Freedom of the Will
Dear friends
Thank you for praying for me. It has been an exciting journey right after my final paper last Tuesday until now (Thursday Dec 4th 2008 3:27am). Thus far, I have been busy with SYFC activities and planning for church camp talks and church service’s music. I thank the Lord for the enormous wealth He has graciously poured unto me during this season of economic crisis, so much so that I can’t keep myself from the output that I’m giving. I am talking in terms of spiritual wealth. What have caused me to pen my thoughts now is because of the mind blowing thoughts that went through my brain as I’m reading the book– “Jonathan Edwards, a guided tour of his life and thought” by Stephen J. Nichols.
I remember those times when I was really inspired by people who defended sound doctrines amidst false teachers and inadequate biblical foundational “truths”. One of them was Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758). However I also remember how simply clueless I was as I attempted to read the super thick books that were on his works and teachings, that I simply gave up. That was why I was excited about this book when the author Nichols explained that he met the similar problems due to some reasons which he concluded. “The specific issues were different, and the language used to discuss them was different. It simply is the case that reading Edwards today requires special effort and special assistance.” ( Jonathan Edwards, a guided tour of his life and thought Pg. 9 ¶6)
Granted, this book is insufficient to cover the complete picture to Edwards’ doctrinal convictions. However I like the way the author puts it – “Again, this work is not an end in itself, but a gateway into the rich and rewarding life, thought, and writings of Jonathan Edwards. The conclusion offers you some directions for continuing your journey. (ibid Pg.24 ¶3) I can’t wait to get my hands on those thick (size) and juicy (theology) books on the works of Jonathan Edwards from YFC rec room now…
I will not endeavor to do a book review of any kind in this post. Nor do I think that I am up to it without misrepresenting the author. I would however attempt to share some intriguing thoughts based on one of the chapters I read today.
The 9th chapter, titled “Understanding the Will” is a summary of what some have “considered Edwards’ greatest literary achievement and, according to many, ranks him as one of America’s greatest theologians and philosophers” (ibid pg. 174 ¶ 2), and that is his work titled Freedom of the Will. Published in 1754, Edwards deals with controversial issues in his day (and ours) with regards to human freedom and responsibility versus sovereignty of God and his decrees.
I hesitate right now to use the words like “Arminian” because I loathe the idea that people think I regard myself as some “enlightened being” by God and thus condemns the teachings of Jacobus Arminius and later advocates like John Wesley. Well, “enlightened being” or not I will not conclude but one thing I know that it is God who has graciously enabled me to “believe in the name of the Son of God so that you (I) may know that you (I) have eternal life.” (1 John 1:13) Because of this, God Himself has also graciously enabled me to understand truth from the Bible which I cannot hide but must stand for and defend, thus this post. I wouldn’t say that the book has caused me to have new insights to Holy Scripture but rather it has served as a way to help me see my convictions, which have been established, are sound and biblical. For my Methodist (or the like) friends, please do not feel offended when I use terms like “Arminian Controversy”, “Augustinian” and “Calvinistic understanding” etc. I beg your pardon if I hurt your feelings in anyway. I do not suppose that I am superior to you in any way since we were all sinners to begin with and only saved by His grace alone. But if anything, may this cause all of us Christians, from whatever camps, to return again to scripture which is fully sufficient “Sola Scriptura” in convicting us of doctrinal truths. I pray that God will help us put down any preconceived thoughts about who God is and come crawling back again to the scriptures and understand how the Bible was meant for us to understand it. So let the adventure begin…
Page 175 of the book begins with the subtitle “The Arminian Controversy”. Some background is given here. “The term Arminianism derives from Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609), a Dutch theologian who originally advocated Calvinism but began to question the Calvinist view of predestination and the atonement. His followers expressed their view in the Remonstrance (1610), which emphasizes human response and free will in salvation. The Remonstrance consisted of five points and was challenged by the Canons of the Synod of Dort (1618). At Dor, a group of Calvinist theologians responded to each of the five points of the Remonstrance, which are summarized in the popular acrostic TULIP as a summary of Calvinist teaching. (ibid Pg. 175 ¶2)
In the preface of Edwards’ Freedom of the Will, Edwards’ himself writes that “the subject is of such importance, as to demand attention, and the most thorough consideration… The knowledge of ourselves consists chiefly in right apprehensions concerning those two chief faculties of our nature, the understanding and will… the grand question about the Freedom of the Will, is the main point that belongs to the science of the Will. Therefore, I say, the importance of the subject greatly demands the attention of Christians. (ibid pg.176 ¶4) What Edwards is ultimately driving at are 2 things – the nature of both 1.the will and 2.freedom.
1. Will. Edwards argues that something drives the will or causes it to choose one thing over another. Therefore, the will is determined. The question to answer is “what determines it?” Edwards offers a preliminary answer that “It is that motive, which, as it stands in the view of the mind, is the strongest that determines the will.” (ibid pg.178 ¶4) The motive therefore underlines the will and directs it. The motive is our distinguishing nature. This nature however has a moral inability due to the fall of Adam. Humanity lost the ability to please God or achieve righteousness. We are totally dependent on the righteousness of Christ and his ability to reconcile us to God. Without Christ, the nature, and thus will is governed by moral inability. That is to say, yes, we can choose to do anything we want in the absence of Christ, but it is impossible to do something that is inclined towards the delight of God. I can think of some scriptures at the back of mind which this point is in line with for example Romans 3:23
2. Freedom. This is where Edwards brings in Arminian’s notion of freedom. It entails 2 things, namely 2.1 self-determining power and 2.2 contingency.
2.1 Self-determining power. “It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined to anything prior its own acts.” (ibid Pg. 180 ¶2)
2.2 Contingency. Freedom is “opposed to all necessity, or any fixed and certain connection with some previous ground or reason of its existence.” (ibid Pg. 180 ¶2)
The above mentioned 2 points, self-determining power and contingency, form the essence of the Arminian concept of freedom. Without them, humanity has no real freedom. Therefore, humans can only be held responsible for their actions if humans are truly and absolutely free in this way.
This concept of freedom makes a lot of human sense. But is this the kind of freedom that is expressed in the Bible? I’m just wondering, when Jesus said “the truth will set you free”, is this the freedom that He is promising? If it is, then is there still a difference between the freedom we have before salvation and after?
Jonathan Edwards objects that “true responsibility demands freedom defined by choice” throughout the treatise. This raises up a common argument which is “how can you blame a sinner for sinning”? Daniel Whitby, an advocate of Arminian concepts is quoted “If all human actions are necessary, virtue and vice must be empty names; we being capable of nothing that is blameworthy, or deserveth praise; for who could blame a person for doing what he could not help, or judge that he deserveth praise only for what he could not avoid?” (ibid Pg. 182 ¶5)
As legitimate as Whitby might sound, we realized that his points are inconsistent with biblical truths. God deserves our utmost praise because of who He is, not only when he has done something. We shall expound more on this point later. Edwards also further turns to specific accounts in Scripture, such as Romans 1:28, where God gives sinful humanity over to a depraved mind. The objection of Whitby, representing the Arminians, becomes an objection against Scripture.
Jonathan Edwards was also quick to recognize the problems of accounting for human responsibility, if freedom is not defined by choice. I am often encouraged to view humans are fully responsible for our actions and God is fully sovereign. John MacArthur in his podcast a few weeks ago also reminded us not to diminish God’s sovereignty though we might not fully understand its parallels to human responsibility.
Until here, the ideas have been encouraging reinforcements of the teachings I received from God through the Bible. Now this next part is probably the most exciting part of my day because Edwards does not just end the argument here. Instead, he takes it a step further by providing insights that are new to me by explaining freedom in a way that is truer to its meaning. You ready? Now here we go!
Freedom, Edwards argues, has to do with acting according to one’s nature. It has little to do with self-determining power and contingency. Edwards points us to 2 questions in which he also answers as he begins his argument:
1. When will humanity be most free? – in the glorified state.
2. What being has the most freedom? – God. (Here’s where I’ll be taking from 3 paragraphs ago)
Before the 3rd chapter of Genesis, humanity was created to worship, serve and have fellowship with God. But because of the fall of Adam, we are bound to sin, or as Paul put it, slaves to sin. However, after our conversion, we are redeemed and purchased from the enslavement of sin. Salvation therefore restores us to our intended role and enables us to do what we were created to do and to be what we were created to be. In heaven, in our glorified state, we will not be able to choose to sin or not sin. We will simply not sin. Now that is biblical freedom.
Remember how Edwards stated that God has the most freedom? Now think for a second, why is that so? I agree with what Edwards suggested that God has the highest possible freedom, according to the true and proper meaning of the term, because He does not need to come into being through making choices, as he is perfect. Freedom is therefore not a contingency. It is a necessity where no choices are involved. We therefore praise God for who He is, not just because of what He does. God’s nature is such that freedom is a necessity. There is no choice for God, and glorified saints, to sin at all. God IS good, entirely praiseworthy.
In the last part of 4 parts of His treatise, Edwards offers the final answer to the Arminian notion of free will by stressing that God’s will determines all things. “The sovereignty of God is his ability and authority to do whatever pleases him.” (ibid Pg. 183 ¶3)
The inability to recognize an evil disposition of the heart is to emphasize subtly humanity’s ability to choose God. This prevents people from being brought off from all their dependence on their own righteousness. In fact, Edwards writes that “things of this kind have visibly been the main hindrance of the true humiliation and conversion of sinners, in the times of awakening, that have been in this land.” (ibid Pg. 185 ¶3) I scribbled with my pencil beside that sentence “and today’s land too”.
Another subtle implication of the Arminian concept of Freedom diminishes the nature of true faith, as “man is not dependent on God; but God is rather dependent on man in this affair”. (ibid Pg. 185 ¶4)
The conversion of a sinner is not
- owing to a man’s self-determination
- free will of man
but rather it is
- God’s determination, and eternal election, which is absolute, and depending on the sovereign will of God
- a view of the will, freedom, and salvation that serves all of the glory for God.
I’m reminded of verses from Ephesians like that of
“even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will.” - Ephesians 1:4-5
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” - Ephesians 2: 8-9
Let us not diminish the absolute sovereignty of God just because we cannot see its parallels to human responsibility. Perhaps understanding the true meaning of freedom will help us in reconciling this. I end off with a quote from the last sentences of the chapter:
“But, we are free indeed. That is, we are free to do what God created us to do. And we are free to be what God intends us to be.” (ibid Pg. 186 ¶3)
