What?!!! you say. How absurd! you are thinking. But I am totally serious. "But why," you ask, "do so many Calvinists (Cists from here on out) deny that men have free will?" Confusion in terms is the answer. First of all, for those who want to see if I am an eccentric who is off his rocker, I refer you to Jonathan's Edwards book "The Freedom of the Will." The arguments I will present in this thread are not derived from this book (or any other) but I have been told enough times that my arguments sound nearly identical to his that I will go ahead and reference his work up front. Second, let me try and define some key terms. There are two distinct senses in which the term "free will" can be meant. Generally when Cists deny that man has free will they only mean to deny one sense of the term. They deny "free will" because they have acceded to the non-Cist use of the term. Personally, I think thats a mistake on their part, but its understandable. Instead, I make clear the distinction between the two senses. Of course, some Cists will deny both senses of "free will", that is not an accurate representation of Cisms position though (much less Scriptures) and those who insist on it are usually better labelled "hyper-Cists". Sense 1 (referred to as free will or FW from here on): "Free will" is the ability to freely choose whatever one wishes. God does not compel men to choose contrary to how they wish to choose. Sense 2 (referred to as libertarian free will or LFW from here on): "Free will" is the ability to choose anything at all w/o reference to any determining agent, including one's own character or desires. One is self-determined in all aspects. When Cists reject free will they usually mean only to reject sense 2, but not sense 1.