Does Man Have a Free Will?

Pastor Ostella

10-4-98

My theme for today, as many of you already know, is the subject of free will. I put it as a question: "does man have a free will?"

For many of you just asking the question will put you on edge. It will make some of you close your mind immediately to whatever I have to say – you will be unable to follow the sermon because you will perceive this sermon as a challenge to something you cherish.  However, if you listen carefully, you will find that in the main what you cherish, I cherish as well. I am not the heretic you may first think I am.  But there are some things about this topic that are truly unbiblical and need to be exposed to the light of day. To expose something to the light necessitates that we examine it, test it, and question it (also read/ reread, even this sermon).

But the question for today's message is actually stated very poorly. As a teacher I notice that there are questions and there are questions. I often see myself asking the wrong question in trying to get students to focus matters of substance.

"Does man have a free will?" is the wrong question for a few reasons.

  1. The term "Free will" has many connotations some okay and some unbiblical; this makes for confusion and hinders biblical understanding. In other words, this question has a loaded term in it. It is so loaded and so confusing that the term has lost most of its value. I think that the term should be abandoned or defined very carefully every time we use it. You will see why I say this as we go on.
  2. We also should define the term man in the question. In the history of Christian thought, this question only becomes relevant and necessary after the fall into sin. So to clarify the question we should add the word "fallen." Then it becomes, "does fallen man have what is ambiguously called a free will?"
  3. We also have to inquire what it means to "have" a free will? Is it like having a heart or a lung? Or is it like having a conscience? This is getting deep but isn't it better to say that the will is not something you have but something you do. You will something, you choose or decide on something. Now the question becomes: "does a fallen man have the power of decision and choice?"

It is really a kind of power, isn't it? It is an ability. Does fallen man have the ability to choose and decide? Stated like this there is no debate.  But when we factor in limits then the debate begins. There is debate over what the limits are (not that there are limits).

No one here will debate with me over my power of choice regarding a million dollars if I say to you I do not have the choice of depositing this amount of money into my savings or checking. You won't say of someone who cannot make this choice that they make no choices whatever. You simply recognize that people have limits. We may have the power to choose and decide but we are finite. We are finite and thus limited creatures bound to the laws of the creation.  We still say we have the ability to choose and decide; we just add that it is within limits.

The debate over free will concerns the limits that affect the power of choice exercised by fallen human beings.

This is truly a difficult and complex subject. Many things need to be carefully considered.  I bring this up now because I want to deal with another paradox, namely, the paradox of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. But I can't take this paradox up until the confusion of free will in relation to human responsibility is first ironed out. I do not want to go to the dinner with divine sovereignty and human responsibility on the table, wearing wrinkled clothes. I need to iron out some things on the confusing subject of free will first. That is today's task.

So here is what I propose. I will answer some sub-questions that should go a long way in clarifying this discussion. They are: 1) How does the Bible use the words "free will"? 2) To be free must a person be able to choose good or evil? 3) Does responsibility mean ability? 4) Does fallen man have the ability to believe the gospel? (Or, in the gospel context, is fallen man free?).

1A. How does the Bible use the words "free will"?

The only places that you have that language in Scripture that I know of is regarding the free will offerings, which simply refer to voluntary offerings (as in Lev. 1:3), and in the book of Philemon (in some translations).  The rare use in the Bible does not make the terminology useless. The word "trinity" is not even a biblical word but it is very useful. The problem with the term free will is that it is a mixed bag containing both good biblical elements and bad philosophical elements.

So as far as I am concerned if we use the term "free will" we should use it with this precise definition in mind: it means to do what you want to do, to act in a way that is voluntary and not forced. That is right out of Philemon 1:14 ("I preferred to do nothing without your consent, in order that your good deed might be voluntary and not something forced"; cf. "of your own free will").   If we mean by free will that people will what they want with consent and without being forced, then I can agree and use the term.

2A. To be free (or have free will) must a person be able to choose good or evil?

In other words, would you be free if you could only choose good? The old Star Trek shows spoofed this point more than once. They would present a world of perfect peace and harmony where everyone does good to everyone else. But this state of affairs is rejected by Captain Kirk and company because man has no free will. If he is not able to choose good or evil, then it is not utopia. He must be able to choose evil but not do so for it to be utopia.

We should note that this is a wholesale attack on heaven. It is a denial that heaven as described in the Bible is a good thing. It denies that heaven is utopia. Why do I say this? Because there are all kinds of personal beings in heaven who cannot choose to do evil and that is part of what makes it heaven.  To whom do I refer? They are the saints, angels, and God!  What kind of heaven would it be if we thought that there could be another host of fallen angels? What kind of heaven would it be if the saints, rescued from sin for eternal life, could fall again like Adam and Eve? Would you even think of it as heaven, if God were capable of sinning?  The elect angels can only choose to do good. The saints in heaven can only choose to do good. God can only choose to do good.

This is just saying that personal beings choose, will, decide and act in accord with their nature. No one can step outside of his or her self. You make choices everyday according to who you are as a personal being.  If you can only choose to do good because you have a holy nature like God then you are truly free!  If you can only do evil because you have an evil nature, then you are not free. This suggests that there is something fundamentally wrong about using the term free with regard to fallen man as we do in the "free will" language. Again, it is better to not use the term or if we use it to define our usage very carefully (the careful sense would mean that our actions are voluntary and not forced or coerced as in the Philemon passage).

Here is a basic claim. It is confusing to use the word free to describe people that the Bible says are in bondage as slaves to sin.  Scripture teaches that as fallen sinners we only do evil. This is a profound point and not easy to accept. But listen to just a few passages.

The full force of this is quite powerful so it might help if we define a good act.

The profound indictment is that fallen man does not have the ability to do good. He is not free. He does not have the ability to will to do good. Being evil, as Jesus said, he can only speak evil. His "want to" is evil so all that arises from his "want to" is evil. His nature and heart is evil. He wills out of the overflow of his nature and heart. So, he only wills evil.

3A. Does responsibility mean ability?

The discussion of free will impacts discussion of human responsibility. In this area I want to deal with two things: the answer to this question and an important lesson.

Must you be able in order to be responsible?

We have just shown that Scripture teaches that fallen people can only do evil. In this context, does Scripture hold them accountable? Yes. Are they responsible for their evil actions even though that is all that they are able to do? Yes.  This is a hard truth isn't it. But it is all through Scripture. Just take one example that we have already looked at in Matthew 12:34-36. Jesus says these vipers only speak evil because they are evil (v. 34). Then he goes on to say that men will give an account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken (v. 36). Though they can only do evil they are nonetheless accountable and responsible!

Consider this argument. Can the unbeliever keep the 10 commandments? Does he have the ability? We have to say no to both. No, he cannot keep the 10 commandments. No, he does not have the ability to keep them. But is he responsible if he breaks a commandment like disobeying parents or committing murder, this is overt outward action or inward heart action?

Then responsibility does not mean ability.

What is the lesson here?  It is a very profound and deep rooted (radical) biblical teaching. It is this: our inability is not an excuse for our sin, it is an index of how sinful we really are!  It shows us how bad we actually are. It shows us the condition of our hearts before God. Anyone who sees this fact clearly must fall on his face before God in sheer horror, sorrow, and repentance.

All the commands and exhortations in Scripture are not there with the assumption that fallen man is able to obey them. For one, the law (command/ exhortation) is given as a school master to show us our true condition, our utter failure before God, our utter helplessness and thus to point us to our only hope which is Jesus Christ, the risen Lord of glory.  Knowing this will drive us to the arms of Christ for salvation ; knowing this will drive us to His feet in worship.  This should enhance our sense of sin and responsibility, drive us away from self-reliance to Christ alone to help us in our need, and draw from the depths of our being a profound recognition of grace that must spill over into eternal praise.

Without the ability to do otherwise, we are responsible because what we do we do voluntarily. We sin because we want to, and we are not forced or coerced in our sinning. So, we are responsible and will give an account for every deed in the judgment, including our excuse making.

4A. Does fallen man have the ability to believe the gospel?

This really just a piece of the pie we have already discussed. Since man cannot do anything good, then he cannot do the good act of obeying and believing the gospel. The evil tree cannot bring forth this good fruit. The person in bondage cannot do this to free himself. No! To obey and believe the gospel he must be freed by another.

Thus, fallen man cannot believe the gospel.  Jesus plainly says that he cannot, he must be freed by the power of God's drawing (Jn. 6:44). Come in context means believe (cf. v. 36-37, note the parallel of believe with come). Thus he is telling us in verse 44 that no one can believe, no one is able to believe. But all whom the Father has given to Christ will be drawn, will come and will be raised to life in the last day with eternal life (vs. 37, 44, 40).

We are either slaves to sin or slaves to Christ. What made the difference? God's call ( 1 Cor. 7:20-22).  Fallen man is a slave and in bondage to sin until he is freed by the grace of God (Rom 6:17-18; Jn. 8:32, 33, 36).

Therefore, I think it is better and more productive to ask "is fallen man free?" than to ask "does fallen man have a free will?" Scripture uses the term free for redeemed man. Fallen man is not free but a slave.  Freedom biblically involves being delivered from sin, from its punishment, its power, its dominion, its very presence in heaven and glory.

Applications

  1. To avoid the automaton confusion we may use the term free with the term will to indicate that in our choosing we are not forced and we are responsible. This use of free will, nothing more nothing less, is acceptable.  We do what we want to do.  We manifest our nature in our choices and actions.  God cannot do evil and fallen man cannot do good. God is to be commended and fallen man is to be condemned. The fact that God cannot do otherwise indicates how perfect He is and how He is to be lauded. The fact that man cannot do otherwise indicates how imperfect and sinful he is and how fully he is to be judged.
  2. Heaven's Freedom: To be an ultimately free rational moral being is to be able, by one's nature, to do only that which is good.  Our freedom in Christ is from bondage to choosing sin to freedom for righteousness more and more until glory when we will be completely free and not able to do evil. The ability to choose either good or evil is not part of true moral freedom, it is not part of heaven's freedom.  God is not able to choose good or evil and He is perfectly free.  Jesus was tempted but temptation did not mean He was able to do evil (to be tempted is to be asked to do evil, to be pointed toward evil, or to be enticed toward evil from our own lusts within: in none of these senses could Jesus do evil; he was asked, pointed but not enticed from within as the holy God-man).  As a true human being Jesus was not able to choose good or evil: He was free from sin; He was and is free from sin. He has freedom! And that is where we are going. Having been set free, the final day will come when creation will be delivered up into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.  In heaven, we will be truly human, truly free, and have freedom as the image of God. In heaven we will not have the ability to do good or evil, but only good. That this is for sure and forever is part and parcel of heaven and eternal life. There will be no second fall from the world of the second Adam.
  3. Does the natural man, fallen unrenewed man, have the ability to choose Christ, or to believe in Christ?  No he does not. When he rejects Christ, he chooses to reject without being forced or coerced. The offer of the gospel is made to him and he willingly, "wantingly," refuses and he is forever without excuse.
  4. How do we give the gospel to those who have drowned? We do not throw out the lifeline to the drowning but to the drowned. We say to them "believe." We know they cannot believe just as we know they cannot obey any command of God like the 10 commandments.  But God tells us to do this. Doing this is a context in which God does His work of giving eyes to the blind, and hearing to the deaf. It is context of the giving of life where there was none. We tell the blind to see knowing that they cannot see but we also know that our telling them to see (gospel witnessing and preaching) is a context in which the Great Physician gives eyes to the blind in the power of His might.
  5. Finally, this all points to how much we need the grace of God, God's power intervening in our lives.

These teachings on our true condition in the fall should make us tremble at ourselves and run with all our might to the Lord Jesus.  It should make us cling to Him for dear life.

It should make us eternally grateful for the eye that diffused a quickening ray and made our chains fall off so we could arise and follow the risen Lord Jesus.