God, Sin and Process Theology

God, Sin and Process Theology

by R.E. Slater

INTRODUCTION

According to the Oxford Dictionary "sin" is an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law: "Such and such is a sin in the eyes of God."

Per Wikipedia, "In religious context, sin is a transgression against divine law or a law of the deities. Each culture has its own interpretation of what it means to commit a sin. While sins are generally considered actions, any thought, word, or act considered immoral, selfish, shameful, harmful, or alienating might be termed "sinful.""

SIN IN A CHRISTIAN CONTEXT

In the Christian vocabulary the subject of sin falls under the concept of hamartiology. Hamartiology is the branch of theology that studies sin. It explores the nature, origin, consequences, and resolution of sin, primarily within a Christian framework. The word "hamartiology" comes from the Greek word "hamartia," which means "missing the mark" or "error".

• Definition of Sin - Hamartiology examines what constitutes sin, often defining it as a willful transgression of God's law or a failure to meet God's standard of righteousness.

• Origin of Sin - It investigates the origins of sin, often citing the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden as the point where sin entered the human race.

• Consequences of Sin - Hamartiology explores the effects of sin, including alienation from God, the consequences of sin on individuals, and the potential for eternal judgment.

• Resolution of Sin - Examination of how sin can be forgiven and addressed through salvation / atonement via confession and repentance - particularly within the context of Christian atonement through Jesus' sacrificial death.

• Key Concepts - Hamartiology also delves into related concepts like original sin, total depravity, and salvation - exploring their implications for human nature and relationship with God.

SIN IN A NON-RELIGIOUS CONTEXT

Naturally one might ask whether it is possible to consider whether "sin" exists outside of a religious context? While the term "sin" is primarily a religious concept, it can be re-evaluated in a philosophical or ethical sense. This involves looking at actions and behaviors that violate a moral code or cause harm, even without religious beliefs.

• Philosophical Sin - According to Wikipedia, philosophical sin refers to morally bad acts that violate a natural order of reason, rather than divine law. This concept is used by societies whose aim is to create a moral, ethical ,and legal system independent of religious beliefs.

• Secular Sin - Some suggest that "secular sin" could be an insensitive or malevolent transgression that causes harm to another soul. This could include actions that violate a person's own standards of behavior, causing them regret and a loss of self-dignity.

• Moral Frameworks - Even without religion, individuals and societies can establish moral frameworks based on principles like empathy, fairness, just-ness, and the avoidance of harm. Actions that violate these principles could be considered "wrong" or "sinful" within that moral framework.

• Consequences - Whether or not actions are considered "sinful" in a religious sense, they often have personal / societal consequences. For example, causing harm to others or violating societal norms can lead to negative outcomes, regardless of religious beliefs.

WHY IS THERE SIN?

Instead of using the term sin perhaps we ask the question "Why is there harm, alienation, or disharmony?” This would imply action words like: Breakdown, disruption, disharmony, misalignment, estrangement, violence, or even destructive agency.

Such terms may explore why things go wrong—internally, relationally, socially, ecologically—without invoking the theological baggage of “sin” as divine offense or moral stain.

HOW MIGHT CHATGPT ANSWER THE QUESTION, "WHY IS THERE SIN?"

I. Reframing Sin: A Process-Based, Non-Theological Definition

Let’s begin by loosely defining “sin” as any action, structure, or pattern that inhibits the flourishing of relational life—whether among people, species, societies, or ecosystems.

In a non-theistic, non-Christian, or even post-metaphysical frame, this becomes:

“Sin” is that which undermines creative advance, wholeness, or harmony in relational becoming.

This allows sin to be understood not as cosmic rebellion, but as:

• A consequence of fragmentation or fear

• A failure of relatedness

• A misdirection of potential or misuse of freedom

---

II. Why Is There 'Sin' (or Disharmony)?

Let’s consider four broad, non-religious lenses:

---

1. Evolutionary & Biological Explanation

• Disharmony arises because competition, error, and aggression are part of evolutionary processes.

• Organisms—including humans—have drives for survival that can conflict with communal well-being.

• These behaviors aren’t “evil”; they’re maladaptive or contextually unfit in a social world.

➡️ Disharmony is an emergent consequence of life navigating complexity and survival.

---

2. Psychological & Developmental Explanation

• People act destructively due to:

  • Unmet needs (attachment, safety, recognition)

  • Trauma or wounding

  • Cognitive biases and emotional dysregulation

• “Sin” is not metaphysical evil but the expression of internal fragmentation, fear, or unresolved pain.

➡️ Destructive behavior is symptomatic of disconnection—from self, others, or the world.

---

3. Sociological & Structural Explanation

• Oppression, exploitation, and systemic harm are institutionalized forms of sin.

• These patterns persist due to power imbalances, historical trauma, or economic systems prioritizing profit over dignity.

➡️ Disharmony is often structurally embedded, not merely personal.

---

4. Process-Philosophical Explanation

• In Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy, reality is always becoming—it is a web of interrelated actual occasions, constantly prehending one another.

• Evil or “sin” in this frame is:

  • The rejection of creative transformation (the lure of possibility)

  • The inhibition of novelty

  • The objectification of others (reducing them to fixed, controllable roles)

➡️ “Sin” arises when entities (individuals, societies) resist relational openness and fall into destructive patterns of self-isolation or dominance.

---

III. Key Summary Table

Term/Concept	Traditional View of Sin	Reframed, Non-Religious Equivalent
Sin	Offense against God	Breakdown in relational harmony
Evil	Rebellion against divine law	Misuse of freedom, alienation
Repentance	Confession of moral failure	Reorientation toward wholeness
Salvation	Deliverance from damnation	Restoration of connection and flow
Grace	Unmerited divine favor	Relational gift, forgiveness, openness

---

IV. So, Why Is There 'Sin'? (Without Sin)

We might say:

There is “sin” because creation is unfinished. Life is emergent, contingent, and full of tension. The freedom that allows love also allows harm. Missteps, alienation, and destruction are not signs of damnation—but of the struggle toward PROCESSUAL BECOMING.

In this sense, “sin” becomes a diagnosis of distortion, not a divine verdict. Processual terms, "sin" is the evolutionary response of living systems adjusting to the cosmos, to external environments, to one another, and - if sentient - to self awareness (sic, acts of consciousness).

A PROCESSUAL APPROACH

The image above is fairly typical of broad approaches to sin. Let's reframe these approaches using Process Philosophy. Let's begin by taking the traditional salvation spectrum from the image (Calvinists → Atheists) and reframe each view through the non-religious, process-informed lens you requested earlier, focusing on:

• Human becoming

• Relational harmony

• Ethical responsibility

• Creative transformation (instead of divine judgment)

We'll translate each viewpoint not in terms of sin and salvation, but in terms of how they address harm, alienation, and restoration in the human experience.

---

🌈 Reframing the “Spectrums of Salvation” through a Process-Based, Non-Theistic Lens

Original Label	Original Focus	Process Reframe
Calvinists	Predestined salvation/damnation	Life’s outcomes are pre-scripted; this leaves little room for novelty and reflects a static metaphysic where creativity is stifled by total (divine) determinism. Alienation is built-into one's view of God and life, and reconciliation is selective.
Arminianists	Choice-based salvation; time-limited decision	Emphasis on personal agency, but within a rigid dualism of right/wrong. Harm is understood as failure to choose correctly. Processual reframing: moral agency exists while becoming is ongoing and never final. Growth isn’t locked in by death.
Cafeteria Believers	Good people make it; vague criteria	Offers a relational ethic but is often morally thin. In process terms, this view intuitively values harmony and kindness but needs grounding in a broader metaphysical vision of interconnectedness.
Mormons	Tiered outcomes based on behavior + belief	Reflects a graded ontology of becoming, but still hierarchical. In process terms, this could evolve into a view where all beings are on a path of unfolding with  ontological hierarchy giving way to mutuality and co-flourishing.
Buddhists & Hindus	All reach liberation, but over lifetimes	This is the closest alignment to process thought: samsara is the rhythm of becoming; karma mirrors relational consequences. Salvation = awakening into harmony. Process embraces this as a cosmology of transformational continuity.
Atheists	No afterlife; meaning through memory or legacy	Rejects metaphysical constructs of salvation, yet emphasizes immanent ethics and contribution to shared becoming. Process agrees: what matters is the quality of becoming and the ripples we leave in relational space.

---

🔄 Key Translation Shift: From “Salvation” to “Creative Transformation”

Instead of asking:

“Who gets saved and how?”

We might rather ask:

“How do beings—human or otherwise—heal, grow, and co-create / co-evolve in an ever evolving complex cosmos?”

This makes the core concern not judgment, but:

• Coherence vs. fragmentation

• Freedom vs. rigidity

• Participation vs. alienation

• Creative advance vs. stuck repetition

---

🌀 Process Theology’s Alternative: A Spectrum of Becoming

We could propose a Process Spectrum of Relational Healing as such:

• Static Rigidity <----------> Open Relational Flow

• Pre-determined fates (e.g., Calvinism)  <----> Co-creative unfolding (e.g., Buddhist/Process/Relational ethics)

• Moralistic binary judgment <----> Compassionate, context-aware responsiveness

• Disembodied Heaven/Hell <---->Embodied transformation in every moment

God then is removed from the human view of divine Judge to the more holistic view of divine initiator and conflator of Healer, Helper, Co-Evolver, Redeemer, et al to One who lures all creation toward deeper relational harmony; who suffers with the world in its brokenness; and who persistently offers new possibilities for transformation, renewal, and creative advance in every moment of becoming."

The Processual God of Salvation

God is no longer Judge -
    upon a throne of absolutes.

But Is the Deep Relational Lure -

    within all things.

God is -

    the Whisper of healing,
    the Breath of becoming,
    the Companion of all creatures in their wandering.

God is the Healer of ruptures -

    not by force,
    but by God's nurturing presence;

God is the Helper of woes -

    not by forced intervention
    but by redemptive invitation.

God is a Co-Evolver -

    One who suffers the world's sorrow,

    yet sings new harmonies into each broken note.

God is not the ender of stories -
    but the Initiator who widens processual horizons.

God is not the punisher of sin -
    but the Wooer towards processual renewal.

God is...

    the One who never ceases to offer -

    a more beautiful next in an infinitely

    evolving complex series of "nexts".

R.E. Slater & ChatGPT
May 30, 2025

@copyright R.E. Slater Publications
all rights reserved

SUMMATION

In summary, contrary to classical theology Process theology shifts the view of God from divine Judge to divine Saviour by emphasizing the following elements of renewal:

• God's divine companionship as versus the classic church view of condemnation.

• God heals relational brokenness through persuasive love as versus being viewed as the divine Punisher.

• God's divine redemption is not a legal pardon but an ongoing co-creative process moving towards atoning wholeness.

• God's continually lures towards redemptive restoration.

• God continually provides opportunities for relational harmony, wholeness, and sanity amid both humanity’s and the cosmos' deep unrest and fragmentation.

CONCLUSION

As we have seen, Process Theology, atonement is not a single event, but the divine rhythm of at-one-ment - wherein God works relentless towards weaving broken relational threads into new patterns of beauty.

Rather than demanding self-imposed guilt, punishment, or flagellation, the processual God of loving restoration absorbs the pain of the world to transforms it - not by decree, but by invitation.

The tragedy of harm and suffering is very real, but never final. In God, the processual future always holds another possibility because God is a continuing presence in the life of his creation.

May every reader's path be full of widening horizons, compassionate presence, and the ongoing rhythm of creative becoming. Thank you for walking through these processual steps with me together. May peace be yours in every unfolding moment however difficult your trial.

R.E. Slater

May 30, 2025

These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world.” - John 16.33 (NASB)

Re-Imagining Peace through Process Philosophy

amazon link

Re-Imagining Peace

through Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater and ChatGPT

I saw the Cobb Institute's title on Re-imagining Peace through Process Philosophy, checked it's price, saw that I could never afford it, then turned to ChatGPT to sort out it's themes and motifs.

On Amazon the book blurb said this:

Reimagining Peace through Process Philosophy: An Integrative Transformation to Address the Global Systemic Crisis, 2024th Edition, by Juliet Bennett (Author)

This book explores the ways in which process philosophers extend and strengthen peace scholars’ outlines of a paradigm of/for peace. It then illustrates the value of such a peace paradigm through the example of the climate breakdown, showing how process thinking and process metaphysics intervene at the roots of a global systemic crisis. In doing so, it articulates a new inroad to process philosophy, and illuminates an integrative intervention in the systemic crises of climate change and global inequality.

The “static-process framework” developed in this book makes the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and the fields he has inspired easier to grasp, and offers a tool to assist in the application of process thought to a multitude of issues. This framework depicts tensions between two modes of thought―static and process thinking―according to five “basic orientations”: abstract/context, closed/open, isolating/relational; passive/generative; one/multi-dimensional. This pattern is mapped across the domains of metaphysics, economics, politics and as the basis for a new mode of living and organising across multiple layers of society.

 

I next asked ChatGPT to discuss the contents with me. Here's what we found out together:

ChatGPT

Here’s an outline and explanation of the treatise "Reimagining Peace through Process Philosophy: An Integrative Transformation to Address the Global Systemic Crisis" based on the synopsis provided:

---

Outline of the Treatise

I. Introduction: Peace Beyond Traditional Paradigms

• Expanding peace scholarship through process philosophy

• Establishing relevance to contemporary global crises

II. The Static-Process Framework

• Core conceptual tension: Static vs. Process thinking

• Five “Basic Orientations”:

  1. Abstract vs. Context

  2. Closed vs. Open

  3. Isolating vs. Relational

  4. Passive vs. Generative

  5. One-dimensional vs. Multi-dimensional

III. Process Metaphysics as a Root Intervention

• Applying Alfred North Whitehead’s philosophy to:

  • Climate breakdown

  • Systemic inequality

• Revealing the structural roots of crisis

IV. Applying the Framework to Core Domains

• Metaphysics: Replacing substance ontology with relational becoming

• Economics: Moving from extractive systems to generative economies

• Politics: Envisioning participatory, evolving democratic systems

• Lived Experience: Inspiring integrative, peace-oriented ways of living

V. The Integrative Vision

• Bridging theory and practice

• Proposing a process-oriented peace paradigm

• Cultivating systems of care, responsiveness, and co-creation

VI. Conclusion: Process as a Pathway for Global Transformation

• Embodied action and structural change

• Peace as an evolving, systemic transformation

---

Explanation

This work presents a re-envisioning of peace not as the mere absence of conflict, but as a dynamic, evolving process deeply entangled with systemic structures such as climate change, global inequality, and political injustice.

It uses Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy as the foundational lens, emphasizing relationality, creativity, and becoming over static, dualistic, and isolating frameworks. This reorientation enables us to reimagine solutions at the metaphysical and structural levels, not just the symptomatic.

The "static-process framework" is a conceptual tool introduced to help readers understand and apply this philosophy practically. It identifies five binary tensions—such as abstract/context or closed/open—that characterize static thinking vs. process thought. These binaries are then mapped across various fields to show how process philosophy can reframe and transform each.

For example:

• In economics, process thinking urges us to move from competition and scarcity toward cooperation and regenerative systems.

• In politics, it supports a shift from centralized control to distributed, responsive governance.

• In lived experience, it fosters awareness of interdependence and the generative power of communities.

Ultimately, this book doesn’t just critique global crises—it offers a hopeful vision of transformation through a paradigm that values openness, relation, and co-creative action. Peace, in this sense, is not a state but an ongoing process of becoming together in a shared world.

RES

Please provide a chapter-by-chapter breakdown...

ChatGPT

Certainly! Based on the available information, here's a detailed breakdown of the chapters in Reimagining Peace through Process Philosophy: An Integrative Transformation to Address the Global Systemic Crisis by Juliet Bennett: Target+2VitalSource+2SpringerLink+2

---

📘 Chapter Breakdown

Part I: Theories of Process and a Metaphysics of/for Peace

1. (Re)imagining Peace Through a Process Lens
   This chapter introduces the concept of peace from a process philosophy perspective, challenging traditional static notions and emphasizing the dynamic, relational nature of peace.

2. Balancing Static and Process Thinking: Nurturing Peaceful Modes of Thought
   Here, Bennett explores the tension between static and process thinking, advocating for a shift towards process-oriented thought to foster more peaceful and adaptable mindsets.

3. The Process-Relational Metaphysics of/for Peace
   This section delves into the metaphysical foundations of process philosophy, highlighting how a relational understanding of reality can underpin a more holistic and integrative approach to peace.

Part II: Applications for an Integrative Transformation

4. Climate Change Through a Process Lens
   Bennett applies process philosophy to the climate crisis, illustrating how dynamic and relational thinking can lead to more effective and sustainable environmental strategies.

5. Co-Creative Politics: A Process Approach to Left and Right
   This chapter examines political ideologies through the lens of process philosophy, proposing a co-creative political framework that transcends traditional left-right dichotomies.

6. Contextual Economics: Nesting Static in Process
   Bennett critiques conventional economic models and introduces a process-oriented approach that embeds static economic structures within a dynamic and relational context, promoting more equitable and sustainable economic systems.

7. Integrating Changes Towards Peace-in-Process
   The final chapter synthesizes the insights from previous sections, offering practical pathways for integrating process philosophy into various societal domains to cultivate an ongoing and evolving peace.

---

This structure reflects Bennett's comprehensive approach to reimagining peace through the lens of process philosophy, addressing both theoretical foundations and practical applications across multiple societal domains.

If you're interested in exploring specific chapters in more detail or discussing how these concepts can be applied in real-world contexts, feel free to ask!

RES

What additional insights might you have related to Bennett's themes and motifs?

ChatGPT

Here are six key insights and observations that emerge when reflecting on Reimagining Peace through Process Philosophy through a broader philosophical, ecological, and ethical lens:

---

1. Peace as a Dynamic Becoming, Not a Static State

• Juliet Bennett’s work reflects a Whiteheadian revolution in peace studies: peace is no longer the "end" or absence of conflict but a continuous process of relational co-creation.

• This redefinition allows peace to flourish amid tension, much like in ecosystems where conflict and cooperation coexist in creative advance.

---

2. Process Thought as a Unifying Meta-Paradigm

• The five “basic orientations”—contextual, open, relational, generative, multi-dimensional—can serve as a diagnostic and generative tool across disciplines.

• Process metaphysics becomes a meta-framework for interdisciplinary transformation, offering common language across economics, ecology, politics, and ethics.

---

3. Nested Structures: A Processual Ecology of Systems

• Chapter 6’s concept of “nesting static in process” is profound. It recognizes that not all structures must be abandoned, but must be contextualized within living, evolving systems.

• This reflects Whitehead’s view of concrescence: actual entities arise from both inherited structure and creative novelty.

---

4. Bridging Political Polarization

• In Chapter 5, Bennett’s co-creative politics transcends oppositional ideologies by rooting action in relationality and novelty.

• This model may serve as an antidote to performative partisanship, offering a shared vocabulary of peace, responsiveness, and mutual becoming.

---

5. Ethics of Embodiment and Responsiveness

• Throughout the treatise, there is an implicit call for a process-relational ethics: one grounded not in fixed rules, but in responsiveness to evolving contexts and lived realities.

• This aligns with feminist, Indigenous, and ecological philosophies of care and relational accountability.

---

6. A New Mode of Subjectivity

• Beyond systems, the book hints at a new anthropology: the human not as autonomous individual, but as intra-active agent within an unfolding world.

• The shift from “I think therefore I am” to “I relate, therefore I become” signals a profound ontological shift relevant to education, psychology, and spirituality.

---

ChatGPT

Would you like a visual matrix that maps these five tensions (static vs. process) across the four domains (metaphysics, politics, economics, lived life) for deeper application?

RES

Sure...

ChatGPT

Static-Process Transformation Matrix:

Here is your Static–Process Transformation Matrix, showing how each of the five philosophical tensions transitions across the four core domains: metaphysics, politics, economics, and lived life. Let me know if you'd like this visualized as a poster-style chart or adapted for teaching or writing. 

RES

Please compare Maga evangelical dogma to Juliet Bennett's work.

ChatGPT

This is a profound comparison. On one side, you have MAGA Evangelical dogma—a sociopolitical-religious ideology that fuses conservative American nationalism with fundamentalist Christian theology. On the other, you have Juliet Bennett’s integrative process philosophy—a peace-centered, relational, and ecological approach rooted in Whiteheadian metaphysics. The contrast is stark and telling.

---

Category	MAGA Evangelical Dogma	Juliet Bennett’s Process Peace Paradigm
Metaphysics	Static, dualistic: Good vs Evil, God vs World, America as chosen	Dynamic, relational: all entities in co-becoming, no ontological isolation
View of God	Omnipotent, external, judgmental, tribal deity	Panentheistic, relational, persuasive, and co-suffering with creation
Truth	Absolute, fixed doctrines (Biblical literalism)	Contextual, evolving truth rooted in experience and creativity
Political Ideology	Nationalist, authoritarian, us-vs-them binaries	Participatory, co-creative, transcends left/right dichotomies
Economics	Prosperity gospel, deregulated capitalism, survival of the fittest	Contextual economies, regenerative, interdependent well-being
Ethics	Rule-based, punitive, purity-centered	Relational, responsive, focused on mutual care and responsibility
Peace	Peace through dominance or “law and order”	Peace as a living process: conflict transformation and generative harmony
Ecology	Anthropocentric dominionism; apocalyptic disregard for climate	Eco-centric: climate breakdown as central ethical-spiritual issue
Human Identity	Isolated soul judged by God; defined by saved/unsaved status	Intra-active being: becoming through relationships, context, and choice
Vision of Society	Hierarchical, exclusionary, fear-driven	Multi-dimensional, open, inclusive, rooted in mutual becoming

Interpretive Insights

1. Theology of Control vs. Theology of Co-Creation
   MAGA theology is about certainty, order, and divine dominance, while Bennett’s vision is about relational creativity, openness to novelty, and divine companionship. Process theology dissolves the fearful architecture that MAGA ideology builds around God and country.

2. Fear-Based Morality vs. Generative Ethics
   MAGA dogma thrives on boundary ethics—us vs. them, saved vs. damned, pure vs. impure. Bennett’s framework replaces this with a fluid ethic of response, where goodness arises through context, care, and relational growth.

3. Static Systems vs. Living Peace
   Where MAGA constructs peace through power, walls, and enforcement, Bennett constructs peace through flexibility, responsiveness, and the nurturance of life’s interconnectedness.

4. Climate Denial vs. Climate Consciousness
   MAGA eschatology tends to embrace environmental destruction as part of end-times prophecy. In contrast, Bennett's philosophy is grounded in ecological repair and the moral urgency of addressing systemic climate collapse.

5. Apocalyptic Fatalism vs. Processual Hope
   MAGA dogma tends toward end-times determinism—a closed future. Bennett’s vision is open-ended, participatory, and evolutionary, inviting human and nonhuman agents to co-author the future.

---

Conclusion

Juliet Bennett offers a nonviolent, post-oppositional paradigm for thinking, acting, and living—a striking departure from MAGA evangelicalism’s fixed, tribal, and punitive worldview. Where MAGA dogma calcifies fear into dogma and hierarchy, Bennett breathes hope into systems, drawing us toward a relational cosmos of shared becoming.

---

ChatGPT

Would you like this reframed in poetic or liturgical language next? Or expanded into a full essay or visual comparison?

RES

I would be curious as to the juxtaposition of liturgical language...

ChatGPT

Absolutely. Below is a juxtaposition of MAGA Evangelical Dogma and Juliet Bennett’s Process Peace Paradigm expressed in liturgical-style language—prayers, affirmations, or confessions—meant to capture their contrasting spirits in form as well as content.

---

I. Call to Worship

MAGA Evangelical Liturgical Voice:

Come, ye chosen, set apart from the nations.

Blessed is the land that exalts His name,

And cursed are they who oppose His anointed.

Return to the old paths, where law and order reign.

Make war if needed, for righteousness must triumph.

Process Peace Liturgical Voice (Bennett-inspired):

Come, all who dwell in the web of life.

Blessed is the becoming, unfolding in each breath.

Let all voices rise, and all boundaries soften.

Gather in the spirit of evolving peace.

We co-create in the dance of relational harmony.

---

II. Confession

MAGA Evangelical Confession:

We confess, Lord, that our nation has strayed.

We have allowed others to take root—

Those who know not your truth.

Forgive us for not standing firm,

For not purging evil from our midst.

Process Peace Confession:

We confess our forgetfulness of the whole.

We confess our part in systems of harm—

To earth, to neighbor, to the very fabric of becoming.

Restore in us the will to relate,

To transform conflict with compassion,

To be gentle in power and just in presence.

---

III. Creed

MAGA Evangelical Creed:

We believe in a God of strength and vengeance,

Who chooses a people and a land.

We believe in the supremacy of truth as given,

And in salvation from the world through faith alone.

We await the Lord’s return to judge the enemies of God.

Process Peace Creed:

We believe in a God who dwells within the becoming of all things.

We believe in truth as an unfolding, revealed in shared experience.

We believe in peace—not as absence, but as process.

We affirm the sacredness of every relation,

And trust the Spirit’s lure toward healing futures.

---

IV. Benediction

MAGA Evangelical Benediction:

Go forth, armed with righteousness.

Protect the borders of faith and nation.

Stand firm against the rising tide of corruption.

For the battle is the Lord’s, and we are His sword.

Process Peace Benediction:

Go forth, gentle co-creators of life.

Hold space for difference, breathe into uncertainty.

Bind the wounds of the world with your presence.

And may the Spirit of Becoming guide you

To make peace, not as it was,

But as it is ever yet to be.

---