Determinism is the belief that every event is determined by cosmic forces.

You are reading this because it was determined by physics and chemistry.

You did not “decide” to read this.

You could not have done otherwise.

Determinism seems wrong to me.

I like to call Calvinism, “Spiritual Determinism”.

Instead of mindless, cosmic forces making everything happen…

…God makes everything happen.

You did not “decide” to read this.

God made you read this.

Every atheist in the world refers to a calvinistic Christianity.

Here are some quotes from atheists…I’m not linking to the originals because it’s too much work.

 

 

Atheist: That’s why the Abrahamic God is logically incoherent. (Medieval Islamic theologians were aware of this problem, incidentally. They solved it by deciding that God’s omnipotence supersedes every other quality, and recognized that that would mean humans had no free will — then they came up with a bunch of gobbledygook to explain how it’s still right to punish humans for sins they had no choice about committing.)

ME: If Calvinism is true and God’s omnipotence decides my actions, then I will be punished for sins that God made me commit.

The atheists are correct that God is an unjust tyrant.

Atheist: No matter what you do or say or think, the puppetmaster is pulling the strings, and operating the voice box.

That’s really kinda creepy.

It also means that all the evil as well as all of the good is not ‘us’ generated, it’s God generated.

ME: Yep. Calvinism makes God the puppet master. We dance on His strings. God is directly responsible for evil acts as well as good.

Atheist: My morality is MY morality. Yours is yours. If I screw up, I let myself down first, and Im not about to run around blaming a god or a faith or a lack of someone else’s beliefs on that.

ME: This is the atheist response to Calvinist doctrine. Morality is determined by the individual.

Atheist morality is completely useless. If I’m making up my own morality, it is impossible for me to “screw up”.  In a deterministic universe, nobody “screws up”.

Atheist: Western moral values and social justice owe virtually nothing to Christianity as preached by Jesus of Nazareth.

But they do owe much of the heinous brutality and complete lack of social justice to the doctrine as espoused by the Christian Church.

ME: I’m not sure what “heinous brutality” is espoused by the Christian Church.

Calvinism can’t hold this atheist accountable for these words. On Calvinism, God wrote this stuff.

The main reason I’m not a Calvinist is: I don’t believe determinism is true.
 
I believe people make choices.
 
That is what it means to be “in the image of God”.
 
God didn’t cause Cain to kill Abel.
 
God held Cain accountable for his choice.
 
Animals are driven by instinct.
 
People have the ability to “override” their instincts.
 
And…
 
…atheists are usually wrong.
 
Atheists don’t believe free will exists.
 
That’s a strong indicator that it probably does.

You gonna keep lurking forever or are you gonna join this exclusive clique?
Stop procrastinating. Click This.

Leave a comment

48 Responses

  1. The Bible actually refers to the saved as the elect. Do a search.

    The problem is that faith is a gift (Isaiah 49:7 is an example). We don’t choose God. He chooses us. And yet we do choose God? Jesus asks us to make a choice. Do I understand this? No. Nobody understands the mind of God. We are His creations, and we don’t even know what makes us tick. Ephesians 2:1-10 is probably the best example of the conundrum.

    1. My understanding is the “elect” is a category, not specific, predetermined individuals.

      I get what you’re saying about not understanding the mind of God. However, I don’t think we are totally ignorant about how God thinks. Christianity is reasonable. If this were not so, we could pull our religious beliefs out of a hat.

      I can’t unpack my entire “unhinged, Calvinism rant” in a single blog post. This article is simply to point out that Atheist arguments tend to be aimed at the doctrine of hyper-Calvinism, or rather a twisted version of it.

  2. The word you’re looking for is “Arminianism”, not “Armenianism”. Armenians (with a ‘e’) are folks from the country of Armenia. Arminians (with “i”) get their name from the theologian Jacobus Arminius, who disagreed with John Calvin on certain points. (My silly spell checker flagged Arminian – LOL.)

  3. I’m no Calvinist either. Not sure if Calvin was a Calvinist. But I agree with you, JB. These kinds of doctrines (total depravity, double predestination, etc.) have been the cannon fodder for atheist’s derisions (I would add, Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement (PSA), but I don’t want to open a whole new theological can of worms here). God is no respecter of persons. He sovereignly exercised His own free will to give us a limited level of autonomy that would allow us to genuinely respond to His grace, which is required for love. Our life with God is one of responsiveness, otherwise we are just automatons and it would be nonsensical to condemn someone who had no choice in the matter. And predestination is not about some exclusive club (as atheists argue) but God’s intent to make humankind His sons and daughters. That’s the intent, but only those who respond by faith are experiencing that intent. Those who don’t have chosen to reject the free gift and will suffer a just consequence. This does not mitigate against God’s sovereignty; it’s integrated into His sovereignty (He is free to do it anyway He wants!) And since He knows the end from the beginning, the temporal language only sounds like we had no choice in some places in Scripture. But, as Paul also said, they know what is right and wrong and their conscience will either justify them or condemn them.

    In Romans 9, Paul refers to the Potter’s house in Jeremiah. This was not about some arbitrary decision of the potter to reject the clay. The potter eventually throws the clay away if it continually refuses to form in His hands. This was the point Paul was making about Israel. They continuously resisted His will and went into bondage. This is not an argument for irresistible grace or double predestination. Quite the contrary.

    One last comment to your point. Atheists don’t have as strong of argument against Eastern Christianity for exactly these reasons. They don’t believe in any part of TULIP or PSA. I’m not Eastern Orthodox but I believe they have a better understanding of these things.

  4. [That’s a little disturbing, that you haven’t heard this from staunch Calvinists in the past. Because the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is about as staunch Calvinist as it gets, is very clear on this point. God’s “effectual calling” takes the form of God “enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.” The “their” in question is “all those whom God hath predestinated unto life.”

    Not that I want to defend Westminster or all its positions, just to say … the Calvinists you’ve met in the past might have needed to do some more homework. Also, sorry for getting bitten by the “something is wrong on the internet” bug! Leaving now.]

  5. God doesn’t punish anyone for sins they don’t choose to commit, but all of us have freely chosen to sin. God is under no obligation to save anyone, but he has freely chosen to offer salvation to some of us. Salvation is a gift. A gift is something that is freely given but there is no obligation to give such a gift to everyone.

  6. I think I am, kind of a Calvinist. Not one of those bearded guys on the internet all hyped upon red bull and testosterone, but more like a TULIP lover.

    A pastor once explained it as we are fish with the freewill to explore the whole ocean… within the aquarium walls.

    Something I have really come to believe is true, we don’t come to the Lord unless He first calls us. We are responding to His call. There is a temptation to pride ourselves on our own reason, to claim “I reasoned my way to the Lord,” or “I’m really smart because I chose Him.” I believe He chooses us and He will even hunt us down if He wants. Look at the story of Jonah. God has a way of making our freewill align with His will.

    Many atheists (and some Christians) act as if they’re in a shopping mall making a purchase. Gal told me yesterday, “I believe in God, just not your God,” as if she is just picking her preferred brand. We seem to be so obsessed with our own consent and choices, we forget that God has a choice, too.

    1. I don’t argue about God’s sovereignty. And I agree that free will doesn’t mean we can make all the same choices God makes. We must stay in the aquarium.

      I don’t think Armenians have cornered the market on arrogance though. Calvinist refer to themselves as “Elect” for crying out loud!

      My hitch is the idea that God punishes some people for wickedness they didn’t choose to do. That completely undermines the idea of a loving God who died to take away the sins of the world.

      In dozens of conversations with Calvinists, I’ve been told that I’m mistaken about this theology but nobody has ever explained how. Instead, I get scripture references. When I post a few scriptures of my own, they are ignored. Hmmmm…..what other group have we seen do that?

  7. Don’t try too hard, the air is a bit thin up here. 😉.

    Ok so, they were naturally hostile to God like Rom. 1-3 says, and thus dead spiritually with a dead stoney heart like Ephesians 2 and Ezekiel 36 says. Yet, they heard the gospel proclaimed by Pete and they responded with broken or melted hearts. Why? Could it be that the Holy Spirit moved on them like Jesus said in John 3, rebirthing them, changing their hearts from stone to flesh that responds properly to God’s command to repent and believe and be baptized (Ezekiel 36)?

    1. Sure. The Holy Spirit moved on them and convicted their hearts.
      Some of them responded to the Spirit, some of them did not.

  8. I think God doesn’t make us choose, but He knows what we will choose. Then that is perceived as making us choose.

  9. I fall on the free will side. I think predestination is a global term because God knows who will accept him but not picking people specifically so they have no hope. If Atheists don’t believe in it then I am even more convinced of it.

    1. I thought that way for awhile, but I’ve fallen away from believing it because God isn’t really “Choosing” anyone if they would come to him anyway, another thing I find problematic with that is that we don’t naturally want to come to God, but God has to work in us before we see how good his ways are

      1. God chose to offer salvation to “whosoever” believes in Christ. God chooses “whosoever”.

        When you say we don’t naturally want to come to God, you’re tacitly agreeing that we have a will that is separate from God’s. God therefore “has to work in us” to help us see the Truth. I agree with this. But this isn’t the position I’ve heard from staunch Calvinists in the past.

      2. Yeah unfortunately free will comes with a side order of sin nature that makes prodigals of us all. This is why we can appreciate Paul when he talks about not doing what he should and doing that which he doesn’t want to. Makes you thankful for grace.

  10. It’s been a stupid busy week… but I’ll make time for this (and I’ll REALLY try to not write a book in the comments…) ^_^.

    First, I want to note that I do believe there is a distinction from “Calvinism” and Determinism as noted by Jeffrey above. That said, I still do identify as a determinist – we have no “free will”.

    Secondly, some definitions. Determinism is that “all events, including moral choices, are completely determined by previously existing causes.” For Free Will, I’m assuming Libertarian Free Will (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism_(metaphysics)) which I think is justified, since the topic is “against determinism.” Essentially, LFW requires that some level of “randomness” be added to the equation for moral choices, since they are not determined.

    So, to be basic, we expect all other things besides our will to act in a determined way – every thing has a reason for happening. God knows the variables that caused the temperature outside to be exactly what it is (otherwise, God would not have been able to predict the weather in a given location, which I I don’t think that’s something that anyone besides an Open Theist would want to claim [I’m not addressing OT right now… but can If challenged on it ^_^).

    Besides “it feels wrong”, I don’t think there is a justified reason for thinking our choices are not determined. Because the only other option is that our choices have at least a hint of randomness (to the extent a choice is not detremined, it’s random). That also “feels wrong.” You don’t escape the problem by escaping determinism. The only way to “escape” this conundrum is to say that some element of our choices are neither determined or random… but that’s incoherent in itself.

    Finally, to address the “We obviously make choices,” type of argument, I would like to point out that computers also make choices all the time – that’s actually their purpose. A computer encounters an input, references it’s programming, and then based on the input and program chooses an output. If it had encountered a different input, it would have chosen to make a different output.

    I’m hoping to get a blog post of my own on this topic this week… sorry about the wall of text …

    1. Shoot…I was hoping the “it feels wrong” statement would slide through undetected.

      I was trying to communicate that when I order ice cream “it feels like” I’m choosing a flavor. Is there any reason, other than determinism, that I should doubt that feeling is true?

      1. I’m not saying you’re not choosing – indeed you are giving preference to black raspberry to double chocolate chip (that’s a choice). However, I think there’s a system of reasoning behind why you’re choosing black raspberry that meant that you were always going to choose black raspberry at that moment. Based on how awesome black raspberry is, the Hershey’s bar you had between meals, and you want to make room in the freezer by finishing the container – your programming chose black raspberry. You could not have chosen double chocolate chip, because there was not enough variables present to pick it (for reasons potentially unknown to you).

        1. I understand the point. We can identify a slew of variables that could potentially be factors in choosing black raspberry. We will never identify all of them. And ultimately, I am not choosing. I’m not aware of all the variables in my system of reasoning so what feels like choice is actually just ignorance. Right?
          I don’t understand what reason I have, other than determinism, for believing this.

          1. Hmm… what do you mean by choice/choosing? I don’t think we’re using those words in the same way. You’re saying ” And ultimately, I am not choosing,” and I would disagree with that statement. – you’re still making a choice, there’s just reasons that fully explain that choice.

          2. I agree with you that reasons are applied to all our choices. Free will is how we determine which reasons are given the most weight. The “randomness” to which you refer would be our emotions. The interaction of reason and emotion manifests itself as “choice”.

          3. “Free will is how we determine which reasons are given the most weight.”

            And that’s determined too, right? You’re just saying that we don’t know how that’s determined, which is the ignorance that looks like we could have chosen the other option (even though, that’s impossible in practice). Is that accurate to what you’re saying? If it is, then I agree with it (though, I wouldn’t call it free will… just will to be clear; libertarian free will implies the practical possibility of choosing the other option with all input variables being the same).

          4. I don’t think either of us know how choice is determined. I’m saying it’s a randomized, emotional “self”. You’re saying it’s an unknowable system of reasons. 🙂

            If determinism is true, this conversation was unavoidable.

          5. Agreed that we don’t know. It just seems to me that the only reason to reject determinism is because it “feels wrong” and I think you hit that same problem when you realize the only other coherent option is a role of the dice… that also “feels wrong”.

            I wonder how our conversation went in the other universes where we chose to pursue a different discourse ^_^.

  11. Hello friends!
    I would recommend that you check out Mike Winger/ Bible Thinker on the subject. He does a thoughtful examination of the relevant scripture.
    https://youtu.be/UO92L11L9jc
    As for me personally, I think if you have a worldview that forces you to reject free will, you need a new world view.
    Now you get to decide if I choose to believe that or if it was predestined. But doesn’t it stand to reason that, if you try to persuade me to change my mind that you believe that I have the freedom to do so? Doesn’t a person trying to convince you that you don’t have free will prove by that very act that they believe that you do?

  12. So, I’m confused JB. Are you saying you’re not a Calvinist because of what atheists say about Christianity, or based on what God says?
    Also are you saying regeneration and thereby justification is based on our free will choice, or just our sanctification? If it’s the latter, I totally agree. 🙂

    One more Q: outside of Christ, is our will truly free?? What does God say about this?

    1. “This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live” Deut. 30:19

      “With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.” Acts 2:40

      Regeneration doesn’t seem to be a prerequisite condition for choosing to yield to God.

      1. So they were dead in their sins like Eph. 2 says, yet they were baptized and saved?

        You don’t see the prophecy of Acts 2 in Joel 2 and Ezekiel 36:22-27?

        1. Spiritually dead is not the same as physically dead. The Jews asked, “What can we do?”. They were told to repent and be baptized. I can’t make sense of this stuff unless they actually had the option to do otherwise.

          1. A lot less humanistic theology would help. 😉

            //Spiritually dead is not the same as physically dead// what do you mean by this??

            They indeed were told to repent and be baptized. Before this commandment was given by peter, what happened to them that made them ask “what shall we do to be saved?”?

          2. Btw, I need to clarify. I believe our wills are free but not freed. By that i mean our wills are not autonomously free. We are free to will inside certain parameters

          3. Maybe, if God enables me, I will ascend to your level of spiritual understanding.

            I mean spiritually dead people are not connected to Christ. Physically dead people are corpses that cannot repent and be baptized.

            According to scripture they were “pricked in their hearts”. They suffered a pang of conscious. Then, they had to decide whether or not to obey the commandment.

  13. You make some interesting points here, but you’re outright ignoring scripture that clearly supports the other side

    For example, 1 Samuel 2:25 – …”his sons, however, did not listen to their fathers rebuke, for it was the Lords will to put them to death”

    (Feel free to read the preceding passages for some context)

    Another example, Exodus 10:20- “But the Lord hardened Pharaohs heart, and he would not let them go” (This same phrase is repeated again in Exodus 10:27 and again in Exodus 11:10)

    Real Calvinism says that humans have free will, but with limits. If God wants something to take place, humanity can’t stop him. That’s the problem with Armenianism- it makes God not omnipotent.

    Since God is the one who bought us salvation, he has the ability to extend that gift of salvation to anyone he chooses, just like if you made cookies, you could choose to offer them to anyone you wanted.

    I’m just curious, do you agree with the other parts of TULIP besides the U?

    1. The U isn’t what he’s criticizing… It’s the “I”.
      If we can’t resist God, then what’s the point of this puppet show?

      1. He’s criticizing both really, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace work together, in a way. I would like to ask you the same question, what’s the point of our existence if God doesn’t choose us? I find the purpose of my existence in being the servant I believe God has chosen me to be.

        1. I believe God has chosen to let us decide whether or not to worship him.

          You have CHOSEN to be the servant God wants you to be. That’s a great purpose! (Seriously!) But you could CHOOSE to be rebellious today instead. You can choose to tell God you want nothing to do with Him. That’s what makes you an actual follower of God, rather than a preprogrammed robot.

          1. Ok so I sort of agree with what you say and I sort of disagree. The Bible hits hard on predestination in a lot of passages, and I just wanted to make it clear to you I don’t believe that God just says “You’re gonna be saved no matter what! BAM! You no longer have free will and I’m just compromising everything you think”
            However, I believe, as RC Sproul states: “God chooses someone, and then intercedes in their life until it would be unreasonable for them not to believe in Jesus” (that’s not a direct quote, I read that in one of his books and I’m summarizing it) I’ve personally seen that in my own life, as God has bombarded me with evidence that showed me that he was real and that he wanted me in his family. God also did it with Paul and Moses, and he does it in different ways with everyone. Paul COULD have rejected God after he had his vision on the road to Damascus, but why would he? That’s what divine election really is, or at least that’s what I understand it to be

          2. If “irresistible” actually means they CAN resist, but they would be stupid to do so, then yes… I agree with you as well.

      2. Paul predicted and answered this question in Rom. 9:17-24. A passage commonly ignored (and I understand why) by semipelagians.

        1. So, Paul calls us “pottery” and John called us “puppets”…
          We agree, then?
          God is pulling the strings, and the only answer we can give each other is not to talk back?

    2. 1 Sam 2:25 is talking about Eli’s sons. These were bad guys. Verse 12 of the same chapter says they were “scoundrels” who “had no regard for the Lord”. They chose their death sentence long before verse 25.

      “If God wants something to take place, humanity can’t stop him. ”
      Of course this is true. Nature demonstrates this every second of every day.
      The question is whether or not God exercises His omnipotence over my will.

      “…if you made cookies, you could choose to offer them to anyone you wanted.”
      Yes. And then those people could CHOOSE whether or not to accept my offer.

      1. What you’re saying about Eli’s sons isn’t true. The Bible doesn’t say that they didn’t listen because they disobeyed God, rather, it says they didn’t listen because the Lord wanted to put them to death.

        Paul, also, could be described as a scoundrel who had no regard for the Lord, but he didn’t have a death sentence on his head for it. Instead, God CHOSE to reveal himself to Paul because God had a bigger plan for him. Like I mentioned with Peaches, Irresistable Grace doesn’t mean compromising free will.

        Let me make one thing clear real quick: I am not a staunch Calvinist. I think (to some degree) totally staunch Calvinism is illogical and Biblically contradictory. I just cant see how you can get around the scriptures that present divine election and predestination so blatantly, like Romans 8:30 and Ephesians 1:5

        1. God has the advantage of being outside time. I am not.

          Scripture is explicit that Eli’s sons rebelled against God. That’s on them. The wages of sin is death. God determines when everyone dies.

          Paul chose to surrender to God after his experience on the road to Damascus. Paul could chosen differently. If he had, the church would have been established by someone else.

          We agree that stanch Calvinism is illogical and contradictory. That’s why I wrote the post. 🙂

      2. Ok, I’ll also admit, the cookie example was pretty bad, but there’s something about your response that made me curious. You said “Yes, and then those people could choose whether or not to accept my offer”, by saying ‘Yes’ you believe that God DOES choose to an extent, but we also have a say in the matter. Am I correct, or did you just misspeak? 🙂

        1. Correct.
          God chose to create the universe. He chose to create mankind. He chose to make us in His image. Without God’s choices, I do not exist.

          God also chooses to allow us to decide our destiny. It’s incredibly risky because we might reject Him. He doesn’t want anyone to perish but He can’t force us to love Him. Love must be given.

          1. I’m sorry, but I just can’t accept that God completely allows us choose our own destiny without him having any say. Look at the Antichrist, for example. Paul calls him ‘the man doomed to destruction’ in 2 Thessalonians 2. The word ‘Doomed’ means: “to have an unfortunate and inescapable outcome”, which would imply that the Antichrist has no choice in what’s going on. I also believe that in order to make a choice, we need to have some sort of inclination to one side or the other. But what gives us that inclination? I think the only reasonable answer is God. God gives us these inclinations. I’m a firm believer that Humans were made ‘to Glorify God and enjoy him forever’, and that God “Works all things to the counsel of his will” (Ephesians 1:11) and I also believe that God “Calls people according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28) . I just can’t see how you could believe any other way without contradicting or ignoring scripture. At first, it doesn’t seem fair, and we “don’t like it” (to quote yourself) but I believe there’s no avoiding it in the end. I would like to convince you, but I can’t really see any way of doing that. Oh well 🙃

Dive into the discussion...

Archives
Subscribe to Blog via Email

Get my blog in your inbox!

Follow

Get the latest posts delivered to your mailbox:

Your Cart