Reasonable Faith Podcast Question of the Week #973: Theological Fatalism and the Best of All Possible Worlds
Jan 29, 2026
A lively discussion reconstructs a theological fatalism argument about divine foreknowledge and human choice. A modal logic pitfall is identified and explained. The idea of humans co-actualizing possible worlds is explored. The claim that God must pick a single best possible world is questioned with reasons why no single best world may exist.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Son's Theological Fatalism Challenge
- Tony reports his unbelieving son argued that divine foreknowledge removes free will using the 'best of all possible worlds' idea.
- The son claims God choosing this world means individuals cannot do otherwise because God knew their choices ahead of time.
Foreknowledge Doesn't Imply Necessity
- William Lane Craig identifies the theological fatalism argument as fallacious and unrelated to 'best of all possible worlds.'
- He shows foreknowledge entails P will happen but not that P is necessary, preserving contingency and freedom.
We Co-Actualize The World With God
- Craig argues we co-actualize the world with God through our free choices, so alternatives could have occurred though they don't.
- He explains the 'best of all possible worlds' assumption isn't required for the fatalism argument and is controversial itself.
