Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    In God's eternal life, each time in its presentness remai... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    In God's eternal life, each time in its presentness remains and nothing ever ceases to be ET-simultaneous with God's life.

    Divine Attributes
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If something ceased to be ET-simultaneous with God's life, that would entail an earlier and a later part simultaneous to God's life, and so temporal succession in God's life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An eternal life has no earlier and later parts; if it did, it would be temporal, not eternal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore nothing passes in God's eternal life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.ET-simultaneity, as defined by Stump and Kretzmann, is non-transitive: if E1 and E2 are both ET-simultaneous with God's life, E1 and E2 need not be mutually simultaneous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If ET-simultaneity is non-transitive, then past events and future events are both 'present' to God, making all temporal moments co-present to each other, which generates contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A relation that entails the co-presentness of mutually exclusive temporal moments cannot coherently ground the claim that 'each time in its presentness remains.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Temporal passage is an objective feature of reality not reducible to relations between events and an observer, as argued by presentists and growing-block theorists like Broad and Tooley.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If temporal passage is observer-independent, then past events genuinely cease to exist regardless of whether they remain ET-simultaneous with an eternal God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim that 'nothing ever ceases to be ET-simultaneous' conflates a relational, epistemic permanence with metaphysical permanence, leaving real temporal passage unexplained.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Divine Attributes

    Related

    A relation that entails the co-presentness of mutually exclusive temporal moment...An eternal life has no earlier and later parts; if it did, it would be temporal,...ET-simultaneity, as defined by Stump and Kretzmann, is non-transitive: if E1 and...If ET-simultaneity is non-transitive, then past events and future events are bot...
    +5 moreShow less
    If something ceased to be ET-simultaneous with God's life, that would entail an ...If temporal passage is observer-independent, then past events genuinely cease to...Temporal passage is an objective feature of reality not reducible to relations b...The claim that 'nothing ever ceases to be ET-simultaneous' conflates a relationa...Therefore nothing passes in God's eternal life.

    Similar

    Each time, precisely in its presentness, remains ET-simultaneous with ...86%All times, precisely in their presentness, are ET-simultaneous with an...86%Therefore nothing passes in God's eternal life.85%Each time t, when present, is ET-simultaneous with the life of an eter...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: immutability
    Stump and Kretzmann (1981)
    View source passageHide passage
    Of course, one wants to know how to make sense of the idea that passage is real only in time. Stump and Kretzmann (1981) gave a take on this while retracting Kretzmann's original commitment to (1)–(4). Suppose presentism. On the Stump-Kretzmann picture, each time t, when present, is “ET-simultaneous” with the life of an eternal being. So that life is ET-simultaneous with t. So all times, precisely in their presentness, are just ET-simultaneous with an eternal life. But in an eternal life, nothing passes. If it did, that life would have earlier and later parts: it would be temporal, not ete...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises accurately reflect the passage's reasoning that cessation of ET-simultaneity would introduce temporal succession into God's life, which contradicts the nature of eternity, thereby supporting the conclusion that each time in its presentness remains ET-simultaneous with God's life.

    Confidence: Clear argument reconstructed from the Stump-Kretzmann picture as presented in the text.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit