The Info List - Theological Determinism

--- Advertisement ---


THEOLOGICAL DETERMINISM is a form of determinism which states that all events that happen are pre-ordained, or predestined to happen, by a God
, or that they are destined to occur given its omniscience . Theological determinism
Theological determinism
exists in a number of religions, including Judaism
, Christianity
and Islam
. It is also supported by proponents of Classical pantheism such as the Stoics and Baruch Spinoza
Baruch Spinoza


* 1 Categorization of theological determinism * 2 Free will
Free will
and theological determinism

* 3 History

* 3.1 Martin Luther
Martin Luther
and Desiderius Erasmus
Desiderius Erasmus

* 4 See also * 5 External links * 6 References


Two forms of theological determinism exist, here referenced as strong and weak theological determinism.

* The first one, strong theological determinism, is based on the concept of a creator deity dictating all events in history: "everything that happens has been predestined to happen by an omniscient, omnipotent divinity". * The second form, weak theological determinism, is based on the concept of divine foreknowledge - "because God
's omniscience is perfect, what God
knows about the future will inevitably happen, which means, consequently, that the future is already fixed".

There exist slight variations on the above categorization. Some claim that theological determinism requires predestination of all events and outcomes by the divinity (i.e. they do not classify the weaker version as 'theological determinism' unless libertarian free will is assumed to be denied as a consequence), or that the weaker version does not constitute 'theological determinism' at all. Theological determinism can also be seen as a form of causal determinism , in which the antecedent conditions are the nature and will of God. With respect to free will and the classification of theological compatibilism/incompatibilism below, "theological determinism is the thesis that God
exists and has infallible knowledge of all true propositions including propositions about our future actions", more minimal criteria designed to encapsulate all forms of theological determinism.


Main article: Free will
Free will
A simplified taxonomy of philosophical positions regarding free will and theological determinism.

There are various implications for metaphysical libertarian free will as consequent of theological determinism and its philosophical interpretation.

* Strong theological determinism is not compatible with metaphysical libertarian free will, and is a form of hard theological determinism (equivalent to theological fatalism below). It claims that free will does not exist, and God
has absolute control over a person's actions. Hard theological determinism is similar in implication to hard determinism , although it does not invalidate compatibilist free will. Hard theological determinism is a form of theological incompatibilism (see figure, top left). * Weak theological determinism is either compatible or incompatible with metaphysical libertarian free will depending upon one's philosophical interpretation of omniscience - and as such is interpreted as either a form of hard theological determinism (known as theological fatalism ), or as soft theological determinism (terminology used for clarity only). Soft theological determinism claims that humans have free will to choose their actions, holding that God, whilst knowing their actions before they happen , does not affect the outcome. The belief is that their God\'s providence is "compatible" with voluntary choice. Soft theological determinism is known as theological compatibilism (see figure, top right).

A rejection of theological determinism (or divine foreknowledge ) is classified as theological incompatibilism also (see figure, bottom), and is relevant to a more general discussion of free will.

The basic argument for theological fatalism in the case of weak theological determinism is as follows;

* Assume divine foreknowledge or omniscience * Infallible foreknowledge implies destiny (it is known for certain what one will do) * Destiny
eliminates alternate possibility (one cannot do otherwise) * Assert incompatibility with metaphysical libertarian free will

This argument is very often accepted as a basis for theological incompatibilism: denying either libertarian free will or divine foreknowledge (omniscience) and therefore theological determinism. On the other hand, theological compatibilism must attempt to find problems with it. The formal version of the argument rests on a number of premises, many of which have received some degree of contention. Theological compatibilist responses have included;

* Deny the truth value of future contingents , as proposed for example by Aristotle
(although this denies foreknowledge and, therefore, theological determinism). * Assert differences in non-temporal knowledge (space-time independence), an approach taken for example by Boethius
, Thomas Aquinas , and C. S. Lewis
C. S. Lewis
. * Deny the Principle of Alternate Possibilities : "If you cannot do otherwise when you do an act, you do not act freely". For example, a human observer could in principle have a machine that could detect what will happen in the future, but the existence of this machine or their use of it has no influence on the outcomes of events.


Many Christians have opposed the view that humans do not have free will. Saint Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas
, the medieval Roman Catholic theologian, believed strongly that humanity had free will. (However, though he desired to defend a doctrine of free will, he ultimately ended up espousing what today would be known as compatibilism, or "soft determinism.") The Jesuits
were among the leading opponents of this view, because they held that divine grace was actual, in the sense that grace is among other things participative, and that humans could freely benefit from grace by a mediation between their own imperfect wills and the infinite mercy of God.


The concept of theological determinism has its origins within the Bible
as well as within the Christian church
Christian church
. A major theological dispute at the time of the sixteenth century would help to force a distinct division in ideas - with an argument between two eminent thinkers of the time, Desiderius Erasmus
Desiderius Erasmus
and Martin Luther
Martin Luther
, a leading Protestant Reformer . Erasmus in Discourses On the Freedom of the Will believed that God
created human beings with free will. He maintained that despite the fall of Adam and Eve
Adam and Eve
freedom still existed. As a result of this humans had the ability to do good or evil. Luther, conversely, attacked this idea in On the Bondage of the Will . He recognised that the issue of autonomy lay at the heart of religious dissension. He depicted an image of humanity manipulated through sin. Humans, for Luther, know what is morally right but are unable to attain it. He claimed that humans thus must give up aspiring to do good, as only by this could salvation be formed. Luther also believed that the fall of Adam and Eve
Adam and Eve
as written in the Bible
supported this notion.


* Determinism
* Calvinism