Dangerous Questions – Freewill or Coercion?

I had an ethics professor that said “if people could choose their looks, we would have far more ugly people in the world than we do now”. His reasoning was “look at what people choose to wear…”

This whole argument is based on a flawed assumption: That people make rational choices when presented with clear options.

People choose bad things all the time. Especially when they can rationalize it. In this case, it is alot easier to ignore hell because we humans are so focused on our carnal nature. A little worldly fun now makes it really easy to dodge the question and/or convince ourselves that heaven and hell do not really exist.

There are other problems with this question, but this is the main one.

First, on question of free will, we don’t have free will in any sort of true sense at all. So much is beyond our control. Take sin, for example, we don’t really even have a choice because (Romans 5:12) we are sinners by virtue of our very existance on the planet; simply because we are descendants of Adam, we have sin, we are sin and we pay the price of sin. According the Ephesians 2, the only thing we’ll ever want to do (to exercise our free will in favor of), on our own, is something other than God. We all are looking for our fulfillment in something other than God — call it religion, call it sex, call it drugs, call it ambition, call it whatever …

Second, we don’t have a choice to make. As the video rightly points out, hell or heaven is no sensible choice. But you see, the Gospel isn’t about heaven or hell. It’s about a Savior, a King, a loving Bridegroom. It’s about Jesus, the Creator of the World, who created this world perfectly and for the praise of His glory. Because His Creation was ruined by sin (which, mysteriously is STILL to the praise of His glory!), He (to the praise of His glory) chose (He did, not me!) dead, blind, naked, sin- and hate-filled (Ephesians 2, Romans 5, I Corinthians 1) people of this planet as a pecuilar or distinct and precious people (Titus 2:14). When we see the beauty of His redemption, His sacrifice, His Kingdom and Himself, we cannot help but cry out “God be merciful to me a sinner!” (Luke 18:13) Heaven is certainly a by-product of that relationship (Heaven being a physical place of Eternal bliss .. but only so because of the presence of Jesus Christ). But Heaven’s hardly the point. The point is to be part of God’s eternal plan for His own glory.

Third, if there’s a choice to be made with the Gospel, it’s not a heaven vs. hell conversation. Instead, it’s a God versus “other gods” conversation (Exodus 20). Who will I put as the ultimate being in my life? To whom will I turn for satisfaction? In whom will I find my fulfillment? Heaven is the ultimate of finding fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Hell is the ultimate end of finding fulfillment in something other than Jesus Christ. As Dr. Tim Keller said, all other gods require that you die to serve them. Jesus Christ is the only God who died for you.

Fourth, God is hardly wringing His hands in heaven hoping against hope that someone down here will proactively choose Him. I John 4:19 says that I only love God because He loved me first. While I don’t completely get why God gets pleasure, glory and praise out of me (that’s part of the reason why the church is often referred to as a “mystery” in the New Testament), I do know that He does (Ephesians 1). And God, being God, hardly leaves His glory (the highest good in the universe) in the hands of such falible folks as myself. He is Sovereign, reigning over all and bring all things about according to His glorious plan.

To summarize my excessively long comment: If choice, free will and heaven vs. hell is what the Gospel is all about, it’s hardly Good News and the author of the video has an excellent point. However, the Gospel of the Bible puts all of the decision-making and power in the hands of the Almighty God. I must and can only (and then only if God in His mercy opens my dead and blinded eyes to the Truth) throw my miserable soul at the bloody feet of the Saviour and beg for mercy and grace … which He so freely gives!

Responding to your responses …

1) Not sure how Calvinist might answer the question, but I do believe that any opportunity to exercise free will end up with me choosing to be anti-Christ. If there was a way for me to be good enough to choose Christ on my own, then salvation would be due to some merit in me, not in Christ’s merit, which is completely against everything taught in Scripture. Also, Ephesians 2:3 notes that I’m not only born in sin, I want to sin and I do sin — that’s just who and what I am.

2) Just be clear, I’m not suggesting that Heaven and Hell don’t exist (don’t think you’re taking that from what I said, but just to be sure…). I agree with your conclusion: no reasonable (natural, if you will, to use Paul’s term from I Corinthians 2) person would choose to glorify God (which necessarily means forgoing our own glory). That only happens when we see the beauty of Jesus Christ. That only happens when, through the converting work of the Holy Spirit, we become the kind of human being that we were originally created to be. Only with a “circumcised” (or changed, severly altered and marked) heart will we ever “choose Christ.” I don’t agree with the “robot” charactarization. In fact, I think if we are ever robots, it’s before salvation. It’s only when we are regenerated (made new in Christ) that we have a clear mind to make useful choices (I Corinthians 2).

3) I’d say basically what I said in response to 2 … no one applying human logic would choose Christ. That’s why Paul in I Corinthians 1 calls the content of our preaching “foolishness” — it is valued as stupid by the unregenerated mind and heart.

4) To make your analogy with your girlfriend apply better to the Gospel, you’d have to start in a position where your girlfriend is blind and mentally limited. If you had the power to open her eyes and make her mind work properly, then by virtue of you being the most perfect man alive (you’d have to be, to be comparable to God in the analogy) she’d love you completely upon seeing you. That’d hardly be duress. In fact, it’d be downright humane of you. You see we don’t need to be warped away from “normal” to love God. But we do have to be made right, normal, good again (sin has warped us). God doesn’t have to program me to love Him. But He does have to break down the wall of partition between me and Him (Ephesians 2:14) so I can actually see who and what He is. One look, and I’m in love!

Quick side note … I’m with you on the quest for answers to hard questions. And this is really an ultimate hard question. And, as you rightly note in your original comment, this is the kind of legitimate question that unbelievers have about religion. A “relgion” that can’t answer them isn’t much of a religion and even less help … it’s just something that hollars “stop it” like your previous post complained about. I’m not sure I’m offering definitive or convincing answers. But I, too, am wrestling with these ideas to be able to give an answer for the reason of the hope that lies within me (I Peter 3:15)

Ahh Calvinism… The conversation can usually be very short, because I have yet to meet a calvinist who is willing to answer one simple syllogism.

1) God does not want evil men to die, but to turn from their evil ways and live (Ez. 33)

2) But we know that many evil men continue in evil, and are judged and die.

3) Therefore either:
-God allows mean to act displeasurably in violation of his desire OR
-God’s nature is self-contradictory

Of course the Bible repeatedly teaches us the first conclusion, but Calvinists seem to prefer the latter.

I totally believe in the complete sovereignty of God. I know that all our choices are within the scope of His sovereignty.

But in my simple mind, I have to also look at all that the Bible says. God tells us to choose. And He tells us we are responsible for the choices we make. I can’t deny the biblical responsibility to choose!

So, to me, I have to answer the “question” (can we choose?) in a way that fits all the biblical data. I think this issue revolves around the truth about “life” and “death.” We cannot now fully understand the bliss of true “life” or the torment of total “death.” God is not threatening or bribing us. He is simply telling us that we have a choice (Deut. 30:15, 19) between life and death. I won’t get into the theological significance of how God is glorified by all this because the “question” is about “choice.”

To some, the choice for death is appealing because it means “independence.” [I think John Milton (Paradise Lost) has best focused on the real issue when he quotes the Devil as saying that it is better to rule in hell than to serve in Heaven. I can’t imagine what would motivate such a brilliant being to make such a decision. But he has made his choice.] I think I understand some of that appeal—my pride. We often make bad choices because of this tremendous motivation of pride.

To others, the choice of life is appealing because we have realized the emptiness of death. We see an eternity of existence apart from true and full life that can be realized only IN God. We gladly give up “independence” to experience true life.

Death is torment [hell and all] though it does appeal to our pride. And life is bliss [heaven and all] though it means being IN Jesus and, thus, dependent. This is not a threat or a bribe; it is just stating the only choice we have: life or death.

Whether a Calvinist or an Armenian, if you’re honest, you’ll admit that there really isn’t a complete way to reconcile sovereignty and free will.

I look at it this way: The sovereignty of God and man’s responsibility (free will) are two parallel lines running in the same direction. No matter how close they get together, they never really touch and become one line. Most of theological history has been spent trying to get them to come together. It isn’t going to happen.

The frustrating reality is that BOTH are true at the same time. It’s fun to talk about but we will never really be able to understand the intricacies of how it works together. I know that sounds like a cop out, but it’s nonetheless true.

Personally, I think absolute sovereignty is where we should start. Big God – Small man. That’s why I like most of Calvinism.

The more I study (and the longer I live) the more convinced I am that we are far less in control than we think and the idea of free will TRULY is a bit like choosing between another kick in the crotch or a bowl of ice cream. I do this with my children all the time: “You can obey Daddy or get a spanking (go ahead and flame me over spanking…) and go to bed with no dessert. You’re choice.” About 30% of the time they go with the spanking. My kids have free will and sometimes they make really stupid choices.