Already to the traditional picture of a hell nothing is found in the Bible, which was detailed e.g. in the contribution “Is there a hell? The ideas persist, however, contrary to the biblical findings, and this is due in no small part to the fact that some doctrines are mutually dependent. They are inferences about Scripture that reinforce each other. The teachings are mutually dependent, just as in a house of cards no card may be taken out without the entire construct collapsing.

Free Will and Hell Doctrine

If one points out in a conversation about hell that hell does not exist in the Bible, then there is often quite fierce resistance. In this context, I have experienced time and again that the clear biblical feedback is evaded by speaking of man’s “free will”. It is virtually the “free will” that also conjures up a hell. These are the internalized conclusions.

This teaching is used, on the one hand, to free God from the shame of hell and, on the other hand, to place 100% of the responsibility for hell on man. There is a reinterpretation of God’s love and of God’s activity in Christ Jesus and a shift of responsibility. Man should be 100% responsible for his own final destiny. The fact that we cannot even foresee the next day does not prevent this theology from placing a burden on man for a fictitious eternity. Thus, the core of the gospel is lost.

These conclusions are a blatant reinterpretation of the gospel. To many, this criticism seems heretical because people do not realize how little these thoughts are supported in Scripture. Ideas of a “100% free will of man” are classified as “biblical doctrine”. However, there is no such expression as “free will” in the Bible. It is an absurdity.

Only God has 100% free will

Anyone who thinks that man has 100% free will is making himself equal to God or placing himself directly above Him. Scripture leaves no doubt that only God’s will is above all, and this is especially true of our calling in Christ:

“In Him [in Christus] the lot has also fallen upon us who are predestined, according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, that we may be to the praise of His glory.”
Eph 1:11

Now, if God works everything according to His counsel and our calling corresponds to His purpose, how can we claim that our will is stronger than His will? It is not an invitation to lethargy. For recognizing this does not mean that we are puppets in God’s theater, nor does it mean that double predestination (of the Calvinist variety) is biblical. However, if we want to understand what the Bible says, these verses cannot simply be ignored.

Only God has 100% free will. He is God. At best, we have a will of our own. We are not God. Just as the expression “free will” is foreign to the Bible, so there is no word for “responsibility”. The idea that something will have “eternal, namely endless” consequences, and that this is entirely our responsibility, is interpreted into the Bible. See also the series of articles on the term “eternity”. If anyone has responsibility for this creation, it can only be God. Otherwise, He is not God.

The assertion that man has absolute free will puts him on the same level as God, makes him God-like, so to speak. However, it does not take much reflection for us to realize that we are not free at all.

David realized:

“LORD, no one is like you, and there is no God but you, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”
1Chron 17:20 Rev. Elbf.

No one is equal to Him. We are not God-like. “There is no God but You!”. And let’s read what David then says about Israel’s election:

“And you have appointed your people Israel to be your people forever; and you, O LORD, have become their God.”
1Chron 17:22 Rev. Elbf.

God determines. No one else. Everything we determine, say, decide for ourselves is subordinate to God’s will. We are not God. But this does not make us puppets in a macabre game, as some doctrines of predestination would have it. That would be black and white thinking, according to which we are either 100% free or 100% bound. Here we need a healthy differentiation and a careful reading of the biblical statements.

Our own will

How can we refute this teaching about absolute free will? First, there is no teaching about it in the Bible. We don’t have to believe in it. A little self-knowledge could provide groundbreaking insights.

We are limited and flawed. We don’t have to feel bad about ourselves to recognize our limitations. Our limitation is real, but should not prevent us from joyfully affirming the here and now. This is what characterizes healthy life and also healthy faith.

I may recognize that God sent His Son precisely because of these limitations and defectiveness – as a solution and redemption of the recognized problems. It is for very ordinary, very limited people that there is a good news of grace in Christ Jesus.

What does it look like? We lack the glory of God and continually fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23). We are so different from Him. From this naturally follows the critical question to representatives of a doctrine of hell: How should a responsibility for an endless eternity be imposed on us by God?

Are we more powerful than God?

In our limitedness, how is it possible for us to have a 100% free will that is even so powerful that it can override God’s will for salvation? How can it be that our limited cognition has a consequence “for eternity”? Are we actually in competition with God’s omnipotence? Who says that God is limited? Does a person’s rejection have that much power? At this point, the doctrine of absolute free will is now inserted. It is a perversion of the biblical statements and the good news of God’s grace.

Has the rejection of a person ever prevented God from achieving His purpose? Or is it rather as Paul writes in Romans, as the conclusion of the doctrinal part:

“For God includes all together in unruliness, that He may have mercy on all.”
Rom 11:32

This is God’s work. He loves not only believers but even enemies (Rom 5:8). He will have mercy on everyone.

Instead of breaking out in jubilation, many Christians are rebelling against it. Their orthodoxy is not based in grace, but in the supposed just punishment of an unmerciful God. What a mockery.

God’s thoughts are often different from the harsh teachings of human tradition. God is God, and He takes care of His creation. Jesus, the Christ, as God’s Son, is the proof. It is precisely in this that the Gospel is resolved. Our will is not at all decisive for receiving divine justice. God’s justice was accomplished on the cross (see also “Justice and Judgment“). This has been accomplished.

No judgment brings about God’s justice

No judgment on people can or will bring about God’s justice. That’s logical, isn’t it? The doctrine of hell nevertheless tries to present it that way, then speaks of “eternal punishment” and “God’s justice”. This is not only strange, but it would immediately make the cross superfluous. Think about it for a moment – it is a fundamental error of the doctrine of hell.

Future judgments are only about the works a person has done in life, and at no point about faith, decision for Jesus or the like. Man will be judged at the judgment according to the works he has done in life. This is as true for individuals as it is for courts of nations (for example, in Mt 25:31-32)

In all judgments, these take place not for salvation or condemnation, but for assessment of things done in this life (this applies equally to the church, 1 Cor. 3:13, as to the rest of mankind, Rev. 20:13). It is completely absurd that, for example, an eternal endless punishment could bring about God’s justice. Just an “endless” punishment shows that justice would never be achieved that way. Punishment never leads to God’s justice. An endless torment of hell has nothing to do with justice, precisely because it would be endless.

Punishment never leads to God’s justice.

The will of man is limited. It is an erroneous theology that infers things that are not written anywhere in the Bible. Of course, Bible texts are quoted. They can be viewed and interpreted individually. As a rule, however, “eternal” consequences are derived where the context speaks of limited situations.

Be free to let go

The doctrine of a “Free Will” was invented, in my opinion, only to free God from the shame of hell. The doctrine is part of a theological house of cards. Take away a card and the house collapses. This is not about sideshows, what is written about. These are significant issues. We should not judge them lightly. It is time to let go of absurd teachings like that of a supposed 100% Free Will.

The Bible does not recognize human free will. It is a wild mess of freely invented things that serve only one thing: the maintenance of the tradition about heaven and hell. It tries to free God from the dark side of the doctrine of hell by making man responsible for his final fate – and removing God from responsibility. However, this is a short-circuit and in the last consequence the denial of the divinity of God and the cross of Jesus Christ.

The doctrine of a 100% “Free Will” will hide a liberated view of God’s workings and promises. Uncovering this is threatening for some, but liberating for others. It is not a matter of not believing something in the Bible, but letting the Bible speak to that point. Let’s sort out toxic thoughts based on the Bible.

Some theologies are – in a comparison with the computer world – “malware”. They are harmful concepts that can contaminate entire systems and are always scaring people. If you really want to think Christocentrically, you have to start taking God at His word. The speeches of a “free will” do not belong to it.

Richard Imberg has long since internalized this. He seems to have been free to let go of this false teaching. The following words show healthy connections.