Article 16
The Freedom and Responsibility to be Human - Part 1
by Wendell Krossa
(From the series "Creating A Horizontal God", Copyright, W. Krossa)

Knowing the human God and the purpose of life in the universe with this God does not require special training or insight. God has made his intentions very clear in persons like Jesus. The human God simply wants people to be human.

 

It is a straightforward argument to state, but it is a profound and radical idea to absorb fully. It is an idea that undermines millennia of religious control and domination. The liberating truth expressed here is that the only moral or ethical demand placed upon people is that of being normal human beings in any way they choose. This truth liberates people from all sorts of enslaving obligation to religious requirements.

 

How we should live is not an issue of right laws or rules or systems of ethics often religiously based. Correct or right living is derived from the new human God that we find in examples such as the truly human Jesus and in humanity in general. As someone once said, "Being human is the greatest truth there is".

 

This new approach to ethics or morality is defined by the basic features of the human self as horizontally oriented, free of all animal-like control, personally responsible, oriented to uniqueness and diversity, and relational or community oriented. It has been summed up in the word love.

 

Such a system of ethics, if you wish to call it that, is not based on any form of written law but it is based, rather, on emerging humanity, on being human. It is human derived and structured. This means to say that God simply requires that we be as fully and truly human as we know how to. This approach offers unstructured freedom for all of the spontaneity and diversity essential to being truly human.

 

As Brinsmead describes Jesus' example of true human living, "Just a truly human Jesus- a man who refused any titles except the self effacing 'son of man' which simply meant the human one. When everyone else aspired to be something more than merely human, and in this very way created a most inhuman society, Jesus dared to be fully and truly human. He didn't always do the traditional thing, the Jewish thing, the religious thing, the expected thing, the social thing, the popular thing or even the safest thing. But he did what God wants us all to do- he did the human thing" (1).

 

Another lady stated, "Life is about being as decent a person as I possibly can be". Jesus said, "All ethical or moral requirements are fulfilled in one thing- love". Both of these statements point to the simplicity of just being human in any way you choose. And may we also once more state that being human is the essence of true spirituality. Spirituality is not about esoteric beliefs, becoming religious, and fulfilling mysterious rituals or practices. It is simply the effort to be a normal human being.

 

When you argue for a new law or ethic which has becoming human as its standard, you are then opening up possibilities for infinite creativity, uniqueness and freedom in human response and behavior. You are allowing every human being to bring their own unique response to life situations. Law based systems of behavior smother creativity and freedom by constraining human response in standardized patterns.

 

Becoming Personally Responsible

While the old animal-like God of religion demands submission to and obedience to dehumanizing systems of law found in often incomprehensible holy books and religious doctrinal systems, the human God simply requires that we act on our freedom to be human. This entails the making of human responses and taking full responsibility for life and the consequences of our choices and actions.

 

We stated in a previous section that true human existence can not be promoted or guided by systems of law or by holy books full of detailed rules for behavior. Those systems of law represent an authority outside of the human self which guides or controls human behavior and thereby short-circuits the development of personal responsibility. Such a law controlled existence is very similar to our bicameral and animal past where humans were controlled by authorities external to the human individual. But those systems of control are inhuman and false authorities which can never properly encourage human relating and existence. Any outside authority over human behavior inevitably introduces an element of destructive coercion into relationships.

 

Jesus often responded to outside authority and controlling law with the declaration that "It has been said before (by law or some other authority), but now I say..." (2). He was stating that he was his own authority and he was refusing any authority or coercion from without his own self. In doing this he was setting a powerful example for all of us as to how we should live as free and responsibly human.

 

Control of human behavior must come only from within the human self as a noncommanded entity and never from systems of authority without the human self. It is only self control that produces the personal responsibility and freedom of choice essential to true human development. Tragically, few social institutions are designed or operate to encourage such human development.

 

Systems of law express a fundamental lack of trust in people to responsibly perform the tasks in which they are involved. That lack of trust undermines morale and performance in the long term. To the contrary, people who are trusted and given freedom to responsibly accomplish some task in their own unique way, will do so with better morale and better long term performance and support for the task.

 

Freedom to Respond as Human

Living by a new and truly human standard means freedom to respond to the example of humanity that we find in people all around us. The disciplines of psychology and sociology have long recognized that human identity is developed in social interaction. Human beings grow and develop as human by relating to and interacting with other humans. Examples of true human relating and behavior inspire us to try to be more human ourselves. They inspire us to be more decent. This inspiration from the example of others leads to a free spontaneity and uniqueness of response that law can never produce. Also, inspiring example does not give any place to coercion or control.

 

Ultimately, we must express our humanity in our own unique way. Every person must take personal responsibility for the freedom to become human. This will involve the making of our own choices in areas now controlled mainly by ideologies, systems of law, or institutions and it will mean accepting responsibility for the consequences of those choices as we respond to myriad situations in daily life. There is no other way to develop humanity and human responsibility.

 

There is also no set blueprint to guide humanity into such a free and open human future. Law has often been the cowardly attempt to create a blueprint, with its supposed predictability, and thereby eliminate the chance and insecurity of living in freedom. But such an attempt to lay out the future in controlled detail simply does not allow for creative freedom.

 

In saying this, we are not advocating the abandonment of all forethought and planning. Rather, we are arguing that we do not take our efforts at organizing and planning too seriously. We tend to institutionalize and freeze into permanent forms much of what we do. In systems of law we codify our past successful responses and freeze them in rigid and difficult-to-change rules which then bring control and conformity to the responses of other people. We make what may have once been the unique responses of a few into governing principles for all people in all places and at all times. What could have served as useful experience to advise and guide others is transformed into a tool of control and coercion.

 

A law approach also encourages the perverse attitude that some people take toward human life and relating which involves the making of a rule to cover every possible new situation that might arise. This is often an effort to eliminate surprise and to bring order and predictability to life. But such an approach only serves to stifle creative response and bring conformity where there should be healthy diversity. This approach becomes an endless process of expanding rule books which only hinders human experimentation and creative response.

 

Law must never govern or control humans in a fixed or final manner. Any fixed law is soon outdated anyway in a rapidly changing world. Systems of such laws can never capture or express all that it means to be human in any rapidly changing context. Such systems can never encompass and express all the possible options available for free and diverse humanity moving into an open and changing future. It is simply impossible for any system of law to foresee and cover every potential situation in life. Living by a system of law in a rapidly changing world only hinders people from responding flexibly and humanly in unprecedented situations.

 

Law simply can not operate to inspire or encourage the spontaneity and creativity of true human relating, cooperation, and existence. To the contrary, law is so essentially a mechanism of control that the inevitable tendency of a law approach is to increase rigidity and uniformity of response which then hinders uniqueness in human response and kills spontaneity. It therefore guts human freedom. We must preserve at all times the flexibility for humans to be free humans.

 

Inspite of the growing understanding of the inability of law to guide human existence, law is still the most widespread contemporary external authority over human behavior. But in operating as a mechanism of outside control of the human self, law is destructive to the development of personal responsibility. It is too often an effort to cover in tortured detail all the potential situations and planned responses to those situations that may arise in life. To try to face life in such a manner only hinders the freedom necessary to respond as a responsible person.

 

Human existence now demands something better than law to inspire and encourage human relating. Fortunately, the human God requires nothing more of people than that they use common sense to fully enter and enjoy life as human beings. Brinsmead has said that this is an invitation to play in a free future. It is an invitation to the spontaneity of an uncommanded existence.

 

Also, in true human freedom there is no all-determining God to rescue us from our poor choices and the consequences of those choices. Such freedom frightens most people back to the security of planned and controlled hierarchies where someone else will take responsibility for difficult choices and their consequences. But frightening as such responsibility may be, it is essential for growth as a truly human person.

 

Avoiding Institutional or Religious Spirituality

In thinking of the process of becoming more human it should also be pointed out that God has never demanded that anyone leave normal life to become religious. Becoming religious is not the 'will of God'. It is merely the will of controlling religious authorities- the religious bosses. God has never required anyone to separate from normal life or humanity to follow some special religious vocation. God has also never placed the obligation on any person to join some form of institutional religion or any other institution.

 

We could also add that neither is there any obligation from God to adopt a religious belief system or ideology of any kind or to pledge loyalty to some institution, whether religious, state, or other. Loyalty to belief systems and institutions often creates walls between people and divides human beings from each other. It encourages people to become fixated on finding their identity in objects or institutions instead of in humanity in general. The only obligation we have regarding loyalty is from our humanity which urges us to join the party of life with the entire human race.

 

We might also add that God does not require any person to become moral. It is a common myth that the basic requirement for becoming a good person is to become moral. But morality too often has to do with religion and religious standards of behavior which may be human or may not. Far too often morality embodies a zeal for so-called ethical behavior which may result in the inhuman treatment of others.

 

We recall the story of a religious young man who rejected the kindness and hospitality of another in order to maintain faithfulness to his religious standards. He wanted to be moral. The young man was doing fieldwork on a very hot day for a farmer. The farmer, on seeing the exhaustion of the young man, took pity on him and brought him some refreshing cold tea. The young man refused the drink because it was prohibited by his particular religious group. He offended the kindness of the farmer out of blind loyalty to the morality of his group. A truly human response would have accepted the kindness and concern of the other in order to make them feel accepted and to show gratitude. This type of moral response too often offends human sensibility, lacks common sense, and ruins human relationships. Therefore we argue that humanity not morality must be the concern of any system of ethics.

 

Ellul gives some sense of the historical rise of morality in Christianity which refused to remain faithful to Jesus who fought morality and died doing so. Ellul says that "In the minds of most of our contemporaries Christianity primarily means morality...(but) God's revelation in Jesus has nothing whatever to do with morality. Nothing. Absolutely nothing... In Jesus the proclamation of grace, the declaration of pardon, and the opening up of life to freedom- are all the direct opposite of morality" (Jacques Ellul. 1986. The Subversion Of Christianity, p.70).

 

In the Bible, says Ellul, that which is good is the will of God. That is all. This is why Jesus attacks the Pharisees so severely even though they are the most moral of all people. live the best lives, and are perfectly obedient and virtuous, says Ellul. They have substituted their own morality for the living Word of God that can not be fixed in commandments. In the gospels, argues Ellul, Jesus constantly breaks religious precepts and moral rules. Jesus, in fact, grants freedom from rules and precepts. His command is to follow me, not a list of things to do or not to do. "The primary characteristic of free people is that they are not bound to moral commandments. 'All things are lawful', Paul twice proclaims. 'Nothing is impure', he teaches. We find the same message in Acts. We are as free as the Spirit who comes and goes as he wills. This freedom is the freedom of love. Love, which can not be regulated, categorized, or analyzed into principle or commandments, takes the place of law. The relationship with others is not one of duty but of love" (Ibid. p.70-71).

 

He continues, pointing out that love obeys no morality and gives birth to no morality. None of the great categories of revealed truth are relative to morality or can give birth to it- including freedom, truth, light, word, or holiness. None of these belong to the order of morality, says Ellul. What they evoke, he says, is a model of life that is very free, involves constant risks and is constantly renewed. The Christian life is contrary to morality because it is not repetitive. No fixed duty has to be done no matter what course life may take, says Ellul. Morality always contradicts this way of life. It is an obstacle to such a life and condemns it, just as Jesus is inevitably condemned by moral people (Ibid, p.71).

 

Ellul also points out that the shift from freedom to morality has been the great drama of Christian history. It has been the most decisive setback to Christianity. "The Christian masses naturally found it difficult to live in the freedom of spirit and love. Norms soon had to be imposed. Duties had to be indicated... People refused to bear the risks of freedom" (p.72).

 

Early church leaders rejected the freedom of the spirit that Jesus introduced and instead sought to train and control new converts. Relations of power and authority were established, the people were organized and institutions were created, says Ellul. "From the second century on, church leaders begin to focus primarily on moral conduct. This becomes the criterion of all else. A Christian morality develops in opposition to that of the world, and Christians rapidly try to apply it to every issue. When they achieve power, they want to impose their morality on all society" (p.84).

 

Throughout subsequent history fresh outbreaks of freedom are soon swamped by returns to morality. "Immediately after the first generation of Reformers had rediscovered Christian freedom, there was a return to moral rigidity, especially with Calvin, and morality again achieved domination over life in Christ" (p.73).

 

"What has been deformed remains deformed. Christianity has become primarily morality... It is a code of conduct.... People are not told to love God and do as they like. Faith is no longer the center from which all else derives. No, that is too dangerous. It is too open. One must not appeal to individual responsibility or initiative. The main virtue that is everywhere developed in the name of the church is obedience" (p.86).

 

Ellul also argues that the immorality and disorder in surrounding society led to the church's emphasis on morality. But this, he says, was a tragic mistake. "The perversion, then, was that of making the gospel into law in order to respond to the challenge offered be successive outbursts of immorality and ethical disorder... The mistake was to deal with these on the moral and legal plane instead of following the example of Paul, who always works through the moral question to the spiritual question, gets back to the essence of the gospel of Christ, and from this derives some models of conduct that are consistent with faith and love" (p.88-89). As Ellul reveals, morality has always been a terrible perversion of the human spirit.

 

Morality encourages a focus on ritual and the fulfillment of religious duty, such as attendance at churches, the saying of prayers, and reading religious materials among other duties. This form of religion has often resulted in an intolerance of others and the condemnation of diversity of thought and behavior. It finds its contemporary expression in various forms of fundamentalism which comfortably support the domination of others both militarily and economically. It is unashamedly conservative and capitalist. This is, in fact, considered good Christianity. But it is a total emasculation of Jesus who stood for radical freedom and love. His life and message completely undermined morality and religiosity and demanded a total commitment to giving all, sharing all, and accepting all as equal. His call was to freedom, creative innovation, and spontaneous human response.

 

Morality is not the demand of God. God simply requires that we become less animal and more human. The human God wills that we free ourselves of all controlling relationships. He requires that we join and enjoy the great party of human life which can not be bound within organizational structures such as those of religion. We are obligated quite simply to fully join the human race.

 

To those who argue that people still need some sort of organized religious gatherings to share spiritual matters, we would suggest that you can do that with the entire community of people you interact with. Instead of forming the special groups of religion with their restricted membership, show the inclusivity of God by joining the human race. Responsible relationships in community should replace religious groupings.

 

What about the special rituals of religion such as the Lord's Supper with its wine and wafers? Again, instead of the special rituals restricted to a select membership, why not join the community rituals of human life as Jesus did? Beer and chips is one great humanizing ritual. The exclusive rituals of religion often destroy normal healthy community relationships by excluding nonmembers or the nonreligious.

 

Also, we remember the condemnation of the enemies of Jesus that he was too much of a drinker and party man. Jesus never denied such condemnations for parties were a common feature in his life. His view of life was that it was a great party and continuous celebration. He even intended that what became known as the 'Lord's Supper' should be a festive party not a sombre mourning for sin (Albert Nolan, Jesus Before Christianity, p.39).

 

Religious people have often taken their belief in separation from evil or from the 'world' to silly extremes and unnecessarily cut themselves off from human community. But many human practices that religion labels as evil or worldly are not really wrong but are simply different from the stifling and life destroying traditions of religion. Such isolationism and sobriety in the name of God is certainly not inspired by God but often merely reflects the antisocial attitudes of religious authorities. Sacralizing such attitudes in the name of God is an abuse of the idea of God.

 

Also, the human God does not urge us to just struggle to accept the differences of others in our communities. God has moved beyond such limited toleration and positively encourages and enjoys the diversity and uniqueness of others to creatively experiment on their way into an open and free future.

 

The Supremely Human God

Contrary to most religious belief and practice, in Jesus we see that God would join the human race and give humanity an example of joining life with all its diversity and freedom from control and coercion. The human God that Jesus would reveal, embraced all of human life and all of humanity equally. Jesus being fully human is a bold statement by God that being human is all right. It is good.

 

The human God that Jesus revealed is also the most profound blow against animal-like control that can be found anywhere in human history. This God who wills that we become fully part of humanity puts an end to all superiority and rule of human persons. In willing to become equal with humanity, God is stating that all life is moving away from the domination of animal existence and toward the new equality of humanity.

 

Jesus, however, has been coopted and used by religious people in a millennia long effort to convert normal human beings to a tightly ordered and controlled religious existence. It is a stifling and restrictive existence of rules, rules, and more rules.

 

To convert someone to a religious lifestyle often results in the destruction of essential elements of their humanity such as the freedom to question, to challenge authority, and to creatively explore alternatives. Religion is about submission to divine authority and the total control of the individual, including thought control. This is a severe distortion of the message of Jesus who consistently sought to inspire human freedom, human relating and existence. Becoming religious, in the institutional manner of most world religions, is too often completely incompatible with being human.

 

The only obligation we need to hold, then, is to be human. God has inspired people to be human in the example he has given in the life of persons such as the human Jesus. This is, you might say, the new law.

 

God has put no obligations on humanity to fulfill complicated ethical systems which often have excessively detailed rules to define what is permissible and what is not. These are often only attempts to define in tortuous detail what is right and what is wrong for human existence. Such attempts to define in exacting detail what is right or wrong for human life are often just the expression of the archaic drive for the controlled existence of the bicameral era.

 

God Subverting Law

Rather than evaluating issues in terms of systems of law or rules, it may be more human to approach issues from the standpoint of basic common sense or a sense of humanity. This will allow the infinite diversity of humanity that finite systems of rules can never capture. It will allow humans to respond as humans, not as institutional personalities or rigid objects conforming to systems of laws.

 

Our responsibility to be human may at times even lead us to break laws (3) and to violate ethical, religious, and cultural values that support controlling hierarchical existence. Brinsmead notes that Jesus taught that our duty to love on a horizontal level takes priority over everything, even over our faithfulness to law.

 

God has thereby demonstrated the subversiveness of being human in Jesus, says Brinsmead. Jesus often purposely broke religious, cultural, and other laws out of human feeling for others. He opposed all human authority and human structures of authority because of their crushing enslavement of humanity. For Jesus, humanity and responding humanly always came before loyalty to law. He was eventually put to death for opposing religious authority, law, and hierarchy.

 

In thinking of Jesus' practice of breaking law in order to respond humanly to others, it is always wise to remember that law is a human creation that often merely embodies the viewpoint and even the arbitrary whims of ruling elites. It is not some sacred thing from God serving the interests of general humanity.

 

The modern concern with the categories of legal/illegal derives much of its content from the above mentioned elite concerns. The belief in legal/illegal has now become a very common way of viewing many issues in life and human behavior and response. But in thinking of Jesus' response to law we would do well to remember that what is legal may sometimes be inhuman and what is illegal may sometimes be the most human response.

 

Also, legal categories tend to orient people toward a law approach to issues which can be very dehumanizing because of the tendency to elevate loyalty to systems of law before compassion to human beings.

 

The demands of love and compassion often conflict with the legal and moreso as modern relationships are increasingly governed by a legal approach. We need to remember the wisdom of Jesus who said that all law is fulfilled in one thing- love. His point is that where people are striving to be decently human, which is most of the human race, then no law is necessary to guide such people. They simply need the freedom to be uniquely human.

 

Jesus on the Horizontal

In his own life, Jesus set forth a new definition and standard for what it means to be human. He set forth an inspiring example of what it means to relate horizontally as equals. His example has rarely been matched and that is why we keep returning to his life. People from nonChristian traditions may find similar inspiration from great examples of true humanity in their particular tradition, but we are more familiar with the tradition of Jesus. Also, we find everything about the historical Jesus so totally opposite to the vertical orientation of institutional Christianity that it is nothing short of shocking.

 

Jesus treated every person as an absolute equal- both women and men, old and young, both religious and nonreligious, both those from his own ethnic group and those from other groups. He adamantly refused to climb through hierarchical arrangements to occupy a position above any other person or set himself aside from others as special or different.

 

He made consistent effort to seek the company of the lowest strata of hierarchical society and he severely rebuked those who sought to separate themselves out from common humanity as special and then climb above and dominate others. In doing this, he showed that being truly human does not involve the climbing of hierarchical institutions or the dominating of others in any way.

 

In fact, Jesus took a active stance against domination or control in any form. When people tried to coerce him to become a ruling king, he refused and fled back to the company of those at the bottom of the hierarchical order of his day. He insisted that the truly human God came to serve, not to be served. If anyone would lead, said Jesus, then he must be the slave of all. If you would influence others, he was saying, then do so by inspiring example, not by dominating position or coercing command.

 

It has been argued that people may be influenced by persuasion as an alternative to coercion or command. But persuasion is only valid in human relationships if there is true equality between people with equal rights, power, privileges, and access to resources. Too often, persuasion is only a token initial step by someone holding power who intends to back it up with coercion if persuasion fails to gain the obedience the powerholder demands.

 

If there is not a genuinely equal relationship between people then persuasion is really only a softer form of coercion. Persuasion only holds validity if the person being persuaded has the genuine opportunity to freely agree because they want to and not because they fear some punishment or loss of benefit from a superior.

 

We stated above that Jesus accepted and loved all humans equally. Race, gender, age, economic or social status, religious or political ideology or other distinctions did not even enter his thinking regarding others. His one demand for true human relating and behavior was love. All the complex and dehumanizing law of religious systems was purposely pushed aside as he focused on this one essential for human life- treat others as humans. This is love. It is the only law for humanity.

 

This obligation to love is equally attainable by every human being. Relatively very few people can be wealthy, famous, or powerful. These highly valued things in contemporary society are often the result of efforts that merely express competitive animal drives to dominate others. Ultimately, these things do not matter and they add nothing to the process of becoming truly human. In fact, these products of the debasing drive of aggression often get in the way of being truly human. They certainly do not reflect genuine human love in any way.

 From the series 'Taking The Vertical Out Of God'
copyrighted material. Contact Us