Re: [asa] Re: on TE and PT, a response to Gregory

On 1/31/08, D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com> wrote:
> Panentheism tries to have a bit of
> both the other views. This results in a deity which is necessarily
> connected to the universe, but greater than the universe. This deity has
> to try to persuade the universe, or its parts, to go along with what it
> intends, but cannot compel or force it."

My own understanding is that, in PT, the diety CHOOSES to try to
persuade rather than "cannot."
>
> I would wonder, from what you wrote, where the
> mass-energy came from if God did not create it?"

Don't have any answer to that, of course. David Ray Griffin has
written extensively on the subject; he rejects ex-hiliho. I find his
writings stimulating; see a review of his RELIGION AND SCIENTIFIC
NATURALISM I wrote for PSCF at

www.burgy.50megs.com/griffin.htm

but ultimately not persuasive.

The review begins:

David Ray Griffin, Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology at
Claremont, a prolific writer on issues of science and religion, has
written a watershed book, one which has received the Book Award for
2000 from the (UK-based) Scientific and Medical Network. This volume,
one in the SUNY series in Constructive Postmodern Thought, argues a
Whiteheadian based philosophy that religion does not require
supernaturalism and science does not require materialism. Griffin
describes himself as a panentheistic Christian, one who sees God as
more than the universe and yet the universe as part of God. He sees
God at work in the universe, but in a "persuasive" rather than in a
"coercive" way.

. . .

Burgy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Feb 1 11:09:54 2008