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
    Paul Helm's defense of timeless foreknowledge concedes th... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The timelessness solution to the dilemma of foreknowledge and freedom is unsuccessful.

    Paul Helm's defense of timeless foreknowledge concedes that timeless knowledge is 'accidentally necessary' relative to any temporal vantage point, preserving the very modal constraint the timelessness solution was designed to dissolve.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Timeless knowledge must be logically consistent with all temporal facts, making certain divine knowledge states necessarily true from any perspective.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Helm correctly identifies that 'accidental necessity' still constrains modal freedom, undermining timelessness as a genuine solution to foreknowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If God's timeless knowledge entails facts about future human choices, those choices cannot be genuinely contingent—defeating the original motivation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.'Accidentally necessary' relativity may not threaten libertarian freedom if necessity only obtains from temporal, not atemporal, standpoints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Helm's 'modal constraint' critique assumes contingency requires freedom from all logical entailment, a standard stronger than required for human agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Timeless knowledge avoids temporal determination of the future even if outcomes are logically necessitated—addressing the core intuition behind timelessness.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Accidentally necessary(describing a type of necessity that Middle Knowledge addresses)
    Something that had to happen, but only because of circumstances—not because it's logically impossible for it to be otherwise.
    Modal constraint(in logic and philosophy)
    A restriction or rule about what is possible, impossible, necessary, or contingent (might or might not happen); it shapes what kinds of statements are logically valid.
    Paul Helm(The statement is about his specific philosophical defense)
    A contemporary Christian philosopher who has written extensively about how God's knowledge relates to human free will and time.
    Temporal vantage point(How the knowledge appears necessary when viewed from within time)
    A specific moment or position in time from which you observe or understand things.
    The timelessness solution(The philosophical approach Helm is defending and the statement claims it has a flaw)
    A proposed answer to the free will problem that says God exists outside time, so God's knowledge doesn't force events to happen.
    Timeless foreknowledge(The main concept being discussed)
    The idea that God knows everything that will happen in the future, but does so from outside of time rather than by predicting future events like we might.
    Timeless knowledge(as an alternative to temporal foreknowledge)
    The idea that God exists outside of time and knows all events (past, present, and future) simultaneously, rather than knowing the future by predicting what will happen.
    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Free Will & Foreknowledge1 linked

    Related

    'Accidentally necessary' relativity may not threaten libertarian freedom if nece...Helm correctly identifies that 'accidental necessity' still constrains modal fre...Helm's 'modal constraint' critique assumes contingency requires freedom from all...If God's timeless knowledge entails facts about future human choices, those choi...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    +3 moreShow less
    The timelessness solution to the dilemma of foreknowledge and freedom is unsucce...Timeless knowledge avoids temporal determination of the future even if outcomes ...Timeless knowledge must be logically consistent with all temporal facts, making ...