The Nature of Human Free Will Debate in Theology
The nature of human free will is a deeply contested topic, with various theological traditions offering distinct understandings of its scope and limitations, particularly in relation to salvation and moral action. The core of the debate often revolves around the extent to which humanity, after the Fall, retains the capacity to choose good or to initiate a relationship with God.
One significant perspective, articulated in the Catholic tradition, affirms that human reason, by its natural power, can attain knowledge of God and the natural law, even though historical conditions present difficulties [8]. Thomas Aquinas, a foundational figure in Scholastic thought, distinguished between two acts of the will: one drawn to an end in itself, and another drawn to means ordained to that end. He affirmed that free will exists in Christ, implying its presence in human nature [6]. This view suggests that while humanity may experience obstacles, the fundamental capacity for rational choice and moral discernment remains.
In contrast, many Protestant traditions emphasize a more significant impairment of free will due to original sin. The Augsburg Confession, a key Lutheran document, states that while human will possesses some liberty to choose "civil righteousness" and things subject to reason, it lacks the power to achieve "spiritual righteousness" without the Holy Spirit [7]. This spiritual righteousness, which involves receiving the things of the Spirit of God, is wrought in the heart when the Holy Spirit is received through the Word [7]. This position aligns with the understanding that "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:14) [7]. Similarly, the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion, foundational to Anglicanism, assert that original sin corrupts human nature, inclining it to evil, and that "man is very far gone from original righteousness" [9]. This corruption means that humanity's nature "deserveth God's wrath and damnation" [9].
A Reformed perspective, exemplified by figures like Charles Hodge, focuses on the will as the faculty of self-determination. Hodge distinguishes between the will as the seat of affections and the will as the faculty by which one determines to do something conceived to be in one's power [5]. From this viewpoint, the question of why one loves God or sin is distinct from the question of what determines a particular act [5]. John Gill, a Baptist/Reformed commentator, interprets the "natural man" in 1 Corinthians 2:14 as an unregenerate individual who lacks knowledge of spiritual things, contrasting this with a "babe in Christ" who, though new, desires and receives spiritual milk [3]. This highlights the belief that spiritual understanding and choice are contingent upon regeneration.
Methodist/Wesleyan theology, while acknowledging the impact of sin, often emphasizes a concept of prevenient grace, which enables individuals to respond to God's call. Adam Clarke, a Methodist commentator, stresses that true religion involves loving God and neighbor, and where this love is absent due to corrupt minds, there is no religion [2]. This implies that while minds can be corrupt, there is still an expectation of responsiveness to truth. The idea that "if any man will do his will" (John 7:17) suggests a human capacity to desire or wish to obey God, which then leads to understanding [4]. This desire to please God is presented as the "grand inlet to light" [4].
Despite these differences, there is common ground. Most traditions agree that God's will is for humanity to be holy, and that this holiness encompasses all aspects of life [1]. The foundation of Christian ethics is understood to be doing God's will, rather than philosophical speculation [1]. The debate, therefore, is not about whether God has a will for humanity, but about the extent of human capacity to align with that will independently.
The divergence in these views often stems from differing interpretations of the effects of the Fall on human nature and the role of divine grace in enabling spiritual choices. Some traditions emphasize the radical corruption of human will, necessitating divine intervention for any spiritual good, while others maintain a greater degree of residual capacity for moral and spiritual choice, often facilitated by grace.
Sources
- 1 Thessalonians (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on 1 Thessalonians 4:3: 4:3 God’s will is for you to be holy: The foundation of Christian ethics is not philosophical speculation about virtue but doing God’s will (Rom 12:1-2; Eph 6:6; Heb 10:36; 13:20-21). Holiness (1 Thes 4:4, 7) embraces all of a person’s life (5:23); here it involves staying away from sexual sin (Greek porneia, any sexual union outside marriage).”
- 1 Timothy (Methodist/Wesleyan) “Adam Clarke on 1 Timothy 6:5: Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds - Disputations that cannot be settled, because their partisans will not listen to the truth; and they will not listen to the truth because their minds are corrupt. Both under the law and under the Gospel the true religion was: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind, and strength; and thy neighbor as thyself. Where, therefore, the love of God and man does not prevail, there there is no religion. Such corrupt disputers are as destitute of the truth as they are of love to God and man. Supposing that”
- 1 Corinthians (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on 1 Corinthians 2:13: But the natural man,.... Not a babe in Christ, one that is newly born again, for though such have but little knowledge of spiritual things, yet they have a taste, and do relish and desire, and receive the sincere milk of the word, and grow thereby; but an unregenerate man, that has no knowledge at all of such things; not an unregenerate man only, who is openly and notoriously profane, abandoned to sensual lusts and pleasures; though such a man being sensual, and not having the Spirit, must be a natural man; but rather the wise philosopher, the Scribe, the dispu”
- John (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on John 7:17: If any man will do his will, &c.--"is willing," or "wishes to do." whether . . . of God, or . . . of myself--from above or from beneath; is divine or an imposture of Mine. A principle of immense importance, showing, on the one hand, that singleness of desire to please God is the grand inlet to light on all questions vitally affecting one's eternal interests, and on the other, that the want of his, whether perceived or not, is the chief cause of infidelity amidst the light of revealed religion.”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 56: the will considered as the faculty of self-determination, and not as the seat of the affections, that comes into view. The question, why one man is led to love God, or Christ, or his fellow men, or truth and goodness; and another to love the world, or sin, is very different from the question, what determines him to do this or that particular act. The will is that faculty by which we determine to do something which we conceive to be in our power. The question, whether a man has power to change his own character at any moment, to give himse”
- 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”
- 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”
- Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion (Anglican) “Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion (Anglican, 1571), Section 225: Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; where”