Skeptical Theism, Predestination, and our Cognitive Limitations (Matt Manry)

I recently read a very helpful article by Derek Rishmawy titled, “Calvinism and the Problem of Evil (Or, Dealing with the Sparsity Objection).” In this article, Rishmawy deals explicitly with divine sovereignty, libertarian free will, and the problem of evil. All-in-all it was a very helpful article. Nevertheless, in the conclusion of his article, he briefly mentioned some quick thoughts about predestination that really got me thinking about how skeptical theism can be applied to the doctrine of predestination. In the following paragraphs, hopefully, I can demonstrate how recognizing the cognitive position that we are in as human beings should impact the way that we approach the doctrine of God’s election.

A (Brief) Overview of The Reformed View of Predestination and Salvation

To put it briefly, Calvinists have usually argued that the Bible teaches that God elects some to salvation and some to eternal damnation. The Westminster Confession of Faith, a document central to the Reformed faith, puts it this way: “By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.” A few of the main biblical texts that Calvinists typically point to in support of the doctrine of predestination are Ephesians 1:4-5, Romans 8:28-30, and Romans 9:10-24. When it comes to the doctrine of salvation, Calvinists are typically monergistic (This is the belief that humans are born again only by God’s working). With all of this stated, I want to now turn and talk about how skeptical theism stands in concord with the Reformed view of predestination.

Skeptical Theism and Predestination

Skeptical theism is essentially the view we should be skeptical of our ability to discern God’s reasons for acting or refraining from acting in any particular instance. Now usually skeptical theism is used as a response to the evidential problem of evil, but I think in this case I can definitely apply skeptical theism to how one should look upon the Reformed view of predestination.

Our Cognitive Limitations and the Doctrine of Predestination

There are a lot of people who look at the Reformed view of predestination and say, “I cannot accept that God would predestine some for heaven and some for hell.” This seems like a rational response. As human beings, in terms of fairness, we want to envision that God has given us all free will so that the ball is in our court in regards to whether or not we accept/reject him. Logically, it also seems to fit very nicely into our theological boxes to assume that God gives everyone an equal chance. I definitely understand this. But let’s assume for a moment that this isn’t exactly the way things are.

As Christians, we must do our best to systematize our doctrine with what we have been given. This is why the Bible has to always be central in all of our theological discussion. So let’s assume once more (for the sake of this post) that the Bible does not teach anything about libertarian free will. If that is the case then we have the responsibility to try and understand what the Bible teaches. And even though we might not be able to fully grasp the doctrine of God’s election, it does not follow that it is not the sound biblical truth. Think about this for a moment. A five-year-old child is going to have an extremely difficult time grasping the reasons why his Mother and Father do some of the things that they do on a daily basis. This is to be expected. The cognitive distance between the child and his parents is extreme. To the child, it seems very hurtful and unfair that Daddy has to leave and go to work each and every morning. In the child’s mind, he just can’t understand why Daddy would do this. It’s just not right.

However, as we all very well know, this child’s Father is in fact going to continue going to work throughout the week. He explains to his son, “You know that Daddy loves you and you just have to trust me. I promise to be home later today when I’m done with work. Daddy has to make money so that we can survive!”

The reason I have used this example is to show you the importance of recognizing cognitive limitations. Humble theology should always recognize the infinite gap that lies between the mind of God and the mind of man. So even though libertarian free will and a synergistic salvation scheme might make more logical sense (in our human minds), it does not necessarily follow that this is in fact the way that God works and operates.

So when we approach the Bible, we must be willing to live with some of the tension. This is why skeptical theism can help us when approaching tough theological doctrines. While a theology of mystery says that predestination is a doctrine that is simply difficult for us to understand; skeptical theism says that we shouldn’t be surprised if there are certain theological doctrines that we can’t fit nicely into a box. This is due to our cognitive position. We should actually expect not to be able to fully fathom the doctrine of predestination if skeptical theism is rightly applied. Hopefully, I’ve at least demonstrated some of the harmonies that exist between skeptical theism and predestination in this post.

Matt Manry is an editor for Credo Magazine as well as the Assistant Pastor at Life Bible Church in Canton, Georgia. He is currently pursuing his Ph.D. at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom.

Originally published at matthewwmanry.com.