Correct. Only a thief wants no government...so he can steal without recourse. You have gotten a little better the last year. Keep going the right direction.
Last edited:
Privilege of ‘Arrest Without Incident’
- Thread starter Buzzword
- Start date
Correct. Only a thief wants no government...so he can steal without recourse. You have gotten a little better the last year. Keep going the right direction.
The State is the sovereign body the Lord Jesus Christ appointed to act in his name (authorized=authority) to wield the sword of justice against the wicked.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
OK, let's grant this for the sake of argument. How was what Garner did "wicked"? Even if we use the theocratic laws of the OT as our standard, there simply isn't anything in the OT that would say selling untaxed cigarettes is an evil act that should be punished. What Traditio is doing is saying that good and evil are defined by the State itself, rather than by God. Do you agree with him or do you agree with me?
drbrumley
Well-known member
Pure GARBAGE!!!!
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
He's getting that from Romans 13, which I agree isn't the correct interpretation.
But I'd say that EVEN IF NICK IS RIGHT that would still only give the State the right to punish evil and reward good, not to do anything else. And not all evil actions. It would seem absurd that a vague passage like this would justify enforcement of any laws that were not in the Biblical theocracy.
Going from there, you could come to a theonomist position or a minarchist position or somewhere in between, NONE OF WHICH would justify the guys who tried to bully Eric Garner.
They were clearly acting in a criminal manner regardless of where you go from there.
The only way the cops were not criminal is if you have a State-worshipping worldview that says government can justly make, and cops can justly enforce, any arbitrary laws they want.
BTW: I don't even agree that the State is positively ordained by God. I believe God "ordains" the State in a predestinarian sense, but that he doesn't endorse it. I just wasn't going to go there because even with Nick's stated premise, what the cops did was still wrong.
Cops are evil. I can't fathom how any reasonable Biblical hermanuetic could say that a Christian could become a cop today. I get pacifists. I get minarchists. I get theonomists. I get people that just don't think Christians should concern themselves with political matters. I don't agree with any of those views, but I understand them (my own position is well known on these forums.)
But I cannot fathom this whole "government can regulate almost anything it wants" viewpoint. I don't see it anywhere in the Bible. Its from a really broad interpretation of Romans 13 that isn't really well supported in the text, combined with basically ignoring all the ethical commands in the rest of the Bible.
Doc, I'm really curious about how we as Christian libertarians are supposed to deal with that. Is a church that doesn't hold uniformed aggressors accountable better than one that doesn't hold homos accountable? And in a country that by and large worships the State and doesn't "get" this, how do we deal with that, as Christian libertarians?
:think: I don't believe theres anything in the OT about cigarettes
or cell phones
or flush toilets
or thermonuclear weapons
this is a good way to get in trouble
instead of assuming, why not ask?
Selling cigarettes is not even slightly immoral, let alone wicked. His problem is he resisted arrest to immoral laws regarding taxes. He died from his pre-existing medical conditions, nothing more.
The State has the authority to regulate commerce. That principle does not change because the State profanes God.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
So are you suggesting that government can regulate anything it wants?
Deuteronomy 4:2 says not to add to the law of God...
Where does the Bible give the State authority to "regulate commerce? " I understand that you're getting the State's right to punish evil from Romans 13:4, but what does that have to do with "regulating commerce?"
What the cops did was wicked. Even trying to arrest him was wicked.
Romans 13
2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
Sometimes I wonder if you have ever even read the book you are debating about.
Exodus 22
1“If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep. 2 If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. 3 If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed. He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. 4 If the theft is certainly found alive in his hand, whether it is an ox or donkey or sheep, he shall restore double.
5 “If a man causes a field or vineyard to be grazed, and lets loose his animal, and it feeds in another man’s field, he shall make restitution from the best of his own field and the best of his own vineyard.
6 “If fire breaks out and catches in thorns, so that stacked grain, standing grain, or the field is consumed, he who kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.
7 “If a man delivers to his neighbor money or articles to keep, and it is stolen out of the man’s house, if the thief is found, he shall pay double. 8 If the thief is not found, then the master of the house shall be brought to the judges to see whether he has put his hand into his neighbor’s goods.
9 “For any kind of trespass, whether it concerns an ox, a donkey, a sheep, or clothing, or for any kind of lost thing which another claims to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whomever the judges condemn shall pay double to his neighbor. 10 If a man delivers to his neighbor a donkey, an ox, a sheep, or any animal to keep, and it dies, is hurt, or driven away, no one seeing it, 11 then an oath of the Lord shall be between them both, that he has not put his hand into his neighbor’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept that, and he shall not make it good. 12 But if, in fact, it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to the owner of it. 13 If it is torn to pieces by a beast, then he shall bring it as evidence, and he shall not make good what was torn.
14 “And if a man borrows anything from his neighbor, and it becomes injured or dies, the owner of it not being with it, he shall surely make it good. 15 If its owner was with it, he shall not make it good; if it was hired, it came for its hire.
If you loved your neighbor, you would not try to steal from him.
Stealing is evil. You know this because you complain about police officers being paid and call it stealing.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
OK, we're talking past each other. "Regulating commerce" doesn't usually just mean prohibiting stealing. And in Eric Garner's case, he wasn't stealing. Even if we allow that the State has a right to tax and that taxation is not always theft (I reject this), the US is taxing far more than the tyrannical ten percent level from 1 Samuel 8, and is using that money on things other than the punishment of evil and the rewarding of good. With that being said, I think its VERY CLEAR that the tax law that Garner was dodging was immoral, that they were trying to steal from him and not vice versa. Garner did not try to steal from anyone. He was trying to avoid being robbed. Why is that a problem?
I find it hard to fathom how Doc does not consider this verse. :idunno:
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
Trust me, Doc is aware of it. As am I.
Of course it does. I am not talking about Garner, but the principles of what government should be allowed to do. The whole reason to regulate commerce is to stop theft. When you are older, you will understand more. Or not.
I resist President Obama, but not by breaking laws, looting, stealing or other immoral actions.
Yup.
God established the concept of government not so that we should blindly respect and obey whoever happens to be chosen to rule, but that we should learn that there will always be someone in charge above us and that what he says is disregarded only with consequences.
However, even the leaders reject this, saying stupid things like "the people are in charge of the government."
Morpheus
New member
With reference to Romans 13:
Most Christians learn not to quote scripture without context. The man who wrote Romans 13 was the same man who spent much of his life behind bars. Then we must also consider John and Peter in Acts 4:1-22, when they faced the Council. Romans13 states that the government is appointed as God's minister, but that appointment does not grant God's minister the liberty to overturn His express commands.
From "A Christian Manifesto" by Francis Schaeffer
http://www.peopleforlife.org/francis.html
Most Christians learn not to quote scripture without context. The man who wrote Romans 13 was the same man who spent much of his life behind bars. Then we must also consider John and Peter in Acts 4:1-22, when they faced the Council. Romans13 states that the government is appointed as God's minister, but that appointment does not grant God's minister the liberty to overturn His express commands.
From "A Christian Manifesto" by Francis Schaeffer
http://www.peopleforlife.org/francis.html