Questions About Souls, Necessary Being, and Video Games

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question:

Dear Dr. Craig, I’m a Christian who is trying to put some pieces together as I deepen my faith, and I have a question about our souls. In Question of the Week #920^[1], you say you believe that we are souls who have bodies, not body-soul composites. I've always held this belief as it seems intuitively true to me but never considered it in the way you presented. I appreciate the straightforward argument that we are identical with our souls. However, as I've thought about this some more I realized that this raises at least two questions. First, what parts or aspects of us are truly part of us, our souls? Are our interests part of the soul? Is one's fascination with mathematics instead of language part of the soul? I seem to recall you mentioning that our souls may be gendered. I think this was on a podcast or interview but I couldn't find it so I apologize. However, it does seem plausible to me that we – our souls – may be gendered. Second, what would this mean for people who experience conflict with their physical bodies, for their gender, or for any other reason? In this broken world, could someone be born with the wrong gender if it really is part of the soul or the person? I believe we are all responsible for how we live and what we do no matter the situation God puts us in. But I wonder if there may be cases where a person's body actually may not entirely match who they are. I greatly appreciate your thoughts on this. I know God understands all this and whatever we may think he knows the truth. However, this question has been in the back of my mind since I read Question of the Week #920, and I'm really curious how you put all these ideas together. Thank you very much for your time. God bless. Jacob, U.S.

DR. CRAIG: I'm grateful to Jacob for his two questions. Let's take them one at a time. First, what parts of us are truly part of us, of our soul? I think that the answer to that, Jacob, is that as an immaterial entity a soul is a simple substance. It is not composed of parts. So things like your interests or your intellect or your will are not parts of the soul. The soul certainly has different properties, but we shouldn't think of the soul as something composed of parts. Now, the question that you raise in your second query is whether or not souls have the property of gender. Are there female souls and male souls? I don't know the answer to that question, but speculating it seems very plausible that in fact souls could be gendered, that they could have the property of being female or male and then are incarnated in certain bodies. Now, for people who experience conflict with their physical body with regard to their gender, I think what we want to say is that these people simply have gender dysphoria. They feel differently than what their body tells them they are, and as such that's a mental problem that needs counseling and needs work to overcome. So certainly people could have this kind of gender dysphoria but I don't think that this shows that souls are gendered or are not gendered. Whatever answer you give to that question, it's possible for people to experience gender conflicts with their physical body.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question is short and sweet: “Dear Dr. Craig, What does it mean that God is a necessary being? Caleb, United States.”

DR. CRAIG: To say that God is a necessary being means that his nonexistence is impossible. One way to think of this visually is to imagine different possible worlds in which things exist with different properties. So, for example, Caleb would exist in some possible worlds but then there are other possible worlds in which he does not exist. He is a contingent being. By contrast, to say that God is a necessary being means to say that God exists in every possible world. No matter which possible world you pick, God exists in that world.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question,

Dr. Craig, In reference to the recent question of middle knowledge, the term “middle” identifies an intermediate state by definition, somewhere between a maximum and a minimum. Since the omniscience of God represents the maximum state of knowledge, surely it would be contradictory for God's knowledge to be described simultaneously as maximum and intermediate. Thanks, David, United States

DR. CRAIG: David is right that the term “middle knowledge” indicates an intermediate, but it's not intermediate between ignorance and omniscience. Rather, it is intermediate in between God's knowledge of what could happen (that is to say, all possibilities) and God's knowledge of what will happen in the actual world. In between those two types of knowledge “what could be” and “what will be” is God's knowledge of “what would be” under various circumstances. So, for example, God knows what you would do if you were in Peter's position in the courtyard of the high priest at the time of Jesus’ trial. Would you have denied Jesus three times? Or two times? Or just run away? Or would you have boldly confessed him? The doctrine of middle knowledge says that God knows what any possible person he might create would do in any set of circumstances in which he might place him. So these three types of knowledge are called natural knowledge, middle knowledge, and free knowledge. God's middle knowledge is in between his natural and free knowledge.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question,

Hello, Dr Craig. I'm having difficulties becoming ordained and serving in a leadership position. No matter what denomination I look at, there's always something in their tradition or faith statement I disagree with. For example, I can't be a Southern Baptist because I reject their eternal security theology. What am I supposed to do here? Josh, U.S.

DR. CRAIG: I would say, Josh, you have no choice but to shop around. There are so many different denominations in which you can seek ordination that you should be able to find one that would line up with your beliefs. I have been able to do so even though I do not believe in the doctrine once saved-always saved. I'm more in the Wesleyan tradition, and so am ordained in a Wesleyan sort of church. So they're out there. You've just got to look around until you find one.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question,

Dear Dr. Craig, What would stop something from coming from nothing? If we start with nothing, then we have no restrictions, as a restriction is something. I suppose this would lead to your second defense of premise 1 of the cosmological argument – if there are no restrictions pertaining to nothing then why only universes? Why don't we see tables popping into existence if there are no restrictions? I think the answer to that is because the universe has a law of conservation of energy. If a table popped into existence in front of you right now, that law would be violated. However, such a law does not exist pre-universe so the universe as a whole is not subject to that law. So once more, if nothing existed, what could possibly stop the existence of something like the universe? Jason, U.S.

DR. CRAIG: I think that the tacit assumption of Jason's question is in error. He thinks of metaphysical possibility or impossibility in terms of there being something that would prevent something from happening, and that's simply misconceived. If there were nothing then there would be nothing to prevent the universe from coming into being, but by the same token there would be nothing to enable the universe to come into being. If there is nothing then there is nothing, period. The impossibility of something coming from nothing doesn't depend in any way on their existing something to prevent it from happening. Now, with respect to the argument concerning the conservation laws, I think the problem there is that the conservation laws are simply observations of what actually happens in the universe, and if things can come into being from nothing then the question is why aren't the conservation laws being violated all the time at every point in space and time? The fact that we do not suggests that things cannot come into being from nothing.

KEVIN HARRIS: We have some questions from Facebook. This says,

Dear Dr. Craig, I've often wondered if I should become a full-time pastor. I don't really have a desire to do so even though I'm involved in various ministries in my local church. Several people have told me I have the gifts conducive to being a pastor, but I'm not sure what kind of call I should expect from God when making that decision. Any thoughts? David

DR. CRAIG: Obviously I'm not in a position to advise David about his career path, but I will say this. Very often others will see gifts and abilities in you before you see them in yourself. So I would listen very seriously to others who think that you have these sort of qualities that would make you a good minister. These might be hints that this is something that you should explore more thoroughly and ask God if he would have you to do that, to lead you in that direction.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question,

Dear Dr. Craig, Do you listen to audio or watch videos of lectures, or do you read everything when you're researching? Which method do you think is best? Sharon

DR. CRAIG: I read everything, Sharon. I don't watch videos, and I do think that the reading method is better because when you have a text in front of you you can reflect on it. You can analyze it. You go back and look at it again. Very often you will need to break down the sentences grammatically in order to understand the argument or expose the fallacy and reasoning, and listening to audiovisual speech just doesn't give you that sort of ability.

KEVIN HARRIS: Next question,

Dear Dr. Craig, In recent times we've seen the incredible growth of megachurches, especially in America. Do you see any problems with a local congregation growing so large some of these churches have more rooms than Hilbert's Hotel? Jackson

DR. CRAIG: Yes, it must seem that way, and I do think there are obvious problems with a church growing so large; namely, people just get lost. They do not form significant relations with others or bonds with others. So I think it's important to have some sort of a smaller group within your megachurch with which you can connect more intimately. We have this in our Defenders class at the church that I attend. We go to a megachurch, but our Defenders class is like a little church within the church. Over the years we have come to love and to know and to support each other through good times and bad. We've had funerals. We've had marriages. We've recently had a couple of births from young couples. It's that kind of connection with people's lives, I think, that will really make you feel a part. So if you're in a megachurch, I would encourage you to try to find some smaller group within that church where you can build more intimate bonds.

KEVIN HARRIS: Final question today.

Dear Dr. Craig, Do you have an opinion on the popularity of video games? People spend hours gaming. Parents have always been concerned about their kids spending too much time watching TV, but today's video games seem to be very addictive. I would love your opinion. Curtis

DR. CRAIG: My understanding, Curtis, is that they are addictive literally, and I think therefore parents need to monitor the amount of time that their children spend playing video games very carefully. I think it's really a shame that children seem to be losing the joy of reading or of being read to by their parents. When I was a child, one of my greatest pleasures was my mother reading stories or poems to us. It is a shame to have that personal element lost. So I do think there is a real danger here that parents need to be alert to.^[2]