Meeting Dr. William Lane Craig at Rutgers University
I am a follower of
William Lane Craig in the sense that I am always listening and reading his
work, and was fortunate enough to meet him at his lecture on The Existence of God and the Beginning of the Universe at Rutgers University. The next
day, we participated in a more personal Q&A with about 30 people
present, where we were able to just pick his brain. My friend Matt came all the way from
Pittsburgh to hear this guy speak—we were pretty excited!
COMPELLING QUESTIONS
I’ve decided to blog on
the questions my friends and I asked.
I’ve paraphrased the questions and answers based off of my notes for a
better understanding of what was asked:
1. Why do you not hold church tradition to the
same bar as scripture? (Sid)
2. Why do you not hold to the Catholic doctrine of
transubstantiation? (Sid)
3. How does your view of Molinism effect the
Catholic doctrine of Papal infallibility? (Matt)
4. How do we classify angelic beings? Are angels
temporal beings that belong to our universe? (Christen)
5. Where do we go in the afterlife? Is it in this universe? Where is it located? (Christen)
6. How do you define and defend the inerrancy and
infallibility of scripture? (Me)
7. Can people come to Christ without an explicit
knowledge of the Gospel? (Christen)
8. Can you be saved without knowing you are?
(Someone else)
9. What does the statement, “Son of God, begotten
of the Father,” from the Nicene Creed really mean? Aren’t the Trinity supposed to be equal in
power and nature? (Matt)
1. Why do you not hold church tradition to the
same bar as scripture? (Sid)
Tradition
simply hasn’t shown itself as a reliable source of New Testament exegesis. Our understanding of the scriptures has only
increased, and in the past few decades, New Testament theologians and
translators have pioneered scriptural exegesis, not church tradition.
2. Why do you not hold to the Catholic doctrine of
transubstantiation? (Sid)
The
doctrine of transubstantiation is a fantastic interpretation, and is just plain
obvious that Jesus is using a
metaphor when he tells his disciples to “eat his body,” (Matthew
26:26-30). How could his disciples eat
his body when his body was right in front of them? The words used contain symbolic meaning, and
Jesus used metaphors frequently. There
is simply no reason to assume anything else is meant here.
3. How does your view of Molinism effect the
Catholic doctrine of Papal infallibility? (Matt)
Molinism
would respond by saying that God’s middle knowledge allows him to know what the
Pope would say in any possible world, so God places who would be Pope knowing
what the Pope would say ex cathedra. However, the opposite cannot be blamed on
God, that all the Pope’s mistakes are God’s fault, because God knew the Pope
would commit them. Libertarian freedom
doesn’t require that no mistakes would be made.
However, as Protestants, we do not ascribe to Papal infallibility, so we
don’t have to worry about this.
4. How do we classify angelic beings? Are angels
temporal beings that belong to our universe? (Christen)
First
of all, there isn’t really a lot of biblical data on angels, so it’s hard to
make factual claims about them. That
being said, they are temporal beings, as evidenced by the fact that they have
their own thoughts and actions. It’s
possible that they were created before the universe was created, in a sort of
“pre-time,” or a metaphysical time, but we just don’t know.
5. Where do we go in the afterlife? Is it in this universe? Where is it located? (Christen)
The
afterlife is certainly in time, as we will receive temporal, resurrected
bodies, not simply disembodied souls. As
far as where it is located? Some
speculate that Hell is in different dimension of space, which is indeed
possible, but once again we just don’t know the details.
6. How do you define and defend the inerrancy and
infallibility of scripture? (Me)
Inerrancy
and infallibility of scripture would be defined as being true in all that it
teaches. This gives some “wiggle room”
when it comes to interpretation. This
means that when Jesus talks about a mustard seed being one of the smallest
seeds in the world, it’s not an error because he was giving a lesson on faith,
not in botany. He would defend it by
saying that this was clearly Jesus’ view of scripture, and as his disciples, we
adopt the same view he did.
7. Can people come to Christ without an explicit
knowledge of the Gospel? (Christen)
Using
the Old Testament as our guide, yes it is at least possible for this to happen.
Biblical characters such as Job and Melchizedek didn’t have any
knowledge of Jesus Christ, and also weren’t Jews or related to God’s promises
for Israel, but clearly knew God and were saved. This means that there definitely could be
some modern day “Jobs” or “Melchizedeks” today who have not heard an explicit
knowledge of the Gospel, but may still have an understanding of God and can be
saved. However, this does not mean they
are saved without Jesus; Jesus’ work
on the cross is still applied to them.
This is the only way to be saved.
However, the vast majority of mankind is not saved in this way if we
take Romans 1 seriously.
8. Can you be saved without knowing you are? (Someone else)
Yes,
assurance of your faith is psychological.
Doubting Christians are still saved; God’s grace wouldn’t disappear just
because someone isn’t sure about it. A
man said to Jesus, “I do believe, but help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mark
9:24).
9. What does the statement, “Son of God, begotten
of the Father,” from the Nicene Creed really mean? Aren’t the Trinity supposed to be equal in
power and nature? (Matt)
We
can simply disagree with the Church Fathers on the wording of the Son being
“begotten” of the Father. This is
definitely a metaphysical description, but not describing the actual divine
nature of the Trinity. The Son was
already existing “in” the Father, then comes forth from the Father. “Begotten” can simply mean unique, possibly
even in reference to his human nature, but certainly not in reference to his
divine nature. The Son does not depend
on the Father for his existence. This
would introduce subordination into the Trinity.
As Protestants, we have no allegiance to the Nicene Creed or the Church
Fathers, so we do not have to hold to this view.
SOME OTHER THOUGHTS
I asked the question on
Biblical inerrancy, and kind of wished I followed up on it. I wanted to ask how this view would apply to
the New Testament (I already blogged on this point and came to the same
conclusion he did, which made me feel kind of smart. You can check that out here). I still am not sure how to defend the
inspiration and infallibility of the New Testament to the same degree of
certainty as the Old Testament, and kind of wished I followed up with that.
It was a privilege
meeting Dr. William Lane Craig face to face, and being able to pick his brain
in a more personal setting. This guy is
one my heroes in the faith, and the ministry of Reasonable Faith has greatly
influenced my thinking, my faith, and the way I do ministry. Thanks Dr. Craig!
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment