Do angels have free will?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by BrainWashed

Have you ever owned a dog?

Did you ever call the dog by name and it didn't come to you?

Yes? That's freewill.

The dog can either submit to your command by responding to your call, or the dog tell you to "go pound sand" and ignore your call.

Freewill allows the dog either one of two choices.

Dogs tell their owners?

Whatever, another thread circles the drain.

[thephnxman]

His NAME is Jesus!

I see only two scenarios:

(1) Angels were created with a free will;
(2) Angels were created with no free will:
(a) some were created to lose "...their first estate...";
(b) some were created to be faithful...
(Option (b) would follow someone's theory on predestination)

I am persuaded that angels (and men) were created with a free will.

Brother Villa

[BrainWashed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Dogs tell their owners?

Whatever, another thread circles the drain.

Yes, telling defines as communicating through vocalization or expression.

Humans communicate with dogs via vocalization, hand signals, body posture, and touch. Dogs also communicate via vocalization (e.g. bark, growl, etc.) or through expression (body movement, limb movement, etc.).

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by houston

Primarily, Esaias. Secondarily, anyone that cares to answer.

I am not actually certain. I was hoping folks would "show their work" which I supposed would include defining "free will". At the moment my idea of free will is as follows:

Will is that capacity of rational creatures to originate volitions. A free will would be a capacity to originate volitions that are not caused by a law of necessity outside the will itself.

I'm sure there is a tautology in there somewhere, though...

[KeptByTheWord]

Does free will involve being able to choose to obey, or not?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Does free will involve being able to choose to obey, or not?

Free will would (with the working definition-in-progress I posted earlier) involve being able to choose to obey or disobey without necessity.

Necessity being defined as a force that is naturally or physically impossible to resist. By naturally or physically I mean "according to nature or essence". Thus for example, the law of gravity is a law of necessity, it is not something that objects can disobey. Another example is in the arena of the mind, there is a law of necessity that governs sensation - sensations are perceptions, and occur by a law of necessity whenever the stimulus is present. One cannot "choose not to perceive" a sensation, either the sensation is, in which case it is perceived, or it is not, in which case it is not perceived. (A blind person does not perceive sight because there is no mental stimulus in the mind corresponding to an input of light. There is no "choice" involved, perceptions operate according to a law of necessity.

So then the will, being the faculty or ability of a being to make volitions ("choices"), would be free IF there is nothing that necessitates any particular choice by a law of necessity. If on the other hand, something produces certain choices by a law of necessity, then the will is not free.

Thus a person may choose to obey or disobey God, but what brought about that choice? Was it the free agency of the individual? Or did something "cause" that particular choice to be made, such that it could not have been otherwise?

The question of free will brings up the issue of ability vs inability, as well as the issue of accountability and the nature of moral valuation ("good vs evil", "right vs wrong", "holy vs unholy", "righteous vs unrighteous", guilt vs innocence, etc). All of them are interrelated and seem to depend on one another.

Finally, the question of humans having free will or not does not necessarily seem to affect the question of angels or of animals having free will or not. for example, we assume humans have free will, thus are accountable for their actions, thus face judgment. Angels likewise are to be judged. So we conclude angels must have free will.

But angels have no offer of redemption, no offer of pardon or mercy. Why not? Our offer of pardon is conditioned upon our repentance (among other things). Repentance implies the probability of free will. Angels have no offer of pardon, implying repentance is impossible for them... which strongly suggests they do not have free will (otherwise couldn't some of them repent? And how does a just God reject the repentance of a fallen angel? Upon what basis?)

My head hurts.

lol

[Amanah]

Humans have free will on the basis of not having obtained immortality (1 Cor 15), not having eaten from the tree of life and sealed our destiny yet (Genesis 3). We have been made a little lower than the angels. (Ps 8:2-7)

Angels, having been created immortal, have no recourse for sin.
(Rev 12:7-12) (Rev 20:15)

[thephnxman]

His NAME is Jesus!

Originally Posted by Esaias

Free will would (with the working definition-in-progress I posted earlier) involve being able to choose to obey or disobey without necessity.
Necessity being defined as a force that is naturally or physically impossible to resist. By naturally or physically I mean "according to nature or essence". Thus for example, the law of gravity is a law of necessity, it is not something that objects can disobey. Another example is in the arena of the mind, there is a law of necessity that governs sensation - sensations are perceptions, and occur by a law of necessity whenever the stimulus is present. One cannot "choose not to perceive" a sensation, either the sensation is, in which case it is perceived, or it is not, in which case it is not perceived. (A blind person does not perceive sight because there is no mental stimulus in the mind corresponding to an input of light. There is no "choice" involved, perceptions operate according to a law of necessity.
So then the will, being the faculty or ability of a being to make volitions ("choices"), would be free IF there is nothing that necessitates any particular choice by a law of necessity. If on the other hand, something produces certain choices by a law of necessity, then the will is not free.
Thus a person may choose to obey or disobey God, but what brought about that choice? Was it the free agency of the individual? Or did something "cause" that particular choice to be made, such that it could not have been otherwise?
The question of free will brings up the issue of ability vs inability, as well as the issue of accountability and the nature of moral valuation ("good vs evil", "right vs wrong", "holy vs unholy", "righteous vs unrighteous", guilt vs innocence, etc). All of them are interrelated and seem to depend on one another.
Finally, the question of humans having free will or not does not necessarily seem to affect the question of angels or of animals having free will or not. for example, we assume humans have free will, thus are accountable for their actions, thus face judgment. Angels likewise are to be judged. So we conclude angels must have free will.

But angels have no offer of redemption, no offer of pardon or mercy. Why not? Our offer of pardon is conditioned upon our repentance (among other things). Repentance implies the probability of free will. Angels have no offer of pardon, implying repentance is impossible for them... which strongly suggests they do not have free will (otherwise couldn't some of them repent? And how does a just God reject the repentance of a fallen angel? Upon what basis?)
My head hurts. lol

Reply PRIMARILY to the sentence in bold

You are quite correct there, Beloved. Angels were created before redemption
was established, thus they are ineligible for redemption. Similarly, there is no
pardon or mercy for angels because in eternity there was no law against sin or
iniquity: and where there is no law, sin cannot be imputed. Therefore punishment
for iniquity or sin could not be exacted. There was only one Law in eternity, it
is the Law of Holiness; which is: Nothing contrary to Holiness can stand in its
presence. It is under that Law that the angels were cast out from eternity.
(That was NOT their punishment: it was to keep intact the Law of Holiness)

As we look at the Laws of Creation, we see that the first thing God established
was light; that is, "...the Light that shineth every MAN that cometh into the world."
So we can see that redemption was established BEFORE man was created, because
God knew man would sin and we would be in need of redemption.
Understand this: man is the crown of God's creation!

Brother Villa

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Free will would (with the working definition-in-progress I posted earlier) involve being able to choose to obey or disobey without necessity.

Necessity being defined as a force that is naturally or physically impossible to resist. By naturally or physically I mean "according to nature or essence". Thus for example, the law of gravity is a law of necessity, it is not something that objects can disobey. Another example is in the arena of the mind, there is a law of necessity that governs sensation - sensations are perceptions, and occur by a law of necessity whenever the stimulus is present. One cannot "choose not to perceive" a sensation, either the sensation is, in which case it is perceived, or it is not, in which case it is not perceived. (A blind person does not perceive sight because there is no mental stimulus in the mind corresponding to an input of light. There is no "choice" involved, perceptions operate according to a law of necessity.

So then the will, being the faculty or ability of a being to make volitions ("choices"), would be free IF there is nothing that necessitates any particular choice by a law of necessity. If on the other hand, something produces certain choices by a law of necessity, then the will is not free.

Thus a person may choose to obey or disobey God, but what brought about that choice? Was it the free agency of the individual? Or did something "cause" that particular choice to be made, such that it could not have been otherwise?

The question of free will brings up the issue of ability vs inability, as well as the issue of accountability and the nature of moral valuation ("good vs evil", "right vs wrong", "holy vs unholy", "righteous vs unrighteous", guilt vs innocence, etc). All of them are interrelated and seem to depend on one another.

Finally, the question of humans having free will or not does not necessarily seem to affect the question of angels or of animals having free will or not. for example, we assume humans have free will, thus are accountable for their actions, thus face judgment. Angels likewise are to be judged. So we conclude angels must have free will.

But angels have no offer of redemption, no offer of pardon or mercy. Why not? Our offer of pardon is conditioned upon our repentance (among other things). Repentance implies the probability of free will. Angels have no offer of pardon, implying repentance is impossible for them... which strongly suggests they do not have free will (otherwise couldn't some of them repent? And how does a just God reject the repentance of a fallen angel? Upon what basis?)

My head hurts.

lol

Very interesting post. It's a little above my head but I'm trying to understand it.

Is this kind of what you are talking about?...

I believe in free will, meaning that we all make choices and are responsible for those choices. However, the choices we make are often influenced by (and even sometimes limited by) our nature. For example, a man can freely will or desire to breathe under water. But given human nature, a human being will drown if they try.

And so while free will is something we all possess, our free will cannot take us beyond our nature. Man, being fallen and sinful in nature is therefore incapable of choosing God.

By nature, a man will freely choose among the many options that tend to focus on wealth, power, prestige, comfort, and pleasure, but not God. God has to make the first move in salvation. Hence the doctrine of Prevenient Grace. Prevenient Grace is an enabling grace that comes through the drawing of the Holy Spirit.

John 6:44
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Prevenient Grace is composed of two elements:

Inner Calling
Outer Calling

The Inner Calling is when the Holy Spirit first begins to draw the spirit of a person inwardly. The individual is awakened to the reality that they need something more. Often, they don't consciously know what it is that they are missing. They begin to struggle with being content in their lives. This can stimulate an interest in religion and spiritual things and the beginning of one's spiritual journey to find what is missing. If resisted, it can result in choices that try to satisfy this sense of need with more sinful or worldly pursuits. However, none of these things will bring contentment or happiness.

The Outer Calling is the preached Gospel. When both the Inner and Outer Calling of God are in operation, the inner drawing of the Holy Spirit bears witness to the preached Word of God and the sinner feels compelled to be saved and becomes fully aware of their need for salvation.

Upon choosing to obey the Gospel and receiving the Holy Spirit, one's spirit (or inner man) experiences Regeneration. Regeneration imparts a new nature to the spirit of the individual. Now one begins to experience an inner desire to obey God and live holy.

But the mind (element of the soul) might not know how. This is where studying the Scriptures comes into play. Through studying the Scriptures, one's own mind is renewed and the mind of Christ is encountered.

And so one's spirit is now regenerated and their mind is experiencing renewal. But the body remains in its natural state. And so carnal impulses to accommodate the desires and cravings of the body (the flesh) continue to arise. These impulses can be either resisted or surrendered to. The battlefield is the mind. If one has the mind of Christ, they will seek to do that which would emulate Christ. The mind of Christ agrees with the new nature of the abiding Holy Spirit and so victory over temptation is attained and salvation affirmed. But if one neglects the Scriptures and becomes carnally minded, the carnal mind agrees with the flesh and sin, and ultimately death, is the result. And so the Christian lives in a state of tension between the new abiding nature of the Holy Spirit and the natural carnal nature of the flesh.

And so we see that while the will is free, it is always subject to the influence and limits of nature.

Is this kind of what you're talking about?

P.S.
I don't remember reading how the same or a similar tension exists within the being of any angel.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Humans have free will on the basis of not having obtained immortality (1 Cor 15), not having eaten from the tree of life and sealed our destiny yet (Genesis 3). We have been made a little lower than the angels. (Ps 8:2-7)

Angels, having been created immortal, have no recourse for sin.
(Rev 12:7-12) (Rev 20:15)

Both humans and angels can choose to obey or disobey.

It seems there is a hierarchy of angels, so that if the head angel rebels all those under his command automatically follow, i.e., Satan and his angels.