THE TRUTH ABOUT FREE WILL AS TAUGHT IN MANY CHURCHES TODAY [PART 2]

THE TRUTH ABOUT FREE WILL AS TAUGHT IN MANY CHURCHES TODAY PART 2

Chapter 3

3.2 Jesus’ Teaching on Human Ability

The teachings of Jesus further challenge the notion of autonomous free will. Jesus consistently emphasizes the impossibility of salvation through human effort. When the disciples ask, “Who then can be saved?” after hearing that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom, Jesus responds: “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”¹⁵ Salvation, according to Jesus, is not merely difficult—it is impossible for humans apart from divine action.

Jesus also teaches that coming to Him requires divine initiative. In John 6:44, He declares: “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.”¹⁶ The verb “can” (δύναται) denotes ability, not permission. Jesus is not saying that people may not come but that they cannot come unless drawn by the Father. This drawing is not mere persuasion but an effectual act of God, as evidenced by Jesus’ promise that all who are drawn will be raised up at the last day.

Furthermore, Jesus describes the unregenerate human condition as one of bondage: “Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.”¹⁷ A servant (δοῦλος) is not free but enslaved. Jesus’ solution is not an appeal to human free will but the liberating power of the Son: “If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.”¹⁸ Freedom, in Jesus’ teaching, is not the natural state of the human will but the result of divine deliverance.

3.3 Paul’s Theology of the Will

The apostle Paul provides the most extensive biblical teaching on the human will, and his writings stand in stark contrast to the modern doctrine of autonomous free will. Paul consistently portrays humanity as spiritually dead, enslaved to sin, hostile to God, and incapable of seeking Him apart from divine grace.

In Romans 3, Paul declares that “there is none righteous, no, not one… there is none that seeketh after God.”¹⁹ This is not a description of a few particularly wicked individuals but of humanity in its fallen state. The will is not neutral but inclined away from God.

Paul’s most explicit treatment of the will appears in Romans 9, where he addresses the question of divine election. He argues that God’s choice of Jacob over Esau was made “before the children were born, neither having done any good or evil,” so that God’s purpose according to election might stand.²⁰ Paul anticipates the objection that such sovereignty makes God unjust and responds by asserting God’s absolute right as Creator: “Hath not the potter power over the clay?”²¹ He concludes that salvation “is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.”²²

Paul also teaches that the unregenerate mind is hostile to God and cannot submit to His law: “The carnal mind… is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”²³ The inability is moral, not physical; the will is bound by sinful desires. Only through the regenerating work of the Spirit can the will be freed to obey God.²⁴

In Ephesians 2, Paul describes sinners as “dead in trespasses and sins,” walking according to the course of this world and the prince of the power of the air.²⁵ Dead people do not choose life; they must be made alive. Thus, Paul attributes salvation entirely to God’s grace: “By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.”²⁶

3.4 Summary: Does Scripture Teach Free Will?

The biblical evidence does not support the modern doctrine of autonomous free will. Scripture affirms human responsibility, but responsibility does not require the ability to choose contrary to one’s nature. Instead, the Bible portrays the human will as bound by sin, spiritually dead, and unable to come to God apart from divine initiative.

The Old Testament emphasizes the need for a new heart. Jesus teaches the impossibility of salvation through human effort and the necessity of divine drawing. Paul describes the will as enslaved to sin and salvation as the result of God’s sovereign mercy.

In short, Scripture presents a doctrine of moral inability rather than autonomous free will. Humans make real choices, but those choices are shaped by a fallen nature that inclines the will away from God until He intervenes. The biblical narrative consistently places the decisive cause of salvation not in human will but in God’s sovereign grace.

Chapter 4 — Free Will in Early Christianity

The early centuries of the Christian church were marked by intense theological reflection as believers sought to articulate the faith in dialogue with Scripture, Jewish tradition, and the surrounding Greco‑Roman intellectual world. The doctrine of free will emerged within this context—not as a clearly defined biblical teaching, but as a concept shaped by philosophical influences and theological controversies. This chapter traces the development of free‑will doctrine in early Christianity, examining its philosophical roots, its adoption by early theologians, and its refinement through the Pelagian controversy.

4.1 Jewish and Greco‑Roman Backgrounds

The earliest Christians inherited a worldview shaped by both Jewish monotheism and Greco‑Roman philosophy. Judaism emphasized God’s sovereignty, covenant faithfulness, and the moral responsibility of His people. Yet Jewish writings from the Second Temple period also reflect a strong sense of divine determinism, particularly in apocalyptic literature, where God’s purposes unfold irresistibly in history.²⁷

At the same time, the Greco‑Roman world offered philosophical categories that would profoundly influence Christian thought. Stoicism, in particular, developed a sophisticated account of human agency within a deterministic universe. For the Stoics, freedom did not mean the ability to choose between alternatives but the ability to act in accordance with reason and nature.²⁸ This concept of internal freedom—freedom as rational self‑governance—would later shape Christian discussions of the will.

Platonism also contributed to early Christian anthropology. Plato emphasized the soul’s rational capacity to choose the good, though he acknowledged that bodily desires often hindered this pursuit.²⁹ Early Christian thinkers such as Origen and Clement of Alexandria drew heavily on Platonic categories, interpreting the human will as a rational faculty capable of choosing virtue.

Thus, when early Christians began to speak of “free will,” they did so using philosophical categories not found explicitly in Scripture. The biblical writers spoke of the heart, desire, obedience, and divine calling—not of an autonomous faculty of will. The language of free will entered Christian theology through philosophical engagement rather than biblical exegesis.

4.2 The Early Church Fathers

The earliest Christian theologians adopted and adapted philosophical concepts of freedom in their efforts to defend the justice of God and the moral responsibility of humanity. Tertullian, writing in the late second century, argued that humans possess a natural freedom of choice, which he saw as essential for moral accountability.³⁰ His defense of free will was partly a response to Gnostic determinism, which denied human responsibility by attributing salvation to secret knowledge and divine election.

Origen, one of the most influential early theologians, developed a more elaborate doctrine of free will. Drawing heavily on Platonic thought, he argued that rational souls were created with the capacity to choose good or evil.³¹ For Origen, free will was necessary to preserve God’s justice: if humans were not free, God could not justly reward or punish them. Yet Origen’s view also led him to speculate about the pre‑existence of souls and the possibility of universal restoration—ideas later deemed problematic.

Despite their differences, early theologians generally affirmed some form of free will, largely because they believed it was necessary to defend God’s justice. However, their definitions varied, and none of them articulated a doctrine identical to the modern evangelical concept of autonomous free will. Their views were shaped as much by philosophical concerns as by Scripture.

4.3 Augustine’s Doctrine of Grace and the Will

The most significant early Christian thinker on the will was Augustine of Hippo. Augustine began his theological career affirming a strong doctrine of free will, influenced by both Scripture and Neoplatonism. However, his views changed dramatically as he confronted the reality of human sin and the teachings of the apostle Paul.

Augustine came to distinguish between the natural ability to choose and the moral ability to choose righteousness. Humans possess the natural capacity to make choices, but because of original sin, they lack the moral ability to choose God.³² The will is not destroyed but is bound by sinful desires. Augustine famously declared that fallen humans are non posse non peccare—not able not to sin.³³

For Augustine, salvation is entirely the work of God’s grace. God’s grace does not merely assist the will; it transforms it. Divine grace precedes, enables, and ensures the human response. Augustine grounded this view in Scripture, particularly in Paul’s teaching on predestination and divine calling.³⁴

Augustine’s mature theology rejected the idea that humans can initiate their own salvation. Instead, he argued that God’s grace is both necessary and effectual. This position would become foundational for later Western theology and would stand in stark contrast to the views of Pelagius.

END OF PART 2 OF 3