I Am Sorry, But We Don't Have A Free Will And Why We Shouldn't Want One Either!
![]() |
Picture Source: http://i.huffpost.com/gen/160795/thumbs/r-FREE-WILL-large570.jpg |
Now, typically this would be the portion of the blog post where I would quote a bunch of verses like John 1:13 to support my stance and then I would probably post some PDF Teaching Sheets like this one here. No, I would rather not go here with this post. Instead I would like to offer up an experiential question for us to ponder. Experiential? "What on earth are you doing Pastor Matt, are you going subjective?" you may be saying. Yes, I am.

Sadly my friends, the idea that our wills are free is the age old myth that has blinded the church and Christians for many generations. Desiderius Erasmus, a very popular Roman Catholic Humanist during the 16th Century, was one of the main adversaries of Martin Luther. At the heart of the debate between Erasmus and Luther was obviously the understanding of the will. Is the will free or bound? That was the main question. Erasmus believed that mankind's will was in a neutral state. Gerhard Forde comments on Erasmus saying, “For Erasmus the will always seems to be that neutral gear in an automobile which can be shifted this way and that 'at will.'" In other words, mankind was free to shift into reverse (i.e. do bad) or into forward (i.e. do good). Thus for Erasmus, the only things that was needed was a nudge for mankind to go forward rather than backwards. It is interesting to note that Erasmus' theology is identical to many teachings within popular American Evangelical Churches today, but that is a totally different subject and post.
Luther though, insisted that Erasmus' view of the will was a, "logical fiction." Luther contended that there was simply no stick to shift, that mankind was stuck in reverse with no possibility of neutral or forward. He held that mankind needed to be delivered from his predicament from someone outside of himself, namely Christ.
Erasmus’ idea of a neutral state of mankind was essentially due to his overinflated view of mankind and a diminishing or downplay of original sin. What this meant was that Erasmus’ understanding of man in a neutral state led to an over emphasis on moralism and opened the door for heresy.
Ultimately the reason for the importance of this discussion over the will is that the very Gospel is at stake. Luther contended that the Gospel is made cheap when the tiniest bit of merit is interjected, for when the tiniest bit of merit is introduced it turns everything back on the receiver and the Gospel is no longer good news. In other words, the higher a person views mankind's abilities (i.e. free will), the lower the person's view of Christ becomes. Inadvertently free will diminishes one's need for Jesus as a divine savior for sinners. Furthermore, the whole idea of a free will is essentially bad news. Yes, it is bad news for us and it is something for us to avoid, not cherish and defend. Martin Luther in his book, "The Bondage of the Will," states,
"I frankly confess that, for myself, even if it could be, I should not want 'free-will' to be given to me, nor anything to be left in my own hands to enable me to endeavor after salvation; not merely because in face of so many dangers, and adversities, and assaults of devils, I could not stand my ground and hold fast my 'free-will'; because, even were there no dangers, adversities, or devils, I should still be forced to labor with no guarantee of success, and to beat my fists at the air. If I lived and worked to all eternity, my conscience would never reach comfortable certainty as to how much it must do to satisfy God. Whatever work I had done, there would still be a nagging doubt as to whether it pleased God, or whether He required something more. The experience of all who seek righteousness by works proves that; and I learned it well enough myself over a period of many years, to my own great hurt. But now that God has taken my salvation out of the control of my own will, and put it under the control of His, and promised to save me, not according to my working or running, but according to His own grace and mercy, I have the comfortable certainty that He is also great and powerful, so that no devils or opposition can break Him or pluck me from Him."
The idea of free will does not pass the test in the school of experience. Furthermore, the idea of a free will is bad news for us.
I am sorry friends, we simply do not have a free will and this is really, really good news for us.
I am sorry friends, we simply do not have a free will and this is really, really good news for us.
To Read More On This Subject: CLICK HERE
Comments
Thank you.
alH
The thing I don't understand however is why God is also not sovereign over our everyday choices? We appear to be free with regard to each other but are we really in the grand scheme of things?
God "works all things according to the counsel of his will" - does that not include what parking space I get (yes of course it does). This doesn't mean it's something I have to discover or that I would actually be able to park in a different space than was ordained from the beginning. If I changed my mind and parked in a different space, then that would only prove it was the other one that was ordained for me. So how do we say we have freedom in everyday choices? I'm not sure I follow.