Frank Turek Affirms Free Will and Uses Rationalist Arguments to Prove God's Existence

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture . . .  Westminster Confession of Faith

[2/12/22   Please note that I wrote this article some time ago.  I was mistaken about Turek claiming to be a Calvinist.  However, I am letting the article stand as the comments I made about his Arminian views and the rational proofs for God's existence are still pertinent to the issues.  The video is no longer available and I'm not sure why.  Charlie J. Ray.]

 

Frank Turek, the avid "Calvinist" Baptist, is up to his old tricks again. Some people wonder why I think the word "Baptist" and "Reformed" do not go together. This is why.  In the past Frank Turek has been an open supporter of Doug Wilson, the Federal Vision heretic.   In this video, Turek affirms free will, which in the Calvinist theology does not exist.  Even Martin Luther denied libertarian free will because if God knows the future then there are no contingencies in God's mind.  Whatsoever God foreknows is absolutely certain to happen.  Therefore, free will did not exist even before the fall of Adam.  That's because the fall was foreordained and predetermined to happen.

Secondly, Turek does not think Scripture is the source of all knowledge or the foundation for a Christian epistemology.  When the atheist student asks questions to do with the design of God's being or aseity, Turek completely misses the point and goes off into a rationalistic justification of God's existence.  This is normally called the cosmological argument.  It's based on Aristotle's prime mover or uncaused first cause.  One problem with this approach is that David Hume totally devastated the idea that there is an infinite regress of cause and effect that would go back to a first cause.   This is because such a regress is not empirically observable.  This poses a problem for empirical science as well as for the Christian rationalist. 

The problem for the empiricist is that sensation does not produce knowledge.  Without a mind the sensations are impressed on a blank.  Further, the senses can be fooled and the mind can perceive things that are not necessarily true.  Another problem is induction.  Just because we can observe one cause and effect does not mean this is a universal law.  Induction cannot produce universal laws precisely because it would require omniscience to know that there are no exceptions to the law in question.

The problem for Turek, however, is that even if the cosmological argument or the teleological argument could prove the existence of a god, which god would it be?  Without Scripture there can be no knowledge of God.  However, the cosmological, teleological, and ontological arguments all fail miserably.

Dr. Gordon H. Clark pointed out that all branches of human knowledge begin with indemonstrable axioms that cannot be proven by empirical science.  Even geometry begins with axioms that are then demonstrated to be logically consistent through theorems.   Why then would the atheist or the rationalist object to the Christian axiom of Scripture.  According to Dr. Clark, all knowledge is deduced from Scripture.  Logic is embedded in Scripture and God is Logic (John 1:1, 9). 

Frank Turek's approach is the same approach that could have been taken by any Arminian.  Yet, Turek "professes" to be a Calvinist.  Turek's arguments in this video are not Scriptural nor are they Calvinist or Reformed arguments.  The Scriptures alone are the Word of God and God's Word alone is the basis for all knowledge or a sound and absolute epistemology.  Absolute truth is revealed through Scripture alone.   (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Isaiah 8:20).

Even more disappointing is Turek's approval of the Arminian view that irresistible grace is somehow God's forcing people to believe.  Free will cannot be true because there are no undetermined choices.  God's effectual call does not violate man's will or force man to choose God or reject God.  Yet God causes both election and reprobation.  The Bible teaches this (Proverbs 21:1).

CHAPTER III—Of God’s Eternal Decree

  1.      God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: (Eph. 1:11, Rom. 11:33, Heb. 6:17, Rom. 9:15,18) yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, (James 1:13,17, 1 John 1:5) nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. (Acts 2:23, Matt. 17:12, Acts 4:27–28, John 19:11, Prov. 16:33)
  2.      Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions, (Acts 15:18, 1 Sam. 23:11–12, Matt. 11:21, 23) yet hath He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions. (Rom. 9:11, 13, 16, 18)
  3.      By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels (1 Tim. 5:21, Matt. 25:41) are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death. (Rom. 9:22–23, Eph. 1:5–6, Prov. 16:4)
  4.      These angels and men, thus predestinated, and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished. (2 Tim. 2:19, John 13:18)


The Westminster Confession of Faith (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996).

All knowledge is deduced from Scripture:

6.      The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men. (2 Tim. 3:15–17, Gal. 1:8–9, 2 Thess. 2:2)

The Westminster Confession of Faith (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996).

 See also Dr. Gordon H. Clark's rebuttal to free will as a solution to the problem of evil: