Does God have "free will - choice?"

[Thomas Helwys]

Freedom is a part of God's nature, and He has endowed all humans and angels with that freedom. To love requires freedom; without freedom, to truly love is not possible. Without freedom, love is not love but compulsion.

 

[Inspector Javert]

But the question of this thread is:

"Does God have complete unfettered freedom of will - choice?"​

​

Does God have freedom of choice?.... Yes, is it "complete and unfettered"....no.

But those who believe in contra-causal freedom of will do not maintain that it is "Complete and unfettered" either.

There are two "rules" that the OP suggests concerning God:

1) God cannot separate from Himself His character and attributes - His nature.

2) God cannot perform or choose what is not conformed to his character and attributes - His nature.​

Agreed.

For the purpose of starting the discussion, the OP takes the view that the answer is: No, God does not have freedom of will-choice.

He does not have the freedom to do anything outside of his nature.......but not all choices must be either consistent WITH or inconsistent with his nature.

I think you have a false dichotomy here. Concievably, God might have "chosen" to refrain from creation at all. That (for instance) might be a choice neither consistent nor inconsistent with his nature per se.

To support that view the following is offered:......

Agree with everything you said here.

Therefore, if God does not have "freedom of choice-will,"

He does.......just not the ability to choose to do something his nature forbids. His nature establishes limits to available choices.

then it follows that humankind who are "made in the image of God" also do not have that same ability

That does not follow actually. For that conclusion to be true, you assume that there is NOTHING man can do that God cannot do. There are myriads of things man can do that God cannot do. Everytime he sins, he is doing something God is incapable of. Everytime he lies or is duplicitous, he is doing something God cannot do.
Every time a mathemetician errs in solving an equation, he is performing an action or "doing something" that God cannot do.

contrary to the desire expressed by some on the BB who have attempted to state such freedom is found in common humankind,

It has always interested me that those who disbelieve in free will assume that those who do must DESIRE for it to be true. I actually would submit the opposite. I also believe in deer ticks and mosquitoes....I DESIRE that precisely the converse were true, but, alas, it is not.

I don't have any particular "desire" either to believe or disbelive in freedom of Will.

If freedom of will does exist: Then all my sins were made in rebellion and were otherwise avoidable:
(Personally, I'd much prefer to appeal to an inherited nature I can do nothing whatsoever about).....

If it does not exist: Then it likely matters not one whit whether one either prefered to believe in it or not inasmuch as such a thing would be pre-determined and thus, one's desire to believe or disbelieve in it would have no effect on their belief.

How does this apply to the nature of humankind?

It doesn't apply. We are not perfectly faithful and consistent......God is. That passage you cite in 2 Timothy even implies the fact that we can be "faithless" but not God:
If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

Can a person deny the fallen nature?

People both regenerate and un-regenerate...... do so all the time. If not, then all people would be as evil as they could be at all times. Never, Ever would a sinner with his fallen nature choose against fulfilling any temptation.

The unregenerate have a sinful nature: (They do not ALWAYS sin)
Those regenerate in Christ have a new nature: (but they do not AlWAYS do right)

Can that NATURE of the fallen - sin filled be free to choose and express will that is not conformed and conforming to that fallen nature?

Yes, otherwise all sinners would be constantly sinning and making the wrong choice at all times, except for the sake of fear of punishment.

The answer is - according to this OP's statements - no. There is no true freedom of choice-will

If by "true" freedom of choice, you mean the ability to chose ANY option at any time, then no human being on Earth believes in this ability.

"Contra-causal" freedom of choice is the capacity to choose between only available options. I cannot "choose" to fly, that is not an available option.
Similarly, most adherents of "free will" maintain that God reserves the right to interfere with or negate man's ability to choose in any number of situations (and presumably does so).

the human nature does not allow such to exist just as the divine nature does not allow such to exist.

The human nature is not the same as the Divine Nature. That is the main problem I see in this post:

This OP desires that folks will bring Scriptures into every post - either to prove God can express some "freedom of will - choice" contrary to His nature - character, or show how God cannot.

Some of these types of questions have engendered ideas of what is called:
"Divine Simplicity".
It's kind of a medieval notion so, I don't get overly wrapped up in it... and certainly it has gone so far as to say that God simply possesses no properties whatsoever, (Aquinas.) But ideas like that are born on such quandries: Here's an interesting link for people to read: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/divine-simplicity/​

 

[HankD]

I know this sounds like a "cop-out" and/or an oversimplification but

God is who He is whether we comprehend the dynamics of His will and thought process or not - and we don't. His word plainly decalres it:

KJV Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts...

Personally I believe its better that we don't understand it all (at this juncture).

NKJ Exodus 3:14 And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM."

KJV John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.​

But we can obey that which He has plainly revealed to us

John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.​

HankD

 

[Luke2427]

Freedom is a part of God's nature, and He has endowed all humans and angels with that freedom. To love requires freedom; without freedom, to truly love is not possible. Without freedom, love is not love but compulsion.

It depends on what you mean by "freedom."

Do you mean, "The ability to do what you want to do?"

Then yes. Every Calvinist and even the most hard determinist on Earth believes God and man possess free will.

But the question is, "Why does he want what he wants?"

We are compelled to choose what we choose. We are compelled by our desires. If we are not compelled by our desires, then we are not free in ANY definition of the term.

But why do we want what we want? I think it is self evident. Because we are what we are.

What makes us what we are? God does.

God designed our DNA. God designed the world in which we are placed. God decided where exactly we would be born and of which set of parents. God decided which events he would both bring to pass actively and would allow to come to pass in our lives.

God did those things.

We choose what we choose because we are what we are.

We are what we are because God made us what we are.

Now, the reader of this post is exploding with the implications of this. "THEN YOU BLAME GOD FOR ____________"

But implications are a another topic. We have to admit this step without dealing with the implications of it first. Then we deal with the implications of it in the next step.

Arminians want to jump past facts to implications of the facts and then deny the facts because they do not like the things they think the facts imply.

But you don't judge whether or not something is so based upon whether or not you are comfortable with what it being so means. Not if you AT ALL care about real objectivity. If you do judge what is so based upon whether or not you like where it leads then you are COMPLETELY subjective and not to be trusted. You are not a seeker of truth if that is the case. You are a seeker comfort.

 

[JonC]

It depends on what you mean by "freedom."

Do you mean, "The ability to do what you want to do?"

Then yes. Every Calvinist and even the most hard determinist on Earth believes God and man possess free will.

But the question is, "Why does he want what he wants?"

We are compelled to choose what we choose. We are compelled by our desires. If we are not compelled by our desires, then we are not free in ANY definition of the term.

But why do we want what we want? I think it is self evident. Because we are what we are.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[agedman]

It seems to me that a number of responses have not dealt directly with the OP.

The OP's position is that God does NOT have freedom of will - choice, but is constrained to His divine nature.

The OP would suggest that both the unredeemed humankind, the demonic hosts, God and angelic hosts must follow their single nature which obliges conformity. That "freedom" exists within and only as to what is consistent with that nature.

As man is created in God's image, it follows that unsaved man also does not have such an expression of freedom - that ability to choose or will what is contrary to the nature.

Perhaps then, when Christ said that the believer would be free indeed, it could perhaps be extrapolated, from the OP, that such freedom is the ability to engage either will (fallen and redeemed), either nature (fallen and redeemed).

Perhaps in that realm, the believer is found in the most unique position of expressing the attributes of the saved and suppressing the attributes of the unregenerate, by a true and unique total freedom of choice - will. Such a condition that both the ungodly, and Godly of heaven and earth are amazed and wonder.

I have moved the OP to the bottom of this post so that the folks won't have to travel back to the beginning to address it. I also edited two spelling errors from it (deoes, possition).

When God created Adam, it is recorded that He said, "Let us make man in our image."

There are those of the BB who proclaimed and attempted to show (in recent threads) that humankind does have freedom of will - choice.

But the question of this thread is:

"Does God have complete unfettered freedom of will - choice?"
​

There are two "rules" that the OP suggests concerning God:

1) God cannot separate from Himself His character and attributes - His nature.

2) God cannot perform or choose what is not conformed to his character and attributes - His nature.
​

For the purpose of starting the discussion, the OP takes the view that the answer is: No, God does not have freedom of will-choice.

To support that view the following is offered:

The Scriptures state: "God is Love" (1 john 4:8)

Love automatically places constraints and values upon the one who loves. All expressions would be conformed by the hierarchy of constraints and values. "God is love" then it follows that the nature of God obliges expressions consistent with what is God.

The Scriptures state: "God is good and upright (just)" (psalm 25:8, 2 Thess. 1:6, Romans 3:26)

God being just and the "justifier" is also integral to His nature. God can make no choice that would be unjust for that would violate His nature. There is not even a "shadow of turning" with God. God cannot perform or conform outside of His nature.
​

The list could go on, but these two alone are sufficient to begin the discussion.



Therefore, if God does not have "freedom of choice-will," then it follows that humankind who are "made in the image of God" also do not have that same ability - contrary to the desire expressed by some on the BB who have attempted to state such freedom is found in common humankind,

Lets restate the thinking of the OP in this manner to further clarify the OP position:

When speaking of faithfulness, in the second letter to Tim, Paul states:

"If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself."

​

Here then is a truth, as presented in faithfulness, but can be extended to every attribute and character (referred to as the nature) of God. He cannot deny Himself. His NATURE demands consistency and compliance in every aspect.

How does this apply to the nature of humankind?

Can a person deny the fallen nature?

Don't get carried away with whether or not a person is "born in sin," because "ALL have sinned." Such an argument has no place in this thread. "All have sinned," and therefore, all have the nature of the fallen - sin filled.

Can that NATURE of the fallen - sin filled be free to choose and express will that is not conformed and conforming to that fallen nature?

The answer is - according to this OP's statements - no. There is no true freedom of choice-will - the human nature does not allow such to exist just as the divine nature does not allow such to exist.

This OP desires that folks will bring Scriptures into every post - either to prove God can express some "freedom of will - choice" contrary to His nature - character, or show how God cannot.

The answer will determine if humankind has such ability.

For the Scriptures state, "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." But the creation became sin filled "...through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned..."

 

[Skandelon]

I believe we would all agree that we choose in accordance with our nature, the question is whether our nature is 'contra-causally free' to choose from among available options (options which all would be within the scope of the nature from which to choose.)

In other words, its one thing to say God cannot choose to lie, because lying is obviously outside the scope of God's nature. But its another thing to suggest that God could not have chosen to refrain from creating the earth or creatures, for to do so suggests He is not all self sufficient in Himself and that somehow he by necessity had to create. Is God free to not create? Is he free to not show mercy to you? Is he free to show mercy to you? Is that a CHOICE? If so, how does he go about making that choice? Can we comprehend such things?

I'm not seeing this distinction being addressed in this thread. I could have missed it but I don't think so.

 

[JonC]

I believe we would all agree that we choose in accordance with our nature, the question is whether our nature is 'contra-causally free' to choose from among available options (options which all would be within the scope of the nature from which to choose.)

In other words, its one thing to say God cannot choose to lie, because lying is obviously outside the scope of God's nature. But its another thing to suggest that God could not have chosen to refrain from creating the earth or creatures, for to do so suggests He is not all self sufficient in Himself and that somehow he by necessity had to create. Is God free to not create? Is he free to not show mercy to you? Is he free to show mercy to you? Is that a CHOICE? If so, how does he go about making that choice? Can we comprehend such things?

I think with us contra-casual free will is questionable as we are bound, or at least influenced, by experiential aspects of being human if nothing else (specifically, a progressive development). Or… perhaps we can break these influencers and truly possess an uninfluenced and libertarian free-will. It’s not anything that can be proven, but then again, this issue wouldn’t apply to an eternal God.

Can we freely choose between choices that we perceive as equally valid options? I believe so. Scripture indicates that our choices belong to us while the future and outcome of those choices belong to God.

Could God have chosen to refrain from creating the earth or creatures - of course he could. This is a matter of omnipotence, not the will. Would he have chosen otherwise? Well, history shows he wouldn’t. That doesn’t mean that God was not free to create, but that it was his will to create. Does this mean that God desired something that didn’t exist prior to creation? I believe so, but not that he somehow lacked in sufficiency apart from the act of creation. But then again, I question the doctrine of divine impassibility (at least to an Augustinian degree). Can we comprehend such things? Perhaps you or someone else can, but not I.

Could I have had pancakes for breakfast? Yep - got the mix in the cabinet. Would I? No. Was this a free choice on my part? I think so, but it would be impossible to prove. There may have been a reason beyond my awareness (maybe my wife whispered "don't make a mess" to me while I slept). :laugh:

 

[Skandelon]

JonC, it does not appear we have any point of disagreement, at least as far as this last post is concerned.

 

[agedman]

I'm not seeing this distinction being addressed in this thread. I could have missed it but I don't think so.

Is God free not to create?

I don't think so, for He is the creator. The only "I AM" capable of making from nothing - substance.

Mercy though is a whole different matter.

Scriptures state, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy."

God's nature does not oblige Him to have mercy on anything.

The last question is no we do not need, nor are we given insight into why God expresses His mercy as He chooses.

I question your definition of 'contra-causally free' as not consistent with what I am finding on the Web.

Atheist, naturalist, even answers..com (added second dot to remove automatic link) all have definitions that are variant from yours. Most reject the choosing from various options, and embrace a larger, choice bracket devoid of any constraints be it nature, body, peer, ...

In that the theme seems to be that there is no "cause" for choices other than what the person imposes upon them self. That true self determination removes all "causes."

You and I would agree (I hope) that such a freedom is absolutely NOT Scripturally sound thinking.

 

[Skandelon]

Mercy though is a whole different matter.

Scriptures state, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy."

God's nature does not oblige Him to have mercy on anything.

Ok, then let's stick with this. So, you affirm that God could have chosen not to show mercy to Paul (for example)? He was 'free' to refrain from showing mercy? Isn't that contra-causal freedom? Is that logically possible in your mind for God to be free to refrain or not refrain from that given choice?

If so, what caused it? The only answer is God did, right?

That is self-determinism, or contra-causal freedom, as I understand it.

 

[agedman]

Ok, then let's stick with this. So, you affirm that God could have chosen not to show mercy to Paul (for example)? He was 'free' to refrain from showing mercy? Isn't that contra-causal freedom? Is that logically possible in your mind for God to be free to refrain or not refrain from that given choice?

If so, what caused it? The only answer is God did, right?

That is self-determinism, or contra-causal freedom, as I understand it.

According to the web, "contra-causal freedom" is the ability to make a choice without any regard to "causal" factors. The choice is devoid of any natural or unnatural proclivities. As the OP suggests, that is not a "freedom" enjoyed by the Heavenly, nor the Earthly.

God nor humankind (exception below) cannot choose outside of their nature, and what the web describes as "contra-casual" would be choices without consideration of the nature.


I put a little twist in the thread later suggesting that the OP actually could make a case that because the believer in the earthly form (not yet "transformed") has a dual nature, they are unique of all creation and even God (not lifting believers above God!!!) because no other has both the nature of the fallen and the nature of the redeemed. Only believers then have the "freedom of choice" - although consequences for choices abound.

Specifically to your last question(s).

"Is that logically possible in your mind for God to be free to refrain or not refrain from that given choice?"

The answer is, of course.

With this added statement - all choices by God must be within His nature. God cannot lie, because it is not in His nature to lie. God would not have that choice in the set of available choices.

The OP suggests the same condition is with the unredeemed. They may choose, but from a set of available fallen choices. For it would be outside the nature to choose anything of righteousness.

Another issue comes from the statements by some suggesting that humankind can choose to do righteously.

But, remember the young ruler? He followed every commandment - completely (at least that was his statement). But his righteousness did not exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees. Only those born again exceed that fallen standard.