Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. (1 Peter 2:16)Wait ... what? Peter says we have freedom. We are free. Then he says that we aren't to misuse our freedom. We're supposed to use our freedom properly by living as servants. Nay, "bondslaves." Peter is saying, "Use your freedom to live as slaves."
It would appear, then, that God's definition of "freedom" is somewhat different than ours. (Surprise, surprise, right?) We think of freedom as the ability to do whatever we want. Peter says freedom is the power or right to do what we ought. We think of freedom as the state of not being enslaved and Peter says that freedom is determined by who it is you are enslaved to -- evil or God.
Maybe, just maybe, in a world where servanthood was the norm this wouldn't be so jarring. Free to serve a master more fully was reasonable. In today's ardent "We will not submit to anyone" American culture, it is just plain wrong. Except, of course, that it comes from Scripture. So who is wrong?
2 comments:
Not much different than the founding fathers and their notion of liberty. I wonder where they go the idea?
I appreciate how the NT authors put things like this. They state the reality that we're free and point out that we choose not to live out that reality.
It's definitely interesting how they define freedom. What's hard for some people is acknowledging that the only worldview where this definition of freedom makes sense is a Christian worldview. It's one of the seeming paradoxes of Christianity.
Post a Comment