“If you have a biblical worldview, you cannot be a libertarian. But if you have a biblical worldview, you will be accused of being one” (Rules, p. 76).
Have 'Em Delivered
Write to the Editor
Subscribe
Connect with
Connect with
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ben
9 years ago
You can’t subscribe to the non-aggression principle?
Andrew Kelly
9 years ago
You can too be a libertarian, as long as you are referring to the truest sense of the word: Jesus came to liberate his people from their sin, which is the foundation of all liberty. No, you can’t be a “mind your own business and let me get my abortion” type of libertarian – the kind that the Libertarian Party in America is full of – but they’re not real libertarians anyways.
Andrew Broadhead
9 years ago
Would love to hear you “unpack” the statement – If you have a biblical worldview you cannot be a libertarian. Do you mean “libertarian” in the worldly sense? Would love to hear your definition of that too.
The brothers Andrew here, eh? Christians can be libertarian in the sense of deeming a much smaller government than we now have to be Biblical (as God’s preference, or command) along with practical, loving (free to serve one another in love, in contrast with dehumanizing bureaucracy), and do-able (there are already private schools, parks, welfare…the British coast guard is a private charity, and there have been private lighthouses [collect at ports from ships that pass en route]). Doubtless other virtues too. Whether to join the Party, and who to vote for, is prudential. I think Doug would agree with this… Read more »
Andrew Kelly
9 years ago
Unfortunately many Party libertarians believe the heart of liberty involves being able to do as one pleases, with no outside coercive force getting in the way. That’s why abortion, sodomy, fornication, divorce, etc. are generally part of Party libertarian’s platforms. But the true heart of liberty involves the individual liberation from sin that Christ provides, with the understanding that it is impossible for a population of people to be individually liberated from their sins without that liberty spreading into that culture’s institutions. If the majority of individuals in the western world became liberated from the sins of theft and laziness,… Read more »
Ben
9 years ago
Sorry Andrew K, but that’s not at all what he said or implied. He said, very simply and clearly, that if you hold a biblical worldview, you cannot be a libertarian. This is not at all the same as saying, “If you hold a biblical worldview, your libertarianism must be grounded in Jesus.” As he knows, true libertarianism (not the Libertarian party platform) has nothing to do with promoting abortion, divorce, prostitution, etc., but rather, it is simply the view that the non-aggression principle, which states that it is wrong to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people, should be… Read more »
Ben, I highly doubt that Doug would say that it’s right to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people. In fact, I don’t know a single person who would say that it’s okay to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people. By that definition I and almost everyone I know would qualify as libertarians. That would be like saying that “true Republicans” simply believe that the government shouldn’t wield unlimited power; it’s a noble-sounding definition, but I don’t know that it actually helps one navigate the politics of our day. Because of its focus on an ideal rather than concrete… Read more »
Rick, I think you make a good point. It isn’t helpful to just say, “If you’re not a libertarian, then you support the initiation of violence against others.” I gladly accept your correction. However, I think if Wilson meant something other than “subscribing to the non-aggression principle is unbiblical,” then he should have clarified, as he certainly knows that this principle is the heart of libertarianism (not the Libertarian party platform). He could have said, “It’s not possible to hold to a biblical worldview and subscribe to the common libertarian view that you own yourself, or the view that any… Read more »
You can’t subscribe to the non-aggression principle?
You can too be a libertarian, as long as you are referring to the truest sense of the word: Jesus came to liberate his people from their sin, which is the foundation of all liberty. No, you can’t be a “mind your own business and let me get my abortion” type of libertarian – the kind that the Libertarian Party in America is full of – but they’re not real libertarians anyways.
Would love to hear you “unpack” the statement – If you have a biblical worldview you cannot be a libertarian. Do you mean “libertarian” in the worldly sense? Would love to hear your definition of that too.
The brothers Andrew here, eh? Christians can be libertarian in the sense of deeming a much smaller government than we now have to be Biblical (as God’s preference, or command) along with practical, loving (free to serve one another in love, in contrast with dehumanizing bureaucracy), and do-able (there are already private schools, parks, welfare…the British coast guard is a private charity, and there have been private lighthouses [collect at ports from ships that pass en route]). Doubtless other virtues too. Whether to join the Party, and who to vote for, is prudential. I think Doug would agree with this… Read more »
Unfortunately many Party libertarians believe the heart of liberty involves being able to do as one pleases, with no outside coercive force getting in the way. That’s why abortion, sodomy, fornication, divorce, etc. are generally part of Party libertarian’s platforms. But the true heart of liberty involves the individual liberation from sin that Christ provides, with the understanding that it is impossible for a population of people to be individually liberated from their sins without that liberty spreading into that culture’s institutions. If the majority of individuals in the western world became liberated from the sins of theft and laziness,… Read more »
Sorry Andrew K, but that’s not at all what he said or implied. He said, very simply and clearly, that if you hold a biblical worldview, you cannot be a libertarian. This is not at all the same as saying, “If you hold a biblical worldview, your libertarianism must be grounded in Jesus.” As he knows, true libertarianism (not the Libertarian party platform) has nothing to do with promoting abortion, divorce, prostitution, etc., but rather, it is simply the view that the non-aggression principle, which states that it is wrong to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people, should be… Read more »
Ben, I highly doubt that Doug would say that it’s right to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people. In fact, I don’t know a single person who would say that it’s okay to initiate violence or fraud against innocent people. By that definition I and almost everyone I know would qualify as libertarians. That would be like saying that “true Republicans” simply believe that the government shouldn’t wield unlimited power; it’s a noble-sounding definition, but I don’t know that it actually helps one navigate the politics of our day. Because of its focus on an ideal rather than concrete… Read more »
*it could lead you* not *I could lead you*
typo.
Rick, I think you make a good point. It isn’t helpful to just say, “If you’re not a libertarian, then you support the initiation of violence against others.” I gladly accept your correction. However, I think if Wilson meant something other than “subscribing to the non-aggression principle is unbiblical,” then he should have clarified, as he certainly knows that this principle is the heart of libertarianism (not the Libertarian party platform). He could have said, “It’s not possible to hold to a biblical worldview and subscribe to the common libertarian view that you own yourself, or the view that any… Read more »