Thus it cannot qualify as "Positive Law" by your own definition. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" />

2) On the "inductive" method of interpreting Scripture see here: Induction and Deduction with Reference to Inspiration, by Dr. Roger Nicole.


Quote
You then stated:
The fact that the Genesis 9:6 mandate contains a penalty, retribution, to be imposed on anyone guilty of bloodshed, makes it unavoidably obvious that the mandate is positive law. . . .
Again, I must disagree with your self-determined and self-imposed terms, their definitions and application. Although the exact nature of the penalties to be exacted upon those who violate both the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Commandments, the nature of those penalties cannot be denied that they are severe. These are incontrovertibly, by your terminology, "Eternal Law" and not "Positive Law" even though they carry with them inseparable punishment.

Quote
Next you wrote:
I see Genesis 9:6 as a commandment regulating society that preceded Moses. . . .
However, unless I am mistaken, in a previous reply you clearly stated that you believed that Gen 9:6 applied only to post-deluvian societies. Again, referring to my remarks above, the prohibition against murder and its consequent punishment of death was "Eternal Law" established by God upon all of mankind from the beginning of man's creation. That men were obligated and held accountable to apply God's law among themselves is indisputable. Likewise, that the majority of mankind failed to do so which eventually led to the entire destruction of the human race, except for Noah and his immediate family is likewise indisputable. But man's failure to conform to the "Eternal Law" of God does not negate its existence nor relegate it to some form of "Positive Law".

Quote
Then switching over to me:
Regarding what you say about the Genesis 9:6 mandate against bloodshed, the case of Cain, and the Ten Commandments being in force from creation, what I say above applies here. I don't doubt that the Ten Commandments existed as eternal law from the beginning. But that's not the same as their existence as positive law.
All laws, unless specifically belonging to a specific group or person(s) and for a particular period of time and/or purpose, are of necessity, "Eternal Law", i.e., they originate with God either by direct command or principle and are perpetually binding upon all men. For example, the moral law of God is perpetually binding upon all men, but the ceremonial and civil laws of the O.T. were given to the theocratic nation of Israel and were in essence precursors to the person and work of the Lord Christ. Any laws originating out of man's own imagination and not founded upon biblical principle and/or authority may be disregarded, IMHO. Romans 13 does not give carte blanc authority to worldly governments nor does it require Christians to offer unfeigned obedience to those governments. As in all things, Christians are to obey the authorities established by God and their laws "as unto the Lord", i.e., as long as "Positive Law" (to use your term) is in accord with God's "Eternal Law", a Christian is under obligation to obey. If any law of man violates God's "Eternal Law", either specifically and/or in principle, there is no obligation to obey it.

Quote
You then ask:
Regarding
Quote
There is no possibility of a Theocracy of any kind being established on this earth. Calvin and some of the Puritans unfortunately erred in this area.
I know that this is the majority opinion in the English-speaking Christian community. I don't know whether I agree or not. Could you explain how, based on Scripture, you come to this conclusion?
[Linked Image] This in and of itself would require a considerable amount of time and space to answer. Thus, I will only ask you to consider one particular text, Luke 17:21. Being one who holds to Amillennialism, I reject any and all notions of a physical earthly kingdom being established on earth before Christ's second coming and the Judgment which will immediately follow His return. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Linked Image] which is: "Is compatibilism the only true Calvinist response?"

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]