Questions and Answers (Christianity and Culture) (Remastered)

Rushdoony’s core claim is that law flows from sovereignty: whoever is lord in a society defines its rule of life. When churches deny God’s law through antinomianism, they effectively confess, “We have no king but Caesar.” The early church refused Rome’s demand to say “Caesar is Lord” and instead confessed Christ’s universal lordship (Phil. 2:9–11). They did not seek change through protests but by bearing good fruit, trusting God’s judgment rather than expecting justice from evil men (Matt. 7:16–20). Obeying Scripture, especially 1 Corinthians 6, Christians built alternative institutions under God’s law. They established church courts to adjudicate disputes, so just that even pagans sought their rulings. Alongside these courts came schools, hospitals, and charities forming a genuine counter-government that Rome feared as “an empire within the empire.” Rushdoony contrasts this with modern states, where law increasingly reflects injustice and elections cannot cure moral collapse. Law works only when people are inwardly governed when it is written on the heart. At the center is atonement and authority. Believers are “bought with a price” (1 Cor. 6:19–20), redeemed from slavery to sin into service under Christ’s rule. Modern statism attempts to replace God as sovereign, leaving no higher court of appeal. Drawing on legal historians, Rushdoony argues that Western law arose from the juridical doctrine of the atonement and the reality of final judgment. Therefore, the regeneration of man requires the regeneration of society. Because God alone is Creator-King (Isa. 40; Ps. 2), only His law has a future, and the church’s calling is to live and rebuild under that law.