How is the non-aggression principle (NAP) consistent with a Christian worldview?
Question 12 in Faith Seeking Freedom: Updated & Expanded
This question is from Faith Seeking Freedom: Updated & Expanded, launching June 2026 in paperback, PDF, and Kindle. Subscribe to this Substack so you don’t miss updates, previews, and the launch announcement.
The NAP is premised on the idea that people have individual rights, including the right to their own bodies and the right to their physical property. As Christians, we believe that God made man in his image. Living peaceably with other people (Rom 12:18; Mark 9:50) and treating them as we want to be treated is a thoroughly Christian idea that is specifically and repeatedly commanded in the Bible (Luke 6:31, Gal 5:14).
Refraining from murder (Gen 4:10–11), kidnapping (Exod 21:16), assault (Exod 21:18), theft (Matt 19:18), fraud (Prov 20:23), and other offenses against others is, of course, all in accord with the counsel of scripture. The legal principles set out by God for Israel included detailed protection for property rights and prescriptions for legal remedies (e.g., Exod 22:1–9).
Christians are called to be respectful to everyone, including those who temporarily occupy positions of social authority (1 Pet 2:17). But we should not be swayed by popularity and worldly rank when we are analyzing questions of right and wrong (Rom 2:11–12). A Christian theory of justice must apply equally to all people, including elected officials and people employed by government bureaucracies (see Question 35).
The NAP is not a comprehensive guide to righteous living. It is merely a principle of justice—a rule about when force may be employed as a solution. Its answer is clear: violence is justified only in response to aggression against people and their property.