Hyper-Past Evils: A Reply to Bogdan V. Faul
A reply to Bogdan V. Faul’s "Can God Promise Us a New Past? A Response to Lebens and Goldschmidt." In this reply we clarify why it is that we regard a scene-changing theory of time to be an improvement over presentism from a theological point of view. We present two benefits: a scene chang...
| VerfasserInnen: | ; |
|---|---|
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
De Gruyter
2020
|
| In: |
Open theology
Jahr: 2020, Band: 6, Heft: 1, Seiten: 374-377 |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
hypertime
B necessary evil B God B Philosophy of time B The problem of evil |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Zusammenfassung: | A reply to Bogdan V. Faul’s "Can God Promise Us a New Past? A Response to Lebens and Goldschmidt." In this reply we clarify why it is that we regard a scene-changing theory of time to be an improvement over presentism from a theological point of view. We present two benefits: a scene changing theory allows God (1) to improve the past and it allows him (2) to give free will to human beings whilst ensuring that they hyper-will never have misused it. More generally, the scene-changing theory when compared to presentism has the more compelling account of the badness of past evils. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2300-6579 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Open theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/opth-2020-0119 |