A Framework For Teaching Free Will in the Church

Few doctrines generate as much discussion—and sometimes confusion—as free will. Christians want to affirm that people make meaningful choices and are responsible before God. At the same time, Scripture teaches that God is sovereign over all things and that salvation depends on divine grace rather than human initiative.

A church teaching on free will should resist simplistic answers. It should present the biblical evidence fairly, distinguish several meanings of “freedom,” and show why the subject matters for worship, evangelism, prayer, and pastoral care. Scott Christensen’s What About Free Will? Reconciling Our Choices with God’s Sovereignty provides a helpful framework for this task, especially from a Reformed compatibilist perspective.

Many disagreements about free will begin because people use the same term in different ways. Church leaders should therefore define their terms before defending a position.

At least three ideas commonly appear in Christian discussions:

Christensen argues for compatibilism. He does not deny that people choose; instead, he challenges a particular definition of freedom—libertarian freedom. In his account, people make real choices because they act willingly, but their choices express their hearts, desires, and character. God’s sovereignty and human responsibility are therefore compatible rather than contradictory.

Teachers should make clear that the debate is not between “people make choices” and “people are robots.” The real question is: What kind of freedom is necessary for responsibility?

A balanced presentation should not build its doctrine on one set of passages while ignoring another. Scripture strongly affirms both divine sovereignty and human responsibility.

The Bible describes God as accomplishing divine purposes in creation, history, salvation, and even events involving sinful human actions:

These texts prevent the church from treating God as a passive observer who merely reacts to autonomous human choices.

Scripture also addresses people as meaningful moral agents:

Such passages should not be weakened into mere appearances of choice. Scripture treats human decisions as significant and accountable.

The Bible’s teaching about freedom must also include its teaching about human corruption:

Christensen emphasizes that people remain active agents even when enslaved to sin. The problem is not that sinners never choose what they want. It is that, apart from grace, their desires are disordered. This distinction helps explain why moral inability does not necessarily eliminate responsibility.

Compatibilism can be caricatured as fatalism. Churches should directly address that misunderstanding.

Fatalism says that outcomes occur regardless of causes, choices, or actions. Biblical sovereignty says nearly the opposite: God ordinarily accomplishes divine purposes through means, including prayer, preaching, decisions, warnings, relationships, and acts of obedience.

For example, God’s sovereignty over salvation does not make evangelism pointless. The gospel is one of the means God uses to bring people to faith (Romans 10:14–17). God’s sovereignty over daily provision does not make work unnecessary. Likewise, God’s sovereignty over history does not render human choices meaningless.

Christensen’s account can be summarized this way: people do what they most want to do at the moment of choice, according to their reasons and character. They are responsible because the action is genuinely theirs. External coercion may lessen responsibility, but acting from one’s own desires ordinarily establishes rather than removes personal accountability.

Church leaders should also acknowledge the questions this raises. If desires shape decisions, where do desires come from? How can someone be accountable for possessing a sinful nature? Why does God permit or ordain actions he condemns? Christensen offers a Reformed answer, but teachers should not pretend that every mystery disappears. Scripture gives real affirmations without providing an exhaustive explanation of how divine causality and human agency relate.

A balanced approach need not treat all positions as equally persuasive. It should, however, describe other views accurately and respectfully.

Many Christians affirm libertarian freedom, arguing that moral responsibility requires a genuine ability to choose among alternatives. Arminian and Wesleyan traditions often combine this view with prevenient grace, through which God graciously enables sinners to respond to the gospel without determining their response.

Other Christians propose models such as Molinism, which appeals to God’s knowledge of what free creatures would do in any possible circumstance. These approaches seek, in different ways, to preserve robust divine providence alongside libertarian choice.

Christensen critiques libertarianism and argues that it struggles to explain how an undetermined choice can be rationally attributable to the chooser rather than arbitrary. A church drawing on his work should present that criticism clearly, but it should avoid suggesting that Christians who disagree are indifferent to Scripture or grace. The goal is theological clarity within Christian charity.

Teaching about free will becomes especially sensitive when discussing conversion. Churches should keep several truths together:

From Christensen’s Reformed perspective, regeneration changes the heart so that the sinner willingly comes to Christ. Grace does not drag people to Christ against their will; it renews the will. God overcomes resistance not by treating people as objects, but by transforming their desires so that they see Christ as desirable.

Even if a church does not adopt every element of Christensen’s account, it can usefully emphasize that biblical grace is more than information or opportunity. God acts personally and powerfully to rescue sinners.

Free will should not be presented only as an abstract puzzle. The doctrine shapes Christian life.

If salvation is fundamentally God’s work, believers have no basis for pride. Gratitude replaces self-congratulation.

God’s sovereignty provides confidence rather than passivity. Christians proclaim the gospel to everyone, knowing that God can overcome blindness and rebellion.

Prayer makes sense because God can actually change circumstances and hearts. Christians need not pray as though God can only offer encouragement while leaving the decisive outcome beyond divine reach.

Believers may trust that the God who began a good work will carry it to completion (Philippians 1:6). This confidence should encourage faithfulness rather than complacency.

A strong view of sin’s bondage should deepen compassion for unbelievers and struggling Christians. It should not foster harshness. Those who stand do so by grace.

Divine sovereignty is never an excuse for sin. Scripture does not allow a person to say, “God ordained it, so I am not responsible.” Joseph’s brothers intended evil, those who crucified Jesus acted wickedly, and yet God sovereignly used those actions for divine purposes.

A church can cultivate balance through its method as well as its conclusions.

Avoid trying to resolve the entire subject in one sermon. A useful sequence might cover:

Teach clearly where Scripture speaks clearly. Be modest where Christians are drawing philosophical inferences or constructing models.

Questions about sovereignty, evil, election, and responsibility are not necessarily signs of rebellion. They often arise from grief, fear, or a desire to understand God’s character.

Terms such as compatibilism, libertarianism, and Molinism are useful, but ordinary-language explanations should come first. Define the ideas before attaching labels.

Discussions of providence and grace should lead to praise, repentance, confidence, and obedience. If teaching produces only argument, it has not yet reached its pastoral goal.

The following questions can help a congregation engage Christensen’s argument thoughtfully:

A balanced church approach to free will will neither minimize human responsibility nor dilute divine sovereignty. It will affirm that human choices are real, morally significant, and expressive of the heart, while also proclaiming that God rules over history and acts decisively in salvation.

Scott Christensen’s What About Free Will? offers a substantial defense of the compatibilist view and a useful critique of libertarian assumptions. Churches can benefit from his work most when they place it within a wider biblical and theological conversation, represent alternative views honestly, and keep the doctrine connected to pastoral ministry.

The ultimate purpose is not to win a philosophical contest. It is to help believers confess with humility that their choices matter, their sins are truly theirs, God’s grace is genuinely powerful, and his sovereign purposes never fail.

Christensen, Scott. What About Free Will? Reconciling Our Choices with God’s Sovereignty. P&R Publishing, 2016.