 |
| Braganza, Portugal, trekearth |
The Trinity: Panentheism & Pantheism
Segments edited from archived article with new material added.
Panentheism April 01, 2012
Panentheism & Pantheism
David H. Nikkel (2003) defines panentheism as from the Greek meaning ‘all is in God’. Nikkel (2003: 1). 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.’ Nikkel (2003: 1).
Panentheism is not identical to pantheism which postulates that ‘God is identical with everything’ Martinich (1996: 556). Pantheism reasons God is in everything and that God and the universe are one. Blackburn (1996: 276). Blackburn also explains Benedictus de Spinoza (1632-1677) is noted for this view within Western philosophy
The difference being that panentheism understands ‘God is in all things’ Martinich (1996: 556). The doctrine being that all things exist in God. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94), but is not identical with all things as with pantheism. Martinich (1996: 556).
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.
Panentheism attempts to ‘avoid the pitfalls’ of traditional theism. Nikkel (2003: 1). 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. Nikkel (2003: 1). God is not eternal within this view.
Panentheism is an intellectual compromise between traditional theism and pantheism. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94). Within panentheism, 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. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 94).
In my traditional Christian theistic understanding, God is beyond a tree and sustains it, but is not the vital force within it. This is my example based on Erickson’s presentation. Erickson (1994: 303-307).
The Trinity
August 10, 2016
Within a trinitarian, biblical perspective, God as transcendent is beyond the finite, material universe. God is the first cause of all things and sustains all finite creation. God is not the vital force within his finite creation, but sustains and maintains it.
God’s nature does not equate to any human nature, for example. The infinite God causes the finite without being finite (This is not contradicted by Jesus Christ, the Word of God taking finite human nature in the incarnation without ceasing to be infinite God). God is immanent within his creation, but his infinite, eternal nature is not mixed with finite nature of any kind. Deity and humanity, two natures, are also not mixed in the incarnation of Christ.
The finite is not infinite. A finite thing is also not eternal. The finite cannot become infinite. The finite cannot become eternal. The finite, can possibly become everlasting. Finite attributes therefore cannot evolve into infinite attributes.
For balance, an academic friend once challenged me that an entity could technically have some infinite attributes and some finite attributes. For example, a being could have eternal life and yet not be omniscient. But the logic of this would be debated. Is not a limitless nature by definition, entirely limitless, lest it be limited? If God was for example, not omniscient, I would reason this would be because infinite, omniscience would be logically impossible. However, an infinite being and first cause could still virtually know all things (divine deduction) even without technical omniscience, in my opinion.
In the same way as God is infinitely good, he cannot logically be infinitely evil. But God is not evil in nature at all, but can use evil for his good purposes. Being evil is not a finite attribute of God. The orthodox view being that God cannot have finite attributes.
Although a reasonable proposition for consideration, I admit. I personally doubt my scholarly friend’s objection as a true.
BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
GRENZ, STANLEY J. AND ROGER E. OLSON (1992) Twentieth Century Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
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.
 |
| Pinterest: Post-fall.... |
