The Atheist Argument:

“Essentially, there’s no free will because God knows it all.

So, from a scientific point of view, there’s no free will if you believe in materialism.

And from a religious point of view, if you believe that God knows everything, including the future, then there’s no free will.”

The Apologetic That Impeaches This Argument:

“If a scientist actually claims that he’s driven to determinism by his theories, then he can’t be rational in accepting his theories.

Because the very rationality of accepting a scientific theory presupposes freedom.

You have to assume that you chose to believe this theory based upon the evidence, not that you were determined to accept the theory for irrational physical causes.

If everything I believe is determined by irrational atoms in motion, then my beliefs can’t be accepted because I choose them on the basis of their rational credentials.

So the claim that all of my beliefs are determined by physical factors is self refuting.

It’s like the statement there are no sentences longer than three words.

When you turn to the theistic argument, just because God knows something ahead of time doesn’t mean he actually determines it.

I happen to know that if I were to offer my son a new car, he’d take it.

But that doesn’t mean that my knowledge of what he would freely do determines that he will do it. he’s still free to say yes or no.

I just happen to know he’d take the car.

Everyone has free will.

Examining The Facts

The Atheist’s Argument Collapses Under Their Two Claims:

1. Materialist Determinism: If the universe is nothing but matter governed by physical laws, then every thought, belief, and decision is the inevitable result of prior physical causes.
2. Theological Determinism (Fatalism): If God knows the future exhaustively, then human choices are fixed and therefore not free.

The atheist concludes: Either way—science or religion—free will is an illusion.

Why This Claim Fails:

Materialist Determinism Is Self-Refuting: Rational Thought Presupposes Freedom

• If materialism is true, then every belief is the result of blind physical processes.
• No belief is held because it is true, only because atoms moved in a certain way.

Science Presupposes Rational Evaluation

• Logical inference
• Voluntary assent to evidence

A scientist must be able to say: “I believe this theory because it is supported by evidence and reason.”

But determinism says instead: “I believe this theory because my neurons were causally forced to do so.”

Those two statements are mutually exclusive. If determinism is true, then beliefs are caused, not chosen

• Rationality becomes an illusion
• Science destroys its own foundation

The Self-Refutation Explained

“If everything I believe is determined by irrational atoms in motion, then I cannot trust any belief—including the belief in determinism itself.” This would include the belief of atheists that no gods exist.

This is the same kind of self-destruction as saying “All sentences are false.”

If determinism is true, then the belief “determinism is true” is not believed because it is rational, but because it was causally unavoidable. That invalidates its truth claim.

“If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true.” —J. B. S. Haldane

For these reasons, materialism collapses under its own weight.

Why Divine Foreknowledge Does Not Eliminate Free Will

The second half of the atheist argument commits a category mistake: it confuses knowing with causing.

Knowledge Is Not Causation: Knowing what someone will freely choose does not force the choice.

• Your knowledge is logically the opposite of the choice
• The choice is not compelled by the knowledge
• The act remains voluntary

God’s knowledge is perfect, but it is still knowledge—not coercion.

The Temporal Fallacy

Atheists often assume: “If God knows the future, then the future must already be fixed.”

This assumes God experiences time the same way humans do. But classical theism rejects this assumption. God is:

• Eternal
• Timeless
• Not bound to past, present, or future
• God does not foresee events the way humans predict outcomes—He sees all moments simultaneously.

From God’s perspective:

• Your choice is not “future.”
• It is eternally present
• And still freely made

Boethius explained in the 6th century: “God’s knowledge does not impose necessity on things known.”²

Why Foreknowledge Requires Free Will Rather Than Destroys It

Ironically, God’s foreknowledge presupposes free will rather than negates it. If humans were not free:

• Their actions would be meaningless
• Moral responsibility would collapse
• Love, obedience, repentance, and faith would be illusions

The Bible consistently treats human beings as morally accountable agents—something impossible without genuine choice.

“I have set before you life and death… therefore choose life.” (Deuteronomy 30:19)

• The Commands of God make no sense without freedom.
• God’s judgment makes no sense without freedom.
• God’s love makes no sense without freedom.

Why the Atheist Argument Ultimately Fails

The atheist is trapped between two impossible positions:

1. Materialism destroys rationality and science itself.
2. Fatalism misunderstands God’s nature and confuses knowledge with causation.

The Christian worldview avoids both errors:

• It grounds rationality in a rational Creator
• It affirms moral responsibility
• It preserves free will
• It explains why reasoning works at all

Free will is not an illusion—it is the precondition for meaning, morality, and reason.

If materialism is true, then no belief is rational—including belief in materialism.
If God’s foreknowledge destroys free will, then knowledge equals causation—which is false.
Therefore, free will is real, rationality is grounded, and God’s omniscience poses no threat to human freedom.

Free Will, Determinism, and Divine Foreknowledge: Why the Atheist Denial of Human Freedom Is Self-Refuting

One of the most frequently repeated arguments presented by atheists in an attempt to refute the existence of God is the claim that free will does not exist. According to this argument, free will is eliminated on both scientific and religious grounds. From a materialist perspective, the atheist argues that all human thoughts and decisions are the inevitable result of physical processes governed by deterministic laws. From a theological perspective, the atheist claims that if God possesses all knowledge of the future, then every human choice is already determined, making free will impossible. The conclusion is that free will is an illusion, regardless of whether one adopts a scientific or religious worldview.

In the mind of the atheist, this posit eliminates the possibility that an all-powerful, all-knowing God could exist.

For some, this argument seems compelling. When we examine this idea closer, however, it collapses under its own weight. The denial of free will, whether grounded in materialism or misapplied theology, ultimately destroys the very rationality required to make the argument in the first place. Far from impeaching theism, the rejection of free will exposes a deeper illogicality within the atheistic argument.

The primary problem for the atheist is their fundamental misunderstanding of God’s foreknowledge.

The materialist denial of free will asserts that all beliefs are the unavoidable consequences of prior physical causes. Using this view, human thoughts are nothing more than electrochemical reactions in the brain, and beliefs are the byproducts of atoms in motion rather than conclusions reached through rational deliberation.

The problem is the immediate and insurmountable problem this position generates. Rational thought itself presupposes freedom. In order for a belief to be considered rational, it must be held because it is judged to be true on the basis of evidence and reasoning, not because it was causally forced by blind physical processes. If a person believes a scientific theory because his neurons were determined to fire in a particular way, then the belief cannot be said to be rationally justified—it is merely the result of physical necessity.

This means that no person could trust any thought or idea they have, including the idea that God cannot exist.

Science, by its very nature, depends upon the assumption that scientists are capable of freely evaluating evidence, weighing arguments, and choosing to arrive at conclusions based on their logical merits. The claim that all beliefs are determined by irrational physical causes undermines the credibility of science itself.

If determinism is true, then no belief—including belief in determinism—can be trusted as rationally grounded. As J. B. S. Haldane observed, if mental processes are wholly determined by the motions of atoms in the brain, there is no reason to suppose that any belief is true rather than merely the outcome of a chemical process.¹

The atheist/materialist worldview commits intellectual suicide by destroying the foundation upon which all reasoning, science, and argumentation rest.

This self-refuting nature of determinism can be illustrated simply. To assert that all beliefs are causally determined is similar to claiming that no sentences contain more than three words while uttering a sentence that exceeds that limit. The act of making the claim contradicts its content. In the same way, the atheist who argues against free will is using his free will to evaluate evidence and determine the truth. Without free will, even the atheist’s argument becomes meaningless.

When the atheist turns from materialism to theology, the argument also fails.

The claim that God’s foreknowledge eliminates free will rests on a fundamental confusion between knowledge and causation. Knowing that an event will occur does not cause that event to occur. Human experience confirms this distinction daily. A parent may know with near certainty that his child will choose a particular course of action, yet that knowledge does not compel the child’s decision. The choice remains free, even though it is known in advance.

God, knowing what will happen, operates on the same principle, though in a perfect and unlimited manner. God’s knowledge of future human choices does not force those choices into existence. Rather, God knows what free creatures will choose precisely because they freely choose it. The necessity lies not in the choice itself but in the truth of God’s knowledge. To confuse these categories is to mistake certainty for compulsion.

The atheist argument assumes that God experiences time in the same way humans do.

Historical Christian Theology has always rejected this assumption. God is not bound by linear time; He does not move from past to present to future. Instead, God exists outside, transcendent time, perceiving all moments of time in a single, timeless act of knowledge. God knows everything because He lives outside these events and has already seen them.

From God’s perspective, human choices are not “future” events but eternally present realities. As Boethius explained, God’s foreknowledge does not impose necessity on human actions; rather, God knows free acts as free.²

This distinction is crucial. God’s knowledge does not make human actions necessary in themselves; it only makes them certain in God’s knowledge. Certainty does not equal force. A free act can be known infallibly without being forced. The error of the atheist argument resides in assuming that if an action is known, it must therefore be caused by the knower. This assumption is false.

Ironically, divine foreknowledge presupposes free will rather than abolishes it.

God’s knowledge of human actions includes knowledge of them as freely chosen acts. If human beings were not free, moral responsibility would be impossible. Commands, warnings, judgment, repentance, love, and faith would all be rendered meaningless. The Bible consistently treats human beings as morally accountable agents, capable of choosing obedience or rebellion. This moral framework collapses entirely without genuine freedom.

Deuteronomy 30:15,19 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil… I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live.”

The denial of free will places the atheist in an impossible position. If materialism is true, rationality itself is destroyed. If divine foreknowledge eliminates freedom, then knowledge is mistakenly equated with causation.

In both cases, the argument against free will fails. The Christian worldview provides a coherent account of human freedom grounded in a rational Creator who designed human beings as free moral agents. Free will is not an illusion; it is the necessary foundation for reason, morality, responsibility, and meaningful human existence.

The atheist’s denial of free will does not disprove God. It disproves itself.

The very act of arguing against free will depends upon the reality of free will. Rational thought, scientific inquiry, moral accountability, and human dignity all stand or fall together. And they stand securely only within a worldview that affirms both a rational God and genuinely free human agents.

Sources and Citations

1. J. B. S. Haldane, Possible Worlds and Other Essays (London: Chatto & Windus, 1927), 209.
2. Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, Book V, trans. V. E. Watts (London: Penguin Classics, 1999), 164–170.
3. C. S. Lewis, Miracles (New York: HarperOne, 2001), 12–25.
4. Alvin Plantinga, Warrant and Proper Function (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 216–237.
5. Victor Reppert, C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 75–112.

Philosophical Sources

• J. B. S. Haldane, Possible Worlds (1927)
• Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, Book V
• C. S. Lewis, Miracles
• Alvin Plantinga, Warrant and Proper Function
• Victor Reppert, C. S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea

Categories: Robert Clifton Robinson