Maintaining Freedom, Part 2

Maintaining Freedom

I've wanted to revisit this many times after posing the question that comprises the original entry above. For some people, they feel and believe that it is the military that preserves the freedom in America. To others they believe that the Laws protect our freedoms and still others feel that it is the Courts. Speaking religiously, these same people might make some correlation between the secular and the spiritual to express their thoughts as to who protects our freedoms.

But who really maintains freedom available to everyone? The one who offers it with no strings attached. The military and government require support, which takes the form of taxes, and acts of obeisance and obedience. Churches often offer what is considered a spiritual freedom but only if those things considered as "spiritual" are honored above those things that are considered as "worldly" or secular and profane, much in the same way the secular world does.

As I said before, the true freedom is that which is offered without strings. Who maintains it? Is it we who attempt to define it by what we can and can't or should and shouldn't do? Or is it the One who is willing to overlook and forgive our shortcomings to allow us to explore and even test the depths of His love?

Previous Comments:

Hi Bill,

Thanks for answering my question.

Re: what you shared here, I'm forwarding an excerpt from this link (not you Link) http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/bth/bth2.html

I don't enjoy his use of the word 'religion', but I do understand what he is saying.
Just wondering if this might somehow tie in with what you are banging around?

Rich-man

We can enjoy true "freedom of religion", therefore, only if it comes as a gift from God to men who recognize their total poverty when it comes to the issue of rights. In this sense, democracy is the very opposite of religious freedom. For it asks people to insist on grasping freedom as a possession, an inalienable right. And in so doing, true religious freedom slips through the fingers of the unsuspecting citizens.[14] It slips through their fingers because the selfish insistence upon our right to life is diametrically opposed to the Christian principle of self-giving love; the selfish insistence upon our right to individual liberty is likewise opposed to the principle of absolute commitment to God; and worst of all, the sel­fish insistence upon our own right to pursue happiness is the root of all evil.[15] Satan deceived Eve by fooling her into believing she had a right to possess life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness [Gen. 3:1-6]; but her reward for grasping this supposed right was death, bondage to her desires, and unavoidable suffer­ing [3:16].

Posted by Richard on September 14, 2003 at 9:26:48 AM


Richard,

I would think that where this ties in to what I'm banging around is when I said:

"Churches often offer what is considered a spiritual freedom but only if those things considered as 'spiritual' are honored above those things that are considered as 'worldly' or secular and profane, much in the same way the secular world does."

I guess what I'm saying is that if freedom doesn't come from you, then it isn't up to you to maintain it. I see that as different than what the author was saying at your link.

Posted by HarryTick on September 14, 2003 at 3:17:29 PM