The Christian Apologist Blogger JW Wartick Offers Fodder for the Case that the Bible Makes No Sense

The Christian apologist blogger JW Wartick, in his  book review on Paul Helm's “Eternal God: A Study of God Without Time,” states that:

"Helm here turns to compatiblism. He freely admits that timeless creation entails determinism (170). Thus, he denies that humans have free will in the libertarian sense. But this, he argues, does not undermine human responsibility. I don’t think I can do justice to the nuances of his argument, but the basic idea is that Helm argues that just because past actions/events determine our actions in the future, that doesn’t mean that we aren’t responsible for what we do. As I said, this is a really, really watered down version of his argument, but I think this is one of the weaker points of his work.

Why? Because the idea of responsibility simply does not make sense on determinism, particularly when it is theistic determinism. For consider the idea proposed here. God has created all of time and space as one bloc. Thus, everything I do or have ever done was created by God once he brought the universe into being. Literally, everything I did, I do because God created the universe such that I would do x. So how could it be that I am responsible for doing x, if I never chose to do x. I simply do x because I have to, I have “already” done it, on the static theory. If I could create a time travel device, I could travel forward in time and see myself doing x, and could not prevent it, because God created the world such that I would do x. But the core of responsibility is that I chose to do x. While we punish people for things they do by accident (vehicular manslaughter, for example, or accidentally breaking a window), these things still resulted from prior choices (playing baseball near breakable window/driving carelessly). I simply do not see how any account of responsibility could make sense unless someone can choose to do what they do."

So, according to Wartick, "... the idea of responsibility simply does not make sense on determinism, particularly when it is theistic determinism." This is exactly right, and as a result, WARTICK HAS ILLUSTRATED THAT THE BIBLE MAKES NO SENSE. First, let me set this out as an argument so that you can see how it works. Secondly, I will show that the bible does espouse responsibility and determinism. Here is the argument:

P1. If there are parts of the bible that espouse the idea of responsibility and determinism then the Bible makes no sense.

P2. The Bible espouses the idea of responsibility and determinism.

C. Therefore, the Bible makes no sense.

Note, P1 is supported by Wartick's claim that "... the idea of responsibility simply does not make sense on determinism, particularly when it is theistic determinism."

Many scholars, including Christian philosophers from Augustine to Pelagius, as well as secular philosophers, have long recognized the conceptual problem of the idea of responsibility and determinism presented in the bible via the roles played by man and Yahweh in the drama of salvation. According to the bible, redemption can come only through the offering of Yahweh of himself, and if a believer is saved, it is ONLY through Yahweh's grace, and it is NOT of themselves. (Ephesians 2:8) On the other hand, the bible also claims that humans chose to sin in the first place, and are FREE to make their own choices, and it must be their own choice to accept Yahweh's salvation, as the bible is also full of admonitions to repent and believe (Acts 3:19) Thus, we have a contradiction in that according to the bible, everything is due to, and determined by Yahweh; and the claim that salvation is the result of the responsibility of man's response to choose freely. As Wartick points out--THAT MAKES NO SENSE!!

As a result of this nonsense, as I mentioned above, Christian philosophers have battled over this issue for centuries, and to this day we have multiple denominations and groups in which some believe in determinism, and some believe in free will, and some believe both!. The battle has been raging for a long time, as the early Christian philosophers such as Augustine and Pelagius disagreed concerning the issue of determinism and free will, and the disagreements continued throughout history, as noted theologians such as Jacobus Arminius espoused the idea of free will, whereas John Calvin and Martin Luther were on the side of determinism.   All this disagreement is due to the fact that the bible is inconsistent and contradictory on the subject of free will and determinism.

According to Arminius, there is such a thing as prevenient grace, which is divine grace that precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin, prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted, and if it cannot be resisted, then the person has no free will on this matter.  Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure, personal acceptance of the gift of salvation. According to John Calvin, humans are in a state of total depravity, and there is no free will at all due to Divine Sovereignty.


This table, taken from Wikipedia, summarizes the classical views of three different Protestant beliefs about salvation.

All these inconsistent and contradictory views are based on the bible. The bible espouses the idea of responsibility and determinism via the passages mentioned above, as well as my favorite passage from (Proverbs 16:33),  "...EVERY decision is from the Lord." These, and other passages such as Ephesians 1:11; Lamentations 3:37-38; James 4:13-15; Psalm 139:16 and Matt 10:29-30 support the case for determinism.  For more information and arguments for the case on biblical determinism, see Calvinism.

As Wartick pointed out: "... the idea of responsibility simply does not make sense on determinism, particularly when it is theistic determinism." If there are parts of the bible that espouse the idea of responsibility and determinism then the Bible makes no sense. As I have shown, that is exactly what the Bible espouses--the Bible espouses the idea of responsibility and determinism. THEREFORE, THE BIBLE MAKES NO SENSE!!