Christianity and the Police State: Authority is NOT a Christian Value

Why hasn’t American Christianity rejected the growing police state, whose goals and activities so often differ from Christian beliefs? Recently Rand Paul was asked how he planned to sell police accountability to a group which polls show unquestioningly supports police tactics and activities–evangelical Christians. The interview was ended abruptly after a brief exchange between Rand and Paul Lewis from The Guardian that included the following dialogue.

“You’re standing for the Republican nomination, all the research shows that Republicans, white Republicans who are going to determine the outcome of this race, don’t think that the criminal law is applied in an unfair way. So how are you going to win the nomination with this group?” asked Lewis.

“I think your premise is incorrect. I think that I can take that message into a white evangelical church anywhere in Iowa and give exactly the same speech and be received well.” Rand responded.

I will forgive you my son, but you must put my laws before your own.
I will forgive you my son, but you must put my laws before your own.

I really hope that Rand can bring this message to evangelical Christians, because it is sorely needed. The abuse, misconduct and corruption occurring in our nation’s policing institutions is a blatant violation of Christian morality and theology. The principles and values which are the cornerstone of the Christian belief system are being violated by police on a daily basis. Whether we wish to consult the Ten Commandments or some more esoteric vision of evil like the Seven Deadly Sins, contrasting what police are doing with what Christians believe humans are supposed to strive to do, it becomes evident that the police state is in severe violation of Christian values.

I began life as a Christian. My great grandmother was the first woman in Iowa to preach at the Foursquare Baptist Church. My experiences of religion as a child are mostly all positive. Unlike many former Christians, I have not become anti-religion. My own experiences in life merely expanded my concepts of God or the Divine until they no longer fit within any single religion. Yet, I have continued to find value in religious teachings by studying the deeper theology and doctrine at a level most adherents are often unfamiliar with. I do not intrinsically find religions or religious people to be enemies of reason or liberty. Their beliefs are invaluable tools that can be used to transform the world into a better place. There is nothing wrong with religion or Christianity; there is a problem with Christians.

Jesus was Himself a victim of a brutal police state.
Jesus was Himself a victim of a brutal police state.

Why do so many Christians seem to unquestioningly support police and the state? To do so itself is rather blasphemous. To put the laws of man and their enforcement above the laws of God and his judgement is downright sinful. When police kill they commit a sin against the Christian God. Regardless of what the victim did or how they lived their life, the police are still guilty of breaking the Lord’s commandment. To forgive this murder while vilifying the victim, whose crimes are often non-existent or far less significant than killing, is to put the state before God. It is the very definition of Idolatry. When Jesus suggests that we give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and give unto God what is God’s, he is implying that all things are God’s. Caesar, or the state, is an unGodly construct. The state is an earthly idol whose judgements are wicked by virtue of believing itself to be more valid than God. To believe in God’s word and His law is to reject the inequities of men who seek the authority which only God can provide. To stand against the laws of God in support of the sins of the state is the most profoundly unChristian way of spending your time on Earth.

Jesus gave refuge to criminals. He preached for peace and non-violence. He threw money-changers out of the temple and warned his followers of the evil of authority. I could fill this article full of scripture supporting my theses, but I expect that Christians are already familiar with the teachings of Christ. Those teachings have a very clear and unmistakable message. If you believe somehow that you can still justify the abuse, misconduct, and corruption of police and the state while remaining a Christian, you are wrong. Those who follow the idolatrous state and its functionaries have lost sight of their religion, their morals, and their teachings. God does not recognize flags or badges or any of this worldly detritus. Jesus died to forgive our sins, so that we could peacefully share his message of love, devotion and faith. To support a paradigm that constantly violates Christian morals and theology is to belittle His sacrifice and reject His word.

Jesus fought authority in the bible and sought the company of criminals and the downcast.
Jesus fought authority in the bible and sought the company of criminals and the downcast.

It is of massive importance that Christians awaken to their religious duties. By standing with the police and the state, you are displaying epic hypocrisy. This hypocrisy shames you and your religion and drives people away from God. It makes you a sinner and a candidate for those eternal flames you believe in. Christianity can no longer afford to be caught in these double standards. Not while the lives and eternal souls of God’s children are in the balance. It is time to be consistent in the values, morals, and ideas that Jesus taught and that you claim to stand for. It is not your job to judge men and women or support those who do. It is your duty to live properly by following the message of Jesus.

By supporting the excesses of the state and police, Christians have lost their way. As I said before, unlike the stereotypical atheist trolls who wander the web, I believe in the goodness of religion to help people act in accordance with higher standards. This is not a call to bash Christians, but to bring them back to the message of the their religion. A message of Love, Peace and Autonomy, rather than the idolatry of Patriotism, State Violence and Bigotry, as expressed by the growing number of evangelical Christians, who have seemingly lost both their minds and their morals. I hope Rand Paul can reach these people and show them the importance of questioning man’s earthly authority, which by all accounts of Christianity, is what the biblical God’s children were intended to do.

Resources for Christians

Jesus Radicals
Simple Liberty
Jaques Ellul



1861 Original Military Civil War Us Army 18th Ny Infantry Band Conductor's Baton picture
1861 Original Military Civil War Us Army 18th Ny Infantry Band Conductor's Baton

Rat Tailed Spud, Scepter, Baton, Mace, Colbert County, Alabama, With Coa picture
Rat Tailed Spud, Scepter, Baton, Mace, Colbert County, Alabama, With Coa

Ferrari Factory 60th Anniversary Relay Baton #5/500  picture
Ferrari Factory 60th Anniversary Relay Baton #5/500

Ferrari Factory 60th Anniversary Relay Baton #103/500 Spectacular picture
Ferrari Factory 60th Anniversary Relay Baton #103/500 Spectacular

Original Repousse
Original Repousse "toussaint Baton Fatra" Unchained Slave Haitian Primitive Art

Alia Atreides

Hi, my name is Trevor. Thanks for reading!

  • tz1

    Luke 3:14 “And
    the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And
    he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely;
    and be content with your wages.”

  • Sikko

    Even if I accept your premise that the police are naturally engaged in actions that are against Christian values, I’m still left to ask why that even matters. Last I checked, the government of this nation has no responsibility to uphold Christian values.

  • Joshua Scott Hotchkin

    No, but Christians do. And when their support of government conflicts with their values, it is time for them to appraise their priorities.

  • t

    Is this a joke? Check out Romans 13 and get back to me on that.

  • Sikko

    Except your idea is flawed, being based on the idea that “Caesar, or the state, is an unGodly construct.” Which is so obviously contradicted by the source of Christian values, the Bible, which clearly states in Romans 13:1 “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”

  • Sikko

    Or Hebrews 13, Titus 3, or 1st Peter 2

  • JC

    Christ also said, those who live by the sword shall die by the sword. So if you are going to go out and intentionally break the law, your actions are your sole responsibility. To actually compare Christianity to the police is beyond stupid. America was founded on religious principals. Look at the offenses people were thrown in jail for as compared to today. It’s not up to you too decide who is christian or not. Copblockers are not the moral compass in America.

    Rand Paul will never be president. He is as goofy as his dad is.

  • WD!

    Christians are quick to drink the koolaid

  • vendetta

    IMO, here is one of copblockers moral and religious values.

    Just think if police were not around to stop and apprehend thugs of this nature?

  • Pw4x3r

    You should go read something on how an anarchist societies functions and would handle this situation. There you can find your answer.

  • tz1

    There is a big difference between a theoretical construct and action. The anarchists are no different in hubris than the communists when they expect real human beings to react in a particular way. There are areas of anarchy. See Detroit. Move there and set up your anarchical utopia there and see if it works. The police don’t enforce anything and it isn’t paradise. You can vote with your feet and move to where there is (de facto) no government. Anarchists prefer to stay in comfort and write long and stupid treatises on how wonderful it would be if there were no government.

    Now it would be nice if the police were around to apprehend thugs, and a handful of “peace officers” do this. More would rather sit at a desk and take reports for insurance or run speed-traps than take the risk or do the hard work to apprehend criminals.

  • t

    Police state.

    Always a funny one.

  • tz1

    First, what Paul and others are talking about is the Natural Law, and Government is the final backstop to evil. Not all sins are crimes, but some destroy society, so the lesser evil of government is warranted. The cases are very narrow. Aquinas had a treatise on law in his Summa.

    Back to the post.

    First the author says in an indirect way that he no longer follows Christ, the bible or Christianity. Since he is vague, I don’t know if his differences or criticisms are valid. I come as a traditional Roman Catholic, and can make the same points and have on other occasions and in other places. Mark Shea (blogs at patheos) is similar.

    Police no more automatically commit a sin when they kill than anyone else. One MILLION innocent babies are slaughtered each year and that IS always a sin because there can be no defense – the baby is not endangering the abortionist. He is a paid assassin. (Where’s Abortion-Block?) There are fewer abortionists than police who pull their weapons. Each police killing stands on its own merits. In South Carolina, it was murder. In Oklahoma, it was manslaughter. In other cases the criminal pulls out a weapon to kill an officer and it is self-defense.

    Also, you might want to check the dictionary. Whatever evil in forgiving a cop that sins is NOT idolatry. It is material cooperation with evil by encouraging and endorsing a sinful act. You know, things like baking cakes for Sodom style marriages.

    The best take is from “A Man for All Seasons”:

    Alice More: Arrest him!More: Why, what has he done?Margaret More: He’s bad!More: There is no law against that.Will Roper: There is! God’s law!More: Then God can arrest him.Alice: While you talk, he’s gone!More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil
    turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being
    flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man’s
    laws, not God’s– and if you cut them down—and you’re just the man to do
    it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would
    blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s

    We need laws, and the courts, and warrants and sheriffs and such for MANs laws – not God’s. Man’s laws concern time, not eternity. They concern scarcity of this earth, not the abundance of heaven. They concern this life, not the next. But they do exist, need to be discovered, and those which require it, enforced.

    Note – the “state” is an abstraction. Abstractions have no will or knowledge so cannot commit sin. They might promote evil, but “states” aren’t going to hell, only the sinful leaders.

    To go back to the holocaust down the block, Christians have been sitting by for a generation as abortion has been protected and the police have been brutal against pro-lifers. If you want to condemn them to hell for failure to act, 50 million dead babies are testifying against them for their indolence. Then ask if the police should protect the assassins? Should the German constables protect the Nazis pushing the Jews into the Cattle cars headed toward the death camps? Or should they enforce against the bakers or the photographers who refuse to cater to Gay weddings? If you want to split Christians from the idea of the state or the police, here is the crack that could split the rock apart, shatter the support.

    I can think of no example where “Jesus gave refuge to criminals”. He forgave sinners, but as I pointed out, sinners aren’t automatically criminals.

    “If you believe somehow that you can still justify the abuse, misconduct, and corruption of police and the state while remaining a Christian, you are wrong.”. Sigh. I and all the Christians I know do no such thing. No one I know justifies abuse, misconduct, or corruption by anyone! So who exactly is this directed to? You make a similar mistake with “By supporting the excesses of the state and police…”.

    “Not while the lives and eternal souls of God’s children are in the balance”. Ought I laugh or cry that you never mention abortion before or after this line? How many have been killed – not even murdered, but just killed – by cops? How many by Abortion?

    “It is not your job to judge men and women or support those who do”. How is the entire post not one big judgment on men and women?

  • Guest

    Luke 22:36

  • Michael Brown

    so Hitlers regime was instituted by God???

  • Sikko

    No, I don’t. However, if a person hold’s the belief that the Bible is the word of God, then that person must accept that Hitler was chosen by God to lead Germany.

  • g2reason

    It was kind of a dumb article.

  • amazedbyidiots

    America was founded on the genocide of my ancestors and the continuing theft of our lands and destruction of all Creation. If that is what you call christian principles; I’m very happy to be Indigenous!

  • Pw4x3r

    Roles such as mercenary, bounty hunter, investigator, detective. Those roles don’t just disappear. There are always going to be individuals who seek justice. There will always be a need for justice. Those things don’t just disappear, no matter what type of society you live in. It’s insane to believe this society has stumbled upon the one end all be all method of governance that throughout all time and space is superior to all other forms. That’s pure insanity. Maybe anarchy isn’t the way. But the police in their current form sure as shit is not the solution.

  • Gary Litfin

    The Q. Why hasn’t American Christianity rejected the growing police state, whose goals and activities so often differ from Christian beliefs? The A. Because it ain’t an abortion? LOL

  • Gary Litfin

    Actually Crystal Methedrine.

  • Morgan O’Brien-Bledsoe

    Has this author ever heard of the dark ages? Of the Holy war? Christians have been forcing their beliefs on others since their idea took hold. This is not new with Christians. In fact it’s how they became a leading religion.

  • Gary Litfin

    This is true, nothing has changed except, genocide has fallin’ out of vogue and replaced by more imprisonment.

  • RAD

    Governance and government are 2 different things. Anarchy means no government, not no governance.

  • tz1

    Mercenaries are paid for a result which may or may not be just.
    Justice is rooted in the truth. But anarchy doesn’t recognize objective truth, so can’t have “justice”, only a dominant opinion – merely different from the current one.
    Thou shall not steal – is that your feeling, or is it objectively true?

    I can and do call much police action as evil because I have a fixed, defensible standard of good and evil, justice and injustice. And the cases are unjust and evil.

    At best an anarchist can say “I don’t prefer it”, but how are preferences meaningful? Justice – and what is considered just or unjust – becomes a preference, not an objective standard.

  • RAD

    The failures of statism ≠ Anarchy

    You realize you’re not making an actual argument against anarchism by simply making ad homs.
    What if I said:
    Statists are so loaded with hubris when they expect humans to react a certain way. Statists write long stupid treatises. Would you accept that as a logical argument against statism(assuming the premises were true)? If I can find a stupid treatise written by a statist, will you accept that as a refutation of statism?

  • tz1

    Worse, they think they can take over the tyranny and use it to end abortion. That is what the politicians on the right say, but we only get more tyranny, never less abortions.

  • Robyn Ryan

    Any religion that begins with a man throwing a woman under the bus to evade personal responsibility can only succeed through conquest. ‘A world without women’ so ardently desired by 4th century monks is a world that denies reality. Modern Christianity has been parsed and harrowed through an exclusive Western European philosophy of domination and ‘king of the hill.’ “Submit or die” is not a workable organizing principle, especially when authority is vested in a translated, 17th century printed text.

  • RAD

    Ironically after he wrote that, the “authorities” probably chopped Paul’s head off.

  • RAD

    What basis do we have to think a letter written by Paul was the word of God? Does the bible say so?

  • Sikko

    That’s the position of a majority of Christian sects.

  • Sikko


  • RAD

    1.Guy writes good christians have nothing to fear from government
    2. Government chops his head off for being a good christian.

  • RAD

    Yeah. I just wonder what the source is on this.

  • Sikko

    Its called living and dying by one’s principles….a concept foreign to the majority of anarchists I have encountered in my lifetime.

    Also, you are working on assumption, for all the facts that are available it is equally likely that Paul died of old age as it is that he was martyred by beheading or crucifixion. Of course you conveniently fail to account why Paul said that a good Christian has nothing to fear from government.

  • RAD

    I don’t know for sure if the head chopping thing really happened – it may not have.

    It’s hard to say what exactly he was saying, but I think as it is normally interpreted, he is saying the rulers only do “terror” to those who do “wrong” and not to those who do “right.”

    But how do we rationalize this with the government crucifying Jesus and cutting off John the Baptist’s head? I would think the arch example of government doing terror to good christians would be the story of Jesus itself…

    It’s been debated whether he’s even talking about the government – referencing the swords seems to imply so.

  • Sikko

    I honestly could care less, since those beliefs are meaningless to me, outside of rigorous debate and discussion with family and friends that hold those beliefs

  • tz1

    The problem with the statists is that they only give Argumentum ad Baculum. They merely keep beating into submission.

    You will find very few true anarchic communities through history, and most of them were highly religious and would be very controlling using social pressure (Rothbard did a study of pre-revolution America, William Penn had trouble collecting fees from such communities).

    I have two problems with Anarchists – they have the numbers and the ability – if they believed in eating their own cooking – to create their utopia. Instead they stay in hi-tax, hi-reg, hi-cop states and whine about the lack of liberty. It is like complaining about the Texas heat or Minnesota cold.

    (Note: I’m moving to a lo-tax, lo-reg, lo-cop state which is not anarchic, but is maximally free, so I personally AM voting with my feet).

    The second problem is at the root: “There are no rules”. No laws. No recognition that there is a difference between truth and lies, good and evil, beauty and ugliness. The argument ends there as it must. It is a negation of all value. The moment you place some rule – even for life and liberty – it ceases to be an “anarchy”. Even the private thugs – you can call them insurance and security (but not justice). But if thugs are private, and there is no superior rule (which there cannot be by definition), then attack and defense are equal – thieves v.s. guards, assassins v.s. protectors. He who has the best or most efficient thugs wins. You will try to smuggle in justice and objective good, or argue that most might prefer such, but you cannot place them in a superior position by definition. If there is no dominion, they cannot dominate, merely be a preference among many.

    To combine the two, a town with several hundred quakers, mormons, or some other strict sect can have no external government because there cannot be a conflict. Their ideas are uniform. The problems come up when you have heterogeneous beliefs, typically about property. Many who call themselves anarchists do, so they can conduct the experiment. And they are free to do so.

    Some are:
    “It may take years before enough Americans recognize this, though. In the
    meantime, we have the power to reduce the role of the police in our own
    individual lives. This year I made a New Year’s resolution not to call
    the police. By participating in efforts in my neighborhood to reduce the
    presence and role of the police in our interactions, I’m also taking
    part in ensuring there is an organized, collectively-responsible
    immediate community with viable, humane and self-empowering alternatives
    to calling the police. Additionally, I know I can rely on resources
    like friends, help hotlines, restorative justice practices, crisis
    centers and so on should I find myself in a jam”.

    I don’t think it will work, as I believe that the 2nd amendment is the correct approach, but I’m open minded enough to change my mind if experiments are conducted and succeed. Practice might resolve the inherent contradiction in ways Logic cannot.

  • TaxCattleKiller

    So some other guys writings trumped statements from the son of god? Yes your total a christian I can tell fucking moron.

  • TaxCattleKiller

    Umm so statements from the son of god are trumped by organized groups that were government’s back then….I smell a idiot Christian here folks.

  • Sikko

    Well, that would be your own odor that you smell. The premise of this article is that authority goes against the values of Christians, whose entire belief structure is built on authority, starting with the authority of their God.

    Further, if you were anything other than a reactionary moron, you’d have scrolled further down and seen just how wrong your accusation of “idiot Christian” is.

  • TaxCattleKiller

    JC why are not you not in SC sucking your shoot em in the back bros dick? He is so said and lonely for his bitches in blue. I honestly don’t even think your a loser pig….just a troll like me. I love how you skew Jesus’s quote and try to make it only apply to criminality. That live by the sword die by the sword crap applies to the “supposed” righteous as well….you fucks in blue. Nothing has really changed you can go to jail for even lamer shit today i.e. letting kids play outside so please suck a dick and just shut the fuck up bitch.

  • JC

    You are a true idiot. Nothing you just said means anything. It’s just rants and raves. Go finish grade school.

  • RAD

    That’s what I don’t get – where does the claim that a letter written by a guy who never met Jesus during the time of his gospel – who only claims to have seen Jesus in a vision years later – is somehow to be taken as the literal word of God? If someone can explain why we should presume Paul of Tarsis speaks for God? Because the council of bishops said so? And who did the council of bishops work for? Oh yeah, Caesar. How convenient.

  • RAD

    Yeah, I’m familiar with the statist ad baculuum. There are two basic fundamental fallacious appeals to consequence that lie at the heart of the statist belief sytem: the statist ad baculuum and the Hobbesian appeal to consequence. The modern state religion teaches us that there is a supernatural invisible higher power, a distinct personal “entity” that recurs throughout statist scripture as an article of faith in the modern state religion: “The state” as its own “person” or personal “entity”, what Hobbes called the Leviathan. He said it is a “god” – the “entity” children are taught to pray to when worshiping the flag idol. The modern state religion’s version of divine right to rule is that the government claims their supernatural power they call “jurisdiction” or “authority” comes from this invisible “entity” called “the state”. The Hobbesian appeal to consequence is that we should believe in this entity and the concordant religious belief system of the state religion, because believing in it has good consequences: It gives us a social technology we can use to prosecute evildoers and hopefully in so doing deter crime and violence, and to organize armies capable of repelling a foreign invasion. The problem is that simply showing that believing in it has good consequences is not a logical argument that the belief itself is true, although it is used as such. You will often see statists implicitly invoke a reverse-version where if you point out that statism contradicts itself logically they will ask “Well, then what’s the alternative?”, the idea apparently being that we need those good consequences so without the church of state to provide them, how else. This is a pragmatic concern, but has literally no bearing on the truth value of statist dogma.

  • tz1

    And what is missed is there need be no monopoly on violence, enforced by priests or police. If there be a state, it can only have rights inferior to its citizens, as it derives existence and any authority from their consent, and you cannot give what you don’t have, and some things you cannot give at all (because you technically don’t own something but are a guardian or conservator like your life itself, or even your body).

    Hobbes argument is that life would be nasty, brutish, and short without “law”, but then jumps to saying only a tyrant can enforce such laws. Individuals manage to do just find in 99% of the cases. For the 1% where there might be efficient criminals, or disputes that breach the peace, or something else, we can discuss it. Hobbes takes that 1% and extrapolates to 100%.

  • RAD

    Yeah, which is likely a false dichotomy: Hobbes says “the state” or as he calls it “Commonwealth” is THE ONLY solution and then introduces a bunch of reified fictions using this false dichotomy and appeals to consequence. How he determined that there is one solution he never explains except to contrast his statist philosophy and statist society with the “state of nature” which I think we can think of as hunter gatherer tribes and pre-neolithic humans – “rouging it” as a full time life-style. How he determined “the state” is the one and only solution to crime, violence and foreign invasion is never explicitly stated but it appears to implicitly rely on an appeal to ignorance: It’s the best idea Hobbes personally knows or can think up and since he can’t think of addressing these issues any other way, it is therefore the only solution. So we are left with this dichotomy:
    1. Statism
    2. A nasty brutish violent existence

    Proto Anarcho capitalism, a la Von Mises comes along and offers a third theoretical option.

    Also, whether statism really is less brutish or nasty is highly questionable. It is hard to imagine WWII happening without the modern day one-world religion of statism as a factor.

  • RAD

    Christianity has been co opted by the religion of statism. Statism is what you can call a religion of tolerance, similar to scientology: One can be a catholic scientologist, a jewish scientologist or an athiest scientologist. Yes self-described atheists can have religions too. Statism is similar: one can be an atheist statist (or statheist – someone who doesn’t believe in God the creator of the Universe but who believes in the man-made god of the “state”) or a catholic statist.
    You don’t get kicked out of the church of statism as it exists today because you happen to be a wiccan or hindu etc.

  • t

    You are correct…I am. But that was just one of my imposters.
    I sorry that you are so jaded that you can’t see Gods hand on the things around you. It really is sad.

  • Ricky Ross

    Watch the Documentary >>> “The Greatest Story Never Told”. It is filled with indisputable facts. We have been lied to all along …

  • RAD

    “The second problem is at the root: “There are no rules”. No laws. No recognition that there is a difference between truth and lies, good and evil, beauty and ugliness. The argument ends there as it must. It is a negation of all value.”

    What you are describing is NIHILISM, which you are equivocating/conflating with anarchism. Anarchism generally is based on the principled axiom that aggression actually decreases efficiency and that peaceful cooperation, or at a minimum non-aggression is a principled pro-survival principle we can use to derive a system of ethics. So the NAP is the LAW of anarchism. Anarchism does not mean no laws or principles.

  • tz1

    I’ve never heard the NAP associated with anarchism. If it was, then it would not be anarchy (no rules) but non-agression-archy.

    But even assuming it isn’t an “enforced rule”, there is the problem of asymmetric application. You cannot have a society of 100% thieves since someone has to produce something to steal. I don’t know where the number lies, but maybe 95% adhere to the NAP, and 5% come and take their stuff (consider what the Vikings did to England around 1000).

    The question is if there are 19 NAPs and one AP, if the AP picks out the weakest NAP and attacks just him, what will the 18 others do?

  • tz1

    No Statism is nasty and brutish, but the nasty, brutish people tend to be concentrated in “the state”. If only there were an “S Ark” along the lines of Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’s “B Ark”…

  • RAD

    That’s why the use of voluntaryism is used nowadays because there is the whole etymological trap of associating “anarchy” as in: “a state of chaos” with anarchism, as in rejecting the philosophical concept of some people using aggression to boss others around. It’s kind of like the etymological trap of equivocating “governance” with “government”. Anarchism or volunaryism is not necessarily against systems of governance if they don’t utilize aggression. Example to demonstrate the difference:
    Police: Forces you to pay them. If your store doesn’t collect sales tax, you get shut down. Claims divine right to rule based on a personal relationship with a metaphysical “entity” called “the state”. GOVERNMENT
    Neigborhood Safety patrol: You can fund them if you want, or you are free not to; they volunteer to patrol after dark or are paid by willing customers. Claims a practical right to patrol and use defensive force insofar as and ONLY insofar as it is used in defense of persons or property. GOVERNANCE
    So, this is two ways to address street hoodlem type activity from a voluntary system of governance or a statist system of government.

  • Forrest

    I forgot this was just a comment under a horrible article I read by someone who thinks they know where many other Christians, and I stand in our faith better then we do ourselves. Probably the single most greatest comment I’ve ever read in my random wondering of the internet that lead me here.

  • tz1

    My only problem with the AnarchoCapitalism is the creation of a virtual state – if you have a group of “insurance/security/arbitration” firms, and they are either a defacto monopoly, or all of them have identical “product”, and they will enforce things against you against your beliefs or will, you can call it whatever you want, but it is no different from the existing state.

    It is not “private” or “voluntary” if it will take (violent or theft) actions against someone who never signed up for any of it.

    If I hire a I/S/A firm, I can be bound by the terms, but if I don’t, and I’m accused or “found guilty”, it would violate the non-aggression principle to enforce the judgment. (perhaps not if the originally aggrieved party did so directly, but this is an arbitrator I did not agree to respect and an agent whom neither I nor my alleged accuser knows claiming the right to do violence). Nor would there be any guarantee that the “law” the I/S/As would not metastasize like the current government.

    Perhaps these problems are fixable, but I simply prefer to admit a minimal state (which I describe as an evil, albeit necessary) which can act in my place in limited, controlled, and documented circumstances.

    But considering I’m at 5% v.s. the AC’s 0%, we agree on the 95% that is tyranny, and can act to get rid of that, and when it is in the single digits we can have a meaningful discussion on where the line should be.

  • tz1

    Interesting that there are voluntary fire departments.

  • TaxCattleKiller

    He probably doesn’t even know that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man rather than the Son of God. There is a big difference between ancient greek writings 50-100 years after death than the crap the Church spit out in the King James Bible almost 500 to a thousand years later…

  • TaxCattleKiller

    Ow I see god’s work alright just not the way fools do.

  • TaxCattleKiller

    Nice way to turn the cheek there bud you get a F in Christianity. Better put the crack pipe of Paul and Revelations down.

  • RAD

    We are getting English translations of greek translations of dialect spoken in Aramaic 2000 years ago reported second or third hand. You know that game telephone? Ever play that as a kid?

  • RAD

    And what leap of logic do you use to imply that incident has anything to do with Copblock or copblockers? The attackers are probably all products of the government education system and probably believe in statism and worshiped flags like other kids brainwashed into the cult of government. Who programmed their behavior?

  • Yankeefan

    Both of them sinned

  • Robyn Ryan

    Adam was in charge.

  • Robyn Ryan

    he still came out of Mary’s uterus.

  • Robyn Ryan

    Thou speakest the truth!

  • Robyn Ryan

    Euro-Christianity is a conqueror’s religion.

  • Yankeefan

    He claimed to be god. The gospel of John is all about his diety. There is also no difference at all. There is a reason the modern Greek from which the kin James came from, was painstakingly translated using40 Greek scholars that had to agree on every word. Plus those Dead Sea scrolls were a boon as well.

  • Yankeefan

    Show me that in gods word. They both ate of the fruit.

  • amazedbyidiots

    Yes it is and it continues to try to force it’s will upon all people. SMH!

  • TaxCattleKiller

    Read the Good News International Bible it comes from a variety of text that were bastardized by the church to make the King James Bible and most of the crap I’m sure you’re reading today. For all you know you’ve been reading Satans writings this whole time…prove me wrong. Claiming equality with god does not make one a god. John writings are also the most metaphorical and poetic.

  • Yankeefan

    I appreciate there is no animosity here but no, they were not.

    The gospel is a non synoptic gospel as it focuses on the divinity of Jesus with his 7 “I am” statements. John 1:1 is very clear who he was. “In the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god” John 1:3 talks about his involvement in the creation. He also forgave sin and received worship. When Thomas declared “my lord and my god” did Jesus correct him? That was not an excited utterance. Lets look at Philippians 2:5-6. Once again, the son being called God. When Jesus was tempted, who was he talking about when he stated to Satan, “It is written thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God”? Jesus was talking about himself as HE was the one tempted, Hebrews 1:4-9 is another passage. Where God the father says let all the angels of god worship him and in v 8 he calls him god. All in context. There was nothing poetic about the Gopsel of John. It is all about his deity ship. The Jews of that day knew what he was claiming when he said what he said. There are versus where he called the son of god by others ‘Truly you are the Son of God’” (Matthew 14:33). Also Matt 28:9 “came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him”.
    So, only god can be worshipped and forgive sin. Then we have Titus 2:13. Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Who is that talking about. All these are in context

    We have to look elsewhere. In the creation story, who was this “let us make man after our image, after our likeness” Who are the others in this plural statement. HI statement in John 8:58 makes that clear Before Abraham was, I am. Same I am god used at the burning bush.

    But, I will believe the King James bible which was translated by 40 Greeks scholars and we still have the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts to consult. Plus those dead sea scrolls that do not contradict the earliest know writings from which we have the King James bible, ultimately.
    So, I am not here to prove to you anything. You believe what you wish and I hope that works out for you. Me, I will believe that Jesus is god based on in context scripture and that we need to do as John 5:23 says.

  • Frederick Raymond Yahne III

    You might want to read a few verses after to find your answer.

  • Sikko

    Nothing in the entirety of Romans 13 undermines the idea of the first verse

  • Weismonger


    SINCE 1991, THE CHRISTIAN POLICE STATE HAS BEEN PLANNED…AND ITS ALMOST HERE…IN 2016. The bible has ZERO verses that promote democracy, or one man, one vote…or a government by and for the people as “our will” and not “god’s will”…. The bible promotes the “divine rights of kings” as chosen by god…and we are not to rebel against them…we are to accept slavery as promoted by Jesus and the bible. I’m amazed at how naive you are.

  • zippinglou

    Greatest reply EVER ??????
    Let’s also not forget that Jesus said according to Mark 12:17 – “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.”

  • zippinglou

    As long as that koolaid has been blessed and has the blood of Christ, bring it on.

  • zippinglou

    Are you saying we should go back to unifying politics and religion? It sure sounds like it.

    Separation of Church and State is there for a reason.

  • zippinglou

    Let’s also not forget that Jesus said according to Mark 12:17 – “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.”

    Are you suggesting we should unify Church and State?

    The separation is there for a reason. It sounds like you are arguing in favor of Christians abolishing the separation. You sir are a hypocrite!

  • abner

    Let me start by saying I’m not Christian but I find the bashing of Christians to get dull. It gets dull to hear complaints about the Christians, yet have no problem having kids be educated by the White Christians 1 says are bad. People are the same everywhere-Whites, Blacks, American Indians, etc. What I’ve found with Native Americans or American Indians is that many times when they talk of ‘stolen land’ what they imply is ‘you did what I wanted to do.’ To say that American Indians (some tribes) wouldn’t have done the same thing if they had the military capacity is talking with forked tongue.

    Yes, -Wars were used to get land from American Indians or Native Americans. Most Whites are not the original inhabitants except for Solutreans who came during the Ice Age & the # of Solutreans or Solutrians is not much. It’s true that wars were used to get land from American Indians, the problem is that there is selective critique.

    Native American societies were not democracies & colonialism, culture/language imposed on Native Americans by Europeans were not democracies. I don’t believe Europeans should impose culture on Native Americans and I also don’t believe Native Americans or American Indians should impose their culture on others. I don’t think anybody should impose their beliefs on others unless it’s forbidding mayhem, murder or other harmful conduct.

    I would not have wanted to live during time of el sistema de las castas & I also would not have wanted to live during time of human sacrifices. I also would not want to live in the difficult lives the Native Americans lived where you fear your 9 year old daughter could be abducted by a neighboring tribe to be taken as a chief’s wife. I am peaceful & wouldn’t want to live in war times which happened between Whites and American Indians.

    I oppose the Aztec & Inca human sacrifices and I oppose violence. I also oppose Europeans imposing culture & religion on Native Americans and I oppose el sistema de las castas which existed in Iberoamerica. I believe again in democracy and all must be treated fairly which means no colonialism, no discrimination .

    What matters what’s happening today. If an American Indian is discriminated against when it comes to jobs, then that is wrong and must be solved by legal system. If an American Indian commits a crime or is a crime victim, then there must be = justice based on facts and circumstances. I support democracy and = rights for all ethnic groups. American Indians or Native Americans must be treated fairly as all other groups. If an American Indian has talent to become an engineer, physicist, then they should get the job. If an American Indian commits a crime or is a crime victim, then there must be = justice based on facts and circumstances. I listen to broadcasts by an American Indian Christian woman Linda P. Harvey (part Cherokee) because what she says is right (I’m not Christian but I like what she says) and she has critiqued the political safeness on the part of American Indian groups.

  • abner

    My parents came from mostly Hindu India but I no longer practice Hinduism as I’m not religious anymore. I am now a secular person. Other than now being a vegetarian (I have no problem with food hunting as long as the animal hunted is humanely and swiftly killed and there is no poaching, etc. & I have a friend who has hunted), I do not follow that much what happens in India.

    I went to Christian schools when I was a kid here in the U.S. & on websites I have defended Christians by saying it’s wrong for Hindus to send their kids to Christian schools and then turn around and say how evil the Christians are-I have seen Hindus do that on another website and I said that this is wrong. It’s 1 thing to believe your religion is right. Christians believe that they are right and other faiths are wrong, Hindus will believe their faith is right and others are wrong, atheists believe there is no God. There’s nothing wrong with believing your religion is right because somebody is right and somebody is wrong. But to call a group evil and then take help from them is wrong. It’s wrong to ask White Christians for help such as education, jobs and then to turn around and say how bad they are.

    There is no need for the Portuguese, British and other Europeans to apologize for colonizing India because 1947 Independence (India), 1954 Pondicherry and 1961 Goa makes all disputes a moot point. Let the British honor Queen Victoria and let the Portuguese honor St. Francis Xavier and Vasco da Gama. They are not disputes anymore. Yes, the British, Portuguese did what they wanted to for their own benefit. But that is history and not happening now. Rather than complain about how life was during colonialism, it’s best to enjoy the independence 1 has. Now I can understand the conflicts between Indian Hindus and Muslims because that has happened for hundreds of years and still happening, though I don’t go to extreme. I can understand the India-China dispute (though again not to extreme as Chinese people are fine though the politics is wrong), but it is useless to complain about something once a dispute is over. It is wrong to bash Whites yet have no problem sending Hindu kids to Christian schools to be educated by Christian whites. I went to a British school when I was 11 to 14 years old (almost 2.5 years) from 1981 to 1984 when I lived in Madrid Spain-King’s College. King’s College’s an excellent school. I’ve also been to the U.K. or Great Britain 7 times-1978,1981,1984,1999,2001,2003 & 2005.

  • amazedbyidiots

    Solutrean theory was debunked. Once I saw that I realized it was pointless to continue this discussion Hoka Hey!

  • abner

    I guess that the next thing you’ll deny is that you pass gas & do turds. Well women also pass gas & do turds & that includes Squaws. You also pass gas & do turds like every1 else. But I think you deny what you know is true. Native American art such as that of Aztecs depicts Europeans so we do know that there were a few Whites living in the Americas who arrived here during the Ice Age but what the # is we don’t know. They have not debunked the Solutrean or Solutrian theory-only that the # is unknown & not believed to be more than 30,000.

    I am not White & & I get tuned out by the Us against them mentality. While European treatment of Native Americans or American Indians was sometimes bad , bad treatment was done by both sides. Hollywood movies like Lone Ranger (didn’t see the movie) showing them to be Noble Savages can’t be taken seriously (Hollywood is about entertainment not education). I can see why Whites get tuned out by this because rather than being about = rights for all ethnic groups, it becomes an Us against them topic when Hollywood movies like Lone Ranger give Noble Savage myths. People are the same everywhere-Whites, Blacks, American Indians, etc. What I’ve found with Native Americans or American Indians is that many times when they talk of ‘stolen land’ what they imply is ‘you did what I wanted to do.’

  • John X

    Paul did say that government and law enforcement was created by God to stop and punish evil doers. Key word, evil doers. Cops, politicians, judges and prosecutors are themselves subject to that same laws as well, according to God. Nobody is above God’s law. They are not above the law and when they violate the laws they should be punished like everyone else. When a politician, cop, prosecutor or judge breaks the law, they are now transgressors and should be punished with the same standard as everyone else by the same laws that they swore to uphold. Any cop, judge or politician or prosecuter can become an evil doer. To answer the question about Hitler. When those that are in power abuse that power, God has them removed, like Hitler was removed. It’s like saying, God created sex to be enjoyed and for procreation between one husband and his wife. That doesn’t mean it cannot be abused in the form of pornography, rape, fornication, adultery and prostitution.The institution was put by God, but it can be abused by people. They will answer to God.

  • Mark Malone

    How about we keep separation of church and state. We don’t need a bunch of religious morons trying to run our police forces. The cops are already stupid enough without some invisible sky daddy telling them what to do.