Nostr Web Client

christians cant be libertarians

freeborn | ἐλεύθερος | 8r0gwg 1y ago 💬 1

I beg to differ, but 🤙

The only valid source/ground for the NAP is the moral law, specifically the 'second table.' Conversely, the only consistent political party for those who 'do not steal' is the anti-taxation libertarians. Among other reasons.

I am a Christian (of the old school sort), and I am a classical liberal (as a _consequence_ of my theological convictions). We're pilgrims. 'For here we have no continuing city.'

It's ok if we disagree though--that's the beauty of nostr--civility without ideological identity. 🤙

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Slate 1y ago 💬 1

sorry i was being a bit of a troll and i shouldn't have

I said that to see what your argument would be.

You're arguing on the wrong premise.

One's political stance does not determine their world-model, rather, it reveals the consistency of their world-model 🤙

freeborn | ἐλεύθερος | 8r0gwg 1y ago

I see, no problem. 😏

My premise is that the moral law of God (i.e., the 10 comnandments) governs all men in all times in all places, and that for a human law to be just, it must conform to that higher law.

Then, this law gets conditioned for 'when' we are in redemptive history. Now is not for theocracy. To oversimplify: the 'vertical' aspects (1-4), are not to be enforced by the State; the 'horizontal' aspects (5-9) may be; and the 10th is spiritual and cannot be.

This is a very oversimplified explanation of the '2 Kingdoms' view which flows from classical Federal/Covenant Theology and its resulting amillennial eschatology. Back of each of those is a revelational epistemology.

What premise do you think I should be arguing from instead? 🤙

Slate 11mo ago

i said cxn cant be libertarian

the argument should be

cxn can have wrong ideas

and still be cxn