I've reviewed "Some Common Theonomic Arguments" by Lee Irons.
'm going to suggest off the top that Tom not spend his time with the automous approach of Mr. Irons in the articles if he wants to learn more about the theonomic case, if for no other reason than the articles are not founded on proper presuppositions to begin with. Better to start with Dr. Bahnsen altogether, such as in "For Whom Was God's Law Intended?" here:
http://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pe079.htm .... there are other free resources by Bahnsen at
http://www.cmfnow.com/freearticles.aspx under "Ethics" for anyone inclined to hear Dr. Bahnsen's approach from Dr. Bahnsen himself.
Mr. Irons leaves a clue as to how a reductio ad absurdum argument could be successful against him. Mr. Bahnsen snuck in a trojan horse in that quote, and unfortunately Mr. Irons took the tragic bait I believe. Review the Banhsen quote carefully, especially the first two words, and then consider the foundations Mr. Irons lays in his first sentence. He underestimates the strength in Dr. Bahnsen here, and goes on to commit the very offence the quote challenges him not to make, which seems to have been the purpose of it.
So I will expound on this later, and attempt to refute not just Mr. Irons article, but his entire approach to the subject and thereby pave for Mr. Irons a way to theonomy.
But not yet.....
Barry
