Theonomy - Should we have the Mosaic civil laws today?

If the Mosaic civil law was to be binding in NT times, why wasn't Paul taken out and stoned when he converted? Or if he didn't kill anyone, why was he not at least beaten, "eye for eye, wound for wound..."
 
If the civil authorities don't carry out a law, Jewish people in that day were not afraid to do what they saw as needed to be done, if it was considered critical (e.g. Jn. 8:59; Jn. 10:31; Acts 7:58).
 
And what about the Corinthians?
 
1 Corinthians 6:9-11  Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were.
 
And isn't Gal. 6:1 a NT command, that shows how to deal with sin, in general?
 
Galatians 6:1  Galatians 6:1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.
 
Now those who don't repent are to be turned out of the church, but this again is not Mosaic civil law, I think here we have a NT prescription, transcending the Mosaic law, just what the Theonomists are insisting we should have.

Was the Mosaic law only orders to the government? Why the prohibition on coveting, if this is just governmental procedure, and individuals have no part in applying these rules themselves? When did the Israelite government seek to detect covetousness, under any judge or king?
 
Romans 13:4  He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
Now will no one else ever punish a wrongdoer, if the government fails?
 
And the avenger of blood was not a member of the government, yet if a man who killed someone unintentionally was caught outside the city of refuge, the avenger of blood could put him to death.
Isaiah 1:23  Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves; they all love bribes and chase after gifts. They do not defend the cause of the fatherless; the widow's case does not come before them.
 
This was spoken to the rulers, to those who should have been doing this. But this was spoken to everyone:
Isaiah 1:16-17  Take your evil deeds out of my sight! Stop doing wrong, learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.
 
The same exhortation is given to both, and not just to the government, about carrying out justice.
 
Job 29:11-17  Whoever heard me spoke well of me, and those who saw me commended me, because I rescued the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to assist him. The man who was dying blessed me; I made the widow's heart sing. I put on righteousness as my clothing; justice was my robe and my turban. I was eyes to the blind and feet to the lame. I was a father to the needy; I took up the case of the stranger. I broke the fangs of the wicked and snatched the victims from their teeth.
 
Otherwise Samuel was sinning, when he put Agag to death, note that Samuel didn't say "God told Saul to put all the Amalekites to death, and he didn't do it," instead he said "as your sword has made many women childless…" This implies that the punishment was for unjustly killing people, i.e. for murder, and he was carrying out the Mosaic penalty, "an eye for an eye," that was due, that Saul had not done.
 
The church was the government under Moses, though, he was a Levite, and also throughout the time of the nation of Israel the priests were giving judgments, and carrying out the law and its penalties. Now maybe this ceased with the new covenant, but (I shall use a Theonomic argument here!) don't we need an explicit renunciation of that role for the leaders of God's people?
 
Also, I would ask, should we urge people to restore what they stole, in the church? If so, then whether or not the church has power to enforce that penalty, we can see that that this Mosaic law and punishment is still applicable today. Now why does this penalty apply, and not the others?
 
Leviticus 24:21  Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a man must be put to death.
 
Why would the church urge restitution on one hand, following the Mosaic law, yet Paul not be stoned himself on the other? So it's not as simple as "the Mosaic civil law all applies or it doesn't," it seems we have more work to do.

When God judges the earth in Revelation, why does he not put to death all the murderers and sorcerers (Rev. 9:20-21)? That was the penalty in the Mosaic law, why will God not carry out that penalty in all cases, when he himself is taking up the sword, to judge the world?