Free Will

Back to the Free Will argument once again. We have been going through the Westminster Confession in one of the adult classes each Sunday. This Sunday my pastor handled the question of free will. The issue is not that complicated really. According to Romans 8:7 (and I am simplifying this of course) Paul states the problem in no uncertain terms: "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot." Romans 6:20 states this: "For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness." In other words, in your exercise of free choice you are not free to do what is righteous in God's eyes. Make sense? Lastly, we have the famous passage in Romans chapter one where verse 21 states this: "For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened." Here we understand that unbelieving man has willingly chosen to go against the way of holiness. But in so choosing the ability to choose the things of God becomes an impossibility. Back to Romans 8 we learn that the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to the things of God therefore will never submit to him (8:5,7). In other words, if given the opportunity to choose the things of God, he will never do so. This is really not an issue of free will at all. The one hostile to God would never ever consider submitting to God. We cannot even entertain the idea for it is completely and utterly foreign. It is not a matter of a violation of freedom that the sinner cannot obey God - in his free will he refuses to obey. He is fully and completely responsible and gladly so of his own, non coerced decision not to obey. What I do find marvelously intriguing is the idea of Adam's state of perfect innocence and his decision to disobey compared to our redemption from Adam's decision to be able to choose to obey from a position not of innocence but of knowledge and determination only because of Christ's work. I think I can explain this better. Adam was innocent of evil. The tree of live and knowledge of good and evil were points of decision. He chose to disobey. Adam's nature is what we might call innocent. It was neither sinful nor was it holy. Perhaps after a time God may have endued Adam's nature with the ability to make right decisions for God all the time, but for the purpose of my argument it was clear God did not. The result of Adam's sinful decision to disobey God had ramifications for all his descendants. The reason this is the case is because Adam broke God's covenant. You cannot break a covenant - especially one that God has made for it did not apply exclusively to him only but also to his posterity. Once broken it was necessary for the consequences apply until sometime they be satisfied. Christ satisfied the requirement and consequently instilled within certain few the ability to have a nature that sought always to please God. Alas, God's children - the church, have this duality within that wars within. This story is depicted in Romans 7 where the Apostle Paul gives voice to his dilemma not to be able to do good for the good he desires to do he does not. But see, the Christian has another nature put there by Christ that seeks God and desires to obey and live a holy life. When we obey Christ the deeds of the flesh (also within us) slowly dies away until at last we see our God face to face. Therefore, as Christians our free will is to serve our Lord faithfully yet when the flesh, which is hostile to God presents itself and we listen our new nature is grieved so that we might repent and ask God to forgive us. I desire to do good and do so only because of the nature of which Christ instilled within me. That even when I do evil Jesus is my mediator who forgives and sets me back on the right path. I willingly obey and seek to do his will and do so willingly without coercion. More later.

-Joe