In the middle of explaining who God is to the Greeks, Paul makes this statement: “²⁵ And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. ²⁶ From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. ²⁷ God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.” Acts 17: 25-27

The thought occurred to me that this whole “open borders” idea from the liberals is yet another attack on God. The Bible makes it clear that it is God who sets the boundaries of the nations. In other places in the Old Testament, it is clear that God set the boundaries of Israel and other nations, and removed those boundaries when it suited His will. The whole idea of “open borders”, supported by Hillary and Merkel, and other liberals around the world, is a direct attack on the authority of God to set those same borders.

Ephesians 6: 12 tells us that the war we are fighting is not against people, but against the spiritual forces of darkness:  ^“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

The problem is that the devil and his demons control humans who are opposed to God. We must therefore protect ourselves from evil. That is why we must control our immigration policies, and remove those who are a deadly threat to our citizens.

Frank

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight.” Isaiah 5: 20-21

Have you noticed how all the left’s attempts to discredit Trump have backfired? The ridiculous recount effort gave Trump MORE votes, not less. The equally stupid Electoral College revolt took more votes from her than from him. Spewing blame on everyone without taking personal responsibility for their loss, as an attempt to discredit the validity of the election, has turned the American people against the liberals, not against Trump. More and more people can now see the liberal left for the hateful, close-minded, subversive extremists that they are.

Since the beginning of the election season, the liberal left (politicians, celebrities, main stream media) have concocted strawman stories about their opposition, using name-calling as their primary strategy. They spewed this nonsense so loudly, and forcefully, that they actually began to believe their own lies. They create a false picture of a horrible, hateful person doing terrible atrocities against humanity, and then actually believe their own false narrative (all the while not realizing they are describing themselves). While they pursue this nonsense, the rest of the country watches as Trump keeps jobs from leaving the country, hires the strongest cabinet assembled in recent history, and sends the stock market soaring based on optimism about the future of our country.

The dichotomy could not be more obvious.

How do you define ‘freedom’? In our secular, pluralistic society, freedom is a grossly misunderstood and misused concept. Freedom is now considered to be “the ‘right’ to do whatever you want to do”.

Is freedom the absence of restrictions? Anyone who believes this is ignoring all of life around them. A fish is ‘free’ to swim anywhere it wants. But it takes in oxygen only from the water. As soon as it leaves the restriction of a water habitat, it will die. The fish is restricted by its very nature. So it is with all things. Freedom therefore is necessarily limited by our very nature. Our concept of ‘freedom’ must account for the nature of things, and the restrictions imposed by those characteristics.

Within those restrictions, the fish is free to go here or there. However, if it swims into the path of a predator, it will likely die. So, it restricts its behavior to avoid certain dangers. This is a self-imposed restriction designed to prolong its life. Is it free to swim into the path of a predator? Yes, but is that freedom good for the fish? Not at all. The fish will follow self-imposed restrictions to its behavior to preserve its life.

This brings up the second misconception of freedom, that all freedom is good. Terrorists think they are ‘free’ to wreak havoc on anyone they decide to terrorize. Is that freedom ‘good’? The civilized world would answer an emphatic ‘no’. This truth applies to many human behaviors. Enron executives thought they were ‘free’ to set their own salaries and benefits, to the detriment of all their employees. Civilization depends upon certain restrictions to human behaviors to keep us from destroying ourselves. Indeed, all our laws are actually restrictions on human behavior. They are necessary to prevent total chaos, and ultimately our annihilation.

So if freedom is not the absence of restrictions, and if not all freedom is good for us, who then determines what restrictions are placed upon us, and who determines which freedoms are good or bad? Let’s take ‘freedom of religion’ for example. Society generally agrees that freedom of religion is a good thing. But how far does that freedom extend? When one person believes that a certain behavior is right, and another believes that same behavior is wrong, which belief wins at the point of confrontation? Who decides that, and upon what set of standards is that decision made?

Is there a universal set of standards by which all freedoms and restrictions should be established? The answer to that question should be blatantly obvious, even to those who reject the answer. The Ten Commandments are a universal set of restrictions placed upon human behavior that govern our freedom. The utopian society that the world longs for would become a reality if everyone adhered perfectly to those ten simple rules. So why has this set of standards been forcibly removed from our nation? If they are so beneficial to us, why have we tossed them out of our schools and government? What impact has this action had on our ‘freedom’? Are we more free without them, or are we in bondage to our propensity for greed and power?

Sadly, by removing those restrictions on our behavior, we are less free than we were when we lived by those rules.

Of course, I know the answer to the questions I have posed above. Our sinful nature would rather create our own set of rules to live by, rather than live by the rules given to us by our creator. And the rules we then establish are based upon our rejection of God’s authority over us. We try to manage our own behavior at the same time our nature is pushing us to pursue greed, power, and pride. We get so far away from God’s rules that we can no longer determine what is right or wrong, and we redefine what ‘freedom’ actually is.

Freedom, properly defined, requires a set of restrictions that enable us to care for and improve everyone and everything around us. We can be free to enjoy nature without damaging or destroying nature. We can be free to love and help people around us without bringing them harm in any way. We can be free to choose a vocation that benefits mankind and provides support to our family, without denying others that same freedom.

When the Bible talks about freedom, it is always talking about freedom from the slavery of sin. We are sinful creatures. We can’t help it, and we can’t stop it on our own. We are, in a very real sense, enslaved to sin. But through belief in Christ, we have been released from the penalty of sin, and are truly free from the slavery of sin. Freedom, therefore, is the inalienable right to do good! Freedom to do bad is nothing more than sin. And that is not freedom, it is slavery! (See Romans 6)