The Ability To Choose - Free Will

[Carbon]

What is free will?
Does man have free will?

I know there is a lot of talk about Reformed Christians (Calvinists) not believing in free will. But scripture always addresses man as a being who not only is capable of making decisions but is also responsible for the decisions he makes.

Simply, man is a creature of options. He is one constantly confronted with alternatives between which he chooses, saying yes to one and no to another.

Mans ability to make choices, sets him apart from all other creatures.

The ability to make choices is basic to human exsistence. Apart from this ability there can be no responsibility, no dependability and no planning.

Thoughts?

 

[Fred]

Mans ability to make choices, sets him apart from all other creatures.

But don't even animals have the ability to choose?

 

[Carbon]

But don't even animals have the ability to choose?

Any particular animal? Seems more like instinct or maybe like a dog who is trained with rewards (treats) or punishments.

 

[Carbon]

But even so, we humans lost our true freedom when Adam fell. We didn't lose our capacity for choice, but true freedom. Which is the ability to live in total obedience to God.

 

[Arial]

But don't even animals have the ability to choose?

Yes they do. They are making choices all day every day. What sets them apart from us is that we are moral agents and they are not. They operate through the instinct they were created with, we operate as having been made in the image and likeness of God.

I just watched my dog Boaz make a choice. He started towards the bedroom to get up on the bed. Stopped for a minute, turned around, came back, and took over the couch instead. Choice.

 

[His clay]

What is free will?
Does man have free will?

I know there is a lot of talk about Reformed Christians (Calvinists) not believing in free will. But scripture always addresses man as a being who not only is capable of making decisions but is also responsible for the decisions he makes.

Simply, man is a creature of options. He is one constantly confronted with alternatives between which he chooses, saying yes to one and no to another.

Mans ability to make choices, sets him apart from all other creatures.

The ability to make choices is basic to human exsistence. Apart from this ability there can be no responsibility, no dependability and no planning.

Thoughts?

If free will is equated with libertarian freedom, then "no" man does not have free will.
If free will just means that people make decisions, volitional choices, and do as they most prefer, then "yes" but the term "free will" is historically misleading.

Yes, people see options. I like to call them future objects of consideration for a choice. We perceive various alternatives. Should I obey or disobey? Should I eat mint chocolate chip or chocolate chip cookie dough? Do I really want to engage a volatile person with an important issue that will probably lead toward an unpleasant encounter? The question is not if people make choices. Everyone believes that people make choices. The true question is "why" people make choices. On the libertarian side, you have indeterminate choices (no causal reason for the choice being thus and not otherwise); and on the Compatibilistic side you have choices made for causal reasons. Caused choices or uncaused choices.

The Bible presents several different avenues of causation. No human being is outside of God's causal preserving hand. No human being is uncaused by their moral nature. No human being is autonomous from God.

Because choice is viewed differently, then responsibility is also understood differently. Because choice is viewed differently, then freedom is understood differently. Mountains more can be said, but those are a few initial thoughts.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I like what Sproul says...


The Freedom and Bondage of the Will

Proper understanding of the freedom of the will in the fallen human condition is assisted by distinguishing free agency from free will.

Free agency is a mark of humanity as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions about what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their conscience, inclinations, and thoughts. They are answerable to God and to the rest of humanity for their choices. Adam was a free agent before the Fall, and afterwards. He continued to have desires and thoughts and to put them into action through his will. Similarly, we are free agents now; we will continue to be so after the resurrection. The glorified saints exercise their wills, but they are confirmed in grace, so that they cannot sin. Their choices are the product of human free agency, made in accordance with their nature, but now these choices are good and right. The transformation of their hearts is complete and they desire to do what is right.

Free will has been defined by Christian teachers from the second century on as the ability to choose any at all of the moral options offered in a given situation. Augustine taught that this possibility was lost through the Fall. The loss is part of the burden of original sin. After the Fall, our natural hearts are not inclined toward God; they are in bondage to sin and cannot be freed from this slavery except by the grace of regeneration. Such an understanding of the fallen will is taught by Paul in Rom. 6:16–23.

Only a will that has been set free is able to choose righteousness freely and heartily. A permanent love of righteousness, that is, an inclination of the heart to the way of living that pleases God, is one aspect of the freedom that Christ gives (John 8:34–36; Gal. 5:1, 13).


R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (Orlando, FL; Lake Mary, FL: Ligonier Ministries, 2005), 1078.

 

[Carbon]

I like what Sproul says...


The Freedom and Bondage of the Will

Proper understanding of the freedom of the will in the fallen human condition is assisted by distinguishing free agency from free will.

Free agency is a mark of humanity as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions about what they will do, choosing as they please in the light of their conscience, inclinations, and thoughts. They are answerable to God and to the rest of humanity for their choices. Adam was a free agent before the Fall, and afterwards. He continued to have desires and thoughts and to put them into action through his will. Similarly, we are free agents now; we will continue to be so after the resurrection. The glorified saints exercise their wills, but they are confirmed in grace, so that they cannot sin. Their choices are the product of human free agency, made in accordance with their nature, but now these choices are good and right. The transformation of their hearts is complete and they desire to do what is right.

Free will has been defined by Christian teachers from the second century on as the ability to choose any at all of the moral options offered in a given situation. Augustine taught that this possibility was lost through the Fall. The loss is part of the burden of original sin. After the Fall, our natural hearts are not inclined toward God; they are in bondage to sin and cannot be freed from this slavery except by the grace of regeneration. Such an understanding of the fallen will is taught by Paul in Rom. 6:16–23.

Only a will that has been set free is able to choose righteousness freely and heartily. A permanent love of righteousness, that is, an inclination of the heart to the way of living that pleases God, is one aspect of the freedom that Christ gives (John 8:34–36; Gal. 5:1, 13).


R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (Orlando, FL; Lake Mary, FL: Ligonier Ministries, 2005), 1078.

Nice!

I have the same Reformation study bible

 

[Binyawmene]

I know there is a lot of talk about Reformed Christians (Calvinists) not believing in free will.

I'm a Compatibilist and I believe in free will. I believe my free will is compatible with God's determinism. And I don't believe libertarian free will can be combined with God's omniscience or deny who God is essentially. What I do acknowledge is there are certain external constraints, errors in choices, and outside forces at play. The free will isn’t free from their own sinful nature. The natural man has no freedom from sin, but is a slave to sin, and his will is rebellious towards God especially his omniscience. There is no freedom from God’s providence and control. No freedom from the laws of nature like gravity. God knows your thoughts and you cannot have freedom from God’s omniscient. You cannot prevent what is going to come to pass in your life. Your days are determined by God, even Jesus Christ too. Except that Jesus' free will wasn't tainted by sin and perfectly obedient to the Father's will.

 

[fastfredy0]

Mans ability to make choices, sets him apart from all other creatures.

Any particular animal? Seems more like instinct or maybe like a dog who is trained with rewards (treats) or punishments.

Choose definition: pick out or select (someone or something) as being the best or most appropriate of two or more alternatives.

Thus, animals chose. Now, if you want to get to the cause of their selection then one can say "instinct", but then you have to answer the question: "What is the cause of their instincts".

What is free will?
Does man have free will?

Lot's of definitions. The "will" part is the ability to chose. I define the "free" part of free will as the ability to chose independently from external influence. This is impossible for created beings as they cannot determine how they will chose things in the future when they were but nothing in the past for from nothing nothing comes.
For example, no one independent of external influence chooses to have a "sin nature".
Aside: there's also liberation free will but I'll skip that save to say it's an amoral type of will

But even so, we humans lost our true freedom when Adam fell. We didn't lose our capacity for choice, but true freedom. Which is the ability to live in total obedience to God.

Was Adam able to chose to sin or not sin freely (independent of external influence)? I think not. God created Adam knowing Adam would sin. This was predestined. Adam could not overturn God's foreknowledge. God could have created an Adam that would not sin just like He did with 2/3s of the angel. Adam could not create in himself the mechanisms that would determine his choices when he was nothing and that was what Adam was before he was created. God is not effected by man; rather, God is the First Cause. Man is never the First Cause. God is never man's puppet.

Job 35:7 “If you are righteous, what do you give God, Or what does He receive from your hand? 8 “Your wickedness affects only a man such as you, And your righteousness affects only a son of man [but it cannot affect God, who is sovereign]” If Adam self determined that he would sin, then he is the cause of God's treatment of God from sending them to hell to sending some a Savior. Adam, the First Cause, I think not.

The ability to make choices is basic to human exsistence. Apart from this ability there can be no responsibility, no dependability and no planning.

Definition of RESPONSIBILITY: having an obligation to do something, or having control over or care for someone, as part of one's job or role.
We are responsible because a being in authority (God) say so and not because we are capable of obeying or not obeying.

 

[makesends]

Any particular animal? Seems more like instinct or maybe like a dog who is trained with rewards (treats) or punishments.

Not to disagree with your POV, but the fact that we are more 'sentient' and better able to think abstractly doesn't mean that we are not instinctive.

Animals show sometimes amazing care and consideration for other animals or people. My friend had a dog who would let her take his bone, with only a growl. But when she took his "mamma's" bone, he bit her. I could argue it's only a matter of degree of sentience. And compared to God's sentience, ours doesn't amount to squat.

But, I only go there to make a point. Whether or not we are instinctive, ('Do not be like the horse or the mule, which have no understanding but must be controlled by bit and bridle or they will not come to you."), we have the ability, (animals irrelevant), to choose, introspectively, and whether or not introspective animals are held responsible, (they are not --at least not in the usual sense), we are. And it is that simple. We are even given consciences, so we have no excuse.

Scripture is replete with admonishments to use our heads. Apparently we have the tendency to not do so. It may be that THERE is the connection between will and responsibility, that we will to think before we act? And Romans 1 applies here.

 

[Fred]

Did anyone choose to post or not to post in this thread?

 

[fastfredy0]

Even though Kansas City did all they could to win the super bowl; yet, they are held responsible. No victory parade.
Even though each of us is conceived in sin; yet, each of us is responsible. You're going to hell unless an authority intervenes.

It's not a matter of whether or not you are capable of doing "X" or "Y", it's a matter of an authority determining that you must do "X" or "Y".

 

[makesends]

Did anyone choose to post or not to post in this thread?

You have a point? Of course we chose --who's saying otherwise?

 

[fastfredy0]

Did anyone choose to post or not to post in this thread?

Yes, I choose to post on this thread but it was not a FREE Will choice because @makesends made me do it.
To be FREE one must not be influenced. But @makesends is such a nice guy that I felt obligated.

Aside: Now if that doesn't get a LIKE from makesends, I don't know what will. .. maybe even a "love"

 

[makesends]

Yes, I choose to post on this thread but it was not a FREE Will choice because @makesends made me do it.
To be FREE one must not be influenced. But @makesends is such a nice guy that I felt obligated.

Aside: Now if that doesn't get a LIKE from makesends, I don't know what will. .. maybe even a "love"

Sorry. You'll have to make do with a haha.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

What is free will? Does man have free will?

That depends on how we are defining freedom. You are asking if the will is free—but relative to what?

Is the human will free relative to God? Absolutely not.

I know there is a lot of talk about Reformed Christians (Calvinists) not believing in free will.

With all due respect, it is not relevant what Reformed folk believe, but rather what scripture teaches. There is one appeal which all Reformed folk make. Does scripture teach that the human will is free relative to God? Quite the contrary, it teaches that God is sovereign over all his creation.

But scripture always addresses man as a being who not only is capable of making decisions but is also responsible for the decisions he makes. Simply, man is a creature of options. He is one constantly confronted with alternatives between which he chooses, saying yes to one and no to another.

Let us grant all of this for the sake of argument. Yet, what does it have to do with free will? What is the hidden premise at work here? That moral responsibility presupposes the freedom of the will?

Man's ability to make choices sets him apart from all other creatures.

This is false, since other creatures are able to make choices.

What sets man apart from all other creatures is God who made us in his image and entered into a covenant relationship with us.

The ability to make choices is basic to human existence. Apart from this ability, there can be no responsibility, no dependability, and no planning.

In the words of Vincent Cheung, "Moral responsibility (or accountability) has to do with whether God has decided to judge us; it has no direct relationship with whether we are free. In fact, if we were free from God but not judged by God, then we would still not be morally responsible (or accountable). In other words, moral responsibility does not presuppose human freedom, but it presupposes divine sovereignty. We are responsible not because we are free, but [rather] precisely because we are not free."

 

[fastfredy0]

That depends on how we are defining freedom.

Agreed. What is your definition?

In the words of Vincent Cheung, "Moral responsibility (or accountability) has to do with whether God has decided to judge us; it has no direct relationship with whether we are free.

Agreed. I like Vincent.

 

[Carbon]

With all due respect, it is not relevant what Reformed folk believe, but rather what scripture teaches. There is one appeal which all Reformed folk make. Does scripture teach that the human will is free relative to God? Quite the contrary, it teaches that God is sovereign over all his creation.

Oh, I agree with you.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Sovereignty of God and Freedom of Man

What about man’s will with respect to the sovereignty of God? Perhaps the oldest dilemma of the Christian faith is the apparent contradiction between the sovereignty of God and the freedom of man. If we define human freedom as autonomy (meaning that man is free to do whatever he pleases, without constraint, without accountability to the will of God), then of course we must say that free will is contradictory to divine sovereignty. We cannot soft-pedal this dilemma by calling it a mystery; we must face up to the full import of the concept. If free will means autonomy, then God cannot be sovereign. If man is utterly and completely free to do as he pleases, there can be no sovereign God. However, if God is utterly sovereign to do as He pleases, no creature can be autonomous.

It is possible to have a multitude of beings, all of whom are free to various degrees but none of whom are sovereign. The degree of freedom is determined by the level of power, authority, and responsibility held by each being. However, we do not live in this type of universe. There is a God who is sovereign—which is to say, He is absolutely free. My freedom is always within limits. My freedom is always constrained by the sovereignty of God. I have freedom to do things as I please, but if my freedom conflicts with the decretive will of God, there is no question as to the outcome—God’s decree will prevail over my choice.

It is stated so often that it has become almost an uncritically accepted axiom within Christian circles that the sovereignty of God may never violate human freedom in the sense that God’s sovereign will may never overrule human freedom. The thought verges on, if not trespasses, the border of blasphemy because it contains the idea that God’s sovereignty is constrained by human freedom. If that were true, man, not God, would be sovereign, and God would be restrained and constrained by the power of human freedom. As I say, the implication here is blasphemous because it raises the creature to the stature of the Creator. God’s glory, majesty, and honor are denigrated since He is reduced to the status of a secondary, impotent creature. Biblically speaking, man is free, but his freedom can never violate or overrule God’s sovereignty.
I and my son are free moral agents; he has a will and I have a will. However, when he was a teen living in my home, his will was more often constrained by my will than was my will constrained by His. I carried more authority and more power in the relationship and hence I had a wider expanse of freedom than he had. So it is with our relationship to God; God’s power and authority are infinite, and His freedom is never hindered by human volition.

There is no contradiction between God’s sovereignty and man’s free will. Those who see a contradiction, or even point to the problem as an unsolvable mystery, have misunderstood the mystery. The real mystery regarding free will is how it was exercised by Adam before the fall.


R. C. Sproul, Can I Know God’s Will?, vol. 4, The Crucial Questions Series (Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2009), 47–49.