Replies

Hi Bill,
Great question! From what I know about the integral community, Whitehead is considered an “ancestor” of that thought due to his developmental approach. Doug King of Presence International and I did a course where he brought in his integral theology to approach the biblical narrative as a story of universal God identity. You might check out Doug’s podcast called Presence. I’m not aware of anyone that’s done a deep dive comparing Whitehead and Wilbur, but that may be out there.
Sheri

Hello Gordon!
Thank you so much for this rich introduction. We are fortunate to have you with us. You have vast experience and I know will bring much to the discussion!
Sheri

That’s beautiful Kyle! I hope you’ll be in the class this evening to share some of those responses with Rabbi Artson!

I can certainly appreciate all of that, Rolla. As I lean toward the heretical myself, I too keep an eye open!

Cobb and Griffin’s introductory text is certainly a good academic text. Bruce Epperly also has some excellent texts, more oriented to the educated general public. You might be able to find the C/G text used. 🙂

Hi Kyle and Scott,
Process theology can be thought of as one system under the wider umbrella of “open and relational theology,” which is an umbrella term that Tom Oord coined. The two main tenets of ORT are that the future is “open” and God is “relational.” Those two points are agreed upon by process theologians and by the more evangelical-leaning theologians who fall under ORT but may not embrace all of process theology. Some theologians are unwilling to say that God does not HAVE the power to intervene in the world, and might say that God empties God’s self intentionally of that power, in a kenotic fashion, but could, conceivably, take that power back if desired.

I’m curious Kyle as to your understanding of universal reconciliation/salvation that leads you to say that process thought doesn’t embrace it. Can you say more?

Yes, Jason, I agree wholeheartedly! It all becomes of a piece and not as if process thought is some weird add on that doesn’t fit. I’m looking forward to hearing from him this evening!

Very well thought out and articulated, Jace. I’m so glad to hear that the certificate program has been generative. I’m very impressed by the level of discussion I’ve seen in the forum so far.

Hi Clarissa,
You can find the idea of Jesus’ “field of force” in Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition” by John Cobb and David Ray Griffin, beginning around p. 102. On p 103 they write, “Paul understood the Christian life as life ‘in Christ,’ and this can best be understood as life in a field of force generated by Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. The compilers of Q and the Gospel writers who used Q were impressed by the power of Jesus’ teaching. Both the field of force and encounter with the teaching of Jesus open believers to the effective work of creative transformation.” (field of force is mentioned in following pages as well)

If you’re not familiar, Q refers to what is presumed by biblical scholars to be a document written before the gospels of Luke and Matthew were written that the authors of both used. A common source.

Just wanting to add more on the idea of God as the “ground of novelty” from Cobb and Griffin’s introductory text p. 28:

“One aspect of God is a primordial envisagement of the pure possibilities. They are envisaged with appetition that they be actualized in the world. The actualization of novel possibilities generally increases the enjoyment of experience; for the variety of possibilities that are actualized in an experience adds richness to the experience, and the element of novelty lends zest and intensity of enjoyment.

This means that the divine reality is understood to be the ground of novelty. This stands in tension with most religious philosophies, according to which deity (if it be the ground of anything in the world) is the ground of an established order. The God of process thought is also the ground of order, but this is a changing and developing order, an order that must continually incorporate novelty if it is not to become repressive of enjoyment. The positive appraisal of novelty resulting from this vision pervades process theology.”

Thumbs up to that, Bill!

That’s really beautiful, Charles. Thank you for this perspective!

Hi Bill,
I think you’ll find much variety in approaches to meat eating in process Christians. I think there are many factors that enter into such decisions, including understanding that different forms of life vary in their complexity even if all have intrinsic value. For me, a foundational truth about this world is that, as Joseph Campbell says, “Life eats life.” Each person much choose the kinds of life they are willing to eat, but at the end of the day, life must eat life in order to survive.
Sheri

Thank you Leslie! Are you saying those two sentences don’t fit with the rest of what you read and know about process theology?

Thank you, Jace. Lots to chew on here. Is this from a paper you’ve written?