Freedom
Posted: June 7th, 2009, 11:37 pm
"What do you know about freedom? You think freedom means doing what you like. Well you're wrong. That isn't true freedom. True freedom means doing what I tell you." Shift the Ape.
It seems to me that freedom isn't the power to do what you want, but rather the power to do what is right. A rich drug addict isn't free, even tho he can snort cocaine all day long. A person who can't forgive his enemies is hardly free, neither is someone who can't control his bodily passions. A person who can't give away all he has isn't free. It's paradoxical. Christ was never more free than when he was crucified. We did not violate his freedom by taking his life. Rather, he demonstrated his freedom by giving his life.
Freedom isn't an external set of conditions, but an internal quality of spirit. It's the power to do what is right. Freedom isn't advanced by democracy or by aircraft carriers, but by prayer and grace. Physical and political liberty is good only if it nurtures this inner liberty. It's the very devil otherwise.
This leads to an observation about universalism. Lewis argued that we are free to reject God forever. But if freedom is doing what is right, rejecting God would be the very antithesis of freedom. It would be impossible, by definition, to reject God freely. Rather, this would be the act of someone utterly enslaved to sin. The damned would be bound to reject God, not free to reject him. This seems to leave me either with double predestination, or universalism.
Any comments?
It seems to me that freedom isn't the power to do what you want, but rather the power to do what is right. A rich drug addict isn't free, even tho he can snort cocaine all day long. A person who can't forgive his enemies is hardly free, neither is someone who can't control his bodily passions. A person who can't give away all he has isn't free. It's paradoxical. Christ was never more free than when he was crucified. We did not violate his freedom by taking his life. Rather, he demonstrated his freedom by giving his life.
Freedom isn't an external set of conditions, but an internal quality of spirit. It's the power to do what is right. Freedom isn't advanced by democracy or by aircraft carriers, but by prayer and grace. Physical and political liberty is good only if it nurtures this inner liberty. It's the very devil otherwise.
This leads to an observation about universalism. Lewis argued that we are free to reject God forever. But if freedom is doing what is right, rejecting God would be the very antithesis of freedom. It would be impossible, by definition, to reject God freely. Rather, this would be the act of someone utterly enslaved to sin. The damned would be bound to reject God, not free to reject him. This seems to leave me either with double predestination, or universalism.
Any comments?