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 God's temporal experience, while involving succession, is very much unlike ordinary temporal experience.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Omniscience of future events requires that God's knowledge updates or is indexed to temporal positions, implying genuinely sequential cognitive states.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If God's knowledge of 'it is now raining' differs from 'it was raining yesterday,' God undergoes real epistemic change structurally identical to ordinary temporal experience.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Aquinas and Boethius ground divine atemporality in simplicity doctrine, but open theists like Swinburne argue a God who acts in history must experience a genuine 'before' and 'after.'
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If divine temporal experience were categorically unlike ordinary succession, God could not be a personal agent responding to prayers or historical events in any coherent sense.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
God is omniscient, so God forgets no part of the past and already knows all about the future.
?
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.