Godly Patriarchies need not worry about defending themselves against any political State.[1] God blesses Christian Patriarchy with security.[2] Those who violate Biblical Law are subject to the Curse (#9); they cannot defend themselves against God’s avengers.[3] Reliance upon carnal weapons of war is forbidden,[4] as well as the international alliances and trade agreements which further such arms build-ups.[5] The end result of the quest for “national security” through strengthened “national defense” is the centralization of power in the State, producing military socialism.[6] An economy dependent upon the production and threatened use of arms is idolatry.[7]
Notes
1. Genesis 14; Genesis 23:6; Exodus 14:14,24-25; Deuteronomy 20:1; Psalm 46:9; 76:6; Zechariah 9:10,15; Joshua 24:7; 2 Kings 7:6-7; Proverbs 21:31; Hosea 1:7; 14:3; 2 Kings 19:35; 2 Chronicles 16:8; 20:15; 18:31.
2. #42; 1 Samuel 12:11; Psalm 78:53; Proverbs 1:33; 3:23; Isaiah 32:17; Jeremiah 23:6; Ezekiel 34:28; Hosea 2:18
3. Isaiah 10:5-6; Leviticus 26:14-17,25,33,36-37; Deuteronomy 28:25,52; Nahum 2:13; Haggai 2:22; Zechariah 9:10; Isaiah 22:7; 30:16; 31:3; Jeremiah 4:13; 6:23; 21:4-5; 50:42; Ezekiel 38:4; Amos 2:15; 4:10; Micah 5:10; Zechariah 12:4; Ezekiel 26:7-11
4. Deuteronomy 17:16-17; Psalm 33:16-17; 147:10; Zechariah 4:6; 2 Corinthians 10:3-6; Psalm 20:7
5. Ezekiel 17:15; 23:6-7,12,23; Isaiah 31:1; 36:9
6. 1 Kings 10:26 - 11:14; 12:11
7. Isaiah 2:7-8
References
Patriarchy and National Security
A Theonomic Defense of Pacifism
Swords Into Plowshares
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
You say that reliance upon carnal weapons of war is forbidden. So you are a strict pacifist?
If God will protect Christian patriarchy without any help from us, then why haven't you established this country yet? I'd love to live there! This is not how God's protection has ever worked though. In the Old Testament, God's people had to fight. God helped them to overcoming overwhelming odds (like Gideon and his 300), but they still had to fight. Likewise, Christendom always had to fight to preserve the Church. If it did not, we'd all be Muslim. And similarly, every father has a duty to protect his family from invasive violence.
Are you telling me that if an evil man broke into your house and began raping your daughter, your response would be, "I have another daughter in this other bedroom." Is that your understanding of the Beatitudes? It must be if you are a strict pacifist. How can you possibly hold that position? Do your family members know that you would not lift a finger to protect them if they were ever in danger?
"But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." - 1st Timothy 5:8
You see, this is the danger in attempting to interpret Holy Scripture for yourself, and why it was condemned in Holy Scripture itself (2nd Peter 1:20).
I would call myself a "pacifist," but not a "strict" pacifist, at least by your definition, and I've never met such a "strict pacifist" as you define it, although I've met zillions of pacifists. "I have another daughter" is a cartoonish portrayal of pacifists.
Old Testaments Israel was under a mandate to wage aggressive, offensive, genocidal warfare against the Canaanites. Nobody today has that same mandate.
Holy War vs. Jesus
Jesus commanded us to love our Muslim enemies, not kill them. Had the church obeyed Jesus, Islam would have been converted out of existence (Proverbs 16:7).
1 Timothy 5:8 is talking about making sure widows are fed (see verse 16), not killing people. If your church teaches that 1 Timothy 5 is about killing people, you need a new church. ;-)
"but not a "strict" pacifist" Okay, that's fantastic (thank God!), but I wonder why not? Where is your Biblical justification for moderating your pacifism?
I certainly understand the desire, utility, and Godliness in advocating for peace (I also desire and prefer peace), but self-defense and defense of innocent others is a natural right that follows strictly from the ownership of property and ownership of self (well, as Christians, it's more accurately expressed as stewardship of God's property). You may think that, "I have another daughter" is a cartoonish reductio ad absurdum, but it proves a point. If you are willing to protect your children from harm with violence or even with deception then you've established that you agree with the right of self-defense and defense of innocent others.
I realize that this fundamental right gets muddled, confused, and often exploited when it is applied through the object of the nation-state. And we are pretty much guaranteed to be morally safe in opposing all wars conducted by the US government. Yet I would still not call myself a pacifist. From a libertarian perspective, I would point to Rothbard's two great essays on war, and from a Christian perspective, the Catholic just war theory.
Might does not make right, but it is required to protect, preserve, and restore what is.
"Old Testaments Israel was under a mandate to wage..." Yes, and I do believe this is the correct distinction to make about the Conquest of Canaan. All is God's property, and He can do with us as He likes. We are not God, and all is God's property, therefore we must respect His property all around us, including ourselves.
"If your church teaches..." My Church is the Roman Catholic Church, the one that built all that is good in the West, the one Jesus established through the Peter's leadership. No other church today even claims apostolic succession from Peter. And when I look at Holy Scripture it is undeniable that Peter was made the head of the Church, and that this position was an enduring one to be passed down through the ages. Has the Catholic Church always been perfect? No. Is there a crisis in the hierarchy right now and since Vatican II? Yes, I believe so. But the Church has been through worse times. All is in God's hands, though we must do our part in accordance with His will.
The Catholic Church is the stone in the Book of Daniel Chapter 2 which struck the statue and became a great mountain filling the whole earth, or at least it has started this process. There is no new church for me.
I never found Rothbard's essays to be a good defense of "defense." Especially defense by "might." Jesus commands us to love our enemies. If "defending" against an enemy requires an action ("might"?) that is contrary to love (an action you would take WRT someone you do not consider an "enemy") then the "defense" is sinful. I give an example here: http://KevinCraig.us/anthony.htm
Post a Comment