Like Jonah. He ran away and made up his mind. He later changed his mind because God kept hounding, coercing, and strongily intervening, as you put it. It seems like if Jonah did change his mind at all, it was done due to all of the factors listed and not done freely.
He could freely have chosen to ignore God or shake his fist at Him or curse Him and be obstinate.
That’s free will. That’s the difference in choice between Satan, who did just that, and Mary, who just submitted and said “Yes.”
By your standards, you’d have to say that Jonah’s “first” decision in this chain wasn’t free. He was influenced by past hatreds of the Ninevites, and fears of going before them, probably because of their brutalities, as well as inculturated prejudices and personal insecurities.
This is the nature of all sin, all deviance from the will of God. Poor choices, made because of personal infirmities, lack of knowledge, poor reasoning, lack of wisdom or ability to see the consequences, fear, faithlessness, pride, etc. This is why sin is insanity, why the Church asserts that following the will of God makes us MORE free, and sin makes us slaves.
It’s not that free will isn’t there, it is that our choices, when sinful, make us less free, in another sense. It’s a matter of degree.
Someone pointing a gun to your head and coercing you (forcing you) to renounce your Faith, and you doing it, is not a free choice at all. It was only done out of fear, our of survival, and because a gun was pointed to your head. Had this not been the case, you would not have renounced your Faith.
It’s just a difference in circumstance. It’s just a difference in consequence of the choice. It’s not a difference in the ultimate freedom of my choice.
By conducting a Mass in England during certain periods of history, a priest could be, later, once discovered, tried and executed. That’s a consequence of his action. He was still free to conduct Mass or not. The immediacy of the coercion is different than if a gun were immediately placed to his head, but the coercive attempt is still there.
It does not change his free will, only the consequences of his choice.
Free will itself is quite and completely independent from consequences and intent. Just because you intend or want something does not mean that you are not free just because the consequences of your choice don’t line up with what you want.
It really baffles my mind to even think of declaring “free will” itself to be non-existent when you don’t like the consequences of a choice, or don’t like that someone might try to do something to influence your choice or persuade you otherwise. But I guess that’s pretty symptomatic of the exceedingly deceptive indoctrination and poor reasoning inherent to our culture today.
It is, after all, the mentality behind abortion (I chose to have sex, but I don’t like that I got pregnant, so I should be able to kill my child, and the government should protect and even help me to do so, otherwise I don’t have any choice) and the madness around the HHS abortion mandate (you’re violating my freedom to choose abortifacients and sterilization because you’re not paying for them! you’re imposing your beliefs on me and making me un-free if you don’t do what I want you to do and facilitate my lifestyle!). It’s behind so many other social ills and threats, for that matter (contraceptive mentality, no-fault divorce, same sex “marriage,” etc). On reflection, this confusion is really pretty prevalent, apparently, and incredibly dangerous and detrimental to society and the individual.
So sad that people are so confused about this.
Hell doesn’t prove that free will exists. It may also mean that God, for whatever reason, destines certain people to hell.
You’re right, that IS a possibility. For it to be, you’d have to assert that your choices don’t matter, and that God (arbitrarily?) inflicts hell upon people. You’d have to say that God is not all good.
It is also possible that God could be so persuasive and merciful, ultimately, that everyone would
freely, in the end, choose to be with Him forever in Heaven.
Free will is more strongly displayed, however, by the existence of hell–since it demonstrates that we can freely choose God in Heaven, or choose to reject Him if we want, and remain in hell.
Judas certainly didn’t lack faith because he realised the enormity of his crime. It is understandable that he lacked hope after betraying his Master but it is impossible to know to what extent he was responsible. Having failed to tempt Jesus it seems likely that Satan would resort to more than one of the apostles to bring about His downfall. Peter fell into his trap and virtually betrayed his Master even though he was the Rock on which the Church was built. It demonstrates how those who believe they are close to God are in danger of damnation. To judge others is a form of pride…
