The Reality of Free Will

[CoreyD]

Listen, you're not going to get anywhere with her. Her belief is that unless you can ALWAYS choose right, you don't have free will. Of course that is a bogus belief, but it's the way she sees it.

I'm not talking to @Clare73. That was @childeye 2 I was addressing.
I asked Clare a question, and until she answers, she isn't communicating with the OP, and the OP has said his final words on that.

I thought you were finished.
I hope you aren't here to give anyone a reason to fill the thread with meaningless posts.
You don't want people who visit the thread to have to dig through a pile of nothingness.

The thread can remain small, without extending it needlessly with someone repeating words they have no support for, and where they aren't interested in conversating.

 

[concretecamper]

It falls to you to show the philosophical error, as well as the Scriptural basis regarding "free will,"
keeping in mind that man's will is not free to live sinlessly, at best his "free will" is only partial or limited.

I think the fact that some can lead more virtuous lives than others displays that the extent of our free will is within our control. There is no need of any other "proof". We limit ourselves.

 

[childeye 2]

Perhaps at this point you can answer the question I asked twice, which you ignored.
Ephesians 4:30 reads... And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
How does one grieve the spirit? Isaiah 65:10

I believe it grieves the Holy Spirit when we don't listen to Him. Sometimes what people say grieves the Holy Spirit inside me. Let me say here, I don't mean to imply in any way someone is going to be perfect as they transform; I'm saying that the transformation is a process that first begins by admitting we cannot choose to BE GOOD, apart from God's Spirit.

Yes, only evil would tell me I could choose not to listen. <--This is my problem with a philosophical free will. Paul says, "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me… waging war against the law of my mind" and "making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me.”

Sure, I'm convinced.

So, you have no problem saying that a believer confesses Jesus as Lord by grace through faith and not by voluntary choice? To rephrase, you agree that we abide in God and He in us from faith to faith?

• Romans 10:9–10 → “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
• But Paul also insists that faith itself is a gift:
  • Ephesians 2:8–9 → “By grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.”
  • 1 Corinthians 12:3 → “No one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.”
• Therefore, confession is not a voluntary choice—it is Spirit‑enabled faith.

You don't?

No.

No, you do... Throughout this entire thread... from your first post.
You have denied all of these.

No, I really didn't. These lexicon terms are single words that carry the sentiment of voluntariness in action (like offerings, devotion, or readiness). I don't deny that. I'm saying they do NOT establish a doctrine of “free will” as autonomous choice. In other words, they describe how in some instances something is given or done (freely, willingly), <-- This is contextual usage, not the existence of an independent from God human will in the moral/immoral context.

CoreyD said:
The Greek term, which you said is an adjective, and not a noun, is hekousios - meaning free will - the neuter of a derivative from hekon; voluntariness -- willingly, which is (an adjective, a primitive term) – properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice), i.e. "of free-will" (J. Thayer).

This is not talking about someone's will, in the sense of my will, your will - the noun, but as it says willing; unforced; deliberate action; voluntary; acting on one's own accord. Which seals the point that free will refers to something done freely.. without anyone or anything forcing it.

Looking at what you said above, I saw nothing to refute. You admit it's not about someone's WILL (the noun). I agree. It seemed to me you were using these as examples to show what "free" means, 'voluntary/unforced' when you use the term free will. It still didn't refer to a free will (noun) in the moral/immoral context.

Regarding free will - the ability to make decisions of our own, unforced; willfully, and intentionally; voluntarily; of our own accord, rather than God controlling or predetermining our choice, is a Biblical teaching.

When did you add this to your meaning? --> rather than God controlling or predetermining our choice. I never said God controls or predetermines our choices. I said God is the Spiritual goodness, the brotherly love in mankind that causes us to do what is right. That He lives in us and we in Him through faith, not by a voluntary ability to choose not to.

The Bible says, at Hosea 14:4, in part...

The Hebrew expression nedabah (נְדָבָה) is rendered freewill offering, freely, plentiful, voluntary, offering, willingly, offering.
This Hebrew word comes from the Hebrew word nadab, of which Topical Lexicon says...
The verb נָדַב consistently underlines a movement of the heart that is neither coerced nor merely dutiful. It describes people stirred from within to give, serve, or step forward because they have first been moved by God. Throughout Scripture this spirit of readiness is linked to worship, stewardship, civic responsibility, and warfare, revealing a multifaceted biblical theology of voluntary devotion.

Spoiler: My Comment

God was not coerced into loving his people, but did so freely; willingly.
Exercising free will first started with God, and as humans are made in God's image, they too have this God given attribute, as can be seen in the scriptures where God allows persons to give him worship of their own accord, or of their own free will.
http://My Comment
God gave humans the opportunity to make a personal choice regarding their course in life. Deuteronomy 30:19, 20

At 1 Corinthians 9:16-18, verse 17 says,

Paul uses the Greek word hekón: Willing, Voluntary. Which means of one's own free will.
According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon...
STRONGS NT 1635: ἑκών
ἑκών, ἑκοῦσα, ἑκον, unforced, voluntary, willing, of one's own will, of one's own accord: Romans 8:20; 1 Corinthians 9:17. (From Homer down.)

At Philemon 1:14, Paul says...

The Greek word hekousios - meaning free will, is the neuter of a derivative from hekon; voluntariness -- willingly, which is (an adjective, a primitive term) – properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice), i.e. "of free-will" (J. Thayer).

This you have done, while at the same time dismissing the meaning of voluntary.
voluntary
adjective

Done or undertaken of one's own free will.​

a voluntary decision to leave the job.​

Acting or done willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.​

a voluntary hostage; voluntary community work.​

Normally controlled by or subject to individual volition.​

volition​

The act of willing or choosing; the act of forming a purpose; the exercise of the will.​

The result of an act or exercise of choosing or willing; a state of choice.​

The power of willing or determining; will.​

​

Now, you are denying that you haven't dismissed them???
No, you have... the entire thread from page 3, post 56.

I didn't dismiss them. They do not undermine my conclusion that God abides in us and us in Him through faith, not by a doubleminded voluntary ability to choice either to believe or not believe. They actually make my point that the only true free will in the moral immoral context is a will free from sin. <-- In this context, will is a noun desire/intent and free means free from the slavery of sin.

1. Premise 1: Life and the capacity to choose are gifts from God (Acts 17:25; Genesis 2:7).
2. Premise 2: Sin and the carnal will exist only to prove God’s righteousness by contrast (Romans 3:4; Romans 5:20–21).
3. Premise 3: Lexicon terms for “voluntary” (nedābâh, hekōn, hekousiōs) describe Spirit‑prompted offerings, not autonomous free will.
4. Premise 4: God’s declaration “I will love them freely” (Hosea 14:4) reveals that love is His nature, not deliberation.
5. Premise 5: Without love, there is no awareness of its absence—love itself is the condition for care and recognition (1 Corinthians 13:2).

Conclusion: The only coherent free will in Scripture is the will freed from sin, aligned with God’s Spirit, and expressed in love. Love is not just the fulfillment of the law—it is the very precondition for perceiving God’s will, since without love there is no awareness, no care, and no righteousness.

 

[Clare73]

I think the fact that some can lead more virtuous lives than others displays that the extent of our free will is within our control. There is no need of any other "proof". We limit ourselves.

Surely you don't believe that we are free to choose to live sinless lives. . .

Keeping in mind that "free will" is a notion of man no where stated in Scripture.
And man defines this notion as "the power to make all moral choices, without external force or constraint."

However, what is stated in Scripture is the slavery to sin (Jn 8:34) of the unregenerate as the result of the fall,
as well as the sin of the believer (1 Jn 1:8-10), which is to be confessed.

Scripture presents no totally "free will". . .i.e., power to make all moral choices, including the choice to live sinlessly (Ro 3:23).
Scripture presents only a limited "free will," exlcuding the power to choose to live sinlessly.

 

[Clare73]

You said this a hundred times in this thread. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 100
Amazing, that you are back with it... this time adding the word unregenerate, as if to say, only some people do not have free will.
How does that support your argument, if man does have free will? It doesn't does it.

It was shown to you that persons are no longer slaves.
Are you a slave, and don't have free will?

I can't choose to live a sinless life.
Therefore, my will is only partially free, it cannot make all moral choices, which is necessary for a totally free will.
The best I can say is my will is partially free to refrain from all sin in thought, word and deed.

All scripture is inspired of God, yes... and the words that translators use are what?
I'd appreciate if you answer that question with an example. So try this...
In the book of Psalm the word מוֹט (Hebrew mot) is used.
Translators use the English words "To totter," "shake", "slip", or "be moved"
For example, Psalm 104:5, when translated, read....

1. He set the earth on its foundations, never to be moved. Berean Standard Bible
2. He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever. New American Standard Bible
3. He founded the earth upon its place, So that it will not shake forever and ever. Legacy Standard Bible
4. He established the earth on its foundations; it will never be shaken. Christian Standard Bible
Which of these four highlighted chosen words is God's word, and are any of them human notion?
You said the word is a human notion. Did you not.

I did not.
I said "free will" (power to make all moral choices, including the choice to never sin) nowhere stated n Scripture, is a human notion.
Free will (defined above) is nowhere stated, or defined in Scripture.
What is stated in Scripture is that the unregenerate are slaves to sin (Jn 8:34, Lev 14:33-53)

I'm not sure what you are trying to say then, since all these words are human construct.
Every word is... whether English, Spanish, German...

All Scripture is God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16) human words.LOL. I don't believe anyone here is crazy... but then, I don't know.
The only person contradicting 2 Timothy 3:16 is the person claiming that God's inspired word is the words translators chose, but they don't accept the words they don't like... such as "freewill", and "free will".
As for the scriptures that refer to free will of man, you did see them... unless of course, you are closing your eyes when you read a post, and see them.

Still waiting for the addresses of the Scriptures which state "free will,"
keeping in mind the revealed Biblical concept of man is "slaves to sin" (Jn 8:34),
unless, of course, you can choose to live sin free, in thought, word and deed.

I know I can't.

 

[Clare73]

I think the fact that some can lead more virtuous lives than others displays that the extent of our free will is within our control. There is no need of any other "proof". We limit ourselves.

C'mon, you know better than that. . .

Just because I can climb a tree as does a monkey doesn't mean I, therefore, can safely jump from tree to tree several feet apart.

 

[concretecamper]

C'mon, you know better than that. . .

Just because I can climb a tree as does a money doesn't mean I, therefore, can safely jump from tree to tree several feet apart.

We are talking about free will and the ability to be virtuous, or not. We are not talking about physical gymnastics, ugh

 

[childeye 2]

The record shows I gave clarification... repeatedly.
The record shows you ignored the posts.

childeye 2 said:
The definition of freewill in Greek that you have given above is an adjective, not a noun. It describes a certain type of action or choice that is uncoerced/voluntary.
----------------------------------------------------

Subjective Semantic Analysis of the op​

Objective Contextual Meaning​

• Will = predisposed intent or desire, shaped by God’s Spirit or sinful desire.
• Free = voluntariness of action.
• These meanings are grounded in the context of Scripture, not abstract philosophy. They arise from how the words function in their passages (John 8:44, James 1:14, Leviticus 1:3, 2 Corinthians 9:7).

Subjective morphing​

When lifted out of their contexts and combined into “free will” or “free‑willed agents,” the terms morph:

• Biblical usage:
  • Will = predisposed intent or desire.
  • Free = voluntariness of action.
  • Together, they describe how choices are made in context (voluntary offerings, desires shaped by influence).
• Philosophical usage:
  • “Free will” = autonomous human faculty of choice.
  • “Free‑willed agents” = beings with innate, independent agency.
  • These are interpretive constructs, not direct lexical meanings.

Mechanics of Morphing​

Here’s how and why the shift happens:

1. Loss of context → In Scripture, will refers to intent/desire, and free refers to voluntariness of action. Once those contexts (offerings, desires, voluntary acts) are stripped away, the words lose their specific grammatical anchors.
2. Fusion into a new phrase → The separate categories (noun vs. adjective/adverb) are merged into a single compound phrase, “free will,” which Scripture itself does not define.
3. Interpretive overlay → Theology and philosophy supply new meaning, treating “free will” as a metaphysical faculty of autonomous choice.

In other words, they become subjective terms, shaped by theological or philosophical interpretation rather than by the objective contextual meaning.

Summary​

• Objective contextual meaning:
  • Will = predisposed intent or desire.
  • Free = voluntariness of action.
• Subjective morphing:
  • Out of context, “free will” becomes a philosophical construct of autonomous choice.
  • The morphing occurs because the terms are lifted from their contextual usage and reinterpreted through theology and philosophy.

The record shows you wanted to talk about something that wasn't actually what the OP referred to.

The op showed the terms were morphing terms taking them out of the syntactical context. The record shows the subsequent disconnect in communication:

CoreyD said:
I referred to the scriptures which refer to man's free will, repeatedly.
Leviticus 1:3;
childeye 2 said:
A "voluntary" or "freewill" choice/decision (an adjective).

CoreyD said:
From your comment, you agree then, that an unforced choice/decision, is an exercising of free will. Yes?
childeye 2 said:
Not really. The context of Jesus saying, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do", implies the character of the father manifests in the fathers children.

CoreyD said:
I don't understand this statement - the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent??
What do you mean? Can you explain. <-- This is a snippet: here is the full sentence: childeye 2 said:
I therefore do not accept the premise that the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent.
CoreyD said:
I don't understand this statement - the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent??
What do you mean? Can you explain.
childeye 2 said:
The Satan is the one that conveyed we have the choice/option to disobey God and not die.

CoreyD said:
You appear to be saying the woman did not have a choice in the matter, and could not exercise her freedom of choice... she had none.
Is that what you are saying?
childeye 2 said:
The scripture is saying she was deceived into doing it. You know that don't you? It's not like she would volunteer to be deceived. Did you know that Jesus came down to destroy the works of the devil?

The record shows that you didn't want to accept that, but wanted it your way, and so, went right on ahead with what you wanted... ignoring me - the OP, and my posts.

The record shows we're having a communication breakdown, because "will" in scripture is a desire/intent, NOT an ability to choose.​

​

Analysis of Syntactical Disconnection, Term Morphing, and miscommunication​

1. Initial Claim​

• CoreyD: “I referred to the scriptures which refer to man's free will, repeatedly. Leviticus 1:3.”
• Problem: Leviticus 1:3 uses nedābâh (“freewill offering”), which is an adjective describing voluntariness of an act, not a noun establishing a metaphysical faculty.
• Morphing: CoreyD lifts “freewill” out of its syntactical context (adjective modifying “offering”) and morphs it into a noun phrase “man’s free will” (faculty of choice).

2. Response Clarifying Syntax​

• childeye 2: “A ‘voluntary’ or ‘freewill’ choice/decision (an adjective).”
• Point: Correctly identifies that “freewill” in Leviticus is adjectival, describing the manner of the offering.
• Disconnect: CoreyD interprets this as agreement with his philosophical construct, but syntactically it is not the same.

3. Morphing into Faculty​

• CoreyD: “From your comment, you agree then, that an unforced choice/decision, is an exercising of free will. Yes?”
• Problem: He morphs “voluntary” (adjective) into “exercising free will” (noun phrase = faculty).
• Disconnect: He assumes voluntariness = autonomous faculty, which is a semantic leap.

4. Counter with Contextual Meaning​

• childeye 2: “Not really. The context of Jesus saying, ‘Ye are of your father the devil…’ implies the character of the father manifests in the children.”
• Point: Returns to contextual meaning—will = predisposed intent or desire, shaped by spiritual influence.
• Disconnect: CoreyD expects agreement on “faculty of free choice,” but childeye 2 insists on contextual predisposition.

5. Further Miscommunication​

• CoreyD: “I don’t understand this statement—the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent??”
• Problem: CoreyD interprets “choice/option” as evidence of free will (faculty).
• childeye 2: “I therefore do not accept the premise that the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent.”
• Point: Argues that the serpent introduced the illusion of autonomous choice, not Scripture.
• Disconnect: CoreyD reads “choice” as proof of freedom; childeye 2 reads “choice” as deception.

6. Final Breakdown​

• CoreyD: “You appear to be saying the woman did not have a choice… she had none.”
• Morphing: Equates deception with absence of choice, still within the “faculty of free will” framework.
• childeye 2: “The scripture is saying she was deceived into doing it… It’s not like she would volunteer to be deceived.”
• Point: Maintains that her will was predisposed and manipulated, not freely autonomous.
• Disconnect: CoreyD insists on freedom as faculty; childeye 2 insists on predisposition and deception.

Summary of Morphing​

• Lexical context:
  • Free = voluntariness (adjective/adverb).
  • Will = predisposed intent or desire (noun).
• Morphing:
  • CoreyD fuses them into “free will” = autonomous faculty.
  • childeye 2 resists, keeping them in contextual syntax (voluntariness + predisposed desire).
• Syntactical disconnection:
  • CoreyD treats adjectives as nouns (faculty).
  • childeye 2 treats them as modifiers (manner/intent).
  • Result: They talk past each other—one in philosophy, the other in grammar/context.

 

[childeye 2]

We are talking about free will and the ability to be virtuous, or not. We are not talking about physical gymnastics, ugh

I see virtue as a power not a choice/decision. In that view, the desire/will, to obtain virtue, would compel us to Christ as the source of virtue.

20 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:

21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole.

 

[CoreyD]

I believe it grieves the Holy Spirit when we don't listen to Him. Sometimes what people say grieve the Holy Spirit inside me. Let me say here, I don't mean to imply in any way someone is going to be perfect as they transform; I'm saying that the transformation is a process that first begins by admitting we cannot choose to BE GOOD, apart from God's Spirit.

Thank you.
So, you believe that people with holy spirit can choose not to listen to God, and go against him.
Free will is having the ability to choose a course willingly; voluntarily; unforced; of one's own accord, desire or will; intentionally and deliberately.

• The angel called Satan the Devil, did this... despite having the influence of holy spirit, and despite being sinless.
• Adam did this... despite having the influence of holy spirit, and being sinless.
• Mankind today does this... despite having the influence of holy spirit.

They all exercise free will regardless of holy spirit or not; regardless of having sin, or not.

 

[CoreyD]

Surely you don't believe that we are free to choose to live sinless lives. . .

Keeping in mind that "free will" is a notion of man no where stated in Scripture.You skipped t
And man defines this notion as "the power to make all moral choices, without external force or constraint."

However, what is stated in Scripture is the slavery to sin (Jn 8:34) of the unregenerate as the result of the fall,
as well as the sin of the believer (1 Jn 1:8-10), which is to be confessed.

Scripture presents no totally "free will". . .i.e., power to make all moral choices, including the choice to live sinlessly (Ro 3:23).
Scripture presents only a limited "free will," exlcuding the power to choose to live sinlessly.

You skipped the question. Any reason why you did so?
I'll repeat it.

All scripture is inspired of God, yes... and the words that translators use are what?
I'd appreciate if you answer that question with an example. So try this...
In the book of Psalm the word מוֹט (Hebrew mot) is used.
Translators use the English words "To totter," "shake", "slip", or "be moved"

For example, Psalm 104:5, when translated, read....

1. He set the earth on its foundations, never to be moved. Berean Standard Bible
2. He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever. New American Standard Bible
3. He founded the earth upon its place, So that it will not shake forever and ever. Legacy Standard Bible
4. He established the earth on its foundations; it will never be shaken. Christian Standard Bible

Which of these four highlighted chosen words is God's word, and are any of them human notion?

 

[concretecamper]

I see virtue as a power not a choice/decision

Ok, we will use power.

You have the power to make more virtuous decisions than I do. And it follows, someone else may have more power than you do to make virtuous decisions.

So I have the POWER to make virtuous decisions say 50% of the time.

You, 75%

Someone else 80%, and so on.

What what arbitrary subjective limit are the free will deniers going to place on the power to make virtuous choices? 90%, 95%, ??????

 

[childeye 2]

Thank you.
So, you believe that people with holy spirit can choose not to listen to God, and go against him.

Yes, only evil would tell me I could choose not to listen. <--This is my problem with a philosophical free will. Paul says, "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me… waging war against the law of my mind" and "making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me.”

Free will is having the ability to choose a course willingly; voluntarily; unforced; of one's own accord, desire or will; intentionally and

Yeah, I don't believe in that. I believe were either serving righteousness or unrighteousness.

deliberately.

• The angel called Satan the Devil, did this... despite having the influence of holy spirit, and despite being sinless.
• Adam did this... despite having the influence of holy spirit, and being sinless.
• Mankind today does this... despite having the influence of holy spirit.

They all exercise free will regardless of holy spirit or not; regardless of having sin, or not.

No, that's not what Jesus said. Jesus said the devil had no truth in him, (there's no Spirt of Truth in the devil) that is why he lies. As for mankind, yes as we experienced the fallen carnal will we did operate out of it, and as we are being renewed there can be backsliding. But I don't call it a free will because that's not scriptural. Scripture denotes a will free from sin as walking in the Spirit of God, and in this we glorify God as our Father and the Creator and that we are new Creations in the likeness of Christ.

 

[childeye 2]

Ok, we will use power.

You have the power to make more virtuous decisions than I do. And it follows, someone else may have more power than you do to make virtuous decisions.

So I have the POWER to make virtuous decisions say 50% of the time.

You, 75%

Someone else 80%, and so on.

What what arbitrary subjective limit are you going to place on the power to make virtuous choices? 90%, 95%, ??????

Thanks for the question. First of all, I believe there will not be sin in the New Heavens and earth in this capacity --> "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me… waging war against the law of my mind" and "making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me.”

With that in mind for context, as per the question, I view virtue as a quality of Character. I'm testifying that the old character of the carnal mind dies through faith in God's Christ. In essence, a virtue doesn't have a choice, He lives in us as we believe. I like how scripture articulates it as walking or abiding in Him. The actions that display the virtue are indicative of a free will (Child of God) forming and replacing the earthly carnal will. Will in scripture means desire/intent in scripture.

 

[CoreyD]

Yeah, I don't believe in that. I believe were either serving righteousness or unrighteousness.

Okay. Thank you.
What you don't believe is what is.

The Bible says, at Hosea 14:4, in part...​

I will freely love them / I will love them freely​

The Hebrew expression nedabah (נְדָבָה) is rendered freewill offering, freely, plentiful, voluntary, offering, willingly, offering.​

This Hebrew word comes from the Hebrew word nadab, of which Topical Lexicon says...​

The verb נָדַב consistently underlines a movement of the heart that is neither coerced nor merely dutiful. It describes people stirred from within to give, serve, or step forward because they have first been moved by God. Throughout Scripture this spirit of readiness is linked to worship, stewardship, civic responsibility, and warfare, revealing a multifaceted biblical theology of voluntary devotion.​

​

At 1 Corinthians 9:16-18, verse 17 says,​

For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if unwillingly, I am entrusted with a stewardship.​

Paul uses the Greek word hekón: Willing, Voluntary. Which means of one's own free will.​

According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon...​

STRONGS NT 1635: ἑκών​

ἑκών, ἑκοῦσα, ἑκον, unforced, voluntary, willing, of one's own will, of one's own accord: Romans 8:20; 1 Corinthians 9:17. (From Homer down.)​

​

At Philemon 1:14, Paul says...​

But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that your goodness will not be out of compulsion, but by your own free will (Berean Standard Bible; NASB; Amplified Bible; Christian Standard Bible; Holman Christian Standard Bible; American Standard Version; English Revised Version; New Heart English Bible; Majority Standard Bible; World English Bible; Smith's Literal Translation; Anderson New Testament; Godbey New Testament) / according to willingness / willingly / voluntary / not something forced.​

The Greek word hekousios - meaning free will, is the neuter of a derivative from hekon; voluntariness -- willingly, which is (an adjective, a primitive term) – properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice), i.e. "of free-will" (J. Thayer).​

​

voluntary​

adjective​

Done or undertaken of one's own free will.​

a voluntary decision to leave the job.​

Acting or done willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.​

a voluntary hostage; voluntary community work.​

Normally controlled by or subject to individual volition.​

volition​

The act of willing or choosing; the act of forming a purpose; the exercise of the will.​

The result of an act or exercise of choosing or willing; a state of choice.​

The power of willing or determining; will.​

These works are not beliefs. There are facts - works of academia.
The definition of the words here, are not subject to change based on one's belief.
They describe free will, voluntary, willful, deliberate, and intentional action.
You cannot accept them... so you claim, but at the same time do not believe them.

I cannot continue this conversation with you, as it would be similar to talking with someone who says they don't believe seas and oceans exist, simply because of their beliefs., and opening works of academia and showing that person that what they are denying is actually proven knowledge makes no difference to them.

So, thank you for the discussion, and you do have an enjoyable day sir.
Good day.

 

[childeye 2]

Okay. Thank you.
What you don't believe is what is.

The Bible says, at Hosea 14:4, in part...​

The Hebrew expression nedabah (נְדָבָה) is rendered freewill offering, freely, plentiful, voluntary, offering, willingly, offering.​

This Hebrew word comes from the Hebrew word nadab, of which Topical Lexicon says...​

The verb נָדַב consistently underlines a movement of the heart that is neither coerced nor merely dutiful. It describes people stirred from within to give, serve, or step forward because they have first been moved by God. Throughout Scripture this spirit of readiness is linked to worship, stewardship, civic responsibility, and warfare, revealing a multifaceted biblical theology of voluntary devotion.​

“Yes, it's true that Hosea shows God acts freely. But the only coherent meaning of ‘free will’ in Scripture is a will free from sin, just as I have claimed. Hosea 14:4 says, ‘I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely, for my anger is turned away.’ Notice the subject: God heals, God loves, God turns anger away. Israel did not heal themselves, and God could not have chosen the other. That’s unconditional love, not voluntary choice. So, if Hosea proves free will, it proves God’s will — a will free from sin, immutable and faithful — not human autonomy.”

​

At 1 Corinthians 9:16-18, verse 17 says,​

Paul uses the Greek word hekón: Willing, Voluntary. Which means of one's own free will.​

According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon...​

STRONGS NT 1635: ἑκών​

ἑκών, ἑκοῦσα, ἑκον, unforced, voluntary, willing, of one's own will, of one's own accord: Romans 8:20; 1 Corinthians 9:17. (From Homer down.)​

Paul uses both hekón (willing) and akón (unwilling) to show that his stewardship was not voluntary. Whether willing or unwilling, he is bound to preach. His point is not that he volunteered, but that he could not have chosen otherwise and been right before God. Hosea and Paul together prove God’s free will, not human autonomy.

​

At Philemon 1:14, Paul says...​

The Greek word hekousios - meaning free will, is the neuter of a derivative from hekon; voluntariness -- willingly, which is (an adjective, a primitive term) – properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice), i.e. "of free-will" (J. Thayer).​

Philemon 1:14, Paul does use hekousios — voluntary, unforced. But notice the context: he is contrasting compulsion with consent in Philemon’s generosity. He is not teaching libertarian free will -> could've done the other. Paul is showing the Holy Spirit is working in him through considerate brotherly love, so that Philemon’s goodness would be uncoerced, not forced.

​

voluntary​

adjective​

Done or undertaken of one's own free will.​

a voluntary decision to leave the job.​

Acting or done willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.​

a voluntary hostage; voluntary community work.​

Normally controlled by or subject to individual volition.​

volition​

The act of willing or choosing; the act of forming a purpose; the exercise of the will.​

The result of an act or exercise of choosing or willing; a state of choice.​

The power of willing or determining; will.​

These works are not beliefs. There are facts - works of academia.
The definition of the words here, are not subject to change based on one's belief.
They describe free will, voluntary, willful, deliberate, and intentional action.
You cannot accept them... so you claim, but at the same time do not believe them.

It's not good that you see me that way. It's a bad spirit. I wish you would take that free will of God (The One without sin) and endeavor to meet me as fair and square as you are able. Know that courage is found in hope.

You’re mistaken. I never said I don’t accept lexiconic terms. I fully acknowledge the academic definitions of hekón and hekousios as voluntary, unforced, deliberate. What I am saying is that they are being taken out of context when used to prove libertarian free will — the idea that one ‘could have done otherwise’, or the false autonomy of "the capacity to choose sin".

In Philemon 1:14, Paul contrasts compulsion with consent in generosity. In 1 Corinthians 9:17, he contrasts willing with unwilling, but either way it is stewardship. And in verse 16 he says, ‘Woe to me if I do not preach,’ which shows he could not have chosen otherwise and been right before God. So the definitions are facts, but the application is wrong. They describe posture in context, not metaphysical autonomy.

I cannot continue this conversation with you, as it would be similar to talking with someone who says they don't believe seas and oceans exist, simply because of their beliefs., and opening works of academia and showing that person that what they are denying is actually proven knowledge makes no difference to them.

Oh, come on. I do believe in seas and oceans? <-- I'm on the record. I don't want you to leave the discussion of my own free will in brotherly Love.

 

[childeye 2]

Ok, we will use power.

You have the power to make more virtuous decisions than I do. And it follows, someone else may have more power than you do to make virtuous decisions.

So I have the POWER to make virtuous decisions say 50% of the time.

You, 75%

Someone else 80%, and so on.

What what arbitrary subjective limit are the free will deniers going to place on the power to make virtuous choices? 90%, 95%, ??????

I just thought of an alternative response to this question. If we suppose we orbit around God, then It could be looked at in a 50/50 balance of a carnal/spirit impetus. So even 55carnal 45spirit state of condition could still be in repentance if it changes to 54carnal/46 spirit depending upon the distance between God and us. Theoretically iniquity is unfair measurement or balance. If wickedness is defined as 'wanting' to believe bad things about others (slander = devil ), then love others as oneself would be God's gravity that draws us away from iniquity. Charity and grace is God's Spirit which we experience both inwardly and outwardly when we walk in it.

 

[CoreyD]

​

“Yes, it's true that Hosea shows God acts freely. But the only coherent meaning of ‘free will’ in Scripture is a will free from sin, just as I have claimed. Hosea 14:4 says, ‘I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely, for my anger is turned away.’ Notice the subject: God heals, God loves, God turns anger away. Israel did not heal themselves, and God could not have chosen the other. That’s unconditional love, not voluntary choice. So, if Hosea proves free will, it proves God’s will — a will free from sin, immutable and faithful — not human autonomy.”

Paul uses both hekón (willing) and akón (unwilling) to show that his stewardship was not voluntary. Whether willing or unwilling, he is bound to preach. His point is not that he volunteered, but that he could not have chosen otherwise and been right before God. Hosea and Paul together prove God’s free will, not human autonomy.


Philemon 1:14, Paul does use hekousios — voluntary, unforced. But notice the context: he is contrasting compulsion with consent in Philemon’s generosity. He is not teaching libertarian free will -> could've done the other. Paul is showing the Holy Spirit is working in him through considerate brotherly love, so that Philemon’s goodness would be uncoerced, not forced.



It's not good that you see me that way. It's a bad spirit. I wish you would take that free will of God (The One without sin) and endeavor to meet me as fair and square as you are able. Know that courage is found in hope.

You’re mistaken. I never said I don’t accept lexiconic terms. I fully acknowledge the academic definitions of hekón and hekousios as voluntary, unforced, deliberate. What I am saying is that they are being taken out of context when used to prove libertarian free will — the idea that one ‘could have done otherwise’, or the false autonomy of "the capacity to choose sin".

In Philemon 1:14, Paul contrasts compulsion with consent in generosity. In 1 Corinthians 9:17, he contrasts willing with unwilling, but either way it is stewardship. And in verse 16 he says, ‘Woe to me if I do not preach,’ which shows he could not have chosen otherwise and been right before God. So the definitions are facts, but the application is wrong. They describe posture in context, not metaphysical autonomy.

Oh, come on. I do believe in seas and oceans? <-- I'm on the record. I don't want you to leave the discussion of my own free will in brotherly Love.

Your arguments do not make sense, and one can see that you are just rambling.
"to show that his stewardship was not voluntary"??? Really? No, he is saying he can do it willingly, and yes, that's what he did.
Holy spirit has nothing to do with making a decision, as shown by the fact that one can rebel against holy spirit, and do their own thing.

How can one continue a conversation with someone, who says they don't believe in free will, after opening works of academia and showing the person the word free will, and the meaning, and the person says, "I don't believe that, because I believe...? It is indeed similar to talking with someone who says they don't believe seas and oceans exist, simply because of their beliefs., and opening works of academia and showing that person that what they are denying is actually proven knowledge makes no difference to them.

What I am saying is true, isn't it.
Using faulty reasoning does not make language words and their usage, or vocabulary disappear.
One either accepts them, or they don't. You don't, because free will used in those lexicons are not philosophy.
Philosophical argument have no place in those works. They are in their own space.

Earlier, you asked a user if they are well, because you said something repeatedly, and their response was as if you actually said nothing.
I posted those lexical works more than half a dozen times, I'm sure.
Did you not see "freewill" and "free will" scores of times? The word isn't written with invisible ink.
So, when you say free will does not exist, or you don't believe it, you have dismissed those work... I'm not confused.

Anyway, I thoroughly detailed the concept of free will, from its origin to its existence, including its distance from philosophy, if you are interested in taking a look. Just scroll down slightly.
However, there is no use in going further, as I have really reached a hard place, where I can go neither up, down, left or right.
I've exhausted all my sources, and there is nothing more I can add.

I'm sure you don't want me to repeat myself like a parrot.
Then you'd be asking me if I am well.
I certainly don't want that.

No bad blood. Take care.

 

[childeye 2]

Your arguments do not make sense, and one can see that you are just rambling.
"to show that his stewardship was not voluntary"??? Really?

Yes really. He wants the Corinthians to see that his ministry is not self‑chosen or self‑serving, but a divine commission. Most all theologians recognize that Paul is saying woe to me if I don't preach the Gospel. He was given a stewardship and necessity was laid upon him.

No, he is saying he can do it willingly, and yes, that's what he did.

I think he did it willingly, I know I do. But that wasn't his point. I too have to preach the Gospel because the Love of others compels me. <-- GOD.

Holy spirit has nothing to do with making a decision, as shown by the fact that one can rebel against holy spirit, and do their own thing.

"The mind set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, indeed it cannot.” Resistance to the Spirit is the natural posture of fallen humanity. Resisting the Spirit (Acts 7:51) is possible, but that resistance is the carnal mind at work. "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." The carnal will is not a free will. John 8:32 --> “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

John 16:8 --> The Spirit convicts the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. Conviction is not suggestion; it is divine persuasion that bends the will. The Holy Spirit convicts me of sin by showing me when I'm not loving others as myself.

1 Corinthians 12:3.

Paul writes: Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says "Jesus is cursed". and no one can say "Jesus is Lord", except in the Holy Spirit.

How can one continue a conversation with someone, who says they don't believe in free will, after opening works of academia and showing the person the word free will, and the meaning, and the person says, "I don't believe that, because I believe...? It is indeed similar to talking with someone who says they don't believe seas and oceans exist, simply because of their beliefs., and opening works of academia and showing that person that what they are denying is actually proven knowledge makes no difference to them.

When I was four years old, we were coming back from church, and I asked my dad "what is free will?' He replied. "It means we make choices". I thought to myself, "Hmm, I knew that." .... That is, I knew I made choices everyday all day long. Believing in the free will you're talking about and my Dad talked about, isn't about believing in the word voluntary or willing, or unforced; it's about believing in a philosophical, theological concept.

That doesn't mean we're not in a battle of words. Basically, I'm just saying what you call free will, is the carnal will.
Resisting the Spirit (Acts 7:51) is possible, but that resistance is the carnal mind at work. The carnal will is not a free will. John 8:32 --> “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Acts 7:51​

51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.​

That's why the free will I believe in is God's will. I must die so Christ may live in me. The dialogue of faith gradually eliminates the dialogue of the carnal will along with the free will concept based on choice. I'm saying that if you think in terms of faith/trust in God and in His Christ, you will come to see the ability to choose against God will die as we trust in Christ. That's why when we're baptized for the remission of sins we are baptized into his death.

If you would just acknowledge that scripture denotes a change from the carnal mind to the mind of Christ that happens through the work of the Holy Spirit, through faith and not by our choice, you would see that the free will of the carnal mindset is not the free will that Christ has.

• Romans 8:6–7 — “For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God…” → Here Paul contrasts the carnal mind with the Spirit‑led mind. The Spirit replaces hostility with peace.
• 1 Corinthians 2:14–16 — “The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God… But we have the mind of Christ.” → The Spirit enables believers to grasp spiritual truth, giving them the “mind of Christ.”
• Romans 12:2 — “Be transformed by the renewing of your mind…” → Transformation of the mind is Spirit‑driven, aligning believers with God’s will.
• Philippians 2:5 — “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” → The Spirit empowers believers to adopt Christ’s humility and obedience.
• 2 Corinthians 3:18 — “We all… are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.” → The Spirit actively transforms believers into Christ’s likeness.

What I am saying is true, isn't it.
Using faulty reasoning does not make language words and their usage, or vocabulary disappear.

Yes, it's true, but your mistake is concluding my reasoning is faulty.

Earlier, you asked a user if they are well, because you said something repeatedly, and their response was as if you actually said nothing.
I posted those lexical works more than half a dozen times, I'm sure.
Did you not see "freewill" and "free will" scores of times? The word isn't written with invisible ink.
So, when you say free will does not exist, or you don't believe it, you have dismissed those work... I'm not confused.

Yes, I saw them every time you posted them. Those words are greek and hebrew words meaning willing, voluntary. Like I said, they are adjectives, adverbs, sometimes verbs, but not the noun free will. So, for instance, let's take the word "willing", it means inclined or favorably disposed in mind, it doesn't mean all choices are voluntarily and I'm always willing. Likewise, when I say I have made a voluntary choice, it doesn't mean all my choices are voluntary choices. But particularly in the moral/immoral context, it's my contention that Love fulfills the law and it is love that causes us to act responsibly and care about how our actions affect others, not our ability to volunteer or not volunteer.

 

[com7fy8]

But particularly in the moral/immoral context, it's my contention that Love fulfills the law and it is love that causes us to act responsibly and care about how our actions affect others, not our ability to volunteer or not volunteer.

Well . . . yes love causes us to do something.

But we do have ability to choose to do something. So, this would mean we have some sort of free will . . . meaning ability to choose.

However, we have how there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" > in Ephesians 2:2. Satan's spirit is working people to do what they do, I see this means, since his evil spirit "works in" disobedient people. And his spirit has anger, fear, lust, and unforgiveness which were not in Adam and Eve when God created them "very good".

Humans now in sin are not "very good". And so their wills are not in the "very good" state in which humans were first created.

So, their wills are free, meaning they can make choices; however . . . where does the Bible say they work their own wills???? And we have, for children of God >

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13)

So, I see from this, that God is the One who works in our wills, to get us to do whatsoever is "for His good pleasure". And this would be in His love having us so submit to Him.

So, we might say we have the ability to choose this, but who in us is working us to use this ability the right way? Are we of our own selves freely getting our own selves to submit to God working at every moment . . . or does God change our character so we become submissive to Him in His love?