Scott Warren, ETS National Conference, November 17, 2005
Page 3
monumental choices as seeking God or independence from him, obedience or
disobedience to God, pursuing (or not) God's direction for one's life, and how one
responds to a comprehensible presentation of the Gospel. I suggest that humans are
generally free in such choices, in the natural sense of freedom. Humans can freely
choose whether to turn to God, or away from him.
The Nature of Freedom
Understanding that a free person can do what (s)he wants, we can conclude
that one's free choices reflect one's preferences. There are two basic factors in free
choices: ability and inclination (as expressed in preferences). One is free to choose
where one has the ability to act. However, within the parameters of one's abilities,
one will choose only according to one's inclinations. For an action to be
undertaken freely, both the ability and the inclination must be present on the part of
the actor. Thus in a criminal trial, the prosecutor needs to demonstrate that the
accused had the ability to commit the crime (i.e., necessary opportunity and means
were available, and there is no alibi inconsistent with the circumstances of the
crime) and that (s)he had the motive (or inclination) to do so. A responsible jury
will not rightly conclude that an accused party is guilty unless both elements are
proven.
The fact that free choices reflect personal inclinations is critical in moral and
legal guilt. This reflects the understanding that inclinations are the decisive reason
behind free choices. Further, these inclinations are not arbitrary; they reflect a real
disposition of the person that would be reasonably likely to drive similar choices
should similar circumstances
4
arise in the future.
4
Both personally and externally.