Biblical Human Will Limitations

The idea we are free to choose from among available options is consistent with our experience. Scripture tells us God sometimes restricts our options, i.e. hardening the hearts of some such that they will reject the gospel, i.e. Romans 11.

"The absence of free will is, however, devastating to all theists since without it you cannot choose to be evil or good, and therefore deserve neither punishment nor salvation." ​

So the complete absence of free will is irrational and unrestricted free will is unbiblical.

Some assert since we are free to choose among various sinful actions, but unable to choose the narrow path that leads to life, it makes sense for God to punish us for the sin we chose. Rational minds object.

We can harden our own hearts by the practice of sin. And God can harden hearts for His purpose, such as Romans 11. God can choose a person well on the way of hardening his own heart, and complete the process. Scripture does not rule any of the three out.

Some say whatsoever comes to pass is predestined to occur. Therefore God is the author of sin. Then some others say while it is true that God to be sovereign must predestine everything, that does not make God the author of sin. Rational minds object.

Why would God still blame us for our choices after He hardened our heart? My answer is He would not. But prior to that, those hardened did make sinful choices, sealing their fate. The hardening, like physical death, simply ends the opportunity to obtain mercy. God, as the potter, has the right to harden whoever He pleases.

Why would God do that, cut short the opportunity of some, and endure their hardened behavior? God did so to make known the riches of His glory (see Romans 9), including even us which He called not from Jews only but also from among Gentiles.

Our ability to make choices from among various options can be restricted by God for His purpose, thus the Biblical doctrine is "Limited Free Will."

Romans 9:16 teaches men can will and work to be saved, thus total spiritual inability as the result of the Fall is shown to be mistaken doctrine.

So when you see disputes raging over complete slavery to sin versus complete freedom of our will, consider that we are fallen and therefore predisposed to sin with a corrupt nature, but we are not so incapacitated as to not be responsible for our choices to reject Christ, or to not treat others as we would treat ourselves, because we have the capacity to accept Christ, and strive to do the will of God.

 

1) Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say all 5 of the points of the TULIP are false. I believe the "P" comes close enough to "Once Saved, Always Saved" to be given partial credit.

2) God is Immutable, nothing in the OP challenged that basic attribute of God.

3) God is sovereign, in that He either causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass. This is the view held by some Calvinists.

4) Some of the future is predestined, everything God has declared will happen will happen. The issue is that some believe the future is totally predestined, making God the author of sin. That view is false.

5) The lost have Limited Spiritual Ability, able to understand and grow upon Spiritual Milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.

6) Irresistible Grace, as defined by the "I" in the TULIP is false doctrine. However, when God decides to transfer an individual from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His beloved Son, that grace is irresistible. And Once placed in Christ, the individual is saved forever. The action is irreversible.

7) Everyone who uses the term "Free Will" without providing explicit limitations is proclaiming false doctrine. We operate within the purview God allows.

8) Limited Free Will is the biblical doctrine. We can choose alternatives that alter the outcome of our lives.

9) You seem to want to define "Free Will" as meaning "Limited Free Will." No problem but our statements should be clear and unambiguous.