Archive for The State
Everything you need to know about the Wikileaks Afghanistan Leak
Posted by: | Comments
In April, Wikileaks.org released a suppressed video of US soldiers killing civilians in Baghdad, and the world was shocked at what it saw. The boldness of Wikileaks to expose this evil was commendable, and their mission to tell the truth about the war continues. Early last week, Wikileaks revealed 91,371 classified military records about American aggression in Afghanistan, including many detailed reports of civilian deaths. This is the biggest military intelligence leak in history. It brings the war lost in time back to the forefront of the world public.
Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.
Tags: Afghanistan, iran, iraq, The State, violence, war, war on terror, wikileaks
Related Content:
New FAQ Questions Added
Posted by: | CommentsSince the opening of the new Christian Libertarian FAQ last week, I have already received a number of interesting questions. Here are the latest inquiries from readers, and since some of them did not leave an email address (naughty, naughty!) it seems more than appropriate to post them directly on the blog as well:
Q1: When Paul wrote Romans 13, the government was distasteful to our 21 century sensibilities for sure. Yet Paul commands believers to honor the rulers, even calling them "servants of God." Coupled with Peter’s instructions to honor them, pray for them, etc., this shows that God has a role for government. Is it possible to determine if Paul personally prefers a small or large government? If God has a purpose for government should Christians be advocating it’s disappearing?
A: The problem with saying that Romans 13 proves there is "a role for government" is that it is conflating government being within God’s plan with government being sanctioned and declared inherently moral by God. When one considers the numerous negative references to the State in the Bible, such as Matthew 4, 1 Samuel 7, Genesis 11, and the book of Revelation, one cannot but admit that the State is, at core, rooted in rebellion against God. So while it is impossible to speak directly for Paul, it seems to me that the State itself is the problem and not merely the size. In conclusions, a Christian can admit that the State is not outside of God’s plan, and yet still advocate for it’s abolition as the greatest oppressor of the innocent in history.
Q2: What in the Bible suggests that followers of Jesus should subscribe to the ideas of libertarianism?
It would be incorrect to say outright "God/Jesus is a libertarian," but what I find very compelling in Scripture is that Christian ethics and libertarian ethics end up being very similar. Other instances: (1) The Golden Rule in Matthew 7:12 is very similar to the non-aggression principle. (2) Scripture is consistently skeptical toward power concentrated into the hands of rulers (cf. 1 Samuel 7). (3) The "Kingdom of God" is never characterized with the aggression of the State. Can you think of any more?
But besides Scripture, libertarianism has more or less emerged from the Western tradition, which is tied very strongly to historical Christianity. It’s ideological predecessor, classical liberalism, was primarily promoted by Christians in its infancy. So, we have an interesting historical argument as well supporting libertarianism from a Christian perspective.
Q3. What in the Bible suggests that followers of Jesus should not subscribe to the ideas of statism?
Besides all the positive reasons that support libertarianism, one of the greatest rejoinders to statism I know of is Matthew 20:25-28, where Jesus says: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant… just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Q4. Where does LibertarianChristians.com make a distinction between resistance to unjust Government action and the directive to "submit himself to the governing authorities"? (Romans 13, NIV)
The position of LibertarianChristians.com is that Romans 13 is about prudence in action toward governmental intrusion in life. While civil disobedience is not immoral and certainly is great to do in certain cases, one must be very careful in executing such measures. For instance, my first responsibility is the caretaking of my family, and then serving the church. I will not do things that bring unreasonable risk upon them. Frequently enough there are better ways of making a difference. But most of all, LibertarianChristians.com does not and will never advocate violence as the answer to our problems.
Would you like to add anything to these answers? Comment below. Or if you like, ask your own question today!
Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.
Tags: Blog News, christian libertarian, Christianity, government, history, libertarian christian, libertarianism, Romans 13, romans13, statism, The State, theology
Related Content:
Tolstoy On Violent Revolution
Posted by: | CommentsRunning on the coat-tails of yesterday’s post, here is an excerpt I found particularly interesting in The Kingdom of God is Within You. Make of it what you will…
“Some persons maintain that freedom from violence, or at least a great diminution of it may be gained by the oppressed forcibly overturning the oppressive government and replacing it by a new one under which such violence and oppression will be unnecessary, but they deceive themselves and others, and their efforts do not better the position of the oppressed, but only make it worse. Their conduct only tends to increase the despotism of government. Their efforts only afford a plausible pretext for government to strengthen their power.
“Even if we admit that under a combination of circumstances specially unfavorable for the government, as in France in 1870, any government might be forcibly overturned and the power transferred to other hands, the new authority would rarely be less oppressive than the old one; on the contrary, always having to defend itself against its dispossessed and exasperated enemies, it would be more despotic and cruel, as has always been the rule in all revolutions.
“While socialists and communists regard the individualistic, capitalistic organization or society as an evil, and the anarchists regard as an evil all government whatever, there are royalists, conservatives, and capitalists who consider any socialistic or communistic organization or anarchy as an evil, and all these parties have no means other than violence to bring own to agreement. Whichever of these parties were successful in bringing their schemes to pass, must resort to support its authority to all the existing methods of violence, and even invent new ones.
“The oppressed would be another set of people, and coercion would take some new form: but the violence and oppression would be unchanged or even more cruel, since hatred would be intensified by the struggle, and new forms or oppression would have been devised. So it has always been after all revolutions and all attempts at revolution, all conspiracies, and all violent changes of government. Every conflict only strengthens the means of oppression in the hands of those who happen at a given moment to be in power.”
Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.
Tags: government, leo tolstoy, non-resistance, pacifism, revolution, The State, violence, war
Related Content:
Leo Tolstoy Against the State
Posted by: | CommentsThis past May, I posted a shorter essay about Leo Tolstoy and non-resistance. I wrote a longer paper on the topic (using the previous essay as its basis) and now wish to share it with you in full. Tomorrow I’ll post an excerpt from Tolstoy’s book The Kingdom of God is Within You that I find particularly compelling. It may be difficult for us to hear the challenge of Tolstoy to today’s world of violence, but even if we do not take a pure pacifist stance it is a message worth taking to heart. May we never think that a few more people dying will make our living better, may we never believe violence is the answer to the world’s problems.
Russian writer Leo Tolstoy is considered one of the greatest novelists of all time. War and Peace and Anna Karenina have inspired millions over the last century. Less well-known about Tolstoy, though, is that his interpretation of Christian ethics has had a profound effect upon the world, especially regarding non-resistance and pacifism. In this paper, I will examine the development of these themes in Tolstoy’s philosophy as they appear in The Kingdom of God is Within You.
Leo Tolstoy was born in 1838 into an aristocratic family. He was the son of Count Nicholas Ilich Tolstoy and Princess Marya Nikolayevna Volkonsky, whose marriage was one of negotiation and convenience. Social class meant everything in eighteenth-century Russia, and the Tolstoys were part of the upper echelon of power. Leo’s ancestry included generals, diplomats, and ministers of the Tsarist rulers. Thus, Tolstoy enjoyed the privileges of the high class, such as the ability to attend university. As a young man, he lived a profligate and wild life while attending the University of Kazan, struggling to find a purpose in his life. He decided to join the military and went to war. Seeing the grim reality of war motivated him to write, and he achieved some early success in his publications while on the front. He finally married at age 34 and settled down to begin the major portion of his literary career. He also began to re-explore religion and came to a realization about God, the church, the state, and self. It was during this time that he reflected upon the writings of anarchists such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, and saw that non-resistance was the only means of lasting change to be found.
Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.
Tags: Book Reviews, Gandhi, government, leo tolstoy, Martin Luther King, non-resistance, pacifism, recommended books, The State, theology, violence, war
Related Content:
Theological Traditions
Posted by: | CommentsMany people do not like the word “tradition.” It holds connotations of oldness or stinginess, and in our modern way we like new, different, novel, unique. But our traditions are always with us, and it is better to understand what traditions are, how they are used, and what forms them, rather than simply rejecting outright.
A theological tradition is a behavior, doctrine, or practice of Christians, passed from generation to generation, informing participants within the tradition about their own identity in the church and in the surrounding culture. Theological traditions exist to help explain reality in the light of biblical reasoning and wisdom, that one may better live out the Christian way of life. Traditions inform dogmas (essential things to be believed), doctrinal values, ethical values, or church organizational principles; they often serve to resolve tensions or concerns experienced at the time by the church. Hence, theological traditions are a critical part of the life of the Christian, even if the Christian that thinks, albeit naively, that “all traditions in the church are just man’s addition to real Christianity, and thus worthless.” While this skeptical thinking has merit in certain cases, the concept of tradition in and of itself is neutral. Traditions can be good or bad. Lets consider how traditions work in more detail. Read More→
Please support LCC by sharing this post on your favorite social network.
Tags: Bible, ethics, The State, theology, tradition, violence, war
Related Content:
Norman is the creator and primary writer for LCC. Learn a little bit about him in the