Do we have free will or are we predestined?

[Wick Stick]

I've heard similar arguments from a Christian teacher I respect. If God exists outside of space and time (which He created), then He knows every free choice every free creature will ever make freely make and how those choices interact. And if He doesn't happen to like the outcome, He can act inside of space-time to change the conditions so that His creatures will freely make different choices. (God's a player too.) It's a complex iterative process that converges on God getting what God wants. God is sovereign; Man is free and morally responsible.

Is it truly free? I don't know.

Such a thing as will exists. Is there any such thing as a will that isn't free?

 

[Riven]

Divine foreknowledge is observational, not causative; human choice is causative, not observational.

Could events have played out such that Judas didn't betray Jesus?

 

[Mathētria]

Could events have played out such that Judas didn't betray Jesus?

Judas had the real capacity to choose otherwise; Grace continued to reach for him, and remorse could have saved him if he had turned remorse into repentance. The problem wasn’t that he could not choose differently, but that he would not. Divine foreknowledge doesn’t remove human freedom; it simply sees the free choice a person ends up making. Possibility is measured by capacity, not outcome — Judas had the capacity, even though he chose the outcome.

 

[Lambano]

Judas had the real capacity to choose otherwise; Grace continued to reach for him, and remorse could have saved him if he had turned remorse into repentance. The problem wasn’t that he could not choose differently, but that he would not. Divine foreknowledge doesn’t remove human freedom; it simply sees the free choice a person ends up making. Possibility is measured by capacity, not outcome — Judas had the capacity, even though he chose the outcome.

Did Judas REALLY have the capacity to do otherwise?

3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. (Luke 22:3)
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. (John 13:27)

Just in case Judas might change his mind at a critical moment, God allowed (?) Satan to take possession of Judas to make sure everything went as planned "before the foundation of the World" (Revelation 13:8).

Yes, God's sovereignty includes Satan.

 

[quietthinker]

Did Judas REALLY have the capacity to do otherwise?

3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. (Luke 22:3)
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. (John 13:27)

Just in case Judas might change his mind at a critical moment, God allowed (?) Satan to take possession of Judas to make sure everything went as planned "before the foundation of the World" (Revelation 13:8).

Yes, God sovereignty includes Satan.

The question is, whose Kingdom do we align ourselves with? (did Judas align himself with) There is the rub. Outcomes flow from that alignment as does water downhill.

 

[quietthinker]

Did Judas REALLY have the capacity to do otherwise?

3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. (Luke 22:3)
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. (John 13:27)

Just in case Judas might change his mind at a critical moment, God allowed (?) Satan to take possession of Judas to make sure everything went as planned "before the foundation of the World" (Revelation 13:8).

Yes, God sovereignty includes Satan.

We have no record as to how Judas became one of the twelve. That would be an interesting one. I wonder whether the parable of the sower might be relevant in his case?

 

[Wick Stick]

Did Judas REALLY have the capacity to do otherwise?

3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. (Luke 22:3)
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. (John 13:27)

Just in case Judas might change his mind at a critical moment, God allowed (?) Satan to take possession of Judas to make sure everything went as planned "before the foundation of the World" (Revelation 13:8).

Yes, God sovereignty includes Satan.

John 17:12 While I [Jesus] was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

 

[Mathētria]

Did Judas REALLY have the capacity to do otherwise?

3 Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. (Luke 22:3)
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. (John 13:27)

Just in case Judas might change his mind at a critical moment, God allowed (?) Satan to take possession of Judas to make sure everything went as planned "before the foundation of the World" (Revelation 13:8).

Yes, God sovereignty includes Satan.

In this transcript dated March 31, 1944, Jesus — according to Maria Valtorta — spoke the following about Judas of Kerioth (Iscariot). I’ve quoted His words from The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. 5:

Too many people think that Judas did something of little importance. Some even go to the extent of saying that he is well deserving, because Redemption would not have taken place without him, and that he is therefore justified in the eyes of God.

I solemnly tell you that, if Hell did not already exist and was not perfect in its torments, it would have been created even more dreadful and eternal for Judas, because of all sinners and damned souls, he is the most damned and the biggest sinner, and throughout eternity there will be no mitigation of his sentence.

Remorse could have also saved him, if he had turned remorse into repentance. But he would not repent and, to the first crime of betrayal, still compatible because of the great mercy that is My loving weakness, he added blasphemy, resistance to the voices of Grace, that still wanted to speak to him through recollections, through terrors, through My Blood and My mantle, through My glances, through the traces of the institution of the Eucharist, through the words of My Mother. He resisted everything. He wanted to resist. As he had wanted to betray. As he wanted to curse. As he wanted to commit suicide.

It is one’s will that matters in things. Both in good and in evil. When one falls without the will to follow, I forgive.

1. Judas really did have the capacity to choose otherwise​

The question “Did Judas REALLY have the capacity?” is answered by Jesus Himself.

Judas had:

• remorse
• grace reaching for him
• the ability to repent

Jesus says:

“Remorse could have saved him, if he had turned remorse into repentance.”

A person who “cannot choose otherwise” cannot be saved by remorse.
Therefore, Judas had real capacity, even though he chose the opposite.

This directly refutes the determinist reading of Satan entering Judas.

2. Scripture shows Judas chose betrayal before Satan entered him
Before any mention of Satan entering Judas, Scripture says:

• Judas went to the chief priests
• Judas agreed to betray Jesus
• Judas accepted the money
• Judas looked for an opportunity

(Matthew 26:14-16, Luke 22:4-6)

Only after these free choices does Scripture say:

“Then Satan entered into him.” (John 13:27)

This proves:

• Satan did not cause the betrayal
• Satan did not override Judas’s will
• Satan entered a will already aligned with evil

This is consistent with the scriptural pattern of demonic influence requiring human cooperation.

3. “Satan entered him” means possession — but possession through consent
The phrase indicates a form of possession.
But in Scripture and Catholic theology, possession:

• does not remove free will
• does not force sin
• does not eliminate moral responsibility

Possession is the result of a long cooperation with evil, not the cause of it.

The following inspired text confirms this with the strongest possible metaphor:

“Possession is the marriage of a spirit with Satan.”

A marriage requires consent.
It is not forced.
It is not imposed.
It is not predetermined.

This is exactly how Judas’s possession should be understood.

4. Jesus explicitly says Judas resisted grace — freely
Jesus lists the graces Judas resisted:

• recollections
• terrors of conscience
• Jesus’s Blood
• Jesus’s mantle
• Jesus’s glances
• the memory of the Eucharist
• the words of Mary

Then Jesus says:

“He resisted everything. He wanted to resist.” “As he wanted to betray.” “As he wanted to curse.” “As he wanted to commit suicide.” “It is one’s will that matters in things.”

This is a direct theological statement:

Judas’s damnation was the result of his will, not Satan, not fate, not God’s plan.

This is the heart of free will in Judas’s case.

5. God’s sovereignty does not require coercion​

Your logic is:

“Because God planned the Passion, Judas could not have chosen otherwise.”

But Scripture never teaches that God must force evil to bring good from it.

Instead:

• God foreknows free choices
• God uses free choices
• God permits evil without causing it

This is the pattern in:

• Joseph’s brothers (Genesis 50:20)
• Assyria (Isaiah 10:5-7)
• Caiaphas (John 11:49-52)

God’s sovereignty works through human freedom, not against it.

This is the correct understanding of Revelation 13:8.

 

[Mathētria]

We have no record as to how Judas became one of the twelve. That would be an interesting one.

Canonically, you’re right — we don’t have a record of how Judas became one of the Twelve.

Maria Valtorta, however, claimed that Jesus granted her visions of Gospel events and explained His reasons for doing so. According to her, these revelations were meant in part to illuminate certain passages of the canonical books, to show what His time as Master was like, and to help readers know Him—He, the Word—in His words.

In her inspired accounts, the first meeting between Jesus and Judas of Kerioth (Iscariot) appears in The Gospel as Revealed to Me (also known as The Poem of the Man-God), in chapter 54, "Jesus Meets Judas Iscariot and Thomas and Cures Simon the Zealot." The acceptance of Judas as a disciple is described in chapter 66, "The Iscariot Finds Jesus at Gethsemane and is Accepted as a Disciple."

And yes — it is an interesting moment to consider.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.

 

[Armour of God]

Canonically, you’re right — we don’t have a record of how Judas became one of the Twelve.

Maria Valtorta, however, claimed that Jesus granted her visions of Gospel events and explained His reasons for doing so. According to her, these revelations were meant to illuminate certain passages of the canonical books, to show what His time as Master was like, and to help readers know Him—He, the Word—in His words.

In her inspired account, the first meeting between Jesus and Judas of Kerioth (Iscariot) appears in The Gospel as Revealed to Me (also known as The Poem of the Man-God), in chapter 54, "Jesus Meets Judas Iscariot and Thomas and Cures Simon the Zealot"

And yes — it is an interesting moment to consider.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.

Judas did show remorse, therefore it is possible that he did repent and was saved. The bible doesn't tell us either way

 

[Wick Stick]

In this transcript dated March 31, 1944, Jesus—according to Maria Valtorta—spoke the following about Judas of Kerioth (Iscariot). I’ve quoted His words from The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. 5:

Why appeal to an authority that nobody accepts? Not even her own church endorses her:

the writings of Maria Valtorta—most notably The Poem of the Man-God (now often titled The Gospel as Revealed to Me)—are not approved by the Catholic Church as having a supernatural origin. The Vatican, via the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), has repeatedly clarified that these visions and revelations are considered literary work, not divine revelations

 

[Mathētria]

Judas did show remorse, therefore it is possible that he did repent and was saved. The bible doesn't tell us either way

Judas did experience remorse, yes — Matthew 27:3 says exactly that.
But remorse and repentance are not the same thing, and the text itself makes the distinction.

Matthew immediately shows what Judas did with his remorse:

• he returned the money to the priests (an act of despair, not conversion)
• he confessed his sin to the wrong people (“I have sinned…”)
• he received no grace from them (“What is that to us?”)
• and then he went out and hanged himself

Suicide in Scripture is never presented as the fruit of repentance. It is the fruit of despair — the opposite of turning back to God.

So Scripture actually does give us a direction:
Judas’s remorse did not become repentance.

And this is exactly what the following inspired transcript, dated August 1, 1943, emphasizes. Jesus—according to Maria Valtorta—said:

When Judas no longer believed in Me, in the satisfaction of money, or in the protection of human law, he killed himself. Remorse over his crime? No. If it had been that, he would have killed himself immediately after grasping that I knew. But not then, not after the vile kiss and the loving greeting, not then, not when he saw Me spat upon, bound, dragged away amidst a thousand insults. Only after having understood that the law did not protect him—the poor human law, which often creates or provokes crime, but afterwards washes its hands of its executors or accomplices and, if need be, turns against them and, after having used them, strikes them dumb forever by eliminating them—and only after having understood that power and money were not forthcoming or were too base to produce happiness, only then did he kill himself. He was in the darkness of nothingness. He cast himself into the darkness of hell. (The Notebooks: 1943)

On March 31, 1944, He also said that Judas could have repented, grace was still reaching him, but he refused every movement of grace and chose despair:

“Remorse could have also saved him, if he had turned remorse into repentance… He resisted everything. He wanted to resist.” (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. 5)

That line captures the scriptural pattern perfectly:
remorse is not repentance; repentance requires turning toward God, not away from Him.

So while Scripture does not give a formal doctrinal statement about Judas’s final state, the narrative trajectory — and the way Jesus speaks of him in Matthew 26:24 — points in one direction, not two.

 

[Armour of God]

Judas could have repented, grace was still reaching him, but he refused every movement of grace

The bible doesn't say he refused to repent
Your only assuming that

 

[Mathētria]

The bible doesn't say he refused to repent

Scripture doesn’t need to use the sentence “Judas refused to repent” for the conclusion to be clear. The Gospel shows what he did with his remorse: he despaired and killed himself. That is not the behavior of someone who turned remorse into repentance and received forgiveness. Repentance in Scripture always moves toward God, not away from Him.

 

[Mathētria]

Why appeal to an authority that nobody accepts? Not even her own church endorses her:

the writings of Maria Valtorta—most notably The Poem of the Man-God (now often titled The Gospel as Revealed to Me)—are not approved by the Catholic Church as having a supernatural origin. The Vatican, via the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), has repeatedly clarified that these visions and revelations are considered literary work, not divine revelations

First, the statement that “nobody accepts her” is simply false. Many do — including Saint Padre Pio during his lifetime, who explicitly encouraged reading her writings. One may disagree with him, but one cannot pretend such acceptance doesn’t exist.

Second, the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith's statement that Valtorta’s writings “cannot be regarded as having supernatural origin” is being misrepresented. That phrasing does not mean “the Church condemns them” or “the Church forbids Catholics from believing them.” It means exactly what it says: the Church has not made a declaration of supernatural origin — which is the case for the vast majority of private revelations, including many widely read and respected ones.

The DDF has repeatedly clarified that:

• Valtorta’s writings are permitted to be read
• Catholics are free to form their own judgment about them

If you want to avoid misinformation, the most recent clarifications about the DDF's statement are worth reading. They directly address the myths that keep circulating: Maria Valtorta and the 2025 Vatican Statement: Clarifying Myths, Facts & Supernatural Status. And, if you're interested, a substantial body of evidence supporting a supernatural origin of her writings can be found here: A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work.

 

[Armour of God]

Scripture doesn’t need to use the sentence “Judas refused to repent” for the conclusion to be clear.

I respectfully disagree. Without the bible saying that he didn't or did repent then I cannot be sure. Remorse is only a step away from repentance so it remains possible that Judas did repent in my mind.

By the way welcome to the forum

 

[Mathētria]

I respectfully disagree. Without the bible saying that he didn't or did repent then I cannot be sure. Remorse is only a step away from repentance so it remains possible that Judas did repent in my mind.

I understand your hesitation, but your conclusion doesn’t follow from the evidence we actually have. Scripture does not say Judas did repent — and it also does not leave the question open. It gives positive evidence that he did not repent.

Here’s the key distinction you're missing:

1. Remorse ≠ repentance​

Matthew explicitly says Judas felt remorse (metamelētheis), not repentance (metanoia).
These are different terms with different meanings.

• Remorse = emotional regret
• Repentance = turning back to God

The text never attributes metanoia to Judas.

2. Scripture gives the opposite trajectory of repentance​

Everything Judas does after feeling remorse moves him away from repentance:

• He returns the money to the wrong people
• He confesses to the wrong audience (“I have sinned…”)
• He receives no absolution
• He isolates himself
• He despairs
• He commits suicide

This is the scriptural pattern of despair, not repentance.

3. Jesus’ own words close the door on the “maybe he repented” theory​

Jesus says of Judas:

“It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” (Matt 26:24)

If Judas repented and was saved, that statement becomes impossible — because eternal life is infinitely better than never having existed.

4. The “possibility” argument collapses under the actual data
Saying “remorse is close to repentance, so maybe he repented” is like saying:

• “Cain felt angry, so maybe he later apologized.”
• “The rich young ruler walked away sad, so maybe he came back.”

Possible in the abstract, but contradicted by the narrative direction.

The text gives us:

• remorse
• despair
• suicide
• Jesus’ own pronouncement

There is no textual space left for a hidden repentance.

By the way welcome to the forum

Thank you!

 

[Armour of God]

I understand your hesitation, but your conclusion doesn’t follow from the evidence we actually have. Scripture does not say Judas did repent — and it also does not leave the question open. It gives positive evidence that he did not repent.

Here’s the key distinction you're missing:

1. Remorse ≠ repentance​

Matthew explicitly says Judas felt remorse (metamelētheis), not repentance (metanoia).
These are different terms with different meanings.

• Remorse = emotional regret
• Repentance = turning back to God

The text never attributes metanoia to Judas.

2. Scripture gives the opposite trajectory of repentance​

Everything Judas does after feeling remorse moves him away from repentance:

• He returns the money to the wrong people
• He confesses to the wrong audience (“I have sinned…”)
• He receives no absolution
• He isolates himself
• He despairs
• He commits suicide

This is the scriptural pattern of despair, not repentance.

3. Jesus’ own words close the door on the “maybe he repented” theory​

Jesus says of Judas:



If Judas repented and was saved, that statement becomes impossible — because eternal life is infinitely better than never having existed.

4. The “possibility” argument collapses under the actual data​

Saying “remorse is close to repentance, so maybe he repented” is like saying:

• “Cain felt angry, so maybe he later apologized.”
• “The rich young ruler walked away sad, so maybe he came back.”

Possible in the abstract, but contradicted by the narrative direction.

The text gives us:

• remorse
• despair
• suicide
• Jesus’ own pronouncement

There is no textual space left for a hidden repentance.



Thank you!

I'm still not convinced. I would need to see the bible actually say that he didn't repent. And because I don't see that I still think it may have been possible and so i say I'm not sure either way

 

[Mathētria]

I'm still not convinced. I would need to see the bible actually say that he didn't repent. And because I don't see that I still think it may have been possible and so i say I'm not sure either way

Scripture doesn’t need to use the exact sentence “Judas did not repent” for the conclusion to be clear.
In Scripture, repentance is always shown by turning toward God — confession to God, seeking mercy, returning to Him.

Judas’s actions move in the opposite direction:

• He confessed to the wrong people — not to the Father, not to Jesus, not even in prayer.
• He received no grace — the priests dismissed him.
• He despaired — despair is the opposite of repentance.
• He killed himself — suicide in Scripture is never the fruit of repentance.

If Judas had repented, the narrative would show a turn toward God.
Instead, it shows a turn away from Him.

So Scripture actually does give us the answer — not by a sentence, but by the trajectory of his actions.
Scriptural authors routinely communicate spiritual realities through what people do, not through doctrinal footnotes.

And Jesus’s own words in Matthew 26:24 (“it would have been better for that man if he had not been born”) point in the same direction.
That is not how Jesus speaks about someone who will ultimately be saved.

Your position — “maybe he repented, maybe he didn’t” — requires a repentance the text never shows, never implies, and directly contradicts by the outcome.

 

[Debp]

Much ink has been spilled by many theologians down the ages over this conundrum of predestination. The perplexity of this mystery as it relates to salvation has, not surprisingly, given rise to the heresy of "predestinarianism", of which Calvinism is one of its chief advocates. This heretical understanding of Paul's teaching concerning "those whom [God] has predestined [...]" is based on two fundamental errors:

• the absolute will of God as the sole cause of the salvation or damnation of the individual, regardless of his merits or demerits;
• as to the elect, it denies the freedom of the will under the influence of efficacious grace and puts the reprobate under the necessity of committing sin because of the absence of grace.

The following will hopefully be a needed correction of the errors it has occasioned.

In this transcript dated October 23, 1948, Jesus—according to Maria Valtorta—explained free will, as well as predestination to grace and glory. I’ve quoted His words from The Little Notebooks:



Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.

Everyone please note she is quoting a Catholic mystic who claims to speak for Jesus.