Dr. Craig is a liar.

[Time Traveler]

Again, because I have to state this emphatically so you don't go off trying to slay straw men, I am ONLY talking about what your timeless God supposedly did before the creation of the universe... not your God's imagined relationship to time after the creation.

You made me read a lot of material to understand the arguments. I find this conclusion from WLC's article on Time and Omnitemporaltiy to be a convincing senario. That do you think?

One must maintain that "prior " to creation there literally are no intervals of time at all. There would be no earlier and later, no enduring through successive intervals and, hence, no waiting, no temporal becoming. This state would pass away, not successively, but as a whole, at the moment of creation, when time begins.

But such a changeless, undifferentiated state looks suspiciously like a state of timelessness! It seems to me, therefore, that it is not only coherent but also plausible that God existing changelessly alone without creation is timeless and that He enters time at the moment of creation in virtue of His real relation to the temporal universe. The image of God existing idly before creation is just that: a figment of the imagination. Given that time began to exist, the most plausible view of God's relationship to time is that He is timeless without creation and temporal subsequent to creation.

Read more: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/timelessn...z48J4TiTa9

First, let me point out that you completely sidestep your own contradictory statements which I explicitly pointed out on page 51 of this thread. I can only assume this means you acknowledge your own incongruous reasoning on this subject.

---

Even a series of mental events is enough to form a before and after (therefore some measure of "time").

Which directly contradicts...

There was no stream of consciousness or successive chains of thoughts.

Contradiction: You cannot have "a series of mental events" and also assert, "there was no stream of consciousness or successive chains of thoughts."
Contradiction: You cannot "form a before and after (therefore some measure of "time")" in a truly timeless state. Timeless, by definition, would have no "before and after."

---

Now, let's address the real subject of your worship, William Lane Craig...

Craig is asserting that 1) God was timeless and unchanging prior to creation and then, 2) God enters time and becomes temporal at the moment of creation.

This is a prime example of sophistry if ever there was one. You start by imagining a God existing before the universe, incapable of thought, or action, or change of any kind, and then imagine God suddenly thinks, and acts, and changes, deciding to create the universe and time. No matter how hard you or Craig try, you can't avoid these stages of transition (a.k.a. Time): Before creation -> The Moment of creation -> Post Creation. God's imagined corresponding stages would be: Changeless/Timeless -> Changing to actualize Creation -> Temporal with the universe. In other words, a timeless state prior to time is self-contradictory, because, by identifying that the timeless state existed before time, we must necessarily place it in time, on a timeline.

This just isn't rational.

That's why your own thoughts on the matter are so contradictory... because it is logically impossible for any sentient being to do anything from a truly changeless, timeless state - including changing the timeless state itself! Your own instincts imagine God must have had "a series of mental events [forming] a before and after (therefore some measure of "time")." Your mentor Craig would completely disagree with your line of reasoning - even though his own disagreement is wholly irrational.

On the other hand, if "God existing idly before creation" is just "a figment of imagination," and "prior to creation there literally are no intervals of time at all," then God and the universe would have begun to exist at the exact same moment! Goodbye special pleading from the Kalam! Absent any moment prior to creation, there is also absolutely no point in arguing for a "timeless, unchanging" state of God, because God's existence would have always been temporal with the universe as there could be no "before," and thus no time for anything, including God, to be in any state - timeless or otherwise. (Q: How long did God's timeless state last prior to the creation of time? A: Zero seconds.)

Now, why must Craig defend such a ridiculous proposition as a timeless God "existing changelessly alone without [before] creation?" and in the same breath asserting "prior to creation there literally are no intervals of time at all" (and thus, no before)? Because he knows, absent this concocted, self-contradictory absurdity, God would himself confront the infinite past regress of events (like the "series of mental events" that you imagined) which Craig asserts is anathema to his philosophy. So Craig attempts to counter this with a preposterous proposal - imagining a timeless, changeless deity existing alone, "timeless without [before] creation and temporal subsequent to [after] creation." And yet, Craig gives God literally no time to exist prior to [without] creation. Can you say "cognitive dissonance?"