Re: Christians and legitimate legal authority

This was a pretty good discussion. Very minor edits. Please alert me to anything doxxy that I missed.

Orius 07/14/2020
The night and call started with the customary life updates. The nincompoop, strictly Fox News, Republican guy started with a story about going into a restaurant to pick up food and purposely making a point about not wearing a mask. Wearing or not wearing a mask became the nights theme. At first it was focused on why he didn’t wear one. Pride? Rebellious? Doesn’t care about people? After getting hit with “but why wouldn’t you just wear it” from a cancer doc in the group (who puts his 3yr olds in masks while picking cherries in the orchard), the republican guy looked baffled. …then the leader said “Right, wouldn’t the disciples wear a mask?” I stepped up to bat at this one. Explained that actually the science is not settled (flu study shows no benefit in mask wearing cultures), we received mix messaging (wearing a mask is ridiculous: Fauci. Must where mask: Fauci), and mainly that there is information to support both sides. Then he took it further and said “If you’re a Christian, you’d wear a mask. Because it’s not about you. It’s about others”. I responded immediately that it’s faulty logic to assume someone ISN’T a Christian because they don’t/can’t/won’t wear a mask. From there, I was backed up by 5 others that piled on as the leader tried to defend essentially excommunicating non mask wearers. 2 thoroughly backed him and the other 3 were silent. So, even if those followed suit, I’m with half. It was more back and forth than I’m conveying. And my main point was not about if we should wear a mask or not, but about shaming people on either side of the debate. He looked petty and political. I think I came off diplomatic and reasonable.

aeoli.pera 07/14/2020
Very nice. You picked a good battle too, very well done.
Now challenge him to combat for control of the group.
Consolidate your power gains and finance it through vassal states in the daycare and youth ministries.
Or maybe satrapies…

thunder Yesterday at 9:16 AM
why wouldn’t you just wear one? the cost/benefit ratio is minor inconvenience/potentially saving yourself or others from coronavirus. i hate that it’s a “law”, but i don’t see why Christians in particular wouldn’t wear one

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 9:27 AM
I don’t think that was the issue at the time.
The man was basically making the case that this is more important than the gospel.
In reality, it’s probably just a flex to train people in submission to government authority.
We haven’t taken any real meaaures and don’t intend to.

thunder Yesterday at 9:30 AM
we are supposed to obey the government, after all. as long as it doesn’t go against God

Orius Yesterday at 9:30 AM
Wearing a mask simply lessens the risk, right? At least that’s the idea. If you said “Christians would lessen the risk of harming others. Because it’s not about you. It’s about others”…it’s silly not to agree. But to what extreme? Do you chew your kids food for them so they don’t choke? Why not drive a max of 30 mph every where? It’s a minor inconvenience, but the fatality rates at such a low speed are significantly better. I also mentioned a flu study showing no significant improvement in mask wearing society.

It’s fine to have that debate. But yes, as AP said, that wasn’t the issue.

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 9:31 AM
The issue is that governments often demand that we bow to them as God.
We recognize that they’re progressively training us to do that, hence the instinctive revulsion.
The retard leading the group would likely be on board with horizontal morality as expressed through the avatar of an 80-foot gold statue.

thunder Yesterday at 9:35 AM

“Christians would lessen the risk of harming others. Because it’s not about you. It’s about others”…it’s silly not to agree. But to what extreme? Do you chew your kids food for them so they don’t choke? Why not drive a max of 30 mph every where?

We don’t chew up our kid’s food because we’re not birds. We don’t drive 30mph in a 45mph zone because that’s not the law. actually the law is against you if you go that slow on the highway
the benefit and practical application of a mask-wearing society might only be showing people that we care and are trying

Orius Yesterday at 9:43 AM
If you don’t wear a WWJD bracelet, you’re not a Christian.

Bad theology, bad logic. Right?

thunder Yesterday at 9:44 AM
i’m not saying you’re not a Christian for not wearing a mask. I’m saying if you’re a Christian, why not just wear a mask?
or maybe i can say that, but a broad application is never right for every circumstance

Orius Yesterday at 9:46 AM
Why not drive 25mph? Or find routes on roads with the lowest speed possible?

thunder Yesterday at 9:46 AM
i’d say your Christian-ness is suspect if you refuse to wear a mask
you’re free to do just that (except on the highway)

Orius Yesterday at 9:47 AM

thunder Yesterday at 9:47 AM
you’re not less Christian for choosing low-risk

Orius Yesterday at 9:47 AM
But if you’re a Christian, why wouldn’t you?

thunder Yesterday at 9:47 AM
because you don’t have to

Orius Yesterday at 9:48 AM

thunder Yesterday at 9:48 AM
ah, shoot. gotta run. and i’ll probably speed to get there

Orius Yesterday at 9:48 AM

thunder Yesterday at 10:46 AM
my main argument should have been that you should wear a mask because it’s the “law” and Christians are subject to the ruling authorities. It’s a nice bonus to be able to justify in your mind that you do it because it might help people and it shows that you care about their well-being
i say law in quotations because the legitimacy of it is debatable, but I don’t think that’s your argument
if a Christian refuses to follow a law they view as legitimate and coming from a legitimate authority over them, they are in deliberate rebellion against that authority over them and therefore against God, which is a dangerous place to be

Orius Yesterday at 11:03 AM
Correct, thats not my argument. But on that topic, I think its pretty easy for any Christian to justify most “laws” or authority as illegitimate if they so chose. I don’t think its our place to comment on that persons salvation.

On the specific argument to wear a mask or not: I think its a spectrum and I’m not willing to judge someones relationship with God for where they land on it. Example: Outside jogging in the forest. No benefit, multiple negatives. Doing a travel podcast with 5 strangers in an 8X8 room, some with underlying conditions and suspected contact with someone that tested positive. Major benefit, minor negatives.

thunder Yesterday at 11:06 AM
those are a couple of very obvious examples. going into a grocery store or restaurant? at church?
it’s important to help our brothers see where they might be in sin so judging them based on the choices they make is A-OK

Orius Yesterday at 11:09 AM
Right. I’d say my examples are good extremes that about 99% of people can agree with. It gets fuzzy in the middle. A restaurant with outdoor seating? Can I take it off to eat? They’re at 50% capacity anyway. Am I with my family or those outside my house?

thunder Yesterday at 11:10 AM
the “law” says that if you’re inside or moving around, you wear it. if you’re at your table, you don’t

Orius Yesterday at 11:11 AM
That doesn’t answer every situation.

thunder Yesterday at 11:12 AM
no, but there are other guidelines for other situations
but that’s not really what we were debating

Orius Yesterday at 11:12 AM
Maybe the issue is whether or not the “law” is in fact legitimate

thunder Yesterday at 11:12 AM
i think that’s the only thing to argue. you’re arguing for breaking the law if we don’t start from there

Orius Yesterday at 11:14 AM
“there” being a legitimate law?

thunder Yesterday at 11:14 AM
a legitimate law from a legitimate authority

Orius Yesterday at 11:15 AM

thunder Yesterday at 11:15 AM
yep. even if it’s a bad leader

Orius Yesterday at 11:15 AM
assuming it doesn’t go against God

thunder Yesterday at 11:15 AM
right. like wearing a mask

Orius Yesterday at 11:16 AM

thunder Yesterday at 11:16 AM
it came from an executive order that so far is not being enforced by the police (and shouldn’t be imho)

Orius Yesterday at 11:17 AM
Yeah, cops are not responding to mask violation complaints. They’re telling people to contact MIOSHA.
If it escalates into a disturbance, they will respond.
Or if a business explains that someone won’t leave.
I take major issue with the EO “law”, especially in some very silly scenarios (like the boating, gardening shutdown nonsense). But most of the time I can either avoid or will comply.
Mainly for respect of the business I’m frequenting.

thunder Yesterday at 11:20 AM
the “law” also says businesses need to refuse service to people that won’t wear a mask, but this contradicts health privacy laws so I don’t think that part is legitimate

Orius Yesterday at 11:22 AM
Right. A friend just went to a restaurant in Brighton that had a sign up to the effect: Governor says you need a mask. But if you have a health reason you can’t, we can’t force you to and will welcome you. Plus we cannot force you to disclose your health reason. If you enter our shop without a mask we will assume you have a health reason and serve you happily.
Terrified peasants can go huddle in their closets…or find a less libertarian shop.

thunder Yesterday at 11:25 AM
agreed. so back to your story, do you think you encouraged people to actively ignore/break the law?

Orius Yesterday at 11:27 AM
Not at all.
I pinned the leader into his stance that Christian = mask wearer. Which he admitted and reaped hostility from others.
Clarifying that a non-mask wearer = non-Christian. He gave slight hesitation and then doubled down with a horizontal morality plea to help others. This plea ignores the issue in an attempt to retain authority of what HE thinks a Christian will or won’t do.

thunder Yesterday at 11:32 AM
I could make his case too, but the reasoning comes from the Bible rather than because the culture around us is doing it
I think we’re all on board with your guy being a victim of the horizontal morality mentality
and you should be on guard

Orius Yesterday at 11:33 AM

thunder Yesterday at 11:34 AM
buuuuut I think he makes the right case just for the wrong reason

Orius Yesterday at 11:34 AM
Thats because you believe the case for wearing a mask…in most cases on the spectrum.
Or do you mean Christians = mask wearers?

thunder Yesterday at 11:35 AM
with a few clarifying points, yes

Orius Yesterday at 11:36 AM
If I don’t wear a mask and God deems me to be one of the elect, is it His fault or mine?

thunder Yesterday at 11:36 AM
and therefore, with those same clarifications, non-mask wearers = non-Christians (or, more likely, Christians in rebellion or Christians making a dumb mistake)

Orius Yesterday at 11:37 AM
sinner =/= non-Christian

thunder Yesterday at 11:38 AM
deliberate, constant rebellion against God (ex: homosexual) = non-Christian
Christians repent of their sins

Orius Yesterday at 11:40 AM
You and I may agree that the “law” is legitimate, but other Christians may not. I think its a valid case.

thunder Yesterday at 11:40 AM
that would be one of the clarifying points
particularly because i’m not convinced it’s legitimate. that wouldn’t apply in the example of the homo
but that’s an example where a gay Christian would believe that they aren’t sinning when they are

Orius Yesterday at 11:45 AM
Right. And their salvation is at risk, but can we say that they are not saved?
Anyway, I think we’re in the weeds again.

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 12:34 PM
Anyway, we agree on the underlying points:
1) Obey God first.
2) Be submissive to worldly authorities, like a wife to her husband, except where rule #1 demands otherwise.
3) The legitimacy of legal authority is clouded and uncertain in America today.
I’d argue that the latter comes from a mismatch between our founding myths, where “the people” are the legal authorities, and the actual sense of responsibility felt by the people.
According to the letter and spirit of the law, the EO has no legitimacy.
However, any introductory law textbook will tell you the law is not in letter nor spirit, but in the behaviors of the people it addresses.
Liberia has the same Constitution as the US, but it’s a different place.
According to this definition, a Christian’s standing order is to be the least subversive element in society possible, and the least resistant to gangs, mafias, Stalinist totalitarian exterminationist governments, and so on.
The trouble being democracy and polarization. There are two legitimate authorities in America which influence political and legal behavior, broadly speaking a conservative world order (which appeals to the old order) and a liberal world order.
The new order is arguably either a coup or the logical successor to the old. I believe the latter is closer to the truth. And it’s certainly closer to the truth that the new order holds greater sway, with the old order living in subjugation.

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 12:51 PM
May I blog this discussion with ID info redacted?
Taki’s Magazine
Our New Religion of Race – Taki’s Magazine

Orius Yesterday at 1:10 PM
You have my consent. Unless, upon sobering up, I decide you are ugly and feel remorse for my decision. In that case, I will cry rape.

thunder Yesterday at 1:11 PM
yes, i like being anonymously famous. it’s a nice ego boost.
since it’s your blog, i’ll settle for anonymous though

Orius Yesterday at 1:12 PM

thunder Yesterday at 2:36 PM

According to this definition, a Christian’s standing order is to be the least subversive element in society possible, and the least resistant to gangs, mafias, Stalinist totalitarian exterminationist governments, and so on.

You lost me on this point. Which definition? About obeying legitimate authorities? I view good Christians as extremely subversive to the culture. If they’re not, it’s usually because they aren’t being good Christians

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:28 PM

You lost me on this point. Which definition? About obeying legitimate authorities? I view good Christians as extremely subversive to the culture. If they’re not, it’s usually because they aren’t being good Christians


Being subversive to the culture is not the same as opposing the current political authorities, although it will set the boundaries for who may be a political authority in the future as cultural values shift.
And the definition I’m referring to is “de facto” law. Hence, something may be unconstitutional but since the Constitution is not the de facto law of the land, and the civil rights revolutionary spirit is the de facto law (ref Caldwell), Christians would be required not to resist it. The coup was successful, therefore the king is dead, long live the king!

thunder Yesterday at 3:34 PM
I can see how following the law gets cloudy

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:34 PM
Of course, another complication arises here.
The new king has declared that whites must die.
Suicide is a sin.

thunder Yesterday at 3:35 PM
right. refer to underlying point 1, obey God first

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:36 PM
Sitting around letting yourself be killed is a form of suicide, ref Human Action by Mises (inaction is also a decision).
So is the masks thing part of the greater depopulation effort?
If we judge it is, then Christians would be commanded to resist it like abortion.

thunder Yesterday at 3:38 PM
i don’t see how it could be
unless you think it’s a small step toward training in submission and eventually we’ll be obedient even unto our own demise

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:39 PM
I judge it is, but in a much lesser sense than abortion so it’s not as big of a deal.
Actually I think the demand is more instinctive and narcissistic than scientific and planned, though the underlying motive is the same. I expect that, as a means, it’s a wash.
The business shutdowns, on the other hand, are more insidious.
Those are quite clearly intended to train us that it’s okay for the government to put people out of business and employment in mass for basically no reason.

thunder Yesterday at 3:43 PM
i think the mask-wearing is a decision to do something rather than the perceived horror of doing nothing. what’s that saying about a bad decision is better than no decision? it’s complicated now by the politics involved

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:45 PM
Call it discernment, call it delusion, I don’t perceive Whitmer is acting in a spirit of self-aggrandizement.

thunder Yesterday at 3:45 PM
i don’t think women typically have that trait

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:46 PM
And I thought I was funny.
You’ve been among conservative W Michigan women too long.

Orius Yesterday at 3:46 PM

thunder Yesterday at 3:46 PM
i get the impression it’s more like she’s a proxy of empowerment for other girls

aeoli.pera Yesterday at 3:47 PM
I see a reckless disregard for her voters’ well-being and their opinions of her that don’t make sense for a politician.

thunder Yesterday at 3:49 PM
hmmm…trying to think more what i meant about self-aggrandizement. more reserved for their inner circles. not so public though they desire to be seen as virtuous by the public

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Re: Christians and legitimate legal authority

  1. William Owlson says:

    Its virtue signaling on the part of conservatives. A totally different type of virtue signaling practiced by liberals but virtue signaling nonetheless.

    Conservatives are concerned with displays of power and anti-status signaling or the opposite of status signaling I suppose.

    Conservatives are more evil than liberals for sure. Theyre power hungry power trippers. Never believe what they say because it is a con mans job to behave like a conservative.

  2. billy says:

    1 Peter 2 13-15 was mistranslated by …people….for…reasons, very few realise this, even though the lives and the martyr’s deaths of the apostles should make if blidingly fucking obvius. it should read as ‘Subordinate every human creature/creation for the sake of the Lord. And if the Emperor, be superior (to him).

    And if governors, if by them is put forth punishment to evil-doers, praise then well-doers.

    Because this is the will of God, to be a well-doer, and to silence the foolish and ignorant men.’

    Also, Paul in Romans 13 was talking about being subject to your spiritual leaders, deacons etc, not to human authorities, and then his head was lopped off for preaching the word. What a guy.

    As for masks, you are made in the image of God, you think a mask pleases Him?
    Or are you scared of men more than Him?
    Good luck!

  3. Obadiah says:

    “I just got a new Star Wars themed Clitty-Boi Brand™ R2D2 chastity cage and I can’t wait to wear it in public!” *Strikes soylent grin and takes selfie with his new product*

    –typical Cuckstainian circa 2025

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s