Our definitions of freedom are all wrong
Freedom. If you’re an American, it’s one of the defining terms of our national philosophy and a constant buzzword of political discourse. If you’re a Christian, it’s one of the defining terms of the New Testament, which Jesus says has set us free. If you’re an American Christian, freedom is a word we really love.
That last part, about Jesus setting us free, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to non-Christians, though. How can you be free when you have to follow a bunch of rules about what you can say, who you can have sex with, where you spend Sunday morning, etc.?
Freedom is a tricky thing to define anyway. The Oxford dictionary defines it this way:
“The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants.”
At first glance, this seems pretty straightforward. Freedom means you can do what you want. Then we think of all the things some people would want to do: things like murder people, and steal, and commandeer nuclear weapons. After about five seconds of that line of thought, we see that this is a terrible definition.
So let’s try this one:
“The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants, if it doesn’t harm anyone else.”
That makes more sense, and sounds like a pretty nice sentiment. The Wiccans have even adopted it as a summation of their moral philosophy. The problem is, what exactly constitutes hurting someone else? Of course you can’t punch someone in the face for no reason, but what about, say, breaking up with a significant other? Staying would hurt you, breaking up would hurt them…who decides whose hurt is more important? Is it okay to hurt people, as long as it’s for a good reason? Who gets to decide what restrictions get put on whom? This is even worse than the first definition, because it’s so vague it can mean anything to anyone.
Let’s move on to Oxford’s second definition, which is, “The state of not being imprisoned or enslaved.”
This is definitely a good start, and in agreement with the Bible. Jesus sets us free from slavery to sin and death (Romans 6:22). But then what? What are we set free for? If we’re set free to do whatever we want, then we’re right back to the first or second definition. And we’re terrible masters of our own lives.
Here’s what I think real freedom is:
“The power and opportunity to choose what is objectively the best possible existence.”
This is what Jesus offers us. The best possible thing in existence is God. Jesus sets us free from everything that prevents us from making the choice to connect with, know, and experience him. The freedom Jesus offers us allows us to make that choice, rather than being consigned to rejection as we are without him.
Jesus offers us not only freedom from sin, but the guarantee of eternal life, as well as the opportunity to fulfill his purpose for us in this world. That is, objectively, the best possible existence we could have, and we can have it forever.
That’s why we can say that Jesus offers us freedom. It doesn’t always feel like freedom. It may sometimes feel restrictive and burdensome. What is objectively the best possible existence may not always subjectively feel that way. But the only way we gain real freedom is to recognize and reject the mere illusion of freedom, which is what freedom by any definition other than this one is, and choose the freedom Jesus offers — the freedom to serve God and know God.
