The Active Voice and Human Freedom

Freedom, or free will, is a subject of considerable dispute withing Christianity. Are we free to choose God or are chosen from eternity past?

Now, exercising freedom its by very nature active. Thus, whenever we use the active voice in speaking or writing, we are making a claim to freedom in making that action, "I did [Y] to [X]." That which is other than freedom is passive. If we are not free, then we should rather say "I was caused by [X] to do/choose [Y]."

I wonder what room there is in the language of Calvinism and Lutheranism for using the active voice, and would invite those who have thoughts about this to comment. Strictly speaking, there is a fundamental denial of human freedom in these Christian faiths, out of an effort to faithfully describe human existance, not out of a desire to force people into passivity.

In other words, would it not be more proper for me to be caused to say that I am being caused to wonder what room there is in the language we are caused to use here for us to be caused to speak in the active voice -- if in fact our wills are not in fact free to act freely but are in fact bound and passive? In what ways would this last sentence not be a more honest appraisal to describing what was occurring if I am not free?

Or in another vein, there is something definately peculiar about theologians passionately defending the bondage of the human's will, since passionate debate presupposes that you intend to convince the other side that they need to revise their views. This presupposes human freedom to change one's mind and flies in the face of the first sentence.

Run with it.