The Bootstrap Paradox and the Problem of Arminian Election

When discussing the doctrine of election, a key divide exists between the Arminian and Reformed traditions. Arminian theology teaches that God's election is based on His foreknowledge of human decisions—He chooses those whom He foresees will choose Him. Reformed theology, on the other hand, holds to unconditional election, meaning God’s choice is based on His sovereign will alone, not foreseen human actions.

A major philosophical issue arises when we examine the Arminian position through the lens of the bootstrap paradox, a concept often found in time-travel scenarios. This paradox occurs when an event or object is caught in a causal loop, existing without an ultimate point of origin. Applying this to election raises an important question: Does the Arminian view of foreknowledge create a logical contradiction where salvation essentially causes itself?

Understanding the Bootstrap Paradox

The bootstrap paradox, also called the ontological paradox, occurs when something seemingly exists without a clear cause. A common sci-fi example would be a time traveler who gives Shakespeare a copy of his own plays. Shakespeare then publishes these works, and centuries later, the time traveler brings them back in time—thus, the plays exist without an original author. The cause-and-effect chain is caught in a loop, with no definitive starting point.

Now, let’s apply this concept to Arminian theology.

The Arminian Causal Loop

Arminianism argues that God elects individuals based on His foreknowledge of their future faith. The sequence, then, looks like this:

1. A person chooses to believe in Christ.

2. God, outside of time, foreknows this choice.

3. Based on this foreknowledge, God elects the person to salvation.

At first glance, this may seem logical. But consider what this means: God’s choice is contingent upon human choice, which in turn is contingent upon God’s choice. If divine election is based on foreseen human faith, yet that faith is only possible because of God’s election, then we have a paradox. The individual’s salvation is causing itself—just like the bootstrap paradox.

The Reformed Alternative: Breaking the Loop

Reformed theology avoids this circular reasoning by asserting that election is unconditional. Instead of God choosing based on foreseen faith, He elects entirely by His sovereign grace:

1. God elects individuals according to His will (Ephesians 1:4-5).

2. Because of this election, He grants them faith as a gift (Ephesians 2:8-9).

3. As a result, they believe in Christ and are saved (John 6:37-39).

Here, there is a clear cause-and-effect sequence. The starting point is always God’s sovereign decree, not a foreseen human decision. Faith is not the basis of election; it is the result of it.

Biblical and Theological Issues with Arminian Foreknowledge

Aside from the logical contradiction, the Arminian position also faces serious biblical challenges:

1. God’s Foreknowledge Is Not Passive

   • Romans 8:29 says, “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined.”

   • The word foreknew (Greek: proginōskō) does not merely mean God knew about people ahead of time. It implies an intimate, relational choosing (cf. Amos 3:2, where God says to Israel, “You only have I known”).

2. Faith Is a Gift, Not a Condition

   • Ephesians 2:8-9 states that faith itself is a gift of God, meaning it is not something we produce apart from His grace.

   • If God only elects based on foreseen faith, then faith originates in man, not in God, contradicting passages like Philippians 1:29, which says, “it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake.”

3. Human Will Is Enslaved Apart from Grace

   • John 6:44: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.”

   • Romans 3:11: “No one seeks for God.”

   • If fallen man cannot even seek God on his own, how can God base election on a choice that man would never make apart from divine intervention?

     
     

The Practical Implications

Why does this matter? The Arminian view subtly shifts the foundation of salvation from God to man. If faith precedes election, then human decision becomes the decisive factor in salvation, undermining the doctrines of grace. This can lead to:

• A view of salvation that ultimately depends on human effort.

• A misunderstanding of God’s sovereignty in redemption.

• A lack of assurance, since if faith originates in man, it can be lost.

By contrast, unconditional election assures believers that their salvation is secure, not because of their own choosing, but because of God’s unchanging will.

Conclusion: A Theology Rooted in Grace

The doctrine of election is not merely a philosophical debate—it has profound implications for how we view God, grace, and salvation. If we recognize that human faith is the result of divine election rather than the cause, we break free from the paradoxical loop of Arminian foreknowledge and rest in the unshakable foundation of God’s sovereign grace.

Salvation is, from start to finish, by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone—not because God foresees our choice, but because He has chosen us before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). This is the true comfort of the gospel: that our hope rests not in our own frail decisions, but in the eternal and unchanging will of God.