Freedom of speech. Freedom of thought. Freedom of religion. They're important. They're in the news. How do they relate to Christianity? Let's start thinking through it.

What does the Bible have to say about them?

Take John the Baptist as an example. He was the essential free speaker, the "voice of one, crying in the wilderness", preparing the way for God. He spoke freely, declaring a new, living religion. But then Herod stepped in, captured him, imprisoned him, and killed him. John (I have something I must speak freely about) is the good guy; Herod (I don't like your speech) is the bad guy.

In Daniel 6:7-23, there's the famous story of Daniel and the lions' den. Daniel was cast to the lions because he was speaking freely -- praying to Jehovah, not to King Darius -- against an edict of the government. Daniel's the good guy. Darius, until he repents, is the bad guy.

Perhaps the most powerful Biblical example is found throughout Jesus's ministry, which required freedom of speech -- the freedom to form, teach, and create a new religion. His free speech revolutionized the thoughts of his listeners. And, what did the powerful religious leaders of the day do? They accused him of blaspheming. They tried to trap him. To get him to recant. To be quiet. He knew that he couldn't do that; His mission was to bring new truths to a thirsty world.

There's a great "free speech" scene during Jesus's entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, in Luke 19:37-40:

"And when He was already near to the descent of the Mount of Olives, all the multitude of the disciples rejoicing began to praise God with a great voice for all the works of power that they had seen, saying, 'Blessed be the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest!' And some of the Pharisees from among the crowd said to Him, 'Teacher, rebuke Thy disciples.' And He answering told them, 'I say to you, If these should be silent, the stones would cry out.'

These are pretty clear examples. The Bible values freedom of speech.

Free speech and free thought are closely related. Deep communication is a big part of what makes us human. Humans developed the ability to have large scale cooperation through shared stories. If we can't speak freely, we lose the ability to communicate real thoughts, and we lose the ability to share new ideas, and our potential drops away.

Here are three excerpts from Swedenborg's works that relate to this:

"...when free speech and freedom of the press are curtailed, freedom of thought, that is, of examining matters in a full and complete way, suffers as well.... Our higher understanding, then, adapts itself to fit the amount of freedom there is to say and do what we are considering." (True Christian Religion 814).

"No one is reformed in a state of intellectual blindness, either. These individuals, too, are not aware of truths and do not know about life, because it is our discernment that must instruct us in these matters and our volition that must act them out. When our volition is doing what our discernment tells it to, then we have a life in accord with truths; but when our discernment is blind, our volition is blocked as well." (Divine Providence 144)

"No one is reformed in states where freedom and rationality are absent." (Divine Providence 38)

I was talking about this with a friend, and he reminded me that there are grey areas, where some freedom and discernment exist, but they are limited. I think he's right; we're mostly living in these grey areas. There are probably rare cases where freedom and rationality are at zero -- maybe when someone is in a coma. And I doubt if anyone has 100% freedom or discernment. In some ways, this makes free speech and free thought even more important. Life is not crystal clear, or free, and things that can help us as we seek understanding and freedom are really precious.

The example of Helen Keller bears on this. She called the day that Anne Sullivan arrived at her house "my soul's birthday". In her autobiography, The Story of My Life (1903), Keller described the moment when she realized that the motion of Anne's fingers, spelling w-a-t-e-r into her hand symbolized the water that she was pouring over her hand:

"I stood still, my whole attention fixed upon the motions of her fingers. Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten — a thrill of returning thought; and somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me.... The living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, set it free!"

Helen Keller also said, “One can never consent to creep when one feels an impulse to soar.”

Free speech and free thought need each other. And... what about religion?

Religion is a core set of thoughts. If you're not free to speak, your thinking is trammeled. If you're not free to think, how can you hope to get to the core ideas about why we exist, and what we are going to do -- how we are going to live? Religion is at the heart of it. Even if you reject religion altogether, you're still living by some sort of belief system, even if it's materialistic or nihilistic.

If you're told what you have to believe, it doesn't usually work out very well. There's a natural tendency to rebel. We need that freedom to figure things out for ourselves.

Albert Einstein said something that speaks to this:

“It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom. Without this it goes to wrack and ruin without fail.” - Paul Schilpp, "Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (1949) ‘Autobiographical Notes’"

And... here's another excerpt from Swedenborg's work, Heaven and Hell:

In a word, anything that does not enter us in freedom does not stay with us, because it does not belong to our love or intentions; and anything that does not belong to our love or intentions does not belong to our spirit. The actual reality of our spirit is love or volition - using the phrase "love or volition" because whatever we love, we intend. This is why we cannot be reformed except in a state of freedom. (Heaven and Hell 598)

M. Scott Peck reinforces this idea:

There is no such thing as a good hand-me-down religion. To be vital, to be the best of which we are capable, our religion must be a wholly personal one, forged entirely through the fire of our questioning and doubting in the crucible of our own experience of reality. - M. Scott Peck - The Road Less Travelled

Finally, let's go back to see what the Bible says about it, in these two stories:

Saul of Tarsus was persecuting Christians -- trying to destroy their freedom of religion. He had a miraculous conversion experience that led him to be renamed Paul, the great Christian teacher and evangelist. (See Acts 9)

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were persecuted - thrown in a fiery furnace - for worshipping in their own way, denying the edicts of Nebuchadnezzar. They were saved by an angel, who kept them from being burned. (See Daniel 3)

Wrapping it up...

It's pretty clear that free speech, free thought, and free religion are part of the same fabric. They're very much part of being human. They're well supported in the Bible. They've been woven into the better governments of our time.

We need to take good care of them. They're necessary for us to be able to learn truth, and reject falsity -- and to "Cease to do evil, learn to do good." (Isaiah 1:16)

9212. 'If you ever take your companion's clothing as a pledge' means if factual knowledge of truths is dispersed by illusions that are a product of sensory impressions. This is clear from the meaning of 'taking as a pledge' as receiving a token for goods that are supplied, for 'a pledge' is a token for goods that are being lent. When spiritual things are understood instead of these, supplying goods means giving instruction in truths, and the token or pledge in this instance means truth on the level of the senses. For 'the clothing' here which is given as a pledge means the lowest level of the natural, which is that of the senses. Since illusions abound on this level and illusions wipe out truths, 'taking your companion's clothing as a pledge' means the dispersing of truths by illusions that are a product of sensory impressions. The fact that these things are meant is clear from the whole train of thought in the internal sense.

[2] In general 'clothing' means everything that clothes another, and so whatever is relatively more external. Consequently the external or natural man is called the clothing in relation to the internal or spiritual man. In a similar way truth is called the clothing in relation to good, because truth clothes good; likewise factual knowledge of truth in relation to the truth of faith which belongs to the internal man. Sensory perception, which constitutes the lowest level of life with a person, is the clothing in relation to factual knowledge of truth.

'Clothes' are lower things that cover higher ones, or what amounts to the same thing, exterior things that cover interior ones, see 2576, 5248. In general they are truths, 4545, 4763, 5319, 5954, 6914, 6917, 9093, factual knowledge of truths, 6918, or truths on the level of the senses, 9158. Sensory perception constitutes the lowest level of life with a person, 4009, 5077, 5125, 5128, 5767, 5774, 6201, 6313, 7442, 7693, and sensory perception is subject to illusions, 5084, 5089, 6201, 6948, 6949, 7442.

[3] The meaning of 'clothes' as truths owes its origin to representatives in the next life. There angels and spirits appear dressed in clothes in keeping with the state of faith or truth that is theirs, and their clothes are varied in keeping with the changes which that state undergoes. Those governed by authentic truth appear dressed in white garments, and those governed by truths springing from good in shining ones. But those governed purely by good, as angels of the inmost heaven are, called celestial angels, appear naked. So it is then that clothes are truths, and that truths are meant in the Word by 'clothes', as may be seen from places referred to above. To these places let the following in the Gospels be added:

[4] In Matthew,

When Jesus was transfigured His face shone like the sun, and His garments became [white] as the light. Matthew 17:2.

'Face' in the Word means the interiors, in particular the affections, 358, 1999, 2434, 3527, 3573, 4066, 4796, 4797, 5102, 5695, 6604, 6848, 6849, and 'God's face' Goodness itself, 222, 223, 5585. 'The sun' means God's love, 2441, 2495, 3636, 3643, 4060, 4321 (end), 4696, 7083, 8644. From this it is evident what the meaning is when it says that the Lord's face shone like the Sun, namely that His interiors were the Good of Divine Love. 'His garments became [white] as the light' means Divine Truth radiating from Him, which also appears in heaven as the light, 1521, 1619-1632, 3195, 3222, 3485, 3636, 3643, 4415, 5400, 8644.

[5] In the same gospel,

When Jesus drew near to Jerusalem they brought the she-ass and the colt and laid their garments on them and set Him on them. But a very great crowd spread their garments on the road, while others were breaking off branches from trees and spreading them on the road. Matthew 21:1, 7-8.

Riding on a she-ass and her colt was a representative sign of the Supreme Judge and King, see 2781, as also is evident from what comes before in verse 5,

Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold, your King is coming to you, meek, seated on a she-ass, and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.

It is also evident in Mark 11:1-12; in Luke 19:28-41; in John 12:12-16; and in Zechariah 9:9-10, where it says of the Lord that He would ride on an ass, and on a young ass, a son of she-asses. There He is called a King, and in addition it says that His dominion will be from sea even to sea, and from the River even to the ends of the earth. The fact that the supreme judge rode on a she-ass, and his sons on young asses, see Judges 5:9-10; 10:3-4; 12:14; and that the king rode on a she-mule, and the king's sons on mules, 1 Kings 1:33, 38, 44-45; 2 Samuel 13:29.

[6] When the disciples laid their garments on the she-ass and her colt, it represented the recognition that truths in their entirety were the foundation on which the Lord as supreme Judge and King rested; for the disciples represented the Lord's Church in respect of truths and forms of good, see 2129, 3488, 3858 (end), 6397, and their garments truths themselves, 4545, 4763, 5319, 5954, 6914, 6917, 9093. This same recognition was likewise represented when the crowd spread their garments, also the branches of trees, on the road. Another reason why they spread them on the road was that 'the road' means the truth by means of which a member of the Church is led, see 627, 2333, 3477. And the reason why they also spread the branches of trees was that 'trees' meant perceptions and also cognitions or knowledge of truth and good, 2682, 2722, 2972, 4552, 7692, so that their branches are the truths themselves. Those actions were also performed then because it was customary for the chief persons among the people to lay their garments on supreme judges and kings' she-asses and mules when they rode in pomp on them, and for the people themselves to spread their garments on the road, or the branches of trees instead. For in heaven judgeship consists in Divine Truth derived from Good, and kingship in Divine Truth, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 4581, 4966, 5044, 5068, 6148.

[7] In Luke,

No one adds a piece of a new garment onto an old garment; in doing so he splits the new, and the binding from the new is unsuitable for the old.

Luke 5:36.

The Lord used this comparison to describe the truth of the new Church and the truth of the old Church; for 'garment' means truth. Sewing on one or binding it to the other means destroying both; for the truth of the new Church is interior truth, thus truth for the internal man, whereas the truth of the old Church is exterior truth, thus truth for the external man. The latter kind of truth prevailed in the Jewish Church, for by means of external things this Church represented internal ones, whereas the Church of today has knowledge of the internal truths that were represented then, because the Lord has revealed them. The fact that these truths are not suited to external ones in such a way that they can exist together is what the words used by the Lord serve to mean. From all this also it is evident that 'garment' means the Church's truth.

[8] In John,

Jesus said to Peter, Truly, truly I say to you, When you were a boy you girded your loins and walked where you wished. But when you are old you will stretch out your hands, [and] another will gird your loins and lead you where you do not wish. John 21:18.

No one without knowledge of the internal sense can see what these words imply; plainly, they contain arcana. In the internal sense 'Peter' means the Church's faith, see the Prefaces to Genesis 18, 22, and 3750, 6000, 6073 (end), 6344 (end). Consequently Peter when he was a boy means the nature of the Church's faith as it is initially, and Peter when he would be old means the nature of the Church's faith as it is finally. From this it is evident what 'when you were a boy you girded your loins and walked where you wished' means, namely that the Church's faith as it is initially is faith composed of truth derived from good, thus faith composed of charity towards the neighbour and of love to the Lord. And at this time a member of the Church in doing what is good acts freely, because his actions spring from the Lord. For aspects of the good of love are meant by 'the loins', 3021, 3294, 4280, 4575, 5050-5062, so that 'girding the loins' means clothing good with truths; and living is meant by 'walking', 519, 1794, 8417, 8420, so that 'walking where one wishes' means leading a life that is free. Those people lead a life that is free, or act freely, whose faith springs from love to the Lord and charity towards the neighbour; for they are led by the Lord, 892, 905, 2870-2893, 6325, 9096. 'When you are old you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird your loins and lead you where you do not wish' means that the Church's faith as it is finally will be none at all, at which time falsities that arise from evil springing from self-love and love of the world will take the place of faith and enslave it. This is the arcanum which these words spoken by Lord contain and which can be seen only from their internal sense. All this shows once again the kind of way in which the Lord spoke, namely in such a way that an inner meaning might be present within every detail, to the end that heaven might be joined to the world by means of the Word. For without the Word, that is, without Divine Truth that has been revealed, they are not joined together; and if they are not so joined the human race perishes.