William Lane Craig is a prominent Christian philosopher, apologist, and theologian known for his work in defending the historicity of the resurrection, the existence of God, and providing arguments for Christianity through philosophical and scientific reasoning. While Craig is often recognized for his contributions to Christian apologetics, some of his theological positions differ from confessional Christianity, particularly in his views on the Trinity, the incarnation, the doctrine of a historical Adam, and his adherence to Molinism.
Key Beliefs and How They Differ from Confessional Christianity
1. Views on the Trinity (Partialism and Subordinationism):
- William Lane Craig's View: Craig’s understanding of the Trinity has been criticized for leaning towards a form of partialism. He suggests that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can be thought of as three distinct centers of consciousness within one Godhead, which some argue implies that the Godhead is composed of three distinct parts. This view can unintentionally suggest that the persons of the Trinity are not fully God independently but rather compose God when taken together. Furthermore, Craig has expressed ideas that some interpret as subordinating the Son and the Holy Spirit under the Father in a way that seems to resemble Arian subordinationism.
- Confessional Christianity: Confessional Christianity, as expressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith, teaches that the Trinity consists of one God in three persons, each fully and equally God, sharing the same divine essence without division or subordination (Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). Reformed theology rejects any form of partialism, emphasizing that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal, and fully divine, existing in perfect unity as one God.
2. Neo-Apollinarianism and the Incarnation:
- William Lane Craig's View: Craig’s Christology has been described as “Neo-Apollinarianism.” He suggests that in the incarnation, the Logos (the divine Word) took the place of the human soul in Jesus, essentially functioning as His rational mind. This view implies that Christ’s human nature did not include a distinct human soul or mind, but rather that His divinity directly fulfilled that role. Craig argues that this model helps avoid the complexities of explaining how Jesus could have both a divine and human mind.
- Confessional Christianity: Confessional Christianity affirms the Chalcedonian definition that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man, possessing two distinct natures—divine and human—united in one person (John 1:14; Colossians 2:9). The Westminster Confession of Faith emphasizes that Christ has a complete human nature, including a human body and soul, in addition to His full divinity. Reformed theology rejects Neo-Apollinarianism because it undermines the completeness of Christ’s human nature, which is essential for His role as the true mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5).
3. Beliefs about the Historical Adam and Evolution:
- William Lane Craig's View: In his recent work, Craig advocates for a historical Adam (sort of) but suggests that Adam could be understood as a real figure who lived approximately 700,000 years ago, potentially belonging to the species Homo heidelbergensis. He integrates elements of evolutionary science with his interpretation of Genesis, proposing that Adam was a member of an early human species who became the progenitor of modern humans. Craig argues that this approach allows for compatibility between scientific evidence and the biblical account.
- Confessional Christianity: Confessional Christianity teaches that Adam was a historical figure created by God as the first human, and his fall into sin resulted in the corruption of all humanity (Genesis 2:7, 3:17-19; Romans 5:12-19). Adam was created directly by God from the dust of the ground and that his disobedience led to the fall of the human race and death. Reformed theology rejects any attempt to reconcile the Genesis account with evolutionary theory as it compromises the historicity of Adam as the unique head and federal representative of the human race.
4. Molinism and God’s Sovereignty:
- William Lane Craig's View: Craig is a well-known advocate of Molinism, a theological system that teaches that God has “middle knowledge.” According to Molinism, God knows what every free creature would do in any possible circumstance (middle knowledge) and uses this knowledge to actualize a world in which His will is accomplished while still allowing for human freedom. This view attempts to reconcile divine sovereignty with human free will by suggesting that God’s knowledge of counterfactuals (what free creatures would choose in various circumstances) allows Him to work His plan without overriding human choices.
- Confessional Christianity: Confessional Christianity, as expressed in the Bible, teaches that God’s sovereignty is absolute and that He ordains everything that comes to pass, yet in a way that does not negate human responsibility (Ephesians 1:11; Proverbs 16:9). Reformed theology rejects Molinism because it implies that God’s knowledge is dependent on human actions and that His will is contingent upon human choices. Instead, according to the Bible, God’s decree is the ultimate cause of all things and that He works all things according to His purpose, while still holding humans accountable for their actions.
5. Approach to Apologetics and Philosophical Reasoning:
- William Lane Craig's View: Craig employs a classical apologetic approach, relying heavily on philosophical arguments, such as the Kalam Cosmological Argument, to defend the existence of God, the resurrection, and other aspects of Christianity. He often engages with contemporary science and philosophy to make the case for the rationality of Christian belief. While Craig’s work has been effective in engaging skeptics, his method sometimes prioritizes philosophical reasoning over biblical exegesis.
- Confessional Christianity: Confessional Christianity upholds the authority and sufficiency of Scripture as the foundation for faith and apologetics (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Hebrews 4:12). The Word of God is the ultimate authority and believers should rely on Scripture to defend the faith. Reformed theology, while not opposing the classical approach, typically emphasizes presuppositional apologetics, which starts with the assumption that Scripture is true and argues that all other worldviews are inconsistent without the foundation of God’s revelation.
Summary of Differences
Why William Lane Craig should be regarded as a false teacher and why his teachings should be approached with caution:
1. Undermining the Historical Accuracy and Inerrancy of Scripture
William Lane Craig has expressed views that question the historical accuracy of certain biblical narratives, most notably the accounts of Adam and Eve in Genesis. Craig has suggested that the story of Adam and Eve might be viewed as "mytho-history" rather than a literal, historical event. This position undermines the inerrancy of Scripture and challenges the clear teaching that Adam was a real, historical person. The Bible consistently presents Adam as the first man, whose disobedience brought sin and death into the world (Genesis 3; Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22).
The doctrine of original sin and the need for Christ’s redemptive work are directly tied to the historical reality of Adam’s fall. If Adam is not a historical figure, then the foundation of the Gospel is compromised. Paul’s comparison of Adam and Christ in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15 makes it clear that just as death came through one man, Adam, so also life comes through one man, Jesus Christ. To question the historicity of Adam is to undermine the entire biblical narrative of sin and salvation, which stands in opposition to the Bible’s clear testimony to its own truthfulness and reliability (2 Timothy 3:16-17, Psalm 119:160).
2. Compromising on the Doctrine of Creation
Craig's position on the age of the earth and his acceptance of aspects of evolutionary theory contradict the straightforward teaching of Scripture regarding God’s act of creation. The Bible presents creation as a supernatural act of God that took place in six literal days (Genesis 1, Exodus 20:11). Craig, however, often promotes a theistic evolutionary view, suggesting that God used evolutionary processes over millions of years to create life.
By allowing secular scientific theories to reinterpret the biblical account of creation, Craig elevates human reasoning and scientific speculation above the authority of God’s Word. The Bible teaches that "By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible" (Hebrews 11:3). Accepting evolutionary ideas as a means of creation undermines the miraculous nature of God’s creative work and diminishes the power and authority of Scripture as the ultimate source of truth.
3. A Philosophical Approach That Marginalizes Divine Revelation
William Lane Craig often employs a highly philosophical approach to theology and apologetics, sometimes allowing philosophy to dictate the interpretation of Scripture rather than the other way around. While Craig is a skilled philosopher and apologist, there are instances where his reasoning and philosophical commitments seem to take precedence over biblical revelation. One example is his acceptance of Molinism, a theological system that seeks to reconcile human free will with God’s sovereignty through the concept of "middle knowledge." This philosophical framework suggests that God’s foreknowledge of human choices is based on hypothetical scenarios rather than God’s sovereign decree.
However, Scripture consistently affirms God’s absolute sovereignty over all things, including human decisions (Proverbs 16:9, Ephesians 1:11). The Bible teaches that God’s knowledge is perfect, exhaustive, and based on His eternal decree, not on contingent possibilities. By promoting philosophical concepts like Molinism that are not found in Scripture, Craig introduces unnecessary complexity into theological discussions and leads people away from the simple and clear teaching of God’s Word.
4. Denial of Traditional Doctrine of God’s Omnipotence and Immutability
Craig's philosophical approach has also led him to challenge aspects of the classical understanding of God’s nature, particularly in areas such as God’s timelessness, immutability, and omnipotence. In his work, Craig has argued that God exists in time rather than outside of time, which runs contrary to the biblical teaching that God is eternal and unchanging. Psalm 90:2 declares, "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God." Malachi 3:6 states, "For I the Lord do not change."
By suggesting that God is in time, Craig opens the door to the idea that God could be subject to change, which is incompatible with the biblical view of God’s immutability and perfection. The doctrine of God's unchanging nature is foundational to understanding His sovereignty, faithfulness, and trustworthiness. Any teaching that compromises God's eternal, unchanging nature undermines the assurance and confidence believers have in God's promises.
5. Elevating Human Reason Above Divine Revelation
While reason and philosophy have a role in understanding and defending the Christian faith, William Lane Craig often emphasizes human reason to the point where it overshadows the authority of divine revelation. In many of his debates and writings, Craig prioritizes philosophical arguments over clear biblical teaching, sometimes downplaying the sufficiency of Scripture in favor of rationalistic explanations.
The Bible teaches that God’s wisdom is far above human understanding and that His revelation is the ultimate authority. Isaiah 55:8-9 declares, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts." The apostle Paul also warned against relying on human wisdom, stating, "Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" (1 Corinthians 1:20).
By elevating human reason above Scripture, Craig risks leading others to trust in their own understanding rather than submitting to the authority of God's Word.
Conclusion from Scripture
The Bible warns against false teachers who lead others astray by distorting or compromising the truth. In Colossians 2:8, Paul writes, "See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ." William Lane Craig’s emphasis on philosophical reasoning, his questioning of the historicity of Adam, and his willingness to reinterpret biblical doctrines in light of secular science and human wisdom place him in a dangerous position where he potentially leads others away from the simplicity and clarity of the Gospel.
Jesus said, "Your word is truth" (John 17:17), and believers are called to "contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). While Craig’s philosophical insights can be helpful in apologetics, his teachings must be approached with caution, as they often compromise or overshadow the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.
For these reasons, Christians should exercise discernment when engaging with William Lane Craig’s teachings and remain steadfastly committed to the truth of God’s Word, which is "living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword" (Hebrews 4:12). True theology and apologetics should always begin and end with the revealed Word of God, not with human philosophy or reasoning. As Paul instructs in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, all Scripture is inspired by God and is sufficient for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness so that we may be equipped for every good work.
-----
Related
Serious Errors in Dr. William Lane Craig’s positions on the Trinity and the Incarnation by Tony Arsenal
Is William Lane Craig a false teacher? Curated Resources
William Lane Craig on Genesis by Jason Lisle
A Response to William Lane Craig on the Historical Adam by Owen Strachan
William Lane Craig and Paul Helm | "Molinism vs Calvinism" (YouTube)
Responding to William Lane Craig’s Critique On The Eternal Generation Of The Son by Ben Franks