@ 1:14 of this video Tommy Ice says: "I really think that what Gary is trying to do is to get people to be operational postmillenialists and go out an act like a postmillenialist and believe that he is the expert on how to get involved in a particular issue so that you will help to bring the kingdom in."
Gary North interrupts: "you are absolutely correct."
True in 1988 and true today. That's that's the goal of the liberty movement. Gary North and Ron Paul are willing to deceive the flock to "usher in the kingdom".
Christian Reconstruction Debate 1988
http://youtu.be/tLCWKa4suoQ
Published on Jun 29, 2013
http://americanvision.org - In 1988, Gary DeMar and Gary North faced off against Tommy Ice and Dave Hunt about dispensational theology and Christian reconstruction.
Dispensationalists on Christian Reconstructionism:
Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse? An Analysis of Christian Reconstructionism (by H. Wayne House and Tommy Ice):
http://www.amazon.com/Dominion-Theology ... 0880702613
"From 1974 until 1986 I was a Christian Reconstructionist. I was attracted to the movement because it boasted of a consistent biblical worldview... However, I finally realized that one cannot be a Reconstructionist and a premillennialist... in order to be a Reconstructionist, one has to adopt some form of postmillennialism... My challenge is simply this: Since postmillennialism is (allegedly) on every page of the Bible, show me ONE passage that requires a postmillennial interpretation and should not be taken in a premillennial sense. After fourteen years of study it is my belief that there is not one (such) passage..." - Tommy Ice
===============
Amazon book review
"Many individuals simply are unaware that there is a small but growing group of Christian legalists who want to take over the courts, the legislatures and other civic functions to create a theocratic state instead of a democracy here in the US. This model is then to be extended to the world at large where all mankind, of all religious persuasions would be subject to this theocratic belief.
What Islam would have worldwide by way of the sword, Reconstructionists would have by way of the so-called intelligencia of the Christian world imposing on that same world, with penalties for disobedience ranging from disfellowship to stoning.
Such is the goal of this small but politically active segment of the Evangelical Christian community called Reconstructionism.
Ice and House bring historical as well as biblical horsepower to bear in bringing Reconstructionism to account on issues which truth-seeking fundamental and evangelical Christians need to understand in these Last Days.
As Ice and House's well documented discussion points out, many of these Reconstructionists may well be born-again believers but much of their self-styled theology appears to have been scrambled in the frappe cycle of mom's blender.
Equally good as a history book of Christianity since the first century. Exposes the growing links between Roman Catholic, Reconstructionist, and Manifest Sons of God/Latter Rain(charismatic) beliefs."
======================
Author responds to critic on Amazon:
"Thomas Ice says:
Sorry, Mr. Anonymous, but I really was a Christian Reconstructionist. I was a premil theonomist. I had a discussion with Gary North once about writing an essay laying out a premil reconstructionist view. He, of course rejected that. Back in the early 70s, when I became a reconstructionist, their eschatology was not front and center like it started becoming in the early 80s. It was the assertion of their eschatology in the early 80s that caused me to realize that I could not really be a reconstructionist without becoming a postmil. This lead me to abandon theonomy, but not a biblical worldview, and become a consistent dispensationalist. Back in 1988, I received a letter from a pastor from the Seattle saying that I was never a reconstructionist. I sent him a clip of a television show that I was on in the early 80s in which the host said that my views sounded a lot like reconstructionism. He ask me point-blank, after mentioning R. J. Rushdoony: "Are you a Christian Reconstructionist?" I answered, "Yes I am." Sorry, but I was. I went to many of the reconstructionist conferences and even video taped a number of them. I followed and read their material for about 10 years. I made a trip to Tyler, Texas in the early 80s and met with Gary North and Ray Sutton for about 8 hours of discussion and had decided to adopt all five aspects of reconstructionism. Back then North defined reconstructionism as believing in Calvinism, Van Tilianism (both of which I still hold to today), theonomy, postmillennialism, and I can't remember the fifth one off the top of my head. On my drive home the next day I realized that I could not become a full-blown reconstructionist since I could not throw a future for Israel under the bus. Upon arriving at home, I went back and read some of my dispensational books and realized that I really agreed that dispensationalism was biblical. Wayne House never claimed to have been a reconstructionist. Read the introduction.
Mr. Anonymous, please give one example of things we made up about reconstructionists. There are about 3 or 4 factual errors in the book. I think all of them were in Wayne House's sections, except one. I said that Bahnsen had read Rushdoony's "Institutes" by the age of 12 (or something like that). Bahnsen said that was wrong. Where did I get that information? It was a common rumor that I had heard multiple times from reconstructionists. Wayne House said that North had a PhD in economics, but it was really in history. I made that correction in the galleys, since I knew it was in history, but the publishers did not look at my galley corrections for Dr. House's chapters. I have had a copy of North's PhD diss. from Cal-Riverside for over 25 years and knew it was in history. The book has a couple of other similar errors in it. However, in "House Divided," Bahnsen counted interpretative conclusions that we made as errors in our book. Thus, he concluded that our book was full of errors.
Often when I talk with those who are current reconstructionists, it is very rare to meet one who became a reconstructionist back in the early 70s as I did. Most are fairly ignorant of the early development of the movement. However, I lived through that time and read almost everything that they put out up through about 1990. I would not be surprised at all to learn that Mr. Anonymous has not read our book. He probably had only read "House Divided."
Thomas Ice "