The Reality of Free Will

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T10:48:09-0600

Clare73 said:
Not a refutation of "God is not a liar" (post #190).

Are you well? I just showed you from the record I was NOT refuting "God is not a liar". I was saying pragmatics do not allow for God to be a liar --> childeye 2 said: The topic is free will. God is Truth. According to pragmatics going against God/Truth must involve believing in something not true.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T11:07:15-0600

CoreyD said:
We have been through this, and I have clarified what exactly free will is.

You're mistaken. You're still using the neutral philosophical meaning of free will that is NOT scriptural BECAUSE it does NOT acknowledge God as the Truth in the moral/immoral context of Character. Note that in scripture the children of the devil sin because they will do the works of their father. In scripture "will" means desire/intent NOT choice.

CoreyD said:
I cannot change your mindset, from the direction you want to go.

I have the mind of Christ because I am continuing in the words Jesus spoke --> "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin". "If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

CLEEB · 2025-11-21T11:22:41-0600

CoreyD said:
Let me warn you, that you are going to engage in a fruitless argument that will only wear you out.
It is already clear from scripture that freedom is relative; cleanness is relative; holiness is relative; righteousness is relative.
Engaging in a debate with someone who insists on using the word "complete" to make something real, is no different to engaging in an argument with someone who insists that knowledge must be absolute, for one to have true knowledge... which is an unreasonable argument.

The argument that freedom must be "complete" for it be real freedom, is no different... either scripturally, or otherwise.
God's people have true freedom. Galatians 5:1
As you know, humans have free will too.
Don't get carried away by the "complete" argument.
No fruit will come from it.

I just read your last email and on this subject I agree with you. Agape is Greek for GODLY love that HE gives us freely and we need to return freely. The lake of fire exists for a reason. Salvation can be lost. This is also by free will. GOD is wanting quality not quantity. GOD does know our choices before we make them but doesn't make them for us. You are correct that this issue has been pounded to much.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T11:25:28-0600

CLEEB said:
Scripture proves a choice between two trees in Eden.

The term choice you're using in this statement implies option. Scripture does not express that they are options implying an either/or.

CLEEB said:
A choice under the law to choose life and live.

This is a strawman argument. No one I know of on this thread is denying that we make choices between right and wrong life and death in the moral/immoral context. The issue is culpability when factoring in that scripture indicates the carnal will (or “mind of the flesh”) is not the true self God intends us to live from. Paul consistently distinguishes between the flesh (carnal nature) and the spirit (new nature in Christ), showing that the carnal will is a corrupted orientation of desire, not the essence of who we are in Christ.

CLEEB · 2025-11-21T11:33:56-0600

CoreyD said:
Let me warn you, that you are going to engage in a fruitless argument that will only wear you out.
It is already clear from scripture that freedom is relative; cleanness is relative; holiness is relative; righteousness is relative.
Engaging in a debate with someone who insists on using the word "complete" to make something real, is no different to engaging in an argument with someone who insists that knowledge must be absolute, for one to have true knowledge... which is an unreasonable argument.

The argument that freedom must be "complete" for it be real freedom, is no different... either scripturally, or otherwise.
God's people have true freedom. Galatians 5:1
As you know, humans have free will too.
Don't get carried away by the "complete" argument.
No fruit will come from it.

If there is no free will then why doesn't GOD just convert everyone instead of allowing them to be trapped in evil ? Remember, that forbidden fruit was the knowledge of GOOD as well as evil. People are capable of doing good on a human level. James describes the human sinful condition. James 1: 13-15 it is our own lust that is sin, GOD doesn't tempt any to sin, its all on us.

CoreyD · 2025-11-21T13:05:05-0600

Can someone help me with this.
Is @Clare73 saying that only the "unregeneerte" do not have free will, but all other men do have free will, even though after the fall no man has free will?
I'm leaving that alone.

CoreyD · 2025-11-21T13:15:21-0600

CLEEB said:
If there is no free will then why doesn't GOD just convert everyone instead of allowing them to be trapped in evil ? Remember, that forbidden fruit was the knowledge of GOOD as well as evil. People are capable of doing good on a human level. James describes the human sinful condition. James 1: 13-15 it is our own lust that is sin, GOD doesn't tempt any to sin, its all on us.

It's all up to us, yes. You are right on that point.
We all have the choice to do, or not to do... As you repeatedly quoted... Deuteronomy 30:19
Joshua, who succeeded Moses, told the people, "if it is unpleasing in your sight to serve the LORD, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve... As for me and my house[hold], we will serve the LORD!” Joshua 24:15
Pretty simple and straightforward. No one is forced, but freely, and willingly make a decision.

CoreyD · 2025-11-21T13:20:33-0600

CLEEB said:
I just read your last email and on this subject I agree with you. Agape is Greek for GODLY love that HE gives us freely and we need to return freely. The lake of fire exists for a reason. Salvation can be lost. This is also by free will. GOD is wanting quality not quantity. GOD does know our choices before we make them but doesn't make them for us. You are correct that this issue has been pounded to much.

Hey, but we can't truly have love, because it's not "complete" love.
So, we cannot truly love one another. Get what I'm saying.
I'm playing the Devil's advocate here. Don't mind me.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T14:11:33-0600

CLEEB said:
If there is no free will then why doesn't GOD just convert everyone instead of allowing them to be trapped in evil ?

AMSWER-> 1 Corinthians 1:29. That no flesh should glory in His presence.

God’s way ensures that no flesh can glory in His presence. Salvation is structured so that all credit belongs to Him, not to human free will, voluntariness, or autonomy.

CLEEB said:
Remember, that forbidden fruit was the knowledge of GOOD as well as evil.

Which God did not want us to have because we would die. If the tree represents experiential knowledge, then sin would be in that knowledge and subsequently death would ensue.

CLEEB said:
People are capable of doing good on a human level. James describes the human sinful condition. James 1: 13-15 it is our own lust that is sin, GOD doesn't tempt any to sin, its all on us.

James 1:14–15: “Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.” → James uses the Greek word epithymia (desire, craving, lust). He emphasizes that temptation arises from within the person — “his own desire.”
James does not explicitly use the phrase lusts of the flesh (epithymiai sarkos), which Paul uses in Galatians 5:16–17 and Ephesians 2:3. Instead, James speaks more generally of “desire” (epithymia) without attaching it to “flesh” (sarx).

Comparison with Paul

Galatians 5:16–17: Paul says, “Walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit.” → Here, epithymia is explicitly tied to sarx (flesh).
Ephesians 2:3: “…we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind.” → Paul makes the same connection: sinful desires = lusts of the flesh.

Double‑Mindedness in James

James 1:8: “He is a double‑minded man, unstable in all his ways.” -> Refers to someone wavering between trusting God and relying on self/worldly desires.
James 4:8: “Purify your hearts, you double‑minded.” -> Calls believers to wholehearted devotion to God, not divided loyalties.

Connection to Free Will

Neutral free will (philosophical idea): A supposed faculty of choice that can swing either way, detached from moral orientation.
James’ double‑mindedness: Not a neutral choice faculty, but a conflicted will — torn between God and sinful desire.
James is not describing a neutral “free will,” but a divided desire. The person is unstable because their will is pulled in two directions.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T14:24:31-0600

CoreyD said:
Can someone help me with this.
Is @Clare73 saying that only the "unregeneerte" do not have free will, but all other men do have free will, even though after the fall no man has free will?
I'm leaving that alone.

She's qualifying unregenerate as the fallen carnal will and subsequently it is not a will free from sin as Jesus promised. It makes sense if you realize regenerate implies a transformative process of the will/desire.

Here is the carnal will/desire in its depravity-> Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Free Will Defined as “Ability to Choose”

Philosophically, free will is often defined as the capacity to choose between alternatives.
This definition assumes a kind of neutrality: that humans can weigh good and evil and then select either one.

The Reality of Depravity

Romans 3:10–12: “There is none righteous, no, not one… there is none who seeks after God.”
Romans 8:7–8: “The carnal mind is enmity against God… those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”
Ephesians 2:1: Humanity is described as “dead in trespasses and sins.”

Depravity means the human will is not neutral. It is enslaved to sin (John 8:34).

Why “Ability to Choose” Becomes Irrelevant

No Neutral Ground
- Depravity removes the possibility of a neutral choice.
- Humans are not standing between good and evil, weighing options; they are already bent toward evil.
Deadness, Not Just Weakness
- Paul describes sinners as dead.
- A dead will cannot exercise “ability to choose” in the sense of moral neutrality.
Choice Is Always Morally Charged either in a negative or positive sense.
- In depravity, every choice flows from a corrupted orientation.
- Even when choosing something “good” outwardly, the motive is self‑glory, not God’s glory Matthew 23:27–28.
True Freedom Comes Only in Christ
- The only way the will becomes relevant again is when God intervenes.
- John 6:44: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.”
- The will is liberated by grace, not by its own neutral ability.

The Key Point

Free will defined as “ability to choose” is irrelevant in view of depravity because:

The will is not neutral but enslaved.
Choices are always bent toward sin.
Without God’s intervention, the “ability to choose” is an illusion — the will can only choose according to its sinful nature.

Conclusion

In depravity, the human will is not a neutral faculty of choice but a captive faculty of sin. That’s why Paul insists in 1 Corinthians 1:29, “That no flesh should glory in His presence.” The irrelevance of free will (as neutral choice) magnifies the necessity of God’s grace — salvation is His work alone.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T14:31:51-0600

CoreyD said:
Hey, but we can't truly have love, because it's not "complete" love.

I'm going to speak out of a belief God is brotherly agape Love: So, what do you mean we can't truly have God?

CoreyD said:
So, we cannot truly love one another. Get what I'm saying.

You're saying God/Love is untrue/unreal?

CoreyD said:
I'm playing the Devil's advocate here. Don't mind me.

Okay, so are you really advocating for Satan or is this sarcasm? Looks to me like you're mocking those who are pointing out that your definition of free will is omitting that God is the Spirit of goodness in mankind. Let's clear this up.

Do you agree we cannot be good in the intent of our moral actions apart from God's Spirit of Love leading us?

Clare73 · 2025-11-21T14:58:37-0600

CoreyD said:
Can someone help me with this.
Is @Clare73 saying that only the "unregeneerte" do not have free will, but all other men do have free will, even though after the fall no man has free will?
I'm leaving that alone.

"Free will" of fallen man, either regenerate or unregenerate, is not a Biblical notion, "free will" of man is not found in the Bible.
"Free will" is a notion of man, superimposed on the Bible.

If fallen man's will were completely free, he could choose to live sinlessly.
Man cannot make that choice, even after being regenerated.
Man's will has limited freedom.
Only Adam and Eve had complete free will, the ability to choose to live sinlessly, which ability was lost for all when they chose to sin, and which will be recovered in the new heavens and new earth.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T15:08:35-0600

Clare73 said:
"Free will" of fallen man, either regenerate or unregenerate, is not a Biblical notion, it is not found in the Bible.
"Free will" is a notion of man, superimposed on the Bible.

If fallen man's will were completely free, he could choose to live sinlessly.
Man cannot make that choice, even after being regenerated.
Man's will has limited freedom.
Only Adam and Eve had complete free will, the ability to choose to live sinlessly, which ability was lost for all when they chose to sin.

I just want an honest opinion, so please don't get defensive when I ask you this:
Do you believe there will 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?

Clare73 · 2025-11-21T15:18:28-0600

childeye 2 said:
I just want an honest opinion, so please don't get defensive when I ask you this:
Do you believe there will 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?

That "capacity" is the result of the fall.

There will be no sin in the new heavens and new earth, which will be the home of righteousness.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T15:26:59-0600

Clare73 said:
That "capacity" is the result of the fall.

There will be no sin in the new heavens and new earth, which will be the home of righteousness.

I just wanted to make that clear in case others might misunderstand you.

childeye 2 · 2025-11-21T15:34:25-0600

CoreyD said:
It's all up to us, yes. You are right on that point.
We all have the choice to do, or not to do... As you repeatedly quoted... Deuteronomy 30:19
Joshua, who succeeded Moses, told the people, "if it is unpleasing in your sight to serve the LORD, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve... As for me and my house[hold], we will serve the LORD!” Joshua 24:15
Pretty simple and straightforward. No one is forced, but freely, and willingly make a decision.

Joshua’s Stipulation

In Joshua 24:15, Joshua says: “If it seems evil to you to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve…”
Notice the stipulation: the “choice” only exists for those who think serving God is evil.
For Joshua himself, there is no choice — “As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”
This means the “choice” is not a neutral free will option, but a testimony of heart orientation.
- Those who see God as wicked presume they have alternatives.
- Those who love God see no alternative — serving Him is the only reality.

This is why the term "will" has to be desire/intent and NOT the ability to choose in the moral/immoral paradigm of good/evil.

The Reality of Free Will

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

AMSWER-> 1 Corinthians 1:29. That no flesh should glory in His presence.​

God’s way ensures that no flesh can glory in His presence. Salvation is structured so that all credit belongs to Him, not to human free will, voluntariness, or autonomy.​

Comparison with Paul​

Double‑Mindedness in James​

Connection to Free Will​

Well-Known Member

Free Will Defined as “Ability to Choose”​

The Reality of Depravity​

Why “Ability to Choose” Becomes Irrelevant​

The Key Point​

Conclusion​

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Joshua’s Stipulation​

Similar threads

AMSWER-> 1 Corinthians 1:29. That no flesh should glory in His presence.

God’s way ensures that no flesh can glory in His presence. Salvation is structured so that all credit belongs to Him, not to human free will, voluntariness, or autonomy.

Comparison with Paul

Double‑Mindedness in James

Connection to Free Will

Free Will Defined as “Ability to Choose”

The Reality of Depravity

Why “Ability to Choose” Becomes Irrelevant

The Key Point

Conclusion

Joshua’s Stipulation