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 If God cannot suffer, then forgiveness cannot consist in the cessation of divine suffering, and a different account of divine forgiveness is required.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The claim conflates forgiveness-as-emotional-release with forgiveness-as-relational-restoration, which are distinct concepts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
God could forgive by voluntarily choosing to restore relationship without requiring prior suffering, making impassibility compatible with forgiveness.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even classical theologians argue divine justice and mercy can be exercised without emotional states, undermining the claim's central assumption.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Classical divine impassibility entails God cannot experience suffering, pain, or emotional states that change in response to events.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If forgiveness requires the cessation of anger or suffering in the forgiver, then an impassible God cannot forgive in this way.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Therefore, divine forgiveness must be reconceived as something other than the cessation of divine suffering or wrath.
?
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.