Last week you may have read my Odyssey article called “An Open Letter Regarding My Request To Move Off Campus.” It was satirical letter mocking both Liberty University’s age restriction on moving off campus and the various on-campus rules that make living in the dorms feel like summer camp.

You likely didn’t read the letter to the editor that I submitted to Lynchburg’s local newspaper, The News & Advance. In it, I respectfully and succinctly describe my opposition to a potential change to the Liberty Way that would allow students above age 21 to drink off campus. This isn’t because I personally object to alcohol, but because I like the culture created by the rule. Unlike the Odyssey article, this letter was an assignment for a writing class I’m taking this semester.

Both of the these letters are vastly different in almost every way, but both concern Liberty’s uniquely restrictive rules. One of my professors said that she was surprised to see my Odyssey article after just having read my News & Advance letter. There was a stark contrast between the respect for the alcohol rules and the lampooning of the living restrictions. She seemed to wonder why I had such different responses to what seem to be similar aspects of the Liberty Way.

I began to wonder too.

In ancient Greece, there were a group of philosophers called Sophists who would argue in order to please their audience, regardless of what they actually believed or knew to be true. Their concern was with showing off their rhetorical skills, not with presenting the truth.

At first glance, it may seem that my letter to the editor was not written to present the truth of my opinion, but rather to please my writing professor, who would see my letter and grade it. If that were the case, then I would be no better than the Sophists that Socrates denounced. But that is truly my opinion—while I have absolutely no problem with drinking, I think that Liberty’s zero-tolerance policy for its students is for the best.

Now the question became not whether I had presented a false view of my opinions, but why exactly I had such divergent opinions on two similar aspects of the Liberty Way. Why do the dorm rules and off-campus restrictions irk me so much while I am happy to abstain from alcohol despite my own convictions?

The answer to my question lay in the distinction between rules of behavior and rules of location.

Rules of behavior limit the kinds of actions you are permitted to perform. These are a part of Christianity, from the Ten Commandments to Paul’s prohibitions of sins of the flesh. Liberty has many restrictions on behaviors, many of which line up with what is explicitly found in the Bible. But there are several behaviors that are restricted by Liberty, such as dancing, gambling, and legal drinking, that stem more from Baptist interpretations of the Bible.

Those rules that come from the Bible are Liberty’s way of keeping its students in line with Biblical living. Serious Christians should have no problem with them. The more Baptist rules are like the “house rules” that every family has about behavior.

Now for a little background on my family. We had house rules regarding Christian behavior, grades, and communication with our parents. These rules limited our behaviors and created a certain environment in our house. Once we reached driving age, as long as we maintained these rules, we were free to go wherever, whenever we wanted.

If we broke these rules (grades start slipping, forgetting to check in), we would suffer consequences of limitations of location. We might get a curfew, we may not be allowed to go out, or we may lose computer privileges. Because we had demonstrated that we could not maintain the standards of behavior of both God and our parents, we were punished by limiting our freedom of when we could leave the house and where we could go.

The lesson: being an adult is being trusted to maintain certain standards of behavior, regardless of location. Being a child is the inability to do exactly that, requiring limitations on location.

Let’s return to Liberty’s campus, where rules of location are woven into your life before you ever have the opportunity to demonstrate irresponsibility. For someone who had never had a curfew, it felt like I was being punished before I’d even had the chance to misbehave. From curfew to off-campus restrictions, these policies treat me like a child unable to obey the rules.

Rules of behavior are a part of the Christian life, but we are not limited to our location. God has called us to go into all the world, at all times of day, to live for Him and spread the gospel. He trusts that through his Spirit we can maintain holiness regardless of of physical location. For that reason, restrictions on location only make sense if you've demonstrated that you can't handle that trust.

I’ll end with a story: I signed out to my parents’ house for the weekend. Having texted my mom ahead of time, I spent time at my friend’s house on Friday, and we had a discussion about faith that utterly changed the way that I saw Christ and the freedom from guilt he has given me. That discussion lasted until 2am, at which point I left, feeling the love of God like I never had before, and returned to my parents’ house.

If I had been under Liberty’s curfew at the time, I would have had to leave her house at midnight to make it back and park by my 12:30 curfew. I wouldn’t have had the life-changing experience of hearing her testimony, and I would have a smaller view of God today. Because my parents trust me enough to act like an adult and make my own decisions about when I should come home, I had a conversation that radically changed my spiritual walk.