"Howard J. Van Till" wrote:
> A number of people have given their personal characterizations of what
> "process theology" entails. However, like more traditional Christian
> theologies, there is no one party line that can be taken as the
> representative of the entire category. So ........ I think it's time
> to engage particular proponents and deal with what they actually say,
> thereby avoiding problems that could arise from glib
> oversimplifications or misrepresentions.
>
> Following, for example, is David Ray Griffin's way of talking about
> the "generic idea of God."
>
> ""God" refers to (1) a personal purposive being who is (2) supreme in
> power, and (3) perfect in goodness, who (4) created the world, and (5)
> acts providentially in it, who (6) is experienced by human beings,
> especially as the source of moral norms and religious experiences, and
> is (7) the ultimate guarantee for the meaningfulness of human life,
> (8) the ultimate ground of hope for the victory of good over evil,
> thereby (9) alone worthy of worship."
>
> He goes on to say that "A Whiteheadian theism can retain all nine
> features by simply modifying the traditional understanding of some of
> them. The central modification involves the second feature, according
> to which God is supreme in power. This change in meaning, from
> coercive to persuasive power, entails a modification of the
> traditional meanings of the 4th, 5th, and 8th features as well. These
> modifications constitute the change from supernaturalistic theism to
> the kind of naturalistic theism affirmed in this book." From Religion
> and Scientific Naturalism, p. 90.
In spite of your introductory remarks, you do not indicate what
Griffin "actually says" about the modifications that have to be made in
these concepts. Thus this does not really further the discussion.
Of course a process theologian can affirm that God "created the
world" if he or she is allowed to say what "created the world" means.
The questions that I have raised, however, have to do not with whether
process theology is internally consistent but with whether or not it can
be an adequate way of expressing the historic Christian faith.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 12:46:23 EST