There has been a lot in the "news" and "social media" recently about people and the use of the phrase "having courage". I find I largely disagree with how courage is being portrayed in our society.
Courage, by definition, is to face something without fear. Okay, so by that simplistic definition, sure, perhaps these people can qualify as having courage. However, I think there is a deeper underlying concept that is implied with courage. This is a difference of being literal versus having contextual understanding of the word. I believe we are confusing the idea of doing what one wants with doing something for a greater cause and purpose.
Courage, to me, means that a person must face and do something they would prefer NOT to do, but in the interests of others, sacrifices the self for the betterment of the many. I believe this is illustrated by the duties of a soldier as well as Esther's actions in the Bible.
A soldier demonstrates courage when he must face the enemy and go into active battle. It isn't that he WANTS to kill the other person/people. It is that he is defending his country, beliefs, or freedoms of others. If he WANTED to do this, we would call him a killer, a murderer, and use the law to stop his ability to hurt others.
Esther is an incredible example of courage. She was married to the king and could have convinced herself that she would survive the extermination of the Jews by remaining silent. She could have justified her silence, especially as going to the king in the first place could have meant she would be killed before even being given the chance to petition the king. In the end, her courage led her to do things that would not only protect herself, but protect an entire nation.
Both of these examples show how courage is more than just doing something without fear. I belief fear is actually overcome, not that it isn't present, when one is exemplifying the attribute of courage. Courage implies doing something beyond being self-gratifying. Rather, it demands a greater purpose in those actions.
