The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto.

This claim strikes most people as utterly implausible or ridiculous.

• Self-proclaimed "Bible-believers" don't like anarchists
• Anarchists don't like the Bible

Both Bible-believers and secular anarchists have been misled. Both groups think an "anarchist manifesto" exhorts the overthrow of governments by assassination and bombs, and results in chaos and lawlessness. The Bible opposes all this.
Second, both groups believe "the Bible is not a political tract." It's about "worship," not politics; it's about sacraments and liturgy (Catholics) or "justification by faith" (Protestants). But the Bible is not a socio-political blueprint. "Everybody knows that."

This website seeks to prove the contrary: The Bible is mostly about governments and empires. And the Bible is opposed to all governments.

But the Bible is also against the violent overthrow of sinful, idolatrous, murderous, pagan governments. Jesus said "Resist not evil" (Matthew 5:39). The Apostle Paul told his readers to "be subject" to "the powers that be" (Romans 13).

• Bible-believers are correct: The Bible opposes the violent overthrow of governments
• Secular anarchists are correct: all governments deserve to be overthrown.

The Bible has about 30,000 verses in it. Most church-goers are familiar with only a handful of those verses. Even those who try to read through the Bible every year, or every three years, find their eyes glazing over when reading most of the Bible. This is because the Bible is mostly about governments, not churches. As they read the Bible, church-goers are trying to "churchify" the verses, to make the verses fit into church-life and individualist/introspective thinking, but it doesn't work. The Bible is more about "The State" than it is "The Church," and the Bible is against the archists,  not the non-archists.

This is the picture hidden in the picture. You can't see it at first, but once you see it, you can't un-see it.

Contents

• What Does the word "Anarchist" Mean? (Answer: "Not an Archist")
• What is an "Archist?" (Answer: The opposite of a "pacifist")
• Jesus commands His followers to be pacifists
• Every Pacifist is, By Definition, an Anarchist
  • Because the State is a Monopoly of Violence
• The Bible gives no human being today permission to be an archist.
• In the Bible, The State is an "Idol."
• In the Bible, The State is a "false god."
  • What are "gods?"

What Does the word "Anarchist" Mean?

When you hear the word "anarchy," you hear "chaos," "lawlessness," "disorder," "riots," "bombings," "crime running rampant," etc. This is The Biggest Lie in the history of human political thought.

When most people (especially those who call themselves "Bible-believing Christians") hear the word "anarchist," they've been trained by government-approved schools to think of a bad person, a violent person:

We here at AnarchistManifesto.com are 100% opposed to such things. We hope you are too.

The word "anarchist" comes from two Greek words:

"a" means "not,"

and "archist," as everyone knows, is . . . .

Wait a minute. Nobody knows what an "archist" is.

We all know (or think we know) what an "anarchist" is, but even though "anarchist" means "not an archist," we've never asked ourselves, "What is an archist?"

I'll let the Bible define it.

I'll let Jesus define it.

In the Gospel of Mark, chapter 10, Jesus discovers His disciples arguing about who is going to be the "greatest" in the Kingdom of God.

They didn't understand that Jesus' Kingdom was quite unlike the kingdoms of the world.

What they were really arguing about was, "Who is going to be the greatest archist?"

The word translated "rulers" comes from the Greek word from which we derive our English word "anarchist."

"Lords," "rulers" and "great ones" are "archists."

The "kings of the gentiles" believe they have a right to impose their own will on others by political force:

• taxation
• imprisonment
• execution
• military invasion

Jesus clearly says His followers are not to be "archists." They are to be "servants." Christians are "Economic Man." Those who aspire to become, or vote for, "Political Man" are idolaters. (See more on this "economic/political" distinction below.)

Every Professor of Political Science in every college and every university in the world will agree that this is the very essence of the institution we call "the State" -- a monopoly right of violence. Forbidden to "laymen," but a "right" of the state -- to do what would be a "crime" if you or I did it.

The "anarchist" is not an archist. The an-archist denies that anyone has the right to impose his will on others by force. The shadowy man above believes in using force to impose his will on others. He is therefore an "archist." Not an an-archist.

Our goal here at the The Anarchist Manifesto is to transform you into a Bible-believing Christian who, as a follower of Christ,

This is the 180° opposite of what most of us have been told is an "anarchist" in our archist-approved "public" schools. 

If you believe the Bible, then your heart's desire should be to see "archists" eradicated from the face of the earth. And yet, a true  "anarchist" does not seek to impose Christ's will on archists by force. We need to pray that archists will repent and stop trying to impose their will on others by force. This will not happen through armed revolution against "the government." We wait for God to regenerate archist hearts.

Many Christians are perplexed by the apparent contradiction between the "Old Testament" part of the Scriptures and the "New Testament" part. The New Testament seems to prescribe pacifism, while the Old Testament seems to endorse war, genocide, slavery, etc. This is a complete misreading of the overall point of the Bible. It is also a convenient myth for those who want to dismiss the Bible entirely:

• We can't trust the Old Testament because it's so primitive, vengeful, and warlike, and
• We can't trust the New Testament because the teachings of Jesus, in particular, are the impractical pacifist platitudes of an unrealistic, utopian hippie, and should be relegated to the inner religious meditations of a Mother Theresa, but should be kept away from civil matters, public policy, and especially foreign affairs and military strategy.

Christians who defend archism don't disagree with this assessment. They use the Old Testament to justify war, and relegate the pacifist ethics of the New Testament to one's "private" "spiritual" life.

Our reply to the alleged conflict is to prove that the Old Testament is just as "pacifist" as the New Testament. The Bible as a whole prescribes pacifism. Jesus requires His followers to be pacifists.

The Bible is a Pacifist Manifesto

My definition of "pacifist" is simple: "One who obeys the commands of the executed Christ."

But for some church-goers, "pacifism" is a bad word. As bad as "anarchism." I've heard "pacifism" called "impractical," "unrealistic," "utopian," "perfectionist," "heretical," and "pagan."

Let's start with the most basic level of Christian morality:

• Thou shalt not kill (Mark 10:19, quoting Exodus 20:13)
• Thou shalt not steal (confiscate property) (Matthew 19:18; Exodus 20:13-16; Deuteronomy 5:17-20)
• Forgive enemies (Matthew 6:14-15)
• Love enemies (Matthew 5:44)
• Bless enemies (Romans 12:14)
• Pray for enemies (Luke 6:27-28)
• Give gifts to enemies (Romans 12:20)
• Exhort your enemy to repent (Matthew 18:15-17)

And if all that fails:

• Leave vengeance to God (Romans 12:19-21)

Every pacifist is an anarchist. Jesus forbids His followers from doing the things archists do. Plus, as we saw above, Jesus said DO NOT BE AN ARCHIST (Mark 10:42-45).

But most Christians are not pacifists. Astonishingly, there are many church-goers who say you can call yourself a follower of Christ even if you advocate intentionally killing your enemy. There's always some excuse or justification for killing our enemies, rather than loving them. Like this one:

"God commanded Israel to kill the Canaanites."

True fact, but hardly a Biblical justification for you killing your enemies -- or Joe Biden killing his enemies -- in 2023.

Church-goers cheered as their sons (and daughters!) went off to Iraq to destroy the largest community of Christians in the Arab world, overthrowing a secular government that gave Christians freedom of religion, and replaced that secular Christian-protecting government with an Islamic Theocracy under Shariah law, after killing, crippling, or making homeless millions of people ("Shock and Awe!")

James 1:27 says that true religion is taking care of widows and orphans.

How do church-goers justify creating hundreds of thousands of widows and orphans through mass murder and destruction of their property?

It takes a Ph.D. to not be a pacifist.

Or it takes someone blindly parroting slogans.

To "love" your enemy means to be a "pacifist" with respect to your enemy.

How can you love your enemy if you're intentionally trying to kill your enemy?

How can you love your enemy if you have de-personalized and de-humanized your enemy to the point where you can thoughtlessly, mindlessly shoot and kill your enemy?

It seems obvious to me that a follower of the executed Christ is a "pacifist."

There's something unique about the teachings of Jesus. He not only commands us not to kill (outward behavior), but not to hate (inner attitude). That would certainly include depersonalizing a human being to make it easier to kill that person.

The Bible gives us the responsibility to rescue the perishing (Proverbs 12:6; 24:11-12), but also to love the wicked attacker.

Matthew 5:43-44
⁴³ Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
⁴⁴ But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

How can you pray for, bless, love, and do good for someone that you have killed or intend to kill?

But the question is always raised: "What would you do if . . . ?" Surely, some would say, there are circumstances under which "Love your enemy" does not apply, and a follower of Christ is free to kill, and (some would say) should not hesitate to do so.

Here's an example of how to love an "enemy." Here's CCTV of someone getting ready to stab someone:

Obviously if you saw someone being attacked, and the attacker was ready to plunge a knife into the victim, you would consider the attacker to be your "enemy," just as the victim does.

It's hard to "love" someone who is about to stab an innocent person.

Speaking as a pacifist, I would have no problem grabbing his raised arm and preventing him from moving his arm and stabbing his victim.

But certain "self-defense" experts, especially those who promote "Second Amendment Remedies," will tell you that you should quickly, without hesitation, shoot the attacker and kill him. Don't even shoot to wound. Shoot to kill.

How can that advice be reconciled with Jesus' commands not to kill, and to love the enemy?

Let me try to engage your imagination.

Suppose the attacker were your son. Or if you don't have a son, a sibling, someone else you love dearly, or a respected public figure that you admire for his contribution to society.

When I was a kid I read a weird book called The Day of St. Anthony's Fire. It was a scary book (at least it was for me at that age). It's the true account of a small town in France in the 1950's which experienced mass hallucinations and violent madness. The flour that made the bread for the town had spoiled, and the mold turned into a form of LSD ("ergot").

Imagine that your son, whom you love dearly, eats some infected flour and hallucinates. He imagines that someone is attacking him, and he decides to exercise his "Second Amendment Remedies." Maybe he only has a butcher knife. Maybe he is in your kitchen.

Your son is a good kid, and wouldn't intentionally do drugs, and certainly wouldn't stab anyone, but what if your son got some bad bread and went temporarily insane, and thought someone was a dangerous threat, and (since you didn't raise your son to be one of those impractical, unrealistic wimpy pacifists) thought lethal self-defense was justified. Except it wasn't really "self-defense." It was aggression against an innocent person.

Would you depersonalize your son and intentionally shoot to kill -- without hesitation, without remorse?

Would you see an imminent attack, and say, "Hey, that's my son! Oh well. He's toast now!"

Of course not. You would try something else. You might yell "STOP, [name of son]!!" at the top of your lungs, just to jolt him out of his pattern of thinking ("pattern interrupt"). "The words of the wicked are to lie in wait for blood: but the mouth of the upright shall deliver them" (Proverbs 12:6). "Mouth," not "handgun." Maybe you're in a position to grab the knife or the arm that holds it. But because you LOVE your son, you wouldn't just kill him without second thought.

You love your son. You don't have to try very hard to love him. You'll think of something besides just blowing him away.

Many "self-defense" gurus strongly advocate killing at attacker without a second thought. But Jesus requires a second thought. Jesus requires you to figure out how to LOVE this "enemy."

That's relatively easy for you to do in the case of your son, or someone you already love and desire to protect.

But what if you see a perfect stranger getting ready to commit an act of violence. Someone who is not like you. A Samaritan, maybe. It's much easier to kill a stranger without giving it a second thought.

But Jesus requires more.

If you're a Christian, and you think about the theological implications of your faith, you know that thoughtless killing is not consistent with what the Bible says about the creation of your attacker in the Image of God, and Christ's work to redeem that person.

You have a moral obligation to engage in creative thinking to LOVE your enemy by preventing the attack without becoming an attacker yourself.

You would want everyone to think that way if the attacker were your son.

What a Christian cannot do is de-personalize his enemy, make the judgment that the enemy's life has no value and is not worth living, and intentionally, thoughtlessly, impersonally, kill the enemy.

"Love" means trying your hardest to treat an unknown invader with the same benefit-of-the-doubt that you would give to your own son or to your best friend in the world, whom you love without having to try very hard.

Love means finding a way to love someone you don't know, as if he were a son or a brother.

Jesus sacrificed Himself to save His enemies; enemies who were hell-bent on killing Him (Luke 23:34). When faced with a violent attacker, we are commanded to "follow in His steps" (1 Peter 2.21). Those who obey Christ try to save violent attackers who are hallucinating on LSD.  Or are not. We must even love ungodly sinners who are in rebellion against God.

Rebellion against God is a bad LSD trip. It is hallucination. It is madness.

We don't model them, but also we don't kill insane people.

But that's how we should view our enemies. Like we once were. Like our own son on ergot.

God, however, can view them as rebels deserving of death. But God says to leave vengeance to Him (Romans 12:19-21). We, creatures, are commanded by Jesus to overcome evil, rebellious people with love, prayer, blessing, and good works for the benefit of the attacker.

Anger against rebellion is understandable. God is angry with sinners. David said he hated his enemies with "perfect hatred" (Psalm 139:22).

But there's another perspective. A New Perspective. It's part of a New Covenant.

Jesus says we are to love the people we justifiably hate.

People who take the commands of Christ seriously will be called "pacifists" by the "Second Amendment" crowd.

Pacifism and Optimillennialism

The heartfelt desire of every true Christian is the
   • Regeneration,
   • Repentance,
   • Restitution,
   • Reconciliation, and
   • Redemption
of "the enemy."
Our assumption should be that "Jesus is the Savior of the world."
Our assumption should be that the total stranger about to do violence to an innocent person is (like David) or will be (like Saul of Tarsus) a brother in Christ.
Jesus commands our love of the enemy.
Not the destruction of the enemy.

Is there a contradiction?

Are we admitting that there is a contradiction between the Old Testament and the New Testament?

No. It's easy to see that the New Testament teaches pacifism. But the Old Testament is more than three times as long as the New Testament, and people don't study the Old Testament the way they do the New. The four Gospels cover mostly the three years of Jesus' public ministry, while the Old Testament covers more than a thousand times as many years of human history. In order to prove that the Old Testament is part of an "Anarchist Manifesto," we have to prove the the Old Testament is part of a Pacifist Manifesto. This requires re-reading the entire Bible with a new set of glasses. This is what we're going to do below in summary form.

In our summary below, we're going to link to many pages to explain the Old Testament narrative. But two issues stand out in most people's minds: "Capital punishment" and "holy war." If you are energetically curious about those two issues, feel free to follow those links, but please return to this page to view the entire Bible as a whole.

While not a "contradiction," it is clear that the New Testament marks a break from the Levitical priesthood of the Old Testament, and this dramatically affects the shedding of blood which is an inseparable part of "capital punishment" and "holy war" in the Old Testament. The New Testament is inescapably pacifist.

It is more like Christ to be killed than to kill.
It is more like Christ to love those we hate. To act lovingly toward our enemies.

"Pacifism" is a Biblical worldview. A way of looking at the whole world, and a way of looking at the specific individual with whom you are in conflict, and a way of looking at what God is doing in history to bring both you and the attacker "unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:13).

The Word of God is more powerful than any gun or knife in the hand of an attacker. Have you ever thought of preaching the Word of God to an attacker rather than attacking an attacker?

"So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
It shall not return to Me void,
But it shall accomplish what I please,
And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."
Isaiah 55:11. See also Hebrews 4:12; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5; Isaiah 55:11; 44:26-28; 45:23; 46:10; 54:9; Deuteronomy 32:2; Matthew 24:35; Luke 8:11-16; John 6:63; Romans 10:17; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 1 Corinthians 3:6-9; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Hebrews 6:7; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23; Ephesians 1:9-11

A Christian loves a single enemy, as well as an army of enemies.

The "Second Amendment" crowd wants us to spontaneously, thoughtlessly, impersonally, kill the enemy.
The military takes this to another level. They engage in brainwashing to prohibit good people from loving their enemies, by depersonalizing and dehumanizing the enemy, and instead to hate them and kill them with blood-lust passion and without regret. The philosophy of "self-defense" leads logically to genocide of millions.

War is never just. It is always un-Christian.

In short: "Love your enemy." (Matthew 5:43-44)
"Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13)
You cannot obey Christ and love your enemy after you kill him.

Every pacifist is an anarchist.

Archists violate the most basic commands of Christ.

If you obey Jesus, you are a pacifist, and if you are a pacifist, you are a capitalist, because socialism is based on violence. A consistent follower of Jesus is a proponent of 100% pure laissez-faire capitalism with 0% Socialism/Communism/Fascism/Keynesianism. Economist Murray Rothbard has coined the term "Anarcho-Capitalism" to describe an economy of 100% pure capitalism and 0% socialism/fascism/etc.

Some church-goers insist that we MUST have SOME socialism. 100% capitalism (anarcho-capitalism) is sinful, they insist.

They would concede that we might be permitted to have a free market in computers, cars, housing, clothing and groceries, but there are some goods or services which MUST NOT be provided by businesses or non-profit organizations which are freely chosen by consumers. An "oligarchy" (a small group of men relative to the size of consumers) must have a monopoly in the provision of these goods and services, without any competition. Consumers must not have a choice. Anyone going into business to provide these goods and/or services in competition with "the government" must be threatened with physical violence and driven out of business.

Of course, if someone goes into business to compete with YOUR business, you are not allowed to threaten your competitors with physical violence in order to drive them out of business. Your only recourse is to serve your customers on a higher level than your competitors.

You may consider your competition as your "enemy," but Jesus commands you to love your enemy and serve consumers at the highest level.

Anarcho-Capitalism is economic pacifism.

Every Pacifist is an Anarchist. Proof:

Premise 1: The pacifist opposes violence.

Premise 2: The State is institutionalized, systematic violence.

Every professor of political science in every university on planet earth will agree that the fundamental nature (or most basic definition) of "civil government" (or "the State") is

• an institution of systematic violence
• which maintains a compulsory monopoly of violence.

Proof:

• Encyclopedia Britannica
• Wikipedia
• Journal of the European Economic Association
• Oxford University Handbook of Max Weber
• International Handbook of Violence Research
• European Journal of International Relations
• more

Conclusion: The opponent of violence is an opponent of "the State." The logically consistent pacifist says that "the State" should not exist.

The Christian pacifist would say that those who defend the violent monopoly of the State are sinning against God.

Every "government" in the history of the world has eventually banned the Bible, believing it to be an Anarchist Manifesto, which it is. Even the government of the United States makes it illegal for public school teachers to endorse or promote the Bible as a divine revelation.

Every pacifist is an anarchist.

If we are to leave vengeance to God, then it is immoral not only to take vengeance by your own hand, but immoral to hire a contract killer or "hit man."

Would this not also mean it is immoral to "vote" for a vengeance-taker?

Instead of "voting" for vengeance-takers, shouldn't we exhort vengeance-takers (and those who voted for them) to repent of vengeance-taking, and leave vengeance to God (Romans 12:19-21)?

But wouldn't these three obvious Biblical points logically result in the abolition of all "civil governments?"

1. civil governments hurt people
2. and pay their own salaries by taking your stuff
3. They don't leave vengeance to God.

Some will say that this line of thinking -- taking these verses literally -- would lead to "anarchy," so this line of argument cannot be true because anarchy is bad, because the Bible commands all human beings to create and maintain "civil governments."

Does it really?

Suppose I had supernatural powers of persuasion, and while your back was turned, I persuaded every human being on planet earth to repent of vengeance-taking and repent of funding acts of vengeance through "taxation" (which is the moral equivalent of theft, violating point #2 above). In other words, all politicians repented, abdicated, completely abolished "the public sector," and got real jobs in "the private sector." No "civil governments" were left on planet earth. Human beings lived in a social condition which economist Murray Rothbard called "anarcho-capitalism." We call this the “Vine & Fig Tree” society (Micah 4:1-5).

What Bible verse can you point to to prove that this stateless society is sinful, and needs to vote for vengeance-takers and tax-collectors?

What Bible verse would you point to
to prove that any human being
has the moral authority to take money from other people by force or threats of violence ("taxation")
and use that money to fund acts of vengeance?

What Bible verse would you point to
to prove that any human being
has a moral obligation to "vote" for someone to take money from other people by force or threats of violence ("taxation")
and use that money to fund acts of vengeance?

I would say it is a sin to create a monopoly of violence. I would say Christians have a moral obligation to abolish all governments (using persuasion, not violent revolution). We should leave "government" to God.

What makes the State right? What gives Caesar the right? Why should all Americans rise up, like America's Founders did in 1776, and declare our independence, and demand that everyone who gets a paycheck from "the Public Sector" resign and get a real job in the private sector?

You truly do not realize how ironic your allegiance to the United States is. It vastly exceeds the allegiance your government has for you.

• If you had been born in another country, you could not become a naturalized U.S. citizen (if you're truly a Christian)
• I know this because I studied law and passed the California Bar Exam, but was denied a license to practice law because the U.S. Supreme Court has held that Christians (whose allegiance to God is greater than their allegiance to the government, Acts 5:29) cannot take the oath to "support the Constitution" and become an attorney. Same with public school teachers, certified elevator inspectors, and many other vocations in many federal cases. You cannot be a faithful Christian and an American.
• Your government has an "established church," and it's not your church. It's the public school system. A system of compulsory atheistic indoctrination. No serious political scientist or theologian would disagree with that claim -- except those who have never given the claim any thought. Every political scientist and theologian alive in 1776 would agree that today's public school system is our nation's "established church." The First Amendment is dead meat. As the linked article above shows, serious thinkers on both the left and the right agree with that claim. Every single person who signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would engage in immediate revolt against the U.S. on this one issue alone if they could read the relevant court cases and sit through a day of public school classes.
• During my lifetime, the U.S. has killed, crippled, or made homeless tens of millions of innocent, non-combatant, non-white civilians around the world. Before I was born, the U.S. needlessly brought about the death of as many as 90 million people to make sure Poland and Czechoslovakia were ruled by Stalin instead of by Hitler, and China was ruled by Mao instead of Hirohito. Mao went on to murder 40 million people. Today the U.S. drops a bomb somewhere every 12 minutes on average.
• Around the world, the U.S. has tentacles of atheism, homosexuality, abortion, imposing an anti-Christian agenda on weaker nations.
• This monopoly of violence known as The United States government is the enemy of God and humanity. 

But you resist abolishing the U.S. government and allowing anarcho-capitalism to thrive because you believe "government" is good. Even though America's Founders -- who abolished their own government in 1776 -- would be horrified at how lawless, tyrannical, and anti-theistic your government is. Abolishing "civil government" is dangerous, unpatriotic, and somehow unBiblical, you believe.

What Bible verse gives the U.S. Federal Government the right to exercise political sovereignty over your state?
What Bible verse gives your state government the right to exercise political sovereignty over your county?
What Bible verse gives your county government the right to exercise political sovereignty over your city?
What Bible verse gives your city government the right to exercise political sovereignty over your neighborhood?
What Bible verse gives your neighbors the right to exercise political sovereignty over your family?
(For the words "exercise political sovereignty" think: "send the tanks," "send armed marshals," "taze, handcuff, and imprison.")

Every civil magistrate -- every monopoly of violence -- eventually declares outright war on God and the Bible, just as the United States of America has banned the Bible from its established church, the public school system.

Imagine an anarcho-capitalist society, living on an uncharted island in the Pacific, unknown to any current government, population 144,000. There are 12 families in this society. Each family is headed by a very Godly patriarch like Abraham, Noah, Job, the Prophets or the Apostles, or Godly kings like Hezekiah or Josiah. Just as Abraham had as many as 12,000 people in his "household,"¹ each of these 12 families are equally large. You would agree it is the most just society in human history -- except for one thing.

There is no "civil government."

Whenever there is a crime, it is adjudicated following the principles Jesus laid out in Matthew 18:15-17, and the appropriate Biblical response to that crime is executed by the island's family heads, and judges are chosen on a Free Market basis, if they are needed.

But there is no "civil government." No monopoly of violence. No tax collectors. "Anarcho-capitalism."

Where is the verse which says
that someone has the moral right to demand that this patriarchal society
vote for him to be the "civil magistrate," and empower him to seize property
to fund acts of vengeance, and threaten violence against competitors?

Which verse says Caesar was morally justified in invading and conquering Israel, and putting Israel under tribute?
When Jesus said, "Resist not evil," "Go the second mile," and "Render unto Caesar," He was de-legitimizing violent revolution by the "Second Amendment" crowd of His day, who wanted to take up swords against conquering invaders, but He was not legitimizing conquest, murder, and enslavement by archists like Caesar.

And beyond that, where is the verse which says that someone
has the moral right to say to Abraham or Noah or Job or any Godly family head,
"You may no longer administer justice. I have a monopoly on the provision of legal services,
and I will enforce my monopoly with violence."

Why is it insufficient to be a citizen of the "holy nation" mentioned in 1 Peter 2:9 (see also Philippians 3:20).

People who are not anarchists and pacifists silently condone the killing and destruction of tens of millions of people, and the atheistic indoctrination of those that remain alive. They deny that Jesus is the only legitimate Archist.

Think about one of those dull statistics above: Today the U.S. drops a bomb somewhere every 12 minutes on average.

Imagine that someone detonates one of these bombs in your neighborhood. Down the street a bit, so that the only damage that is done to your house is maybe some particulate matter is dropped on your lawn. No big deal, right?

Are you kidding? Your house would be rocked, even if not damaged. You would look out the window in horror to see several of your neighbors' homes in rubble. Every decent and humane psychologist would say you have experienced the kind of trauma that one experiences through the death of a spouse or child. Not only would your house be rocked, but your whole world (psychologically speaking) would be rocked. "What is going on in our world?"

The U.S. government does this to millions of people every year.

The people in Washington D.C. are sociopaths.

The people in your city ("law enforcement") who enforce the diktats of the violent atheistic federal government are also sociopaths.

If you are not an anarcho-pacifist, you are experiencing a form of PTSD without realizing it.

1. F. Willeson, The Yalid in Hebrew Society, 12 STUDIA THEOLOGICA 192-210 (1958) (Estimates that Abram's household in Genesis 14:14 numbered near 12,000 people).

"The State" is a False god.
"Civil Government" is an Idol.

This is the message of most of the verses in the Bible. The dusty parts of the Bible that nobody reads.

Do You Worship a False god?

If you attended a government-operated "public" school, you probably worship a false god.
If the Apostle Paul could travel through time and have a personal conversation with you, he would probably conclude that you are an idolater.

The first of the Ten Commandments is this:

Exodus 20
2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

The only legitimate God is our Creator. Jesus is our Creator (John 1:3). Our Creator is our only real Lord, our only real God. We must worship the Creator, not the creature.

Romans 1:25
who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

When the Bible describes Jesus as "The God of gods," the Bible is saying those other gods are false gods. Illegitimate gods.

Deuteronomy 10:17
For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe.

Joshua 22:22
“The Lord God of gods, the Lord God of gods, He knows, and let Israel itself know—if it is in rebellion, or if in treachery against the Lord, do not save us this day.

Psalm 136:2
Oh, give thanks to the God of gods!
For His mercy endures forever.

Daniel 2:47
The king answered Daniel, and said, “Truly your God is the God of gods, the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you could reveal this secret.”

Daniel 11:36
“Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.

Politicians claim to be gods. They claim to be lords. They claim to be kings.
This is all a lie.
The Bible says there are many gods, many lords, many archists.
They do not have divinity. They do not have sovereignty. They do not have the right to impose their will on others by force or threats of violence.

1 Corinthians 8:5
For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords),

If Jesus is the "God of gods," thereby de-legitimizing all other gods, Jesus is also the "King of kings," thereby de-legitimizing all other kings.

1 Timothy 6:15

Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;

Revelation 17:14

These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Revelation 19:16

And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

Our Creator is our only real Lord. All creaturely kings and all creaturely lords and all creaturely gods (whether human or demonic) are false gods, false lords, and false kings. Our Creator is the only lord, god, king we should worship and serve. Romans 1:25

Israel wanted a king "like the gentiles," and God said this was a rejection of God (1 Samuel 8). ← Read that passage. Having a king is a rejection of God.

Having a military is a rejection of God.

Is the Bible about going to heaven when you die, or is the Bible an Anarchist Manifesto?

If you reject God in this life, you will reject God in the next life.
If you put your trust in human archists in this life, you will not put your trust in God in the next.
As Milton put the words in Satan's mouth in Paradise Lost, "It is better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven." See again Mark 10:42-45.

Some people don't want to rule others, but they want others to rule over them.
Being ruled is better than being responsible.
"Better to have Medicare Part D in hell than to serve in heaven."

What are "gods?"

Answer: "archists"

In the Bible, "gods" are politicians, emperors, and military conquerors (or images of those Pharaohs, Caesars, and Führers, or the demons behind the political puppets). In the New American Standard Bible, the word "gods" in Exodus 20:3 ("Thou shalt have no other gods before Me") is translated "judges" in Exodus 22:8-9 (and Exodus 21:6 in the KJV), "rulers" in Psalm 82:1 (compare Psalm 138:1), and "mighty prince" in Genesis 23:6. After the gods (Pharaohs, Caesars, and Führers) successfully invade and subjugate a people, they brainwash the enslaved masses into believing that their masters are actually their "benefactors" (Luke 22:25) or "saviors." According to the German historian, Ethelbert Stauffer, the religious principle of the Roman Empire, from the days of Augustus on, was salvation by Caesar: “Salvation is to be found in none other save Augustus, and there is no other name given to men in which they can be saved.” (Political Saviors) Does that sound familiar? It would if you have read Acts 4:12.

Jesus is the only legitimate archist (1 Timothy 6:15). He is described as "the Lord of lords, the King of kings," and the God of gods. The fact that there exist kings, lords, and gods, doesn't mean that their kingdoms are legitimate. They are real, but they are rebellious. The only morally legitimate "nation" on earth is the nation mentioned in 1 Peter 2:9. Whether we describe Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden as "kings," "lords" or "gods," they are false gods, according to the Bible. If Joe Biden is a "king," he should shut down his earthly "kingdom" at once, and let Jesus be King.

The Bible is against rival gods.
The Bible is against rival kings.
All creaturely gods are false gods.
All creaturely kings are false kings.
All Presidents are false gods.

The desire for a king is a desire for a false god and a rejection of the true God (1 Samuel 8). (We're going to repeat that passage for you multiple times. It is important.)

1 Samuel 8:7

And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.

1 Samuel 10:19

And ye have this day rejected your God, who Himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto Him, Nay, but set a king over us. 

If you believe you cannot live without a king,
without a human government,
then you are an idolater.
The God of the Bible is the only legitimate Governor.

If you are not an "anarchist," then you reject God from being your sole, exclusive Archist. You put your trust in human kings and false gods to bring you salvation.

In the Bible, the word for "save" is sometimes translated "deliver." In the majority of cases, people want to be delivered/saved from archists who threaten to impose their own will on the people by force or threats of military invasion. In the Bible, "salvation" usually means "freedom from archists." God's Word promises that if we obey His Law, He will not send archists against us. If we disobey, He promises to send evil, that is, "governments" and their armies ("the sword").

---

If you believe you cannot live without a king,
without a human government,
then you are an idolater.
The God of the Bible is the only legitimate Savior.

---

Salvation is seen in Exodus 20:2

I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

"Anarchism" is seen in verse 3:

Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

Thou shalt have no other archists before Me. "Anarchism" -- a world free from false gods, false lords, and false kings -- is the "Good News" -- the Gospel.

The word for "salvation" is also translated "deliverance," "welfare," "victory," "wholeness," "peace," "health," etc. There are always various departments of "government" that promise "salvation" in the holistic Biblical sense of the word.

1 Peter 2:9 says there is only one legitimate "nation." It also says there is only one legitimate priesthood. Jesus is the only legitimate King and Priest. We are all priests and kings (Revelation 1:6;5:10), and no human being is a priest or a king in an exclusive way different from the way that every human being (in Christ) is a king and a priest. No human being is a legitimate "archist." Jesus is the One True Archist. All other archists are false gods and idols.

Not only is the Bible about abolishing "governments," it is also about abolishing "churches." Most human beings in the last 6,000 years of human history have lived under a church-state. The Emperor was a god. Their king was their priest. Their Church was their State. There is never a "Separation of Church and State." Every State is a religion. Either the State serves a religion, or religion serves the State.

Protestant churches today are partially-reformed Roman Catholic churches. They are Roman, not Hebrew. They are humanist, not Biblical. They are state-churches, not house-churches.

Politics vs. Patriarchy
Polis vs. Patria

There was only one "institution" in the Garden of Eden: The Family.
There was no "state" and  no "church" in the Garden of Eden. Just the family.
Feminists scream "Patriarchy!"
Feminists believe in Politics.

The word "Politics" comes from the Greek word polis, which means "state" or "city-state."
St. Augustine said the history of the human race is the history of the conflict between "The City of God" and "The City of Man."
On this planet, this is the conflict between Patriarchy and Politics.

Obviously "The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto" is a controversial proposition.

• Anarchists don't like the Bible
• Bible-believers don't like anarchists.

People who call themselves "Bible-believing Christians" will tell you not to trust anarchists.
Anarchists will say you can't trust the Bible.

I trust the Bible. I believe the Bible is the Word of God. In fact, I worship the Bible.  But I also believe the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto.

Not only are you probably thinking that I'm wrong to say "The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto," you're thinking that it's OBVIOUSLY wrong -- so obviously wrong that there's something screwy, dishonest, or perverse about someone who would say "The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto."

I'm surprised, frankly, that you're still reading.

If you'll give me three minutes, I think I can not only convince you that I'm right, but that I'm obviously right, and then you'll say, "OK, I see where you're going with this," and you'll be tempted to think that this is a trivial point; a play on words.

But this is not a game. I want you to take this truth so seriously that you risk losing your job, being arrested by the government, and even put to death.

Like Jesus.

Here is my argument in a nutshell:

If I had been alive in 1776, I would have been executed by the likes of George Washington and Alexander Hamilton.

• I believe all governments should be abolished
• I believe taking up arms against "the Red Coats" is contrary to Christian ethics.

America's Founding Fathers said the exact opposite:

• God requires human beings to form "governments"
• We have the right, nay, the duty, to abolish the government by armed revolution if it becomes tyrannical (see the Declaration of Independence)

But if America's Founders could travel through time, look at the carnage and destruction wrought by "governments" in the 20th century, and study America in the 21st century, they would be shocked, appalled, outraged.

And I'm confident I could prove to America's Founders that their whole theory of political science and political resistance was unBiblical. It's a product of the "Enlightenment," and the scholastic synthesis between "Jerusalem and Athens." Our political theories came from Greco-Roman humanism, "the kings of the Gentiles," not the Bible.

If you have the same broad understanding of the Bible that the average 15-year old in colonial America had (c. 1776), that 60-second summary above should be sufficient to persuade you that the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto. But you may be a victim of educational malpractice, with virtually no familiarity with the Bible, or only a distorted view of the Bible that circulates on the internet or in Sunday School classrooms. So I need to give you two things: (1) a survey of the Bible, and (2) an answer to objections we've all been given for abolishing archism, such as "If we abolish the government, evil will take over."

What I want to give you is an understanding that

• The Bible commands us to abolish all governments by converting all archists into followers of the executed pacifist, Jesus Christ
  • As the prophet Micah puts it, beat "swords into plowshares"
• This would work. This would make life on the planet a paradise. It's practical, sensible, realistic, moral, and ... inevitable.
  • Again, the prophet Micah says the day is coming when we will all dwell peacefully under our own "Vine & Fig Tree."
  • And we are not to just sit around on our duffs waiting for the "second coming" to make this happen for us.

And Now, A Word From Our Sponsor

Thank you for giving me three minutes of your time.

It will take about an hour to read the rest of this website, proving that the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto.

Clicking all the links below could take the rest of your life. The total website contains over 2,000 pages.

This website is sponsored by a non-profit tax-exempt organization called "Vine & Fig Tree."

We sell a home Bible Study program designed to prove to you that the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto, and show you how to become a Christian anarchist. Our webpages have been freely available on the internet since 1996, but if you pay for our program, you get the latest editions and personal coaching. The best way to read the Bible as an Anarchist Manifesto is to do so a little bit every day, with a coach to answer your questions and hold you accountable. Our program has a DOUBLE your money back guarantee. Beats the stock market.

Contents, Part 2

1. Who Cares About the Bible?
2. What is That Big Book about?
   • The Bible is about "The Kingdom of God."
   • or, "The Government of God."
   • God governs when people obey His Commandments.
   • The word "Theocracy" means "God Governs."
   • God is the only legitimate Governor.
   • When God's will is done "in earth as it is in heaven" (Matthew 6:10) you have "Theocracy" (God governs) and "anarchy" (no human pretenders or substitutes for God).
   • We call this "Anarcho-Theocracy."
   • So here's what the Bible is about, in chronological order:
     • Anarcho-Theocracy Before The Fall
     • Anarcho-Theocracy Before The Flood
     • Anarcho-Theocracy Before Sinai
     • Anarcho-Theocracy Under Moses
     • Anarcho-Theocracy and The Rise Of The State
     • Anarcho-Theocracy and Providence: The State
     • Anarcho-Theocracy and The Messiah
     • Anarcho-Theocracy and The Early Home-Churches
     • Anarcho-Theocracy In "The Millennium"
3. Objections to Anarcho-Theocracy
   1. "Evil will take over."
   2. Romans 13 -- Being conquered and put under tribute is good.
   3. The Bible isn't about Anarchism, it's about SALVATION!
      1. In the Bible, "salvation" most often means "freedom from archists."
      2. In the Bible, "saviors" save us from archists.
      3. The Jews rejected Jesus as their Savior, that is, as their Messiah
         • If you reject Jesus as your Theocratic King/Messiah/Christ/Archist, you have rejected Him as your "savior" (ticket to heaven).
      4. Jesus has been saving the world for 2,000 years.
      5. When Jesus is our only Archist, we enjoy "Civilization."
   4. But, but, but . . . the government is ordained by God!
      1. God never commanded human beings to be archists over others.
      2. The Bible says the origin of "the State" is demonic.

Anarchists who aren't Christians (and non-anarchists who aren't Christians) might ask,

Who Cares About the Bible?

What difference does it make if the Bible is an anarchist manifesto or not? It's just an old book. In fact, it's so old, and has been changed so many times through long centuries of history, that nobody even knows what the original writers were even trying to say.

This claim is as false and misleading as the claim that the Bible commands human beings to form "governments."

Most of the arguments against the Bible share common traits with one of the most common: "The Telephone Game" argument.

At a party, the first participant in "the Telephone Game" will whisper a sentence to the person in the next chair, who whispers the message to the person in the next chair, and so on around the circle. The final person in the "phone chain" reveals the message, which is compared with the first participant's real message. The two are found to be totally different, and everybody laughs.

As the argument goes, this is like the transmission of the Bible over the centuries. Nobody involved in copying the Holy Scriptures took it all that seriously, they whimsically changed words, sentences, or paragraphs to suit their fancy, and the Bible we have today bears no resemblance whatsoever to what Moses, Isaiah, Matthew (or whoever started the chain) had in mind.

This argument can be made to sound very educated and sophisticated, but it is pathetic and juvenile.

Here is some information on the actual transmission of the Biblical text.

In 1912, Frederic Kenyon was knighted Sir Frederic Kenyon for his service as Director and Head Librarian of the British Museum. He describes how the Jews meticulously copied the Old Testament:

Besides recording varieties of reading, tradition, or conjecture, the Massoretes undertook a number of calculations which do not enter into the ordinary sphere of textual criticism. They numbered the verses, words, and letters of every book. They calculated the middle word and the middle letter of each. The enumerated verses which contained all the letters of the alphabet, or a certain number of them; and so on. These trivialities, as we may rightly consider them, had yet the effect of securing minute attention to the precise transmission of the text; and they are but an excessive manifestation of a respect for the sacred Scriptures which in itself deserves nothing but praise. The Massoretes were indeed anxious that not one jot nor tittle, not one smallest letter nor one tiny part of a letter, of the Law should pass away or be lost.

In Kenyon's day, the oldest copy of the Old Testament was a copy from the 10th century after Christ. But in 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and they contained a complete copy of the Book of Isaiah, dating over one thousand years earlier than that 10th century copy. The results astonished the scholarly world. Gleason Archer, in comparing the manuscript variations of the Hebrew text with pre-Christian literature such as the Egyptian Book of the Dead, states that it is amazing that the Hebrew text does not have the phenomenon of discrepancy and MS change of other literature of the same age: "Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A. D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible" with the exception of minor variations in spelling, on a par with the British "colour" and the American "color." "Even those Dead Sea fragments of Deuteronomy and Samuel which point to a different manuscript family from that which underlies our received Hebrew text do not indicate any differences in doctrine or teaching. They do not affect the message of revelation in the slightest."

In other words, the Old Testament we have today is virtually letter-for-letter the same Old Testament Jesus had in His day. And the copy of Isaiah that Jesus read from (Luke 4) was virtually letter-for-letter the same as the one Isaiah himself wrote. Ditto for the Proverbs of Solomon, the Psalms of David, and the books of Moses.

All this about the Bible being filled with corruptions and changes is the polar opposite of reality. There is no ancient manuscript evidence to support this view; all the evidence is against this view.

This proves that atheists live in a world of fantasy. Some atheists believe the Bible is unreliable because that's what they've been taught, and they want to be respected by those who told them. But there are some atheists who are bad people and are just making this stuff up. The ones who start these rumors about the Bible have a completely different conception of history than historical reality, and a completely different view of religious people than reality. If an atheist -- knowing even one-tenth as much about the Biblical manuscripts as the Director and Head Librarian of the British Museum -- makes up the story that the Bible is untrustworthy and unreliably transmitted through the centuries, then he is a liar who probably hates God and doesn't want to love his neighbor, refrain from stealing, or be faithful to his wife. You would be wise not to listen to such people.

Here's an analogy that better represents the analysis of different copies of an ancient manuscript. Suppose you won the Pillsbury Bake-Off. Everyone wants your winning apple strudel recipe. So you hand-write a copy. Then another. Then another. You end up making 50 copies of your recipe. Then you lose it. You call all your friends and tell them you lost the recipe, and request that they give back the copy you made for them. When you get the copies, you discover that on a couple of copies you made minor mistakes. On one copy you put "2 Tbs" instead of "2 tsp." On another recipe you  wrote "20 minutes at 350°" instead of "30 minutes at 350°." But since all the other copies had the correct item, it's easy to see which copy had the mistake. This is the science of "textual criticism."

"Textual Criticism" is how, in God's Providence, we can learn what God wants us to learn, and what the original authors of the books of the Bible wrote.

There are thousands of copies of the New Testament, some copied only decades after the original. There are only a handful of copies of the History of Herodotus (B.C. 488-428), and they are centuries older than the long-lost originals. F. F. Bruce notes,

Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest manuscripts of their works which are of any use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals.

"Textual Criticism" looks at actual texts and compares them. This is very different from "Higher Criticism," which presupposes that there is no God who communicates with people created in His Image, and speculates that the entire Bible evolved in a meaningless universe -- even though there are no actual texts supporting this view -- much like Darwin speculated that species evolved -- even though all the transitional forms were missing from the record. (And still are.)

If the Bible we have today is not an accurate deposit of the writings of the original authors, then there is no such thing as human history. All history is bogus. We can't know anything about the past.

But if we have an accurate edition of the writings of Moses, Isaiah, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, who cares? They were just primitive peasants. Why should we listen to their long story?

I believe the story-tellers. There are two reasons I believe them.

First, they appear to be people of integrity. Simon Greenleaf, a co-founder of the Harvard Law School and the greatest authority on the law of evidence in the 19th century, said that if the New Testament were to be subjected to the Anglo-American laws of evidence in a court of law, the resurrection of Christ would be an established fact. The witnesses (the authors of the Gospels, for example) are credible witnesses.

It has been said, "History is written by the conquerors." The Old Testament is different. It is obviously not written by biased Jews who only wanted Israel to look good. The Old Testament is in a sense the most "anti-semitic" book ever written. It paints a picture of a group of people who were chosen by God and given every favor, and still rebelled and failed. They are portrayed as history's most faithless losers. And yet their story was meticulously and faithfully copied over and over by those very same folks.

This is because they believed the Bible was the Word of God, not just the word of some man.

But one element of the story these credible witnesses report is that God moved them to speak and to write exactly what God wanted written. That's their testimony. I believe it. I believe it because I like the idea of living in a universe that's lovingly controlled by a personal and sovereign God. There are no credible reasons given by atheists why I should not accept this entire worldview.

Peaceful and loving people want the Bible to be true. Rational people believe the Bible is the Word of God.

OK, let's assume just for the sake of the argument that the Bible is the Word of God. That God "breathed out" His own Words through human penmen.

Is the Bible -- the Word of God -- an "Anarchist Manifesto?"

The Bible is both a creed and a manifesto. The word "creed" comes from the Latin word credo, "I believe." The Bible tells us what we should believe about who God is and what He wants us to do. But the Bible is also a manifesto, which is why most governments throughout history have banned it -- including now, the United States. It is a manifesto promulgated by a government called "The Kingdom of God." The word "kingdom" is not used much in our day. When Jesus used the word, it was subversive. He was talking about a rival government.

There are over 30,000 verses in the Bible. Thousands of people throughout history have sacrificed greatly -- even to the point of death -- to preserve copies of these verses and hand them down to us.

What is God trying to tell us in all these verses?

The Bible is not written in the form of an article in the Harvard Law Review or the Unabomber's Manifesto. It has many literary genres:

• song,
• biography,
• law,
• poetry,
• genealogy,
• history,
• proverb,
• census reports,
• government indictments,
• architectural blueprints,
• personal letters,
• etc.

This website defends the proposition that God in the Bible wants us to abolish all of man's kingdoms and let God be our King, our Lawgiver, our Judge, and our Deliverer. Of the 30,000 verses in the Bible, most of them touch on the conflict between the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of man.

Immediately some will object that if we abolish all visible, earthly kings/presidents/prime ministers, and if we abolish all human legislatures, and if we abolish all human judges, and beat our "swords into plowshares" (Micah 4), we will be plunged into a state of "anarchy."

This is technically correct, as the word "anarchy" means "absence of rulers." Or as we like to say, "absence of archists."

Christian Anarchism from Genesis to Revelation

The whole Bible teaches Christian Anarchism. From cover to cover. Most Christians are familiar with only a few passages in the Bible, those on "salvation," or maybe a few passages on "the rapture" or "the second coming." Most Christians have never read the history of the rise of the State or the idolatry and infanticide of the kings, and the Prophets who so thoroughly denounced them. Most of the Bible is about politics, and the Bible is against politics.

The Bible Describes the Battle: Politics vs. Patriarchy

The whole history of man as recorded in the Bible is the history of sinful rebellion against God's model for society as created in the Garden of Eden, and the construction of institutions based on Humanistic power: coercion and violence. It is the history of Politics vs. Patriarchy.

God created human beings male and female: The Family. This is the core institution of human society. Feminists don't like the word "patriarchy," but you'll find it on this website anyway. We made up a new word: "Patriagora."
Patria = "family" + Agora = "market"
God designed human beings to live in families and serve consumers in a Free Market.

The Institution called "The State" is unBiblical. It reflects rebellion against God's Law. The patriotic people who don't like feminism don't like the word "anarchism," but we use it anyway. We are not archists.

God never commanded human beings to form a "state." The State was formed by rebels who wanted to seize the wealth of others rather than work for it or engage in peaceful trade. The archist is applauded by those who want something for nothing, and don't mind being accomplices to crime.

• The Criminality of the State - Albert Jay Nock
• The State as Criminal

The Demonic Origin of "Civil Government"

God did not create or command the entity we call "the government" or "the State." It was formed by people who rejected God's government over them. It was formed by people who wanted to conquer other people. We can call these people "archists."  An "archist" is somebody who believes he has the right to impose his will on other people by force. From cover to cover the Bible says "archists" are bad. God uses "archists" to accomplish His purposes -- like when he used the Assyrian Army to punish Israel (Isaiah 10) -- but then He punishes the "archists" He used to accomplish His purposes (same book and chapter). The "archist" is a conqueror, a bandit, or a politician. A peaceful and prosperous society is one without "archists." God punishes a people who choose to be ruled and/or defended by archists instead of God.

Click here for more on the Origin of "The State."

Here are links to our old webpages:

• PATRIARCHY Table of Contents
• Theonomy: God's Law
• Let's Define Our Terms!
  • Just Another Name for Anarchism?
  • Rehabilitating the Word "Patriarchy"
  • Redefining the Family
  • What is an "Institution"?

Forty years ago I put together "95 Theses on the State," in homage to Luther's 95 Theses on Justification. I went through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and pulled out 95 key concepts that relate to the issues of politics, law, economics, and government. Nowhere did I find a Biblical warrant for a king, or even a "State" of any kind. No book is more highly critical of empires than the Bible. Emperors are idols -- false gods.

I have copied below a section from this page which contains an outline of my "95 Theses on the State." It is found on the left-hand side. Each of these links contains numerous cross-references from Scripture and other resources on the subject. On the right-hand side are hints at how each Thesis can be used as the foundation for other academic subjects which might be covered in a home school curriculum. This is somewhat sketchy at this point.

I have variously entitled these Theses, "95 Theses on the State," "95 Theses on Patriarchy," "95 Theses on Anarcho-Theocracy," and here I have substituted "Anarcho-Theocracy" for "Patriarchy" except in those instances where there is a specific reference to the institution of "The Family" vs. Church or State.

These 95 Theses cover the Bible from cover to cover. They are arranged under the following time periods:

1. Anarcho-Theocracy Before The Fall
2. Anarcho-Theocracy Before The Flood
3. Anarcho-Theocracy Before Sinai
4. Anarcho-Theocracy Under Moses
5. Anarcho-Theocracy and The Rise Of The State
6. Anarcho-Theocracy and Providence: The State
7. Anarcho-Theocracy and The Messiah
8. Anarcho-Theocracy and The Early Home-Churches
9. Anarcho-Theocracy In "The Millennium"

INTRODUCTION

• View | Welcome to “The 95 Days of Christmas”
• View | The Importance of Luther's 95 Theses	In his book on How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization, Tom Woods overstates the role of the Institutional Church and understates the role of the Bible in the creation of Western Civilization. The link at left cites John Robbins, who overstates the role of Luther and the Protestant Reformation in the creation of Western Civilization. Western Civilization is Biblical Civilization
• View | The Origin of These 95 Theses
• View | Introduction: Taking the Bible Seriously	The Bible sets itself before us as a revelation from God. The authors of the books of the Bible make this claim. This claim is either true, or the Bible is evil. The claim cannot be ignored. The Bible is the most important book in the history of the human race. No other book has had more influence. A secular (Bible-denying or Bible-ignoring) education is irresponsible.      Christians would agree that some people have made praiseworthy cultural advances motivated by the Koran, but we would say that these advances were either incidental or epistemologically inconsistent with the Koran. Many praiseworthy advances have been made by people motivated by the Bible, but if the Bible is fundamentally a hoax, then the amount of evil (and missed opportunities) caused by the Bible greatly outweighs these inconsistent advances. More on the Bible.
• View Thesis | Thesis 1: Christ the Word	Jesus claimed to be God. The Jews of His day wanted Him put to death for saying this. The incarnation of God is either a lie or the most important event in the history of the human race.      The Deity of Christ is the heart of the doctrine of the "Trinity." Thomas Jefferson denied this doctrine. If he were here today, I would make him read two books which would completely change his mind on this issue. First, The Hoax of Higher Criticism by Gary North. Jefferson fell for the myths of 18th century German Higher Criticism hook line and sinker. These myths have long since been debunked. Another easy source is Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Second, The One and The Many, by R.J. Rushdoony. Rushdoony's book shows that the Trinity is the foundation for liberty and humane society. Governments always embody theological error. The problem of "the one and the many" is a vexing philosophical problem that cannot be solved without the doctrine of the Trinity. Jefferson would see immediately -- taking in the facts of the modern world (socialism, communism, fascism, crony-capitalism, and the complete abandonment of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights) -- that "higher criticism" was a ruse for big government. Big Unitarian Government. Jefferson was not an enemy of morality. Higher Criticism is. Government is. I believe the modern combination of tyranny and anti-trinitarianism would click in Jefferson's mind. He would realize that the war against the Bible is a war for Big Government.
• View Thesis | Thesis 2: Christ the Creator
• View Thesis | Thesis 3: Creation, not Evolution	Why teach the laws of physics, or the laws of chemistry, if the universe is actually a random, constantly-evolving multiverse? Evolution is a faith, not a fact.
• View Thesis | Thesis 4: Omniscience, Predestination, and Providence	The Total Security State seeks and claims omniscience, and other "incommunicable attributes" of God. The doctrine of God's Providence is a bulwark of liberty. www.AstonishingProvidence.com more
• View Thesis | Thesis 5: “Self-Evident Truths”	Deep down, everyone knows the Bible (also called "The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God") is true. Students should be taught how to turn conscience into a worldview. Education without reference to "self-evident truths" is self-deception.

 View | A. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY BEFORE THE FALL

• View Thesis | Thesis 6: The Biological Basis of Patriarchy	Students should learn that there is no biological basis for homosexuality. "Homophobia?" Children need to be assured of the fundamental facts of life: not condoms, but the goodness of fathers and mothers.
• View Thesis | Thesis 7: The Dominion Mandate	The opposite of environmentalism.
• View Thesis | Thesis 8: Patriarchy and “the Extended Family”	The Bible commands grandparents to be involved in the homeschooling of their grandchildren. See also Thesis 39.
• View Thesis | Thesis 9: Anarcho-Theocracy and the Sanctions of the Covenant   Christians are the sons of Abraham and heirs of the promises made to Abraham. Of Abraham the Scripture says: For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him. Genesis 18:19 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. Genesis 26:4-5 "Theonomy" is the Gospel: And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying,            In thee shall all nations be blessed. Galatians 3:8 "The blessings of liberty" -- "Good News" indeed -- come only through obedience to God's Law.   Skip down to Thesis 10	This Thesis is a major point. .      If the Bible is not true, there really is no such thing as "Law" except the "positive law" of the State.      Every home school curriculum needs to teach children ""The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," that is, Biblical Law, also known as "Theonomy."      It was one of the most important features of early American public schools that they inculcated "religion and morality," a.k.a. "piety and virtue." America's Founders believed that religion and morality were "necessary for good government and the happiness of mankind," and this was the explicitly stated reason why schools were created.      One of the centerpieces of early American education was the Westminster Shorter Catechism. It was in virtually every single classroom in America, and in nearly every home. One of the finest features of that work is an exposition of the Ten Commandments, including "the duties required" and "the sins forbidden" by each commandment. This is the foundation of the Common Law and American Law. A school curriculum is not complete without a daily study of the Ten Commandments. Rushdoony's The Institutes of Biblical Law would be an appropriate text for home-schooled high-schoolers. Here is an outline of a home-study program that I still haven't finished, as well as links to the Westminster Standards. The Ten Commandments prohibit: 1.  Idolatry 2.  False Religion 3.  Swearing a false oath 4.  Refusal to work 5.  Disrespecting parents and other authorities 6.  Murder 7.  Cheating on your Wife 8.  Theft 9.  Slander 10. Covetousness For more than 300 years -- roughly 1600-1900 -- "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" -- that is, the Bible -- permeated America's schools and American culture. These laws are the foundation of civilization. Ten Principles for a Free Society The Ten Commandments in a Biblical Worldview The Ten Commandments Moral Inventory and Meditation Program Rules for the Right Understanding of the Ten Commandments How to Examine Yourself in the Mirror of the Ten Commandments: Ask "Who?" Preface to the Ten Commandments From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: Introduction: The Importance of the Law The Validity of Biblical Law The Law as Revelation and Treaty The Direction of the Law The First Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Idolatry and the Ten Commandments Day 67: Duties Required in the First Commandment, part 1 Day 68: Duties Required in the First Commandment, part 2 Day 69: Sins Forbidden in the First Commandment, part 1 Day 70: Sins Forbidden in the First Commandment, part 2 From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: The First Commandment and the Shema Israel The Undivided Word God versus Moloch The Laws of Covenant Membership The Law as Power and Discrimination The Second Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 71: Duties Required in the Second Commandment Day 72: Sins Forbidden in the Second Commandment, part 1 Day 73: Sins Forbidden in the Second Commandment, part 2 Day 74: Reasons Annexed to the Second Commandment What is "Worship?" Day 81: Religious Worship, part 1 Day 82: Religious Worship, part 2 Day 83: Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience, part 1 Day 84: Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience, part 2 Day 85: The Word of God in Worship, part 1 Day 86: The Word of God in Worship, part 2 Day 87: The Word of God in Worship, part 3 Day 88: The Word of God in Worship, part 4 Day 89: Of the Sacraments, part 1 Day 90: Of the Sacraments, part 2 Day 91: Of Baptism, part 1 Day 92: Of Baptism, part 2 Day 93: Of Baptism, part 3 Day 94: Of The Lord's Supper, part 1 Day 95: Of The Lord's Supper, part 2 Day 96: Of The Lord's Supper, part 3 Day 97: Of The Lord's Supper, part 4 Day 98: Of The Lord's Supper, part 5 Day 99: Of The Lord's Supper, part 6 Day 100: Of Communion of Saints, part 1 Day 101: Of Communion of Saints, part 2 From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: The Lawful Approach to God The Throne of Law The Altar and Capital Punishment Sacrifice and Responsibility Holiness and Law Law as Warfare Law and Equality The Third Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 75: Duties Required in the Third Commandment Day 76: Sins Forbidden in the Third Commandment, part 1 Day 77: Sins Forbidden in the Third Commandment, part 2 Day 78: Reasons Annexed to the Third Commandment Day 79: Of Lawful Oaths and Vows, part 1 Day 80: Of Lawful Oaths and Vows, part 2 The Oath of Office An Oath is an Act of Religious Worship From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: The Negativism of the Law Swearing and Revolution The Oath and Society Swearing and Worship The Oath and Authority The Name of God The Fourth Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 102: The Fourth Commandment, part 1 Day 103: The Fourth Commandment, part 2 Day 104: The Fourth Commandment, part 3 Day 105: The Fourth Commandment, part 4 From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: The Sign of Freedom The Sabbath and Life The Sabbath and Work The Sabbath and Authority The Sabbath and Law Appendix 4. The Economics of Sabbath Keeping by Gary North The Fifth Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 106: The Fifth Commandment, part 1 Day 107: The Fifth Commandment, part 2 Day 108: The Fifth Commandment, part 3 Day 109: The Fifth Commandment, part 4 Day 110: The Fifth Commandment, part 5 Day 111: The Fifth Commandment, part 6 Day 112: The Civil Magistrate, part 1 Day 113: The Civil Magistrate, part 2 Day 114: The Civil Magistrate, part 3 Day 115: Of The Church, part 1 Day 116: Of The Church, part 2 Day 117: Of Church Censures, part 1 Day 118: Of Church Censures, part 2 Day 119: Of Synods and Councils From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: The Authority of the Family The Promise of Life The Economics of the Family Education and the Family The Family and Delinquency The Principle of Authority The Family and Authority The Holy Family The Limitation of Man's Authority The Sixth Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 120: The Sixth Commandment, part 1 Day 121: The Sixth Commandment, part 2 Day 122: The Sixth Commandment, part 3 - "Capital Punishment" Day 123: The Sixth Commandment, part 4 - "Lawful War" I Day 124: The Sixth Commandment, part 5 - "Lawful War" II Day 125: The Sixth Commandment, part 6 - "Necessary Defense" Day 126: The Sixth Commandment, part 7 - conclusion "National Defense" is unBiblical "Capital Punishment" is unBiblical There is no "Just War" A Politician's Moral Inventory From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: "Thou Shalt Not Kill'' The Death Penalty Origins of the State: Its Prophetic Office See also John Frame's Doctrine of the State “To Make Alive” Hybridization and Law Abortion Responsibility and Law Restitution or Restoration Military Laws and Production Taxation Love and the Law Coercion Quarantine Laws Dietary Rules Christ and the Law Work Amalek Amalek and Violence Violence as Presumption Social Inheritance: Landmarks The Seventh Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 127: The Seventh Commandment, part 1 Day 128: The Seventh Commandment, part 2 Day 129: The Seventh Commandment, part 3 Day 130: The Seventh Commandment, part 4 Family Values: Abortion Adoption Bio-Ethics Taxes Destroy Families Child-Labor Laws Early Education and Child Care Higher Education Education Euthanasia Homosexuality Hospitality Marriage: A God-Ordained Institution "Marriage Amendment" Evangelism and Social Order Pornography Homeschooling Sexuality and Culture Democracy Assassinated the Family Marriage Amendment More Republican Support for Homosexuality Pink Pistols Survey From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: Marriage Marriage and Man Marriage and Woman Nakedness Family Law Marriage and Monogamy Incest The Levirate Sex and Crime Sex and Religion Adultery Divorce The Family as Trustee Homosexuality Uncovering the Springs The Mediatorial Work of the Law The Transvestite Bestiality The Architecture of Life Faithfulness The Eighth Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 131: The Eighth Commandment, part 1 Day 132: The Eighth Commandment, part 2 Day 133: The Eighth Commandment, part 3 Day 134: The Eighth Commandment, part 4 A Politician's Moral Inventory From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: Dominion Theft Restitution and Forgiveness Liability of the Bystander Money and Measure Usury Responsibility Stealing Freedom Landmarks and Land The Virgin Birth and Property Fraud Eminent Domain Labor Laws Robbing God Prison Lawful Wealth Restitution to God The Rights of Strangers, Widows, and Orphans Injustice as Robbery Theft and Law Appendix 3. "Stewardship, Investment, and Usury: Financing the Kingdom of God" by Gary North The Ninth Commandment  Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 135: The Ninth Commandment, part 1 Day 136: The Ninth Commandment, part 2 Day 137: The Ninth Commandment, part 3 Day 138: The Ninth Commandment, part 4 From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: Tempting God Sanctification and the Law The False Prophet The Witness of the False Prophet Corroboration Perjury Jesus Christ as The Witness False Witness False Freedom The Lying Tongue Slander Within Marriage Slander Slander as Theft “Every Idle Word” Trials by Ordeal and the Law of Nature Judges The Responsibility of Judges and Rulers The Court The Procedure of the Court The Judgment of the Court Perfection   The Tenth Commandment    Overview Do I Agree With God's Word? Have I Violated This Commandment? Am I Resolved to Obey it in the Future? How This Commandment was Applied in Early American Law Day 139: The Tenth Commandment Day 156: Aggravated Sins, part 1 Day 157: Aggravated Sins, part 2 Day 158: Aggravated Sins, part 3 Day 159: Aggravated Sins, part 4 Day 160: Aggravated Sins, part 5 From Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law: Covetousness The Law in Force Special Privilege Offenses Against Our Neighbor The System
• View Thesis | Thesis 10: The Priority of Agrarianism	Gary North introduces Ron Paul's Curriculum with a video about the Industrial Revolution entitled "How Did We Get So Rich." It is an interesting debate.
• View Thesis | Thesis 11: Anarcho-Theocracy and the Mountain	The Bible is not just a book about "religion," i.e. liturgies and rituals, nor is it solely a book about law ("thou shalt," "thou shalt not"), even though every verse in the Bible is law. The Bible is also one of the most amazing pieces of literature in human history. It is a vast literary symphony, with recurring symbolic themes or leitmotifs. The "mountain" theme not only solves perplexing riddles of Bible prophecy, but helps us read the Bible like a picture.

View | B. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY BEFORE THE FLOOD

View | C. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY BEFORE SINAI

• Elders as Judges
• View Thesis | Thesis 17: The Post-Flood Absence of The Institutional Church
• View Thesis | Thesis 18: The Patriarchal Power Of “Capital Punishment.”
• View Thesis | Thesis 19: Nimrod: The First Politician (Post-Flood)
• Nimrod: The First Politician
• View Thesis | Thesis 20: Patriarchy vs. Political Slavery
• Nimrod: "Hunter of Men"
• View Thesis | Thesis 21: Demonic Activity At Babel	The Tower of Babel has been an inspiration for the United Nations and European Union, yet students in a Bible-free school might not know anything about the Tower of Babel Tyranny and tower-building receives a great boost from a Bible-free curriculum. The original architect of "The State" was Satan. In the Bible, the archetypal origin of "Politics" and "The State" is The Polis of Babel, usually referred to as the tower of Babel. Yes, there was a "tower," but more important than the tower was the political ideology that built it. The State was a Savior. Genesis 11 4 “Come, let us build ourselves a city.” 5 But the Lord came down to see the city  8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city. In the Septuagint, the Greek word for "city" in Genesis 11 is "polis," from which we derive the English word "politics." Augustine wrote about "The City of God" in contrast to "the city of man." The Polis of Man is the Society of Satan, as Rushdoony observed. The Apostle Paul writes about the City of Man in Romans 13, calling it "the powers," a word which speaks of demonic power everywhere the word is found in the New Testament.
• View Thesis | Thesis 22: The Division of The Nations
• Babel and "The Religion of Humanity"
• The Dispersed Nations of "The Family of Man"	See also: Chapter VII: THE UNITED NATIONS by Rousas J. Rushdoony in The Nature of the American System
• View Thesis | Thesis 23: Evangelism In The Old Covenant	Hospitality Evangelism and Social Order Private Service Creates Public Order
• View Thesis | Thesis 24: Patriarchy, “National Defense,” And Military Socialism	"National Defense" is unBiblical.
• View Thesis | Thesis 25: Anarcho-Theocracy and “Sacraments”: Circumcision
• View Thesis | Thesis 26: The Myth of The “Separation Of Church And State”	They never were. They never can be. more
• View Thesis | Thesis 27: Patriarchy, Precious Metals, and Money	The Bible teaches a commodity standard for honest money. Most of our nation's economic problems would be solved if this issue were dealt with. Secular Austrian economics can tell you that if you pursue Monetary Policy A, you will experience economic effect X, or, if you pursue Monetary Policy B, you will experience economic effect Y. But secular Austrian economists cannot, and they are committed not to, tell you which policy is immoral and will bring the judgment of God on your nation. You need a Bible-based curriculum if students are to avoid the judgment of God. God's Law Concerning Money The Ungodliest Man in the World! Cleansing the Home Usury and Unabombers What About Borrowing? "The Evils of Capitalism" -- Wrong Enemy FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING AND VIOLENCE Usury and Rewarding the Wicked Gary North on Usury, Interest, and Loans THE FREEMEN R.C. Sproul on Debt For Further Reading
• View Thesis | Thesis 28: Salvation is Political	The Federal Department of Salvation

View | D. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY UNDER MOSES

View | E. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY AND THE RISE OF THE STATE

View | F. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY AND PROVIDENCE : THE STATE

View | G. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY AND THE MESSIAH

View | H. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY AND THE EARLY HOME-CHURCHES

View | I. ANARCHO-THEOCRACY IN “THE MILLENNIUM”

Objections

Despite the fact that "governments" have proven to be massively more lethal than "criminals," we still hear the objection that without "the State," criminals will "take over" and "rule the world."

• Again, compare the costs.

People think that any effort to abolish archists is "disrespectful" of "authority." And it's true that some people who are labeled "anarchists" have the attitude that "nobody can tell me what to do." But from a Biblical perspective, humanity will never abolish empires without a massive increase in social morality. There must be a society-wide willingness to accept greater levels of personal responsibility. It's not enough to not be an archist. We must become servants. Society must develop heightened sensitivity and moral aversion to theft, kidnapping, vengeance, and murder before society will abolish the greatest perpetrator of this violence ("the State"). The stereotypical lawless and disorderly "anarchist" will never become a movement and succeed in abolishing archists. He is a wanna-be archist. He wants to impose his vision on society by violent revolution.

• How to abolish the State by increasing social morality

Many people think there are socially necessary services which can only be provided by archists (the "public sector"), and cannot be provided by public, profit-seeking businesses, and public-benefit non-profit charities. In other words, some level of socialism is needed in every society, because capitalism (the Free Market) can't be depended on to provide these valuable services. One such service is the adjudication of disputes. The Bible has a very different view:

• Free Market Dispute Resolution Organizations

What about "national defense?" If our nation abolishes the Defense Department, the Chinese will invade the U.S. and "take over." But Jesus says "national defense" is a sin. "What?!?" is the response. "We're just supposed to allow the commies to enslave us?"

• "National Defense" is a Sin | Being a slave is a virtue

Finally, the most common objection: "What about Romans 13?" We have an entire website on Romans 13 -- www.Romans13.com  In a nutshell, Romans 13 talks about being subject to "the powers," a word which means "demonic forces" every single place where it occurs in the New Testament. Everyone in the world in the days when Romans 13 was written believed that empires were guided by demons, but patriots believed their state-demons were good, and their enemy's were bad. Here is the table of contents:

Romans 13: A Table of Contents

We have devoted an entire website to Romans 13 - www.Romans13.com.   Here are some pages from that website which dig deeper into the background and meaning of Romans 13. They explore God's sovereignty over evil, the work of angelic beings in the Providence of God, and the necessity of abolishing evil in the world, especially the State. These are the lost themes of Romans 13.

We recommend reading them in the order below. The first three pages are foundational. The first page helps us cultivate the heart of a servant and Christian non-archist. The second page is critical to understanding Romans 13, and the reader is urged to spend some time perusing the rest of the pages on that site ("TOTAL Predestination"), particularly the pages on "Baalism" and "Radical Calvinism."

1. Pray for a Servant's Understanding of Romans 13
2. All Evil is Predestined by God
   Reading all these verses puts Romans 13 in a completely new context.
3. Christian "Anarchism" is Our Goal

For those who would like more detail, especially on the cultural background of Romans 13, the following are useful. These essays were written back in the early 1980's, and have not been revised since. We're counting on the reader being delayed by those first three pages (above) long enough for us to get the rest of these pages edited and revised. As you will discover, there are very few original thoughts on this website. Nearly all our ideas are plagiarized from other writers: Reformed, Dispensational, and even secular. Our contribution is putting them all together for the first time. 

4. Angels and God's Throne of Government
   Providence - God Governs through Angels
5. Stars and Idolatry
   God Governs the Evil through demons
6. Why the State Always Encourages Immorality
   Theft, murder, vengeance, fraud, sexual immorality
7. Unlucky 13 -- Romans 13, Revelation 13 and Isaiah 13
   Isaiah 13 and Revelation 13 say the same thing as Romans 13
   The State is evil, but God is sovereign over it.
8. A Roman's-Eye View of Romans 13
   • The State:  The Religion of Man
   • The Liturgical State
   • The Supernatural State
   • The Syncretism of the Universal State
   • The Greco-Roman Background
   • Views of Babylon, Egypt
   • Main Currents in Greco-Roman Statism
          • Power (dunameiV, dynameis)
          • Astrology
          • Monotheism
9. "Principalities and Powers" - Part One: The Old Testament
   • Judaism vs. the Bible
   • The Spirit World of Judaism
   • Deuteronomy 32:8
   • Daniel 10
10. "Principalities and Powers" - Part Two: Powers in the New Testament
    • German Liberals and Conservative Protestants
    • Lords Many and Powers Many
    • Exousiai is plural
11. Lakes of Fire in "Smoke-Filled Rooms"
    • "Demons" (daimones, daimoneV)
    • Pagan Demonology
    • Christian Syncretism 
12. Romans 13: The Burden is on the Archists
    • Romans 13 is Not a Starting Point
    • God's Law is Our Starting Point
    • The State vs. the Family: Monopolization of Powers
    • Why the Decline of Patriarchal Power?
    • If the State is "Ordained," How Can it Be Judged?
13. Taxation, "Consent of the Governed," and the Myth of the State
    • The Myth of "Representative Government"
    • Taxation and Biblical Law - Can the State tax too much?
    • Taxation and "Representation" - Did Christians in Paul's day enjoy representation?
    • Consent of the Self-Governed
14. Why the State is not a "Divine Institution"
    • Some Kind of "Christian Anarchism"?
    • The State and the War of the Powers Against Supernatural Government
    • The State after Nimrod
15. Angels and Autarchy
    • Angelic Government Before the Cross
    • Autarchy and Anarchy
    • Angels Watching Over Me
    • The Church's Witness to the Angels

You'll recognize one of those archists above as Adolph Hitler. Hitler did not kill six million Jews. Name one Jew whom you can prove Hitler killed. Six million Jews were killed by six million Germans who chose to wear a silly uniform, walk a silly goose-step, and follow the orders of a beyond-silly, pathologically evil man. These Germans were archists. They were "ordinary people." Just like you.

If you don't take immediate steps to become an anarchist, then by default you'll be an archist. Plus, you'll be unable to resist the temptations, the bribes, the pressure and the threats by archists to become an archist. You'll become an archist just like those rows and rows of "good" Germans above. They are just like you. You are just like them. "Sensible." "Rational." "Practical."

How To Become a Christian Anarchist

The most important proof of our thesis is simply going through the Bible and inductively putting together a theory of the State. Where did it originate? What does God say about it? The preponderance of the Biblical evidence is anti-State.

A Call for a "Paradigm Shift"

Ninety-Five Theses Against the State

This is where you can get a bird's-eye view of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. You'll see that God never commanded human beings to form "the State."

Here is what a Christian Anarchist looks like after he has joined The Christmas Conspiracy.

Additional studies on Romans 13:

• Romans 13 Intro
• Romans 13: The Text
• Romans 13 From Augustine to Adams
• John Adams and Romans 13
• Romans 13 -- American Government of God
• Romans 13 -- The Founders' Starting Point
• Romans 13 and the American Revolution
• Romans 13 and the "Separation of Church and State"
• Gary North on Romans 13
• Calvin on Romans 13:9-10
• Romans 12 and 13
• Calvin on Romans 13
• Calvin on Romans 13:8-10
• Calvin on Romans 12
• Calvin's Defense of the State
• Commentators on Romans 13
• Romans 12
• Romans 12 text
• Romans 12 Cross-References
• Scandal and Conscience in Romans 13
• John Frame on the State
• exousiai
• hupotasso
• The Doctrine of Providence
• Hiroshima, August 6 / Nagasaki, August 9 -- Resisting the Powers that Be
• The Department of Un-Subjection
• Give Thanks for Slavery and "Subjection"
• Give Nothing Unto Caesar?
• Rushdoony on the Tribute Money
• Jesus and the Tax Revolt
• Anarchist Thursday
• Calvin's Institutes on the Civil Magistrate
  • Book III Chapter 19
  • Book IV Chapter 20
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 1
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 10
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 11
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 12
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 13
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 14
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 2
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 3
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 4
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 5
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 6
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 7
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 8
  • Book IV Chapter 20 Section 9
• Calvin on Romans 12
• Calvin on Romans 13
• Calvin on Romans 13:8-10
• Calvinism and Anarchism
• Calvinism: Source of Democracy?
• Calvin's America
• Calvin's Defense of the State
• Contents: Calvin Thesis files
• Defining "The State"
• God Sends EVIL ! Why Calvinists are Anarchists
• In Defense of the Crusades
• Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
• Outline - Calvinist Anarcho-Theocracy
• Predestination in American History
• PROBLEMS IN EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION
• Prospectus
• Radical Calvinism
• Refuting "the State" by Defining "the State"
• Romans 12 and 13
• Romans 12 Cross-References
• Romans 13 and the American Revolution
• Romans 13:9-10
• Scandal and conscience in Romans 13
• The Biblical Prohibition of Vengeance
• THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS THE DIVINE ORDINATION OF GOVERNMENT: The Parallels
• "Private" Vengeance and "Public Justice."
• A Prima Facie Case for Biblical Anarchism
• Anarchism: Chaos or God's Law?
• Bibliography - Calvinist Anarcho-Capitalism
• The Myth of Private Religion
• The Old Testament and the New America
• The Structure of the Book of Romans
• The Thesis in Broader Perspective
• VIOLENCE AND THE STATE: Why the Prince of Peace was an Anarchist
• Guns in Churches
• Pay Your Taxes!
• MLK Murder (see second half)
• On Overthrowing Governments
• North Korea
• Can Christians Rebel Against Government?
• "The State" Defined
• The Consent of the Governed
• Romans 13 Through History
• God "ordains" and "sanctifies" EVIL "for our good."
• Romans 12-13 and the American Revolution
• A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers by Jonathan Mayhew
• Christian Anarchism vs. The Westminster Confession
• Government and the Lex Mercatoria
• The year is 2017
• Death Penalty Debate - "Separation of Church and State"
• Does Jesus Command His Followers to Take Up a Sword?
• Biblical Examiner Examined - Bill Gothard and the Civil Magistrate
• Response to "Brother"
• Sanctions in an Anarcho-Capitalist Theonomic Utopia
• Can Christians Rebel Against Government
• Romans 13 and the Myth of Legitimate Government
• The State as "Minister of God"
• Is War Ever "Just?"
• The Sixth Commandment "Thou Shalt Not Kill" -- Except by Majority Vote
• Romans 13 | "Give Nothing Unto Caesar?"
• The Department of Un-Subjection | The CIA has successfully and unsuccessfully attempted to overthrow numerous foreign governments. Is this a violation of Romans 13?
• Give Thanks for Slavery
• Hiroshima, August 6 / Nagasaki, August 9
• Romans - Chapter 13 - Geneva Study Bible [analysis coming soon]

Patriarchy and Providence

• THESIS 30: AS WITH ALL ANGELIC ACTIVITY, NO STATE ACTION IS COINCIDENTAL OR RANDOM
• THESIS 46: ROMANS 8:28 AND THE STATE
• THESIS 47: GOD'S SOVEREIGN ORDERING OF EVERY STATE
• THESIS 49: THE STATE SERVES GOD BY SINNING
• THESIS 49: THE STATE AS SANCTIFIED “SERVANT” / “DEACON” / “MINISTER”
• THESIS 50: THE STATE DOES NOT SERVE GOD SELF-CONSCIOUSLY
• THESIS 51: ONLY ONE KING SELF-CONSCIOUSLY SERVES GOD
• THESIS 52: JUDGMENT OF THE STATE IN HEAVEN AND EARTH
• THESIS 53: MOLOCH-WORSHIP AND THE NATURE OF IDOLS
• THESIS 54: WAR AND “THE SWORD”

 Anarchism and Submission to the Evil Empire

Vine & Fig Tree: A World Without "The State"

Other important angles:

• Capital Punishment
• Pacifism

Archive: View an earlier version of this website: August 3, 2001

Please leave your Romans 13-related comments here. (Vine & Fig Tree does not endorse any political candidates.)

The Biblical Doctrine of "Salvation"

The Fall of Man

Man's basic sin against God is the desire to "be as gods."

Genesis 3
⁴  And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
⁵ For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

An aspect of this rebellion is the desire to get something for nothing, or something without working for it. (James Jordan has argued that Adam and Eve would eventually have been allowed to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, but they were required to work for it first and earn it.)

This is a major motivation for forming "the State" and conquering other people. (The other one being vengeance.)

God is man's Governor. Man rejects God's Government by desiring to be his own governor.

God punishes man for his rebellion by granting him his wishes. When man lusts for political power, God gives it to him.

Then in His mercy, God saves the repentant sinner by delivering him from the political disease.

If we obey God's commandments, we will not have war; God will not send "the sword" against us.

I will argue below that peace is possible only in a state of "an-archy," that is, the absence of "archists." This too is a "paradigm shift."

When we disobey God's Law, God sends archists as a judgment/curse against us.

We see this repeatedly in the Scripture. Israel lusts after gentile archists (false "gods," like Moloch, which means "king"). God delivers Israel into the hand of these false gods, these pagan archists, and Israel cries out for deliverance, and God delivers them by sending a deliverer, or "savior" or "judge" who "saves" Israel from the pagan archists.

Here's how Nehemiah sums up Israel's history of rebelling against God's Law and then being "saved" from the consequences of their disobedience:

Nehemiah 9:23-31

²³ Thou also multipliedst their children as the stars of heaven, and broughtest them into the land, concerning which thou hadst promised to their fathers, that they should go in to possess it.

²⁴ So the children went in and possessed the land, and thou subduedst before them the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, and gavest them into their hands, with their kings, and the people of the land, that they might do with them as they would.

²⁵ And they took strong cities, and a fat land, and possessed houses full of all goods, wells digged, vineyards, and oliveyards, and fruit trees in abundance: so they did eat, and were filled, and became fat, and delighted themselves in thy great goodness.

²⁶ Nevertheless they were disobedient, and rebelled against thee, and cast thy law behind their backs, and slew thy prophets which testified against them to turn them to thee, and they wrought great provocations.

²⁷ Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.

²⁸ But after they had rest, they did evil again before thee: therefore leftest thou them in the land of their enemies, so that they had the dominion over them: yet when they returned, and cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and many times didst thou deliver them according to thy mercies;

²⁹ And testifiedst against them, that thou mightest bring them again unto thy law: yet they dealt proudly, and hearkened not unto thy commandments, but sinned against thy judgments, (which if a man do, he shall live in them;) and withdrew the shoulder, and hardened their neck, and would not hear.

³⁰ Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testifiedst against them by thy spirit in thy prophets: yet would they not give ear: therefore gavest thou them into the hand of the people of the lands.

³¹ Nevertheless for thy great mercies' sake thou didst not utterly consume them, nor forsake them; for thou art a gracious and merciful God.

God sent Israel many "saviors." When Bible-believers think of a "savior," they think of someone who will save Israel "out of the hand of their enemies." The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph, and said:

Matthew 1:18-23

Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.

A first-century Jew, steeped in the Scriptures, would hear this as a promise to save "His people" from the consequences of their sins, the curses imposed on them by God because of their rebellion against His Law. John the Baptist's father "Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying"

Luke 1:67-80

⁶⁸ “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
⁶⁹ And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
⁷¹ That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
⁷⁴ To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
⁷⁵ In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.
⁷⁹ To guide our feet into the way of peace.”

The Babe born in Bethlehem saved Christians in the first century from their enemies: the Jews who collaborated with Rome. Then the Rock destroyed Rome, and has filled the earth with Christian Civilization -- The City of God. The growing and filling continues.

Consider this classic Christmas text:

Luke 2:8-20

⁸ Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. ⁹ And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. ¹⁰ Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. ¹¹ For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. ¹² And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.”

¹³ And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying:

¹⁴        “Glory to God in the highest,
              and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

What would a first-century Israelite think if an angel of the LORD announced the coming of a "savior?" They would doubtless think back to all the saviors in the [Old Testament] Scriptures. Those saviors did not just promise a ticket to heaven when everyone died. They promised to save Israel from the consequences of her sins. Those consequences included "the Sword." Freedom from the sword is one aspect of the holistic Biblical concept of Salvation, and one of the benefits of a Biblical savior. The savior brought the benefits ("blessings") of obedience upon a people who had not been obedient, but who had repented of their disobedience.

"Salvation" is holistic/cultural/economic, not just a ticket to heaven when you die. We'll see this below in more detail.

In the Bible, "Savior" = "Deliverer" (Deliver from evil, from enemies)

1. evil/enemies were raised up by God as "punishment" or incentive to repent
2. evil/enemies are the consequence of unrepentant sin
   1. idolatry - false religion
   2. political alliances with pagans
   3.  trusting in violence/archism
3. Deliverance from evil = saved from sins (and the consequences of sin, which are God's judgments)

Jesus was a Savior in this Biblical tradition. He came to bring Salvation. He came to save His people from their enemies, so they could get on with the work of building the New Jerusalem.

The name "Jesus" comes from the Hebrew word Yhowshuwa', which is derived from yasha', which is the Hebrew word most frequently translated "salvation."

A Biblical "Savior" Brings Biblical "Salvation"

The Hebrew word in the Bible

Read every one of these verses. If possible, read them in the paragraph in which they are found. For each occurrence ask yourself, "Does salvation in this verse mean going to heaven when I die, or does it mean being free from archists?"

What is "Salvation" in the Bible?

Not "What is 'salvation' in the minds of most professing Christians?"

What does the Bible say?

The Hebrew word most frequently translated "salvation" or "save" is yasha'. In various derivatives it can be translated "deliverance," "victory," "safety," "security," and "welfare." (The Greek equivalent also carries the idea of "health.")

What does the government promise? We have a Department of Health, a Welfare Department, a Department of Homeland Security -- all components of the Biblical concept of "salvation." "The Government" (a.k.a. "civil government") is always a substitute for God. God is our Governor (Isaiah 33:22), and He brings salvation.

The Hebrew word for "save" or "bring salvation" is "yasha." Here is how a very mainstream, non-anarchist scholar defines that Hebrew word:

I admit that I say many controversial things. That definition is not one of them. It is thoroughly Biblical. That's a very conservative, mainstream reference work. Let's look at it in more detail.

Consider first the phrase "safety and security necessary to maintain life." This is also the "safety and security necessary to maintain a prosperous and humane society." In order to go to WalMart and buy a shopping cart full of food and household accessories, there has to be a global network of businesses who create and transport millions of products by making billions of economic calculations and transactions. Millions of human beings have to get to work on time, run the trucks on schedule, choose to work instead of stealing and robbing, and work the graveyard shift so that when you get to the store, all the items you want are neatly arranged on the shelf in an order which makes it possible for you to quickly find what you need and get on with life.

Who should we trust for "safety" and "security?" What does the Bible say?

The Bible repeatedly says that if we obey God the Lawgiver by loving our neighbor through productive service, God our Judge and King will "bless" us with peace and prosperity. "Peace" means "safety" and "security." These are all components of the Biblical picture of holistic "salvation."

But there are those who want to supplant God the King by promising to give us salvation if we will vote for them.

• "safety" is part of holistic Biblical "salvation"
  • the government has a "National Highway Traffic Safety Administration."
  • it also has an Occupational Safety and Health Administration
  • there's the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
  • don't forget the Consumer Product Safety Commission
  • I'm sure you check the government's FoodSafety website every day, just like Betsy Ross, Dolley Madison, and Abigail Adams used to do.
• "security" is part of "salvation"
  • we've been trained to think the government provides "National Security."
  • or " Homeland Security
  • or Social Security (not)

False gods Promise a False Salvation

When Israel rejected the government of God and lusted after Gentile archists, God delivered Israel into the hands of her archist lover/idol. Then Israel cried out for deliverance from these archists. This deliverance is the doorway through which we can gain a larger understanding of the Biblical doctrine of "salvation."

Most Christians think "salvation" means "going to heaven when I die." They focus on a tiny fraction of the Bible, and ignore the vast majority.

"Salvation" -- in the vast majority of Biblical texts -- means "anarchism." "Salvation" means a "libertarian" society. Some would call it an "anarcho-capitalist" society.

The Libertarian Party requires party members to affirm but one proposition:

I do not believe in or advocate
the initiation of force
as a means of achieving political or social goals.

People who will not make this pledge are "archists." They believe they have a right to impose their will on other people by force, usually by "the sword" -- political or military power.

Being an "archist" is un-Christian (Mark 10:42-45). We are not to spread Christianity with the sword. We are not to vote for archists who promise to bring salvation.

"Safety" and "security" are blessings from God, not government. We enjoy "safety" and "security" when our nation is Christian and observes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," that is, the Bible. Nobody enjoys "safety" and "security" when the government becomes a tyranny which bans the Bible and people behave like pagans.

• The Bible promises that as Christianity pervades a society, even pagans will start acting like Christians.
• Then we will all enjoy "salvation."
•  Jesus is "the savior of all men, especially those who believe." 1 Timothy 4:10 (see below)

Here are other key descriptions of Biblical "salvation," according to our mainstream source above:

• being placed in a "wide" space
• having "sufficient" quantities of things needed (God's Covenant promises more than you "need")
• opposite: having your options "narrowed"     \   Q.: Who does these things?
• opposite: being "restricted"                             | A.: Archists
• opposite: experiencing "distress"                   /   "Blessing" = "salvation" = freedom from archists
• "the ability to pursue one’s own objectives" without someone else telling you what to do and imposing their will on you by force
• living life unafraid of "dangers" [dangerous people, i.e., archists who threaten your liberty and prosperity]

The Bible describes "salvation" as being placed onto a large piece of property that supplies everything you need:

• Psalm 118:5 
  I called upon the LORD in distress: the LORD answered me, and set me in a large place.
• 2 Samuel 22:20 
  He brought me forth also into a large place: He delivered me, because He delighted in me.
• Genesis 26:22 
  He moved from there and dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it; so he called it Rehoboth, saying, “Now the LORD has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.” 
• Hosea 4:16 
  For Israel slideth back as a backsliding heifer: can now the LORD feed them as a lamb in a large place?
• Psalm 31:8 
  and hast not delivered me into the hand of the enemy; Thou hast set my feet in a broad place.
• Psalm 18:19 
  He brought me forth also into a large place; he delivered me, because he delighted in me.
• Psalm 66:12 
  Thou hast caused men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water: but thou broughtest us out into a wealthy place.
• Psalm 69:35
  For God will save Zion, and will build the cities of Judah: that they may dwell there, and have it in possession.

In the Bible, Godly men are shown to be concerned about living in a “large” land. Of course, in a more agrarian society, “large” is better, as far as land goes. But when God promises to save us by putting us into a “large land,” it’s clear that more is included than going to heaven after living for decades in a narrow land before we up and die. What is the modern equivalent of a “large land?” It varies from person to person, but it includes some form of economic prosperity and political Liberty. “Liberty” and “large” are Biblical concepts we are not familiar enough with. Let’s review them and put them in our brains, so that as we read the Bible we will be more aware of them.

• Genesis 34:21
  “These men are at peace with us. Therefore let them dwell in the land and trade in it. For indeed the land is large enough for them. Let us take their daughters to us as wives, and let us give them our daughters.
• Exodus 3:8
  So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites.
• Judges 18:10
  When you go, you will come to a secure people and a large land. For God has given it into your hands, a place where there is no lack of anything that is on the earth.” 
• 1 Chronicles 4:40
  And they found rich, good pasture, and the land was broad, quiet, and peaceful; for some Hamites formerly lived there.
• Nehemiah 7:4
  Now the city was large and spacious, but the people in it were few, and the houses were not rebuilt.
• Nehemiah 9:35
  For they have not served You in their kingdom,
        Or in the many good things that You gave them,
        Or in the large and rich land which You set before them;
        Nor did they turn from their wicked works.

One of the blessings promised to the obedient in the Bible is "liberty."

• LEVITICUS XXV.X (25:10)
  proclaim liberty throughout all the land to all its inhabitants.
• Psalm 119:45
  And I will walk at liberty,
           For I seek Your precepts.
• Isaiah 61:1
        “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me,
        Because the LORD has anointed Me
        To preach good tidings to the poor;
        He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
        To proclaim liberty to the captives,
        And the opening of the prison to those who are bound; 
• Jeremiah 34:8
  This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people who were at Jerusalem to proclaim liberty to them:
  Jeremiah 34:15-17
  15 Then you recently turned and did what was right in My sight—every man proclaiming liberty to his neighbor; and you made a covenant before Me in the house which is called by My name. 16 Then you turned around and profaned My name, and every one of you brought back his male and female slaves, whom you had set at liberty, at their pleasure, and brought them back into subjection, to be your male and female slaves.’
  17 “Therefore thus says the LORD: ‘You have not obeyed Me in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother and every one to his neighbor. Behold, I proclaim liberty to you,’ says the LORD—’to the sword, to pestilence, and to famine! And I will deliver you to trouble among all the kingdoms of the earth.
• 2 Corinthians 3:17
  Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
• James 1:25
  But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.
• James 2:12
  So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

"Liberty" means "freedom." But "freedom from what?" In the pages of the Bible, the answer is almost always: "freedom from archists."

One of the blessings promised in Leviticus 26 is "peace," or freedom from those who bear the sword. Those who bear the sword are archists. They are also called in the Bible "enemies."

Of course, "freedom from" is always for the purpose of "freedom to" -- freedom to serve and obey the Lord.

The name "Jesus" comes from the Hebrew word Yhowshuwa', which is derived from yasha', which is the Hebrew word most frequently translated "salvation." "Jesus" means God will save. It was said of Jesus at His birth:

Luke 1:71  

That we should be saved from our enemies
and from the hand of all that hate us;

74 That He would grant unto us, that we
being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve Him [exercise dominion and build His Kingdom] without fear [living under our "vine and fig tree" "with no one to make them afraid" (Micah 4:1-7)]

This is what "salvation" means in the Bible.

The specific enemies Christians had in the first century were of the Jewish establishment, but I believe Jesus the Messiah will save us from our enemies today -- whoever they may be, whenever we live -- if we obey God's Law.

"But isn't the real meaning of salvation 'being forgiven of your sins and going to heaven when you die?'"

Most church-goers ask this.

Forgiveness of sins = restoration to fellowship with God,
Forgiveness of sins = restoration to our original Edenic Mandate to build the Kingdom of God.

Forgiveness of sins is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

The overwhelming majority of Christians today agree with Jews who say that Jesus is not the Messiah. The vast majority of Christians believe that Jesus will not reign as Messiah until there is a second Christmas -- a second Advent, or "second coming of Christ" -- which is really the first coming of the Christ, since at His first Advent Jesus came only as "savior," -- that is, someone who secures for us a ticket to heaven when we die -- and not as "Christ" -- that is, someone who delivers us out of the hand of our enemies, sets us in a wide open place, opens the bounties of heaven, and makes our land like Eden, so we can enjoy a  “Vine & Fig Tree” society.

Many Christians in our day say that the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, therefore He could only offer to be their Savior. This is so confused it's hard to know where to begin.

1. Most Jews accepted Jesus as Messiah; only the corrupt upper-crust establishment rejected Jesus (Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7; 12:24; 19:20; 21:20; Matthew 13:31-33; John 12:24,42; 3:2; 11:45; 19:38; Colossians 1:6).
2. Jesus' claim to be a "savior" (i.e., to forgive sins [but not to punish sins as a Messiah would]), was considered blasphemous by the Jews who rejected Jesus as Messiah (Matthew 9:2-8; Mark 2:3-12, Luke 5:18-26)
3. Just because someone does not want Jesus to reign over him as Messiah is no impediment to Jesus (Luke 9:14,27). Jesus reigned as Messiah over the apostate Jews by directing Titus to destroy those who rejected Jesus as Messiah with the Roman legions in AD 70.
4. There is no Biblical distinction between a "Messiah" and a "Savior."
   Most Christians today say Jesus came 2,000 years ago only as "Savior," and only when He comes again (in our future) will He reign as "Messiah." But if you look at how the Scriptures use the words "save" and "savior," you can easily see why no 1st-century Jew would have understood such a distinction. It is not in the Bible. In the Scriptures, "saviors" did the work of "messiahs." We saw above how Nehemiah says God sent many "saviors" to Israel after they became dissatisfied with their Gentile archist lovers:

   Nehemiah 9:27

   Therefore Thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies that vexed them: yet in the time of their affliction, when they cried unto Thee, Thou heardest them from the heaven, and through Thy great mercies thou gavest them saviors, who saved them out of the hand of their adversaries (cp. Luke 1:71,74).

   The idea that Jesus is only a "savior" but not the Messiah is is not a Biblically tenable position. There is almost no hint in the Bible that any "savior" would do nothing to "save" his people in this life, but only in the next.

There is no Biblical support for the idea that the Messiah can only reign over those who give Him their permission. The Old Testament prophets spoke of a Messiah who would

• "break in pieces the oppressor" (Psalm 72:4)
• "shall judge among the nations,
  He shall fill the places with dead bodies,
  He shall execute the heads of many countries." (Psalm 110:6)
• with righteousness He shall judge the poor,
  And decide with equity for the meek of the earth
  He shall strike the earth with the rod of His mouth
  And with the breath of His lips He shall slay the wicked. (Isaiah 11:4)
• He shall judge between many peoples,
  And rebuke strong nations afar off; (Micah 4:3)
• "Yes, all kings shall fall down before Him;
  All nations shall serve Him." (Psalm 72:11)
• "I will beat down his foes before his face,
  And plague those who hate him." (Psalm 89:23)
• The Lord said to my Lord,
  “Sit at My right hand,
  Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
  The Lord shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion.
  Rule in the midst of Your enemies! (Psalm 110:1-2)
• There I will make the horn of David grow;
  I will prepare a lamp for My Anointed.
  His enemies I will clothe with shame,
  But upon Himself His crown shall flourish.” (Psalm 132:17-18)

In fact, Jesus destroyed His enemies in A.D. 70, laying waste the city of Jerusalem, while saving the remnant who believed Him. The Jewish historian Josephus recorded the horrifying judgment on unbelieving Jews in his writings on the Jewish wars and destruction of Jerusalem, in which the Jews, under relentless protracted siege by the Roman armies, resorted to cannibalism before Jerusalem was completely destroyed (Deuteronomy 28:52-57). The Jews thought the Messiah would destroy the enemies of the Jews -- the unclean pagan conquering Roman gentiles. It turned out that the Messiah's enemies were the Jews themselves.

Even if Jesus was never described as "Messiah," but only as a "savior," the word "savior" in the Scriptures is virtually synonymous with "messiah."

• The Biblical word for "savior" is also translated "deliverer," and the "judges" are called "deliverers" and "saviors" (example: Nehemiah 9:27).
• The prophet Obadiah (verse 21) said, "Then saviors shall come to Mount Zion, To judge the mountains of Esau, And the kingdom shall be the LORD’s." 
• But the "judges" were also "rulers," who "judged" (governed) Israel very much like "kings," and the word "messiah" means "anointed," as in "king."
• So there really is no Biblical difference between a "savior" and a "messiah-king." A "savior" is also a "governor." Jesus was made messiah and king at His first coming 21 centuries ago, not just "savior."
• More details?

One of the first acts of Jesus' reign as Messiah was destroying Jerusalem. And Jesus the Christ has been reigning as Messiah ever since.

Obviously, unbelieving Jews do not agree with that last sentence -- and with the thousands of Jews in Acts 2 who did.

The vast, overwhelming majority of people who are found in a church building on Easter Sunday agree with the unbelieving Jews.
    Most church-goers do not believe that Jesus is the Christ today.

• They believe Satan is in control; "Alive and Well on Planet Earth" (according to a book that sold millions of copies).
  • Maybe they believe that Jesus has the "right" to be the Christ
  • Maybe they believe that Jesus offered to be the Messiah, but the Jews rejected His offer, so He had to settle for offering them a ticket to heaven when they die. (An offer they also reject, because who wants to spend eternity hanging out with a deluded con-man who falsely claimed to be the Messiah and rejected the Law and the Prophets [held dear by the Jews]?)
    He could only be the "Savior" of the Jews, but not their "King."
  • Most likely the Easter Sunday crowd believes that Jesus will someday ("soon") become the Messiah, when He comes again, a second time. In the future.
• But they all agree that Jesus is not -- today -- reigning as Messiah (exercising His rightful powers at full level, high-octane, on "the throne of David," and bringing all those verses above to fulfillment). The Messianic reign is for tomorrow, not today.
  • (Why do they call themselves CHRISTians instead of JESUSians? Why do they celebrate CHRISTmas instead of JESUSmas?)

I would like to suggest that Jesus is in fact fulfilling those Messianic Prophecies, and understanding why this is true can revolutionize your faith.

Most Christians are pessimistic about the future. Up ahead: "The Great Tribulation," "Armageddon," and "One World Government" under "The Antichrist."

Easter is actually a message of tremendous optimism about the future: "Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end" (Isaiah 9:7).

Most Christians are pessimistic about the ability of human beings to live in peace.

Easter is the message that Jesus is "the Savior of all men, especially those that believe" (1 Timothy 4:10). A "savior" is one who brings "salvation," which (in the Bible) is the peaceful “Vine & Fig Tree” society. When we work and pray for peace (1 Timothy 2:1-2; Matthew 6:10; Micah 4:3), Jesus changes the hearts of politicians and generals (Proverbs 21:1; Proverbs 16:7).

Most Christians believe that Jesus must sit on a throne in Jerusalem in order to bring about "millennial" conditions.

Easter is the "good news" that Christ has been creating "millennial" conditions for 2,000 years. Prophets like Isaiah, Micah, and Jeremiah would be astounded at what the Messiah has accomplished thus far. The crucified Jesus was made "Lord and Christ [Messiah]" when He was raised up to the right hand of our heavenly Father (Acts 2:36). Israel was sinfully mistaken when they said they needed a king on an earthly throne like the gentile nations (1 Samuel 8).

How do you see the world?

"OK, but what about peace? Wasn't the Messiah supposed to bring about "peace on earth" (Luke 2:14)?"

A Harvard Professor recently wrote a controversial article entitled "Why is there Peace?" The controversy is not over his answer ("Why") but over his claim ("There is Peace").

We are all victims of educational malpractice. We don't know history as we should. We don't see the stunning contrast between human life before the Advent of the Messiah, and human life today. The world before Jesus the Christ was a world of savage violence caused by insane rebellion. Some historians suggest that a third of all human beings died violent deaths, or had their lives shortened by the effects of continued violence. Israel was a dim light in the darkness. You have to be insane to be God's Chosen People and still go whoring after golden calves and dumb idols, sacrificing your own children to the political saviors these idols represent. Idols were the political equivalent of a red hat that says "Make Assyria Great Again."

Today, in the Age of the Messiah, most people die peacefully. It is a dramatic contrast. Isaiah and Jeremiah would see it immediately if they could travel through time from their day to ours. We are not grateful for the remarkable change that Jesus has wrought. Are you waiting for the Messiah to come, so that He can rule from the Throne of David, so that you can live in a world of amazing beauty and calming peace, with prosperity so unimaginable that you fall to your knees every morning in gratitude to God? Are you unable to see the evidence that Jesus is the Christ today?

"Saviors" in the Old Testament served what we could call primarily "messianic" functions." Biblically speaking, "savior" is virtually a synonym for "messiah." And "Messiah" is a political term, that is, a term that does not have primary reference to us after death, but reference to our lives today, in their holistic cultural, social, political, civil, economic, recreational, and legal dimensions.

A "Messiah" brings political changes. A "savior" brings "salvation." But the Biblical definition of "salvation" is not just a short-term relief on the battlefield, but long-term liberty from archists. See the definition of the Hebrew word for "salvation," yasha, which we looked at above.

A true "savior" is the Messiah who brings Christian civilization, that is, "salvation" over the long haul, now over twenty centuries.  See the five books listed here: Christian civilization. (That's an important link.)

Jay Wile writes (An Interesting Observation from China | Proslogion):

Recently, I read an article by Dr. Paul Copan entitled, “Jesus-Shaped Cultures.”¹ In that article, he makes the case for how faithful Christians have transformed the societies they have served. For example, he discusses the Ethiopian famine that took place in 1984 and 1985. Brian Stewart, a CBC journalist, noted that it was Christians who were on the front lines of the famine, giving aid to the suffering. Their service was such a powerful witness to him that it started him on his journey to becoming a Christian himself.

While Copan’s article is interesting, it led me to a book that I thought was even more interesting. It is entitled Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity Is Transforming China And Changing the Global Balance of Power, and it is written by David Aikman, who served as a journalist for Time Magazine from 1971 to 1994. In his role as a Time correspondent, he visited China several times and even lived in China for two years as Time’s bureau chief. He returned to China in 2002 to gather the information he needed to complete his book.

He begins the book in a dramatic way. It is worth quoting at length:²

The eighteen American tourists visiting China weren’t expecting much from the evening’s lecture. They were already exhausted from a day of touring in Beijing. But what the speaker had to say astonished them.

The Victory of Reason Listen Now | Download

“One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world,” he said. “We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next, we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West has been so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.”

This was not coming from some ultra-conservative think tank in Orange County, California or from Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia. This was a scholar from China’s premier academic research institute, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) in Beijing in 2002. (emphasis mine)

In his book, Aikman suggests that Christianity will transform China to the point where it won’t even be communist anymore. He suggests that in the next thirty years, nearly one-third of China could be Christian, making it one of the largest Christian nations in the world and a strong ally of the U.S.

2. David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity Is Transforming China And Changing the Global Balance of Power, pp. 5-6

See also: The Iona Institute | Christianity the reason for West's success, say the Chinese

In asking whether Habakkuk's prophecy has been or is being fulfilled, and whether the knowledge of God covers the earth as the waters cover the sea, don't ask those who should admit that they know the Lord; ask the Scriptures whether they ought to admit it. Sometimes they won't, but many times they will. Truth is truth, whether we admit it or not.

Today, the Chinese are "streaming" to Zion (Micah 4:1-2). So are people in Latin America, Africa, and even India, according to Philip Jenkins. Humanity has been flowing to Zion for 2,000 years, but the rate may be accelerating. This phenomenon is not yet on the radar of archists. It will dramatically increase when Christians become widely recognized as a Dispute Resolution Forum. It will exsanguinate the State by doing so.

Jesus is the Savior of the World

John 4:42
Then they said to the woman, “Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.”

1 John 4:14
And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.

John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

John 3:17
For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

Isaiah 45:22
“Look to Me, and be saved,
All you ends of the earth!
For I am God, and there is no other.

1 Chronicles 16:23
Sing to the Lord, all the earth; Proclaim the good news of His salvation from day to day.

Psalm 65:5
By awesome deeds in righteousness You will answer us, O God of our salvation, You who are the confidence of all the ends of the earth, And of the far-off seas;

Psalm 67:2
That Your way may be known on earth, Your salvation among all nations.

Psalm 74:12
For God is my King from of old, Working salvation in the midst of the earth.

Psalm 98:3
He has remembered His mercy and His faithfulness to the house of Israel; All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.

Isaiah 45:8
“Rain down, you heavens, from above, And let the skies pour down righteousness; Let the earth open, let them bring forth salvation, And let righteousness spring up together. I, the Lord, have created it.

Isaiah 49:6
Indeed He says, ‘It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.’”

Isaiah 49:8
Thus says the Lord: “In an acceptable time I have heard You, And in the day of salvation I have helped You; I will preserve You and give You As a covenant to the people, To restore the earth, To cause them to inherit the desolate heritages;

Isaiah 51:6
Lift up your eyes to the heavens, And look on the earth beneath. For the heavens will vanish away like smoke, The earth will grow old like a garment, And those who dwell in it will die in like manner; But My salvation will be forever, And My righteousness will not be abolished.

Isaiah 52:10
The Lord has made bare His holy arm In the eyes of all the nations; And all the ends of the earth shall see The salvation of our God.

Acts 13:47
For so the Lord has commanded us: ‘I have set you as a light to the Gentiles, That you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth.’”

2 Corinthians 5:19
that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

1 John 2:2
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.

1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

1 Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Romans 5
17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one;
21 even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

John 6:33
33 For the bread of God is He which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

When the Lord spoke to Isaiah and the prophets, that He would save the whole world, was He announcing a doctrine of "universalism," that every individual would go to heaven when he died? Even universalists would say no -- provided they understand the prophetic meaning of the concept of "salvation." That is, even if eternal paradise after death has been granted universally to all individuals, that's not what the prophets were talking about when they foretold the "salvation" of the entire world.

In the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, "salvation" means what economist Murray N. Rothbard described as "anarcho-capitalism" -- a vibrant global network of commerce liberated from the "strife," "war," and coercive regulatory "domination" of the City of Man. The economics of the New Jerusalem rather than the Old Babylon.

Contrary to amillennialists like Michael Horton, Christians best "serve" the world by helping to "save" it. For "serve" see here. For "save" see here. "Save the world" does not mean "preserve the world in a state of rebellion against The City of God." It means convert the whole world into the City of God. "In earth as it is in heaven" (Matthew 6:10).

The Origin of "Civil Government"

The Bible is an infallible history of the human race and the origin of "Civil government."

 "The State" has its origin in rebellion against God and conquest of other human beings.

Nowhere in His inscriptured Law does God command any society to form an empire or a State or a "civil magistrate." 

We must agree with James Benjamin Green who, in his exposition of the chapter on the Civil Magistrate in the Westminster Confession of Faith rightly observes (concerning Romans 13:1), "It is not meant that God directly ordained the state by saying to man, Thou shalt set up a government or organize a commonwealth."

Romans 13 doesn't mean that because it never happened. God never commanded anyone to form "the State."

"The State" was invented by rebels against God. They did not want God as their king. They believed they have some moral right to impose their own will on others by force or threats of violence. drew the distinction between "Economic Man" -- who produces goods and services for a living -- and "Political Man" -- who confiscates the productivity of "Economic Man" for a living.

The Bible is opposed to this, from cover to cover.

Sociologist Franz Oppenheimer, in his book The State: Its History and Development Viewed Sociologically, distinguishes between "Economic Man" and "Political Man."

• "Economic Man" takes natural resources and transforms them into something more useful to human beings, and under a division of labor, trades most or all of what he produces for the fruit of the labor of others. Both producers in such a voluntary trade are better off than they were before the trade.
• "Political Man," on the other hand, uses force to seize the wealth produced by "Economic Man." This was the operating ideology of Imperial Rome. "Political Man" creates "governments" to impose their own will on others by force or threats of violence.

Here is an excerpt from Albert Jay Nock and the Libertarian Tradition - Jeff Riggenbach - Mises Daily

One such question was, what is the nature of the state? Where did it come from? If the state was in fact useless for the purpose of improving human society what was it in fact good for? So he wrote a book. It's called Our Enemy, the State. It came out in 1935, after being delivered as a series of lectures at Nock's newly renamed alma mater, Bard College. Our Enemy, the State is a true libertarian classic, one of those books you simply must read if you have any serious interest at all in the libertarian idea. The state, Nock wrote, did not originate in the common understanding and agreement of society; it originated in conquest and confiscation. Its intention, far from contemplating "freedom and security," contemplated nothing of the kind. It contemplated primarily the continuous economic exploitation of one class by another, and it concerned itself with only so much freedom and security as was consistent with this primary intention; and this was, in fact, very little. Its primary function or exercise was … maintaining the stratification of society into an owning and exploiting class, and a propertyless dependent class. The order of interest that it reflected was not social, but purely antisocial; and those who administered it, judged by the common standard of ethics, or even the common standard of law as applied to private persons, were indistinguishable from a professional-criminal class. … The positive testimony of history is that the State invariably had its origin in conquest and confiscation. No primitive State known to history originated in any other manner … no primitive State could possibly have had any other origin. Moreover, the sole invariable characteristic of the State is the economic exploitation of one class by another. Nock quotes the German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer, who described the typical primitive state, in respect of its origin, as an institution "forced on a defeated group by a conquering group, with a view only to systematizing the domination of the conquered by the conquerors, and safeguarding itself against insurrection from within and attack from without. This domination had no other final purpose than the economic exploitation of the conquered group by the victorious group." Nock wrote, Any considerable economic accumulation, or any considerable body of natural resources, is an incentive to conquest. The primitive technique was that of raiding the coveted possessions, appropriating them entire, and either exterminating the possessors, or dispersing them beyond convenient reach. Very early, however, it was seen to be in general more profitable to reduce the possessors to dependence, and use them as labour-motors. … [This] modified technique has been in use almost from the beginning, and everywhere its first appearance marks the origin of the State. … The State, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing. In essence, then, "taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class." After all, Nock argued, there are two and only two means of making a living in this world. There's the economic means — earning it. And there's the political means — seizing it from someone else who has earned it. The state, Nock said, is "the organization of the political means." Does this sound familiar somehow? Does it sound, perhaps, like the rhetoric of Mr. Libertarian, Murray N. Rothbard? Nock had an immense influence on Rothbard. He also had an immense influence, apparently, on another major figure in the contemporary libertarian movement, Ayn Rand. According to Anne C. Heller, whose biography of Rand, Ayn Rand and the World She Made, was published about a year ago, it was the theory Nock had adapted from Franz Oppenheimer that inspired Rand to write The Fountainhead.

Happy Birthday Franz Oppenheimer

Franz Oppenheimer was born on March 30, 1864 in Berlin; he died September 30 1943 in Los Angeles. This is not the Oppenheimer associated with the Atomic Bomb. Our Oppenheimer exposed the mythology of the "social contract" theory of the State, by showing its roots in conquest and violence.

Oppenheimer started out as a physician. Then he studied economics and wrote his PhD dissertation on David Ricardo. After accepting a call to serve as Chair for Sociology and Theoretical Political Economy at Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt/Main (the first chair dedicated to Sociology in Germany) a cooperative agricultural community of individual farms (called a "Moshav") was founded by Jews using Oppenheimer's blueprint. Oppenheimer later taught in Palestine. He fled Nazi persecution to Los Angeles, and became a founding member of The American Journal of Economics and Sociology.

Oppenheimer's book The State looks at the origins of this political entity:

"The State, completely in its genesis, essentially and almost completely during the first stages of its existence, is a social institution, forced by a victorious group of men on a defeated group, with the sole purpose of regulating the dominion of the victorious group over the vanquished, and securing itself against revolt from within and attacks from abroad. Teleologically, this dominion had no other purpose than the economic exploitation of the vanquished by the victors." 

"No primitive state known to history originated in any other manner. Wherever a reliable tradition reports otherwise, either it concerns the amalgamation of two fully developed primitive states into one body of more complete organisation, or else it is an adaptation to men of the fable of the sheep which made a bear their king in order to be protected against the wolf. But even in this latter case, the form and content of the State became precisely the same as in those states where nothing intervened, and which became immediately 'wolf states'." (p. 15)

Economic Man and Political Man

Oppenheimer made the compelling observation:

"There are two fundamentally opposed means whereby man, requiring sustenance, is impelled to obtain the necessary means for satisfying his desires. These are work and robbery, one's own labor and the forcible appropriation of the labor of others. Robbery! Forcible appropriation! These words convey to us ideas of crime and the penitentiary, since we are the contemporaries of a developed civilization, specifically based on the inviolability of property. And this tang is not lost when we are convinced that land and sea robbery is the primitive relation of life, just as the warrior's trade - which also for a long time is only organized mass robbery - constitutes the most respected of occupations. Both because of this, and also on account of the need of having, in the further development of this study, terse, clear, sharply opposing terms for these very important contrasts, I propose in the following discussion to call one's own labor and the equivalent exchange of one's own labor for the labor of others, the “economic means" for the satisfaction of needs, while the unrequited appropriation of the labor of others will be called the "political means." (pp. 24-25)

Albert Jay Nock introduced these concepts to American readers in his own book Our Enemy, the State.

h/t Wikipedia

The Demonic Origin of "the State"

Start with the essay "Stars and Idolatry" in the Romans 13 essays above.

Then see how the Bible consistently refers to the State as "evil."

More:

• View | Thesis 12: The Fall Of The Angels
• View | Thesis 16: The Demonic Roots of Violent Tyranny
• View | Thesis 21: Demonic Activity At Babel
• View | Thesis 22: The Division of The Nations
• View | Thesis 30: As With All Angelic Activity, No State Action Is Coincidental or Random
• View | Thesis 35: Angels And The Pedagogical Legal Structure
• View | Thesis 41: The Character of “gods” || More here (much more)
• View | Thesis 48: The State "Serves" God by Sinning
• View | Thesis 53: Moloch-Worship and the Nature of Idols
• View | Thesis 60: Christ’s Binding of Satan
• "Unlucky 13": Isaiah 13, Romans 13, Revelation 13
• A Romans-Eye View of Romans 13
• "Principalities and Powers"
• "Principalities and Powers" - part 2
• Lakes of Fire in "Smoke-filled Rooms"
• View | Thesis 69: Sons of God and Pedagogues
• View | Thesis 83: Pedagogy and The Powers
• View | Thesis 84: The End of Archists: The Pedagogues Judged by the Church

Table of Contents

That's probably the nuttiest thing you've ever heard.
• No Bible-believing Christian you've ever met believes the Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto."
• Even anarchists don't think the Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto."
If I can convince you that the Bible is an "Anarchist Manifesto," you and I may well be the only two people on planet earth who believe that.

A few years ago, I never heard anyone suggest that the Bible endorses anarchism. Do you know anyone else who claims that the #1 agenda item on the "To Do" list of the Church (I mean, "The Body of Christ") is to eradicate all "civil governments" from the face of the earth?

But if I had heard someone say that years ago, I would have laughed at that insane proposition, or I would have thought that such a person was a person of bad moral character, a dangerous person I should not listen to, a "wolf in sheep's clothing." Even an "antichrist."

But today, I am the dangerous person my Pastor warned me about.

But I think my Pastor was wrong, and I am a better Christian, a more Biblical Christian, for concluding that the Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto.

I think if I share my path with you, how I became a Bible-believing anarchist, what changed my mind from believing that "governments" are a good thing to believing that "governments" are the worst thing human beings have ever invented, you might change your mind as well, and become a Bible-believing anarchist.

But I totally get it. Right now you think "Bible" and "Anarchist" are total opposites.

Most people have heard that the main idea of the Bible is "How to go to heaven when you die."
Nobody has heard that the main idea of the Bible is that we should abolish all "civil governments."

Most of the 30,000 verses in the Bible are not about going to heaven when you die.
Most of the 30,000 verses in the Bible are about idolatry, and especially the most dangerous idol: "The State."

I'm not saying that the Bible doesn't say anything at all about how to go to heaven when you die. But if you earnestly desire the existence of a "civil government," you won't be happy living for eternity in heaven with the God who wrote the Bible. Because The Bible is an Anarchist Manifesto. The God of the Bible does not want human beings to have "civil governments." The Bible says having an earthly governor is a rejection of God as Governor, and a form of idolatry. Are you sure that's the god with whom you wish to spend eternity?

Most of the Bible is the history of the rise of "the State," and prophecy of its decline and future eradication.

Vine & Fig Tree
Taney County, MO
65731-0179
[e-mail to V&FT]
[V&FT Home Page]
[About KC]