So the apostle Paul proclaims in Galatians 5:13 that we’re called to be FREE. But it is not freedom for our own self indulgence; rather, we are set free so that we can become servants–or if you take the actual greek, slaves.
Set free to be slaves. This jarring juxtaposition of words, freedom and slavery, was the focus of this past Sunday’s sermon. How can freedom be associated with servanthood and selflessness and sacrifice? These words seem to violate our self autonomy.
Here’s a quote from Sunday’s message: “If God were to declare to a fish– ‘Do not use your freedom to climb onto shore where you cannot breathe and you will surely die. Instead, go and swim the seas and eat shrimp’ — would the fish say ‘How restrictive! How oppressive !’ Of course not. God is simply releasing the fish to do what it was made to do. What if it’s really the case that we’re not made to indulge ourselves? What if it’s true that we are freest when we forget about ourselves and we stop worshipping our own needs and we serve one another in love? Could it be that God is actually setting us free when he gives us the call to be servants?”
So what do you think? In your experience, have you seen this to be true– where indulging yourself is actually a form of imprisonment, and loving and serving others a way of liberation?
Feel free to comment on this, or on anything else on this past Sunday’s message.
God bless
PD
September 17, 2008 at 1:05 am |
is “freest” really a word??
September 17, 2008 at 8:29 pm |
In my current experience, it has been extremely hard to “live for the Lord” because I have been so busy with school and life. And it is really tempting to allow myself to have a 2 year sabbatical from God’s Lordship until I’ve graduated. But I know it is all just excuses. I used to think that when when life’s circumstances play out just right, like having enough money or extra time, that then I would really love people by inviting people over and reaching out to nonchristians. But has that ever happened? No way. I wonder what the Good Samaritan’s schedule was like the day he stopped and helped the jewish stranger on the road. I’m sure it wasn’t that he set aside a day to help random strangers cause most people aren’t on roads who aren’t going somewhere.
Business and not being thoughtful and mindful about my life is such a killer. I appreciate the blog. It allows me to stop and think. If life is so busy that I don’t have time to think about God, let alone worship him and adore him, really living? I guess another question for myself is what am I really gaining by being so busy? Thank God for his faithfulness and his mercy.
September 17, 2008 at 11:05 pm |
Inevitably and unfortunately, all Christians will fail and indulge in their sins since we are living in sinful flesh. Are we freed over an over again? Or were we not truly freed in the first place? Is there a degree of freedom that we can fully enjoy only after Christ’s return?
September 20, 2008 at 4:33 am |
The exegetical context of Paul’s argument against the “justification by law” theology is rooted in the concern that the Galatians were buying into the scheme of gaining membership into God’s kingdom through the observance of ceremonial law. However, this is hardly surprising given the radical nature of Paul’s assertions: “we are no longer under the supervision of the law” (Gal. 3:25) For Jews and Gentiles alike, relinquishing the law (with a centuries old legal and religious precedence) signified a fundamental paradigm shift in the consciousness of Christian existence, a detail that we often overlook in traditional Pauline discourse.
But there in lies the discrepancy. If Paul was so insistent on the “bondage” of the law, then why were the Galatians tempted to return or even adhere to it?
See, I believe it’s because it was in fact EASIER for the Galatians to follow and accept a theology that was in some ways more MATERIAL than what Paul was preaching. The difference between a physical road map (the law) vs. a spiritual instinct (Holy Spirit/Faith). How much more CONVENIENT would it have been to have an outline of what and what not to do to enter into the house of God (despite the sheer impossibility of the task) vs. this intangible notion of faith?
But this is the genius of Paul: “Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not Gods … but now that you know God – or rather are known by God – how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?” (Gal. 4:8-9)
The Law is in fact oppressive with no guarantee of reserving your spot in heaven. Paul in essence, pulls a coup d’etat. I don’t mean to sound sensationalistic or anything, but this is real and groundbreaking apologetics in motion.
And finally, freedom from the law meant the removal of barriers and social divisions (this is recapitulated in Colossians). “Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and is in all.” (Col. 3:11) Christians are now even “free” to love one another and fulfill God’s greatest commandment. There is no longer any excuse under the law to abstain from loving a Gentile or a slave, thus uniting the believers under the body of Christ. (Amen)
I wanted to discuss the “slave” component of this specific dialog … but I just finished dling Season 5 of LOST.
This blog is great!
September 22, 2008 at 9:55 am |
First of all—how is season 5 already available for download! Wow.
Secondly, great insight into the nature of the law. I completely agree. Law keeping is actually more convenient than genuinely relating to the living God. And we fall into that miserable trap all the time. Rather than humbly submitting ourselves to the loving hand of God, we inexplicably turn to law keeping and self-striving, We even flagellate ourselves to alleviate our own haunting guilt and shame but of course to no avail. For even our own condemnation is a form of law keeping.
I see freedom from the law as something more fundamental than a removal of barriers and social divisions. Those things are definitely a direct outcome of our freedom. But I see the freedom in the radical transformation of our nature through FAITH. Galatians 3:23-25 talks about how we are no longer prisoners of the law because “FAITH” has now come. Then iv v26-29, Paul details how we are sons of God, baptized into Christ and clothed with Christ—a child of promise. In 4:21-31, Paul uses Hagar and Sarah as a typology to again emphasize how in Christ, we are children of promise and not of slavery. So it seems to me, that the freedom Paul is promoting in chapter 5 is the life of promise, or to be more specific the life of faith–or to be even more specific–justification by faith alone.
Slavery is the sad attempt at trying to justify ourselves through law keeping. Freedom is God giving us righteousness by our faith in Jesus Christ.
Because we have been made righteous through faith, he law is no longer external and oppressive, but native to our soul since the law is written on our hearts. Now love is no longer a codified system of rules, but a genuine overflow of heart between God’s children where there are no more Greek, Jew, Slave, etc. All the descriptions and effects of freedom flow out of this fundamental and radical change from unrighteousness to righteousness through faith. This is what the law could not accomplish for us. The laws themselves could never make us righteous, which is why they became an oppressive curse–holding out the image and forms of righteousness, but not providing a viable way to attain it.
Just a few thoughts on a lonely monday morning.
September 22, 2008 at 11:50 pm |
But P.Di (Pastor Dihan mind you, NOT Princess Di, j/king) … is it necessarily an unbridgeable gap? I’ve often struggled with Galatians and Paul’s virtual abolishment of the law. At first I thought, ‘cool beans, early instances of Christian fundamentalism!’, and yet then I became increasingly disturbed. I began to wonder if Galatians wasn’t simply an artifact of the times … a revolutionary tactic used by Paul out of fear that the Galatians were on the verge of committing apostasy (the worser sin). I came to this conclusion in particular after considering the contradictions between Romans and Galatians (I remember you sorta touching on this as well – but you spun it some other way).
Of course, justification by faith is the singular path towards salvation … but how do you explain Matthew and Mark, how do you reconcile Paul and James? Wasn’t James an inflection of Pauline theology – or wait, reverse that – Pauline theology an inflection of James (even worse)? If anything, these oppositions further reinforces my secondary notion that Paul was waging some kind of sociocultural war.
I know this is all just speculation on my part and I don’t expect all the answers, but as you can tell, justification by faith vs. works is something I have yet to figure out. What was your proffer? Imbuement into the soul, engravement on the heart (this sounds very calvin-ish) . in either case, it was a relief when you mentioned that freedom from the law didn’t quite absolve one of personal or moral responsibility. but at the same time, THAT I also found to be ironic! because if anything, I believe we as a contemporary (and in many instances Korean) society are so quick to condemn each other on the basis of some bogus and artificial version of Mosaic law. In some ways, we have subjected ourselves to the same antiquated institutional codes that Paul had warned us against. There is no “dangerous misapplication” of Paul’s freedom from the law but only the converse … we are more inclined today to subscribe to the legalism that Paul knew would imprison us (this is why I refer to Gal. as a “prison” epistle) – quick to judge others based on their “works” – when it is by the metric of faith that we ourselves will be judged.
And btw, lonely Monday mornings sometimes make for the best of company.
ps: the lost 5 was a fluke … in short, i was pwned.