Kings, Customs, and Matt Doyle’s Argument

In this episode of The Lancaster Patriot Podcast, Chris Hume responds to feedback from Matt Doyle regarding 1 Samuel 30:25, Greg Bahnsen, and the distinction between historic theonomy and Lancastrian theonomy.

The core argument of this episode comes down to one fundamental sentence: We are arguing for general equity adjudication, not general equity legislation. A legislature attempts to pre-adjudicate every case in advance—imposing human-made rules on everyone before an event occurs and stripping judges of the biblical wisdom required for individual cases. By contrast, biblical adjudication calls on judges to apply God’s revealed law with wisdom, prudence, and diligent inquiry to real disputes after they happen.

Chris examines David’s army custom, the difference between voluntary customs vs. state-enforced legislation, the role of Israel’s kings under Deuteronomy 17, and why a return to local judicial wisdom under Christ’s lordship is the path forward for Christendom.