Origin of the term in English

The word “free” became part of “freewill” (or “free will”) in English usage gradually, with roots in Old English components but a clear combination emerging in Middle English (c. 1200–1400) as theological ideas were translated. It wasn’t a sudden event but a linguistic evolution tied to Christian thought, fully established by the 16th century. The single-word “freewill” (adjective) is an older variant that persists in specific contexts (e.g., adjectives), while “free will” (noun) dominates today.

Philosophical Nuance:

Man’s will isn’t free in the traditional sense of unfettered autonomy; it’s a limited faculty—created, fallen, finite, subordinate, and grace-dependent. Biblical texts like Romans 7 and 1 Corinthians 10:13 don’t depict a sovereign will but a contingent one, thriving only in partnership with God. This reframes human agency as real but bounded, offering humility and hope over illusory independence.

Note: While often used interchangeably, “liberty” tends to focus more on the legal and political right to be free from external constraints, particularly from government overreach, while “freedom” has a broader meaning encompassing personal autonomy and the ability to act without restrictions, including both external and internal limitations; essentially, liberty emphasizes the absence of restraint, while freedom emphasizes the power to choose and act freely. Early Christian writers would likely see the term as “liberty” as that is the Latin, “libertas” and “liberum”

God’s Freedom: Some theologians like Aquinas argue God’s will is “necessarily free” in that He cannot act contrary to His nature (e.g., He can’t sin), yet this isn’t a limitation but the perfection of freedom—choosing only what’s consistent with infinite goodness.

Man’s Freedom: Human free will, per Augustine, is real but compromised. In other words, it is not truly free. Pre-Fall, Adam had “libertas” (true freedom to choose good); post-Fall, it’s “liberum arbitrium” (erroneously translated free choice) but enslaved to sin unless liberated by grace (John 8:36). This contrasts sharply with God’s unenslaved will. Liberum arbitrium is closely linked to ideas of moral responsibility, blame, and praise. It’s also a concept that has been debated by theologians and philosophers. 

Since Augustine was writing in Latin there was no understaning of modern philosphical debates. If he were alive today and had a broader vocabulary, like English, I’m betting we would agree that man’s will is constrained, not truly free. We might better understand his concept as “agency”.

Paul reveals that man’s will isn’t a unified, free entity like God’s boundless will. Instead, it’s fractured. He wants to do good (aligned with God’s law), but his actions betray that desire. This split reflects the limitation of so called human free will after sin entered the world (Genesis 3). Unlike God, whose will and actions are perfectly one, man’s agency is compromised by an internal adversary: “sin living in me.”

Practical Example:

God: If God wills a storm to cease (Mark 4:39), it does—His will is unopposed and effective.

Man: If a person wills to resist greed during a financial crisis, they can choose to, but success depends on internal resolve and external aid (e.g., God’s strength). Their will might waver or fail under pressure, unlike God’s.

Humans are accountable for their choices (Romans 14:12). This is better understood as “agency” and implies culpability not freedom. However, choosing sin isn’t forced but willful (James 1:14-15).

In 1 Corinthians 10:13, God’s will is free to permit temptation and to provide escape (reflecting His faithful nature). He’s not compelled by human action but acts from His eternal purpose to sustain believers.

The human response—resisting temptation or enduring it—requires exercising a self will. Yet, this self will isn’t absolute: without God’s “way of escape,” the will would falter under unbearable pressure. Misunderstanding this as total autonomy (meaning., “I can handle it alone”) leads to the negative outcomes previously discussed in this post, like pride or despair.

God’s Will vs Man’s Will

God’s will refers to His sovereign, unhindered capacity to intend, decide, and act according to His nature and purposes. When we say “free like God’s will,” we mean a will that is perfectly free—unconstrained by external forces, fully aligned with His character (e.g., holiness, goodness, omniscience, omnipotence), and capable of effecting whatever He decrees.

God’s will is supreme and absolute. He declares, “I am God, and there is no other… My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please” (Isaiah 46:9-10). Nothing can thwart it (Job 42:2). It’s inherently good, just, and wise, reflecting His flawless nature (Psalm 18:30, Deuteronomy 32:4). There’s no internal conflict or moral failing. God’s freedom isn’t bound by time, space, or contingency. He creates, sustains, and governs all things (Colossians 1:16-17). His will doesn’t depend on anything outside Himself. He acts from His own eternal being (John 5:26).

Man’s so called free will refers to the human capacity to make choices within the constraints of their nature, circumstances, and God’s overarching sovereignty. It’s the ability to act voluntarily, exercising agency, but it’s not absolute or unbound like God’s. It is not truly free.

Humans can choose, but their will is constrained by physical limits, knowledge, sin (Romans 3:23), and external factors (like environment, upbringing). Unlike God, man’s will isn’t omnipotent—choices have boundaries . For example., I can’t will myself to fly.

Post-Fall (Genesis 3), human will is tainted by sin, often inclined toward self-interest rather than God’s will (Romans 7:18-19). It’s able to choose, but not free from internal corruption without divine grace. Man’s will operates within God’s created order and providence. Even its limited choices are a gift from God (Genesis 1:26-27, humans made in His image with volition). In 1 Corinthians 10:13, the “way of escape” shows humans rely on God’s intervention to exercise their will rightly under temptation.

Key Differences

In conclusion

I do not like the term freewill or free will when it comes to defining man’s will. Man does not choose his parents or time and place of his birth. From the beginning each man/woman is limited by these factors and they only grow as he grows. It is better to say man has responsibility for his actions but understandably is limited in his ability to choose based on many factors beyond his control. Therefore, God provides the way out and that is found in the sacrifice of His son Jesus Christ, our Saviour.