On Ockhamist accounts, God's past-tensed belief that Peter will deny is a 'soft fact' about the past, whose obtaining is itself counterfactually dependent on Peter's future free act.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Counterfactually dependent(used to describe the relationship between God's belief and human choice): When one thing relies on what would have happened in an imaginary situation that didn't actually occur—like saying 'my grade depends on what would have happened if I'd studied harder.'
Ockhamist(as the main subject of the statement): A philosopher who follows the ideas of William of Ockham, a medieval thinker who believed we should only assume things exist if we absolutely need to—don't multiply explanations or entities without good reason.
free act(Leibniz's compatibilist account of free will): An act that spontaneously flows from an agent's own individual nature or complete concept and represents the agent's choice of what the agent perceives to be the best option, where the contrary of the act does not imply a contradiction
past-tensed belief(in discussions of God's knowledge and time)

Based on where you are in your exploration