Gods will vs mans free will

I started reading the Bible for myself back in 1968. Sometime around 1969 I
ran across that passage in 1John 3:9 and it really caught my attention.

As fortune would have it, there was a Protestant elder managing the welding
shop where I worked so I ran it past him to see if he could clarify it for me.
Well; his explanation was pretty much the same as yours and when he
finished I asked him if he was positive the explanation was true. He
answered: What else could it mean?

Well, I was a neophyte at the time so I pretty much had to go along with him
because I just simply didn't know any better. However; in time I discovered
that he was the victim of a logical fallacy, to wit: he assumed that his (and
your) explanation was correct because no one had thus far in his experience
come along with a better take on it.
_

Born again Christians are referred to as begotten of God.

You just made my point, not all decisions are moral spiritual, but everyday life decisions nonetheless.
How about where to go to college? How about what career to take? Where do we draw the line? Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could discern God's will perfectly? The reality is that it ISNT always clear, so we must take a leap of faith and hope it works out.

Now, where do we draw the line for God to get involved... I suspect this is different for each individual.
My savings are running dry, I need to work.. I'm looking at making deliveries on Uber... is that my choice or God's will for me. I was a senior vice president at an established investment firm, the good Lord has humbled me and that's OK.

There are two ways to become begotten of God.

One is by reproduction and the other is by regeneration.

Jesus is God's begotten son by means of reproduction: in point of fact Jesus
is the only child that God every produced by multiplying Himself.

Jesus is oft described as God's "only begotten" which is translated from the
Greek word monogenes which basically pertains to biological children as
opposed to foster children and/or adopted children.

Born-again Christians are no such thing as monogenes. They are neither
God's biological children nor the result of God multiplying Himself, instead,
they are the result of His handiwork, viz: born-again Christians are regenerated
creatures rather than divine beings.
_

That is true but only if you leave grace out of the picture. However, grace has never been out of the picture as the Lord makes His sun to shine and his rain to fall on the good and bad alike.

The heart is not inherently evil, indeed nothing in all creation is inherently evil, for if it was it would mean God created evil in His creation. He can no more do that than He can create something inherently good for only He is good inherently.

Good and evil are learned attributes. Our problem stems from the inherent corruption in our flesh, genetically formed and inherited from Adam which, means God cannot generate a human spirit, hence we are cut off from having any capacity to know God. (spiritually dead)

As the sinful nature in our flesh is against the Spirit of God, it works to deceive our minds along with the world system (which is based on Satan's way of thinking) as well as spiritual entities. So we have three things working against our mind (heart) so, is it any wonder the heart learns evil and is corrupted? If it were not for the grace of God at work from the moment each of us were born, we all would be doomed to being eternally lost and without hope and worst yet, never understanding why.

But grace does work which is why we are enabled to see the light and make our choice freely according to what we prefer, light or darkness. Those who prefer darkness shun the light but those who prefer the light are enabled to respond to God's call but the preference is ours and ours alone. God does not cause us to prefer one over the other. Therein is a mystery for each will never be able to relate to the other and why one chooses darkness and one chooses light? It simply is who they are. For those of us who prefer the light, we can only acknowledge the existence of those who prefer darkness but we will never understand (relate) them and vice versa.

Of course once one responds to the light and is showered in it, the question remains ... "how much light can one stand?"

You draw the line for the involvement of God whenever you find yourself in a circumstance whereby you can ask the question: Is this situation I'm in God's purpose for my life? Vocational issues are life issues and are subject to that kind of question. Whereas the color of the socks I should wear today are not.

Or take a situation I'm in: My wife wants to move so that she can be closer to her best friend who lives about 75 miles from us; and we're closing on our new home in less than a month I, on the other hand, do not want to move for several reasons. I prayed often about this situation because I take my stewardship responsibilities seriously, as well as my marriage vows. But I even considered staying in my house and letting my wife move, since we could afford to support two residences. But God works in mysterious ways. Shortly after having a long heart-to-heart conversation with my financial advisor, God put it into my heart to move with my wife; and He even graciously gave me a sense of peace about his will for my life in this situation in which I find myself. But this doesn't mean I now want to move but only that God wants me to, so I'm at peace with what He wants.

No-one said they were monogenes but the word used in 1Jn.3:9 is the same word used of believers in the other passages I quoted and is not monogenes.

The verse begins with "everyone" who is born (begotten) of God. The verse clearly is speaking of believers. Jesus Christ is not everyone, He is unique.

As a comparison, John 1:14 where it clearly speaks of Christ is monogenous but in 1Jn.3:9 it is gegennēmenos.

John is speaking of regenerate believers. If you are walking by means of the Spirit you cannot sin because it is the Spirit who is controlling you. This is what it means. It is the only good form of DUI (driving under the influence).

Oh...but the heart is inherently evil, since we inherited Adam's sin nature

The verse begins with "everyone"

And therein is the great paradox to man's will. As a moral agent, we can voluntarily (freely) make choices. On the other hand, because our hearts (the seat of all our faculties) are full of evil and corruptness our choices are inherently biased toward sin and evil; therefore in this sense the unregenerate man's will is in bondage to the world, the flesh, the devil and and even the Law since the law arouses sinful passions.

Where?

And therein is the great Calvinist paradox to man's will. As a moral agent, Calvinists say, we can voluntarily (freely) make choices. On the other hand, Calvinists claim, because our hearts (the seat of all our faculties) are full of evil and corruptness our choices are inherently biased toward sin and evil; therefore, Calvinists assert, in this sense the unregenerate man's will is in bondage to the world, the flesh, the devil and and even the Law since the law arouses sinful passions.

Yes. It's certainly a paradox for Calvinists, but not for those unfettered from Calvinism.

Jesus is God's begotten son by means of reproduction: in point of fact Jesus
is the only child that God every produced by multiplying Himself.

The Greek word translated "everyone" in your version is pás, which is a mite
ambiguous. Pás can range anywhere from one alone to many together.

Ambiguous words are a pain in the neck for translators and Bible readers
alike. They are one of the primary reasons why there are so many versions
to choose from out there. To begin with, it is virtually impossible to move
thoughts from one language into another without losing something; and
ambiguous words only make matters worse. Caveat Lector.

Another ambiguous word in 1John 3:9 is "seed" which is translated from the
Greek word sperma. It can not only refer to agriculture, but also to the
genetic material that people's bodies secrete for making babies. Now some
folks prefer that the seed in 1John 3:9 is a figure of speech pertaining to the
word of God, whereas others prefer that the seed pertains to heredity.
_

Yes inherited sin nature, not evil nature. Adam was not created evil nor did he become evil when sinned.

You understand what inherent means, yes? It means to be born with something. We are not born evil, we are born sinners. The sin nature is a genetically formed corruption in the body, not in the mind. If the mind (soul/heart) were inherently evil we could never be saved and Paul could never have written Romans 7.

And therein is the great Calvinist paradox to man's will. As a moral agent, Calvinists say, we can voluntarily (freely) make choices. On the other hand, Calvinists claim, because our hearts (the seat of all our faculties) are full of evil and corruptness our choices are inherently biased toward sin and evil; therefore, Calvinists assert, in this sense the unregenerate man's will is in bondage to the world, the flesh, the devil and and even the Law since the law arouses sinful passions.

Yes. It's certainly a paradox for Calvinists, but not for those unfettered from Calvinism.

And the rest of my post? Will you ignore the fact what you want begotten to mean in 1Jn.3:9
does not say monogenes?

Your understanding of free will doesn't exist because everything is bound to it's own nature but is that what is meant by free will?

Free does not mean to be without limitations. If such were the case, freedom couldn't truly exist for the universe would be a mishmash of random chaos.

The body of Jesus that is…

Well then he is right, our will is not free no matter what state we are in. So I do understand what you're saying and what you mean, and don't even disagree with it, but if this is the case then we should just leave the "free" out of it. Don't call being enslaved to your nature "freewill", and we can avoid this argument all together. Just to be clear though, when most people say freewill they're not talking about what we are defining here, they actually mean FREE will. That's why so many redefine it in these conversations, to make sure we're talking about the same thing. Freewill doesn't actually exist.