The Instigator
IRAconspiracy
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
headphonegut
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Christian Anarchy is Just and Peaceful

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/10/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,835 times Debate No: 16395
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (14)
Votes (0)

 

IRAconspiracy

Pro

The first Round is just for those who want to accept the debate and lay down some rules and definations and Questions
Rules:
1) No video links
2) No wikipedia
3) Reliable Sources Only

Definitions:
Christian Anarchy:
The definition of Christian Anarchism does not mean a social choas by those who beilive in God. It is not to provoke a revolution by christians. There is not human head only a God head. (1)

Government:
Ayn Rand defines the State/Government as a legal monopoly on the use of physical force over a given geographical area(2)

Extras, Questions, Notes:
only accept this if you are intersted in this debate and are serious about it.

Sources:
1) http://christianandstate.wordpress.com...
2) http://aynrandlexicon.com...
headphonegut

Con

Define Just, peacful, and christian anarchism
can you expound on your definition of Government

please give a clear and concise definition

I accept your challenge

We will be debating whether or not Christian anarchy in practice (I assume) is just and peaceful or if you're talking about it in theory please say so.
Debate Round No. 1
IRAconspiracy

Pro

First to make things clear is my definitions:
Just- meaning expedient, based on whats right, done by truth (1)

Peaceful- Free from War. (2)

Christian Anarchy- does not mean a social chaos by those who believe in God. It is not to provoke a revolution by Christians. There is not man head but a God head, which means God is the only true ruler for us no other governments. Christian Anarchist are against all forms of government except the direct government of God. Although there are some things we are not against in government which i will discuss in my argument.

Government- I will use Ayn Rand's definition of a government/State- which is again a legal monopoly on the sue of physical force over a given geographical area (3)

I will affirm that all governments should be ablosished. Christian Anarchy is thought to be contradictory by many because they think christians can not be anarchist. This is a false interpretation because the only true christian is an anarchsit. We are not against church government or family government or voluntary agreement between equals. The form of government that we are against is the state which is a legal monopoly on the use of physical force over a given geographical area. Examples of the resolution being true would be the Old Testament period of the Judges, Hitler's government should have been supported, and what Paul truley meant through Romans 13. I will argue that Christian Anarchy is Biblical and Just and Peaceful. First we will aruge that the Old Testament nation of Israeil under the judges is an example of Chrisitan Anarchy. Scripture agrees with this. There is no where in scripture where God establish the State government although he does establish church and family government. God teaches us that he has everything we need for good works( 2 Tim 3:17) then if a state was neccessary for our society doing good then God would have established this institution, which He did not. The only form of government that was established in the Old Testament was the Israelite Covenant this was completely voluntary and it depended upon the voluntary actions of the people. There was no Central Government to enact and enforce the laws or collect the tithes (taxes). God command the Iraelites to give their first fruits to him in the temple. This tithe was up to the people to bring to the temple. In the Deuteronomy code there was no authority that would come and take your first frucits, if you did not brin them voluntarly. There was no tax/tithe police. Thus according to what has been stated God himself established a anarchy.
Second the state government is a failure and is unjust according to the apoostle Paul. Many Chrisitans of today are using Romans 13:1-10 as a form of where God had establish a state government power. If you were to interpret the passage in this mannor, then we would have to support Hitlar's institution. If Hitler would have succeded in his goals and was ruleing us now then there would be no remains of the Jewish people and others as well. God teaches that all humans are equal and that he loves each one of us equal. This would be saying that innocent people such as the Jews would have been forced to death. This action is unjust to what God teaches, that we are to love each other as Christ loved the church and treat each person with respect and have no hatred towards any man we all are equals. Paul intended this passage to mean that the government is only their to punish the crimes of murder, theft, adultery, fraud, and covetousness. Any state government which goes beyond what this has been mandated, goes beyond Saint Paul had authorized the government to do and they are also unjust in their ways. Therefore we should seek more peaceful and moral ways to organize society. Chrisitan Anarchy provides the only just way that is peaceful and moral. Therfore Christian Anarchist are the only true christians of the faith.

(1)http://dictionary.reference.com...
(2)http://dictionary.reference.com...
(3)http://aynrandlexicon.com...

I wish Good luck to my opponent.

~~Vote Pro~~
headphonegut

Con

thank you.

first what about the people who aren't christians?

It isn't anarchy when you're worshiping somebody when you do whatever that one person tells you to do. In fact I would say god established a form of totalitarian gov't. people bringing him their goods sounds like god has figured it out threaten with death and give a chance at eternal life hell maybe I should be christian. :p

My opponent said "Examples of the resolution being true would be the old testament period of the judges, HITLERS GOV'T SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED, and what paul truley meant through romans 13."

As I understand it weren't judges imposing authority and didn't they rise to power during times of war like military leaders? the books says they gave up their power when it finished but I think it's lying maybe it was like the romans they put someone to power during times of war like Caesar unfortunately for them he never gave up that power.

R1
The idea of anarchy I like to believe from time to time isn't that of rebellion or that of defiance it's wanting to have a sense of freedom from a gov't that either oppressive or moronic. Wanting to abolish all gov't and implement a system of "god" a being that supposedly made a bet with the devil to see if a man would still worship him after god took everything away. The man lost everything and god won a bet god sounds like a hella of a guy.
Debate Round No. 2
IRAconspiracy

Pro

IRAconspiracy forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

headphonegut forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
IRAconspiracy

Pro

IRAconspiracy forfeited this round.
headphonegut

Con

blah blah blah blah blah
Debate Round No. 4
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by medic0506 5 years ago
medic0506
A Christian communist??...Interesting
Posted by headphonegut 5 years ago
headphonegut
what is your definition for ChristianAnarchy
Posted by headphonegut 5 years ago
headphonegut
what is your definition for ChristianAnarchy
Posted by IRAconspiracy 5 years ago
IRAconspiracy
Thanks for accpetion Headphonegut if you have questions or any parameters for the debate that you would like to add post it in round 1 Round 2 starts the debate good luck
Posted by bigpoppajustice 5 years ago
bigpoppajustice
......lol Ayn Rand.
Posted by CrazyRepublican 5 years ago
CrazyRepublican
yes but wikipedia alows people to post any info they want regardless if its right or not.
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
Do you know how many "sources" people use that would not fly in court?
Posted by IRAconspiracy 5 years ago
IRAconspiracy
Wikipedia was said to be an unreliable source according to the United States Judiciary branch.(1)
Any person can post on wikipedia it can be written by anyone.

(1)http://www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us...
[FootNote 3 Is where this is said]
Posted by CrazyRepublican 5 years ago
CrazyRepublican
any moron can post stuff on wikipedia lol thats whats wrong
Posted by chickenquiff 5 years ago
chickenquiff
whats wrong with Wikipedia??? LOL!
No votes have been placed for this debate.