# Free Will



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 26, 2004)

Being new to all this reformed theology I have a few questions about "free will".

I have heard it said that within Calvinism there is a sort of free will. What would someone mean by this? How does the reformed tradition deal with 'will' (whether free or not)

I also read somewhere, maybe even on this site, that James Arminius could not comprehend both unconditional election and free will and so settled for solely free will. Is this statement right or wrong?

 I am a bit lost and confused about where human will fits into Calvinism. For example if I decide to be cruel and not walk my dog is that Gods providence or is it my wickedness. Or is it that Gods providence is everywhere and he creates the laws of nature etc... sets the ball rolling and changes things along the way according to his good pleasure? So He controls all things but He by his will lets humans by _our_ will do things... confusing!!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Oct 26, 2004)

Fraser,

A good treatment of free will from a Calvinstic perspective is found in Thomas Boston's _Human Nature in its Four-Fold State_. Calvinists do believe in free will properly understood. 

See http://www.sovgracepub.com/sgpbooks/1589600061.htm

See also Loraine Boettner's treatment:

http://www.mbrem.com/calvinism/free.htm


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 26, 2004)

thanks


----------



## Goosha (Oct 26, 2004)

God determines through divine sovereignty the actions, decisions and choices men make throughout the course of history. However, men make real decisions; yet, they are not robots. We do have 'free will' but not the libertarian 'free will' that arminians argue for. 

Human philosophy can't make sense of this. However, Jonathan Edwards makes one heck of an effort in his book, "Freedom of the Will." 

Most of us calvinists pretty much speak out of both sides of their mouth on this issue because we affirm something that appears beyond human philosophy. Unfortunately, arminians define their view of 'will' pretty much based on philosophy. For instance, arminians pretty much follow what Palagius set in motion concerning the ethical accountability of man and man's ability to chose. Palagius argued that God would not make a commandment that men aren't capable of keeping; therefore, man can keep the ten commandments. Arminias isn't near as bad but what most arminians argue is that God wouldn't command us to accept Jesus if we weren't at least "capable" of heeding the command. Therefore, all men are able to respond to the call of the gospel. 

Calvinists pretty much argue that men are "capable" of responding but they simply don't have the "desire" to respond. 

All this plays into the discussion. Many of these points are very much interelated and at the end of the day I tend to just say "yes, I believe in free will" and "yes, I believe every single one of my decisions were predestined by God."

There are all sorts of things that could be addressed like secondary causes, the fall of Adam blah blah blah. The Westminster has some excellent stuff on the subject concerning your question on providence. I'd recommend going to that first.


----------



## openairboy (Oct 26, 2004)

I. God has endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil.

II. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.

III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.

IV. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He frees him from his natural bondage under sin; and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he does not perfectly, or only, will that which is good, but does also will that which is evil.

V. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.

This is chapter 9 from the Westminster Confession, so it is clearly set forth that the Reformed faith holds to free-will. When I first came to Calvinism I sought avoid this term, but that is not necessary.

openairboy


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 26, 2004)

I just showed how blind people can be... I read chapter 10&11 figuring they were the best places to look but didnt see chapter 9


----------



## Scot (Oct 27, 2004)

I'd recommend (as I'm sure most others on the board would) reading "Freedom of The Will" by Jonathan Edwards."


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 27, 2004)

You can also read a 30 page condensation of Edwards in John Gerstner's _A Primer on Free Will_


----------



## Scot (Oct 28, 2004)

> You can also read a 30 page condensation of Edwards in John Gerstner's A Primer on Free Will



Yeah, that would be much easier!


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Oct 28, 2004)

Even quicker try to get yourself inot heaven or create a world out of thin air

lol

blade


----------



## cih1355 (Nov 7, 2004)

How would you define the term, "free will" ?


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 7, 2004)

arminian and secular humanist: I, with no one or thing influencing me, autonomously choose to do what I want at this particular time and may autonomously choose to do differently at another time.

Calvinist: Man chooses to act according to his prevailing inclination at that time. The catch is: we are dead in trespasses before conversion and thus our actions are determined by our prevailing sin nature.


----------



## Puritanhead (Dec 29, 2004)

*God in the Hands of Angry Sinners*

I believe in free will... my free will would have nosedived me straight to the bowels of hell, but for the unmerited saving grace of Christ imputed to my account.

"Free will carried many a soul to hell, but never a soul to heaven." -C.H. Spurgeon

If you would like to read more about free will controversy, R.C. Sproul has assembled an anthology of theological writings including everyone from the Augustine to Pelegius to Wesley to Calvin. It should strengthen your will understand the nuances separating the views of Protestants and Catholics, Calvinists and Arminians, the Reformed and Dispensationalists. Many recommend Luther' and Edwards' books respectively on the nature of the willl, but they can be very technical and hard to read as they lack fluidity, though the content is top notch-- I've yet to tackle them. Not easy reads, so Sproul's anthology on free will controversy is a good start and very fluid with good selections.

~Willing to Believe: The Controversy over Free Will~ by R. C. Sproul
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0801064120/qid/

They way I see things-- man's problem is not the lack of a will per say, but rather that he is bondage to his will and that will is to sin. Nothing save the grace of God, and the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit can break man of that bondage. People who struggle with free will are struggling with original sin... the Bible is not just about theology but anthropology (i.e. the doctrine of man). Arminians ascribe salvific powers to man's free will and don't fathom the totality of man's fall. Modern Arminians are more Pelagian than their predecessors, so the problem is comprehension of original sin. The free will Arminians believe in was lost after the fall, so in word man doesn't have free will. If my free will could save me, I'd "will" myself to stop sinning while in the flesh.... Hmmm... No dice... I'm still a sinner as of now.

The cult of "will-worship" exalts man's free will and ascribes salvific powers to man's will and is synergistic, making the salvation of man a cooperative venture between God and man, and inevitably lays the diadem of salvation on the believer's free will and not on God. I tried my cooperative venture in my salvation and guess what? I never made any progress! Twas grace that saved me"”the free, unmerited, undeserved grace of God. The "natural man" in the church is Arminian. 

*The Papist Gospel of Will-Worship*
Council of Trent. Canon 4. If anyone says that man's free will moved and aroused by God, by assenting to God's call and action, in no way cooperates toward disposing and preparing itself to obtain the grace of justification, that it cannot refuse its assent if it wishes, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive, let him be anathema.

We're not Arminians more or less saying the same thing?

Amazing Free Will, How Sweet the Sound? 

*The Gospel of Free and Unmerited Grace*
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. "”Apostle Paul, Ephesians 2:8-10


But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be anathema As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be anathema. "”Apostle Paul, Galatians 1:8-9


"Take any religion and test it by this standard: Is it characterized by man or by God? If it elevates man, if it exalts man, if it deifies man, if it glorifes man than it's not the true faith. If it exalts God, if it gives God the glory, if it puts the diadam upon the crown of Christ than that must be the true religion." 
"”Rev. Ian Paisley, Free Presbyterian Church, Ulster.


"The Blessed Christ of God has finished the work. It is not Christ's sacrifice plus anything, it's Christ's blood and Christ's blood alone that saves the soul."
"”Rev. Ian Paisley, Free Presbyterian Church, Ulster.


http://www.amazinggracedvd.com/

[Edited on 12-30-2004 by Puritanhead]


----------



## doulosChristou (Dec 30, 2004)

I affirm the freedom of the will, but Calvinistic free will is a far cry from Arminian free will. Calvinistic free will is a freedom of inclination. Basically, we believe that all people are free to do whatever they most want to do given the circumstances. The problem, of course, is that the effects of the Fall has left man's inclination totally depraved. Hence, John 6:44, 15:5, etc. Arminians, on the other hand, believe that, given the exact same circumstances, a person could have done otherwise. This is libertarian free will, and it is logically untenable. Basically, under the libertarian free will model, a person would have to be able to have done otherwise for the exact same reason and under the exact same circumstances. This should be patently vapid to all. The unique aspect of classical Calvinism as it relates to human will and God's sovereignty is that of compatibilism. We affirm that God can control the very same action that man also controls. Joseph's brothers selling him to the Midianite merchants is a good example. Interestingly, hyper-Calvinism, Arminianism, Openness Theology, and Process Theology are one and all agreed that if God is in control over something, man cannot be and if man is in control over something, God cannot be. Only true Calvinism sees the compatibility of the two. Edwards' "Freedom of the Will," in my opinion, is the greatest work on the subject. This view greatly exalts the omnisapience and omnipotence of God.


----------

