ABSTRACT
Discussions of divine eternality ought to distinguish between the sort of complete timelessness – God’s being outside of time – that is sometimes associated with the concept, and a dišerent sort of timelessness, also frequently associatedwith eternity, that involves lacking temporal parts, and so existing “all at once”. e main thesis of this chapter is that a plausible case can be made for all-at-once existence, rather than complete timelessness, as the best understanding of what eternality is. To be clear about exactly what these dišerent notions involve, I need some
precisely dened terminology: A temporal entity, as I will use the term here, exists at one or more times and, unless it exists for just an instant, exists through time. It coexists – that is, exists simultaneously – with other entities existing at the same time. An atemporal entity, on my usage, is one that is not temporal. It does not exist in time, in the sense that it does not exist at any time and so, a fortiori, does not exist through time. It cannot be said to exist simultaneously with, or before, or aŸer any other entity. Amerechronic entity partly exists at some instant in time, but also existed or will exist at other times, and does not wholly exist at any one time. A holochronic entity is one that is not merechronic. It exists as a whole, all at once, for all of its existence, and does not partly exist at dišerent times.
