Burden of Choice

In any orderly society, the intention of legal constraints is to curtail, as much as possible and practical, activities that yield counterproductive and even destructive results for its members.

Throughout the Old and New Testaments, we observe descriptions regarding believers and their roles and relationships with governing authorities and the law. Various passages in Scripture explain in detail the divine purpose of human government and what an effective Christian perspective ought to entail (Romans 13:1-7; Hebrews 13:17). As the apostle Paul clarifies, we respect the laws of the land and those in positions of authority to enforce those laws out of our desire to honor and obey God himself — not merely from fear of judgment or punishment.

Elsewhere in Scripture, we are reminded that God is concerned with whether our hearts are truly moved to pursue truth and righteousness (1 Samuel 16:7; Proverbs 21:2; Jeremiah 17:10; Matthew 5:8). Of course, we ultimately answer to the highest possible authority, that of God Almighty (Acts 5:29).

We also observe that the Bible does not blindly endorse every legal system administered by human beings. It readily acknowledges imperfections and flaws. For instance, Jesus was critical of the Pharisees and their idolatry of the law itself — deifying the letter of the Torah (Mosaic law) and traditions above God’s intention of blessing the world through his chosen people (Matthew 23). Again, Jesus was more interested in people’s inner motivations and their willingness to serve as both recipients and channels of mercy and reconciliation with God.

Ideally, a legal system is intended to guide humanity in assembling an organized society that provides structure, safety, and support for mutual welfare. But history (and common sense) shows us that just about any type of political system or government can be distorted or corrupted to a point where it subjugates rather than protects. Ministries of state that begin with the best intentions can end up as overbearing as any despotic regime.

This reality is vividly illustrated in an episode of the original Star Trek television series. The crew of the USS Enterprise investigate a planet whose society resembles late 19th-century Earth. The citizens appear aimless but content, except for periodic, scheduled outbreaks of chaotic, violent behavior.

Captain Kirk and his landing party soon discover that these “festivals” are mandated by “Landru,” a supposed authority enforced by robed “lawgivers.” When Kirk resists their attempt to “absorb” him and his crew into the “Body,” it is revealed that Landru is not a man but a computer — one programmed thousands of years earlier to maintain order. Its version of utopia meant enforced conformity, controlled outlets for primal urges, and the elimination of free choice.

Kirk and Spock ultimately confront the computer:

KIRK: “Without freedom of choice, there is no creativity. Without creativity, there is no life. The body dies. The fault is yours.”
SPOCK: “Are you aiding the body, or are you destroying it?”

In the end, Landru concludes it is doing harm rather than good and self-destructs, freeing the people to live with autonomy and responsibility.

Self-determination is harder than submission to an autocracy, but it is the path to true growth. Paul reminds us that “your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion, but of your own free will” (Philemon 1:14). God does not merely desire that we do good; he wants us to want to do good for the right reasons — to manifest his love and grace, not out of fear of punishment or to elevate ourselves by burdening others.

Jesus even invited us to exchange the weight of the law for his lighter burden of salvation through grace (Matthew 11:28-30). Ultimately, we are given the choice described in Joshua 24:15: “Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve.”