A slightly scientific look at Calvinism vs. Arminianism
If you are looking for a theological debate that stretches across many generations, look no further than the Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate. Ever since the 1600s, and probably even before that, theologians have been grappling with this problem of predestination vs. free will and the debate still rages on today.
For those who would like to catch up on the debate, just do a Google Search. Here is a link to a quick comparison between the two points-of-view for those who are lazy or don’t know how to use Google.
Now it is important to realise that many people may subscribe to one of these two points of view with minor squabbles on some of the details. For example, many Calvinists would point out that they do in fact believe that Jesus died for everyone, and not only the elect.
Whatever the case may be, this article will not attempt to prove or disprove either of these points of view from a Biblical perspective, there are hundreds of other websites where you can go find strong biblical evidence for both views. This one is about science!
Well ok, maybe we will mix in a little philosophy as well.
The main issue
Most people believe that science and theology don’t mix well, and should rather be stored in separate rooms whenever possible. Well I don’t. I think science and theology could be wonderful partners when you apply them correctly. There are plenty of examples where theology provides the “why” to scientific questions, while science provides the “how” to theological questions.
Let’s consider one of the central questions in the C vs A debate: “Do we have a free will?” While this debate originates from the interpretation of a multitude of Biblical references, we should ask ourselves whether it would be possible to gather some information from extra-biblical sources. It is interesting to note that the whole question of free-will has been around for many ages in the philosophical and scientific circles as well. It is by no means a question that is unique to theologians and Bible-ponderers.
Arminius suggests that the choice to accept Christ’s salvation is wholly and uniquely our own choice and that our will is completely and utterly free.
Calvin, on the other hand, suggests that our salvation is completely and utterly beyond our own choice in the matter and that free will is an illusion. In fact, many Calvinists make statements like these.
“If there is one maverick molecule in the universe, God is not God.”
– R.C. Sproul
“Not only is every atom and molecule, every thought and desire, kept in being by God, but every twist and turn of each of these is under the direct control of God.”
– Paul Helm
When we “choose” to follow Christ, it is because we were predestined to do so. Also note that these two quotes most certainly make strong assertions on scientific topics. I will thus take these two statements as an invitation to scientist to weigh in on the debate. Let’s explore the topic of free will from a philosophical and scientific perspective.
Free will: Our most valuable possession
Why is it that democracy is such a wildly popular political system? Why is it that the western world considers anything other than a democracy as a human rights “violation”? If one consider the central tenets of socialism, it is a much more sensible systems (at least in theory) which brings about equality and security to everyone, and equality and security are the two qualities that every politician tries to sell every time they get onto a pedestal.
The problem is that that socialism comes at the price of giving up your free will to a certain extent. Democracy allows you to, and celebrates our ability to exercise our free will in choosing whom and how we would like to be governed, even at the potential price of equality and security.
Politics is by no means the only place where we see this phenomenon. A multitude of books and movies have shown us that people will gladly give up Utopia for the privilege of making their own choices.
In The Matrix, Neo gave up his old life for his free will and a world that is already utterly messed up by the machines. In The Giver, a prefect world where everything is clean and everyone is happy (but ignorant) is put in jeopardy so that everyone can know about their history (and associated pain) and make their own choices. The list of movies and books addressing this topic goes on and on. Divergent. The Adjustment Bureau. V for Vendetta. Inception. The Truman Show.
It seems to me as if we as people have an inner longing to be able to make our own choices. We will exchange a happy life for a free life every day of the week.
Another topic that may give us some insights into whether we have a free will or not, is the whole question of morality. In a previous article I argued that there is indeed a connection between morality and the fact that we are created beings. I made the point that morality is a by-product of us being human beings created in God’s image and hence all people, Christians or not, have the ability to inherently decide between good and evil. What good is morality if we are not afforded the opportunity to exercise a choice in the matter?
If we look at our everyday experience it appears to us whether we have a free will. It also seems as if we a humans will go to extreme lengths to fight for our freedom, the ability to choose our own destination for better or for worse. Any government, institution or god that comes in our way is apparently subject to having a rebellion in their futures.
We should however still concede at this point that we cannot rule out the possibility that our free will is only an illusion. If we live in a deterministic universe, it is quite possible that our brains are simply preconfigured machines telling us that we have a free will, all the while dancing to the deterministic chemical reactions governed by the laws of the universe. Let’s consider whether physics even allows for the possibility of free will to exist.
Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of
There has never been a more fantastic time to be alive as a scientist. Or more confusing. In the last century we’ve had brilliant minds come up with some of the most accurate mathematical theories and descriptions of how our universe works. Most of these major breakthroughs can be grouped into one of the two major theories, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.
The problem with our modern scientific theories is that they are surprisingly unintuitive. Trying to explain the main tenets of quantum theory to your grandma should best be left to experts and crazy people. QM (quantum mechanics) is a case of truth being much stranger than fiction.
One of the weirdest findings in QM is that the observer of an experiment seems to have an influence on the outcome of an experiment. There are certain experiments that show that particles will behave in particular way (like going through two slits at the same time), but once you try and find out through which of the two slits it actually travels, it will suddenly only go through one of the slits. Refer to this Youtube video for a nice explanation of the double-slit experiment and the effect of the observer on the experiment. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc).
For some reason, which we don’t understand yet, it appears as if we as observers may actually influence the world around us on the quantum scale. It is important to note that this is a prediction from the math, and not simply because our ability to do proper experiments are lacking. We don’t experience this during everyday life, but the effect is certainly very real.
Now up to this point, everything I’ve mentioned in this section is verifiable scientific facts. You are most welcome to Google it and learn a bit more about our strange quantum world. But what does it all mean? What does this have to do with free will? Let’s bring on the speculation…
Uncertainty and free will
Let’s consider the chemical interactions that goes on at each of the trillions of connections between the synapses in our brain. These chemical reactions are governed by the laws of our universe and we can describe them mathematically using our theory of quantum mechanics. Given the fact that an observer can intimately become involved in the outcome of a quantum experiment, I don’t think it is unreasonable to consider the possibility that the uncertainties contained in each of these chemical reactions could somehow be influenced by us as an “observer”. The fact that we are a conscious beings could potentially allow us to “control” or influence these interactions on quantum scale which we would then experience as the ability to make a choice, free will.
One could also reason that this would lead to a circular argument, a bit of chicken and egg and which came first. I am going to short-circuit the long line of reasoning that will eventually bring us to the whole philosophical debate of whether consciousness resides in our brain (as a chemical by-product) or whether consciousness is meta-physical in nature. I personally find it hard to consider the complexities of the human mind to be purely a physical effect and I thus subscribe to the idea that our minds and will are super-natural in essence. Since this article is about a biblical debate in the first place, I refer to the fact that the Bible refers to us as souls (the part of us that is made in God’s image) that will live on after death. The soul’s ability to “will” something is probably the driving force that influence the quantum uncertainties in our brain in the same way an observer would influence the outcome of a quantum experiment. If you find this conclusion a little too strange to swallow, do recall that I already mentioned that this is pure speculation.
The important point that I am trying to make though, is that there is enough strangeness in the laws of our universe to allow for the existence of free will without going outside the realm of reality as described in QM. Our universe appears not to be deterministic as it is understood by R.C. Sproul and Paul Helm mentioned earlier.
Maverick Molecules?
So if there are all these quantum uncertainties in the universe, and if we as humans have the ability to exercise our free will by “manipulating” these uncertainties, where does this leave God’s sovereignty? Does this mean God is no longer in control of every single atom in the universe?
Many people find it hard to even consider that God could still be in ultimate control without constantly tending to each and every particle and atom, every single moment of the universe. For me as an engineer, I would find it baffling that a God of infinite wisdom could not figure out how to put laws in place to automate these minute pieces of details. When I write a piece of computer code, I make sure that I make the computer do all the hard lifting by doing all the mundane calculations that I need to design the item that I am working on. All these calculations in the code happens strictly according to the rules that I write into the code. Even though I do not manually add and multiply each of the millions of calculations, I am still the author and creator of the results and final product at the end of the day. Why would we consider God any less powerful of in control when He does the same? Quite to the contrary, when I as an engineer consider the fine-tuning and brilliance built into the laws of physics, I stand amazed at the might and wisdom of an Almighty God. Those ‘maverick molecules’ operate well inside the confines of the laws God wrote into the fabric of the universe and in no way subtracts from God’s sovereignty.
Time and Relativity
If we really have a free will, does that mean we can “surprise” God by doing something unexpected? Can He still be all-knowing and allows us to have a free will?
The second big breakthrough of the previous century was Einstein’s theories of relativity which discussed the link between time and space and gravity. In 1988 Steven Hawking and Roger Penrose received the Wolf Prize for Physics for additional work done on Einstein’s theories. One of the significant findings of their work was that time, the fact that stuff happens sequentially, is an inherent property of our universe. That means that any entity outside of our universe would not be subject to our experience of time. It is pretty impossible for us to explain what that would be like, but we can make the following conclusion.
- God created this universe and is not part thereof
- Everything that is part of our universe is subject to our time
- Thus God is not subject to our time.
It would thus be reasonable to assume that God would be able to see or move forward and backwards through what we call “time”. How would this work? It is impossible for us to really tell, but maybe it is like a movie on a film reel. Since we are not part of the film reel, we are free to skip all the way to the end and study a single frame near the end in as much detail as we want. We can take as long as we want. For the actors “trapped” in the movie, life happens at 25 frames per second and there is no stopping or going back. They would even be making their own choices and decisions that will influence the rest of the movie. As ror me standing on the outside, I can go peak what will happen at the end without influencing their free will.
If (and we have no way of knowing) this universe is like a movie reel and God is standing on the outside, independent of our time line, it is quite possible to see that God would know who would be accepting or rejecting Him as saviour from the very beginning without compromising our ability to make a choice for ourselves or surprising Him with such a choice.
Conclusion
While the theological debate on free will still rage on, I propose that the laws of our universe as described by quantum mechanics and relativity allows for the possibility of us as humans having a free will without violating God’s sovereignty or all-knowingness, or any known laws of physics.
While I have speculated on how this might work, it remains just that, speculation. Even so, there are no physics that, as a matter of principle, prevents us from having the ability to make a free choice.
We also see that humans throughout all ages have had a yearning to have our own free choice in a matter, even if it is to our own detriment.
While science and philosophy should not have the final say in the theological debate, it is clear that modern science and philosophy are more consistent with Arminiasm than Calvinism.
Implications of having Free Will
Personally I am of opinion that God provides us with a completely free option of accepting or rejecting Him. He will not force His offer of salvation onto anyone. I believe we will all die one day and then we will be standing before the God who created our universe and who wrote the rules. The same God who points out to us that we are desperately wicked at our core and stand no chance of impressing Him with our good works. The same God, knowing that we cannot free ourselves from this burden, became one of us and died on the cross to pay the price that we deserved so that we can one day be in His presence and fulfil the purpose for which we were created.
The very same God who created QM and relativity which allow you the option of REJECTING this offer of salvation and rather stand before Him legally liable for your own works. Your choice.