I am a Christian anarchist (this already implies, at the very least, that I subscribe to : natural law and associated private property norms, the libertarian non-aggression principle, praxeology, Austrian economics, Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism, voluntaryism and the idea that the State is to be abhorred and eschewed as a wholly evil institution). This note is my attempt to capture in summary form, in logical succession, what I mean by words like ethics, law and morality, as well as other derivative concepts. These thoughts are a synthesis of what I have learned in the tradition of Bastiat, von Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt and Rothbard.
NATURAL CONDITION : The natural condition of human life and of nature is one of resource scarcity and poverty. If one did nothing at all, one would die. Christians ascribe this to the curse (banishment from need-free Paradise to an earth cursed with thorns, which requires work in order to mold nature into products that sustain us and enable us to thrive -- the cultural mandate of subduing/stewarding/ruling over creation).
CONFLICT and the desire for PEACEFUL (NON-VIOLENT) RESOLUTION : A fact of life, as one goes about this business of living in society, is conflict over scarce natural resources. In the animal kingdom, conflicts are resolved via fights to the death or threats thereof. This is also one possible mode of operation in human societies. However, history, personal experience and intuition, has taught us that this mode of operation results in unending blood-shed and wars, spread over generations, resulting in misery for all over the long-term (regardless of short-term happiness variously enjoyed by current victors). This leads to the desire for a different system of conflict resolution.
ETHICS & LAW : This desire for conflict reduction/avoidance leads to the birth of ETHICS : an inter-subjective BUT objectively communicable and objectively observable standard for deciding peacefully, i.e. non-violently, b/w parties in conflict (who is in the right, who is in the wrong, and what just restitution and recompense ought to be from the guilty party to the victim). When codified, we call it LAW. (Note : Objectively communicable/observable standards of ethics and codified law may be either objectively good or evil -- and we will return to that separate point later). There are two related requirements for an ethical system or law in order to optimize it for the goal of conflict resolution : (a) it needs to provide the same answer to a case question before a judge, regardless of the power inequality b/w plaintiff and defendant; i.e. even if the plaintiff and defendant were to exchange roles (such that the formerly powerful one is now the weaker party; the adjudication should not change or be influenced by that), and (b) internal logical consistency : if an ethical system is logically inconsistent, then, judicial answers to questions can change based on which of the conflicting principles are applied. If either or both of these aspects are violated, the law based on that ethical system becomes either meaningless and unenforceable OR it becomes arbitrarily enforceable, in which cases, might makes right --> leading back to a state of conflict, thereby, defeating the purpose.
NATURAL LAW (also, MOSAIC MORAL LAW / LIBERTARIAN ANARCHIST NON-AGGRESSION PRINCIPLE) : A particular ethical system, that is posited to be both internally logically consistent and power-indifferent, may be built from a few foundational axioms, chief among them being : (a) it is wrong to take the life of a person who has not initiated aggression, (b) it is wrong to take property of person who has not initiated aggression. In addition to these two, we add praxeology, argumentation ethics and Lockean homesteading principles to determine what exactly constitutes the property of a person, and we add the aim of restitution as opposed to retribution to determine recompense. Let us call this ethic or law LIBERTARIAN ETHICS.
MORALITY : a subjective and personal evaluation of what thought, word or act is good (right) or evil (wrong) in any circumstance. While morality is entirely subjective and personal, a group of people can share many (or, all, or, no) moral values. Moral values are often (but not always) objectively communicable. But, most importantly, unlike ethics, they are not objectively observable (I cannot see your values and thoughts directly). Christians state that non-subjective and objectively true morality exists. This is logically consistent with and possible (and I would say true) -- but, it does not detract from the subjective nature of moral values.
MORALITY and ETHICS/LAW : A given system of MORALITY can be consistent or inconsistent with a given system of ETHICS.
CHRISTIAN ANARCHISM : Christian anarchists (as well as Christian libertarians to a large degree, albeit inconsistently) posit the following : Christian morality (seen in the moral commandments of the New Covenant of our Lord -- a whole thrust of Scripture) must be compatible with LIBERTARIAN ETHICS. Furthermore, it must far exceed those standards and move into a lifestyle of self-denying, self-giving love for one's neighbor. However, any violation of LIBERTARIAN ETHICS is already a violation of Christian morality. So, satisfaction of that is the basic starting point. But, for the Church, i.e. for Christians, the mere satisfaction of LIBERTARIAN ETHICS does not automatically satisfy Christian morality.
Anarchy, the rule of law and the Old Testament
A notion within Christian anarchism is that a society can have either the rule of law (the anarchist proposition) OR the rule of archons/rulers (the Statist model) -- but, a society cannot have both simultaneously. In the OT, Israel moved from the age of the rule of law (w/ judges and jurisprudence) to the age of archons/rulers (i.e a State) in 1 Samuel 8. Anarchists (whether Christian or not) seek the possibility of the rule of law, which is why they oppose the State, which is understood to be law's greatest enemy.
The call to the Church
Dear Christians, Any act of allegiance or moral support and legitimization lent for any form of violent coercion over others is an exceedingly wicked and wretched act of blasphemy and heresy. This includes support for evils like taxation and evil systems like the US Constitution, which is a morally abhorrent system founded on legitimization of mutual hatred, scapegoating, perpetual violence and mob rule -- all opposed to the natural law of ethical behavior. Any act of swearing an oath to uphold this system or lending tacit assent (by not opposing it or not advocating for ending it) is immoral and places you in the position of active opposition to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. You are like those who opposed the fight to end slavery, out of concern for lack of practicality, or, among those who argued that the Nazi Gestapo/SS/brown-shirts were "just following orders". Arguing that the Constitution is a lesser evil than other cartoonish caricatures of evil is lukewarm hypocrisy -- Satan happily accepts all invitations to grow his power given any opening, regardless of how small to begin with. Christians, lay down your arms and repent. Remove your implicit or explicit complicity with and assent for the State.
References
[1] The Law : http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
[2] On the difference between Country and State : https://fee.org/articles/the-state-1919/
[3] On the ethics of voting : http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/library/EthicsVoting.html
[4] Christian anarchism resources : @paulvp/christian-anarchism-a-selection-of-links-to-articles-and-books
[5] http://www.anarcho-calvinism.com/
Appendix 1 : Scott Bakke's comment on a post on the Christian Anarchists FB group
It is anarchism that embraces capitalism in the pure form, markets and property. The term was coined by Murray Rothbard.
Be aware that sometimes here it comes up as confusion (not by you) as to how capitalism could be consistent with Christian anarchism. Let me take the basic backup of how this all fits together. Christian anarchism is just the the natural orientation resulting from Christian allegiance to God alone and a unique (and non-coercive) kingdom, and therefore skepticism/disinterest/avoidance/hostility toward the coercive state. So, secondarily, any talk of an alternative "system" will include a non-coercive way of loving/serving each other. No advocated economic system will be implemented significantly from the top down or through traditional political means following Christian anarchism. Anarcho-capitalism allows for us to serve others while following the golden rule and not being coercive.
Capitalism (being free trade and respected private property) is necessary for a human society that is not going to be based on unjustified aggression. Note the capitalistic economy is 100% about mutual benefit. Use of resources is not arbitrary or determined by power groups by grabbing without consent of others who may be more justified in the use thereof. (Stealing/plunder is considered wrong like other clear violations (murder, lying, rape, etc)). Nothing precludes any type of giving or sharing within an anarcho-capitalistic culture at all. People will meet preferences though their time/effort no matter what. And these subjective preferences can be for the "highest" of orientations, 100% compatible and evolving toward our callings in the kingdom of God with Jesus our Lord.
So, in lieu of the government, which, in addition to being immoral and illegitimate, is like an idol that keeps people from living their fully free and responsible life, what kind of solutions do such people advocate? By market solutions, we mean those that are agreed to voluntarily by the parties. In this way, things that are normally and historically done coercively, inconsistent with Jesus' kingdom, can be done non-coercively. Also, from a utilitarian perspective, it is the most effective to help the most people the most rapidly with their material conditions. (Lack of property reliability and burdens on entrepreneurial activity are the opposite). And this is a general concern for Christians, the ideal of subsidiarity. But, it is very important psychologically and spiritually so that individuals are able to make their own choices, be creative, and take responsibility and steward what they are given, to improve things and serve others through one's gifts as well, all as part of being made in the image of God. (along with being image bearers, we also must keep in mind the creation/stewardship mandate of Genesis 1:28).