Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Aquinas's doctrine of the 'eternal now' (nunc stans) holds that God comprehends all moments of time in one timeless, unchanging act of intellection.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The nunc stans doctrine seems incoherent: how can a timeless mind 'comprehend' succession without itself experiencing or apprehending change?
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If God timelessly 'sees' all moments equally, the modal distinction between necessary and contingent truths appears to collapse into fatalism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The model cannot explain how God knows *that* an event occurs at *this specific time* rather than another—temporal indexicality seems irreducible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
God's omniscience requires knowing all truths; temporal succession is only how finite minds access truths already eternally present to God.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Classical theism requires God's immutability; if God's knowledge changed with time, God would be subject to temporal becoming and change.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The nunc stans model preserves human freedom by grounding God's knowledge in timeless vision rather than causal determination of future acts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.