True freedom

@kevin-eleven said
There is certainly a lack of self-restraint in some cases, and vigilante volunteerism in others.

In some cases? When we cast off all restraint or pick and choose those we wish to obey, we have no restraints when we choose only to obey them as we wish. When we are told to love God and each other and treat that as a suggestion, we have no constraints; when we know to do good and choose not to, we have no constraints; when we make up our morals as we go, we have no constraints.

Driving in town or on the highway, it is only when all of the drivers obey the constraints of the rules of the road that is that done safely, and even then we can accidents. Without the rules of the road, the whole road, not just the proper side, could be driven on, stop signs would be up to the drive to decide if they wanted to stop or not, yielding for pedestrians would be optional.

Without constraints, nothing restrains our baser impulses; everything is justifiable simply because we want what we want when we want it.

Animals (other than humans) do not make laws, yet some have freedom.

@bigdogg said
Animals (other than humans) do not make laws, yet some have freedom.

Look at the world the animals live in.
We all have freedom, which isn't the point, but freedom without restraint is one where we cannot live together. Casting off all restraint, casting off all love and compassion, leaves us in the animal world; the strong and the opportunistic feed off the weak and vulnerable. We are more than that, better than that, yet it is the lowest common denominator. The more we free ourselves of our restraints the less true freedom we have, take away stopping at stop signs all cross roads become very dangerous.

@bigdogg said
Animals (other than humans) do not make laws, yet some have freedom.

Humans aren’t animals and the theory of evolution is false (as far as macroevolution.) Total bunk.

@kellyjay said
Look at the world the animals live in.
We all have freedom, which isn't the point, but freedom without restraint is one where we cannot live together. Casting off all restraint, casting off all love and compassion, leaves us in the animal world; the strong and the opportunistic feed off the weak and vulnerable. We are more than that, better than that, yet it is the lowest c ...[text shortened]... e less true freedom we have, take away stopping at stop signs all cross roads become very dangerous.

I agree that some self-restraint and some rule of law, when done wisely, can enhance overall freedom. In particular, violence must be heavily discouraged if we're to have any peace.

However, think of the average citizen of China. Wouldn't you agree that they'd be more free if they could get rid of certain restraints?

Restraints are not an inherently good thing.

@bigdogg said
I agree that some self-restraint and some rule of law, when done wisely, can enhance overall freedom. In particular, violence must be heavily discouraged if we're to have any peace.

However, think of the average citizen of China. Wouldn't you agree that they'd be more free if they could get rid of certain restraints?

Restraints are not an inherently good thing.

I agree with you there too. The restrictions that are the best are those that level the playing field and enhance safety and the pursuit of happiness. Love is the best foundation but that is a heart matter, not something law enforcement can enforce.

@kellyjay said
Look at the world the animals live in.
We all have freedom, which isn't the point, but freedom without restraint is one where we cannot live together. Casting off all restraint, casting off all love and compassion, leaves us in the animal world; the strong and the opportunistic feed off the weak and vulnerable. We are more than that, better than that, yet it is the lowest c ...[text shortened]... e less true freedom we have, take away stopping at stop signs all cross roads become very dangerous.

Why are you asking a philosophical question in spirituality and what has freedom or lack of it got to do with Christianity.
You Christian’s nearly always engage in duplicity, why is that?
I looked at this thread because it had a very open ended title but I should have realised that it was really about plugging a particular sectarian viewpoint, and consequently descend into the usual Christian naval gazing and sectarianism.
You can have true freedom if you are prepared to face the legal and societal consequences of exercising said freedom. You have voluntarily given up any facade of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.
No offence intended

<<Why are you asking a philosophical question in spirituality and what has freedom or lack of it got to do with Christianity.>>

Freedom as it pertains to Christianity means freedom from guilt, fear, condemnation, the yoke of the Law and the power of sin.

Those who have accepted Jesus Christ and who believe in Christ and His Resurrection are free from all of those. We are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. Sin is no longer our master. Jesus Christ is.

<<You have voluntarily given up any facade of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.>>

<<You have voluntarily given up any facade of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.>>

That’s not Christianity. That’s Old Testament.

Christianity is about a relationship with Jesus Christ.

@kevcvs57 said
Why are you asking a philosophical question in spirituality and what has freedom or lack of it got to do with Christianity.
You Christian’s nearly always engage in duplicity, why is that?
I looked at this thread because it had a very open ended title but I should have realised that it was really about plugging a particular sectarian viewpoint, and consequently descend into ...[text shortened]... of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.
No offence intended

Why do you ask your questions, make your pronouncements?

@pb1022 said
<<Why are you asking a philosophical question in spirituality and what has freedom or lack of it got to do with Christianity.>>

Freedom as it pertains to Christianity means freedom from guilt, fear, condemnation, the yoke of the Law and the power of sin.

Those who have accepted Jesus Christ and who believe in Christ and His Resurrection are free from all of those. We are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. Sin is no longer our master. Jesus Christ is.

Well those are very qualified freedoms and surely the “ guilt, fear, condemnation, ” that you have freed yourself from only exist because of the rule maker that you claim has freed you from them, or am I missing something here🤔
If I joyously embrace what you call a sin how am I a prisoner of it if you are not a prisoner of the set of rules that Jesus laid down for you to joyously follow?

“ We are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. Sin is no longer our master. Jesus Christ is.”

So that’s a No to “True Freedom” but rather a celebration of one master over another. That’s honest and at least you are exercising the freedom to choose.

@kellyjay said
Why do you ask your questions, make your pronouncements?

The philosophical jury is still out on whether true freedom is attainable but I’m almost certain it cannot be attained by following a set of dogmatic rules.

@pb1022 said
<<You have voluntarily given up any facade of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.>>

<<You have voluntarily given up any facade of personal freedom to a book so you probably shouldn’t be asking the question.>>

That’s not Christianity. That’s Old Testament.

Christianity is about a relationship with Jesus Christ.

This doesn’t help an agnostic much, there are many Christian’s who do not believe you can view the teachings of Christ ( New Testament ) in isolation from the Old Testament / Torah and as a quite frequent observer of this forum the two seemed manacled to each other.

@kevcvs57 said
Well those are very qualified freedoms and surely the “ guilt, fear, condemnation, ” that you have freed yourself from only exist because of the rule maker that you claim has freed you from them, or am I missing something here🤔
If I joyously embrace what you call a sin how am I a prisoner of it if you are not a prisoner of the set of rules that Jesus laid down for you to jo ...[text shortened]... on of one master over another. That’s honest and at least you are exercising the freedom to choose.

Well, do you drive on both sides of the road, go through stop signs and red lights as you desire? Do you drink or get high and drive impaired? Do you take things that belong to others just because you want them? Do you harm others only because you don't like them for some reason? What constrains our baser instincts are restrictions; not having them make may indeed remove what is good and justice from the equation, but not having them means all life would be at the whim of strong over the weak and helpless.

What you are missing is without constraints, we would be immediately in a dog-eat-dog world. Justifying your desire to be free of some things and not others is simply talking out of both sides of your face; I will accept what I will accept when I want to, which is no different than having no restrictions on yourself since nothing hinders you accept your own choices. Making any claim I like this rule not that one is like saying I think the weak should be taken care of as long as they don't have anything I want, or hinders my life in any way.

@kellyjay said
Well, do you drive on both sides of the road, go through stop signs and red lights as you desire? Do you drink or get high and drive impaired? Do you take things that belong to others just because you want them? Do you harm others only because you don't like them for some reason? What constrains our baser instincts are restrictions; not having them make may indeed remove wha ...[text shortened]... k should be taken care of as long as they don't have anything I want, or hinders my life in any way.

But these are self imposed civil laws enacted in order for us to be able to coexist in civil society and not do physical harm to ourselves in the real world.
You are advocating ( unless I’m mistaken ) the adherence to a set of arbitrary rules that may or may not be beneficial to us in the real world as a means to obtaining freedom.
Some of these rules may even be harmful to us in the real world.
I can understand that if you sincerely believe in the god of the Bible or any other dogmatic text then it’s obvious that adhering to its rules regarding personal conduct would be a good thing.
However adhering to those rules could not be considered the path to True Freedom Per se.