A Challenge to Public Debate

I, as a Christian Anarchist,
hereby challenge
you, as a Christian or a secular defender of the concept of "the State"
to a public debate.

If you agree to the terms, I will pay you $1,000, whether you win or lose.
(Plus half of the internet and book royalties.)

The topic:

Resolved:
That the Concept of "The State" is
unBiblical, Immoral, Unethical, Impractical,
and Should Be Repudiated.

This will be the most remarkable exchange of ideas you have ever participated in.

The terms:

1. I will support the resolution, you will oppose it.
2. The debate will be an email debate.
3. I have the right (which I will exercise) to publish the email debate as a website. You will have a chance to view the website before it is uploaded to the Internet, and I will honor nearly all of your editorial requests (with the exception of your groveling plea not to publish your embarrassing defeat at all). I will honor reasonable requests to correct typographical errors, bibliographic references, and even to sharpen up your side of the debate with overlooked examples and arguments, and to eliminate your many logical fallacies. I want you present the clearest possible defense of "the State," so I don't end up wasting my time refuting a strawman. You have similar rights to internet publication.
4. The debate will be published as a book, in the spirit of #3 above, terms to be agreed upon.
5. You must commit to contribute a minimum of 10 letters, with a minimum average of 500 words and 10 bibliographic references or hyperlinks per letter.
6. You are welcome to cut and paste from your previous work when you feel it advances your chances of winning the debate. This does not have to be new material, just the best material.
7. The spirit of this debate is educational, not partisan. The goal is to help readers become better Christians, better Americans, better human beings; it is not to attack one political party over another. (But attacking all political parties equally is acceptable.)
8. I reserve the right to select an opponent based on more than academic qualifications, but on marketability. A more popular author may be selected over an obscure but brilliant scholar. A good-looking writer may be selected over a more intelligent but ugly one. An intelligent rock star may be selected, for example, if one can be found. I want to draw more hits to the website when it is completed, and sell more copies of the book, in the hopes of advancing the goal in No.7 above.

The Form of the Debate

I propose discussing the following five subjects. You will propose five subjects of your own:

1. The origin of "the State": An invention of evil men for evil purposes. "The State" is not "ordained" (approved) by God.
2. "The State" violates the Commandments of God in the Hebrew-Christian Bible.
3. "The State" is the most dangerous, most violent criminal organization on the planet.
4. "Anarcho-Theocracy" best represents the genius of America's Founding Fathers.
5. The "Depravity of Man" and the "Kingdom of God."

I will begin with my first subject, you must respond within 10 days. I may respond if I feel like kicking a dead horse (also within 10 days). You may but need not respond. Subsequent rebuttals at the debaters' convenience.

You will then inaugurate a discussion of your first subject. I will respond within 10 days. You may respond as a desperate act of recovery (also within 10 days). I may but need not respond. Subsequent rebuttals at the debaters' convenience.

I will then post my second presentation, and we will rotate through the opening 5 presentations.

Formally speaking, your only obligation is one response to each of my five subjects and five presentations of your own. In the educational spirit of the debate, it is hoped you will be motivated to submit at least one rebuttal beyond these opening presentations, but they are not required. A lengthy, protracted, but enthusiastic, witty, enlightening, and encouraging debate is hoped for.

Whoever wants the last word gets the last word, until death do us part.

My Qualifications -- My Positions

Why should you invest your time debating me? What exactly is my position, anyway?

Fair questions.

Who I Am

I am the founder and webmaster for Vine & Fig Tree, Inc., a non-profit educational organization that has been promoting Christian anarchism for over 20 years. Vine & Fig Tree has nearly 1500 webpages on the Internet. The name "Vine & Fig Tree" comes from the Old Testament prophet Micah, and is described here.

My Argument Against the State

I will lay out my position so there will be no surprises. Here are the 5 subjects I would like to cover.

1. The origin of "the State": An invention of evil men for evil purposes. "The State" is not "ordained" (approved) by God.
   1. A survey of Biblical history: God nowhere says 'Form "the State."'
   2. Motives for forming "the State" were never legitimate.
   3. Romans 13: The most disastrously misunderstood Biblical text in history! Its profound influence in Western political thought.
2. "The State" violates the Commandments of God in the Hebrew-Christian Bible.
   1. Thou shalt not steal
   2. Thou shalt not kill
   3. Manstealing
   4. Vengeance
   5. Exercise Dominion
3. "The State" is the most dangerous, most violent criminal organization on the planet.
4. "Anarcho-Theocracy" best represents the genius of America's Founding Fathers.
5. The "Depravity of Man" and the "Kingdom of God."

These links should help you anticipate how I will respond to your counter-arguments.

What's In It For You?

$1,000. That's 50 of those colorful new Federal Reserve Notes with Old Hickory's computer-morphed face on them.

But wait . . . there's more!

How much more? How much more do you want? You see the value of this project but $1,000 isn't enough? Name a price. I'll stage a fund-raiser. I hope to recover your fee from book royalties.

If you don't see the value of this project, I can't blame you.

I have to admit, I'm desperate to find someone who'll debate me. If you defend the State, you won't consider exposing the myths that support it a good thing. Giving people an invitation to re-think the legitimacy of "the government" is not high on your list of priorities. And since the Vine & Fig Tree website is a radical call for personal responsibility, self-sacrifice, and a denunciation of the statist principle of living at the expense of others, it is too radical to ever be wildly popular. Without your help, my influence will be limited. But I'm going to keep working at it, and I'll be targeting YOUR readers, so you might as well debate me now. If you're optimistic, you might be saving us both a lot of time. Eventually my position is going to win out and become the dominant paradigm.

Already "anarcho-capitalism" is a growing ideological movement on the web.

If you have never heard of Vine & Fig Tree or its vision of "Anarcho-Theocracy," you're in for a roller-coaster ride. If your first impression is that it's a "10" on the nut-scale of 1-10, if you peruse the links above you'll eventually conclude it's a "10" on the really-interesting-and-probably-beneficial-new-ideas scale. Perhaps before the debate even begins, you'll have switched from debating me as an adversary to joining me as an advocate.

• If you're a conservative and you long for smaller government, you need to ask yourself why government has been growing at an exponential pace in the last 100 years.
• If you're a liberal and you want social needs taken care of, you need to ask yourself why Americans have become more ingrown, self-centered and individualistic over the last 100 years.

The Vine & Fig Tree vision is the only answer to both questions.  "Anarcho-Theocracy" is the maximization of the ideal that made America the greatest, most admired nation on earth: "Liberty Under God." Conservatives like "Under God" but not "Liberty." Liberals have an etymological relationship to "Liberty" but look to the Messianic State for social salvation and fear the God of "fundamentalism." "Liberty Under God" means compassion, not indifference, nurtured by persuasion, not coercion. The Vine & Fig Tree vision motivated America's Founding Fathers, though not in as consistent an expression as ours.

I recognize that you have more status than I do, and that your participation in this debate will make the website and book a success. I will be personally grateful for your participation, and a courteous and  gracious debater. Truth and understanding are advanced through the clash of competing ideas.  You have never faced competition like this.

My Invitation List