I have heard it in support of free-will (free-agency) before. Let it be known before I write the way the argument was presented to me, I do not agree with these arguments. First the person pointed out that when God loved the world it means the world collectively, everyone ever born. and since God, loves the everyone, only those who profess belief in Him, of their own free-will are different from those that don't. Their statement of free-will is in the phrase whoever believes (or, whosoever believes, for the King-James-only-ist). Belief is an active choice made in the freeness of each man's will. since God loves everyone, it's up to us to stand up and believe, and seperate ourselves from the crowd. Now, as is pointed out by Marie, the context speaks of being born again. Who causes him/herself to be born?

My contention is with the phrase Free-Will, itself. What people hold up and revere in popular, semi-pelagian belief systems, is more free agency than free will. We cannot deny that we have a free will, temporally, though it is contingent to the almighty, infinitely. Any choice we make, whether it is a trivial choice, like rolling over to hit the snooze button; or a moral choice, do I tell the truth, or is it not beneficial to me to do so, is a choice we make personally, freely, based on circumstances surrounding us at the moment, lessons learned in the past, fear, or joyous expectation of consequences... But, the choice that is spoken of, and implied by the term Free Agency, is that at any given moment, a person, apart from who he/she is, past lessons, future expectations/fears, a person can make a choice. there is never a point when a person is seperated from the past, present, or future. So, to make a long story interesitng, whether a person believes that he is a sinner in the hands of an angry God, or not, determines the choice for, or against believing in Christ for our salvation. And that realization that we are substantially indebted to an infinite God, does not come through any means but that God gives us the desires of our hearts. A person will make a choice based on their strongest inclination at the given decision time, and without Christ's intervention, our will remains tainted against him. that's our nature. Oh the depths, and the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! So, in summary:

1) We make choices, which are our own, but are under the hand of God. (Prov. 16:4, Jer. 29:1, Gen. 50:20)

2) We cannot choose good until we are made good (John 6:65, especially)

3) We are, by nature, so not good that we can't even want/will to be good (Rom. 3)

4) So we must be born again (John 3), drawn as water from a well (John 6), made alive by God through Christ (Eph 2).

Anyways, that's my two-bits, i have trouble debating free-will, because of today's connotative use of the English language. I'm a stickler for definitions, so whenever a discussion is started on any point of doctrine, definitions must be presented on both sides. If a person cannot define his or her position, the debate is over until they can. In truth, introduction of a new term isn't the answer, either, but does often help to order in my own mind what it is, exactly, that I am debating. God has mysteriously ordered our lives, and kept us from being robots, by allowing us to be decision-makers. Contingency is such a beautiful thing to the Christian, and such a hateful thing to the unbeliever. Oh that unbelievers will be led to the truth of the foolishness of trying to put themselves in the place of God, and turn to Him, and yield, if God wills, to His almighty hand! By greatest comfort in life and death, is that my God is in control of both!!

Grace is but glory begun;
Glory is but grace perfected!
- Jonathan Edwards