Question about Free Will

[Toasty]

Is there a correct definition of the term, free will? I was wondering because different people define "free will" differently.

 

[Fogetaboutit]

WCF Chapter IX
Of Free Will

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.

Most of the time when I hear Arminians arguing against sovereign grace they usually pervert the understanding of free will to mean that God forces you to make a choice against your will. Our will is bound by sin, those who argue against this minimize the power of sin over our entire will, thinking process and actions. The choices we make either while being unregenerate or regenerate we do willingly in that sense we are free to choose what we will, but we do not have the ability to control our inner affections (which determine our will) appart from God's grace.

 

[Pilgrim Standard]

The problem I have encountered in discussions of "will" is that some people use the term to mean "autonomy," not "will."

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Free will: choosing according to your greatest inclinations at the moment you so choose.

 

[greenbaggins]

In Reformed thought, the will is bounded (and even determined) by our character. We can freely choose whatever it is in our character to choose. This is why God is unable (not free!) to sin: it is not in His character. The character of a fallen human being is defined by depravity in all his parts: he is unable to choose to perform an action that will please God, even if he could conceivably choose an action less heinous to God than some other action might be. The problem is when free will is defined by the Arminians as the ability to choose either action A, or the opposite of action A. By this definition, they can choose to thwart God, or they could choose to please God by an action. This definition of free will is completely incompatible with God's sovereignty.

 

[Cymro]

How can the will be free if it is in bondage? The person can only act according to his
nature. Perhaps it should be free choice instead of free will. Choosing according to your nature.

 

[SolaScriptura]

In Reformed thought, the will is bounded (and even determined) by our character. We can freely choose whatever it is in our character to choose. This is why God is unable (not free!) to sin: it is not in His character. The character of a fallen human being is defined by depravity in all his parts: he is unable to choose to perform an action that will please God, even if he could conceivably choose an action less heinous to God than some other action might be. The problem is when free will is defined by the Arminians as the ability to choose either action A, or the opposite of action A. By this definition, they can choose to thwart God, or they could choose to please God by an action. This definition of free will is completely incompatible with God's sovereignty.

I've highlighted your use of the word character. In my readings I have always seen the word "nature" used precisely where you use "character." Is there a distinction between "nature" and "character" of which I am unaware, or do you consider them synonyms?

 

[greenbaggins]

In Reformed thought, the will is bounded (and even determined) by our character. We can freely choose whatever it is in our character to choose. This is why God is unable (not free!) to sin: it is not in His character. The character of a fallen human being is defined by depravity in all his parts: he is unable to choose to perform an action that will please God, even if he could conceivably choose an action less heinous to God than some other action might be. The problem is when free will is defined by the Arminians as the ability to choose either action A, or the opposite of action A. By this definition, they can choose to thwart God, or they could choose to please God by an action. This definition of free will is completely incompatible with God's sovereignty.

I've highlighted your use of the word character. In my readings I have always seen the word "nature" used precisely where you use "character." Is there a distinction between "nature" and "character" of which I am unaware, or do you consider them synonyms?

Ben, I don't think there is any difference between the two words. The way I've seen "nature" used on this thread is identical to how I am using "character."

Jeff, there is more than one definition of "free" that is biblically possible. The Bible certainly does talk about us being enslaved with regard to whether we can obey God or not. So, if free is defined in terms of whether we can please God, then obviously we are not free unless God regenerates the human heart. However, is the sinner free to choose among various sinful actions? Yes he is. So, in that sense he is free, but in the other sense, he is a slave.

 

[Cymro]

If he is a slave then he is bound to his Master, and his master's will he does
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves to obey, his servants ye are
to whom ye obey."

 

[MW]

I think of a clock set to the wrong time. Precisely because the clock runs so well it never tells the right time.

Fallen man's volitional function as a rational creature runs perfectly fine so far as the mechanics are concerned. But because he is spiritually and morally wrong his volitional function always makes sinful choices.

 

[reaganmarsh]

Reading through this thread, I'm reminded of Spurgeon's statement:

"Free will I have often heard of, but I have never seen it. I have always met with will, and plenty of it; but it has either been led captive by sin, or held in the blessed bonds of grace."