Human religion does not begin with belief but with becoming.Around 2.6 million years ago, early hominins emerged within a living world experienced as active, dangerous, and mysteriously responsive. Survival, perception, and proto-meaning slowly braided together as cognition expanded, social bonds deepened, and the earliest intuitions of reverence arose - not yet as gods, but as awareness that life was more than mere mechanism.
By 200,000–45,000 BCE, ritual behavior appeared alongside symbolic language and burial practices. The world was no longer inert; it was alive, relational, and communicative. Animism did not imagine spirit imposed upon matter - it recognized spirit within matter. Religion, at this stage, was not doctrine but participation.
With the Neolithic Revolution (c. 10,000–3,000 BCE), humanity’s relationship to time, land, and continuity shifted. Agriculture, settlement, and seasonal cycles gave rise to sacred spaces, fertility rites, and cosmic rhythms. Order itself became holy, mirroring humanity’s new dependence on patterned stability.
As civilizations formed (c. 3,300–1,200 BCE), polytheistic pantheons emerged. Gods specialized, hierarchized, and increasingly reflected political power structures. Divine agency was associated with kingship, empire, and cosmic maintenance - religion stabilizing society as much as society shaped religion.
Between 2,000–1,000 BCE, many cultures moved toward henotheism, elevating particular deities without denying others. In Israel, covenantal loyalty to Yahweh developed within a broader divine ecology, emphasizing moral obligation, communal identity, and historical relationship rather than abstract ontology.
The prophetic revolutions (c. 1000–300 BCE) marked a decisive turn. Prophets challenged ritualism, rejected divine manipulation, and insisted that justice, compassion, and care for the vulnerable were the true measures of faithfulness. God was encountered not in control but in ethical demand (today: Calvinism:Control vs. Open & Relational Theology:Loving Participation)
During the Axial Age (c. 900–200 BCE), wisdom traditions across Israel, India, China, and Greece converged on a profound insight: transcendence is discovered not through domination but through alignment - through compassion, harmony, restraint, and attentiveness to the Sacred Way of reality itself.
Under imperial domination, Second Temple Judaism (c. 300 BCE–70 CE) diversified dramatically. Apocalyptic hopes, messianic expectations, wisdom reflection, and covenantal endurance all coexisted, expressing a faith struggling to reconcile divine faithfulness with historical suffering (sic, the subject of "theodicy")
It is within this plural, fermenting landscape that Jesus of Nazareth (c. 30 CE) enters world history - not as a theological abstraction, but as a historical, prophetic, wisdom-shaped figure whose life embodied radical trust in divine nearness, nonviolent love, and communal restoration.
As Jesus’ meaning spread beyond its Jewish matrix (c. 50–160 CE), Paul and the early church translated a relational, participatory gospel into Hellenistic conceptual worlds. Greek metaphysics gradually reframed lived faith into ontological claims, stabilizing belief even as earlier pluralities narrowed.
By late antiquity and into the medieval period (c. 300–1600 CE), the Christian canon and creed solidified. These structures preserved continuity but often froze process, suppressing the evolving, dialogical nature of religion and sets the stage for later tensions with science, pluralism, and modern consciousness.
In our contemporary moment (c. 1600 CE to the Present), the sacred re-emerges not to a return to premodern certainty, but through a renewed awareness of process, relationality, and interdependence. Advances in cosmology, evolutionary biology, neuroscience, and relational ecology have revealed a universe that is unfinished, participatory, and deeply entangled - undermining both rigid supernaturalism and reductive materialism.
Within this modernal-context, religion is increasingly interpreted not as a system of fixed beliefs, but as a living practice of meaning-making within an evolving world. Processual interpretations of faith draw together the insights of deep time, prophetic ethics, wisdom traditions, and cruciform love, inviting humanity to rediscover the sacred as that which calls toward creativity, responsibility, compassion, and shared becoming.
To summarize - the rebirth of the sacred today is neither i) a revival of old gods nor ii) the triumph of secular reason, but iii) a fragile, hopeful reorientation toward a cosmos - and a humanity - that is still in the making, evolving, forming, and shaping.
This is the inheritance with which we now stand. And it is why process thought might be the more reflective when asking the followers of God - or of the sacred way - to underlay all foundational beliefs with the phrase, "Let us be led by the Spirit via doubt and uncertainty, rather than by rigid certainty and dogmatic formulations." When we do, we have become the more willing to shape our faith in participatory alignment with all the world's faith - whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, or Confucius, to mention a few. That we are willing to risk being open, questioning, and relational rather than settle into dogmatic perceptions of people, societies, history, or science.
Without Love there is no Truth. And True Truth is always Loving. There is no dichotomy between these terms but only seamless integration. This is the premier centering focus of a Processual Theology of Love. - R.E. Slater
Reframing the Question That Has Dominated ChristianityWhether Jesus is or is not God has long functioned as the fulcrum upon which Christian theology turns. Entire systems of orthodoxy, heresy, inclusion, and exclusion have been constructed around this question. Yet history suggests that this framing, however earnest, may not be the most faithful one religion can ask, nor the most generative for the metamodern world now emerging.
The earliest religious traditions were not primarily concerned with metaphysical essence but with presence, action, fidelity, and transformation. Hebrew faith asked not what God is but how God acts and what God requires. Her prophets did not speculate about divine metaphysical substance; rather, they called communities back to justice. Wisdom teachers did not define God's ontology; they taught alignment with life and love.
To ask whether Jesus is God in later metaphysical terms is to import static, substantialist categories to this undertaking - largely inherited from Greek ontology and metaphysical philosophy - into a world that thought in relational, historical, and ethical terms. The earliest witnesses encountered not a metaphysical theorem but a way of living life sacredly: a way of being human in radical responsiveness to divine lure.
This does not diminish Jesus. It re-situates Jesus within the very purpose of his mission to teach and show loving compassion and mercy to one another. Jesus was recognizing what earlier humanity had been feeling - that there is more to this life than living.... That humanity must situate itself within the very flows of life. To learn to become part of the divine Sacred moving through an evolving landscape with one another in loving and helping ways. Life requires help. A Jesus faith offers that elixer.
This was Jesus' (prophetic) message which Jewish Christians picked up on and elevated back into divine status as it had been forgotten and neglected by their Jewish priests and scribes. It was a message which mirrored Israel's earlier prophets who had preached to their communities in earlier eras of God's love and compassion and the need for repentance and circumspection. Jesus took the prophetic message, integrated it with the apocalypticism of his day, and died for challenging the status quo's waywardness, its teachings, its hardness of heart, and callousness to those they served.
Nor does Jesus' message absolve Christians today of their responsibility to be faithful to Jesus message of love. And yet, we do not see this today in Christianity's maga-movement. It's movement to be "great" again. As if greatness comes stripped of bigotry, racism, and oppression. Christianity's maga-message has become a cruel terror to all those whom Christians deem unworthy and without value; and is not without similarity to the message of the Pharisees and scribes in Jesus' day. Such a wicked message has been repeatedly decried by the world that maga-Christianity's message is deformed, crippled, and ungodly. That wolves have entered its sanctuaries and debased the Christian message with side-streams and off-message formulations pretending holiness for love.
For Jesus, his response today would be the same as his response in the early first century CE... to repent, to turn from unbecoming policies, politics, creeds, confessions, and practices. To return to the Sacred divine that is present, and become with it even as it is becoming in its creation, its centrality, and its offshoots. This holy responsibility has ever been placed on mankind even as God through Jesus and the prophets of the world have preached loving outreach time-and-again immemorial.
Jesus as Processual Disclosure, Not Ontological ClosureFrom a process perspective, Jesus is best understood as a becoming disclosure within history - but not its salvific closure. He does not end the religious story of salvation; he intensifies God's ongoing, redeeming work across creation. Salvation has come through Jesus, who, if God, both ends and begins God's salvific work. But any doctrine of salvation of the orthodox church is also a processual doctrine of God's work that is undone, incomplete, and without finality through the lives of his church. Greek metaphysics gave finality to Jesus' work but in process thought, it is just begun, mimicking the world of creation as God's salvation continually evolves within all processes of men and nature.
In Whiteheadian terms, Jesus may be seen as an unusually coherent actual occasion - a life whose prehensions aligned profoundly with the divine aim toward relational harmony. His significance lies not merely in who he was, but in how fully he embodied the persuasive, non-coercive movement of divine love.
This allows Jesus to be Christic without making the Christ principle exclusive nor complete. Christ becomes, not a metaphysical possession of Christianity, but a mode of incarnational love - a Sacred love that became flesh whose story is that of divine relational wholeness wherever and whenever it breaks into history (in a coming essay #14, we will discuss the Christicism of Christ = Christ as the Messiah of the world to complete this series).
Such a reading neither reduces Jesus to moralism nor inflates him into metaphysical isolation as an untouchable, uncaring, transcendent God of coming wrath and judgement per early Christian apocalypticism's portrayal of the divine Sacred. Rather, the early Christian story of the gospel honors both Jesus' historical particularity and his universal resonance (this was the entirety of the message of many of the new testament books in the Christian bible which linked and integrated the wholism of the Jewish Scriptures of the old testament).
Scripture as Processual Memory, Not Divine StenographyWithin this framework, sacred texts retain profound importance - but not as inerrant transcripts of divine speech. They are better understood as photographs of communal growth and discernment, taken from within specific religious cultures, crises, and horizons of understanding as has been shown across all essays of this series.
The Hebrew Bible’s evolution - from its polytheistic traces --> to henotheistic loyalty --> to ethical monotheism - reveals a faith in motion. The New Testament reflects diverse interpretations of Jesus shaped by differing communities, needs, and philosophical vocabularies (refer to the series' supplementary articles and essays, SM1-SM11).
Jesus himself read Scripture this way: dynamically, creatively, ethically, and situationally. “You have heard it said… but I say to you” is not rejection but processual reinterpretation. Faithfulness meant responsiveness, not dead repetition as the Scribes and Pharisees had done.
To reclaim Scripture as processual memory is not to empty it of authority, but to relocate its authority in wisdom, trajectory, and moral fruitfulness rather than in static perfection.
Worship in an Open, Generative CosmosA processual metaphysic of the spiritual envisions the universe not as a finished product but as co-creative becoming. Reality itself is participatory, relational, and open-ended. God is not the supreme controller but the deepest companion - the Lure toward richer forms of beauty, harmony, and care. This tenet then integrates Christianity with many of the tenets of other world religions and beliefs. There is common foundation which binds humanity to one another when perceived in this way.
Consequently, within such a cosmos, worship cannot mean submission to fixed decrees. It becomes attunement, participation, and response. Faith is not a brand of religious certainty but trustful alignment with what nurtures life.
Jesus matters not because he solves metaphysical puzzles, but because he models this very alignment of metaphysical inclusion through himself - sic, "love over power," "mercy over purity," "future openness over violent control". Jesus' life reveals what becomes possible when humanity cooperates with divine persuasion rather than resisting it. Jesus exemplifies "selfless, sacrificial, service" to others even as other great religious leaders throughout history have done the same in their lives. Even as today's Christian church is asked to do the likewise despite its current mis-shapened path.
Toward a Faith Spacious Enough for the FutureAt the last, this project has not sought to dismantle religion but to redeem it from its own rigidities. I did not write this series to defend Christianity nor argue for Jesus' divinity (though the Apostle Paul's message is clear that an incarnating God who dies for others is a mystery to be explored and examined. I will explore this message in the next essay re the subject of divine cruciformity).
Rather, a sacred expression of faith gestures toward a form capable of housing all faiths - whether Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, secular humanism, scientific realism, or even metamodern emerging cosmologies. Not by erasing differences, but by grounding them in shared commitments to becoming, relationality, and loving care. I think this has been extensively written of through the entirety of this series from humanity's earliest day unto the present era.
Whether Jesus is confessed as God, a revealer of God, or especial exemplar of divine-human coherence, the deeper calling remains unchanged: to participate in the ongoing healing of the world. Whether we refer to God, to a sacred cosmic reality, or to a divinity which lies throughout creation - it is the general belief of the ages that there is something more to life than mere living; and it is this sacred resonance which we share together as mortal humans.
A religion worthy of the future will be measured not by metaphysical certainty but by the kind of people and kind of worlds it helps usher into becoming. If divinity is to mean anything, it must mean love - or it must mean nothing. The Apostle Paul said as much of the Christian faith: “If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.” (1 Cor 13.1ff)
And if love is real, then it must be lived again and again within the unfinished processes of history, community, and cosmic becoming.
In this sense, this work does not conclude. It re-opens mankind's living need to lean into the sacred divine.
R.E. Slater
January 3, 2026
No comments:
Post a Comment