After the Battle

After the battle has broken,
The strong men are down.
All that's left are the pieces
Strewn on the ground.

So many years of hatred,
Decades of war.
All that's left are the pieces
Floating back to the shore.

The fighting has ended,
The smoke lifting to see.
All that's left is the rubble,
Nothing tidy and neat.

Here we stand in the ashes,
Those left from the fray.
It's our job to rebuild
Without any delay.

We stand not alone,
Though battered and flawed.
For after the battle,
God is still God.

© Daniel Lorimer
October 2, 2009

Freedom Pt 2 - Freedom and Selfishness

O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

– Star Spangled Banner

Please Note: This is a longer blog. If you don't have time for the full journey, please read the Introduction and the Summary at the end.

Introduction:
The United States of America: the “land of the free and the home of the brave.” This month, we remember once again our Day of Independence, when the United States began her quest as an independent proponent of freedom. This freedom is at the core of who we are. Without freedom, we would not be the United States of America. This freedom has suffered many challenges because as the old adage goes, “freedom is not free.” We have lived for it, fought for it, died for it. But yet, freedom stands. But freedom is such a fragile thing, so difficultly gained, so easily lost. As a nation, we are once again at a crossroads. How can we ensure that freedom is maintained and passed on to our posterity?

In my last post (part one) I talked about freedom and suffering. If you missed it, catch it here: http://dplorimer.blogspot.com/2012/07/freedom-pt-1-freedom-and-suffering.html

Now I want to share part two, and look at yet a different perspective of freedom – in the realm of the personal. What does selfishness have to do with freedom?

The Journey: (The Journey is best, but if you don't have time, please skip to the “Summary” in bold at the end.)
The dictionary defines freedom as “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.” If we have freedom, then we can do whatever we want, right? Isn't that the purpose of freedom, so that we can do as we please? This is the philosophy of many. But what impact does this have on freedom? The truth is that this view of freedom is rooted in selfishness and attacks the very foundation of freedom. Selfishness is the very antagonist of freedom and nothing will destroy freedom more quickly. How can I say that?

The Biblical concept of freedom/liberty is not license to do whatever we please. In fact, Paul addresses this very issue in Galatians: “For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” - Gal 5:13

Rather than self-pleasing, the Biblical concept of freedom/liberty is the liberty to serve others. It is a selfless pouring out of ourselves to do what is best for someone else.

So we have two competing principles: selfishness and selflessness. Selflessness is the preserver of freedom and selfishness is the destroyer of freedom. So what do we do about it? How do we preserve freedom?

Let me start by saying that all freedom is personal and internal. If someone is free internally, you can't take that freedom away with external bonds. If someone is bound internally, you can't set them free with external means. So to address the core issues of freedom, we must address the core issues of the person. To really deal with selfishness and freedom, it takes us right to the heart of man.

The real issue behind selfishness is carnality. At the root of the carnal nature is selfishness. The result of selfishness is bondage – you cannot be free and selfish because the selfishness will put you in bondage. Selfishness will control you. It will dictate your life. You are bound, and unable to act as you should. Selfishness puts you in chains to money, greed, government, sex, hate, something. There is no question, selfishness will make you its slave. It will control you.

The solution? “I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.” - Gal 13:16-18. The Spirit of God brings freedom. He is the source of selflessness, and it is only selflessness that brings true freedom.

But there it said it again – if we are led by the Spirit, we are not under the law, so that means we can do what we want, right? No. Because this freedom is freedom to serve others (Gal 5:13). And you find that by serving others you are preserving freedom – both your own freedom and theirs. A society of internally free (selfless) people is the only society that will remain free.

For that reason, freedom apart from Christianity cannot exist. Because God is the giver of real freedom, and any freedom without Christ is a mere fantasy. But we speak in the personal level. Does this really have an impact on whole societies? Yes.

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams (The Works of John Adams, ed. C. F. Adams, Boston: Little, Brown Co., 1851, 4:31)

“Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments." - Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence

“Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants.” - Benjamin Franklin

“It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.” - Patrick Henry

Take for example Islam. We hear a lot about Islam being a religion of peace and freedom. It is not a religion of either. Islam is a religion of fear and bondage. In Islamic countries that have been given freedom, does it last? Some have overthrown their government. Who comes into power but more tyrants? Some have been given freedom externally, and they struggle to maintain it, because the people are not internally free. They are bound, because they have forsaken the true God.

But it's not just Islam. Every godless country in history has fallen because freedom cannot be maintained. Without God, America is headed toward the same end. The only thing that can save her is a return to Christ, who gives true freedom.

Summary:
Freedom and Selfishness – Here's how it works.

Carnal Nature → Selfishness → Person does what self wants; disregards others; disregards laws → Laws are required to contain this person → the more selfish, the more external rules are imposed → the more external rules imposed, the less freedom → the cycle continues until freedom is lost.
The end result is the loss of freedom altogether. The root cause is selfishness.

The only way to reverse this trend is to reverse the beginning. The root of selfishness must be replaced with selflessness, the very essence of Christianity. We start over:

Spiritual Nature → Selflessness ---> Person does what is best for others; follows rules; obeys laws → Rules/laws are not necessary to contain this person because the person is self-governed → the more selfless, the less external rules are imposed → the cycle continues toward greater and greater freedom.
The end result is absolute freedom. The root cause is selflessness.

This equation applies in personal life, the church, school, work, government, everywhere. If you want to have freedom, you must be self-governed. You cannot be selfish and self-governed.

All freedom is personal; All bondage is personal. If you are in bondage internally, you will be in bondage externally. If you are free internally, you will be free externally.

“Bad men cannot make good citizens. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience are incompatible with freedom.” - Patrick Henry

The Bible teaches it. The founders believed it. People must be free internally in order to maintain freedom externally. If the United States is to stay free, it will only be because the citizens are truly free, free with the liberty in Christ to do what is best for others, and not just serve themselves.

To preserve freedom we don't need better laws, we need better people. For the sake of freedom, will you be one?

Freedom Pt 1 - Freedom and Suffering

O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

– Star Spangled Banner

Please Note: This is a longer blog. If you don't have time for the full journey, please read the Introduction and the Summary at the end.

Introduction:
The United States of America: the “land of the free and the home of the brave.” This month, we remember once again our Day of Independence, when the United States began her quest as an independent proponent of freedom. This freedom is at the core of who we are. Without freedom, we would not be the United States of America. This freedom has suffered many challenges because as the old adage goes, “freedom is not free.” We have lived for it, fought for it, died for it. But yet, freedom stands. But freedom is such a fragile thing, so difficultly gained, so easily lost. As a nation, we are once again at a crossroads. How can we ensure that freedom is maintained and passed on to our posterity?

In part one of this 4th of July blog, I want to look at freedom from a little different perspective. What does suffering have to do with freedom?

This journey takes me back several years to a book written by Peter Kreeft titled Making Sense out of Suffering. If you haven't read it, it's a good read. He makes an interesting case: “Freedom is both the source and the solution to suffering. Freedom both makes suffering possible and makes suffering meaningful.” (p.99) That's quite a pill to swallow right off the bat and doesn't seem to make sense. He's basically making a double-sided statement, so let's look at each side.

The Journey: (If you don't want to read all this, please skip to the "Summary" in bold at the end.)
First, how is freedom the source of suffering? This may not seem logical, so let's look at it. Freedom necessitates choice – you can't have freedom without the ability to choose. To have the ability to choose, there must be more than one option (or it's not really a choice). Every option logically must have a negative counter-option. For example, I may choose to eat, or choose to not eat. Freedom also necessitates consequences – you can't have freedom unless your choices actually have some impact. If all choices have the same outcome, then it it not really freedom, because you didn't actually choose anything – the end was already dictated before-hand. If choices have consequences, there must be a possibility of suffering, because suffering is the negative counter-option to wellness. Thus is how freedom is the source of suffering, because without freedom suffering would not have to be an option. But with freedom, suffering must be a possibility, or it is not really freedom. Before you go to far, let me point out that non-freedom does in no way guarantee that there is not suffering. Whoever dictates when there is no freedom could dictate suffering. But if the dictator were all powerful, etc., they could dictate no suffering, because there would be no choice. So, in summary, non-freedom does NOT guarantee non-suffering, but freedom requires or creates the possibility of suffering.

Second, how is freedom the solution to suffering? The answer to this question is very practical, because this is where it hits home. If freedom is the source of suffering, how could it be the solution? Here's how. Non-freedom does not guarantee non-suffering, and if suffering is mandated without choice, then we can do nothing about it and there is no hope. If there is suffering because of freedom then there is a possibility of a different outcome and we can make a difference in that outcome, and therefore there is hope. Suffering without freedom is not tolerable. It is pointless. Would you willingly suffer if it would not change the outcome? Would you take a bullet for someone if it wouldn't make any difference? Would you endure hardship if it couldn't change anything? No. See, freedom gives meaning to suffering. We face suffering because we can make a difference. We endure suffering because we hope for a better future (a future that we have a choice in). Freedom infuses suffering with meaning and purpose because we can look past the suffering to what we are suffering for. Suffering only has any purpose if we have freedom. Freedom is the solution to suffering because it gives purpose to suffering.

What is the purpose to suffering? Some suffering is the necessary consequence of choice (either one's own or someone else's). But there's another kind of suffering, and that is the suffering that we willingly accept. It seems logical to think that the purpose of this suffering is to end suffering. See, if you can make a difference in the outcome, then suffering is tolerable if you can lesson suffering in the future. But this contains the seeds of its own destruction, because freedom necessitates the possibility of suffering. Therefore, suffering to destroy suffering is in reality suffering to destroy freedom. Instead of suffering to destroy suffering, let me venture to say that the purpose of this kind of suffering is someone else's freedom. Look at Christ as an example. He willingly suffered, because He could make a difference. Did He suffer to destroy suffering? Not primarily. He suffered to give us freedom, and “by His wounds we are healed” (Is. 53:5). Freedom is only possible through suffering. Someone must suffer for another to have freedom. See how this all fits together? Freedom gives purpose to suffering in part because suffering is what makes freedom possible.

Having this background, let's look at the world. There is suffering in the world. That either means that there is freedom or that suffering has been mandated without choice. If it has been mandated, then there is nothing we can do and there is no hope. If there is freedom, then there is hope because we can make a difference. If there's hope, we can endure or tolerate suffering because we have something better to look forward to. In fact, we will accept suffering for the sake of granting freedom to another. We will suffer so someone else doesn't have to.

So, if we have freedom, what should be our primary goal? To end suffering? Or to grant freedom? One might think it best to pursue the end of suffering, but be careful. Remember that freedom necessitates the possibility of suffering? Therefore, pursuing the goal of ending suffering is actually pursuing the goal of ending freedom and thus destroys freedom (and does not end suffering). We should pursue the goal of granting freedom primarily, because it is freedom that makes suffering tolerable. And we find that pursuing freedom lessons suffering because one person willingly suffers so another doesn't have to.

Can I give you one major example of this controversy in our world today? It's called “Capitalism” and “Socialism.”

Capitalism is a system of private ownership. Capitalism pursues freedom to ensure the continuation of the private ownership. Capitalism works because of freedom. People are willing to suffer because they are free. They own things and they make the choices. They are willing to suffer because they can make a difference in the outcome.

Socialism is a system of state/government ownership. Socialism pursues non-freedom to ensure the continuation of government ownership. Most people don't like that idea, however, because there is suffering in the world and suffering is not tolerable without freedom. So socialism often takes on a “happy face” with the primary purpose to end suffering. People are drawn toward socialism because they desire both freedom and the absence of suffering. Socialism seems to offer that. But it's a lie. Remember that freedom necessitates the possibility of suffering? To destroy suffering on earth there must by necessity be the destruction of freedom. Therefore socialism seeks to take away freedom under the guise of ending suffering. But you remember that non-freedom does not guarantee non-suffering, and socialism can't eliminate all suffering. But it does eliminate freedom and thus takes away people's acceptance of suffering. But suffering still exists. No one wants to suffer because they are no longer free, and suffering has lost any sense of acceptability. If no one will suffer for the good of all, then all end up suffering. Thus, the downfall of socialism.


Summary: For all you “to the point” people.

Premises:
One is either free or not free.
Freedom necessitates the possibility of suffering.
Non-freedom is the only possible way for suffering not to exist.
Non-freedom does not guarantee non-suffering.
Suffering exists.
Suffering is either the necessary result of freedom or the imposed result of non-freedom.
Suffering is not tolerable if the sufferer cannot make a difference.
Non-freedom makes suffering non-tolerable because the sufferer can't make a difference.
Freedom makes suffering tolerable because the sufferer can make a difference.

Socialism:
To end suffering, freedom must be destroyed.
When freedom is destroyed, suffering is no longer meaningful.
When suffering is no longer meaningful, no one will willingly suffer.
If no one will willingly suffer, all must of necessity suffer.
Socialism fails to eliminate suffering and destroys freedom in the process.

Capitalism:
To ensure freedom, suffering is a possibility.
With freedom, suffering has purpose and is tolerable.
Because suffering has purpose, some will willingly suffer.
When some willingly suffer, others do not suffer as much.
Capitalism maintains freedom and makes suffering tolerable in the process.




So what of Freedom and Suffering? For freedom to endure, we need people who will step up and say: “I am willing to suffer for the sake of someone else. I will accept suffering for myself with the redemptive purpose of granting another freedom and reducing their suffering.” They've had many names: founder, patriot, marine, preacher, missionary, . . . . For the sake of freedom, will you be one?




P.S.  How does all this work in Heaven?  I'm afraid I can't speak to that here.  This blog is "earthly" in nature, dealing only with the issues of freedom and suffering as they relate to us here on earth.