-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Libertarian Christians
- Thread starter andrew
- Start date
Barry: Do you agree with the article that I posted?
Ditto, and ditto the no-disrespect-for-those-who-see-it-differently.
That's the part we should all agree on.
Noahide covenant gave 7 mitzvahs to the Righteous Gentile who beleive in G-d for them to live by.
The Noahide Laws
- Do establish laws. (He did not specify what ones)
- Don’t curse G-d.
- Do not practice idolatry.
- Do not engage in illicit sexuality.
- Do not participate in bloodshed.
- Do not rob.
- Do not eat flesh from a living animal.
Last edited:
Tally up the democide death toll from secular nations in the 20th century alone and then compare that to the previous 2000 years of religious killings and you might change your tune.
Every indication is that secular nations cannot remain free. At some level, God must play a part or it is unhinged from moral strictures. The US did not start out a purely secular nation; that is only the last 50 years and the more secular we become the closer we get to the killing fields.
All Mojo was referencing was a 'theocracy'. I don't think he would be opposed (I certainly wouldn't) to our culture trying to recover some semblance of basic biblical/traditional morality.
A government that has the power to enforce anything we could agree on here also has the power to enforce someone else's agenda on us (which it is busily doing). We can fight for the power to tell others what to do (picture the Emperor in Star Wars and give in to the hate), or we can fight for the liberty to live the way we want to and leave others to their own devices without being forced to pay the costs of the consequences of their bad decisions.
Kevin, that would be best pursued in a separate thread. And really, I didn't open this thread to encourage political debate but to provide resources for those who want to do their own research into what libertarians actually support. Let's try to stay on that track here, and if someone wants to open up a new thread to discuss some other political orientation, whoever wants to can discuss that there.
A government that has the power to enforce anything we could agree on here also has the power to enforce someone else's agenda on us (which it is busily doing). We can fight for the power to tell others what to do (picture the Emperor in Star Wars and give in to the hate), or we can fight for the liberty to live the way we want to and leave others to their own devices without being forced to pay the costs of the consequences of their bad decisions.
Kevin, that would be best pursued in a separate thread. And really, I didn't open this thread to encourage political debate but to provide resources for those who want to do their own research into what libertarians actually support. Let's try to stay on that track here, and if someone wants to open up a new thread to discuss some other political orientation, whoever wants to can discuss that there.
I won't hijack this thread any further, but I just want to clarify that I am a libertarian-minded Christian, and I don't see amy contradiction with my faith.
Something statistical to think about over the last 2,000 years. With the population explosion over that time, you could add up the total number of people up to 1800 and it probably wouldn't equal the current population. The percentage of those killed is probably less, but I can't say for certain.
Regarding theocracies, I agree that any government devoted to an ideology (communism) or a singular despot (Take your pick) is by most definitions a theocracy. The sinful nature of man ensures that whether Christian theocracy, or secular theocracy, men will always try to exert unrighteousness power over others. The ideology that promotes the freedom of the individual, rather than the power of a government, will be the one to preserve our ability to live for Christ as we see appropriate.
I cede this thread back to @andrew
Another resource for those who are trying to get their heads around Christian libertarianism is the Conservative - Libertarian - Christian page on facebook. Don't know the guy who's writing, but he is a consistently thoughtful voice in the midst of all the chaos and mudslinging on fb. Here's one from today:
I believe in a government weak enough to keep the strongest politicians from posing a threat. Simply having our elected officials obey the constitution would result in the most pro-liberty, pro-growth, pro-peace and prosperity era of our lifetime. Truly limited government attracts people to office seeking to support and defend the constitution. However, one where overreach is condoned or even demanded attracts narcissistic, imperial personalities.
The true measure of a nation’s strength is the willingness of its citizens to accept responsibility. So many of the laws and programs we institute and the debts we rack up are simply a desire to escape the risk and responsibilities that come with life. Those consequences cannot be avoided by legislation. Politics will not solve our problems. Yet despite failure after failure Americans when confronted with any problem look to collectively solve them through government and public policy.
Age res proprias tuas is Latin for mind your own business and was Ben Franklin’s preference for our national motto. Mind Your Own Business is great advice in any language and unfortunately spoken in very few.
The true measure of a nation’s strength is the willingness of its citizens to accept responsibility. So many of the laws and programs we institute and the debts we rack up are simply a desire to escape the risk and responsibilities that come with life. Those consequences cannot be avoided by legislation. Politics will not solve our problems. Yet despite failure after failure Americans when confronted with any problem look to collectively solve them through government and public policy.
Age res proprias tuas is Latin for mind your own business and was Ben Franklin’s preference for our national motto. Mind Your Own Business is great advice in any language and unfortunately spoken in very few.
This is false. Ideologies cause conflict. Religions account for most of them. We've had our share of idealogues not directly influenced by religion who have been trouble makers too. Humans are capable of ruthless and cruel ambition no matter what their world view is. I would say the capacity to commit atrocities is a human trait.
We have to realize Stalin and Hitler were in a time when the Earth was much more populated than many previous times of war, and the advancement in weapon technology had advance to a point where bombs and machine guns allowed for immensely larger scale bloodshed. The population of the Earth was up to around 450 million by 1340 C.E. but after the great famine and the Black Death in 1350 C.E. the population dropped drastically. In 1500 C.E., there were only about a total of 370 million people on Earth. The population shortly began to balloon because humans had re-learned agricultural methods, irrigation and governments were re-established. 314 million is about what the United States has today alone. Until the 11th millennium B.C.E. the population is estimated to have topped out at 3 million people. During the time of Hitler and Stalin the Earth’s population had popped up to around (2 billion) and weaponry technology allowed for the subjugation and the genocide of people by the millions, instead of hundreds of thousands. Using a higher number to substantiate someone as bigger villain is improper logic. Had the perpetrators of the crusades had machine guns and Jets dropping bombs on a larger population, you can guarantee there would have been higher death tolls.
Over Millennium humans have coordinated slaughter on millions of other humans for territorial claims, religion and nationalism. Dictators with no religious affiliation are not simply killing for Atheism, they are killing for power. Religions have historically had power and dictators are often not looking to compete with alternative potential threats which may have influence or gain power. Stalin was killing for Marxism and totalitarian rule.
It’s true that the tyrannical communist regimes of Mao and Stalin were opposed to religion, with religious belief discouraged and punished under their rule. This had less to do with atheism and more to do with the threat of religion as competition with their own tyrannical plans. Totalitarian regimes are built on dogma and fear, not freedom of speech and inquiry. In this way, they greatly resemble religion. In effect, these leaders essentially created religions and inserted themselves at the top as new deities. As Sam Harris put it, “The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions.”
Maybe around the time of the communist revolution in China, roughly 30 millions died for some reasons, including starvation, illnesses, warfare and senility. That’s only about 5% of the population back then.
In Europe, the Catholic church ordered people to massively kill cats, and as a result, mice increased in number, spread plague all over Western Europe and killed over 30% of the population back then. But Europeans have never seemed to blame the church and its popes…
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4076
I am totally stealing this! Next time someone writes something awesome... yeah, if I had the time, I would have written thatIf I had more discretionary time, I would have written that...or something like that
That is a myth.
The crusades? You apparently fail to realize that this was a response to centuries of Islamic conquest against the west. Wars to conquer and destroy us and raids to enslave us.
They weren't murdering their people by the millions using bombs and fancy technology. It was largely one knife and one bullet at a time; or old school methods like death marches, stealing food, etc. I analyzed the numbers a while back nearly half of the death toll was in incidents that made heavy use of starvation.
Its an easy out to claim the atrocities were bigger due to larger populations but I've yet to see anyone break them down by % of the population. So I don't think we can say that. But what many have noted is the difference in kind of these killings. Not just the scale, but the brutality, intent, and systematicness of it. Like, the soviets literally had quota's to meet. They'd send out a message to a given local with a mandatory # of people that had to be killed.
The Christians didn't just start murdering 100's of millions of political and religious opponents when the achieved the technological means to do so. It had everything to do with atheism. When there is no higher power to judge you, you are free to do as you wilt. Free to pursue power by any means necessary. The scale and brutality of the killings perpetrated by scientific atheism is almost unparalleled. To find similarities you'd have to reach back to Genghis Khan. And it wasn't just that any one was bad. But that they all happened in quick succession and from the same ideology. It took 900 years to match his scale and then they do it not once but many times over.
I notice I'm horribly off topic now so I'll drop it and let you have the last word if you will.
Last edited:
You just did
.In all seriousness, I started to write something like it in #29, but I had zero time to develop it.
Bill Maher and his ilk like to point to religious killings as proof that we don't need religion in society. They forget about the secular/atheistic religions (communism, etc.) that have perpetrated these things as well.
There's such a thing as religious atheism too, whereby a heavy handed ruler uses God and religion to quell the masses and justify his deeds, yet has no faith in any god other than himself (can't resist...think Trump).
It's ideologies that kill, whether that ideology is one person centered, or political system driven. That's why...bringing this back to libertarianism...the ideologies more prone to freedom and liberty are better for not just Christians, but for everyone.
@sun, regarding libertarianism, we've had this discussion before and you appear to have learnt nothing from that. In the last discussion you stated how terrible libertarianism was, but demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on what libertarianism even is. The references you cited built a straw man that was labelled libertarianism and then shot it down, but did not actually discuss libertarianism. Now, months later, you are still making the same statements and posting equally irrelevant references.
You appear to be very passionate about libertarianism. But you simply have a pre-existing mindset, read writings that support your pre-existing mindset and get you even more passionate about it, and then post them as if they prove it. They don't. On the contrary, the things you are reading are simply confusing you.
This is because people looking only from the outside often don't understand the very thing they're trying to look at.
If you truly want to understand libertarianism, or anything, in order to either support or refute it, you need to read more widely. You need to read the classic writings of those who support classical liberalism / libertarianism to ensure you understand it properly. I'd recommend starting with "The Law" by Frederic Bastiat, from around 1850. This short and easy to read classic text explains the proper purpose and limits of law from a Christian perspective, and is absolutely foundational reading for anyone considering such matters.
In the same way, if you want to understand communism, you need to at least read the Communist Manifesto (which is fascinating by the way, everyone should read it). If you want to understand Islam, you need to at least read the Quran. And so forth.
You appear to be very passionate about libertarianism. But you simply have a pre-existing mindset, read writings that support your pre-existing mindset and get you even more passionate about it, and then post them as if they prove it. They don't. On the contrary, the things you are reading are simply confusing you.
This is because people looking only from the outside often don't understand the very thing they're trying to look at.
If you truly want to understand libertarianism, or anything, in order to either support or refute it, you need to read more widely. You need to read the classic writings of those who support classical liberalism / libertarianism to ensure you understand it properly. I'd recommend starting with "The Law" by Frederic Bastiat, from around 1850. This short and easy to read classic text explains the proper purpose and limits of law from a Christian perspective, and is absolutely foundational reading for anyone considering such matters.
In the same way, if you want to understand communism, you need to at least read the Communist Manifesto (which is fascinating by the way, everyone should read it). If you want to understand Islam, you need to at least read the Quran. And so forth.
The American founders established what was essentially the closest that any culture has come to true Libertarianism. And that is also why it fell apart so quickly. Biblical law must be the standard. It must be the center. Nothing else can hold no matter how dedicated that even Christian men may be to the cause.
Did you read the critique in the posted link? Pretty much the opposite of excellent....
And describing what happened to the original constitutional republic as "falling apart" reveals a whole bunch of assumptions we're just not going to thrash out here.
Again, my purpose here was to provide resources for people who are liberty-curious, not provoke a political debate; that's why we're in the "links of interest" forum. Please open a different thread to discuss other points of view or engage in debate over the relative merits of different political theories.