Refuting Calvinism: Do we have free-will?

Do human beings have free will, and if so, to what extent can people choose good over evil? This question has been discussed amongst philosophers who influenced Western thought since at least the time of Socrates around 400 BC. However, Babylonian and Jewish traditions, and Eastern writings such as the Vedas, go back approximately another thousand years and all discuss free will and the consequences of human choices.

In general terms the early traditions of the Vedas emphasize cosmic order and social obligations. The later Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita discussed karmic ideas, how present actions shape future outcomes, but always is the insistence that humans are morally responsible, even though there are certain restraints on freedom. This same pattern of thought is found in Zoroastrianism, Confucianism and Taoism.

In the Code of Hammurabi, and the vast majority of social codes throughout history, specific behaviors such as murder, adultery, giving false witness, stealing etc, are considered choices which people have the power to make, unless inflicted with a form of insanity. In the Mosaic Law, written approximately 1400BC, the Jews are commanded to obey God and either blessings or judgment are applied as outcomes. 

The Greek philosophers varied considerably in their views. Socrates connected wrong practices to ignorance or a lack of wisdom. Plato in ‘The Republic’ taught that people can direct themselves toward either truth or lower base desires. True freedom is to live according to truth and reason, and slavery to be ruled by passions and desires. Aristotle, in the ‘Nicomachean Ethics’ distinguished between voluntary actions, involuntary actions, and actions done from ignorance or compulsion. He affirmed human agency and responsibility, but also recognized the influences of upbringing and habitually shaped choices. The Stoics, however, generally believed that the universe is driven by rational fate. A person could not control events, yet they could control their reactions to those events.

The earliest Christian theologians affirmed that human beings possess genuine moral freedom and are responsible for their choices. They found themselves responding to pagan fatalism, astrology, Stoic determinism and Gnostic systems which denied real human responsibility. Their fundamental arguments were that (1) God’s commands would be meaningless without human responsibility, (2) judgment requires real choice, and (3) love for God must be voluntary. For example, Irenaeus, in his ‘Against Heresies’ wrote:

Man is endowed with reason, and in this respect is similar to God, having been made free in his will, and with power over himself. 

Those who exercise it shall receive glory and honor, because they have done that which is good when they had it in their power not to do it; but those who do not obey shall receive just judgment, because they did not obey when they had it in their power to obey.

(Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, 37)

And Justin Martyr, writing against fatalism writes:

We have learned from the prophets… that punishments, chastisements, and good rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power…For if it is fated that one man be good and another evil, then the first is not deserving of praise nor the latter blame.”

(Justin Martyr, First Apology, chapter 43)

Prior to Augustine of Hippo, the vast majority of Christian writers held firmly to similar views regarding human free will, for they recognized that without the ability to genuinely choose right moral choices there were no grounds for divine justice, nor the ability to freely choose to love God. The influence of Augustine of Hippo can hardly be overstated. He claims to have been converted from Gnostic Manichaeism to Christianity in 386 AD at the age of 31. 

Just 11 years later, he introduced a radical departure from early church interpretations of Scripture and introduced his doctrine of inherited sin and guilt. This doctrine became the foundation of the Roman Catholic beliefs and practices of Mariology (immaculate conception, Mary as Queen of Heaven, Mary as perpetual virgin and mediator), and after the Reformation, the doctrines of Calvinism (total depravity, double predestination, and the annihilation of genuine free will).  The implications of Augustine’s inherited sin and the specific doctrines of TULIP are discussed in many videos on this channel, and in detail in chapters 10 and 12 of my Practical Systematic Theology.

For the first years after his claimed conversion, Augustine held to early church theology. In his On Free Choice of the Will, written immediately after his conversion, he writes;

We must not believe that God gave us a free will so that we might sin, just because sin is committed through free will. It is sufficient for our question, why free will should have been given to man, to know that without it man cannot live rightly. That it was given for this reason can be understood from the following: if anyone uses free will for sinning, he incurs divine punishment. This would be unjust if free will had been given not only that man live rightly, but also that he might sin. 

Augustine, On Free Choice of the Will, trans. Anna Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff (New York:  Bobbs-Merrill, 1964), Book II, ch. 1, p.36

After adopting his own inherited sin/guilt doctrine, Augustine’s views hardened to the logical outcome of that heresy as witnessed in his ‘Grace and Free Will’ written in 426, 40 years later. He writes:

The Almighty sets in motion even in the innermost hearts of men the movement of their will, so that He does through their agency whatsoever He wishes to perform through them (GFW XL.1). 

Ray Griffen. ‘On Augustine’, in The Problem of Evil. Selected Readings. Ed. Michael. L. Peterson. (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992) p. 206

Augustine’s doctrine ends up with a view of God’s sovereignty which denies the possibility of any creature having the freedom to rebel against Him. He writes;

For He is not truly called Almighty if He cannot do whatsoever He pleases, or if the power of His almighty will is hindered by the will of any creature whatsoever.

Augustine of Hippo, Enchiridion of Faith, Hope, and Love.

Fast forward to the Reformation and we witness Martin Luther, a former Augustinian monk, writing;

Thus the human will is like a beast of burden. If God rides it, it wills and goes whence God wills…If Satan rides, it wills and goes where Satan wills. Nor may it choose to which rider it will run, nor which it will seek.  But the riders themselves contend who shall have and hold it.

Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, Christian Classics

For Luther, humans are just pawns in a divine game. We are controlled either by God or Satan and have no ability to choose who controls us. In his ‘Institutes’ Calvin states similar views to Luther and even uses the same ‘beast of burden’ analogy. This same view of God’s sovereignty is/was held by all monergistic Calvinists such as John MacArthur, R.C Sproul and John Piper to name a few. In Piper’s words;

He (God) is sovereign over every single human decision. We have all kinds of thinking that we do, but in the end, the Lord decides...about God’s sovereignty...it is unstoppable power and authority over all things, including the human will.

John Piper (https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/what-is-the-sovereignty-of-god)

The logical conclusions of the Calvinist view of God’s sovereignty are utterly evil and defame His holy character to be on a par with the demonic. If God is an unstoppable power who wills every human decision, then God has willed every murder, rape, child abuse and sin in all of human history, including the fall in Eden, and this is exactly what Calvinists claim, even in their own creeds such as the Westminster Confessions which states;

Our first parents were led astray by the cunning temptation of Satan and sinned in eating the forbidden fruit. It pleased God to allow them to sin, because in his wisdom and holiness he planned to order their sin to his own glory. (WCF 6.1)

And

God’s providence reveals his almighty power, unknowable wisdom, and infinite goodness. His providence extends even to the fall and to all other sins of angels and men. These sins are not simply allowed by God, but are bound, ordered, and governed by him in the fullness of his wisdom and power so that they fulfill his own holy purposes. However, the sinfulness still belongs to the creature and does not proceed from God, whose holy righteousness does not and cannot cause or approve sin. (WCF 5.4)

The Westminster Confessions insist that sins are not simply allowed, but rather bound, ordered and governed by God. Furthermore, God was pleased to allow the sin of Adam and Eve because he ‘planned to order it’. In this sense, Satan just helped the Calvinist God to carry out His plan.

According to these statements, the holy righteous God can, plan sin, order sin, govern sin and bind human beings to sin, but cannot cause or approve sin. At the very least, this is a schizophrenic deity, and at worst a deceitful and malevolent being who creates mindless, yet sentient puppets and orders them to commit sin, and then blames them so that he can enjoy tormenting them. This is not the God revealed in Scripture and through the person of Jesus Christ.

John MacArthur expresses Calvin’s view of free will in this short clip.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XGWTs0bowC8

MacArthur claims that ‘we can choose any sin we want, but we cannot choose not to sin’. He ties this idea to the Calvinist foundation of Total Depravity, he mentions God’s sovereignty and concludes that depravity is so profound that the only thing unbelievers can choose is ‘which sin’.

MacArthur’s words may apply to the tiny percentage of people who are psychopaths or serial killers and spending their lives in prisons, but has no basis in truth regarding the average human being.

According to MacArthur, given the choice between murder or not to murder, we cannot choose not to murder. Given the choice to commit adultery or fornication, we always choose adultery and fornication, we just cannot choose not to sin. When a person does acts of kindness and love they are choosing to sin, when a soldier sacrifices his life for his comrades he chose to sin.  The truth is that people do have the ability to do sincere acts of kindness, love and self-sacrifice irrespective of their religion.

What then does Scripture say about human free-will? Please note that we are asking about free-will, and not about freedom. No one is ever completely free. We are all subject to the demands of our bodies, to hunger, thirst and the need to sleep, yet we can have control over gluttony, etc. We are also constrained by the laws which govern us and there are consequences for disobeying those laws, therefore people control themselves, even if only for fear of the consequences. We are also born with both the capacity and inclination to demand our autonomy and this is the root of sin. People can easily become enslaved by the desire for wealth, fame, sexual fulfillment, ambition etc, and if such desires are not controlled they can become our masters. 

The question we are asking is if Scripture states that we can exercise free-will in regards to right and wrong.

Let’s begin with the very first generation of human beings after the Fall, Cain and Abel in Genesis 4. The two men brought their offerings to the Lord. Abel’s offering was looked upon with favor from the Lord, but Cain’s was not. Cain appears to have been jealous that Abel's offering had been accepted. We are told that his face was downcast, and that he was very angry. God warns Cain that;

"If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it." (Genesis 4:7)

The implication here is that both Cain and Abel knew what offering would be acceptable, but Cain chose to bring what he wanted. The Lord asks Cain if he will be accepted when he does what is right. Was the Lord suggesting that doing what is right was impossible for him? If, as MacArthur and Calvinists claim we can only choose to sin, then how did Abel manage to gain the favor of God?

The question we must ask here at the very beginning of human civilization is simply this. Did Cain have a real and free choice or had he inherited the sin and guilt of his father, and have a totally depraved nature he could not control?  The answer is obvious! God gave him a choice of doing right or wrong. 

The Lord also warned him that sin was crouching at his door, not that sin was his master. God told him to master his desire, not that desire was his master. Cain refused to control his anger, and rather than bring a proper sacrifice, spilled his brother’s blood through murder. The Lord punished Cain with a just judgment because Cain had been warned to do what was right.

And what of Enoch who walked faithfully with God for 300 years (Genesis 5:24)? Or Noah who lived among people who were ruled by the Nephilim, the offspring of fallen angels? The description of the depth of wickedness of Noah’s generation is utterly demonic, but Noah refused to be involved, he chose to be faithful to God.

And what do we see when we fast-forward to the covenant of the Law. Throughout the books of Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, God outlines the law for His chosen people, Israel. The constant theme is to love and obey Him, to keep His commands, to refrain from following false Gods and to be holy as He is holy. That first generation who came out of Egypt failed to trust Him, so the Lord outlined afresh His covenant with their children who would be led by Joshua. The Lord calls His covenant a ‘covenant of love’, and He promises incredible blessings for them, but there will also be severe punishments for those who break the covenant, both individually, and collectively. In Deuteronomy we are given a summary statement.

11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so you have to ask, “Who will ascend to heaven to get it and proclaim it so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

15 See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. 16 For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to Him, and to keep His commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess. 17 But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18 I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordon to enter and possess.

19 This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live 20 and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Deuteronomy 30:11-20)

Have Calvinists ever read these verses, or do they purposely ignore them because they utterly contradict their twisted theology? Is there any suggestion here that these people could only choose sin as MacArthur claimed? No…the Lord states that what He is commanding them is not too difficult for them and that it is in their hearts, but if their hearts turn away, there will be consequences. They are called to make a choice and to choose life and all of the blessings the Lord promised them.

And did the Lord expect them to keep these commands perfectly all of the time. No, and He provided the means of atonement, he provided the priesthood to administer justice, He provided sin offerings, guilt offerings and even freewill offerings. To state that these people had no freewill is to call God a liar.

But what of those who did not have the law, what about pagans? In Romans 2:6-16 Paul divides these people into two groups;

6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.” 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger….12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 

14 Indeed, when Gentiles who do not have the law, do by nature things required of the law, they are a law for themselves…15 they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times defending them. 16 This will take place when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares. (Romans 2:6-16)

Paul has already stated in chapter one God has made Himself known in creation so that all are without excuse. His point here is that there are pagan Gentiles who refused to worship man-made idols and false gods and lived according to the revelation they had received…they persisted in doing good, for that is all they could do. God will judge them according to their actions. The same book, Deuteronomy, which I quoted earlier states regarding the Lord that:

He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he. Deuteronomy 32:4

Here is the crux of the issue of free-will and the point at which I part company with monergistic Calvinists. Calvinists teach that God can do anything, but they are wrong. God can never do anything contrary to His nature as revealed in Scripture. He can never lie, can never be unjust, can never break His word and never be unholy. Yet Calvinists, with their twisted view of God’s sovereignty, teach that God can order, plan and govern sin, indeed Calvinists teach that God actively wills sin as outlined in my video entitled ‘the Evil side of Calvinism’.

And when it comes to free-will Calvinists throw divine justice out the window entirely. The Calvinist God can order, ordain, will and govern people to commit sins without the slightest possibility of them doing otherwise, and then punish them with eternal torment for doing what he willed them to do? The Calvinist ‘god’ is less just that the most corrupt human magistrate.

In Conclusion.

Every person is born with the capacity and inclination to sin, that is, to demand our independence from God and enthrone self. We easily become enslaved to this sin principle, but it is not total depravity, it is not total inability which destroys free will. Can we make ourselves righteous and holy through performing good deeds, good enough to meet God’s standard of holiness? No, we cannot, for His standard is perfection, and perfection can only be gifted to those who are united with Christ.

However, although all have sinned and fall short of God’s glory, we are not utterly evil except in the case of those who have willfully submitted to the demonic. People retain the ability to do acts of kindness, to love other than ourselves and even sacrifice ourselves for others. And we have a conscience which God can speak to, although our conscience can become calloused and hardened by sin and pride.

In general, people have the ability to choose right from wrong, even if in extreme cases, we only control our base desires because of the consequences of doing otherwise. All cultures have laws, have courts, have judges to administer justice, and these reflect God laws.

When we finally stand before God and are judged, we will be judged on what we did with the freedom we were given to make choices and which choices we made. If we chose to reject God’s holiness and love, we will be judged by His holiness and be forever cut off from His love and presence. If we chose to recognize our sin, through His speaking into our conscience through conviction, we will have embraced His love by virtue of His grace, mercy and forgiveness and received His divine nature within us; we will have been united with Christ and received His gift of righteousness, and live in His love eternally.  

Without freewill there is no foundation for justice and God must be perfectly just. Without freewill there is no basis for genuine love, and loving God is the purpose for which we were created.

God bless