Apologetics Thursday – Craig Argues Against Time

In his post of God and time, William Lane Craig posits a proof that time is not infinite:

1. If the past is infinite, then at t God delayed creating until t + n.
2. If at t God delayed creating until t + n, then He must have had a good reason for doing so.
3. If the past is infinite, God cannot have had a good reason for delaying at t creating until t + n.
4. Therefore, if the past is infinite, God must have had a good reason for delaying at t and God cannot have had a good reason for delaying at t.
5. Therefore, the past is not infinite.

Ignoring the fact that the Bible describes God as existing forever into the past (Psa 90:2, Isa 57:15, Job 36:26, Deu 33:27), Craig’s proof does not logically hold. Logically, step 2 does not follow.

First, why would God have to have a “good reason” for holding off on creation? That seems like an arbitrary claim by Craig and would end up being a very subjective determination. Two, Craig seems to believe that God is not creative. God cannot be sitting around one day and have a good idea to create some sort of spectacular world and inhabit it with people with whom to commune.

Craig would disallow this. To Craig, God is some metaphysically obtuse being that is omniscient and extremely calculating. Every action is planned to be of optimal value to some grand objective. But this is just not how the Bible depicts God. Instead, God acts in time (as events occur) and responds dynamically. With this understanding, Craig’s proof falls apart. Craig’s ideas about God are rooted in Platonism, and only in Platonism does Craig’ proof make sense.

2 comments

  1. I would argue that Craig’s third premise is also untenable. How does it follow that God from the infinitude of time that God could not have had a good reason for delaying at t creating until t+n? It seems that would only be true if one assumes that there is no qualitative difference between moments of time prior to Creation, which is fairly dubious.

Leave a Reply