It takes a certain kind of brainpower to stumble headfirst into heresy while thinking you’ve just unlocked the deepest philosophical vault in heaven. But that’s exactly what William Lane Craig does with his recent theological gymnastics. Craig is so smart, he’s stupid—literally, because this one’s a doozy.

Here’s what Craig actually said—verbatim:

“One might think that if God is omniscient, then he can’t learn anything new, because to be omniscient is to know all truth, it’s to know all the facts there are. But in fact, an omniscient being can learn things that are new if he is in time.

If God is in time, then at any particular moment of time, he knows all the truths that there are at that moment. But if truth changes over time, then God’s knowledge will change over time as well. So to illustrate, say at a certain moment, God knows that Bill Craig is now eating lunch.

But in a few moments, he will no longer know that, because Bill Craig is not eating lunch at that moment. He will now know Bill Craig is resuming his study, and he’ll come to know instead of Bill Craig is now eating lunch, he will say Bill Craig was then eating lunch.

So if God is in time, even though he knows all the truths that there are at any moment of time, because truths change over time, God will in fact learn new truths, new facts as time elapses.”

Listen:

This is not just a theological misfire—it’s a full-scale doctrinal demolition. This is Open Theism in its purest, most uncut form, wrapped in a lab coat and served with a smug grin. Craig has essentially looked the God of Scripture in the face and said, “You’re not actually omniscient—you’re just up-to-date.”

Let’s go ahead and rip the mask off this nonsense.

First, if God “learns,” then He wasn’t omniscient to begin with. If He “comes to know” something at T+1 that He didn’t know at T, then between T and T+1 He was ignorant of a fact. And ignorance and omniscience are mutually exclusive. This isn’t deep theology—it’s basic logic. It’s dictionary-level clarity. But Craig, in his desperate attempt to jam eternal omniscience into the tiny cubicle of human temporality, ends up neutering the divine entirely.

God doesn’t “come to know” anything. God decrees the end from the beginning. (Isaiah 46:10) He doesn’t peer down the corridors of time like some elderly librarian checking overdue books. He authors the story. All of it. Every line. Every beat. Every breath.

But in Craig’s bizarre framework, God sounds more like a cosmic intern—learning as He goes, updating His mental notepad, and apparently shocked to discover Bill Craig has finished his sandwich. This is not theology. This is warmed-over process philosophy masquerading as Christian thought. And it stinks.

What Craig has done here is exactly what every heretic does…he anthropomorphizes God until God is no longer God. He reshapes the Infinite Creator into the image of the finite creation so that He’s easier to stomach, easier to understand, and ultimately, easier to dismiss. Theologians used to call this idolatry. Now they call it a podcast.

The idea that truth “changes over time” and therefore God’s knowledge must “change” is nothing short of metaphysical clownery. Truth doesn’t change—circumstances do. God doesn’t update His hard drive every second like some divine CPU. He is outside of time, not shackled to it. Time is His creation, not His master. And if your theology can’t handle that, the problem isn’t with God—it’s with your theology.

And here’s where things get downright incoherent. Craig also claims to be a Molinist—a proponent of the view that God possesses “middle knowledge,” knowing every possible outcome of every possible choice from eternity past, and actualizing the world in which His will is accomplished through libertarian free decisions. That’s the very backbone of Molinism.

So riddle me this:

If God already knows all possible outcomes of every free choice—if He knew from eternity that “Bill Craig would eat lunch at 12:03 PM on Tuesday in World #392785C”—and then actualized that specific world, what’s left for Him to “learn” in real time?

If God sovereignly ordained the unfolding of that timeline, then this entire idea that He’s “coming to know” things as time passes doesn’t just clash with Molinism—it nukes it from orbit. Craig wants to keep one foot in classical omniscience and another in the cesspool of Open Theism. But that’s just not going to work.

You can’t have both. Either God knows the future completely, or He doesn’t. Either God is outside of time and decrees all things, or He’s caught inside time, watching events play out like the rest of us. There’s no halfway house between omniscience and ignorance. That’s irreconcilable logic. It’s Molinism on Monday, Open Theism on Tuesday, and theological schizophrenia the rest of the week.

But it seems Craig wants a God who is in time, reacting and adjusting like a weather app. Why? Because a God who is outside of time, who decrees all things, who is immutable and omniscient and sovereign, is a terrifying God to those who still want to sit on the throne themselves.

This is the dirty little secret behind all forms of Open Theism. It’s not about God. It’s about man being in control of himself. Intellectual control. Spiritual control. The control to define a God you can argue with, tame, and keep on a leash.

Imagine being so arrogant that you believe you can explain God apart from His revelation. Craig doesn’t want a sovereign God. He wants a domesticated God. A manageable God. A God who’s just a few steps ahead, but still within reach—like an old professor who grades on a curve. But the God of the Bible isn’t defined by our terms. He’s not manageable. He’s sovereign. He’s holy. He doesn’t learn—He ordains. He doesn’t react—He rules.

And let’s not pretend this is just some philosophical curiosity. Ideas have consequences. If God learns, then He can be surprised. If He can be surprised, then He can make mistakes. If He can make mistakes, then He is not God. That’s Craig’s theology in a nutshell. A giant, cracked, ridiculous nutshell.

This isn’t harmless speculation. This is a full-on frontal assault on the God of Scripture, and it needs to be called what it is—blasphemy with a diploma. William Lane Craig’s God is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It’s the god of Plato, Hegel, and modern man’s fragile ego.

Craig’s god isn’t worthy of worship. He’s worthy of pity. Because he’s just as confused as the rest of us, watching the clock tick, waiting to see what happens next. That’s not omniscience. That’s impotence.

And that’s heresy.