(Author's note: the article below represents my hypothesis on the subject matter, and may not be theologically accurate. Read at your own discretion.)

Objective

This article attempts to look at the theological concept of predestination from a Chaos Theory approach. A brief background is given to facilitate the understanding of certain terms and concepts that would be mentioned subsequently.

Background

The first true experimenter in chaos was a meteorologist, named Edward Lorenz. In 1960, he was working on the problem of weather prediction. He had a computer set up, with a set of twelve equations to model the weather. Although it didn't predict the weather itself, this computer program did theoretically predict what the weather might be.

One day in 1961, he wanted to see a particular sequence again. To save time, he started in the middle of the sequence, instead of the beginning. He entered the number off his printout and left to let it run.

When he came back an hour later, the sequence had evolved differently. Instead of the same pattern as before, it diverged from the pattern, ending up wildly different from the original. (See Figure 1 below.) Eventually he figured out what happened. The computer stored the numbers to six decimal places in its memory. To save paper, he only had it print out three decimal places. In the original sequence, the number was .506127, and he had only typed the first three digits, .506.

Figure 1: Lorenz’s experiment [1] - the difference in the two curves is only 0.000127.

By all conventional ideas of the time, it should have worked. He should have gotten a sequence very close to the original sequence. A scientist considers himself lucky if he can get measurements with accuracy to three decimal places. Surely the fourth and fifth, impossible to measure using reasonable methods, can't have a huge effect on the outcome of the experiment. Lorenz proved this idea wrong.

This effect came to be known as the butterfly effect. The amount of difference in the starting points of the two curves is so small that it is comparable to a butterfly flapping its wings.

This phenomenon, common to chaos theory, is also known as sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Just a small change in the initial conditions can drastically change the long-term behavior of a system. Such a small amount of difference in a measurement might be considered experimental noise, background noise, or an inaccuracy of the equipment. Such things are impossible to avoid in even the most isolated lab. With a starting number of 2, the final result can be entirely different from the same system with a starting value of 2.000001. It is simply impossible to achieve this level of accuracy - just try and measure something to the nearest millionth of an inch!

From this idea, Lorenz stated that it is impossible to predict the weather accurately. However, this discovery led Lorenz on to other aspects of what eventually came to be known as chaos theory.

Lorenz started to look for a simpler system that had sensitive dependence on initial conditions. His first discovery had twelve equations, and he wanted a much simpler version that still had this attribute. He took the equations for convection, and stripped them down, making them unrealistically simple. The system no longer had anything to do with convection, but it did have sensitive dependence on its initial conditions, and there were only three equations this time. Later, it was discovered that his equations precisely described a water wheel.

The equations for this system also seemed to give rise to entirely random behavior. However, when he graphed it, a surprising thing happened. The output always stayed on a curve, a double spiral. There were only two kinds of order previously known: a steady state, in which the variables never change, and periodic behaviour, in which the system goes into a loop, repeating itself indefinitely. Lorenz's equations were definitely ordered - they always followed a spiral. They never settled down to a single point, but since they never repeated the same thing, they weren't periodic either. He called the image he got when he graphed the equations the Lorenz attractor. (See Figure 2 below.)

Figure 2: The Lorenz Attractor [3]

 

Discussion

In the process of Creation, God had incorporated free will into living beings, and had thus allowed chaos and randomness into this cosmic system. However, is this system entirely chaotic? Not necessarily. Mankind, or any living creature in fact, is not entirely random or chaotic in making choices and decision. Decision-making behaviour may be likened to the Lorenz attractor. There is still some semblance of order or repetition in behaviour, since man is known to be a creature of habit. Therefore we can infer that our world has some degree of order amidst chaos, as well as some degree of chaos amidst order.

Is God deterministic? God is a defined God. Not deterministic, but with fixed attributes that describe Him and His behaviour. He is eternal and unchanging, faithful and just etc. Scientifically, one can say that we can “model” God with such attributes, much like equations model physical processes. But just as Chaos Theory stipulates, we cannot predict God’s actions exactly. However, we know that there are boundaries and limitations still, only in the aspect of His nature, not in His power.

Is life predetermined? Like a movie or book where past, present and future are all fixed already with the characters seemingly making free will choices along the way but with unalterable storylines and ending? The entire plot would thus already be known to the author. I disagree with such a concept. God had been, is and will be deeply involved with the history and future of His people. The same God that Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses knew is still the same God interacting with people now. We know God can change His mind, although His decisions will always be within His divine character. If God is open to negotiation, request and changes, then the future shouldn’t be a predetermined finality.

When God wanted to destroy Sodom, Abraham pleaded with God not to destroy the righteous with the wicked. At first God said that He would not destroy the city if there are fifty righteous men, and Abraham bargained his way down to ten righteous men. (Genesis 18:17-33). God had intended for Moses and the Israelites then to enter the promised land, but because of their sin, the Israelites were wandering in the desert for forty years, and God raised a new generation under Joshua to take the promised land (Exodus to Joshua).

This shows that God in His interaction with us is reactive. He did not write an extensive storyline of the world and sits back to watch it unfold. If that were true, it would be totally static from a higher perspective, for it implies that prayer would not change anything, or that if the prayer works, it is because God had previously planned that you or I would pray that prayer. I propose that free will is a degree of chaos or randomness that God had deliberately allowed in His design. This would mean that God is extremely unlikely to have arranged or willed the act of a murderer or an incidence of cancer, but that He allowed both to happen in a world He had created and ordained to be itself. He allows both good and bad choices to occur, and therefore there is a system of reward and punishment, or more simply, consequences.

Instead of an analogy with a book or film, let’s draw an analogy to a multiplayer online RPG (Role Playing Game) computer game. In a virtual created world, you play a character that can do anything and go anywhere in the game. Whatever you decide will have fixed real-time consequences. If you decide not to take a certain action, someone else's character may end up doing it. If there is a game designer or moderator who has a fixed storyline he wants to take place, he could shape the events of the game world to affect the overall outcome. If, let's say, he wants a city destroyed, he could, for example, assign one of the players a quest to do so, or he might arrange for a Non-Player Character (NPC) to accomplish it, dependent on his eventual decision.

God has similar milestones in His plan. Significant events that would take place as He promised in the bible. The timeline is not fixed as we know it. Prophecies can foretell the coming, but not the exact moment. Millions of other inconsequential events may take place before, alongside or after these milestone events, but these events will certainly take place.

But all this goes against the concept of a predetermined future. So how does predestination occur and not clash with free will? Is God still omniscient as He is described to be if the future is not predetermined?

If our lives are really a linear path fixed by God, then free will becomes a mere illusion, and choices become a huge cosmic hoax. Every decision we make leads to numerous branches of possibilities which extend further and further in an extensive complicated web, with potential consequences like the butterfly effect. Suppose God does have a perfect divine plan for each one of us. It’s a single traced path in that complicated web. Let's also assume that God's omniscience allows Him to know every single possible path a person can trace in that complicated web. The moment a person makes a decision that deviates from the perfect plan or route, he goes into a different branch. But God is not unprepared. He is aware that should this person make this particular decision, he will end up on another path. Now my idea is that since God can and does intervene, He may keep dropping hints and pointers, through personal revelations, words from friends or family etc, at every branch in order to steer the person back to the perfect route, albeit at a later junction, or juncture. In other words, God plans a new perfect path that links to the perfect route.

Figuratively, this idea is depicted in Figure 3, albeit much simplified. Each black full circle represents a node where a decision has to be made. Timeline progresses from left to right. The orange line represents God’s perfect plan for this person’s life (to reach from point A to point B). Suppose the person decides to do something else, and follows the blue line to point C. God already knows that there is a possibility this person may choose this route. Of course, God knows the probability of this occurrence as well. At this point in time, God also realizes that the perfect plan for this person is now the route traced first by the red line then along the orange line to point B.

Figure 3: Decision Tree

Suppose again, this person chooses to do otherwise, as depicted in Figure 4. Instead of rejoining the perfect route, he ends up at point D. Again, God is aware of both the possibility as well as the probability of this occurrence. Also, God will again know the perfect plan at this point in time, shown similarly by the red line. Therefore this does not conflict with God’s declaration (and promise) that He always knows the best and perfect plan for each of us, yet we have the liberty to exercise our free will. God, of course, retains the liberty to influence the probabilities at any decision node, since He has the power to intervene if He wants, or needs to.

Figure 4: Decision Tree, continued

Extend this idea infinite times in infinite directions, superimposed with billions more decision trees of other individuals, and we have an extremely complex web of infinite possible occurrences, which only God with His omniscience can fully envision.

This theory sounds likely legitimate also because this idea thus allows a continual redemptive work of God that can restore any person to the perfect plan despite any error in decision along the way. It allows room for any person to make mistakes without having the burden or consequence that he may have irreparably and irreversibly changed the course or ruined his entire life. This is definitely in line with God’s redemptive nature and purposes. It does not violate the concept of free will, nor does it violate God’s knowledge of the best plans for each one of us. Furthermore, because it is evidential (as discerned by faith) that God can, had and still does intervene, He is therefore always in control, despite the degree of chaos. Additionally He is able to transform a bad event for the greater good. These are common truths that many believers are familiar with, which this theory doesn’t at all contradict.

We know that when God wants to accomplish something, He usually chooses a person (or people) to achieve it. But when that person fails, He always raises up another person to complete the work. Therefore we know that God’s agenda is always accomplished, regardless of human failure. An example is David chosen to replace king Saul (1 and 2 Samuel). Also, let’s look at another example. Was Abraham the only person God called to leave his homeland at that time? We’ll never know. The bible records Abraham simply because he obeyed God. God may or may not have had a few candidates that He called. Perhaps he asked a few in turn, and was systematically rejected till Abraham. Perhaps He only asked Abraham.

The question here would naturally be how and who would God choose, if a person’s decision making is not predetermined but governed by chaotic free will? There is an viewpoint I shall propose here. Using Chaos Theory ideology, we can make a simple postulate combined with some basic theology. Since God made each one of us and knows us intimately (Psalm 139), we can safely assume that God knows the Lorenz attractor of behaviour of every person. My postulate is that God may have had chosen and called Abraham because He knew that Abraham at that point in time may had been the only man whose behavioural pattern (Lorenz attractor) was most probable to follow or was already most suitably aligned to God’s perfect plan for his life or for a milestone event (migration to a new land) in a divine plan.

 

Conclusion

Chaos Theory’s intimation of openness changes the classical relativity viewpoint where space-time is viewed as frozen chunks of history along a linear timeline. The future is not there waiting for us to arrive; we make it as we go along. This constitutes the free will God has given to the world. Does God know the future? Yes, He knows every possibility that can occur in every moment throughout time. We can also safely assume that God knows the most probable possible futures as well. This constitutes His omniscience and the idea of predestination. There is therefore no conflict between free will and predestination.