If the government were to begin taking away our means of defense, how would we defend ourselves while still respecting the principles of the non-aggression principle? We want to be prepared for the worst-case-scenario, but as liberty-loving Christians we are still called to avoid violence at all costs.

If the U.S. were to be attacked again in the manner of Pearl Harbor or 9/11 what would be the best way to retaliate? Our history tells us to fight back for revenge; however, Christians are called to act differently by avoiding violence at all costs. Individually, we can each make the decision to reject the sins of the state by not participating or encouraging bloodshed.

Why is there such a difference between the Libertarian Party and the Mises Institute? Libertarianism has many sects within it that disagree with one-another due to their differing views on how liberty should be established in society. Mostly, the split occurs with groups favoring incrementalism or pragmatism. But we all can work together as libertarians to achieve liberty.

Why has the Church and its leaders followed the pandemic mandates when we are taught not to live in fear? Living in fear is not equivalent to precaution. By following mandates, though legislated and enforced by the state, we are showing respect for each person’s health around us. The Church has faced multiple pandemics in its history, which is pointed out in N.T. Wright’s book God and the Pandemic. How can we as Christians act in times full of crisis?

If we were to live in a libertarian society, who would take care of the orphans, elderly, sick, and poor? Would it be left to private charity, volunteers, and/or monetary support; and could the Church undertake such a role? We are confident that there are plenty of good people in society who still care about the wellbeing of others. The state is not the only guarantor of wellbeing or progress - in fact, it is highly inefficient. Charity increases with prosperity; therefore, a healthy free market could possibly cure the issue at hand.

Should Christians be pacifists? The topic of violence and our interaction with it as Christians is a difficult subject to tackle. Defense is technically allowed within the framework of the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP). As followers of the Prince of Peace we are called to act like our Savior, what does that mean for our security when met with aggression?

Audio Production by Podsworth Media - https://podsworth.com

Does pledging allegiance to something such as a nation or flag have an object or subjective meaning? As Christians we should solely pledge allegiance to the Kingdom of God and his desires; however, as we discuss there may be particular situations in which an individual can make a pledge. But just like everything else, it may not be initially wrong intrinsically, if the oath or pledge of allegiance encourages sinful behavior it should be avoided.

In today's episode of the Faith Seeking Freedom Podcast we were asked if we saw a correlation between the moral degradation in America and the suppression of Christianity in the public school system. A lot of people have seen America as slowly declining; however, politics should not be our main focus of cultural integrity. Instead, as Christians, we should strive to be beyond politics, and influence a more positive environment in times of social-instability. In conclusion, we should not look to politics (or the state) as the moral compass of a society.

Have you ever wondered, “if we had never left the Garden of Eden, and we lived in a ‘pre-fallen world,’ would profit still exist?” For today’s episode of the Faith Seeking Freedom Podcast we discuss the ethics of profit, the motive behind profit, the economics of charity without sin, and how resources may work in a pre-fallen system.

We tackle the question of how we as Christian libertarians - who make political decisions based on their religious principles - explain to non-believers why faith can never be completely left out of politics. As we point out, everyone on this planet has some sort of religion that influences our decisions - whether that be an idol, ideology, religion, etc… Thankfully, both libertarian and Christian ethics disregard coercion as a method for making people accept a certain set of principles.