Excerpt taken from Predestined to Believe (2nd ed.)

Dear Wesley,

Thank you for your most recent letter addressing the topic of predestination and fatalism. I found it to be very thought provoking and it challenged me to think deeply about my own convictions. I must say in all honesty that I truly enjoy when someone brings issues to light that I might have never before considered. So for accomplishing that—and in such an articulate manner—I thank you. But in the final analysis, I do not believe your conclusion is accurate. I can understand how someone can be easily confused and think the two doctrines are similar but there is only a superficial agreement at best.

This topic is too important for me to let you persist in your confusion so let me be as clear as I can when I say that predestination is not the same as the pagan philosophical doctrine that emphasizes the subjugation of all events or actions to fate—specifically, fatalism. This perennial charge has been a constant stigma of God’s free will but as you will soon see it is unwarranted. I would tell you that nearly every generation has had to deal with this issue and so long as people are around to debate God’s sovereignty the issue of fatalism and predestination will continue to linger. And it appears that our generation has not been spared of this debate either. My desire is for you to be able to realize the two positions are not compatible and that belief in the latter does not lead to indifferent fatalism.

Let me begin by agreeing with one of your propositions, just to show you that I do not always disagree with everything you write. I’m not ashamed to admit that we can agree on theological matters every now and again. I would here point out that you were correct when you said that both philosophies assume the absolute certainty of all events. But, alas, that is as much as I can concede.

You might then wonder: Is not that one similarity alone enough to reject the idea of predestination? I would answer with an emphatic, no—and for good reason. The primary difference is that fatalism leaves no room for a personal God, whereas predestination holds that a sovereign and infinitely wise God appointed all events to happen for His purpose. Fatalism espouses the notion that all events come to pass through the workings of a blind, random, impersonal force which carries mankind through the odyssey of life. I think fatalism can best be summed up with the words que sera sera, whatever will be, will be.

The biblical doctrine of predestination, however, upholds that God from all eternity had one immutable plan for His creation. His decrees will never falter nor are they irrational or impersonal. All things work together for good for those who love God (Rom 8:28). Only predestination maintains the belief in a final cause, an idea that God has control over the outcome of all events. Nothing, therefore, is left to chance. Everything that comes to pass is part of a greater paradigm, one that cannot be fully understood by finite creatures because of our limitations. Remember this: The biblical perspective is that the world and all of its inhabitants were decreed before time began by an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-loving God.

Another irreconcilable difference as I see it is predestination’s view of free will. This doctrine, when understood correctly, preserves mankind’s freedom and responsibility to God. Despite the fact that God is sovereign over all actions and works everything according to His plan, God has ordained human liberty. The same cannot be said for fatalism since it does not allow for such autonomy. It does not allow for choice or for personal acts of freedom. In the fatalistic worldview, one is inescapably left with the realization that he has no power, no freedom, and no room for moral ideas. Love, mercy, and justice are reduced to subjective and meaningless terms in a world fraught with inevitable impersonal forces that are ultimately meaningless. Such a doctrine can easily lead to misery and despair while the doctrine of predestination gives hope for one knows that a sovereign God reigns supreme and gives assurance to His people that all things work for good.

Calvin was aware of this charge, and he emphatically repudiated the accusation that his beliefs were analogous to fatalism.

"Fate is a term given by the Stoics to their doctrine of necessity, which they had formed out of a labyrinth of contradictory reasonings; a doctrine calculated to call God Himself to order, and to set His laws whereby to work. Predestination I define to be, according to the Holy Scriptures, that free and unfettered counsel of God by which He rules all mankind, and all men and things, and also all parts and particles of the world by His infinite wisdom and incomprehensible justice." And again, ". . . had you but been willing to look into my books, you would have been convinced at once how offensive to me is the profane term fate: nay, you would have learned that this same abhorrent term was cast in the teeth of Augustine by his opponents."

I believe another difference is worth mentioning. Think for a moment if there can even be such a thing as a consistent fatalist. That is, does the fatalist’s worldview even comport with reality or does he live out his life inconsistent to his views? If the fatalist truly believed his position then he would have to reason something like this: If I am going to die today, then I will not bother to eat; nor do I need to eat if I am to live a hundred years, because I will live a hundred years anyway—therefore, I will not eat. But I think it is say to say that no one lives by this type of reasoning.

Now consider the Christian who believes in predestination. Is he forced to reason the same way to remain internally consistent with his position? Absolutely not. If God has predestined someone to live a hundred years then He has also predestined to keep him from the folly of starving himself—that is to say, God has also ordained the means (eating, exercise, et cetera) to achieve the prolonged life. Fatalism, however, does not allow for such rational reasoning.

So as you can see, there are some tremendous differences between the two. I would submit to you that anyone who carefully considers the differences between fatalism and predestination will not rightly conclude that they are one in the same. But do not just take my word for it. I want to share one of my favorite anecdotes that I believe paints a vivid picture and masterfully illustrates the difference between these opposing doctrines. The former principal of Princeton Seminary, Benjamin Warfield once wrote:

There is a story of a little Dutch boy, which embodies very fairly the difference between God and Fate. This little boy’s home was on a dyke in Holland, near a great wind-mill, whose long arms swept so close to the ground as to endanger those who carelessly strayed under them. But he was very fond of playing precisely under this mill. His anxious parents had forbidden him to go near it; and, when his stubborn will did not give way, had sought to frighten him away from it by arousing his imagination to the terror of being struck by the arms and carried up into the air to have life beaten out of him by their ceaseless strokes. One day, heedless of their warning, he strayed again under the dangerous arms, and was soon absorbed in his play there forgetful of everything but his present pleasures…suddenly, as he played, he was violently smitten from behind, and found himself swung all at once, with his head downward, up into the air; and then the blows came, swift and hard…It had come then! And he was gone! In his terrified writhing, he twisted himself about, and looking up, saw not the immeasurable expanse of the brazen heavens above him, but his father’s face. At once, he realized, with a great revulsion, that he was not caught in the mill, but was only receiving the threatened punishment of his disobedience. He melted into tears, not of pain, but of relief and joy. In that moment, he understood the difference between falling into the grinding power of a machine and into the loving hands of a father.

That is the difference between fate and predestination. And all the language of men cannot tell the immensity of the difference.

I hope that this letter clarifies the reality that fatalism ultimately destroys the meaning and purpose in life, while the biblical alternative of predestination holds that a loving and supreme Father is unfolding His eternal plan—all the while maintaining our personal freedom. I trust that whatever confusion you might have had has now been resolved, and I look forward to reading your response and answering any further questions you undoubtedly have about the doctrines of grace.

Your affectionate uncle,
Luke