by Dr. Daniel T. Lewis

Published 07/21/2026

Last updated 7/26/2026 

Why does this matter?  Freedom and individual liberty provide the fundamental structure needed for the quest for human flourishing. Without freedom and individual liberty, the pursuit of human flourishing becomes impossible. 

How can I apply it this week?  You can apply principles of freedom and individual liberty to move yourself towards the state of human flourishing. 

Built on a solid foundation of faith and epistemology, the framework of freedom and individual liberty provides the fundamental structure needed for the quest for human flourishing. Political philosophy generally defines freedom as the absence of external constraints, allowing for absolute autonomy of the individual or natural will. The Bible defines freedom as a spiritual change that allows an individual to fulfill ethical responsibilities. In Exodus, God liberated the Hebrews from slavaery in Egypt to enable a life of abundance and flourishing. In the New Testament, God delivers individuals from the bondage of sin to a life of abundance and flourishing. The Bible frames freedom and human flourishing as a result of aligning one's life with the will of God. Throughout the Bible, God communicates His will. Individuals and nations make the choice to obey or disobey God. The choice to obey or disobey always results in predictable consequences, and usually the Bible describes those consequences in great detail. Societies realize freedom as individual liberty. Free societies use laws, an understanding of ethical responsibilities, and the recognition of individual rights to protect individuals from oppression and ensure mutual human flourishing. Ancient views about how the individual related to the state differed from modern ways of considering that relationship. 

Following the Biblical concept of freedom, the Hebrews saw freedom as release from oppressive physical and spiritual bondage to willingly serve God, follow His ethical laws, and build a just, holy community (What is True Freedom?, 2024). The Biblical history of the founding of the city-state of Babel describes the formation of oppressive human government in rebellion against God's plan for humanity (Genesis 11:1-9 KJV). In contrast, the ancient Greeks defined freedom as collective participation in public affairs and self-government (Constant, 1819). Among the ancient Greeks, self-government took the form of the city-state or polis, where the people enacted the laws they thought would best maintain the social order. The ancient Greek model of self-government vested individuals with a great amount of political freedom, but they became subject to the will of the majority. The fate of the people came to depend upon the nature of their rulers. Hebrew philosopher and political leader Solomon noted, "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn" (Proverbs 29:2 KJV). The modern concepts of freedom (since the Enlightenment) center on individual sovereignty. The modern concept of freedom includes: right to be left alone, secure in private life, property, and freedom of expression, without interference from the government or the tyranny of the majority.  Volunteerism focuses on free association and mutual aid, replacing state coercion with voluntary, horizontal cooperation. In this model, individuals organize directly to meet community needs, ranging from resource sharing to emergency response (Mack, 2014). 

Classical liberals such as John Locke and John Stuart Mill argued for the sovereignty of the individual and described negative liberty, or freedom from interference (Berlin, 1969). Mill (1859) limited the role of government to preventing the individual from harming others. Frédéric Bastiat (2007) limited the proper function of government to protecting individual rights. Philosophers such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and G.W.F. Hegel advocated for positive liberty or self-mastery. The concept of positive liberty involves the possession of the power and resources to take control of one's life and realize one's true human potential. The Biblical view of individual liberty frames individual freedom as a result of God empowering humanity to share leadership responsibilities with him (Lewis, 2022). The classical liberal tradition gave rise to the founding principles of the united States of America. These principles prioritize private rights, limited government, and the rule of law over collective state goals. Thomas Jefferson, borrowing from John Locke, chose these principles as the foundational framework for the pursuit of happiness or human flourishing. The framework of freedom and individual liberty, especially when examined through the Biblical lens, incorporates basic principles applicable to leadership and daily life, and these principles help frame specific public policy positions. 

Individuals interact within a system of dynamic interdependence, where two people's actions jointly shape their outcomes, serving as the foundational component for larger group norms, roles, and power dynamics (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959). Economically, the division of labor drives economic productivity and national welath (Smith, 1776/1952). The social obligation arising from our interdependence includes a duty to promote the happiness of others (Kant, 1785). Individuals exist to aid each other, and hurting others harms oneself (Aurelius, 167).Individual happiness emerges from the connection we forge as we care for others (Seneca, 1918). In John 15:12 (KJV), Jesus commanded that his followers love eachother, in the same way he loved others.  In Matthew 22:36-40 (KJV), Jesus explained that the greatest commandments require total love towards God and unconditional love towards others.

In free societes, rational indiviudals voluntarily colaborate to accomplish shared and mutually benefical goals (Mill, 1859; Locke, 1952; & Smith, 1776). In the classical liberal view, freedom exists as an absence of external restraints of the individual, and when the state exists, its legitimate scope only extends to the protection of life, liberty, and property (Locke, 1952). Mill (1859) distinguished between actions that primarily affect the individual (such as personal lifestyle choices or beliefs) and those that impact the safety, rights, or well-being of others. Only the latter justify state interference or legal punishment. Conservatism holds that social cohesion and moral order, embodied in institutions such as culture, family, and the church, shape individuals. In this view, unchecked indiviudalism pose a threat to the stability of social cohesion and moral order (Burk, 1790; Hayek, 1978; Kirk, 2001). Modern liberalism redefines indiviudal freedom as access to the power and resources needed to reach goals and adviocates for wealth-redistribution through a welfare state to help indiviudals flourish (Berlin 1969; Green, 1986; Rawls,1971/1999). A combination of individuals, calling themselves a government, comit a form of robery when they collect taxes without the consent of those being taxed (Spooner, 1870/2012). Furthemore, governemnt without consent of the govorned lacks legitamcy (Locke, 1952). The advancement and preservation of peaceful, voluntary, and mutually beneficial interaction requires interacting with each other in a manner that doesn't rely on violence, threats, and deception. 

References

Aurelius, M. (167). The Medetations. (trans.  George Long). https://classics.mit.edu/Antoninus/meditations.html

Bastiat, F. (2007). The Law. Ludwig von Mises Institute. https://cdn.mises.org/thelaw.pdf

Berlin, I. (1969). Two concepts of Liberty. Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford University Press. 

Burke, E. (1790). Reflections on the Revoltion in France. https://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/burke/revfrance.pdf

Constant, B. (1819). The Liberty of Ancients Compared with that of Moderns. https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/constant-the-liberty-of-ancients-compared-with-that-of-moderns-1819

Green, T. H. (1986). Lectures on the principles of political obligation and other writings (P. Harris & J. Morrow, Eds.). Cambridge University Press. 

Hayek, F. A., (1978). The Constituion of Liberty. The University of Chicago Press 

Kant, I. (1785). Grounding Work of the Metaphysics of Morals. https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/kant1785.pdf

Kirk, R. (2001). The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot. Gateway Editions 

Lewis, D. T. (2022). The impact of followers’ sense of empowerment on their perception of eudaimonic happiness [Doctoral dissertation, Trevecca Nazarene University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. 

Locke, J. (1952). The second treatise of government. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), Great books of the western world (Vol. 35, pp. 25-81). Encyclopædia Britannica. 

Mack E. (1978). Voluntaryism: The Political Thought of Auberon Herbert. Journal of Libertarian Studies. (2). 4. p. 299-309 

Mill, J.S. (1859). On Liberty. The Walter Scott Publishing Compnay.  https://www.gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm

Rawls, J. (1971/1999). A theory of justice (rev. ed.). Harvard University Press. 

Senaca, (1918). Moral letters to Lucilius . (trans.  Richard Mott Gummere). https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius

Smith, A. (1776/1952). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations (M. J. Adler, Ed.). Great Books of the Western World (Vol. 39). Encyclopaedia Britannica. 

Spooner, L. (1870/2012). No Treason.  Free Patriot Press 

Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley 

What is True Freedom?. (2024). https://rabbisacks.org/archive/what-is-true-freedom/