The term Christian Anarchist tends to lead to some raised eyebrows, assumptions, and often times serious accusations. Preconceived notions and varying definitions can leave statist Christians and non-theist anarchists alike wondering how “anarchy” could possibly be compatible with Christianity. Greg Koukl from Stand to Reason attempts to address this topic in his youtube video published in 2014 titled “How Do You Engage in Conversation with a Christian Anarchist?” 

This is in no way an attack on Greg Koukl or his apologetics organization. Stand to Reason is an excellent resource for learning apologetics whether you are wanting to explore the topic for your own enrichment or learn how to respond to skeptics. This “how to engage” tutorial is a common theme for Greg. His most popular book is called Tactics and is not a traditional apologetics book as its focus is how to communicate– how to initiate conversations and speak truthfully when defending the faith. Whether or not you are familiar with Greg, his book Tactics, or the organization Stand to Reason, we see that this video is presented by someone who is well educated and well regarded. We’d like to lovingly and directly address the concerns Greg raises in this video about Christian anarchy as we evaluate the relationship between the Christian and the state. 

The following is a transcript from Episode 81 of the AnarchoChristian Podcast

Greg Koukl: Apparently, somebody has been having a conversation with a person who identifies themselves as a Christian anarchist and wants to know how to proceed effectively. I’m chuckling because I guess I’ve heard of such things now that I think about it, but it strikes me as odd, because an anarchist is somebody who does not believe in government broadly. I guess there are different types of anarchists and stuff…. 

AnarchoChristian: Here Greg is beginning to define anarchists. We don’t have an objection quite yet, but it’s worth noting that this is a “how to engage” video that opens with “I guess I’ve heard of such things.” Obviously, there isn’t anything at all wrong with not having heard of Christian anarchism. However, before most people start a “how to” video, especially when speaking from a place of authority and knowledge on a subject, they typically do some research first. AnarchoChristian started as an effort to put more resources out there about the concept of Christian anarchism. Of course, all of that was after this 2014 video was published, but there were other resources out at that time. Christian anarchism isn’t as popular as things like Christian nationalism, but it isn’t a new concept by any means. 

Greg Koukl: I guess there are different types of anarchists and stuff. I don’t know exactly the nature of this particular anarchist, but just taking the notion at face value…. doesn’t it strike you as somewhat oxymoronic, like contradiction in terms to have a Christian anarchist? 

AnarchoChristian: This is a common objection. Christian anarchism is perceived as an oxymoron, and as he clarifies, a contradiction in terms. This is understandable given the Mirriam-Webster definition. The dictionary defines it as “a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (such as cruel kindness).” Greg goes on to explain how Christianity is contradictory to anarchy. We will have a look at his words and then address the objection. 

Greg Koukl: The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch, all right? So, Christians are disciples of Christ. A disciple is a disciplined follower. That is somebody who’s under somebody else, okay? And that person is not just under Christ, but Christ came proclaiming the kingdom of God– the king over his domain. The king-dom. King-domain. That’s law, right? That’s authority, so the Christian is someone who has come back under the government of God as it <is> appropriately construed in the New Covenant period. So, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, so from the beginning of our story we have a king and his domain. We have a kingdom. That’s the basic theme of the Bible, and that kingdom suffered a rift when Adam would disobey God and went off on his own. Anarchist! 

Adam became an anarchist. “I want to do it myself.” Human autonomy out from underneath the authority of God, and the appeal of the New Testament– of the entire Bible really, is an appeal for restoration of that proper relationship. A man under God’s authority, back in the kingdom of God, or the king of heaven; different ways to express the same thing. And so, we are called back to the kingdom first by walking through the door Christ provides, because we are rebels and we’re under need of forgiveness, and we get forgiveness through Jesus, and that brings us then back under the appropriate authority of God and we are walking under that authority. And so, Christians can’t be anarchists by definition because they are under God’s authority. 

AnarchoChristian: Here, there are a few things we can address. Admittedly “anarchy” does have a few definitions out there. One of the best clarifications comes from a letter J.R.R. Tolkien wrote to his son, in which he says: 

“My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs)” 

There are some fantastic observations from Tolkien in this letter. Click here to learn more.

Greg is showing his definition to be in line with a lot of the Anarcho-Communists which can be summed up as anti-hierarchical. Google has a good concise definition here: “a system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority.” This isn’t a very good way to look at anarchism, and it’s a conversation worth having with the AnCom types. 

The term anarchy is made up of two Greek root words – “an” meaning without, and “arkhos” meaning ruler. This is why we need to be very careful how we define things and then add to them by assuming other qualities about the term. Anarchy just means “no ruler,” and specifically the ruler is someone who will excise governance, control, or sovereignty over another person or persons. The reason why we shouldn’t read hierarchy into this is because hierarchies do not necessarily imply a ruler. This ruler claims control over another individual. 

There are a million ways we could imagine representative government. We all know that this authority can and usually does include the perceived authority of that ruler to initiate violence over those under its rule. Coercive taxation and the prosecution of victimless crimes are the easiest examples. The most common victimless crimes are violations of state licensing, and drug and alcohol use. These are crimes where there are no victims, yet one can be thrown into a cage or even killed for committing them. This sort of thing is inherent to a ruler even though they may vary, but they are not inherent to a hierarchy. For example, if you have a group of individuals that have voluntarily gathered together and look to a certain individual to make certain decisions based on their experience, they have created and participated in a hierarchy without there necessarily being a ruler. These sorts of rankings of authority do not require coercion. Authority can be simply based on knowledge and experience, like a certain scholar is an authority in his field. 

This means that we have disciples, as Greg said a “dedicated follower” or someone “under” someone else; in this case, under Christ. There is no theological issue here, and it certainly isn’t oxymoronic or contradictory. We’ve already shown that the anti-hierarchical perspective isn’t necessarily part of the anarchism definition. But here we are looking at the presentation of Christ as a ruler. We have covered this a few times on the podcast. (Check out Episodes: Is Christianity Compatible With Anarchism, and No King But Christ)

Anarchy is not referring to the spiritual. Even though “no gods, no masters” is a common phrase in the atheist anarchist community, it is a mistake for an objective definition of anarchy. The best way to look at it is like this: Anarchy is only referring to a horizontal relationship – this relationship of rule between man and man. Anarchy is not referring to the vertical relationship between God and man. 

God is obviously over man in every way. What the atheist anarchist phrase of “no gods, no masters” is saying (and what Greg is repeating) is that anarchy somehow has something to do with the vertical relationship. Similar to the Greek roots of the term anarchy, we already have terms that relate to the vertical. Those are “atheism” or “theism.” Theism coming from the Greek “theos” meaning God, and the “a” prefix again denoting without. “Theos” would not be used for the horizontal relationship, just as “archy” would not be used in reference to the vertical relationship. 

It is not contradictory to have a Christian anarchist. 

Even though Greg just taught these definitions objectively, he will quickly brush off this man vs God distinction, to bring us another objection. Let’s continue… 

Greg Koukl: Somebody might say, “Yes, but that’s God’s authority, not man’s authority and so man’s authority is expressed in governments and so I don’t have to obey those governments. I could be kind of on my own or whatever.” 
And I said, “Wait a minute. Where did government come from?” Governments are ordained by God for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right among other things. 

AnarchoChristian: And here we have a loose paraphrase reference to Romans 13. We’ve talked quite a bit about Romans 13 at AnarchoChristian, but let’s continue and address the whole argument. 

Greg Koukl: Governments aren’t just out there somewhere doing their own thing. I mean as an institution, obviously. Many governments are doing their own thing, but as an institution God gave governments and this is why we’re told over and over and over again. And if you want a couple of references just look at 1 Peter chapter 2 and chapter 3 I believe, or maybe chapter 4, but chapter 2 has a lot about it. Submit therefore to the governor, to the king, all in authority, so that by doing the right thing you can silence the objectors— basically is what Peter is saying. 

AnarchoChristian: As usual, we are dealing with presumptions people have about the text. Let’s break it down. First, this idea that God ordaining government necessarily means that the government is somehow godly or righteous. This really presents a conflict when someone who has this assumption has to wrestle with the simultaneous observation that not all governments are good. Greg begins to struggle with this logic in the video when he says, “Governments aren’t just out there somewhere doing their own thing. I mean as an institution, obviously. Many governments are doing their own thing, but …” 

In our No King but Christ episode, we go further into a biblical understanding of God setting up and using wicked rulers to further His plans for His people.

The second presumption is that being “subject” in either Romans 13 or 1 Peter 2 means some sort of allegiance or approval of that government. Being subject here is being under subjugation, which is far from some sort of participation or allegiance to these states or governments. 

Check out the Romans 13 link and associated episodes for a deeper dive into these verses and concepts. 

Greg Koukl: The nature of Christianity is to be under authority. First under God’s authority and then those authorities that He has ordained like government, like parents, like pastors. That’s also by the way in 1st Peter chapter 5. So, we have throughout scripture in a couple of very, very significant places, we have references to authorities we are to be under, and one of those authorities is government. 

AnarchoChristian: Again, we need to examine the nature of being under this authority. We are told that we are sojourners and exiles and under subjugation. 

Greg Koukl: There are some exceptions to obedience to government, but in general we’re to obey. The exceptions are exceptions and other kinds of authority and all of these things represent expressions of the authority of God. 

AnarchoChristian: There are definitely biblical accounts of God’s people disobeying authority and practicing what we would call civil disobedience. We addressed them in episode 24, Obey God Rather Than Men, which comes from Peter in the book of Acts. 

Acts 4 and 5 have Peter jailed for disobeying the authorities and continuing to preach. 

Daniel 3 conveys the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego refusing to worship the golden statue of Nebuchadnezzar and being thrown into the fiery furnace. 

Daniel 6 has the story of Daniel disobeying worship laws and being thrown into a lion’s den. 

We also know that eventually all but one of the Apostles are killed for preaching the Gospel. Some of Paul’s writings were from prison.

So yeah, there are exceptions and they aren’t something small. To further a narrative that commands obedience to worldly government, all of these “exceptions” are quickly passed over or ignored. 

But let’s go ahead and finish this up with his closing comment that brings us all the way back to our first point. 

Greg Koukl: So, hence, Christian anarchist. Where does that come from? I don’t get it. 

AnarchoChristian: Teaching objectively about a subject and book ending your lecture with “I guess I’ve heard of such things” and “where does it come from? I don’t get it,” presents a very flawed teaching. It does a disservice for anyone really looking for education on that subject. 

In four and half minutes, Greg never actually gets to anything that explains the title “How Do You Engage in Conversation with a Christian Anarchist.” Not only did he not give an accurate explanation of Christian anarchism, because as he said, he “didn’t know and didn’t get it,” he didn’t demonstrate how to engage this thing he didn’t get. Engagement is often accomplished by simply asking questions to better understand a philosophy, its definitions, and flesh out any inconsistencies. By doing that you might skip making a case that’s made up of incorrect assumptions about the individual. 

Greg showed what he thought were inconsistencies but we didn’t hear any example of how to engage with that information. Unfortunately, he also leaves the listener with his condescending chuckles to emulate. This is generally a bad idea if you’re looking to engage any person with an ideology you don’t agree with. 

Perhaps this is more likely a simple mistake of an inaccurate title, but it is inaccurate none the less. While this video makes somewhat of a failure to connect, it does encompass some of the most common objections and assumptions that you will hear from both Christians and non-theist anarchists. Hopefully you can use the resources presented here to lovingly and honestly interact with someone who may or may not be under the tutelage of Greg Koukl and attempts to “engage” with you, the Christian anarchist.

____________________________________
This has been a transcript from Episode 81 of the AnarchoChristian Podcast