[HarleyD]

Jeepers dear brother, but Dictionary.com gives an extraordinarily "flat" definition of free will. Compare with the entry for "free will" given in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

This is not a definition but a philosophical discussion of free will. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy cannot define it. I also went out on the Catholic website and they can't define it as well. So how can anyone say the dictionary is incorrect or "flat"? And, if the dictionary is incorrect, then what is the correct definition and by who's standard?

I see a lot of people out here who say they support sola scriptura, yet no where in scripture is the term "free will" used (there is one place of a "free will offering"). However, "free will" seems to be something that everyone insists that we have even though

1) no where is "free will" mentioned in scripture,

2) no one can define "free will", and

3) Augustine linked the idea of "free will" with Pelagius, calling it out in those specific term.

I would think just those three things would make people a little bit nervous. Especially when they defend it so vehemously as the gospel. This is not what sola scriptura is all about.

With all due respect, I think the Encyclopedia saying we really don't know what free will means is a total cop out. People know exactly what it means. They just don't want to admit that they are in error so they torture the concept and refuse to define it. Augustine knew what "free will" meant and it's clear his audience knew what it meant.

Therefore," says the Pelagian, "He foreknew who would be holy and immaculate by the choice of free will, and on that account elected them before the foundation of the world in that same foreknowledge of His in which He foreknew that they would be such.

Augustine on the Predestination of the Saints

Augustine didn't find a need to have to explain it. Now look at what Augustine defined as a Pelagius and see if we measure up to that definition.

I went back to the Council of Orange's Canon which is where, from my understanding, the Church first formally denounced the idea of "free will". Without getting into all of the Canons (and the specific use of "free will"), please note Canon 6:

CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).

Canons of Orange

Now that is pretty cut and dry. The Holy Spirit does everything. We can't even humble ourselves or be obedient without God's help. One thousand years later the Council of Trent retracted this idea after Protestants embraced it. Now about 300 years later Protestants started embracing this error. Now it's rampant in just about every church.

[betty boop]

It is not true that "no one can define 'free will'." My favorite dictionary is the Oxford Dictionary of the English Language, and it gives this definition:

Free Will: noun
the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion.

Seems pretty clear and straightforward to me.

I do not believe that the Stanford Encyclopedia ever said "we really don't know what free will means." Certainly the writer of this entry was aware of Augustine.

I'm having difficulty following you, dear brother HarleyD. On the one hand, you seem to reject the idea of free will out of hand. Then on the other, you appear to agree with Augustine's definition of it: "He foreknew who would be holy and immaculate by the choice of free will, and on that account elected them before the foundation of the world in that same foreknowledge of His in which He foreknew that they would be such."

I have reason to believe the Stanford article illuminates Augustine's thinking on this subject: "omnipotent God's cooperative activity can be (explanatorily) prior to a human choice and yet the outcome of that choice [can] be settled only by the choice itself."

You say that nowhere in Holy Scripture can we find the words "free will." Well jeepers, how can we understand the fall of Adam other than as a consequence of his free choice, his decision to disobey God? Or do you hold that God "programmed" Adam to disobey Him? Then it seems we are the position of having to say that Adam was simply God's pawn, being moved about on some divine chess board, not a creature made in His image, possessing reason and free will.

The Holman Bible Dictionary has an entry for "free will offering" — i.e., "free will" here used in its adjectival form: Holman defines it as "a gift given at the impulse of the giver.... The distinctive mark of the free will offering was the 'stirred hearts' and 'willing spirits' of the givers...."[See Exodus 35:29, Exodus 36:3-7, Deuteronomy 16:10, I Corinthians 16: 1–2.]

To hear the way some people speak of "sola scriptura," sometimes I get the impression that such folks believe it is "sola scriptura" that saves, and not Jesus Christ. That is, if we have the "correct" doctrine, then and only then can we be saved. In short, it's all about "what you know" and not about "how you live."

Finally, why would God bother to give us His revelation in the Holy Scriptures if it's being addressed to creatures who are not free either to accept or reject it? I don't believe God was "writing for His own amusement."

Sigh.... I grant you, dear brother, this is a very deep subject. Suffice it for now to say that the Creation is partly "determined" and partly "free," roughly corresponding to what my dear sister Alamo-Girl indicated in distinguishing God's creative will and His permissive will.

If there is no free will in the Bible, then why does it say that there is no greater rejoicing in Heaven than when a sinner has a change of heart (i.e., is converted and reconciled to, "convicted" in Christ)? If there is no free will in the Bible, then what are we to make of the Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32)?

Well enuf for now. Thank you heartily, dear brother HarleyD, for sharing your views with us!