What do you think?
Rate this book
God Over All: Divine Aseity and the Challenge of Platonism
God Over Divine Aseity and the Challenge of Platonism is a defense of God's aseity and unique status as the Creator of all things apart from Himself in the face of the challenge posed by mathematical Platonism. After providing the biblical, theological, and philosophical basis for the traditional doctrine of divine aseity, William Lane Craig explains the challenge presented to that doctrine by the Indispensability Argument for Platonism, which postulates the existence of uncreated abstract objects. Craig provides detailed examination of a wide range of responses to that argument, both realist and anti-realist, with a view toward assessing the most promising options for the theist. A synoptic work in analytic philosophy of religion, this groundbreaking volume engages discussions in philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of language, metaphysics, and metaontology.
256 pages, Hardcover
Published December 30, 2016
16 people are currently reading
155 people want to read
About the author
William Lane Craig
136 books843 followersWilliam Lane Craig is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California. He and his wife Jan have two grown children.
At the age of sixteen as a junior in high school, he first heard the message of the Christian gospel and yielded his life to Christ. Dr. Craig pursued his undergraduate studies at Wheaton College (B.A. 1971) and graduate studies at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (M.A. 1974; M.A. 1975), the University of Birmingham (England) (Ph.D. 1977), and the University of Munich (Germany) (D.Theol. 1984). From 1980-86 he taught Philosophy of Religion at Trinity, during which time he and Jan started their family. In 1987 they moved to Brussels, Belgium, where Dr. Craig pursued research at the University of Louvain until assuming his position at Talbot in 1994.
He has authored or edited over thirty books, including The Kalam Cosmological Argument; Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus; Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom; Theism, Atheism and Big Bang Cosmology; and God, Time and Eternity, as well as over a hundred articles in professional journals of philosophy and theology, including The Journal of Philosophy, New Testament Studies, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, American Philosophical Quarterly, Philosophical Studies, Philosophy, and British Journal for Philosophy of Science.
At the age of sixteen as a junior in high school, he first heard the message of the Christian gospel and yielded his life to Christ. Dr. Craig pursued his undergraduate studies at Wheaton College (B.A. 1971) and graduate studies at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (M.A. 1974; M.A. 1975), the University of Birmingham (England) (Ph.D. 1977), and the University of Munich (Germany) (D.Theol. 1984). From 1980-86 he taught Philosophy of Religion at Trinity, during which time he and Jan started their family. In 1987 they moved to Brussels, Belgium, where Dr. Craig pursued research at the University of Louvain until assuming his position at Talbot in 1994.
He has authored or edited over thirty books, including The Kalam Cosmological Argument; Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus; Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freedom; Theism, Atheism and Big Bang Cosmology; and God, Time and Eternity, as well as over a hundred articles in professional journals of philosophy and theology, including The Journal of Philosophy, New Testament Studies, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, American Philosophical Quarterly, Philosophical Studies, Philosophy, and British Journal for Philosophy of Science.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
May 8, 2021
Great book, clear introduction to the various realist and anti-realist views even if you disagree with Craig's conclusions. I'm going to read up on divine conceptualism and see if I can make it work, if not I'll go with Craig and be a nominalist regarding abstracta.
January 30, 2021
To postulate an infinite plenitude of beings as real as planets existing independently of God, so that the realm of concrete objects brought into being by God is literally infinitesimal by comparison, would be to betray Jewish monotheism and to trivialize the doctrine of creation.
There are two types of people in the world: those who already know what the above quote from William Lane Craig is referring to, and those who do not. The former group are likely very philosophically minded, the latter are not at all stupid (necessarily), but are ignorant (in the literal, non-pejorative sense) of a complicated yet important debate in the world of philosophy of religion. Craig's God Over All (GOA) is an attempt to bring that debate to a more popular-level audience and expose more people--especially those who already are theists--to an intriguing and deceptively niche topic of consideration. That topic is the existence of abstract objects.
As the subtitle relates: 'Divine Aseity and the Challenge of Platonism', GOA is Craig's popular-level culmination of literally a dozen years-worth of study and work on how the potential existence of abstract objects affects the aseity of God--aseity meaning God's attribute of self-existence; his depending on nothing else and the idea that all else depends upon him for its existence. In light of that, how the heck do abstract object relate... and what even are abstract objects??
To be brief, consider the very first clause of this review: 'There are two types of people in the world.' Almost every single person flies past a sentence like that and gives little thought to the content of it; a philosopher studying and considering abstract objects and their existence, on the other hand, might not. The question one might ask about that statement is 'Does the phrase "there are" commit the speaker to the literal existence of whatever follows it?' In other words, I have said 'There are two types of people...'; does that commit me to the existence of something called 'types'? What is a 'type'? Is there something called a 'type' just floating out there in the world that everyone is referring to when they use that term? Many people have an initial, almost gut-level response to that kind of question, and most lay-people unfamiliar with philosophical discourse would probably answer in the negative; some might answer in the affirmative. Either is fine... or is it?
This particular example is literally one of seemingly infinitely many. More common, and maybe more relevant, to many people unfamiliar with these concepts would be to consider numbers and other mathematical operations and terms. Do numbers exist? Does the number 2 actually exist alone 'out there' somewhere, and we attach certain other things to it when we say 'There are two pens in my hand'? As I said, examples could potentially be given ad infinitum. The question tackled in GOA is whether or not these things exist and how does that relate to God's attribute of self-existence? If things like the number 2 exist--and thus there would be practically an infinite number of things of that nature that would exist--do these things exist outside of God, or does God create them/keep them in existence somehow? If one says these things do not actually exist, how would one explain our ability to use and refer to them with such confidence and certainty? Are we actually lying when we say things like 'There are two types...'?
All of this and so many more weird concepts of this sort are addressed by Craig in GOA. By way of brief review, I am thoroughly impressed with his ability to actually accomplish this on a semi-popular level and in ~200 pages. The strategy and structure here was to lay the potential problem out in a couple of chapters, and then explore the different options the theist has in addressing this problem in the remaining chapters.
The briefest summary would be:
-If abstract objects exist (i.e., realism), they exist independently of God, God might have created them, or they could be thoughts in the mind of God.
-If abstract objects do not actually exist (i.e., anti-realism), they could be 'useful fictions' of discourse, figurative language, or items of 'make-believe'.
Each of these options gets a full chapter to explore the ins and outs of the view as well as the pros and cons of each. Although this book is the result of a condensing of Craig's scholarly work on the topic, seemingly no stone is left unturned still. There are so many rabbit trails to explore in this area of study, but Craig doesn't indulge too far down any particular route. The highs and lows of each view are hit, he gives his personal insight, and then it's on to the next. Just enough is given for the reader to (potentially) understand each option, a little extra is teased just to show the depth of the subject matter of which he is just scratching the surface, and then Craig gives his concluding remarks. (I say 'potentially' understand because, although adequately explained in the simplest available terms, some of this stuff is flatly difficult to thoroughly comprehend for the non-philosopher, or the amateur philosopher--me. That's just the nature of the beast, not a fault of Craig's.) Craig does give his own conclusions and states what his tentative answer to the issue is, but I won't say what that is here. I will say it falls under anti-realism, though. His goal isn't to convince the reader of any one solution, and the general conclusion he gives is that there is a plethora of different options available to the theist on this subject. He gives his opinion and, not surprisingly maybe, I tend towards what he suggests. What can I say? He's convincing in what he does!
In the end, Craig accomplishes what he sets out to do, and I think he does so extraordinarily well: he wanted to make a succinct, yet meaty, introduction to and explication of a pretty obscure--though incredibly important--topic of theology. He literally poured over a decade of his life into this single subject and it shines through his writing. He's seemingly become an expert in many independent fields of philosophy--mathematics not the least--to understand and attempt to solve this one potential theological problem, and I'm incredibly inspired by and grateful him for doing so. As with many subjects I study that Craig has touched, I had no idea there even was an issue in the 'Platonic realm' that posed a threat to God (or at least one aspect of God) beforehand. Now I know, and I am even fairly confident in my ability to articulate and answer this problem, if not for the sake of anyone else ever asking it, but at least for my own sake should such doubts ever come back up.
Craig is an expert at bringing these lofty ideas down to mere mortal levels and GOA is a prime example of this. I would not necessarily recommend it to just anyone due to its niche nature and subject matter. But if you consider yourself philosophically minded or want to explore rare corners of theology, I think GOA is a must-read. I am 100% biased towards Craig and his work, but I really do think this is a near-perfect attempt at this kind of work.
There are two types of people in the world: those who already know what the above quote from William Lane Craig is referring to, and those who do not. The former group are likely very philosophically minded, the latter are not at all stupid (necessarily), but are ignorant (in the literal, non-pejorative sense) of a complicated yet important debate in the world of philosophy of religion. Craig's God Over All (GOA) is an attempt to bring that debate to a more popular-level audience and expose more people--especially those who already are theists--to an intriguing and deceptively niche topic of consideration. That topic is the existence of abstract objects.
As the subtitle relates: 'Divine Aseity and the Challenge of Platonism', GOA is Craig's popular-level culmination of literally a dozen years-worth of study and work on how the potential existence of abstract objects affects the aseity of God--aseity meaning God's attribute of self-existence; his depending on nothing else and the idea that all else depends upon him for its existence. In light of that, how the heck do abstract object relate... and what even are abstract objects??
To be brief, consider the very first clause of this review: 'There are two types of people in the world.' Almost every single person flies past a sentence like that and gives little thought to the content of it; a philosopher studying and considering abstract objects and their existence, on the other hand, might not. The question one might ask about that statement is 'Does the phrase "there are" commit the speaker to the literal existence of whatever follows it?' In other words, I have said 'There are two types of people...'; does that commit me to the existence of something called 'types'? What is a 'type'? Is there something called a 'type' just floating out there in the world that everyone is referring to when they use that term? Many people have an initial, almost gut-level response to that kind of question, and most lay-people unfamiliar with philosophical discourse would probably answer in the negative; some might answer in the affirmative. Either is fine... or is it?
This particular example is literally one of seemingly infinitely many. More common, and maybe more relevant, to many people unfamiliar with these concepts would be to consider numbers and other mathematical operations and terms. Do numbers exist? Does the number 2 actually exist alone 'out there' somewhere, and we attach certain other things to it when we say 'There are two pens in my hand'? As I said, examples could potentially be given ad infinitum. The question tackled in GOA is whether or not these things exist and how does that relate to God's attribute of self-existence? If things like the number 2 exist--and thus there would be practically an infinite number of things of that nature that would exist--do these things exist outside of God, or does God create them/keep them in existence somehow? If one says these things do not actually exist, how would one explain our ability to use and refer to them with such confidence and certainty? Are we actually lying when we say things like 'There are two types...'?
All of this and so many more weird concepts of this sort are addressed by Craig in GOA. By way of brief review, I am thoroughly impressed with his ability to actually accomplish this on a semi-popular level and in ~200 pages. The strategy and structure here was to lay the potential problem out in a couple of chapters, and then explore the different options the theist has in addressing this problem in the remaining chapters.
The briefest summary would be:
-If abstract objects exist (i.e., realism), they exist independently of God, God might have created them, or they could be thoughts in the mind of God.
-If abstract objects do not actually exist (i.e., anti-realism), they could be 'useful fictions' of discourse, figurative language, or items of 'make-believe'.
Each of these options gets a full chapter to explore the ins and outs of the view as well as the pros and cons of each. Although this book is the result of a condensing of Craig's scholarly work on the topic, seemingly no stone is left unturned still. There are so many rabbit trails to explore in this area of study, but Craig doesn't indulge too far down any particular route. The highs and lows of each view are hit, he gives his personal insight, and then it's on to the next. Just enough is given for the reader to (potentially) understand each option, a little extra is teased just to show the depth of the subject matter of which he is just scratching the surface, and then Craig gives his concluding remarks. (I say 'potentially' understand because, although adequately explained in the simplest available terms, some of this stuff is flatly difficult to thoroughly comprehend for the non-philosopher, or the amateur philosopher--me. That's just the nature of the beast, not a fault of Craig's.) Craig does give his own conclusions and states what his tentative answer to the issue is, but I won't say what that is here. I will say it falls under anti-realism, though. His goal isn't to convince the reader of any one solution, and the general conclusion he gives is that there is a plethora of different options available to the theist on this subject. He gives his opinion and, not surprisingly maybe, I tend towards what he suggests. What can I say? He's convincing in what he does!
In the end, Craig accomplishes what he sets out to do, and I think he does so extraordinarily well: he wanted to make a succinct, yet meaty, introduction to and explication of a pretty obscure--though incredibly important--topic of theology. He literally poured over a decade of his life into this single subject and it shines through his writing. He's seemingly become an expert in many independent fields of philosophy--mathematics not the least--to understand and attempt to solve this one potential theological problem, and I'm incredibly inspired by and grateful him for doing so. As with many subjects I study that Craig has touched, I had no idea there even was an issue in the 'Platonic realm' that posed a threat to God (or at least one aspect of God) beforehand. Now I know, and I am even fairly confident in my ability to articulate and answer this problem, if not for the sake of anyone else ever asking it, but at least for my own sake should such doubts ever come back up.
Craig is an expert at bringing these lofty ideas down to mere mortal levels and GOA is a prime example of this. I would not necessarily recommend it to just anyone due to its niche nature and subject matter. But if you consider yourself philosophically minded or want to explore rare corners of theology, I think GOA is a must-read. I am 100% biased towards Craig and his work, but I really do think this is a near-perfect attempt at this kind of work.
December 17, 2017
This was a fascinating read. I will confess I am probably more confused about the issue than when I started, but that's not the author's fault. A detailed study of the possible ways of accounting for abstract objects and what implications they have for God's self-existence. The thesis of the book is modest: namely that there are more plausible options than either platonism or divine conceptualism, such that a Christian is epistemically not obligated to commit to one in particular. This is one of those issues that will almost never be on a lay Christian's radar but is nevertheless important for the way we conceive God. I don't always agree with Craig, but he is a consistently stimulating interlocutor.
July 30, 2021
Interesting but needs clarity and better classification.
Dr Craig's work is interesting, but his work is flawed because Craig consistently redefines or misunderstanding positions associated with classical theism. The book offers a confused argument since it redefines classical Theological terms and contrasts positions that are not pertinent.
Dr Craig's work is interesting, but his work is flawed because Craig consistently redefines or misunderstanding positions associated with classical theism. The book offers a confused argument since it redefines classical Theological terms and contrasts positions that are not pertinent.
May 6, 2020
“God Over All” is a philosophical defense of the Christian doctrine of divine Aseity, against the challenge of Platonism. The doctrine of divine aseity makes the claim that God is the sole ultimate reality, which means that nothing exists outside Himself, or His creation. Platonism obviously poses a serious threat to this concept, given its commitment to a countless number of uncreated abstracta.
Craig is very thorough in this volume, as he examines numerous positions available to the theist, including Divine conceptualism, Absolute Creationism, neo-Meinongianism, Fictionalism, Figuralism, Pretense Theory etc.
Given my relative inexperience with this topic, I was taken aback with just how much of this debate centers around linguistics. A great deal of the ontological quagmire presented by Platonism can be avoided by adopting a linguistic understanding, which differentiates metaphysically heavyweight statements from the peculiarities of normal, everyday speech.
This book is not for the faint of heart, as it dives headlong into some intuition bending metaphysics. I think that Craig accomplishes his goal of illustrating that Platonism is not an insurmountable obstacle to Christianity. I am thankful for minds like William lane Craig, who will take the time to explore these complex issues, in order to demonstrate the coherence of theism.
Craig is very thorough in this volume, as he examines numerous positions available to the theist, including Divine conceptualism, Absolute Creationism, neo-Meinongianism, Fictionalism, Figuralism, Pretense Theory etc.
Given my relative inexperience with this topic, I was taken aback with just how much of this debate centers around linguistics. A great deal of the ontological quagmire presented by Platonism can be avoided by adopting a linguistic understanding, which differentiates metaphysically heavyweight statements from the peculiarities of normal, everyday speech.
This book is not for the faint of heart, as it dives headlong into some intuition bending metaphysics. I think that Craig accomplishes his goal of illustrating that Platonism is not an insurmountable obstacle to Christianity. I am thankful for minds like William lane Craig, who will take the time to explore these complex issues, in order to demonstrate the coherence of theism.
August 17, 2020
Tim Keller had a great line about reading, “If you read one book you are a clone. If you read two books you are confused. If you read ten books you have your own voice. And if you read one hundred books you are wise.” Well, I've read about enough on this topic to be thoroughly confused.
There is a spark of an insight that I'd like to explore. What are abstract objects? Well, if they really exist, then God has competition. He isn’t the sole ultimate reality. If they exist as divine concepts (my default impulse), then how do they instantiate? Did they not exist before God thought them?
Surprisingly, the one position I was least prepared to accept is calling to me. That abstract objects don't exist. Instead they are useful fictions. I like this concept that they might be spandrels. Doughnut holes. Because God is so precise in His movements, in His makings, then the residue left behind is what we think of as mathematics. I'm reminded of being a boy and building cabins out of Lincoln logs. There was always a small space between logs. Little gaps in the cabin. They were all the same width because all the logs were the same width. So in theory you could add up all these spaces, even though they don't properly exist, and come to a total. Maybe this is how abstract objects work. I'll need to read a few more books before I can say.
There is a spark of an insight that I'd like to explore. What are abstract objects? Well, if they really exist, then God has competition. He isn’t the sole ultimate reality. If they exist as divine concepts (my default impulse), then how do they instantiate? Did they not exist before God thought them?
Surprisingly, the one position I was least prepared to accept is calling to me. That abstract objects don't exist. Instead they are useful fictions. I like this concept that they might be spandrels. Doughnut holes. Because God is so precise in His movements, in His makings, then the residue left behind is what we think of as mathematics. I'm reminded of being a boy and building cabins out of Lincoln logs. There was always a small space between logs. Little gaps in the cabin. They were all the same width because all the logs were the same width. So in theory you could add up all these spaces, even though they don't properly exist, and come to a total. Maybe this is how abstract objects work. I'll need to read a few more books before I can say.
May 17, 2023
Excellent survey of the options available to theists who do not hold to a heavyweight platonism. This book is effectively a layperson summary of his larger scholarly work “God and Abstract Objects” and therefore the amount of information per page is substantial. That said, the book is quite readable. Setting aside the theistic issues, the book is a great general primer on the subject of abstract objects for anyone looking for a quick read on the subject.
January 18, 2023
Great book for thinking about whether or not the existence of abstract objects is pertinent to a Christian worldview. Not a simple read for those not familiar with philosophy and mathematics, but still accessible and helpful even for laymen.
July 20, 2019
Great introduction for the non-specialist. Not directly related to God or even aseity, but a fascinating read nonetheless by a brilliant thinker.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews