Oneproblem

It is so turned around these days.

Thursday, July 06, 2006

Question #2

Remember last month I said I would have a weekly question? Well, here is the long over due Question #2. I don't know about you but I had a wonderful 4th of July holiday. We had way too many people over, had way too much to eat, and had way to much fun and fellowship. It's great to celebrate our countries independence, and for some reason this year I really got choked up at the fireworks when I sat back and really contemplated how this country has weathered the last 230 years. Some people will laugh at the notion that God has particularly blessed the USA. Some would like to have us believe that our country was founded by diests and not men who believed in Jesus and the God of Abraham. But the more I read history and biographies the more I am convinced that our founding fathers were God fearing men of the Judeo-Christian persuasion. I say this to remind us that yes we gladly celebrate our "independence day" but this country has been "dependent" on God from the very start. If anything I feel our country is anxiously awaiting it's independence from "God." To which I will quote Dennis Prager.

"Many countries have recovered from economic and political catastrophes but not a one has recovered from a moral catastrophe."

This leads me to my question of the week....kinda sorta. Independence and Freedom seem to go hand in hand. I have had some "go-arounds" with a few of you about what freedom means. My question is this.

Does freedom mean that we are truly free to do whatever we want or are we obligated to conduct ourselves in certain ways to help promote freedom?

Does that make sense? If so discuss.

13 Comments:

At 10:20 PM, Blogger C. J. Summers said...

Americans today see freedom only in terms of individual liberty or license. Yet, it's only in each of us curbing our individual liberties that we can all indeed be free.

For example, by obeying parking laws and not blocking my driveway, I'm free to come and go freely from my house. By parking in the driveway instead of the street, you're free to park on the street without blocking my driveway. It's a silly example, but it makes the point.

We can't all do whatever we want because that would be chaos and anarchy. Where the arguments come is in deciding where to draw the line for certain behaviors.

So, my answer would be, we are "obligated to conduct ourselves in certain ways to help promote freedom."

 
At 6:27 AM, Blogger BJ Aberle said...

One correction:

"But the more I read history and biographies the more I am convinced that our founding fathers were God fearing men of the Judeo-Christian persuasion."

Should have been "most of our founding fathers"

 
At 8:32 AM, Blogger BJ Stone said...

BJ, this:

"I say this to remind us that yes we gladly celebrate our "independence day" but this country has been "dependent" on God from the very start."

...once again assumes that "god" is a given. That has yet to be proven.

 
At 8:56 AM, Blogger Eyebrows McGee said...

I think Christian freedom and political freedom are using two entirely different words and I'm not sure which one you want here. :)

I will say I don't think America is specially beloved of God, and I think that's a darn dangerous way of thinking. I'm a citizen of the church first, and of America second. Nations are merely incidental when comared to the Body of Christ. I think making patriotism about God loving America best confuses the issue. I'm burstin' with pride to be an American, but I don't think God likes us better than God's suffering children in Darfur.

I think with your question, though, you've hit on the primary problem of a free society -- do we allow people the freedom to do things that undermine our freedom? And if we don't allow those things, how can we call ourselves truly free?

 
At 10:16 AM, Blogger BJ Aberle said...

I'm not saying that God has partiality towards America either. I am saying our society has flourished because we have chosen to follow, for the most part, a system of values decreed by Him. And the more we stray from those values the closer we come to chaos.

For BJ Stone:
Yes, my wolrdview assumes the existance of God. I feel Common Grace and Natural Revelation is more than enough proof that He exists for me. I guess I could turn it around and ask for you to disprove His existance. But that could be saved for Question #3. But I welcome an attempt none the less.

 
At 11:33 AM, Blogger C. J. Summers said...

Well, in all fairness to BJ Stone, you can't prove a negative. For the sake of discussion, perhaps we can agree on a utilitarian argument -- that America was founded on biblical principles, such as those embodied in the ten commandments, and our dependence on those values to order our society has sustained us for 230 years so far.

Regardless, I think the actual "question #2" still can be discussed even if you reject Aberle's introductory comments.

 
At 12:19 PM, Blogger BJ Aberle said...

C.J. Thanks for the clarification. The first part of my post was just some editorializing on my part. The question itself was meant to be a stand alone. I should have made that more clear.

 
At 5:56 PM, Blogger BJ Stone said...

C.J. - absolutely, I agree the question itself can be discussed. I apologize for straying off-topic. As far as the question itself:

I don't think we are free to do "whatever we want", I think there must be law. I also think we are obligated to act a certain way to promote freedom, but I don't think it's tied into religious beliefs in any way. I also think the current administration has done nothing to promote freedom, only hurt it worldwide and on these shores.

To BJ's request: I have always said, you can't prove there is a god, and I can't prove there isn't. Hence my agnosticism. I'm not an athiest. I just desire proof, one way or the other. But, as C.J. said, I couldn't prove that negative anyway. But one day, if it's the truth, god's existence will be proven. Or Darwin's basic theory, or an offshoot of it, will be proven. I long to be around to see that day, as either way someone's going to have to say a big "oopsie".

 
At 7:22 AM, Blogger C. J. Summers said...

So, if the way we're "obligated to act" is not tied to religious beliefs, to what is it (or should it be) tied?

To BJ's comments: What kind of proof would you accept for the existence of God?

 
At 9:03 PM, Blogger C. J. Summers said...

*chirpchirp* *chirpchirp*

I guess I really stifled the conversation on this one. Sorry, man.

 
At 9:08 PM, Blogger Eyebrows McGee said...

Hey, BJ, your guy Francis Collins is in Time with week with a big interview!

(This time I read alllllll of it and didn't miss the important parts, lol)

 
At 5:38 AM, Blogger BJ Aberle said...

Sweet!!! Thanks for the tip Ms McGee!

 
At 12:44 PM, Blogger BJ Aberle said...

C.J. says:

"So, if the way we're "obligated to act" is not tied to religious beliefs, to what is it (or should it be) tied?"

duh....C.J. The answer is obvious ......Bono.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home