Give Thanks!

Happy Thanksgiving!

May the time with your friends and family be a time of renewal and peace.

Passover, like most things God institutes, fulfills multiple purposes, but the stated one is so that Israel may remember their history and God’s faithfulness in creating their nation. In some ways, Thanksgiving is the American Passover. Let us share the story of His faithfulness to us. Share with your family history—the history of your family, the history of your country, the history of your faith.

Share with them the story of our freedom and why it is precious.

SDG

Freedom 2: The Bible and Freedom

Yesterday, I gave some brief thoughts on the nature of freedom and its parameters. Next, it is helpful to see what the Bible says about freedom, to see the contexts where it is discussed and what the implications are for us as Christians.

The idea of freedom is first explicitly mentioned in Genesis 2:16-17: “And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;  but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.’” However, the concept, as I defined it yesterday of having influence over one’s environment occurs even earlier, in Genesis 1:28:  “God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’” That command definitely contains the idea of having great freedom in Eden, and even beyond through to today, for God’s command was not conditional upon our innocence, though it can be argued theologically that some of our stewardship role was abdicated to Satan in the Fall, but I don’t want to get too distracted by this, other than to say we became slaves to a sin nature, so we did lose our freedom when we were deceived and rebelled.

Then let’s jump ahead to the giving of the Law through Moses. There are a number of passages that talk about the treatment of slaves and indentured servants, particularly when and how they must be freed. Slavery was legal in certain contexts, but it was meant to be temporary in many cases. The context for freeing slaves was often given in the context of God’s freeing the Jews from Egypt during the Exodus—God freed them from slavery, so they are to treat their slaves with the remembrance of being slaves themselves and to free them when appropriate. Thus, freedom of individual self determination is a cherished Biblical value. (See verses:  Exodus 6:6, Ex 21, Leviticus 19:20, Deut 15, and others)

Then in the Psalms, we often see freedom longed for or rejoiced in, and here, it is a different kind of freedom. Previously we saw the desire to be free of human masters. Here we typically see freedom from sin, care, worry, the burdens of this life, and that freedom is found in following God righteously, in addition to numerous calls for deliverance from human enemies. What is interesting here is that this type of freedom is achieved by self-limiting our personal sovereignty to the limits set by God. Psalm 119 in particular has the theme throughout it that human freedom is best expressed when living within God’s boundaries. Yet, here is the aspect of freedom that is a key—willingly choosing to be self limiting, rather than being externally forced to. (Some Psalms that address this issue are: 25, 31, 37, 54, 73, 81, 105, 112, 116, 119, 129, 136, 142, 146) Two novels discuss this issue, Frank Peretti’s Piercing the Darkness and Madeliene L’Engle’s A Wrinkle in Time.

Another aspect of freedom is revealed as major themes in the prophets, particularly Isaiah and Jeremiah. The context is God’s people in captivity to Assyria and Babylon due to their rebellion towards God, and God in return is proclaiming that His people will be freed again and what is more, be freed in some sort of permanent way, and we see with growing clarity God’s plan for the redemption of ALL people, not just the Jews, that He will deal with the ultimate issue of sin and free people from both His condemnation due to sin, and from the bondage to sin itself. Whereas the Psalms dealt mostly with individuals, the prophets are talking about nations, cultures, and the human race as a whole being freed.

Fast forward some more. Jesus Himself was passionate about freedom of many kinds, declaring people He touched free from disease, infirmity, demonic forces, and sin. (Mk 5:29, 34; Lk 4:18, 13:16, Jn 8:36) He sums it all up in John 8:32, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free,” talking about the truth of Himself and the Gospel.

Paul was obsessed with the freedom from sin that Christ procured for us, and almost as an afterthought suggested slaves seek out freedom if it comes their way, but he was more concerned that people follow Christ in their spiritual freedom regardless of their terrestrial situations. (There are just too many versus in Romans, the Corinthians, Galatians, and his other letters (Philemon). It is a worthwhile topical study.) Similarly, the theme of freedom runs through the letters of James and Peter, and the Hebrews.

So what? God gave us a great deal of freedom in the beginning, which we threw away/lost, and the whole story of history is the process of fighting to get it back. That’s not insignificant. It is revolutionary. So much so, that it fired the Revolutionary spirit of the founders of this country. Reading the Federalist papers and the letters and speeches of the founders reveal the Biblical roots for the concept of creating a nation of freeborn citizens.

We could do an entire symposium on the Biblical justifications or lack thereof for rebelling against British rule, but I don’t want to go there right now. Neither am I about to launch salvos in the debate of whether we were ever a Christian nation or not. I’m getting to something more fundamental.

Freedom to choose one’s path in life, to build communities of like-minded citizens and build a nation of federated states was the main goal of most of the founders. Indeed, some of the biggest disputes centered around how strong the central government should be. Ultimately, the Bill of Rights was included precisely to counteract what some founders felt was too strong of a central government as described in the main body of the Constitution.

One of the challenges of having a Biblically based discussion on the American philosophy of freedom is because there was no government like it during the times that any of the books of the Bible were written. The Roman Republic had already become the Roman Empire during the Intertestamental Period of the Bible. Thus, you see everything from anarchy to theocracy to monarchy to empires, but no republics, which is what the founders created. Thus, we have to look at principles rather than commands. Peter said we are to “honor the Emperor,” (1 Peter 2:17) because the rulers were put in place by God (Romans 13:4), and Paul also agreed with his accusers in Acts about the Biblical injunction against speaking ill of one’s ruler. (Acts 23:5)

When a nation has self-determination and can choose their ruler, this is somewhat new ground. Does this mean that God has not set our leaders over us? Since we are, in a sense, the boss of our elected officials, are we free to badmouth them? (as admittedly, nearly all of us LOVE to do! How many political cartoons, emails, or jokes have you laughed at or forwarded??) What is the role of a Christian as a citizen in a Republic?

This is not an easy question to answer. I’m already on the third page of this post, so cannot hope to do it justice here. In fact, I’m not sure I’ve come to any solid conclusions, except that we are called to have an active role. How do I know this? 1) We are human beings created in God’s image with the power and authority to act as moral agents, 2) are tasked by God to be stewards of the Creation, which includes societies created by humans, 3) as redeemed people, the Holy Spirit of God Himself dwells within us, guiding us into all righteousness, thus we should be passionate about justice, equality, fairness and righteousness in our government, and 4) the country we live in has a Constitution that specifically empowers its citizens to be active in the governing of this country. Therefore, we have an obligation to be active in the public discourse.

So far, we have not explicitly looked at anything that dictates whether we ought to be Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Conservative, Socialist or Libertarian, and as I promised, I will not go there. There are Biblical Christians in every one of those groups, and that is because every one of those groups do have things to contribute to the dynamic functioning of a large complex society. The questions that arise typically fall into the category of who’s responsible for what aspects of society—the government, the people, the churches, business, and so on.

Homework: I want to hear from you through comments your answers to the question: What is the role of a Christian as a citizen in a Republic?

SDG

What is Freedom?

I promised from the beginning of this blog that it was apolitical, and I have come to realize I did not say what I meant. A better word would be apartisan. Anytime a statement is made about human systems, it is a political statement—it deals with the policy of a polis, a group of human beings. Thus, when I discuss academic freedom or even different views on Creation, those are political statements, even if they are not partisan. Of course, I do need to clarify what I mean by partisan, which is I will not advocate for any of the organized political parties in the US. I will share views on issues, some (many) of which may be identified with a plank in a given party’s platform, but those are happenstances of agreement rather than advocacy, as I will also usually challenge weaknesses of a given view or its application to policy.

Enough disclaimer.

Obviously, I feel the need for the disclaimer today because “freedom” is a very political concept. There is inherently a prepositional implication: “freedom from” or “freedom to.” It is certainly THE most cherished value in our society, yet strangely, one of the least defined or discussed. It is so foundational an axiom in Western life that few meditate on it or study it. It is the water in which our culture swims, and we rarely realize that indeed, we are wet. That is, until we perceive dry spots on our scales.

Literally, herein lies the rub. In its most basic sense, freedom is the ability to shape the environment around us, to a greater or lesser extent. To have freedom is to possess the ability to influence. Therefore, if there is more than one entity with the ability to influence, then the risk arises that these influences will interact. When they do, the interaction can be constructive, neutral or destructive, in the sense of achieving the goals of both entities. Dry spots occur when the influence of one entity reduces the influence of another entity. Given that the entities are separate, it stands to reason that the motivations and goals of each will have differences, and can run counter to each other, or, that the preferred methods for achieving even common goals can be different.

Therefore, as the number and complexities of entities increase, the risk for conflict increases until at a certain point, that risk becomes a certainty. Conflicts are avoided or resolved by one of two means, restricting an entity’s own freedom, or restricting the freedom of others. These are the only two options, yet they play out in a variety of ways: self-restraint, overpowering, or compromise (which is mutual self-restraint).

When an entity refuses to exercise self-restraint, conflicts become more intense. If its influence is small, its impact on others is small to non-existent. The greater its power (the freedom to influence a larger area of its environment), the greater the conflict in intensity, number of involved entities, or both.

The ability to influence is not the only issue however. There is also the quality of self-awareness. A hurricane has a substantial ability to influence, but is not self-aware, and therefore cannot be said to have freedom. An animal has the ability to influence (building a nest), and perhaps some minor level of self-awareness (a dog being obedient or not), but it is an open discussion as to how ‘free’ they are in the context of this post. No, for purposes of this discussion, we are talking about human beings and the systems that groups of humans create in order to have working societies.

So, given that conflicts arise due to the exercising of freedoms, what are our options? We basically have two—live with it or take away freedom. If we live with it, it means we are accepting the other’s ability to hinder our freedom (i.e.- to be inconvenienced). However, in order to take away freedom, there must be an entity with enough freedom to do so. Thus, when a restriction in one entity’s freedom is imposed, it of necessity must be done by another entity with more freedom…AND/OR the permission of the restricted entity. So really, there really is only one option—when conflict arises (apart from issues of pure misunderstanding), someone’s freedom is restricted. The questions then become who’s freedom, by how much, and who imposes the restriction?

With this foundation, in the next post or two, I will look at contemporary examples of freedom to see if we can find resolutions for points of conflict. {Of course, if this extends past two posts, I am merely exercising my freedom as the owner of this blog. You are welcome to exercise your freedom to read or not!}

SDG

Student Sabbaths

It just occurred to me that one way for us to demonstrate our faith to students, TA’s, and our research team is by giving them regular Sabbaths. As Christians, we are not under the Law, however, the Lord did teach the disciples and Pharisees that the Sabbath was made for us. In short, God created us with a need to rest and recharge, and dictated that it should happen weekly.

Today’s academic rat race pushes everyone to burn the candle at six ends. How can we creatively work our classes and research schedules such that we encourage those for whom we are responsible to actually take those breaks? At the very least, to take the breaks from the work we give them, as we have little control on their duties for our colleagues?

This thought occurred to me as I was contemplating the short holiday week we have this week. Often, faculty tend to have major assignments due the Monday after Thanksgiving, with the idea that the students can use that time to finish up. I’ve always tried to have things due before Thanksgiving, so they could then hopefully relax and enjoy their time with family/friends before the last push for finals. Furthermore, have them due on Monday rather than Wednesday. This way they aren’t pulling all-nighters then driving home across the state. (I did this preparing for my last final one semester and very nearly was in a bad accident. I woke up just before I drifted into another car. Praise the Lord!)

It really amazes students when we do things that take their situations into account. What a ministry opportunity!

SDG

Good Enough

When I was in grad school, my roommates (all from church) nicknamed me, “Mr. Soft Love,” because I was always sympathetic, looking for the best in people, etc., particularly compared to the others. I think it was the Texan in me compared to the Yankee in them.

Here’s the funny thing—they probably wouldn’t call me that anymore. Some of it has probably rubbed onto me from them, but I think most of it comes from being an educator, especially for folks near the end of their schooling. They often need a swift kick, given in love.

Two things that definitely contributed to being closer to Mr. Tough Love than I used to be—two books: The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, and No More Christian Nice Guy. Lewis was the first to clue me in to the dynamic range of the concept of “good:”

"Aslan, a man?" said Mr.Beaver sternly. "Certainly not. I tell you, He is the King of the wood and the son of the Great Emperor Beyond the Sea. Don't you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion - The lion. The Great Lion."

"Ooh," said Susan. "I'd thought he was a man. Is he...quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion!"

"That you will deary and no mistake," said Mrs.Beaver. "If there's anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they're either braver than most or else just silly."

"Then he isn't safe?" said Lucy.

"Safe?" said Mr.Beaver. "Don't you hear what Mrs.Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? Course he isn't safe.....but he's good. He's the King I tell you."

This passage jumps out at me because of a friend who pointed it out to me with joy and wonder. She was right. Our vision of goodness, holiness, and righteousness is far too tame, too banal, for the infinite God who created the universe with supernovae and, yes, lions.

The second book, by Paul Coughlin, kicked me forward in a big way. He contrasted goodness also, but this time with the idea of “nice.” He points out that Jesus was not always a “nice” person. How many nice people do you know who braid whips to use on corrupt people preying on folks in a bind? I know that calling my elder board a “brood of vipers” would put me at the top of Santa’s “nice” list.

Those of us raised in the South (and in this case, Texas would fall into that category) are brought up to be nice to one another and that being nice was a cardinal virtue in all situations, regardless of how we actually felt or even what was appropriate.

Just one problem. Ok, two. 1) It isn’t healthy. 2) It isn’t Christlike.

There are simply times where the good thing is to tell someone, “it is NOT alright!” “This is not acceptable.” “I expect a change in your behaviour.” “That was rude.” “I will not bail you out of the crisis of your own making.” And so on.

This is especially important in education. Our job is to train people in certain subjects and the very nature of grading is telling the student how they measure up. Does protecting their self-esteem from any/all bruising really help them master the material? My job is, in a respectful way, to help them master physical chemistry, not make sure they are fully self-actualized. True self esteem comes from knowing that you are 1) a fallen human saved by the grace of God’s wild but incredibly good love, and 2) competent to excellent in your vocation through which you glorify God and in your daily life. When we protect a student’s self-esteem at the cost of their mastery of the subject, we cheat them of their potential and their ‘self-esteem’ is based on a lie.

Strong words.

Have I mastered this area in my life? Not hardly. In fact, I sometimes hit both extremes—too harsh and/or too nice. Fortunately, God is the best educator. He’ll get me there, and it will be with the appropriate self-esteem not only preserved but enhanced.

God’s goodness—it isn’t safe in the common understanding of the term, and it isn’t necessarily nice. Perhaps, if we understood this better, as He reveals about Himself in His Word, then the “problem of evil” would be less of a problem. Maybe it really is a “problem of good,” or, at least our understanding of it.

SDG