God acts in the world. He created the universe and keeps it in existence. God is the holding company of the universe in its existence at any moment what holds the universe from one moment to the other exists. If at any time, they have been left unanswered, would cease to exist. When God the universe through various measures taken at different moments of time and change from one moment to the other bears. If God can change, this is temporary.The interventions of God in the world are often interacting with people. Redeemed his people the answers to their prayers and forgive their sins. It is also with the support and comfort and give them the means. A defender of the divine timelessness a sense of God and interacts with these opportunities? It is, of course, that the necessary conditions for the interaction, which are. If you respond to a query (a prayer), unless the action is performed after the application, so that the fact that God answers prayer helps ensure the temporariness. Some thinkers have thought that a response can be initiated only after a request. Others have argued that, well that normally responds to requests after the request, it is not necessary to do so. To count in response, the action on the basis of the application should be. However, no relationship does. The answer is not normally called by the application, but has caused a cause and effect relationship is a species because of the relationship. The answers are contingent, while the effects of the causes in a sense are needed. The cause of the link pertaining to the answer to a question has the intention or goal to do so.In some cases, it seems that there is no need of the request before responding. If a father knows that his daughter come home and ask sandwich of a peanut butter sandwich to do so in advance. There is a sense in which responds to your request, although it has not yet been made. If the relationship between a request and the answer is not necessarily temporary Lord God answers prayer. Hey all our prayers in his act of eternal consciousness and action deliberately, he wants answers to our different Anforderungen.Vielleicht the effects of force majeure are at the moment, but its performance is not. In one Act, the Lord wants to speak with Moses and the departure of the sea in another. Therefore, to speak of Bush's God at the same time, hear Moses and Moses much later sees part of the sea God. But life and the consciousness of God, these actions are not sequential. Enter l always speak to the game. The order in which the effects of the Lord God is not to say that God has done is of a temporary nature are. The assertion that God is eternal is a rejection of the claim that God is temporal. First God exists, but temporary place, it does not exist. Rather hold that God is eternally eternal and therefore, always present, is does not all this position that God exists, but at a time is very short. God is in total over time. You could say also if not always does God exist in the eternity of God is available. This means that eternity is that a non-temporal position anywhere in time is a provisional place. On the other hand, he believes that this successor of Dios not experiences. The relationship of God to every event in the timeline panel is the same, their relationship with any other event. God is not in the first century, until he learned in the experience of the twenty-first century. Both of these centuries have experienced God in an eternal present. It is true that in the 13th century Aquino understanding and, if God's answer to prayer is not something then that took place in this century. God in his eternal, Thomas von Aquino prayers have been heard and have done so. Firstly he did not listen, and they responded. He listened and responded in fact offered the prayers of the timeless moment, which listens for and responds to a moment out of time in the 21st century. This version of the principle eliminates the difficulty of observing, but continue to use the concept of frameworks and temporary States to describe timeless. Alan Padgett (1992) argue that stress and Kash can not longer than to defend a loose analogy with the theory of relativity. He stressed that advocate the use of the theory of relativity as a heuristic device and nothing else. However, his analysis of the relationship between a timeless temporal events requires more than a loose analogy. To the extent that it refers to the theory of relativity, a temporary simultaneous time or absolute absolute ordering between two events in the cone of light. Sealing that simultaneity is absolute only when two events are considered, that each of them is outside the other problems of beam. If two events are the cones of light in this way, not causally interact. The analogy of the relationship between humans and a temporary event on one hand and the reference to the relationship between events in different frameworks is very low on the basis of the theory of relativity. Much of the debate today of timelessness begins with the eternity of article of Eleonore Stump & Norman Kretzmann (Kash and dull, 1981). Strain Kash and indications of Boethius, who articulates what has become a standard to spread understanding of divine timelessness: eternity, then is life whole, perfect and unlimited simultaneous (Boethius, 1973). Stump, Karvalics identified four ingredients, which they say are essential to its (eternal) Lord. (Although the cast their argument in a be eternal, this article uses the term without time). First of all, life is that all human beings without time. Secondly, can eternal life, somewhat limited. Thirdly, this life is a special type of duration. Everything that has life must the length, but a Lord being without temporary duration. A timeless being, has his life at a time. Is this last element, which means that the time eternal essence is off as a being of living lightning storm has only a moment of his life, at the same time.The two aspects of the timelessness of divine, the blunt and Kash to highlight, a being out of time is life and this life, even if no temporary duration. The life of an eternal beings brings the nature of what is contrary to the sort of abstraction as numbers or property objects. The image of God who leaves us with this point of view is a creature whose existence is simply too full, he in an instant a Zeitpunkt.Die challenge for a defender is a timeless concept of God, because God relates to declare temporary events. For example, God knows every moment directly. You do not get the report with its timeless realization and temporary objects of their knowledge through strictly temporary relationships such as competition, because simultaneity is a transitive relation. God is eternal, in the consciousness of the fall of Rome and at the same time knows my spilled my coffee. Decline is Rome however occur at the same time, pour the coffee. We need is a term not transitive relationship of God with the temporal world. To this end, the stump and Kash introduces the concept of and (Eterna-temporal) - Gleichzeitigkeit: (and) for each x and for each and x and y and concurrent if and only if are:. While the knowledge of God in the future will be by many as a strong support for the eternity of God, many philosophers believe that the knowledge of God is strongly leaning in that its temporality. If God knows everything, you need to know to this day, it is. If God is eternal, so the argument goes, you don't know what day it is. Therefore, it should be only temporary. (This argument appears in various forms by Craig, 2001a, 2001b; Charles, 2004; Hasker, 2002; Kash, 1966; Padgett, 1992, 2001 and Wolterstorff, 1975).On the affirmation of a perpetual get of God may do not know what day it is, we can start with the facts, it is not possible to change an eternal God and God knows all that can be detected. But if God knows that it is today, December 13, 2006, will know more tomorrow. He knows that yesterday, it was December 13, 2006 and today is December 14, 2006. Therefore, God must know different things at different times. If the content of the knowledge of God, it changes. If temporary and is not out of time.The quick answer to this concern is to deny that something God, know different at different times. First of all, it is obvious that someone who says that God is eternal don't think that God know sometimes even things. Dios skills are not in time lies, even though he knows what is temporary. Not true, it was this God thing know today. He knows things today, but he knows these things and timeless.God knows that today ' hui 13 is white, to whom I want to say what happens if I use the word today, to write this introduction on December 13. If the issue tomorrow (may Gott to always know what day it is?), God knows that this second usage refers to December 14. Uses like today, tomorrow and now refer to sentences temporal fairness several with different temporary locations. In this way, it is similar to concepts such as here, you and me. The point is that the meaning of each set of a term indexical, framework depends on usage. Terms of the fairness may relate to several articles with different uses, we can these lighter sentences by substituting the index term with a term whose Referenz is.The sentence: I write this sentence can be adjusted by you other expressions indexikalische, explicitly to replace the Indexicals. For example, I write this sentence in 11.58 December 13, 2006 (EST). Better yet, this type of sentence Ganssle is 11.58 (is) December 13, 2006. These statements may be claimed, expressing the same statement. I am also now written here can be clarified on 13 December 2006 at11 Ganssle wrote: 58 (EST) bread in the breadbasket in Hamden, Connecticut. Of course, God, all proposals, white brought by these non-indexical sentences expressing. In addition, the contents of his knowledge should not changed from day to day. The declaration, which expresses the set forever indexical not true (or never), if this is all true. The statement expressed by the sentence, Ganssle types, the true tomorrow and beyond, and thus this sentence to 11.58 (is) December 13, 2006. God can know these things and be immutable. Therefore, it is timeless.There are many philosophers who refuse and quickly the non-referential proposals know the reasons respond that God can still know what will not now. Such an objection raises a timeless presence of the second approach to the problem of the knowledge of God. This approach of omniscience, by change, but is not. I know, I write a sentence on a date (call, t refers to the structure of the universe, including space and time.) The question of the relationship of God with time has generated much of the philosophical and theological reflection. The traditional view is that God is eternal in the sense of being of the period as a whole; It is, exists but does not exist at any point in time and no timetable was known. What is today the dominant vision of the philosopher is perhaps temporary but eternal; i.e. began Dios has always exist and will never go out of existence. It is every time. Connection with a place only eternal benchmark, X and there is, is: (a) X is in the eternal present compared with (b) and is in the present moment and (c) x and a connection so that it can enter into a causal relationship direct and immediate with each of them and (if location of consciousness) can directly be informed of each li; (e). Some philosophers believed that God's relationship with the rest of each category of temporality and timelessness cannot be captured. On the other hand, God is a third type of relationship with time. An intermediate position, it is that God does not in our time, but in his time. In this perspective, the inner life of God is the result and so temporarily, but his relationship with the timeline at the same time. In some respects, has God his own timeline. It is located at any point on our calendar. In this view, God does time not our time. The weather is completely different from ours.Another point of view is that God Omnitemporal. It is in this view, God is not in our time, has known, but the moment in its essence. Our time consists of the physical time. (Metaphysical) time God has no intrinsic metric and consists solely of the life divine (1992, 2001 ODP; Charles 2002, 2004). If God is Omnitemporal, assign somehow our metaphysical time of physical time. Therefore, there is a literal sense in which I know God, now that I have now to write this sentence.Another view (Craig, 2001a, 2001b), it is that God became temporarily when he created time. The existence of God without creating is an eternal, but actually temporary existence that concerns the existence, God himself must be changed. If, then at least at some temporarily modified ways. How is what exactly happens before its entry, does qualify as a past out of time, but time limited in God not this vision. This language implies that there was a time when God was out of time and then, later, when it is always temporary. In this perspective, there was a time when it was out of time. Timelessness Dios is no creation, precisely because the time of creation was created. in this encyclopedia). It will suffice to say that more often than the B-theory is a theory. If the statement that all instructions concerning the events form are reduced to the proposals of the event takes place in the AMT implies a theory controversial at the time, there will be no successful defense, how many would. Without doubt, this does not mean that it is not the right answer, but the burden of defence has increased accordingly.Another type of response to the assertion that the divine omniscience requires that God should be temporary to kiss at the end of the argument and maintain that God is not omniscient suggested, although the lens is Omniscient. In other words, God's knows of any, but it is some suggestions that can be detected by the spirit, are the indexically. God will not fail, all the essential facts. Access to all the facts, is however not indexical (Wierenga, 1989, 2002). He knows that the fact that when I think that I write here today. The proposal by the knowledge that this is but differs in that the proposal I know. God knows the fact by the statement that Yet The Timeless In You Is Aware Of Life's Timelessness writes Ganssle by any Indiciale to Panera on 13 December 2006. This solution is not without costs. Above all, we must be careful how you describe the omniscience of God. We cannot know, describe any statement against God. It is not true, in this context, that God knows all the proposals. God of knows of any Tatsache.eine is average against this point of view to deny that the proposals which indexikalische by non-indexical rates find expressed leave in or out. Take which is essentially how fairness are, instead of a few sentences or claims are some facts. This objection does not seem very plausible stories like that. Suppose that you claim you (really), I'm in the kitchen (also real) and say that I was in the kitchen. These sets are not identical and the vision that we consider, express different proposals. Why so much of the truth of these statements is the same fact; the fact that someone in particular (Ganssle) consists in a certain location (kitchen). My knowledge is mediated by a proposal that expresses the fairness with phrases, and his knowledge is transmitted through the proposals expressed with phrases. If there is one thing that makes these different stencils phrases is, apparently, what can the two actual sentences suite indexikalische: Ganssle is in train to write and types of Ganssle on December 13, 2006. If true, in fact these prayers that God knows all the facts, but I do know that we know some facts of the same. Our knowledge of the facts is due to our position of stencils. In other words, we know that our way to see our personal, temporal and spatial coordinates.A third answer is possible. This response can be combined with the second, to deny that the knowledge of God is mediated through proposals at all. William Alston argued that God knows what she does without conviction. On the other hand, the knowledge of God is a direct knowledge of the facts in issue. This perspective implies that the omniscience of God not as regards records has been disconnected. In addition, has been the realization of the reality of God in the presence of God-consciousness of that fact, it is possible that this presence of God, not by nature affects. If this is the case, God can be aware of the facts in their different positions without if temporary change. If there is a successful strategy, since it is an open question (Alston, 1989; Ganssle 1993, 1995, 2002 c).Many followers of the divine temporality philosophers frame their arguments on the following: If God is eternal, the B-theory of time, it must be true. B-theory of time is wrong. Therefore, God is not eternal. Philosophers, the timelessness of the divine to defend, then take one of the two nails with heads. If you keep the first premise to the embrace and theory B of time (1988, 2001 helmet; Rogers, 2000) or argue against the second premise. God is the time forever, when it is in fact a theory. In this case try to prove that a God may know facts without hung himself. Some supporters of timelessness is trying to harmonize his conception of a theory is the theory of the time, they have. Like the common theory, timelessness result of God is most compatible with help you strengthen the general case of timelessness. ), can not know. If a God never know no proposal is not omniscient.There are two types of responses to this type of reasoning. The first is to deny that there are proposals which are irreducible fairness in this way. Each statement in the sense of knowledge and the event enters t. Another argument is for the eternity of God begins with the idea of the contingent in time. If the quota for the time and God is not, then it is possible that God exists without time. This conclusion is not the claim that God is outside of time, but maybe we can say more. If the time is dependent, then it depends on God for their existence. God brought the existence of the time or in existence forever. (Confirmation of this time is air conditioned, however, is undeniable. The arguments for the need of the time below applies.)If God has created a time in the context of the creation of the universe, this is why it is important or not, has the universe at the beginning at all. Although it seems strange to think that God can create the universe, even if the universe without beginning had, it would be strange that philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas. In the framework of Aristotelian work, like an eternal universe a very real possibility. (The third way) argues that even a universe with an infinite past should have said their existence on God. His opinion was that, for the moment, was not a beginning, influenced. God is the universe and time itself, at any time, as you need.Today, it is the position of the majority, that the universe had a beginning. The most people, because this statement is that the physical universe is initiated. If time is infinite, had a start, or be a matter open for many. If the past is infinite, it is eternal physical and metaphysical period. Topics such as the Kalam cosmological argument, the goal is to show that it is not possible, that the past is infinite (Craig and Smith, 1993) Craig 2001b). We have now been set up in the universe, so that the universe passed is finished. This means that the physical time was created by God. It is possible that where the metaphysical time is infinite, or that God is pure (metaphysical term) created. In this case, God was timeless. God created the physical and metaphysical time and the existence of God, completely out of time. God wanted then, out of time. Unless God became storm at any given time, God remains timeless. The most famous argument for divine eternity, it is that this position offers a solution for the problem of the foreknowledge of God of free shares. The challenge of reconciling human freedom and divine omniscience is better, if we believe that God is temporal. If God is omniscient and infallible, he knows the truth and is never wrong. People are free in the libertarian direction, then one person performs certain actions plotted, in the sense of action aim to refrain, or initiate. The problem arises when someone (in the future) are mainly assumed to choose an action. We assume that Jeanie decides tomorrow to a cup of tea at 16:00. If it is a free part of your Act, must be in their power to make a cup of tea or to refrain. If God is in time and know your cup of tea then ago already su of Jeanie. When can Jeanie Miss tomorrow on a cup of tea? It argued that Nelson can Pike (Pike 1965) only, if it is in your power to change what has been, believed Dios since the beginning of time. Therefore, even though God has always believed that it would make tea, have the power to change what you believe God. You able to get the case, God has always believed that she would make a cup of tea. Many philosophers have argued that nobody has that kind of power in the last human freedom is also not compatible with the foreknowledge of God Gottes.Wenn forever, but it seems that this problem will not occur. God does things, points in time and therefore must not Jeanie is on the convictions of God. Needs power over their timeless feel. This power is not the problem because the knowledge of God without time, an event that corresponds to our current knowledge of an event. Is the occurrence of the event that determines the content of our knowledge of the event. In the occurrence of the event that determines the content of the knowledge of God. When Jeanie made a cup of tea, God knows and timeless. If he fails, he knows that this is not possible. The knowledge of God will not be passed, but it is timeless.It might be argued that if God is temporal, is the content of his knowledge after the occurrence of the event on the same path. This statement is true. There are two elements, including the update here. First of all, just in case, which of the foreknowledge of God a temporary Jeanie makes tea, the counterfactual, secondly, should have go if God a hundred years ago, knew that he wanted to make tea, there is a sense in which they can get between the event and the knowledge of God. In other words, is the fact that God knows what he knows, solid, until she started the event. It is a free choice on their part, she no more of the. Its decision, tea or not to do is temporarily retained between the content of faith in God and the occurrence of the event.The position that God is eternal, is often cited as the best solution for the problem of reconciling the knowledge of God for the freedom of man and the future. If God is eternal, after all not all progress. Boethius, Anselm, Thomas von Aquino and many other must solve this problem to cause feelings of Dieu.Semble offer a good strategy during the proposal, that God is eternal, it remains a significant problem. This problem is the prophecy. Suppose that God to Moses, says among other things that Jeanie will tomorrow make a cup of tea. Now we have a different situation completely. While the knowledge of God, Jeanie is a cup of tea is not only temporary, Moses is know that Jeanie will be the on a temporary basis. In addition, because the information comes from God, Moses does not understand about the future (1991, Walsh Wierenga, 1991).The Prophet is a problem, some argue that, if God, who really said Moses Jeanie. God, says apparently not much to Moses or any other Prophet. Expected finally, why God of Moses? Moses, certainly not Jeanies Cup interferes with tea. The prophecy of this type are relatively rare, we can be sure that the knowledge of God does not prevent our freedom. Some have argued if it is possible that the God of Moses (or something) that make Jeanie, then have we have a version of the same compatibility, which presents, but we would if we celebrate God he foreknows in time and his tea. We call this version, could be the possible problem of the Prophet. If the potential problem of the Prophet is serious enough of God prove eternal events to come (future, i.e. from our current location point) is not compatible with these free, then it is that it is timeless God does not solve the problem of knowledge. Brian Leftow defended the eternal life of God in other ways. There, there are moments in the life of God. In the following reports from the front and the rear, even if they are not temporary, before or after the other. Leftow calls this view temporary almost eternity (Qty) (Leftow, 1991). A quantity is his life at the same time timeless. Died at every moment of your life and there no time when already elsewhere not always inhabited. Significantly, because the sequential moments of life has a quantity, duration is the duration or extension of the life of a transient. Because in the same time, or all at once the life, is a timeless Wesen.Leftow believes that his vision has the advantage, that they consider the challenges of Fitzgerald, the doctrine of divine simplicity. There may be the kind of life that can be metaphysically simple discrete moments after its position in the life of a God, individualized being timeless. Leftow says there a big difference between a being, the spatial parts or materials and a creature with a duration, consisting of different times or places or points. If the duration of the life of God is made up of discrete components, no God be a metaphysically easy. Share, however, is not. A line segment is completed not by a finite number of points, so that the sum or the subtraction of one number (finite) points will change its length. If not counted points or moments or the positions of the life of God in the context of life, finite length must be zero.Fitzgerald had criticized, the blunt and Kash notion of eternal life through the insistence on this duration should consist of various positions. This tax will not affect the position of Leftows. Leftow allowing there several points in the life of a God eternal (and metaphysically simple). He insists on the fact that these points are not part of the life of God. Therefore, God is no being, whose life includes clearly defined sections. It is simply metaphysics. His life contains points, but consecutively ordered. Dios Qty. allowing God with points sequential for the kind of life that he wanted to be Fitzgerald, but timeless. In this way, the concept Qty. of eternal life is more satisfactory than delivered butt and Kash's long term. Timeless, understand, Leftow, properties of actions with a temporary duration. In a recent essay, he defended the idea that these specifications without temporal representation of God (Leftow 2002) can be divided. It makes a distinction between properties, on a temporary basis to do something and those who are generally of a temporary nature. A usually temporary (PTT) feature is a property that is typical for temporary events and helps make temporary. It is not enough to make an event a temporary event, but have a TTP. What is a temporary event called TTP. Leftow points out that almost everyone, saying: that God eternally also asserts that at least some TTP has the life of God. ? Similarly, anyone who claims, God is God, he believed at the time each TTP. By example, a PTT, is altogether in the future with regard to a temporary event but God, even if it is a temporary phenomenon must not have this property. God has no beginning. Thus, their lives of God's life is not completely in the future for temporary Veranstaltungen.Das, every life is an event, but this time will not and who will move to no change. This description captures what it means eternal life. While it is hard and as an event each TTP Leftow argues well that not the kind of TTP, likely to be only temporary things. The life of God, may be an eternal life. What if another TTP God is eternal? The life of God is also gifted, says Leftow. Have a PTT is a gift, but a gift from God is a gift - no time. Now, God has not been visited. Now, it's the answer to the question is an event when it occurs? The term Leftow, choose when he left the compound. If not, all are sometimes, however. Eternity, in the sense of being a place out of time, can also be if (see also Leftow, 1991). Can answer the question of eternity if God works?Leftow's analysis of these functions temporarily shows that typically few objections to eternal life and the eternal relationship of God to a temporal world are not critical. An eternal God be present, even if temporarily absent world. You have a life, the event has a duration, but not only the temporary duration. Critics of the stump and Kash are therefore correct when they say that these properties are the kind of things that make their temporary vectors. It is possible that, even if they are things that have these properties usually of a temporary nature, are not necessarily. William Lane Craig position includes another variant. It is that God temporarily because it is in metaphysics. The life of this God is characterized by the creation of the era. Since God has created the universe, it has been temporarily. Before the creation, God was out of time. It is of course wrong not to say before the creation in the literal sense. The way that Craig describes his point of view, is that without God is timeless. God with creation is limited.If God has changed eternal position in this way, some arguments against timelessness or temporality is therefore rejected. For example, is the Omniscient Eternal God in your state. He did not know of any. Know that God must, in their State out of time, write that I am now. If God knows (without equipment) that I write now, I think that a God with eternal creation can know that I write now. Therefore, the eternity of God is not incompatible with the theory of the time (Hasker 2003). Response by Craig is also long the universe is created, there is no time, and therefore, any proposal of Tese are wrong. You know that God in eternity without creating timeless offer of Ganssle on December 14, 2006. After the creation of the universe in real time and these sets has acquired a timeless steps there are all the facts. To find out when the time is there, God must also know that I write now.The challenge with this response, is that some of the strategies to facilitate the work of the B-theory seems to support. Do not forget that the theory of the time of the esteem the most basic things to places of the past, present and future. Theory B maintains that the fundamental aspects of relations time before, after or at the same time. In the vision of Craig, it is difficult to argue that the most fundamental WindGURU B if class Relaciones B would be a location. Without the creation, it is a fact that I write this sentence on 14 December 2006. After you have created the time are more facts, as if he writes now, or have done so already. The fact that I write on 14 December seems more important than the facts, which are when you create time.Position of Craig raises another interesting question. Is it possible for a provisional or temporary eternal be timeless? Philosophers who discussed with opinions, I accept not the answer to this question. Kash, and stump would be like any changes. His vision of divine eternity is deeply linked to the divine simplicity, which in turn is regarded as part of gasoline even of God. Charles also tolerates this kind of change and not be do step out of time, a person may be or no relationship of cause and effect in their point of view. Craig is of the opinion that it is possible. God knows any declaration on the events. This response is in fact, the defence of the rapid response previously given. Then this position of his followers, is a commitment with the B-theory of time. B - theory of time (also called timeless or rigid theory) involves the assertion of the fundamental properties of relations and over time. These relationships can be reduced to talk about courses on time (past, present and future). The storm is no longer an objective function of reality, but it is a characteristic of our experience of reality. If the theory of time B is true, this objection to the divine eternity is flawed.Anyone who thinks that there are proposals on facts, which do not fall on the proposals of the form event and joins t. Katherin Rogers (1994, 2000) says that both Leftow and dull and Kash is able to articulate a concept of compelling or even coherent Divine eternal life. I call his assertions that the opinions of timelessness in the Boethius and other medieval thinkers include a duration. These texts, he argues, are more ambiguous. Rogers his background in Plotinus and Augustine are that it does not better read to assign these philosophers, such as the life of God is sustained. Augustine and Anselm especially the notion of timelessness of the idea expressed.Although medieval thinker of timelessness as in which the duration is thought, the difficult question of whether we should think that way. Rogers noted that the two buttocks Kash and Leftow, serve to the defence of the concept does not its divine timelessness against common objections of distinctive concepts of timeless duration at all. In addition, the statements of the consistency of eternal life are inconclusive.Kash and blunt used the analogy of two parallel lines (Kash and blunt 1987:219). The largest illuminated completely (all at once) while the lowest point is lit, while moving at uniform speed. The light in each row is this indivisible. Which collection is a timeless gift indivisible, during each point on the timeline a gift (a). In this way, the life of God, so to speak, in fact analogy consists of temporary Seite.Diese lies in their essential characteristics. Rogers holds the row that represents the timelessness (this line and call it) is also made by various points, or not. If not, then no period timelessness. If so, these points must be somehow respond to points in the timeline (called T). The geometric aspect of the analogy has slipped significantly, if we see that some point t (they call it T1) will be much stronger at a point and (E1) the T235. However, the life of God in the same relationship for each point must remain over time where God must be really timeless. Mark Rogers, who never found the analogy in the medieval writers. His favorite geometric analogy is in the middle of the circle and the point. The circle represents all the time and point of timelessness. Timelessness is the same ratio of each point along the temporary matrix. The point itself has no extension or Teile.Wenn God a QTÉ to a brow of life out of time and points back. However, they have no experience of God in order. They are experts at the same time timeless time. Rogers submitted that the willing Leftow's two options. Or discuss, distinguish between the principles there are moments in the life of God and their experience with these moments (those moments can be successively have learn without all at the same time) or shall provide subsequent simultaneous can and moments of life in God. No other solution increases the likelihood or the clarity of the claim, that the life of God is eternal life.Rogers offers a geometric analogy not found in San Agustín (1993), which deals with the relationship between God and time conditions. God's relationship with the world is similar to human memory of the past. As mental exercise the human being can be called to a series of events that are sequential, God in eternity perhaps temporary events do not sequentially know the whole sequence.Position of Rogers, then, is that the eternal life of God do not live. Do not think that deny God's life, reduced to a kind of existence static or frozen. These terms are temporarily unavailable. Each of them includes a State of equilibrium for a period of time. Enter the God a point geometry, with the exception of the absence of extension (Rogers, 1994, s.) (14) is. His life, but not just any what extension. While there are many arguments for the claim that God is eternal, this three test who consider as most important. Here are the arguments about the knowledge of the future free acts of God, the fullness of life in the creation of God and God of the universe. In addition, you will learn some responses to these arguments. Sometimes temporary position appears to the reader of God as a position that limits the nature of God. Philosophers who defended divine temporality made for a similar methodology, hired by the promoters of timelessness. Inside of parameters, that operate historic biblical orthodoxy and media is the idea that God is the greatest. Therefore, the defender of the divine temporality considers that God is omniscient and omnipotent. Dios is temporality as the limit of its power or its knowledge, to study. Proponents of a temporary God often work during the generation of solutions to the challenge of the divine knowledge and human freedom. You use the term, God knows what can be detected and therefore all-knowing. Even the philosophers who claim that do not know the free future of actions to defend the divine omniscience of God. I do not think that there are truths on future measures freely or none of this truth can, even by God (Hasker, 1989 and Pinnock et al. 1994 to be detected). God is Omniscient because he knows everything that can be detected. Divine temporality is no Orthodox concept of God.In has published, it is often the commitment of his biblical orthodoxy, which raises arguments that God better than preliminary is expected. Finally, the Pslamist said that God "from eternity to eternity. (Psalm were born) It seems that it means eternal temporality of God. Two of these topics will be discussed: the argument that divine action in the world requires of temporality, the knowledge of this God of facts argument should be limited in time. , the great thinkers have argued that God does not Estabaen at all time. As long as God, in the sense of thinking, that it eternal or timeless. Now, the prevailing view among philosophers, that God is temporal. His eternal existence is considered to be is never again. Never materialized and will never go out of existence, but it exists in time. supporters of individual positions give the eternity of God. Thus, the eternal Word became ambiguous or the general term refers to different positions. In this article the term forever, will be used anything on God's relationship with time. Temporary refers to God as time and the timeless sense God as timeout. ,,.