London, Greenwich (trekearth.com)
March 26, 2012
Panentheism
Process theism approaches are sometimes referred to as being panentheistic.[1] The two approaches are not identical but process theism moves in the direction of panentheism.[2] David H. Nikkel (2003) defines panentheism as from the Greek meaning ‘all is in God.’[3] Both God’s transcendence and immanence are accepted, as the world and matter is in God, and God is ‘all-encompassing with respect to being.’[4] Panentheism is not identical to pantheism which postulates that ‘God is identical with everything’[5] or that God is in everything and that God and the universe are one.[6] The difference being that panentheism understands ‘God is in all things’[7] but not identical with all things as with pantheism.[8] As example, God in pantheism may be considered to be equal with a tree. God in panentheism may be considered beyond the tree, but the vital force within it, where as in my traditional Christian theistic understanding God is beyond a tree and sustains it, but is not the vital force within it.[9] Panentheism attempts to ‘avoid the pitfalls’ of traditional theism.[10] God is prohibited from having a true and genuine relationship with matter and the universe because of traditional theistic views such as that God is immutable, impassible, and eternal and timeless.[11] Panentheism is an intellectual compromise between traditional theism and pantheism.[12] God is more than just the material universe, as there is an unchanging aspect to God’s being and also a dynamic aspect to God as the divine being changes as matter and the universe do.[13] German philosopher, F.W. J. Schelling [14] (1845)(1936) reasons: ‘As there is nothing before or outside of God, he must contain within himself the ground of his existence.’[15] He reasons God’s nature is inseparable from God and yet can be distinguished.[16] Panentheism can reasonably be understood as an overarching view within many process theism approaches[17] which I have contrasted with my own views.[18]
[1] Geisler (1975: 153).
[2] Grenz and Olsen (1992: 142). I am not stating that this is the case in every documented view of process theism, but it is generally true that the two views are closely related.
[3] Nikkel (2003: 1).
[4] Nikkel (2003: 1).
[5] Martinich (1996: 556).
[6] Blackburn (1996: 276). Blackburn also explains Benedictus de Spinoza (1632-1677) is noted for this view within Western philosophy
[7] Martinich (1996: 556). The doctrine that all things exist in God. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
[8] Martinich (1996: 556).
[9] This is my example based on Erickson’s presentation. Erickson (1994: 303-307).
[10] Nikkel (2003: 1). Many modern theologians and philosophers now question the concept of an eternal God. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
[11] Nikkel (2003: 1). God is not eternal within this view. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
[12] Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
[13] Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
[15] Schelling (1845)(1936: 32).
[16] Schelling (1845)(1936: 32). Schelling sought to deflect criticisms that he was a pantheist. ‘Unity is of essence, but so is diversity.’ Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxxi). However, his comments make it possible that he had views which were perhaps panentheistic. Material things are dependent on God and yet independent.
[17] Including that of Whitehead. Nikkel (2003: 2-3). Grenz and Olsen (1992: 142).
[18] My views are Reformed but not strictly within a certain camp such as Presbyterian or Baptist. I have primarily come to my Reformed views through MPhil and PhD research.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
GEISLER, NORMAN L. (1975) Philosophy of Religion, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
GRENZ, STANLEY J. AND ROGER E. OLSON (1992) Twentieth Century Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
GUTMANN, JAMES (1845)(1936) ‘Introduction’ in SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.
GUTMANN, JAMES (1845)(1936) ‘Introduction’ in SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.
KREEFT, PETER and RONALD K. TACELLI (1994) Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
MARTINICH, A.P. (1999) ‘Pantheism’ in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
NIKKEL, DAVID H. (2003) ‘Panentheism’, in Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, MacMillan Reference USA, New York.
SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.
Fire Lake, BC (trekearth.com)
Sole Porto Ferraio, Italy (trekearth.com)
Yahoo Background Image
iTunes Personally Evolving Toward Classical
My former desktop and PhD computer had been infected via YouTube with Zero Access RootKit viruses as discussed on the satire and theology blog. This required a Windows operating system reformat and a reloading of the one week plus worth of songs on iTunes. I have a decent collection of compact CDs from rock (progressive, art), jazz (fusion) and classical music. This has been a collection I have gathered slowly over the years, mainly several years ago. There was then a power outage in our building and I went to visit my Mother in the hospital. I arrived home and the power was restored but a power surge had destroyed the motherboard/mainboard on my desktop computer. I was forced to replace my computer and decided to buy my first modern notebook. My iTunes were of course lost. I am presently at the one week point at reloading iTunes as I type this post. This is just a ‘best of’ from my collection and selection from most discs, I rarely will copy entire discs. That is how I prefer to listen to music. I then set iTunes to random.
I rarely purchase CDs now and when I do they are primarily classical discs. Also the prediction I made to Uncle Chuck about fifteen years ago is basically true. I stated that based on the music trends of the time I would primarily run out of interesting progressive, innovative music to collect in the rock and jazz genres and start collecting more classical discs. Basically from the 1990s onward formerly progressive more innovative rock and jazz artists from the 1970s and 1980s tended to resort to playing for marketing purposes more typical rock, or more typical jazz, and I am not usually interested in such but like rock fusion, more commonly known as progressive rock and jazz fusion. These tend to be more innovative and complex. Also I suppose it would be difficult in today’s music scene for a new music act to make it in rock or jazz commercially performing progressive, fusion music that was not considered mainstream or within one genre.
The issue of secular lyrics has never been an important for me as an adult. For one, I have never paid much attention to them. Two, I am in agreement with a former professor from Columbia Bible College that there is no solid proof that hearing lyrics that one disagrees with in music will necessarily influence a person’s views for the negative. In fact, he suggested it might just as easily have the opposite effect of putting the listener against what the artist is stating.
As well, after four degrees and in particular two secular theses degrees focusing on theodicy, the problem of evil within Philosophy of Religion and Theology, there were many things I read that I disagreed with, and it is quite frankly possible to enjoy aspects of an author while disagreeing with other aspects. This is so even with atheists and critics of Christianity. It also possible to learn from someone that has a different worldwiew on some specific points. So, one could potentially listen to an artist for the musicianship and enjoy it while disagreeing with some of the lyrics. However, as noted in my case I think lyrics have little overall impact.
I prefer how much less in price most classical discs are compared to other genres of music. I suppose the older classical music is considered public domain and there is no estate to collect royalties. 'Newer' recordings of these artists would have copyrights by record companies and orchestras but not necessarily the estates of these artists.
First warm day of Spring 2012, April 7 (Blackberry photo)
