Category Archives: Christian Libertarianism

God is the Font of Morality. Why Objectivists Hate Ron Paul. (updated)

Some surfers may wonder at the title of this blogpost.
Does it reflect malice on the part of the Author?
I would say it does! Some malice can be justified, and there are so many reasons to dislike the irrationality of the bulk of Objectivists… those whom emulate their Icon to the greatest degree.
I must take care not to collectivize all Objectivists into one lump, as this type of oversimplification is a great error to be avoided … way too mechanistic… and thankfully humans are not machines…and thus there are always exceptions which must be given the credit they deserve… Such Mechanistic irrationalism is endemic to Objectivism… most believing such Ideas that “All Muslims are Evil”… “All Christians hate Gays”… Etc, yet there is a moderate minority who avoid this error, and I give these Libertarians their due.

I am angry about the amount of effort the Objectivists put into undermining the Campaign of Ron Paul, whom was by Far the best hope for saving America from Economic ruin and for implementing Libertarian reforms across the board.
The source of this Irrational hatred has been hidden to a large degree and has left many people wondering why Objectivists hate Ron Paul..

Read what ‘Cornell’ has written on this subject on the Lindsay Perigo Objectivist Blog Solo….

Quote:
“It’s odd to me that so many Objectivists dislike Ron Paul. Of all the mainstream presidential candidates out there, his platform is by far the most consistent with Objectivist principles. The only points of major disagreement that I can think of between his politics and Rand’s and Peikoff’s politics are:
1. Abortion — he doesn’t see abortion as a right to be protected by the Federal government; although he does not stand for banning it outright (he takes the “leave it up to the states” stance), and
2. Foreign Policy — Rand and Peikoff take a much more hawkish stance.
However, (1) most states are not going to ban abortions, so I don’t see his stance on abortion changing much of anything, except that he will take away federal subsidies for abortion, which Objectivists would be for anyway, and (2) the truth is that we need to take a less agressive stance towards foreign policy, if for no other reason than that we simply can’t afford to be fighting all these wars accross the globe — we just don’t have the revenue to support it anymore; and I think that Rand would agree with Paul on his strategy, if not on his premises, with the possible exception of Iran.
So am I missing something, or does the Objectivists’ objection to Paul really just boil down to Iran?
If so, then I’m not that worried about Iran. If America leaves Iran alone, you can believe the Israelis will pick up the slack. And you can’t tell me that the American private security firms won’t help out the Israelis with weapons and man-power should all hell break loose; there’s too much to gain by Israel winning another war in the Middle East unhinged from American intrusion. “ End Quote.

Let me tell you Cornell what is Ron Paul’s anathema in the eyes of the Bulk of Objectivists…
He Breaks the First Commandment of Objectivism… “Thou shalt not love the Lord God in any way shape or form..”
This is the unpardonable sin in the eyes of Objectivism.
Objectivism is a Religion.
Atheism is it’s First principle.
And Objectivists willingly sacrifice the principles of Freedom for the sake of halting any Theistic champion of Liberty or justice taking the limelight… thus in spite of all their claims to reason.. they prove them selves to be irrational religious zealots/fanatics.
In their minds It is unthinkable for them to accept the Idea that a theist could be the champion of Liberty and justice.
To accept this they would have to abandon Objectivism because Objectivism is based upon Anti-theism… and it is this which attracted most of them to the faith.

Peter Creswell clearly indicates this *Here* when he says Ron Paul cant be a Libertarian because he’s a Creationist… who will not draw a line between his religion and the State.
Comming from a Randoid this is shear hypocracy… and not true, ie Ron Paul maintains a separation between his Religion and the state, and the fact that He is a Creationist whom rejects the theory of evolution does not render him irrational at all!
PC speaks from his own Bigoted Anti-reason superstition.

Thus The Title of my Blogpost and the Meme explains everything… why Objectivists helped the Powers of Evil in undermining the Greatest champion of Liberty in America today.

Many Libertarian minded Kiwi will be gathering next Saturday to discuss the formation of a New Libertarian orintated Party to gather together the remnants of the Act Party, The Libertarianz, and others like the legalize cannabis party into an Electoral fighting force. It will not be an easy thing to achieve, esp if Objectivists hope to contaminate the constitution with their personal religion, and to put out Anti-theistic blogs and press releases in the name of the New organization. The only hope this New Paty has is that it establishes a true separation between personal beliefs and the constitution, and operates via a libertarian spirit of toleration… for mutual benefit.
I have my own view about how such a party ought to be constituted and I hope to produce a blogpost in this subject before Next Saturday.

Hell is for the Self Righteous, Heaven is for Sinners.

A Photo from Face book…

This guy is making a Fatal mistake!
Real Christians do not claim to be good.
The Bible tells us There is none that are Good… no not one.
All fall short of the Glory of God.
Christ came to redeem *sinners*.

What we are seeing in this Photo is an arrogant refusal to admit moral guilt, and because a person must freely choose to receive the Gift of Salvation it is essential that a person first realises they are *not Good*, and that they are Guilty before God.

The self righteous don’t believe they need Salvation…
this guy obviously thinks he’s Good… That’s vanity! That’s self delusion…
That’s his biggest mistake!
It may be true to say that in practical terms he is comparitivly Good/ no worse morally speaking…than the ‘average Christian’. Indeed He may even surpass the moral integrity of the average Christian… never Stealing, he may not tell horrendous lies, He may not be violent, He may be a faithful husband, and care for the oppressed and infirm, etc…yet it is a mistake to think that a Christian is getting into Heaven on his own merits, and that all that is necessary is to be more virtuous than the average Christian… and God will have to let you into heaven.
It does not work like that.
The Moral standard of goodness and acceptiblity unto God is not set by the behavior of the average Christian. It is set by the Holy character of God Almighty… and that is 100% sinlessness.
And No Son of Fallen Adam has ever lived a perfectly holy life.
We are all guilty before God and will be judged for our sins, unless we accept God’s means of Salvation for sinners… Christ’s death on the Cross… as a substitutional sacrifice… payment in full for our Sins.

Now many people will Recoil from this.
Some vain, Egotistical, and self-righteous folk will not believe their sinfulness is serious enough to warrant such an extreme punishment… such an excruciating death as their means of salvation… they will not believe their ‘insignificant indiscretions’ made it necessary for Christ to be crucified on their account.
Others will look at the grotesqueness of the cross and say that
It is offensive to contemplate such a barbaric thing could be the means a good God would utilize for his purposes.
Both these views fail to apprehend that it is God’s sovereign right to set the terms and conditions for salvation, and that one of the reasons he chose this means was not only to demonstrate how seriously he condems all sin, but also so that no one could boast.
To receive Christ is a humbling thing to do.
There is no place for vanity, or Ego… We must accept Salvation on God’s terms and conditions… not ours…and for this reason alone Christ is despised by many.
Yet In the great day of Judgment for sin, Perhapse the greatest sorrow of the Damned of our age will be the realizations that God loved them… that he did everything short of negating their volition to redeem them… and that he made the truth available to the utmost parts of the earth that salvation was Free… yet they were blinded by their own Pride and lusts. They will know utterly that they rejected Christ, and as a consequence have actually Damned themselves!

God is not willing that any should perrish.

So Dear Reader, I hope you have contemplated your own moral condition, and used the correct yardstick in your measurements… 100% holiness… not as this poor Sod has done. I hope you realize your own Moral culpability, and from this realize why Christ died on the cross… Because Hell is for Self-righteous fools… and Contrary to Human Rationalism… Heaven is for sinners whom have humbled themselves enough to call upon the name of the Lord.

Christianity is the only religion where the prerequisite for admission is the unworthiness of the applicant.

Ye Sinners…Heed The Gospel of St Paul!…

“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:” Rom3vs10

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” Rom3vs23

“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Rom5vs8

“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom6vs23
“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Rom10vs13

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” 1Cor1vs18


St Paul. The Apostle of the Gospel of Grace and the Teacher of us Gentiles.

“This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.” 1Tim1vs15,16

Tim Wikiriwhi.
Sinner, Libertarian Christian, 1611 King James Bible Believer, Dispensationalist.

Public Property

The relationship between public property, government and the public is the same as the relationships of a trust.

The public are the beneficiaries and the government officials should act as trustees by managing the public assets according to the interests of the public.

The rights and wrongs of government property management are similar to the rights and wrongs of personal property management. In the case of property management the mandate of the majority is as legitimate as the will of an individual property owner.

This means that it is not wrong for government officials to manage fishing quotas, forests, Boobs on Bikes, littering and much more.

Freedom is not an overriding principle.

Our Father Who Art in Parliament

The question I ask myself to work out my legislative political views is this…

In this situation is it right for me (or some other person) to use force against a neighbour?

If my answer is “yes” then I support legislative force and government interference in the situation.
If my answer is “no” then I oppose legislative force and government interference in the situation.

I have noticed that sometimes other people will think it is not right for them to use force in a situation but that it is right for government to use force in that same situation. Why do they have a discrepancy? Why would someone think it is right for government to do something that would be wrong for them to do by themselves? They must think that government is special. They must think that government is above their own moral limitations.

An attempt to explain this discrepancy was made to me in a recent discussion. The explanation given was that the government (in this case the court system) is like a father settling disputes amongst its children.

I think viewing government as a father is idolatry.

Questions for the readers…
Do you believe there are situations where it would be wrong for an individual to use force but right for government?
If so, how do you explain the discrepancy?

Standing up for Justice more important than Personal Ambitions


Independent Libertarian and Christian Tim Wikiriwhi Supporting the Hamilton Boobs on Bikes Parade 2011.

This picture was posted to the Treatygate Facebook page by a Racist radical separatist with the intension of discrediting me. These are the sort of dirty tricks these Degenerates practice rather than presenting a valid argument.
Some of the people at Treatygate may buy into this ploy.

One of the most difficult problems with selling Liberty, equality, for all is that it behooves Libertarians like myself to defend unpopular minorities from ‘mainstream/ popular phobias and prejudice.
So few are the number of people who truly desire freedom and equality before the Law…for everyone.
Most people want liberty for themselves yet also want the state to oppress those groups whom don’t share their personal values.

Yet The truth is I am utterly unashamed of my support for Boobs on bikes.

If I was more concerned about posturing as a conservative…more concerned about winning votes and my personal political ambitions than standing up for justice I would never have walked down that street holding up that sign!
I would never have attended Jay Days.
I would never have made submissions in defense of the rights of prostitutes.
I would never have argued to end the war On drugs for years through letters to the Papers , and on the many election campaigns, etc.

It is true that I would love to get elected so that I could play a more important role in defending Liberty and the rights of individuals from socialist oppression, yet my political aspirations cannot be at the expence of justice…. not at the expence of selling out the oppressed… reviled…Fringe dwellers! I have always subordinated expedience to Idealism.
Im not a Politician!
I’m an idealist.
I dont believe politics ought to be about compromise or expedience….before principle.
The personal cost has been political isolation and redecule from all quarters.
It has been a hard road, yet if Lance thought that this photo associating me with Strippers would embarrass me …he picked the wrong guy!
My life is an open book.
Anyone who doubts this obviously does not know me at all.
Even this Blog is a testament to my refusal to pander to the sentiments of the Herd.
In God I Trust.
What matters to me is that I set a Good example for my children, and that My life has been of service to God my Father.
My teasure is in Heaven.

I wrote this response to Lance…
” Where did you get this Photo of the Hamilton boobs on bikes parade? Do you have any more? I am puzzled why you would post this photo to Treatygate. I can only think it was in the belief that it would somehow discredit me? You…do know that I am a Libertarian Christian… and that as such I have defended the liberty of unpopular minorities from Mob bigotry and oppression.??? Thus I put justice before any concern that my activism may offend the average Wowser.

My intension at this Parade was to explode the myth that Christianity demands prudish bigotry and an obligation to legislate morality…and persecute infidels.
Here you see me defending liberty from the notion that the government/ council has the right to act like the Taliban…”

Thus as strange and contrary to common understanding as it may seem to many… In this Photo I am implementing my Christian ethics… to be quick to stand up for the oppressed, to oppose tyranny where ever it appears, I am testifying to the truth That Christianity is not about Legalistic oppression of Non-Christians… but about ‘Freedom, Grace, and loving my Neighbor as myself…
Like My Savior whom I seek to emulate you will not find me sitting with the self righteous, but with the publicans and sinners… The Pot smokers… The Prostitutes…
And I will be the first to admit I greatly prefer their company to that of the Vipers… The Self-righteous hypocrites… The Anti-freedom Bigots… The Pharisaic Legalists!


2010…. check out at 43 second mark 🙂

Update: 11/15

The Rape Of American Democracy

So Mitt Romney is the Republican Candidate for President.
In my veiw He’s a Wolf in sheeps clothing… Dangerous and dishonest!

Many Republicans are talking up a storm, speak in Rapturous terms about How Morally Upstanding the Romney’s are, and about how Money savvy he is… how he’s gona get Americans jobs (where have we herd that line before??? Oh Yeah He stole that one from Obama!)
Yet from where I sit, these people must be deranged!
The reason I say this is because Romney did not win the Right to represent the Republican Party against Obama… He rigged it, and Robbed America of the Oppotunity of Choosing The Libertarian minded Ron Paul for President!

The scale of this deceit… the implications this fraud has regarding the well being of America and the global economy is Gargantuan!
And Yet Romney supporters have the audacity to call Ron Paul supporters vile names because after the betrayal of their Hero, some of them now think it would be better to vote for Obama!
The Romney supporter may be identified as a Rightwing socialist… someone who hated what Ron Paul represented… His Libertarian views in respect to Drugs, His Anti- military interventionalism, etc.
Even though personally I believe there has been a dire need for interventions, and that many other nations could use military support, Ron Paul’s argument that America simply cannot afford to be the Police force of the world is 100% true and irrefutable.
Yet his truthfulness has not endeared him to the Right.
They would’nt even allow Ron Paul to speak at the convention unless he endorsed Mitt Romney!
They changed the rules so that they could disqualify him!

And so they are Happy that they got Ron Paul out of the way.
It doesn’t matter by what means.
They don’t even want to think about it.
They hope their Rape of American Democracy goes unreported… or at least is quickly forgotten.
So Today they are busy waving their Romney Flags, and trying to get everyone to focus on what an evil lying bastard Obama is… how hopeless he is…
Yet I want to remind people of the sort of people The Romney’s are, and the sort of Party whom he fronts.

If the Romney camp had not defrauded the vote tallys leading up to Tampa.
If the Republican party had not already endorsed Romney before the delegate vote
And instead give Ron Paul Equal Air time etc…
Had Romney been Man enough to face off against Ron Paul in a fair and square showdown at Tampa and defeat him… Then You could call Romney the rightful and worthy candidate to face off against Obama… and Ron Paul supporters would probably have thrown their vote in with Romney too.
Yet because The Romney camp chose the Low Road at every opportunity… and defrauded and cheated… No Moral man can support Him! He is a scoundrel, backed up by a band of Scoundrels! He has No Legitimacy. He is a fraud. He defrauded the American People! He robbed Democracy! He’s a Devil. I guarantee you the only reason he chose Paul Ryan for his running mate was to capture the tea party vote. Ie It was a clever political move because many Tea partiers would prefer Ron Paul over Romney any day of the week! So by getting Ryan on his team he took some of the wind out of Ron Paul’s sails for himself. So I predict that once he gets elected he will marginalize Paul Ryan, and not implement Tea party policy at all. He will feign ‘emergency’ and expedience to continue expanding Socialist interventions/ bail outs… protectionism… subsidies …etc, raise taxes, and increase debts.
He wants to maintain the status quo… increase his wealth, and loves Power more than justice… more than freedom… We can know this because of the shameful way he achieved the Republican Nomination … Its as simple and as clear as that.

RON PAUL WON!
As a Shunned and reviled Kiwi Christian Libertarian whom has stood unsuccessfully for election many times I have had first hand experience, both of being marginalized by my Party because of my ‘unorthodox beliefs’, and having been Blacked out by the Media.
Thus watching Ron Paul’s campaign has been more personal to me than to many of my fellow Kiwis, because I have watched this good man suffer the very same evils.
I wrote a glowing article about the virtues of America’s democracy when Obama was elected, yet sadly today I must say that in many ways it is as Undemocratic as our own Mickey mouse electoral system here in New Zealand.

I believe America is doomed to economic collapse.
I think all the talk by economists that the worst of the global recession is over to be absolutely ridiculous!
I believe the real recession/ depression has only just begun!
The one Man whose policies were radical enough to stop the slide into the abyss has been betrayed and eliminated.
The Collapse is now virtually a certainty.

Satan Laughing Spreads his Wings.

If I was an American voter, I would give my Vote to the Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson

Tim Wikiriwhi
Christian Libertarian.

The Villars Statement on Relief and Developement.

This is a very interesting Christian Libertarian Book.
It discusses the failure of Socialism and promotes Free Market economics.

THE VILLARS STATEMENT ON RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT
PREAMBLE
In the spring of 1987, a group of forty evangelical Christians from around the world gathered in Villars, Switzerland, to examine the topic of “Biblical Mandates for Relief and Development.” For five days, we engaged in intense discussion, debate, and private reflection, our energies focused by a number of prepared study papers. As a result of our consultation, we who gathered at Villars have the concerns enumerated below. We encourage other believers to consider these issues in light of the Scriptures and their relevance for implementing Biblical relief and development.
A WORLD IN NEED
The extent of hunger and deprivation around the world is a reality haunting modern times. Confronted with disaster, disease, and chronic poverty, relief and development agencies have provided massive material assistance. Yet for all the resources expended, hunger and deprivation appear to be increasing. The sad reality is that so much effort has produced little in long-term results.
This reality calls us as Christians to reassess the work of relief and development in light of God’s Holy Word. It is our conclusion that the consistent application of Biblical teaching will require a reorientation of relief and development practices, and that this may involve a change in our understanding of human need and in strategies to relieve suffering.
“Relief and development” is an expression that recognizes two Biblical principles. Relief refers to the insistence in both Testaments that the people of God must help the hungry and oppressed. Development stems from the Biblical vision of a people exercising their proper stewardship of God’s gifts—of societies that are productive, healthy, and governed justly. Together, relief and development envision substantial improvement in economic and human well being.
We acknowledge our own sinfulness and fallibility, and we recognize that other committed Christians may not agree with all our convictions. Nevertheless, we are compelled by God’s Word and by the reality of human suffering to share our convictions with Christians and others. We do not claim to have spoken the final word. Thus, we offer the following conclusions of the Villars consultation for the research, dialogue, and open debate among all who claim Christ as Lord.
ISSUES OF CONCERN
With this as our goal, we raise our concerns over the following issues:
1. The failure to operate from a distinctively Biblical perspective in both methods and goals.
2. The tendency to focus on meeting material needs without sufficient emphasis on spiritual needs.
3. The attempt to synthesize Marxist categories and Christian concepts, to equate economic liberation with salvation, and to use the Marxist critique, without recognizing the basic conflict between these views and the Biblical perspective.
4. The emphasis on redistribution of wealth as the answer to poverty and deprivation without recognizing the value of incentive, opportunity, creativity, and economic and political freedom.
5. The attraction to centrally controlled economics and coercive solutions despite the failures of such economies and their consistent violation of the rights of the poor.
6. A disproportionate emphasis on changing structures without recognizing the frequency with which this only exchanges one oppressive structure for another.
7. The danger of utopian and ideological entrapment, whether from the left or the right.
8. Neglecting to denounce oppression when it comes from one end or the other of the political spectrum.
9. Focusing on external causes of poverty in exploitation and oppression without confronting those internal causes that are rooted in patterns of belief and behavior within a given culture.
10. The need to make conversion and discipleship an essential component of Christian relief and development work, and to carry this out in conjunction with the local church.
11. The need to apply the teaching of the Bible as a whole in the areas of personal life, family, and work, but equally in the shaping of the culture and social life.
12. The need to reaffirm the Biblical support for the family as the basic social and economic unit and its right to own and control property, and to stand against any ideology that would diminish the family’s proper role in any of these areas.
13. The need to oppose a false understanding of poverty which makes poverty itself a virtue, or which sanctifies those who are poor on the basis of their poverty.
BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE
In response to these issues we draw attention to the following Biblical teaching and its implications for relief and development:
1. God created mankind in His own image, endowing man with freedom, creativity, significance, and moral discernment. Moreover, prior to the Fall, man lived in harmony with all of God’s creation, free from pain, suffering, and death.
2. The devastating reality of sin and evil, hunger, oppression, deprivation, disease, death, and separation from God is the result of man’s rebellion against God, which began at the Fall and continues through history.
3. The causes of hunger and deprivation, therefore, are spiritual as well as material and can only be dealt with adequately insofar as the spiritual dimension is taken into account.
4. Man’s rebellion against God affects every aspect of human existence. The Fall resulted in God’s curse on creation and in destructive patterns of thought, culture, and relationships, which keep men and women in bondage to poverty and deprivation.
5. The work of Christian relief and development, therefore, must involve spiritual transformation, setting people free from destructive attitudes, beliefs, values, and patterns of culture. The proclamation of the gospel and the making of disciples, then, is an unavoidable dimension of relief and development work—not only for eternal salvation, but also for the transformation of culture and economic life.
6. When people were held in bondage to hunger and deprivation by unjust social structures, the Bible consistently denounced those who perpetuated such oppression and demanded obedience to God’s law. The Biblical emphasis, then, is not on “sinful structures,” but rather on sinful human choices that perpetuate suffering and injustice.
7. God’s ultimate answer for suffering and deprivation is the gift of His only Son, Jesus Christ, who broke the power of sin and death by His own death and resurrection. The decisive victory was won on the cross in the atoning death of Christ for all who would believe Him. The final victory will be accomplished when Christ returns in power and glory to reign with His people. Until that time, all who claim Jesus as their Lord are called to care for those in need as the Holy Spirit enables them, and to share the only message of true hope for a broken world.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, in light of the issues raised and the Biblical perspective outlined here, we encourage research, dialogue, and debate among all who claim Christ as Lord, so that we may serve Him more faithfully and work together more effectively.
We encourage you to send your response and your concerns to:
Villars Continuing Committee
P.O. Box 26253
Santa Ana, CA 92799-6253
The Villars Statement was signed by the following Villars consultation participants:
David M. Adams
Trans World Radio
Howard F. Ahmanson
Fieldstead & Company
Roberta Green Ahmanson
Fieldstead & Company
Theodore Baehr
Good News Communications
Clarence Bass
Bethel Theological Seminary
Charles Bennett
Food for the Hungry, International
VILLARS STATEMENT ON RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT, 4
Pierre Berthoud
Faculte Libre de Theologie Reformee
Spencer Bower
Christian Service Fellowship
Otto de Bruijne
Association of Evangelicals in Africa and Madagascar
Phillip Butler
Interdev
David Chilton
Church of the Redeemer
Placerville, CA
Michael Cromartie
Ethics and Public Policy Center
Lane T. Dennis
Good News Publishers/ Crossway Books
Gene Dewey
United Nations, Geneva
Homer E. Dowdy
International Institute for Relief and Development
George Grant
President, H.E.L.P. Services
Carrie Hawkins
Herbert Hawkins, Inc.
Preston Hawkins
Herbert Hawkins, Inc.
Evon Hedley
World Vision
Alan Jensen
Biblical Institute for Leadership Development, International
Henry Jones
Spiritual Overseers Service
Stephen Paul Kennedy
Patricia D. Lipscomb
Fieldstead & Company
Ranald Macaulay
L’Abri Fellowship
Vishal Mangalwadi
Traci Community and ACRA
Rob Martin
Fieldstead & Company
Don McNally
University of Toronto
Udo W. Middelmann
International Institute for Relief and Development
Darrow L. Miller
Food for the Hungry, International
Gareth B. Miller
Farms International
Ken Myers
Berea Publications
Ronald H. Nash
Western Kentucky University
Brian P. Newman
Marvin Olasky
University of Texas at Austin
Marvin Padgett
Logos of Nashville
Clark Pinnock
McMaster Divinity College
VILLARS STATEMENT ON RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT, 5
Herbert Schlossberg
Allen R. Seeland
AGW Group, International
Susumu Uda
Kyoritsu Christian Institute for Theological Studies and Mission
Tetsunao Yamamori
Food for the Hungry, International
Names of organizations are for identification only and are not meant to imply organizational
commitment to the statement.
Olasky, Marvin, Herbert Schlossenberg, and Clark H. Pinnock. Freedom, Justice, and Hope: Toward a Strategy for the Poor and the Oppressed. Crossway Books, 1988. 141-48.