Can God change the past?
November 21, 2005 10:06 AM   Subscribe

Can God change the past?

Serious theological answers please.
posted by cillit bang to Religion & Philosophy (65 answers total)
Are we assuming She's omnipotent? Then yeah.
posted by bshort at 10:07 AM on November 21, 2005

Even if so, how will one know?
posted by Gyan at 10:07 AM on November 21, 2005

I can't give you a theological answer, but here's an epistemological problem: How could you possibly know the past had been changed?
posted by Rothko at 10:09 AM on November 21, 2005

Are you wondering what the answer is according to each of many differing opinions in different sects of different religions? Or whether it's logically feasible? Or what?
posted by Marquis at 10:10 AM on November 21, 2005

If God can completely change the present, in effect he would change the past, either in terms of changing its effect on the current - or indeed by 'resetting' the current to same settings (for want of a better word) as the past.
posted by prentiz at 10:14 AM on November 21, 2005

In many religions god exists outside of time (is eternal) and the whole of space/time is one gigantic creation (I'm remembering a multifaceted jewel as the metaphor, but that may just be from Watchmen). From this viewpoint, god could change the past at will as part of the work of creation, but the change would have been done in whatever outside god exists in. To those of us who live within space/time and perceive the passage of time, it would be invisible and unknowable.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 10:21 AM on November 21, 2005

The question of past-changing falls under a general class of paradoxes related to Omnipotence. This article at Stanford's philosophy site will give you an insight into some of the major thoughts on this as well as some further reading.
posted by vacapinta at 10:24 AM on November 21, 2005

Depends on your concept of God. If you're going by Judeo-Christian concepts, the answer would be yes. However, there'd also be much argument against this ever happening, as the Judeo-Christian God has left humanity to free will.

Generally, any concept of an omnipotent God would be capable of changing the past by definition of what they are. Respect for free will would be the most likely reason for God not doing so, or contentment with what has happened. As well, one could argue that God has, or even is currently changing the past, and we simply do not know or understand this.

One could argue that God IS the past, present, and future. This would be an omnipresent God, although not necessarily omnipotent. I do not know of any religion that subscribes to this concept offhand, but it's a potential scenario.

In general, changing the past is seen as the realm of omnipotence, or perhaps omnipresence. Outside of that, the only Gods with any sway over the past are those who govern time itself. Even then, such a concept is rarely discussed in most mythologies.

When Man takes it upon himself to create a world where he is God (Writing stories, imagination), this ManGod can change the past as he pleases.

Marty McFly could do it. So, perhaps the more appropriate question is, "Is God more capable than Marty McFly?" Or worse yet, "Is Marty McFly God?" Nonsensical, perhaps. I've heard people who truly believe far more bizarre ideals though.
posted by Saydur at 10:27 AM on November 21, 2005

From what I understand in the Bible, God is all about letting humans use their freewill to make their own destiny, so he would have no reason to change the past.

If God really is omnipotent and all-powerful, then God is able to do anything and everything an infinite amount of times. By saying that God is *not* able to change the past proves that God is *not* all-powerful. Also God may still be omnipotent but at least constrained by some rule or force to a linear time existance.
posted by cleverusername at 10:28 AM on November 21, 2005

the past is a memory,the future an expectation, neither actually exist there is only continuous now.
posted by hortense at 10:30 AM on November 21, 2005

can god make stone too heavy for god to lift?

As a teenage atheist, I thought this was a really cool paradox to lay on my religious friends. I (and they) didn't know that serious religious scholars haven't taken this seriously for centuries.

"God" is a loaded word. Can ANY all-powerful being make a rock too heavy for him to lift? Well, if he's ALL powerful, then he can lift all things. There's no such thing as "a rock so heavy that he can't lift it." The "paradox" is similar to saying, "Can God pleeble poogle pebble bling?" It's nonsense. There MUST be rocks that God can't lift -- or there must be spells God can't do (i.e. He can't make a rock so heavy that He can't lift it.)

The solution: by "all poweful," most intelligent theists mean that God can do anything that isn't contradictory. God can make it rain and he can make it not rain, but he can't make it be both raining and not raining at the same time (in the same place). He's still all powerful in any useful sense of the term.

So If the past is something that can be changed without causing a contradiction, then God (assuming He exists and is "all powerful") can change it.

Let's say the past still (somehow) exists -- even in the present. And lets also assume (though we may want to deal with the possibility of this being false) that there's a causal relationship between the past and the present. In other words, if you kick me in the head in the past, that will cause me to feel pain in the present.

God alters the past. In his new version, you DON'T kick me in the head. Do I still feel pain in the present?

I think this is an important distinction you need to make. Are you asking, "Can God alter the past withOUT changing the present?" Well, if the past CAUSES the present, then this would create a contradiction. So God can't do it.

If the past doesn't cause the present, then He can. I could remove some frames from the beginning of "The Godfather" without altering later frames. This is because there ISN'T a causal link between the earlier frames and the later frames. (Even though our brains create the illusion of causation when we view "The Godfather" as a story -- what actually exists is a series of individual still pictures that don't affect each other.)

Or maybe God CAN alter the past and that DOES affect the present. He removes the you-kick-me and that stops me-feeling-pain. I don't see a contradiction here.

I only see a contradiction if (a) the past causes the present and (b) you want God to be able to alter the past WITHOUT altering the present.

Before answering whether or not God can alter the past, you need to grapple with much more complicated questions, like "What IS the past?"

Note: it's interesting to substitute other points-in-time for the past and the present. What happens if God alters the future? Also, if he alters the present, does that affect the past?
posted by grumblebee at 10:33 AM on November 21, 2005

There is a valid philosophical question that asks if God can mainuplate the universe or if He (God can't be a woman for obvious reasons), has to abide by the rules of the universe that He created. I don't have any texts here but it explores it in a religious way.
posted by geoff. at 10:43 AM on November 21, 2005

One could also say that believing in an god can allow you to selectively interpret the past or even change the account of it wholesale. But you could also say the same for all manners of foolishness.
posted by dobie at 10:45 AM on November 21, 2005

Cilit bang, what exactly is the past, in terms of your question?

Is it the universe in our memories? Is the past-present--future universe in God's memory, and therefore contained within God?

Is God a distinct entity from the universe and if so, are you asking if the past like a book that God can edit at will?

A lot of the answers you get depend on your meaning of "past". Please clarify for us what you mean.
posted by Rothko at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2005

Timekeeping is the invention of man, and is meaningless to God.
posted by DandyRandy at 10:52 AM on November 21, 2005

Whether he could or couldn't wouldn't matter unless he chose to.

Those who opt to post logically unsound "two lines both longer than each other" or "make a rock heavier than he can lift" dares ought to recognize that such concepts don't even make sense to begin with in order to be attempted. Such things aren't even conceptual, and are neither possible nor impossible.
posted by vanoakenfold at 10:52 AM on November 21, 2005

1) An omnipresent and omniscient God can change the past.

2) Such a God would do it in such a way that you'd never notice.

3) You, even as a believer in that God, would never know.

(4) Under what circumstances would God change the past? And why?)
posted by nicething at 10:53 AM on November 21, 2005

Timekeeping is the invention of man, and is meaningless to God.

I would say this (and I think where Rothko is going) is spot on. Seems like man's physics has show that "time" is simply a useful conceit for discussing the way we perceive events. I don't think this necessarily helps answer the question, but it does suggest the question isn't as paradoxical or as important as it sounds.

I would say the J-C God isn't going to be pulling the Delorean out of the Heavenly Gates very often given the emphasis on man's free will. But I don't know that a being who could microwave a burrito so hot He/She/It could not eat it would be encumbered by our concept of time. Or three dimensions.
posted by yerfatma at 11:05 AM on November 21, 2005

Oooh, ooh, let me at this...I am in the middle of a theology class right now.

There is a concept in theology known as the Divine Decree. In other words, everything that God decides is to happen is part of this Decree of His. Everything-past, present and future. (As far as sin goes, the decree is permissive-God permitted it for His own good reasons but is not the author of it.)

If I have this straight, there would be no need for Him to change the past as whatever happened to begin with was part of what He decreed WOULD happen.

I do know that this can lead to a very long and involved discussion regarding man and free will (we do have it; it's just a paradox.)

I'd love to discuss this further, but I am in the middle of a paper for this very class.
posted by konolia at 11:11 AM on November 21, 2005

serious religious scholars haven't taken this seriously for centuries -- not because there was an answer, but because it was agreed that there isn't an answer. descartes was not right; but neither was aquinas right; it's more about the pondering than the right or wrong of it, and what that pondering can do for your mind.
posted by dorian at 11:13 AM on November 21, 2005

C. S. Lewis discusses God's relationship to Time in Mere Christianity (Book 4, Chapter 3). Maybe that's what you're looking for.
posted by Prospero at 11:14 AM on November 21, 2005

Here is a model
posted by hortense at 11:22 AM on November 21, 2005

Better question: can Charlotte Church change the past?

It seems most responses are treating your question as some sort of half-baked koan (toke up, brah!), but DandyRandy seems pretty close to the truth of it.

C.S. Lewis's Mere Christianity discusses the concept of time as it applies to the Trinity.
posted by Loser at 11:24 AM on November 21, 2005

(God can't be a woman for obvious reasons)

Huh? I mean, the world's major monotheistic religions refer to God using the masculine pronoun, but that doesn't mean much -- if I were speaking German, my computer and television would be referred to with masculine pronouns, and they certainly aren't men.

And if you are speaking monotheistically, God can't be a man OR a woman for reasons that should ACTUALLY be obvious -- in order to define something by its sex, you need at least two of them.
posted by dagnyscott at 11:37 AM on November 21, 2005

God doesn't make mistakes, so there's nothing to change.*

*also God doesn't exist
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:38 AM on November 21, 2005

If God does not exist neither do the rest of us.
posted by konolia at 11:41 AM on November 21, 2005

what does it mean to change the past? do we assume a single history for the universe? or does it mean choosing an alternative option in a "multiverse"? is it possible to change the past without changing the present? does that require some kind of persistence of information between changes? how do you know whether that information is reliable? is it possible to change the past in a way that doesn't alter the information in the present? is that a change? is it important that a change be observed? what is an observer? are there regions of the universe that will never be observed? how are information content and observation related?

why isn't this trivial? why can't we win back time to a previous point and then start again? why is "can god change the future?" not the same question? why does it have to be god?
posted by andrew cooke at 11:45 AM on November 21, 2005

I think you're asking "Can God invalidate his own existence?" I believe that God is bound by laws, just as we are. As we learn to understand and work in harmony with those natural laws, we gain the ability to do what God does. But it also works the opposite way. We are limited by the rules. Eg: 3 dimensions, one way time, etc. Now these natural laws may be just localized phenomenon, but I don't think that matters, because we cannot place ourselves outside of them. Anyways, my answer is this: God can do whatever God can do. He understands the laws and rules of his existence and is obedient to them. That is what makes him God. I think the important question for me is "Does God have free will?"
posted by blue_beetle at 11:46 AM on November 21, 2005

what is to changing the past as free-will is to changing the future?
posted by andrew cooke at 11:49 AM on November 21, 2005

Re: God wouldn't change the past because He wants us to have free will: I don't think changing the past would necessarily take away our free will.

Example 1: Person X through his own free will chooses to drive drunk one night and kills someone. God had a plan for that someone to go on and do something important in 10 years. God wants that person alive. Without taking away anyone's free will, God could:

A) send a gust of wind as the drunk goes to the car. The car keys fall from his inebriated hands and he needs to take a few seconds to pick them up. He still gets to decide to drive drunk. He still does drive drunk. But since he's running a few seconds later, he misses a green light. This puts him about 30 seconds behind where he would have been without dropping the keys. Now the person he would have killed is not in his path. No one killed.

B) Cause an accident at a vitamin plant that causes slightly too much iron to go into a multivitamin. Not enough to kill anyone mind you, but just a little more. Former killee takes vitamins and gets hit by drunk driver. Blood clots slightly better than it would have otherwise, so victim does not die.

C) (make up your own crazy scenario here, none of which need involve removing free will)

And of course, without removing free will, God could apparate some extra rock in a fault-line to stabilize it. Prevent an earthquake. No free will lost.
posted by duck at 12:02 PM on November 21, 2005

God can do whatever God wants because that is what makes God a god and not a mere mortal. God is all powerful, humans are not, therefore any rules or restrictions that humans would attempt to place upon God are pointless.

If you, like me, don't believe in God, then the answer is a simple, no, God cannot change the past.
posted by Pollomacho at 12:36 PM on November 21, 2005

dagnyscott, sarcasm.
posted by geoff. at 12:48 PM on November 21, 2005

I don't believe there is anything in religion or science to suggest that the past is immutable, or indeed that the "direction" in which we perceive the occurrence of events - the linear and uniderectional pathway of time - has any real significance from the perspective of absolute reality.

So yes.
posted by nanojath at 1:02 PM on November 21, 2005

Pollomacho, while I don't believe either, (with all due respect) I think your answer is too simplistic:

God can do whatever God wants because that is what makes God a god and not a mere mortal.

Can God sdljfalsjflSDHfl;sdhflhasfsdfh?

If you say, "well, what does that mean?" My answer is that it's meaningless. It's just nonsense characters that I typed on my keyboard. But according to your post, God can do it, anyway.

Note, I'm not saying that IF sdljfalsjflSDHfl;sdhflhasfsdfh meant something, God can do it. I'm saying (or rather you're saying) that even though sdljfalsjflSDHfl;sdhflhasfsdfh doesn't mean anything, God can still do it. In fact, God can also do fdljfalsjflSDHfl;sdhflhasfsdfh, which is the same as sdljfalsjflSDHfl;sdhflhasfsdfh except it starts with an f instead of an s.

And God rob Himself of all His powers, and yet -- while powerless -- give Himself back His former powers; He can make 1 + 1 = 5,6,7,8 and 9 all at the same time; Make rocks so heavy that he can't lift them and all sorts of other nonsense.

What do you base this on? The fact that theists call Him "all powerful." It's completely reasonably to use "all powerful" to mean "capable of doing anything POSSIBLE." (If I own a shoestore and I put a sign in the window saying "EVERYTHING 50% OFF," I mean everything in the store, not everything in the world. You can't expect to go into the hardware store next door and get stuff for 50% off.)
posted by grumblebee at 1:03 PM on November 21, 2005

If God could change the past, surely he would more consistently delete open-ended chatty questions from AskMe.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 1:03 PM on November 21, 2005

The question is nonsensical. Also, common sense strongly suggests God doesn't even exist. If you want philosophical answers to theological questions please read Kant and go from there.
posted by nixerman at 1:10 PM on November 21, 2005

Evidence against: if you're asking about the god of the old/new testament, he made two attempts at "rebooting" his creation (the flood and the birth of christ) which wouldn't have been necessary if he could just change the past.

Although I like grumblebee's answer better.
posted by zanni at 1:21 PM on November 21, 2005

common sense strongly suggests God doesn't even exist.

Nixerman, can you explain this? I'd argue that Occam's Razor suggests God doesn't exist -- but not common sense. Most people believe in god, so the COMMON sense is that He exists.

Most people FEEL that God exists. I don't believe one's feeling correlate with reality, but I'm not using common sense when I say that. Common sense tells us to trust our feelings.
posted by grumblebee at 1:27 PM on November 21, 2005

One of the attributes of God is that we cannot know him, his ways or his powers. So we can debate the question but we can not know the answer.
posted by beagle at 1:37 PM on November 21, 2005

I always understood that complete omnipotence was bound by no law. Can God make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it? Yes. Can he then lift that rock? Yes. Can God cause a colorless green idea to sleep furiously? Yes. A God which transcends all time and space, all physical laws, all laws of logic or causality, can do anything, even things which don't make any sense to our feeble human minds.

God doesn't have to make sense, that's why they call it religion.

Also, under the rules of religion, "Yes, but not in any way that we can understand," is also an allowable answer.
posted by tew at 1:39 PM on November 21, 2005

the past doesn't exist to god. all time is now, that's omnipotence and ubiqui..tivity! he does what he wants.
posted by soma lkzx at 2:04 PM on November 21, 2005

Serious theological answer: the concept of a decision-making God who interacts with things is incompatible with the universe we live in. This is a non-question.

Regarding the Christian God - when God regrets making man (which of course shows that he is fallable), he doesn't turn back the clock and un-make him; he brings a genocidal flood.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 2:11 PM on November 21, 2005

Yeah, and so can I. No need to thank me: you're much better off not knowing why you'd need to.
posted by Eamon at 2:29 PM on November 21, 2005

dagnyscott, sarcasm.

Sorry, I usually expect sarcasm to either be funny or have a point, preferably both.
posted by dagnyscott at 2:33 PM on November 21, 2005

Timekeeping is the invention of man, and is meaningless to God

You mean this God?

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

'Night'? 'Day'? 'The first day'? Sounds an awful lot like timekeeping to me. There's more:

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years

Lookee, seasons and years, and a means to track them, all invented by Jebus.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 3:23 PM on November 21, 2005

This post unassailably proved not only that God exists but also that he can in fact change the past and also contained a simple yet comprehensive explanation of the exact mechanics behind the act and several noteworthy examples of its use. It also had an awesome recipe for portobello mushroom burgers. Unfortunately, God changed the text of this post in the past to what you are now reading. Sorry.
posted by shinji_ikari at 3:23 PM on November 21, 2005

Is there a Google cache?
posted by InfidelZombie at 3:25 PM on November 21, 2005

Of course not, because Google is God. But seriously, God takes offense at you trying to catch him on the Google cache thing. Like he'd miss that.
posted by shinji_ikari at 3:35 PM on November 21, 2005

The whole question makes no sense. To God, the past, the future, and the present, all are. There's nothing to change.
posted by megatherium at 3:39 PM on November 21, 2005

If God does not exist neither do the rest of us.

I find this argument unconvincing.
posted by ludwig_van at 3:48 PM on November 21, 2005

Can the Flying Spaghetti Monster create a ball of marzipan bigger than the physical universe? If the Crisis on Infinite Earths retroactively changed the continuity, did Superman really have a career as Superboy, or not? If Cthulhu and the Borg got in a fight, who'd win?

You can assert pretty much whatever you want when there can't be any evidence for or against something. Yes! No! The question is meaningless! The question has an answer but we can't know it! Yes and no!
posted by Zed_Lopez at 4:11 PM on November 21, 2005

The question is meaningless!

Did King Lear divide his kindom amongst his daughters? Well, if you agree to play be the rules of textual evidence then yes he did. Does Shakespeare's play describe real events that actually happen? If you're applying logic to the text of his play, it doesn't matter. If we can't say that something is true or false in a work of fiction, we can't enjoy the fiction. Does Jack Bower live or die at the end of the second episode of "24"? If your answer is, he's made up so we can't know, then what's the point of the show (substitute your favorite story if you dislike "24".)

I'm bringing this up because it's unnecessarily to ask whether or not God exists in order to answer this question. There's a CHARACTER called God in a story called The Bible. According to the rules of that storyworld, can God change the past? Maybe that's an unanswerable question, but you shouldn't just brush it under the carpet without explaining your reasons. (What was King Lear's wife's name? Given evidence witchin Shakespeare's play, we can't know.)

Just imagine the question was (needlessly, in my mind) reworded so that it read, "For the sake of this question, pretend God exists and has the abilities most theists (i.e. Christians/Jews/etc.) believe He has. Could such a God change the past?" The only problem with that question is that "God" is such a hot-button character. If someone wrote, "Can Darth Vader do X, Y or Z?" he'd surely get tons of serious answers from people who don't believe Darth Vader exists.

Zed_Lopez, I didn't mean to assume you're an atheist (I don't know what you believe), but it shouldn't matter either way.
posted by grumblebee at 4:31 PM on November 21, 2005

So what you're saying, Zed, is mu.
posted by ludwig_van at 4:33 PM on November 21, 2005

I'm bringing this up because it's unnecessarily to ask whether or not God exists in order to answer this question. There's a CHARACTER called God in a story called The Bible. According to the rules of that storyworld, can God change the past? Maybe that's an unanswerable question, but you shouldn't just brush it under the carpet without explaining your reasons.

grumblebee, you're being a good sport here as always, but I agree with Zed that this is not a very meaningful question, for the simple reason that "God" is not well-defined enough. Yes, King Lear is a fictional character, but we know a whole lot more about him, his physical properties, and his capabilities than we do about God. There are so many conflicting notions of God and so little consensus about God's nature that it's hard for this type of discussion to get off the ground unless the terms are explicitly agreed upon from the outset, which they weren't here.
posted by ludwig_van at 4:39 PM on November 21, 2005

What is 'the past'?
posted by Smedleyman at 5:09 PM on November 21, 2005

Yes, I can.
posted by Mwongozi at 5:18 PM on November 21, 2005

"For the sake of this question, pretend God exists and has the abilities most theists (i.e. Christians/Jews/etc.) believe He has."

I don't see that "the abilities most theists believe He has" is anything close to meaningfully defined. There are libraries devoted to the arguments on the subject. So if we're playing by the rules of textual evidence, which text are you going to choose?

Zed_Lopez, I didn't mean to assume you're an atheist (I don't know what you believe), but it shouldn't matter either way.

True. It doesn't matter.
posted by Zed_Lopez at 5:48 PM on November 21, 2005

From the perspective that God stands outside of time, the question is moot. When God does something that affects the course of events it's not the past, present or future from God's perspective.
posted by winston at 5:56 PM on November 21, 2005

which text are you going to choose?

This gives us a framework to answer the question, i.e. "As a Catholic, I was taught that..." and "In the Mormon faith, we believe that..." Questions don't always have to leave to consensus. It's fine (at least in my opinion) if they lead to multiple, clear answers. Maybe that won't happen here, but if not, I don't think it's because the question is meaningless.

I'm not a member of any religion, so I think about the question this way: Can one imagine a being that is as powerful as is conceivably possible? Such a being can do ANYTHING as long as it's imaginable (i.e. doesn't result in contradictions or gibberish). Could such a being change the past without altering the present? I say "yes" if the past doesn't cause the present and "no" if it does.

If it's okay to change the present, then definitely "yes."

It's fine if you (or anyone else) has a different definition for God. Use that definition to answer the question. Just explain your definition. That way, we can come out of this thinking, "If you believe is such-and-such a god, the answer is X. But if you believe in another type of God, the answer is Y."

(I don't want to put words in cillit bang's mouth, but I perhaps he could have caused less controversy by eliminating God from the question: is it conceivably possible to change the past without altering the present? Is it conceivably possible to alter the past if you also allow the present to be altered? cillit bang, does God add anything meaningful to your question? Presumably, if it's possible it all, it's possible for God (if He exists)).
posted by grumblebee at 6:40 PM on November 21, 2005

If God decided to make a rock that even he couldn't lift, you can be sure he won't be able to lift it!
posted by parallax7d at 7:21 PM on November 21, 2005

posted by parallax7d at 7:21 PM on November 21, 2005

If god exists as a 4 dimensional being, then clearly he or she could alter the past, just as easily as he or she could the present.
posted by Paris Hilton at 9:37 PM on November 21, 2005

Scott Adams (yes, the Dilbert guy) actually addressed this in his whimsical, but "impossible-to-market-to-comicheads" book, God's Debris:

OM: “Like the Easter Bunny, the past exists only in your mind,” he said. “Likewise, the future exists only in your mind because it has not happened.”
A: “But I can find evidence of the past. I can check with the weather people and confirm that it rained this morning.”
OM: “And when you get that confirmation, it would instantly become the past itself. So in effect, you would be using the past, which does not exist, to confirm something else from the past. And if you repeat the process a thousand times, with a thousand different pieces of evidence, together they would still be nothing but impressions of the past supporting other impressions of the past.

You can get this quirky little book at Amazon, or you can download a totally free electronic copy of it here.
posted by crazyray at 11:20 PM on November 21, 2005

In Windows XP, the owner of a file can change the security permissions that apply to that file, regardless of whether or not there are already permissions in place that would permit her to do so were she not the owner. Also, most files are owned by the Administrators group.

Therefore, by strict theological analogy: yes.
posted by flabdablet at 11:43 PM on November 21, 2005

There's actually a simple answer. Grant that God is omnipotent and can change whatever he wants. Then it simply depends on whether the past is real (i.e. 4dimensionalism is true). If doesn't exist (i.e. presentism is true) then it would make as much sense to say God can change the past as it would to say that God could make unicorns have two horns.

Then again if presentism was true and God was omnipotent, maybe he could make 4dimensionalism become true so he could change the past. Assuming such a thing makes sense, I think the answer is more safely yes than no.
posted by ontic at 10:04 PM on December 1, 2005

« Older Help me smack Aunt Flo down!   |   dns hosting Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.