From most leftist to most right-wing:
1. libertarian socialism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
2. mutualism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)
3. agorism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism
4. anarcho-capitalism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
5. minarchism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchism
6. US Libertarian Party:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Libertarian_Party#Recent_issue_stances
7. libertarian conservatism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_conservatism
..and the first four on that list all technically fall into the category of "voluntaryism":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntaryism
Libertarianism is the only Scriptural political philosophy because God did not command us to turn our secular governments into monolithic theocratic states.
This government was not originally secular, but has now become so. This is what both the left and the right statist parties seek: theocracy, bein. Leftist Christians want to enforce commandments to give to the poor, and right-wing Christians want to enforce commandments about homosexuality and other things. When a member of either group uses the Bible to justify their stances, I ask them if they want to ban lying too, because not lying is a commandment. Instead of looking at God's commandments for individuals and using that to form our governments, we need to look at Scripture that comments on governments and is related to how they operate.
Even in ancient Israel, before there was a king, the people self-regulated and followed God's commandments by their own choice, without needing a king. When they demanded a king, God said "They have rejected Me":
6 But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the Lord. 7 The Lord said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.
-1 Samuel 8:6-7
The act of asking for a king is mentioned later as "evil":
19 Then all the people said to Samuel, “Pray for your servants to the Lord your God, so that we may not die, for we have added to all our sins
this evil by asking for ourselves a king.”
-1 Samuel 12:19
Asking for a king is evil, then, but look also at the immoral acts that governments commit. Namely, every government violates "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal". In waging war without needing God's commandment to do so, governments are killing. In taking money from people to fund those wars and any other government program, governments are stealing. When the Israelites demand a king, Samuel warns them that a king "takes":
10 So Samuel spoke all the words of the Lord to the people who had asked of him a king. 11 He said, “This will be the [
d]procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place
them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots. 12 He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and
some to [
e]do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves and give
them to his servants. 15 He will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards and give to his officers and to his servants. 16 He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys and [
f]use
them for his work. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants. 18 Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
-1 Samuel 8:10-18
Notice that many of the sentences have "he will take" or "he will also take". Samuel knows that a king will steal much from the people, and he warns them of this after they demand a king.
Now, examining Scripture that is commonly used to support the existence of the state:
Romans 13:1–7
Many Christians use this verse to support the existence of the state. Now, it does demonstrate that no Christian should engage in the act of tax resistance. Tax resistance is a violation of "resist not evil" and "turn the other cheek" as it is. What this passage doesn't demonstrate is that Christians must support the existence of the state or the existence of the state in its current form; it only demonstrates that we Christians must submit to governments so long as they don't force us to violate God's commandments.
Church of the Brethren minister Vernard Eller explained this quote well, he said: "Be clear, any of those human [authorities] are where they are only because God is allowing them to be there. They exist only at his sufferance. And if God is willing to put up with...the Roman Empire, you ought to be willing to put up with it, too. There is no indication God has called
you to clear it out of the way or get it converted for him. You can't fight an Empire without becoming
like the Roman Empire; so you had better leave such matters in God's hands where they belong."
Christians who interpret Romans 13 as advocating support for governing authorities are left with the difficulty of how to act under tyrants or dictators. - Wikipedia
Another quote used to support Christian statism is Matthew 22:21
"They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."
This quote is actually a very libertarian quote. Yes, it commands Christians not to resist taxes, but Christian libertarians are not tax resistance advocates. Christian libertarians want the government to tax less or not at all, but they should not resist taxation. Other than that, this quote doesn't say that the Roman government is acting morally in taking from the people. In fact, that is not what this quote is about at all. Jacques Ellul explained this quote remarkably well:
"Render unto Caesar..." in no way divides the exercise of authority into two realms....They were said in response to another matter: the payment of taxes, and the coin. The mark on the coin is that of Caesar; it is the mark of his property. Therefore give Caesar this money; it is his. It is not a question of legitimizing taxes! It means that Caesar, having created money, is its master. That's all. Let us not forget that money, for Jesus, is the domain of Mammon, a satanic domain!"
In saying "give to Caesar what is Caesar's", Jesus is saying that the coinage is Caesar's, it is under his control. This quote is a rejection of the Roman fiat currency in saying we should give it back to its maker.
That is my explanation of why libertarianism is
the Scriptural political philosophy, let me know what you think!
I myself
am a voluntaryist at heart (although sometimes I take slightly more moderate stances when discussing libertarianism with statists), and choose not to identify as anything more specific than that.