This post is Part Three of a modified form of the talk I gave at Christians for Liberty 2015. Read Part One and Part Two. The purpose of the talk was to explore why valuing peace is a critical point…
This post is Part Two of a modified form of the talk I gave at Christians for Liberty 2015. Read Part One here. The purpose of the talk was to explore why valuing peace is a critical point of integration…
Political engagement shapes us. It forms us. Politics affect, not just our thoughts, but the inclinations of our heart. Political engagement is a type of spiritual formation.
I mean “politics” in the common sense as when someone says, “I hate politics.” “I enjoy watching my political shows on Sunday mornings.” “My grandfather and I always talk politics when we get together.” Politics, generally speaking, is that which deals with government, public policy, and things that affect the community as a whole.
Since most of us are not elected officials, politics is a spectator sport. It’s something we hear about in the news, listen to talk-show hosts discuss, or pay attention to when it’s time to vote for a president every four years. Political engagement is typically a passive affair. We pay attention to the more important issues of the day, form some sort of opinion on the matter, and hope that our side prevails.
Whenever statistics about inequality and the so-called “control of wealth” get published, the Progressive blogosphere goes wild and their social media statuses light up with indignant calls for concern for the poor in the face of “obvious injustice.” Since few people read beyond the headlines and summary paragraphs, and even fewer seek out alternative analyses of the data, the popular meme of “rich get richer, poor get poorer” pervades our world. It is a sad reality that few people think beyond their emotional responses.
This article was jointly written by Doug Stuart and Jessica Hooker. See Part 1 here.
Elizabeth Stoker has argued against what she presumes to be the incompatibility of Christianity and libertarianism. In our first post we examined the first of her three arguments. Here we begin to look at the subject of private property.
2.) Not only does the Bible indicate that God values private property, in it we see God’s desire to see property stewarded for its value to humanity.
John Locke began his Second Treatise on Government with a comment on property:
“…we must consider what state all men are naturally in, and that is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit…”
The idea of private property is fundamental to libertarian philosophy and is clearly supported in the Bible. We find in the book of Exodus the laws God gave the people of Israel as they emerged from Egypt. This covenant between God and the Israelites ordered justice in their community. Part of that covenant and establishment of justice included property rights. Exodus 22 deals solely with laws regarding property—both livestock and land—and also lists the restitution that is required if these laws are violated. While this may be an oversimplification, the concept of property rights was a part of God’s arrangement with Israel in ordering a just society. God expected them to share, yes, but how can one share what is not one’s own? Perhaps the phrase “stewardship rights” is more accurate a description than “property rights.” We each “own” something, which is to say, we are stewards of real property, and God has certain expectations of us.