What biblical support do Arminians and open theists find for libertarian free will? Libertarian free will is the position that a person’s choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. Libertarians generally argue that we cannot be held responsible for our own choices unless we were entirely able to have made a contrary choice instead.1

I’ve included both Arminians and open theists in the question because my understanding is they would generally agree on their views and would both self-identify as holding the libertarian free will position.2

Please no philosophical or logical arguments or opinions. The question here is what case can be made for this view from the Bible. Answers are welcome from determinists and compatibilists as long as you think you can faithfully represent the libertarian position (always cite your 
sources if applicable!).



1 This is not to be confused with the political view known as libertarianism. Political libertarianism and libertarian free will, sometimes called metaphysical libertarianism, are completely unrelated. For a fuller definition see Theopedia › Libertarian free will. 
2 For an Arminian defending libertarian free well and self-identifying as libertarian, see Society of Evangelical Arminians › Libertarian free will. For an open theist, see ReKnew.org › Is Free Will compatible with Predestination?.
I will address some background issues prior to bringing the point home.

Yes, most believe in a sinful nature for mankind. I believe along with Dallas Willard and all those in the Wesleyan tradition that total depravity is not the description of mankind. It is interesting to note that Calvin himself believed that babies are born innocent. Luther on the other hand would require baptism for babies since he did not believe they were born innocent. So, except for that discrepancy, evangelicals believe that depravity is not total. Usually what the Calvinist means by this phrase is total inability. I would identify with Dallas Willard when he talks of sufficient depravity (as evidenced in Rom 3:23) At present there are less Calvinists than not, not that numbers prove a position. Once total depravity is accepted, the rest of TULIP just naturally flows logically.

I do not believe in original sin. What is sin? Sin is a missing of the mark. If one can miss the mark at the moment that one is born then we have more capability than we know. Babies are born innocent. Calvin got that right. Just because my father sinned does not mean that any of those sins were transferred to me. That is true all the way back to Adam. (c.f.Ezekiel 18:20)

I do believe in the Sovereignty of God as expressed in the Bible. I also believe eternal security, though not as expressed in the P of TULIP. The Sovereignty of God does not override the free will of man. The free will of man in no way threatens the Sovereignty of God. In fact God in His sovereignly has decided that the angels and man are to have free will. This in no way thwarts God's plans. I am stating these without reference to any particular scripture, but do have many in mind. I will get around to those shortly.I do not believe in total depravity. Let's say for sake of argument, man is totally depraved. We believe that Jesus is totally God and totally man. Scripture affirms this. 

How can Jesus be fully man if man is fully depraved from birth?... from Matt Elton (who is Monotheist while I believe in the Trinity)

The answer is that man is not fully depraved from birth. Man is born innocent. David in the Psalms said that man is born into sin - notice - not with sin. Psalm 51:5 David said that he would go to his son by Bathsheba -the son that died. (2 Sam 12:23) Paul talking in 1 Cor 14:20 has reference to babies being innocent as the basis for an argument. He assumed it, and assumed that his audience assumed it. Otherwise his argument would fall apart. There are other times that God is talking about the innocent blood of children being spilled in pagan sacrifices. (Psalms 106:38 and others - From Rich Deem's website) Babies are innocent. Realize also that when Jesus spoke of being born again, He was indicating that we needed go through a process to become innocent once again - as we were when we were born.

We do come to an age of accountability. Adam did and so do we. This is referenced by Paul in Romans 7:7-11. Adam did not lose perfection, he lost his innocence. 

What is the point of the book of Job? Surely Satan has free will or God would have just changed Satan's mind instead of working to convince him about Job's allegiance. And if Job had no free will then what was being determined - that Job could be a puppet? Oh and by the way, there is a verse that says that we will judge angels. If God judges man arbitrarily, then that is our example for how to judge the angels later. (1 Corinthians 6:3)

Matthew 22:1-14 talks about chosen. This chosen is the same Greek word as in Romans. Here Jesus himself explains how the kingdom is working. The first part of the parable signifies those who choose not to participate in the kingdom. Note that the King is enraged. If the King already knew that they would not choose to participate - why would he be enraged? The last part of the parable is about those who choose to participate in the kingdom. Then the last statement is "many are called and few are chosen" So riddle me this - If the Calvinist take was taken, then it should have been "many are called and many are chosen" - or "few are called and few are chosen"

If there is no free will, then at least five things do not make sense... repentance, prayer, evangelism, rewards, and punishment. Hence this is why some (most?) Calvinists do not adhere to no free will after salvation. Choice is implied in all the Bible, but is made most obvious in some scriptures (Deut 30:19 and Joshua 24:15)

God's sovereignty is not encroached on by our free will. God controls when we die (Sodom and Gomorrah, the Worldwide Flood, etc) As well as other means of affecting people without affecting free will (Blinding (Genesis 19:11), Changing their language (Genesis 11:9), etc.)

God is Sovereign and Just. If God's love is greater than our love, then it would seem to follow that God's justice is greater than our Justice. His ways are higher than our ways. His thoughts higher than our thoughts. (Isaiah 55:9) Note that in James 1:13  "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." If God does not tempt someone, then why would He do something more intrusive like harden someone's heart? Apologetics Press addresses the topic "Who Hardened Pharaoh's heart?"(see (1) below)

The Book of Life is interesting in regard to predestination. Exodus 32:32-33 is its first mention and where God says that those who have sinned will be blotted out of the Book of Life. Another place it says that those in the Book of Life are from there from the foundation of the world  "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:" (Ephesians 1:4) If the elect are from the foundation of the world, and they are known ahead of time, why would some of the elect be blotted out? Did God make a mistake? Do you see the problem here? The problem is resolved if we realize that the word elect is the word for chosen. And those that are chosen are those that chose first. And God made the system, grace, whereby it is possible for us to choose. Note that this implies that the Book of Life originally had everyone's name. Some references in Revelation muddy the waters, but they may be referring to people who have done the unforgivable sin and are just around until their death happens.

Predestination is not predestination to be saved. It is once saved being predestined therefore to be conformed to  the likeness of Christ. 

Who did Christ die for? All are wanted. Reference 2 Peter 3:9 and 1 John 2:2.

Also, what comes first belief or regeneration? (see John 1:12 and John 20:31)

Calvinism purports to promote and magnify God and demote man. What it does in the end is to demote God and promote and magnify man. What do I mean by that? Man is promoted to a place where he doesn't have to worry about his actions (or at least his salvation) - because they are all predestined - determined. He also is in a place where God needs him to further God's kingdom - God can't do without him, and so appoints him to salvation. God is demoted in that no longer is God "just" in man's estimation - and heaven's estimation. God arbitrarily chooses who He will and rewards them for God's efforts. Those who God does not see fit to choose to further the kingdom are punished without any recourse for something that they do not have any chance of affecting. This is the end conclusion of accepting total depravity. This is what atheists hear about and have a justifiably good argument that that God is not one to be admired and worshiped. (see (1) below)

So while we do partner together Wesleyan and Neo-Calvinist, I will not back down from promoting God and His true justice so that sinners see a great God - not a monster God. And promote letting the Bible say what it has to say. Using the obvious verses to interpret the harder verses to understand. (2 Peter 3:16 and 2 Tim 2:15)

(1) http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&amp;article=1205

(2) http://watchmanforjesus.blogspot.com/search/label/Calvinism%20Heresy