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 Logical incompatibility between foreknowledge and free will presupposes divine knowledge is temporally antecedent, which timeless eternity denies.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Timeless knowledge still represents truths about what agents will freely do, raising the same necessity problem without temporal order.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim that eternity escapes temporal logic merely relocates the problem rather than solving the underlying logical contradiction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If God timelessly knows p will occur, the truth of p seems logically necessary regardless of whether knowledge is temporally prior.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Temporal priority requires the prior event to causally constrain later events, making foreknowledge incompatible with genuine agency.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Timeless eternity places divine knowledge outside temporal sequence, so God's knowing doesn't precede or determine human choices.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The incompatibility problem dissolves when foreknowledge isn't temporally ordered relative to free choices.
?
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.