Debate on Human Free Will in Theology and Philosophy
The debate on human free will is a longstanding and complex issue in both theology and philosophy, with various Christian traditions offering differing perspectives. At its core, the debate revolves around the extent to which human beings have control over their choices and actions, and how this relates to God's sovereignty and grace.
The disagreement is not about whether humans have some form of free will, but rather about the nature and scope of that freedom. Some traditions emphasize human agency and the ability to make choices that are not predetermined by God or other factors. For instance, the Methodist/Wesleyan tradition, as represented by Adam Clarke, interprets Romans 7:19 as indicating that the human will is on the side of God and truth, suggesting a significant degree of freedom in making moral choices [3].
In contrast, other traditions, such as the Reformed tradition, represented by John Calvin, stress the limitations of human free will due to the effects of sin and the necessity of divine grace for salvation. Calvin argues that faith is a gratuitous gift of God and a special illumination of the Spirit, implying that human will is not entirely free to choose God without divine intervention [4]. The Lutheran tradition, as expressed in the Augsburg Confession, similarly teaches that human will has some liberty to choose civil righteousness but lacks the power to work spiritual righteousness without the Holy Ghost [8].
The Catholic tradition, as represented by Thomas Aquinas, posits that human beings have free will, but this freedom is not absolute. Aquinas argues that Christ had free will, but it was drawn to the good in a way that was ordained by God. He also notes that human choice regards means to an end, rather than the end itself, which is often determined by one's nature or circumstances [6]. The Catechism of the Catholic Church acknowledges the difficulties humans face in coming to know God by reason alone, highlighting the interplay between human freedom and divine providence [9].
The Eastern Orthodox tradition, as seen in the writings of John Chrysostom, emphasizes the limitations of human understanding and the need for divine illumination to comprehend spiritual truths. Chrysostom suggests that the human soul is unable to fully grasp the nature of God or the afterlife without divine revelation [2].
The Patristic tradition, represented by Augustine, navigates the tension between maintaining human free will and asserting God's grace. Augustine is quoted as saying that Pelagius professed agreement with Ambrose's views on free will and grace, indicating a nuanced understanding that seeks to balance these concepts [7].
Despite these differences, all positions agree that human beings have some degree of responsibility for their actions and that God's grace plays a crucial role in salvation. The Jewish tradition, as represented in the Babylonian Talmud, also grapples with the concept of free will, discussing the balance between human choice and divine providence in the context of Jewish law [10].
The divergence in views on human free will stems from differing hermeneutical commitments, historical contexts, and prior doctrinal premises. For example, the Reformed emphasis on the total depravity of humanity leads to a more limited view of free will, while the Arminian/Wesleyan tradition, with its focus on the universal availability of grace, tends to affirm a more robust understanding of human freedom.
The various interpretations of Scripture also play a significant role in shaping these positions. For instance, Psalm 119:104 is seen by John Gill as an expression of the psalmist's willingness to offer spiritual sacrifices, highlighting the role of human will in religious devotion [1]. Similarly, Jamieson, Fausset & Brown interpret Psalm 51:12 as a plea for a willing spirit, underscoring the importance of human volition in maintaining a right relationship with God [5].
Sources
- Psalms (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Psalms 119:104: Accept, I beseech thee, the freewill offerings of my mouth, O Lord,.... Not sacrifices out of his flocks and herds, such as were the voluntary and freewill offerings brought to the priests under the law, though there may be an allusion to them; nor out of his substance, such as David and his people willingly offered towards the building of the temple; but these are not the freewill offerings of his hands, but of his mouth; the spiritual sacrifices of prayer praise: prayer is an offering; see Psa 141:2; and it is a freewill offering, when a man is assisted by the ”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on John & Hebrews: all? To a sophist or philosopher? To every one trained in the wisdom of the Gentiles? By no means. The human soul is simply unable thus to philosophize on that pure and blessed nature; on the powers that come next to it; on immortality and endless life; on the nature of mortal bodies which shall hereafter be immortal; on punishment and the judgment to come; on the enquiries that shall be as to deeds and words, as to thoughts and imaginations. It cannot tell what is man, what the world; what is man indeed, and what he who seems to be man, but is not;”
- Romans (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on Romans 7:19: For the good that I would I do not - Here again is the most decisive proof that the will is on the side of God and truth. But the evil which I would not - And here is equally decisive proof that the will is against, or opposed to evil. There is not a man in ten millions, who will carefully watch the operations of this faculty, that will find it opposed to good and obstinately attached to evil, as is generally supposed. Nay, it is found almost uniformly on God's side, while the whole sensual system is against him. - It is not the Will that leads men astray; but the c”
- CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 1 (Gen 1-23), section 8.10: the question, whether God justifies men gratuitously, and that by faith? For this must be received as a settled point, that, in the judgment of God, no respect is had to works until man is received into favor. Another point appears equally certain; since the whole human race is hateful to God, there is no other way of reconciliation to divine favor than through faith. Moreover, since faith is a gratuitous gift of God, and a special illumination of the Spirit, then it is easy to infer, that we are prevented 232 232 The word prevent”
- Psalms (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Psalms 51:12: free spirit--"thy" ought not to be supplied, for the word "free" is, literally, "willing," and "spirit" is that of David. "Let a willing spirit uphold me," that is, with a soul willingly conformed to God's law, he would be preserved in a right course of conduct.”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part (Tertia Pars), Of Christ's Unity of Will, Art. 4: Article: Whether there was free-will in Christ? I answer that, As was said above (Article [3]), there was a twofold act of the will in Christ; one whereby He was drawn to anything willed in itself, which implies the nature of an end; the other whereby His will was drawn to anything willed on account of its being ordained to another---which pertains to the nature of means. Now, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 2) choice differs from will in this, that will of itself regards the end, while choice regards”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 5: Augustine — Anti-Pelagian — CHAP. 52 [XLVII.]--IF PELAGIUS AGREES WITH AMBROSE, AUGUSTIN HAS NO CONTROVERSY WITH HIM.: Inasmuch, however, as the discussion about free will and God's grace has such difficulty in its distinctions, that when free will is maintained, God's grace is apparently denied; whilst when God's grace is asserted, free will is supposed to be done away with,--Pelagius can so involve himself in the shades of this obscurity as to profess agreement with all that we have quoted from St. Ambrose, and declare that such is, and always has been, his opinion also; and end”
- Augsburg Confession (Lutheran) “Augsburg Confession (Lutheran, 1530), 1 Of Free Will they teach that man’s will has some liberty to: 1 Of Free Will they teach that man’s will has some liberty to choose civil righteousness, and to work 2 things subject to reason. But it has no power, without the Holy Ghost, to work the righteousness of God, that is, spiritual righteousness; since the natural man 3 receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2:14; but this righteousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy Ghost is received 4 through the Word. These things are said in as many words by Augustine in his Hypognosticon,”
- Catechism of the Catholic Church (Catholic) “Catechism of the Catholic Church, CHAPTER ONE (part 4): the image of God".12 37 In the historical conditions in which he finds himself, however, man experiences many difficulties in coming to know God by the light of reason alone: Though human reason is, strictly speaking, truly capable by its own natural power and light of attaining to a true and certain knowledge of the one personal God, who watches over and controls the world by his providence, and of the natural law written in our hearts by the Creator; yet there are many obstacles which prevent reason from the effective and fruitful use o”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 40b.5: The Gemara challenges this explanation: And yet it is free on only one side, as the term is superfluous in two of the verses but not in all three of them. The Gemara explains: Granted, with regard to these two, idol worship and conspiring witnesses, it is free, because it could have been written only: And you inquire and you investigate, but instead the word “diligently” also appears in the verse. But in the verses concerning an idolatrous city, what could it have written differently? They are all written.”