Autonomy

The question isn't just a Calvinist question. Secular philosophers debate it as well. Interestingly, as modern science becomes the "god of this world", modern philosophy, in order to remain consistent, must conclude that the answer is "no". What is the question? "Does Man have Free Will?"

The difficulty with the question is definition of terms. What, exactly, is intended by the term, "Free Will"? As it turns out, there is a whole gamut of meaning to the phrase. On one end of the spectrum is the idea that human beings have the capacity to choose apart from any influence whatsoever. At this end, "free" is defined as "apart from any influence" and "will" is defined as "the capacity to choose". This definition of the phrase, however, turns out to be completely nonsensical before it gets out of the gate. You see, in order to make a choice you must have inclinations, and inclinations are things that influence choices. An example I heard was the image of a person who comes to a fork in the road. Someone who has no inclinations, no predilection, no influence at all, will not be able to actually choose a direction. If they do choose a direction it will be a random choice -- a flip of the coin, so to speak. This kind of choice is not a choice. It is a random selection. And they will not be liable for such a choice because there was no real intent. So it isn't "will", but random action.

At the other end of the spectrum of definition is the notion of "determined free will". At this end, the idea is that humans can make choices ("will"), but that for it to be "free", all that has to happen is that it isn't decided for the human. They make the choice without external coercion. Of course, between the extremes there are multiple shades of meaning by multiple people.

The conflict for science occurs when they impose a naturalistic prerequisite on the world. Science, when it is consistent (consistent with the prevailing idea that all events are of naturalistic origins and Man is simply a biochemical computer), must conclude that humans do not have free will at all. They make choices that are coerced by their biochemistry. All choices are predetermined by their "programming". Humans think they're making uncoerced choices, but it's actually just an illusion, the product of their physical world.

The conflict for Christianity on the topic of "free will" occurs when we apply the premise of God's Sovereignty. Many Christians argue that God is sovereign but Man has "free will", and they use that term in a sense that God cannot and does not influence or interfere with human choices. In other words, whether or not the arguer intends or accepts it, God is not sovereign when it comes to Man's choices. Sorry, God. Maybe You're mostly sovereign or almost sovereign, but certainly not the only Sovereign that Paul recognizes in 1 Tim 6:15. What humans generally want from God (and my term "humans" includes many Christians) is autonomy. They want to believe that they are sovereign over themselves. Any infringement on that autonomy is, well, not right. God wouldn't do it. God shouldn't do it.

In general, we can conclude two things from the Bible. One is that Man makes choices and that he is held liable for those choices. The other is that God is Sovereign. If we start with those two premises, we have to come to a different view of "free will" than you might have expected. One is that Man certainly has "free will" in some sense because Man is liable for the choices he does or doesn't make. If all choices are coerced, we aren't liable for those choices. So we must make some choices without coercion. The other is that the notion of autonomy, completely free choices, does not exist. Humans make their choices based on their inclinations. A person who possesses only a sin nature is inclined to sin and will choose to do so, not because God coerces them to, but because their nature does. In Jesus's words, sinners are "slaves to sin" (John 8:34), and that's not "free". Forgiven people with imputed righteousness and the Spirit working in them have the capacity to make other choices, but that's because there is another influence at work in them.

The Bible holds both concepts -- Sovereign God and the limited free will of Man -- in suspension. They're both true, even if they appear to contradict. In Genesis 20 Abimilech is told not to touch Abraham's wife. When he tells God he didn't, God says, "I know that you have done this in the integrity of your heart, and it was I who kept you from sinning against Me. Therefore I did not let you touch her" (Gen 20:6). Both God and Man made that choice. In Luke 22:22, Jesus says that Judas's betrayal was predetermined and Judas was liable for his own choice to betray Christ. In Philippians 2, Paul tells us to "work out your salvation" (our job) because it is God at work in us (His job) giving us the will and power to do so (Phil 2:12-13). We know that God works all things after the counsel of His will (Sovereignty), and we must make the proper choices ("will") in being transformed (Rom 12:2).

The human tendency is to argue for autonomy. The truth is that it's a myth. If we start with God and follow His character and Word, you can only conclude that humans have limited free will and that, in the final analysis, God is Sovereign. Anything else diminishes God and magnifies Man.