Quotes & Sayings


We, and creation itself, actualize the possibilities of the God who sustains the world, towards becoming in the world in a fuller, more deeper way. - R.E. Slater

There is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have [consequential effects upon] the world around us. - Process Metaphysician Alfred North Whitehead

Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem says (i) all closed systems are unprovable within themselves and, that (ii) all open systems are rightly understood as incomplete. - R.E. Slater

The most true thing about you is what God has said to you in Christ, "You are My Beloved." - Tripp Fuller

The God among us is the God who refuses to be God without us, so great is God's Love. - Tripp Fuller

According to some Christian outlooks we were made for another world. Perhaps, rather, we were made for this world to recreate, reclaim, redeem, and renew unto God's future aspiration by the power of His Spirit. - R.E. Slater

Our eschatological ethos is to love. To stand with those who are oppressed. To stand against those who are oppressing. It is that simple. Love is our only calling and Christian Hope. - R.E. Slater

Secularization theory has been massively falsified. We don't live in an age of secularity. We live in an age of explosive, pervasive religiosity... an age of religious pluralism. - Peter L. Berger

Exploring the edge of life and faith in a post-everything world. - Todd Littleton

I don't need another reason to believe, your love is all around for me to see. – Anon

Thou art our need; and in giving us more of thyself thou givest us all. - Khalil Gibran, Prayer XXIII

Be careful what you pretend to be. You become what you pretend to be. - Kurt Vonnegut

Religious beliefs, far from being primary, are often shaped and adjusted by our social goals. - Jim Forest

We become who we are by what we believe and can justify. - R.E. Slater

People, even more than things, need to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone. – Anon

Certainly, God's love has made fools of us all. - R.E. Slater

An apocalyptic Christian faith doesn't wait for Jesus to come, but for Jesus to become in our midst. - R.E. Slater

Christian belief in God begins with the cross and resurrection of Jesus, not with rational apologetics. - Eberhard Jüngel, Jürgen Moltmann

Our knowledge of God is through the 'I-Thou' encounter, not in finding God at the end of a syllogism or argument. There is a grave danger in any Christian treatment of God as an object. The God of Jesus Christ and Scripture is irreducibly subject and never made as an object, a force, a power, or a principle that can be manipulated. - Emil Brunner

“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” means "I will be that who I have yet to become." - God (Ex 3.14) or, conversely, “I AM who I AM Becoming.”

Our job is to love others without stopping to inquire whether or not they are worthy. - Thomas Merton

The church is God's world-changing social experiment of bringing unlikes and differents to the Eucharist/Communion table to share life with one another as a new kind of family. When this happens, we show to the world what love, justice, peace, reconciliation, and life together is designed by God to be. The church is God's show-and-tell for the world to see how God wants us to live as a blended, global, polypluralistic family united with one will, by one Lord, and baptized by one Spirit. – Anon

The cross that is planted at the heart of the history of the world cannot be uprooted. - Jacques Ellul

The Unity in whose loving presence the universe unfolds is inside each person as a call to welcome the stranger, protect animals and the earth, respect the dignity of each person, think new thoughts, and help bring about ecological civilizations. - John Cobb & Farhan A. Shah

If you board the wrong train it is of no use running along the corridors of the train in the other direction. - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

God's justice is restorative rather than punitive; His discipline is merciful rather than punishing; His power is made perfect in weakness; and His grace is sufficient for all. – Anon

Our little [biblical] systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee, and Thou, O God art more than they. - Alfred Lord Tennyson

We can’t control God; God is uncontrollable. God can’t control us; God’s love is uncontrolling! - Thomas Jay Oord

Life in perspective but always in process... as we are relational beings in process to one another, so life events are in process in relation to each event... as God is to Self, is to world, is to us... like Father, like sons and daughters, like events... life in process yet always in perspective. - R.E. Slater

To promote societal transition to sustainable ways of living and a global society founded on a shared ethical framework which includes respect and care for the community of life, ecological integrity, universal human rights, respect for diversity, economic justice, democracy, and a culture of peace. - The Earth Charter Mission Statement

Christian humanism is the belief that human freedom, individual conscience, and unencumbered rational inquiry are compatible with the practice of Christianity or even intrinsic in its doctrine. It represents a philosophical union of Christian faith and classical humanist principles. - Scott Postma

It is never wise to have a self-appointed religious institution determine a nation's moral code. The opportunities for moral compromise and failure are high; the moral codes and creeds assuredly racist, discriminatory, or subjectively and religiously defined; and the pronouncement of inhumanitarian political objectives quite predictable. - R.E. Slater

God's love must both center and define the Christian faith and all religious or human faiths seeking human and ecological balance in worlds of subtraction, harm, tragedy, and evil. - R.E. Slater

In Whitehead’s process ontology, we can think of the experiential ground of reality as an eternal pulse whereby what is objectively public in one moment becomes subjectively prehended in the next, and whereby the subject that emerges from its feelings then perishes into public expression as an object (or “superject”) aiming for novelty. There is a rhythm of Being between object and subject, not an ontological division. This rhythm powers the creative growth of the universe from one occasion of experience to the next. This is the Whiteheadian mantra: “The many become one and are increased by one.” - Matthew Segall

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

-----

Note: Generally I do not respond to commentary. I may read the comments but wish to reserve my time to write (or write from the comments I read). Instead, I'd like to see our community help one another and in the helping encourage and exhort each of us towards Christian love in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. - re slater

Friday, March 28, 2025

The Incarnational Cosmic Christ, Part 1



The Incarnational Cosmic Christ
PART 1

by R.E. Slater


I am going to begin a concentrated discourse of process philosophy which must necessarily take us into a great many fields of study. After fifteen years of forging 1) a new path for Christianity and 2) for faithful Christians to explore-and-consider (see The Calf Path of an Open, Discerning Faith which I wrote in November of 2012) I believe it's time to double down and give even greater root to this new directional assignment encumbering my heart. Roots which are both philosophical and theological.

Incarnational

I titled this post here "The Incarnational Christ" which means to me that the God who became man, and lived as a man, within the world of his creation, has transformed God's Self from "what-ness" to "being-ness." Now perhaps my ontology is wrong and God has always been a Cosmic Being of some sort but where it concerns humanity, I can easily make the case that God has furthered God's Being-ness by God's transforming human incarnation into this world we inhabit. (As an aside, God's Being-ness has ever been... God's Incarnation is making this fact evident to humans here.) 

Cosmic

By "Cosmic" I mean to assert that God as Christ was always existent and will always be existent. That as Creator, Christ must be as cosmic as Christ is Incarnational. That neither diminishes the other but significantly expands and expounds the other. If Christ is not Creator-God than Christ is less a cosmic Being than is understood.

Christ

Lastly, by "Christ" I mean "the Son of God" who is at the right hand of the Father and in fellowship with the Father and the Spirit. Though I prefer for simplicity's sake to think of God as One the bible and tradition seem to imply their is a tri-partness to God's Being... that of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In essence, this speaks to me of relationship, experience, and presence.

Process

Not inconsequentially then does process philosophy and theology insist on the same qualities of panrelationalism, panexperientialisim and panpsychism all bound up in one cosmic ontological presence. Thus my attraction to process thought as it correlates quite nicely with traditional Christianity - and, might I add, other interrelated religious touchstones (sic, interfaith commonalities)

Conclusion

And so, I believe I am going to settle in and think through how a post-structural, metamodern, radically processual Christian faith might live and breath underneath it's verbiage. When I look at a healthy field of grasses and wildflowers swaying together under a small breeze, seeing, smelling, feeling within it its greenery and colours, I assume there resides healthy, complex ecosystem of roots. But should I dig those roots up I could further explore what makes the field of grasses and wildflowers so beautiful in its expanse and vibrancy.

Here, I intend to look at my process faith root-and-all, small-and-large, heartbeat-and-body, soul-and-spirit, as an expression of the God I love in correlation with process philosophy and theology. Now for those readers who want an expositional bible study they will need to go elsewhere... perhaps in my earlier discussions over the years; but here, I intend to use philosophical dialogue in conjunction with theological ideas so that your and my Christian faith not wilt under the intemperate suns of human ideologies conflicting this same faith. Why?

Because my theological faith built on loving ethics and community needs a bit more depth in order to breathe. I need to test it out a bit more... or help it extend and expand a bit more... into societal thinking. This project then is my missional project to the world of inter-religious and Christian faith. My request is to pray for the Spirit's continued enlightenment to dissect, discern, direct, discover, and help determine a healthy expression of God's announcement in Christ:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life". - John 3.16

Peace,

R.E. Slater
March 28, 2025

"For God so loved the world...": This phrase highlights the profound and extensive love God has for humanity.

"...that he gave his only Son...": This emphasizes God's ultimate sacrifice, offering his Son, Jesus, as a means of salvation. 

"...that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life": This outlines the consequence of faith in Jesus: eternal life, not death.



Thursday, March 27, 2025

Timelines of Western Philosophy


School of Athens


The most famous philosophers of ancient times move within an imposing Renaissance architecture which is inspired by Bramante's project for the renewal of the early Christian basilica of St Peter. Some of these are easily recognizable. In the centre Plato points upwards with a finger and holds his book Timeus in his hand, flanked by Aristotle with Ethics; Pythagoras is shown in the foreground intent on explaining the diatesseron. Diogenes is lying on the stairs with a dish, while the pessimist philosopher, Heracleitus, a portrait of Michelangelo, is leaning against a block of marble, writing on a sheet of paper. Michelangelo was in those years executing the paintings in the nearby Sistine Chapel. On the right we see Euclid, who is teaching geometry to his pupils, Zoroaster holding the heavenly sphere and Ptolemy holding the earthly sphere. The personage on the extreme right with the black beret is a self-portrait of Raphael.


The work above depicts a scene of ancient Greek philosophy. Aristotle walks with his teacher and mentor Plato (whose appearance is modeled on Raphael’s close friend, fellow Renaissance thinker and painter Leonardo da Vinci.) The figure of Plato (center left, in orange and purple) is pointing upwards, symbolizing the Platonic ideology of philosophical idealism. The more youthful Aristotle (center right, in blue and brown) has his hand outstretched in front of him, encapsulating Aristotle’s pragmatic empirical mode of thought. Aristotle examined affairs practically as they are; Plato examined affairs idealistically as he thought they ought to be.


Socratic philosophy is a method of questioning and dialogue that encourages critical thinking and self-examination. It was developed by the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates of Athens (c. 470–399 BC).

Socratic method
  • Involves a teacher asking thought-provoking questions to students
  • Focuses on understanding the underlying beliefs of participants
  • Encourages students to ask questions and think critically
  • Creates a classroom environment that's productive and not intimidating
Socratic ideas
  • Philosophy should have practical results that improve society
  • Knowledge of virtue is necessary to become virtuous
  • All evil acts are committed out of ignorance
  • Committing an injustice is worse than suffering an injustice
  • The only thing one can be certain of is one's ignorance
  • The unexamined life is not worth living
Socrates' influence
  • Socrates' ideas influenced Western philosophy and Classical antiquity
  • He's considered the father of modern education
  • His ideas are reflected in the works of Plato, Xenophon, Søren Kierkegaard, and Friedrich Nietzsche
  • His ideas are also reflected in modern educational frameworks


Platonic philosophy is a system of thought that originated with the ancient Greek philosopher Plato (c.427-347 BC). It's based on the idea that the physical world is a reflection of unchanging Forms, or Ideas, which are the true reality.

Key concepts
  • Forms: Abstract objects that are non-physical, timeless, and unchangeable
  • Theory of Forms: The idea that the physical world is not as real as Forms
  • Platonic idealism: Another name for the Theory of Forms
  • Platonic realism: Another name for the Theory of Forms
  • Platonism's influence
  • Platonism has had a profound impact on Western thought.
Examples of Forms
  • Some examples of Forms include goodness, beauty, equality, bigness, likeness, unity, being, sameness, difference, change, and changelessness.
Platonic love
  • The term "platonic love" refers to a relationship between two people based on close intimacy and attraction, but without sexual intimacy.
Platonic society
  • Plato believed that a good society is based on virtue, including friendship, freedom, justice, wisdom, courage, and moderation.


Aristotelian philosophy, a tradition rooted in the work of Aristotle (c.384-322 BC), a polymath, whose works ranged across all philosophical fields emphasizing deductive logic, inductive methods, and the study of natural philosophy and metaphysics, including ethics and political theory, with a focus on virtue and the pursuit of human flourishing.

Here's a more detailed breakdown of key aspects of Aristotelian philosophy:

Core Concepts
  • Deductive and Inductive Logic:
  • Aristotle is credited with the development of formal logic, using deductive reasoning (syllogisms) and inductive methods to analyze and understand the world.
  • Metaphysics:
  • Aristotle explored the nature of reality, including the concepts of substance, form, matter, potentiality, and actuality, seeking to understand the fundamental principles of existence.
  • Ethics:
  • Aristotle's ethics, outlined in his Nicomachean Ethics, emphasizes the importance of developing virtuous character through habit and practice, leading to eudaimonia (flourishing or happiness).
  • Politics:
  • Aristotle's political philosophy, as explored in Politics, examines different forms of government and the ideal state, focusing on the common good and the importance of citizens' participation in public life.
  • Natural Philosophy:
  • Aristotle's natural philosophy, encompassing physics, biology, and other natural sciences, sought to understand the natural world through observation and reason, focusing on the causes and purposes of natural phenomena.
  • Four Causes:
  • Aristotle's theory of causation involves four types of causes: material, formal, efficient, and final, which help explain the nature and development of things.
  • Teleology:
  • Aristotle believed that everything has a purpose or telos, and that understanding the purpose of something is crucial to understanding its nature.

Key Areas of Influence
  • Western Scholasticism:
  • Aristotelian philosophy became the intellectual framework of Western Scholasticism during the Middle Ages, influencing theology and philosophy.
  • Virtue Ethics:
  • Aristotle's ethics has inspired the field of virtue ethics, which emphasizes character development and the pursuit of excellence.
  • Contemporary Philosophy:
  • Aristotle's ideas continue to influence contemporary philosophy, particularly in areas like metaphysics, political philosophy, and the philosophy of science.
  • Renaissance:
  • Aristotelian works were the subject of renewed interest in the Renaissance, with many commentaries on Aristotle's works being composed during this period.
  • Thomas Aquinas:
  • St. Thomas Aquinas, in the 13th century, attempted to reconcile Aristotelian philosophy and science with Christian dogma, influencing the theology and worldview of the Roman Catholic Church.


I Ancient Philosophy (Pre-Socratic to Hellenistic)
  • Pre-Socratics (6th-5th centuries BCE):
  • Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Parmenides, Empedocles, Zeno of Elea, Anaxagoras, Democritus.
  • Classical Greek Philosophy (5th-4th centuries BCE):
  • Socrates, Plato, Aristotle.
  • Hellenistic Philosophy (3rd century BCE - 1st century CE):
  • Epicurus, Zeno of Citium (founder of Stoicism), Pyrrhon of Elis.
  • Roman Philosophy (1st century BCE - 5th century CE):
  • Cicero, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Plotinus.

II Medieval Philosophy (5th-15th centuries CE)
  • Early Medieval (5th-10th centuries):
  • Augustine of Hippo.
  • High and Late Medieval (11th-15th centuries):
  • Boethius, Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham.
  • Islamic Philosophy:
  • Al-Kindi, Avicenna, Averroes, Al-Ghazali.
  • Jewish Philosophy:
  • Maimonides.

III Renaissance and Early Modern Philosophy (15th-18th centuries)
  • Renaissance:
  • Machiavelli, Pico della Mirandola.
  • Early Modern (16th-18th centuries):
  • Francis Bacon, René Descartes, John Locke, Baruch Spinoza, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Isaac Newton.
  • Enlightenment:
  • John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Voltaire, Montesquieu.

IV Modern and Contemporary Philosophy (19th-21st centuries)
  • 19th Century:
  • Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, Søren Kierkegaard, John Stuart Mill.
  • 20th Century:
  • Bertrand Russell, G.E. Moore (Analytic Philosophy), Friedrich Waismann, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Martin Heidegger (Continental Philosophy), Hannah Arendt.
  • 21st Century:
  • Contemporary analytic and continental philosophy, feminist philosophy, postcolonial philosophy, philosophy of science, ethics, and political philosophy.

click to enlarge

A Timeline of Western Philosophers


600 B.C.E.
Thales
Anaximander
Anaximenes
Pythagoras
Xenophanes

500 B.C.E.
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Protagoras
Zeno of Elea
Hippias
Empedocles
Leucippus
Anaxagoras
Democritus
Socrates

400 B.C.E.
Aristippus
Antisthenes
Xenophon
Plato
Diogenes
Euclid
Aristotle
Xenocrates
Pyrrho

300 B.C.E.
Epicurus
Zeno of Citium
Timon
Archimedes
Chrysippus
Eratosthenes

200 B.C.E.
Carneades

100 B.C.E.
Lucretius
Cicero

C.E.
Philo
Seneca

100
Epictetus
Marcus Aurelius

200
Sextus Empiricus
Plotinus
Porphyry

300

400
Hypatia
Augustine

500
Boethius

600

700

800
al-Kindi
Erigena

900
al-Faràbi
Saadiah

1000
Ibn Sina
Ibn Gabirol
Anselm
al-Ghazàlì

1100
Abelard
Ibn Daud
Peter Lombard
Ibn Rushd
Maimonides

1200
Fibonacci
Grosseteste
Albert the Great
Roger Bacon
Aquinas
Bonaventure
Siger
Boetius of Dacia

1300
Scotus
Eckhart
Marsilius of Padua
Ockham
Gersonides
Buridan
Crescas

1400
Cusa
Valla
Pico della Mirandola
Ficino

1500
Erasmus
Machiavelli
Thomas More
Paracelsus
Copernicus
Ramus

1550
Teresa of Avila
Montaigne
Bruno
Suarez

1600
Kepler
Charron
Mersenne
Francis Bacon
Grotius
Galileo
Herbert of Cherbury
Gassendi
Princess Elizabeth
Fermat
Queen KristinaDescartes
HobbesFilmer

1650
Glanvill
Geulincx
Pascal
Henry More
Cordemoy
Nicole
Cudworth
Cavendish
Arnauld
Cumberland
Rohault
Foucher
Boyle
Malebranche
Pufendorf
Spinoza
Newton
Conway
Régis
Locke
Masham
Toland
Bayle
Souvré

1700
Clarke
Shaftesbury
Norris
Leibniz
Berkeley
Cockburn
Vico
Mandeville
Hutcheson
Butler
Wolff
Gay
Hume
La Mettrie
HartleyMontesquieu

1750
Euler
Condillac
Price d'Alembert
Voltaire
Diderot
Rousseau
Bayes
d'Holbach
Helvétius
Smith
Jefferson
Reid
Paine
Lessing
Burke
Kant
Wollstonecraft
Bentham
Mendelssohn
Stewart
Godwin
Schiller
Malthus
Paley
Fichte

1800
Gaussde
Staël
Schelling
Schleiermacher
LaplaceHegel
LamarckSaint-Simon
FourierSchopenhauer
Whately
Babbage
LobachevskyJohn AustinComte
WhewellJames MillProudhon
BolzanoEmersonFeuerbach
De MorganFullerKierkegaard
BooleThoreau

1850
RiemannSojourner TruthMarx
DarwinTaylorEngels
Hamilton
MendelJ. S. MillLotze
Spencer
VennAnthonyBakunin
CantorBrentano

1875
Sidgwick
DedekindClifford
PeirceCaird
MachGreen
FregeDiltheyNietzsche
CarrollBosanquet
PeanoStantonRitchie
DurkheimJamesRoyce
GilmanBradley
ParetoVeblen

1900
PlanckFreudWeberBergson
PoincareMeinongDuboisCook Wilson
DuhemHusserlAddamsSeth
ZermeloMooreCroce
EinsteinJungGoldmanVaihinger
BohrWatsonLuxemburgOtto
HilbertUnamuno
AdlerLeninSaussure
LukasciewiczDeweyTrotskyBuber
RussellWhitehead
MeadAlexanderMcTaggart
KeynesBroadLukácsSantayana

1925
ReichenbachLovejoyRossBerdyaev
HeisenbergSchlickKelsenHeidegger
NeurathRamseyHartmannCassirer
GödelPerryGramsciCollingwood
SchrödingerC. I. LewisIngarden
AyerBachelardMao ZedongMaritain
WaismannDayOrtega y Gasset
TarskiCarnapBlanshard
E. NagelPopperGandhi
HorneySartre
RyleH.H. PriceLangerCamus
StevensonHayekJaspers
Wittgenstein Adorno
TuringPrichardMarcelBeauvoir

1950
von NeumannLorenzWisdomTillich
HopperArrowHareMerleau-Ponty
PolyaSkinnerBerlinWeil
ChurchAnscombeRandHorkheimer
FeiglAustinHampshireArendt
HempelStrawsonKurt BaierGadamer
QuineGriceHartLacan
GoodmanSellarsHabermas
KuhnSmartMarcuse
FeynmanBergmannRicoeur
GettierArmstrongKingAlthusser
ChomskyChisholmDerrida
SearleLakatosRawlsFoucault
KripkeE.O. WilsonDeleuze

1975
FeyerabendThomsonSingerEco
DummettPutnamDworkinLyotard
DavidsonT. NagelMidgleyDaly
HofstadterRortyNozickCixous
MandelbrotKimReganLe Dœuff
HarawayGilliganKristeva
MinskyAppiahNoddingsIrigaray
Lehrer Annette Baier Held
HardingRuddickHoagland
KemerlingMacKinnon
DennettNussbaumBordo
Westhooks

2000





What Is Open Theism


A personal note.

Any recent articles on Relevancy22 between myself and ChatGPT from January to March of 2025 will feel distinctly different from the strictly theological discussion held below. That is because I have applied Whitehead's process philosophy and theology to the conceptual idea of creational freedom and freewill within a panpsychic panentheistic universe. However, there may be some value for readers in the article below which I here cite with my own personal reservations.

R.E. Slater
March 27, 2025

ps... in "The Spectrum Map of Open Theism" illustrated near the end of the article I would have to place Whiteheadian views of freewill to the radical far left as creation cannot be absent freewill. It is what fuels process thought. As example, from God comes agency; without God agency is simply causal affect without purposeful formation (process teleology). In creation the subject of love informs freewill which influences generative behavior or degenerative dissonance and disruption to Divine precedence and persuasion. - re slater

Suggested References:

Index - Process PanPsychic Panentheism  <-- primary source

Index - Process Teleology  <-- another excellent source


pss... Since beginning Relevancy22, the subject of Open Theism has shifted and morphed from the 1990s. More recently, during the first quarter of 2025, I have written more directionally about this subject from any number of significant perspectives. But to the unobservant, pew-taught Christian, the subject of agency is conflicted with the theology of sin. And yet, in (open and relational) process theology, human failure is not the driver of God's Story. Rather, cosmic/creational/human thriving becomes the centerpoint to all Christological themes bespeaking atoning resurrection. That love is the motif upon which all else flows and not the imbalanced Christianized ideations of sin and evil which sociological themes we see driving the maga-Christian and evangelical churches today. In a word, these modern-day cultic institutions have taken their eyes off Jesus and have placed their own wicked hearts upon the Cross making idols of themselves and their manmade religion focused solely on legalistic living. Consequently, the beauty and love of God is forgotten whenever the snake of man's soul is lifted up into the desert place of our landscapes. And unlike Moses' cruciform image lifted in the Wilderness to allay the toxins of the deadly desert serpent, maga cultists cannot save themselves nor the societies around their ungracious churches by fleshly efforts of self-atonement whether by dogma, apologetic or missional assimilation that all be like their miserable, errant religions. - res




What is Open Theism?
god is open logo 2023


What is Open Theism?

Open Theism has been called many things by many people. A leading critical webpage defines Open Theism as: “the teaching that God has granted to humanity free will and that in order for the free will to be truly free, the future free will choices of individuals cannot be known ahead of time by God.” Although this describes some philosophical conclusions of some Open Theists, it does not serve as a very good defining characteristic.

Another critical website claims Open Theism is: “the belief that God does not exercise meticulous control of the universe but leaves it “open” for humans to make significant choices (free will) that impact their relationships with God and others.” Although this definition is better, it still just breaks the surface of what the Open Theist movement entails.

The same site also lists the definition by a leading Open Theist, Pastor Bob Enyart of Denver Bible Church. Enyart states: “The future is open because God is free and God is creative. The settled view of God denies God’s own freedom and the ability to create, do something new, etc. God was, is and always will be free. God was, is and always will be a creative God.” This is really the heart of the matter. God is free to do as God pleases. God can write new songs, create new relationships, and even change the future. This is the God that the Bible depicts; a God eternally interacting with His creation, reacting and moving, living and creating, planning and accomplishing all His goals.

Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not closed but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative.

Furthermore, the Biblical Open Theism belief is that the Bible depicts God as God truly is. The God of the Bible is truly lovingpowerfulrighteousfaithfulvengefulrelational, and desperately beautiful. God raises up nations and destroys them (Isaiah 40:23). God is heartbroken by rebellion and exacts retribution (Genesis 6:6-7). God pleads with His people to return to Him and attempts everything He possibly can to make them love Him (Isaiah 5:4). God is nauseated by heinous sin (Jeremiah 19:5). God forgets His people’s sin for God’s own sake (Isaiah 43:25). God feels scorned and rejected when we abandon Him (Hosea 1:2).

But most of all, God is love (1 John 4:8). God so loved mankind that God made us in His image (Genesis 1:26). Imagine the God of the universe making lowly man into God’s own image! The picture is beautifully breathtaking. God created man for a love relationship! All God’s actions point to God’s love, even His vengeance. God desperately wants man to love Him and will go through extreme lengths to make it happen.

God describes Himself as relational and powerful. God can do everything; God can test people and learn that people love Him (Genesis 22:12), God can listen to new songs (songs WE(!) write for Him) (Psalms 33:3), and God can perform new creations (2 Corinthians 5:17). God even explains His relationship to mankind in the most loving way; God states that He will stop judgment against a nation if they repent (a judgment God “thought to bring upon” the nation)( Jeremiah 18:8). Amazing and righteous! God thinks He is going to destroy a nation, but repents based on human repentance. We see this wonderfully illustrated in Jonah, where the most wicked people on Earth repent and then God does not bring upon them “what He said He would bring upon them” (Jonah 3:10).

God so loved sinners that time and time again He laments about our unbelief. In fact God states that He tried so hard to save us that He expected(!) us to turn to God, but we did not (Jeremiah 3:7). In God’s infinite love, God has given us the ability to interact with Him, and the freedom to reject Him despite His best efforts! The God of the Bible responds to His creation.

Because God is righteous, God answers criticism. God answers the pagan king Abimelech when the king questions God (Genesis 20:4). God responds to critics. He does not ignore them as if their reasoning did not matter.

This is the God of the Bible. Open Theism claims that the Bible should not be ignored when it speaks about who God is and what God is like. The God of the Bible is truly loving, powerful, dangerous, faithful, vengeful, relational, and desperately beautiful. God is a complex, free, and wonderful person. God is hopelessly personal. That is the position of Open Theism.

Spectrum of Open Theism

It is important to distinguish between Christian open theists and non-Christian open theists. While open theism can refer to Muslims and other religions, it is primarily associated with Christianity. The most straightforward written method of distinguishing between the two is by capitalizing Open Theism when referring to the Christian subset. I am proposing that this standard is adopted as a norm.

Open Theism, then, would be the subgroup of all open theists that adhere to Christianity. This would not include Jewish, Muslim, Agnostic or even Process open theists.

Open Theism can be rightly understood as a spectrum of beliefs ranging from Philosophical Open Theism (Open Theism as derived from metaphysics) to Biblical Open Theism (Open Theism derived from Biblical descriptions of God’s acts and nature). Between these two poles range a wide variety of belief. To the extent that people use metaphysics (such as Perfect Being or Dignum Deo theology) as their metric to understanding the Bible, they move down the spectrum towards the Philosophical pole. To the extent that people use authorial intent (figuring out the concepts that the author was trying to communicate to his audience) as their metric, they move down the spectrum towards the Biblical pole.

Each pole has characteristic (but not absolute) attributes. Understanding the spectrum of thought will help Open Theists interact and critics to build accurate depictions of Open Theism.

open theism spectrum

A few items of note: Not all Open Theists embrace Omniscience and Perfect Being theology. Also, not all Open Theists embrace Biblical Inerrancy. Not all traditions of Open Theism flow from the same influences, and some influences for Open Theism are not compatible with certain Open Theists views. When critics cite Whitehead and Hartshorne as influences on Christianity, the entire Biblical side of the chart is more likely to have never heard these names before. It is a mistake to view Open Theism as a monolithic and strictly defined movement. Instead, it is better seen as a loose confederacy of divergent traditions and beliefs. Understanding this will allow Open Theists to better communicate and collaborate at common goals, the primary of which is to accurately describe the nature and character of God.

Saturday, March 22, 2025

The Importance of Torah and Community vs. Maga Anarchy and Imperialism



The Importance of Torah and Community
vs. Maga Anarchy and Imperialism

On the whole I have understood the term anarchy as a violent reaction to legal authority which has more recently been applied to maga-evangelicalism's activist rejection of America's Constitutional authority as evidenced in it's severe reaction to Donald Trump's presidential loss in 2020 to President Biden on January 6, 2021, in it's mass violent demonstrations in Washington, D.C.

I am also of the firm belief that America's conceived liberal democracy adjudicating for legal fairness and equality within its form of liberal democracy for all races and religions is the gold standard for any society wishing to pursue peaceful policies for cooperative and humane society building.

Today I am including an article which advocates for these same ideas by "radicalizing" or "twisting" the term "anarchy" away from it's violent connotations to a non-violent form of response to unfair governance and rule.

Which is ironic when applied to America's Constitutional political process... and yet imaginable in that America's Republican party has failed in its leadership role and guidance towards societal fairness and equality:
Presently, under President Trump, Maga-Republicans are actively advancing maga-majority white rule via maga-based Hillsdale (Christian) College's Project 2025 which advocates the resurrection of the bad-old days of Colonial Western-European rule over non-whites and non-white religion.
In my idealism of America's Civil Right's for women, gays, non-whites, and non-Christians it seems that the nation's white Christian population is not as benevolent nor societally-minded as its originating Constitutional contract put in place in 1776.

In my naivete I had thought that rightness would displace wrongness but maga-evangelicalisim's societal response to color and difference has shown to me only my misguided idealism for the Christian church.
An idealism which I had held within my white evangelical church setting until lately coming to the new maga-reality under the Trump-era commencing in c. 2015 to the present day.... How very wrong I was.... Nor do I suspect the evangelist Billy Graham could have foreseen the church's deep misapprehension of Jesus' Gospel by today's maga-church.
The Middle-Eastern Jesus I had come to love and preach has unfortunately been historically aligned over the centuries with the bloody Christian Crusades against all non-Christian races and beliefs. Rather than preaching a non-assimilating, non-white gospel of love, peace, and harmony in the Abrahamic God of Jesus (who Christians believe to be God Incarnate on Earth) the church's missional God has been politicized to reflect non-Christian injustice and inequality currently held by its majority maga-congregants.

Under Maga's political influence we are witnessing once again another form of White Western "Christianized" Crusading that is Constitutionally illegal, unjust, oppressive, harming, and persecuting.

Maga has brought a new kind of religious violence into American society and is justifying it under its errant theologies of church dominionism which I have described in the past as New Covenant-based Reconstructionism. That is, under Jesus' atoning redemption today's maga-church wishes to overthrow American Constitutionalism for it's own beliefs in the rightness of Church-led, Kingdom-based, rule via institutionalized monarchy.

Thus and thus the plethora of lies and propaganda which we witness daily from the mouths of Trumpian maga'ites who no longer can lawfully abide under the American Constitution but wish to overthrow it's legal document and imports so that white anarchal rule might reign supreme.

This then is how I have used and understood the word "anarchy" in my white church setting over the years when reflecting politically on my church's most recent misguided teachings and doctrines begun under Jerry Falwell's "Moral Majority." Once centered in Jesus and not politics my Christian faith has now been displaced by political revisionism and oppression:
Thus I decry the maga-church's misappropriation of its religious beliefs in overthrowing America's Constitution for its own incongruous rule of Christian injustice upon race, color, and difference.
Maga has determined not to learn how to apply Christian love and harmony into our Constitutional spaces but to act illegally and treasonously against America's 300 year-old experiment of imperfect democracy.

Hence my departure from the maga-Church and my own personal advocacy for a process-based understanding of the Christian religion and its faith practices beginning with the firm belief that God is love and that all faith - and faith practices - including the ethical / moral political rule of society - must be grounded in loving response to God and to our fellow man in ethical / moral policies, behaviours, and endeavors.

R.E. Slater
March 22, 2025


Reflections on peace and faith

Is there such a thing as a
Christian political philosophy?

by Ted Grimsrud
April 22, 2023

[reformatting and edits are mine. - re slater]


As long as I have cared about Christianity and politics, which is about as long as I have been a pacifist, I have thought that we need a political philosophy that captures key elements of the biblical vision of human social life. None of the main options one encounters in a political theory class (such as liberal democracy, communism, or monarchy) seem to come close to doing that. That leaves pacifist Christians with a kind of disembodied political philosophy—which is surely part the reason that pacifism seems too unrealistic. To try to fit pacifism into a philosophy of liberal democracy where a core principle is that the meaning of the state rests on its monopoly on legitimate violence is like trying to fit the proverbial round peg into a square hole.

Not long after I embraced pacifism, I learned to know a couple of anarchists. They helped open my eyes to a possible option. Then, when I took a class on the history of political theory in graduate school, I was pleased that the professor treated anarchism as a legitimate theory within the cacophony of theories that have been articulated in the western tradition. He didn’t spend much time on anarchism in the class, but that recognition of anarchism as a serious political philosophy planted a seed for me. I am still trying to make sense of Christian pacifism as a realistic and important set of convictions for people of good will. In this post, I want to reflect on the possibility that something like anarchism (or, more precisely what I will call an “anarchistic sensibility”) actually may help us imagine better the political relevance of pacifism.

What is anarchism?

The term “anarchism,” similarly to “nonviolence,” is a negative term that in its most profound sense speaks of a positive approach to human social life. Though the term “anarchism” literally means against “authority” (arché), it is at its heart—as I understand it—not mainly against something. It is for freedom and for decentralized ways of organizing social life that enhance human well-being. Anarchism has an unfair, though not totally unfounded, reputation for being violent, even terrorist. There indeed have been numerous acts of violence in the name of anarchism, perhaps most notably in the US the 1901 assassination of President McKinley at the hand of a self-proclaimed anarchist (though one who had few links with other anarchists).

The great thinkers in the anarchist tradition, however, generally were not people of violence nor advocates of terrorist tactics. Late 19th and early 20th century writers and visionaries such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Michael Bakunin (perhaps the most pro-violence of the lot), Peter Kropotkin, and Emma Goldman had ambivalent feelings about violence, but for all of them, the main concern was imagining how human life might be organized in ways that enhance human freedom and self-determination. Still, what probably united classical anarchists as much as anything was a strong antipathy toward the state. There is a sense that the spirit of anarchism is not unfairly described as a spirit of rebellion versus centralized nation states as much as any one commitment. To achieve [a] political life that is genuinely free and self-determined, the state must go—root and branch.

However, it could be that the anarchism represented by these thinkers is too state-centered. Maybe we would do better with a political philosophy that has anarchistic sensibilites if we did not equate politics with state-politics. This may be the key to developing a Christian political philosophy as well—to imagine it as having not simply to do with how we might run the state. In several articles and a PhD dissertation, political thinker Ted Troxell has helpfully brought together Christian theology, anarchist thought, and what he calls “postanarchism.”

Postanarchism

“Postanarchism” is a term that has arisen in the 21st century to refer to attempts to apply postmodern or poststructuralist thought to anarchism. This is not a way to be finished with anarchism but rather to apply these new styles of thought to anarchist theory in order to make it more relevant to our contemporary context. Troxell mentions one important postanarchist thinker, Todd May, who differentiates between what he calls “strategic” and “tactical” thinking. Strategic-thinking-oriented anarchism focuses on one particular theme, the state, while a more tactical-thinking-oriented approach questions that unitary focus and seek to broaden the scope of applying anarchist thought.

One especially important theme, according to Troxell, where this increased flexibility becomes key is our response to macroeconomic issues related to the dominant neoliberal regime we live in that is not strictly state-centered. In general, a more tactical approach creates possibilities of heightened creativity in navigating the particular issues facing people seeking a more humane politics in the contemporary world. Postanarchism, as presented by Troxell, also makes a closer link between Christianity and anarchism seem more possible. 

Christian anarchism

As a rule, not without reason, anarchists have seen Christianity as part of the problem. However, ever since the rise of Christendom in the early Middle Ages, a few Christians have joined the resistance to the domination system:

Note, the early Franciscans’ voluntary poverty; the Anabaptists’ radical anti-Christendom witness; the pro-labor and antiwar activism and unconditional hospitality of the Catholic Workers, and the overtly Christian influences on the Civil Rights Movement.

Troxell suggests it is even possible to talk about “Christian anarchism.” However, this is an anarchism that agrees with postanarchism in not focusing on overthrowing the state. Christian Anarchism instead will seek to find ways to live out an alternative witness [for] a peaceable world as a way to anticipate the hoped-for kingdom of God

Contemporary theologian, Alexandre Christoyannopoulos, has written a book, Christian Anarchism: A Political Commentary on the Gospel, that articulates a vision that has in mind not the overthrow of present structures so much [as] the subversion of them. This subversion emphasizes creating alternative communities that embody the way of life that is to come. The hoped-for revolution will lead to social transformation, but through love, forgiveness, and patience not violence and terror. For Christian anarchism, radical living in the present is made possible by trust in God’s guidance of history that will lead to an authentically [peaceable] anarchist social reality. 

The Anabaptist contribution

The Anabaptist tradition has been occasionally recognized as a kind of prefiguring of anarchism, though rarely have there ever been overt connections between anarchists and Anabaptists. In recent years, especially in light of a decentering of the idea of overthrowing the state, it has become more common for Christian anarchism to see Anabaptist emphases as relevant.

An Anabaptist critique of the state would not include a call to abolish the state, though the state indeed is all too often characterized by Jesus’s charge of tyranny. However, even so, it plays a necessary restraining role in protecting people from the resultant destructive chaos likely to ensue were the state abolished before people were truly ready for the self-determination anarchism hopes for. Recognizing that abolishing the state is not an immediately desirable outcome is thus a common stance that Anabaptistic and a postanarchistic sensibilities share. 

As part of the decentering of the state and state power, we could see a point of contact in thinking about power more generally. An Anabaptist reading of the New Testament notes the use of power in the plural—the “powers and principalities”—with the sense that it is appropriate to reject the notion of power in the modern world that sees it as centralized and univocal and rather recognize that power should be seen as multifaceted [sic, "empowering" others vs. "powering-over" others]. Postanarchists also understand power to arise “from many different sites” in ways that interact to form our social world. 

To recognize power’s decentralized manifestation in the world supports seeing social action as oriented toward efforts to construct humane spaces for creativity and peaceable living more than to directly overthrow the existing order. The efforts of the Anabaptists over the centuries have been focused on creating alternative faith communities and in the context of those communities to develop strategies for meeting human needs and express human creativity and, in a sense, letting the state take care of itself. 

Troxell calls this positive focus on creating space to be human [and humane] outside the domination of the state “a structural indifference to the state.” With this, the state is not necessarily rejected as unimportant on a practical level so much as it is not the central emphasis for the community’s political involvements. In a parallel manner, postanarchism is uninterested in typical anarchist strategies of creating a “vanguard movement” to take down the state. Instead, since there is no centralized source of power that must be taken control of, the focus may be turned toward the decentralized politics of direct involvement in the day-to-day work of humane engagement. The goal is to construct a politics that embodies decentralized power all the way down.

When the focus is to construct decentralized spaces to be humane more than concentrated efforts to overthrow the state, the emphasis will be on the practices to sustain that humaneness—another point of close connection between Anabaptist thought and postanarchism. Anabaptist peaceable practices are similar to what some postanarchists call “micropolitics.” A central practice is that of patient listening to various points of view. This listening is a key element in processing conflicts. Inspired by the Anabaptist emphasis on the importance of the Bible, we may seek a reading of scripture that highlights ways that the Bible actually might support an anarchistic sensibility. The points of congruence between Anabaptism and postanarchism may be linked with such a reading.

The Bible’s “anarchistic” politics: Old Testament

The Bible provides much material for idealistic hopes, and we should take that material seriously. One of the main functions of the Bible is to hold before us a vision of genuine healing and shalom. At the same time, the Bible does give us pictures of human fallenness, of imperfect communities, of power politics. The tension between the imperfect and the ideal remains very much in place.

From the start, the story expresses a deep suspicion of centralized political power. At first this is a bit subtle. Only if we notice what is missing in the creation story will we recognize its subversive tenor. The creative force and center of power in the universe is not anything hinting of human kingship or empires. It is a free, humane, relational God whose creative energies stem from love not domination. The human politics in the rest of Genesis are familial, decentralized, local, and often surprising. Younger sons at times take priority. Injustices at times are forgiven. The God at times sides with the weaker and more vulnerable members of the community.

In Exodus, the Bible’s anti-imperial sensibility becomes explicit. The paragon of power politics, the god-emperor Pharaoh of Egypt is shown to be corrupt and overtly opposed to the God of the Hebrews (that is, according to the story, the God who is the Creator of the Universe—so this is a cosmological statement). God intervenes to liberate the Hebrews from slavery in Egypt and gifts them with a blueprint for a just and humane society—the law codes (Torah). Though Torah certainly contains many ambiguities and reflects its own time and place of origin, as a whole, it may fruitfully be read as an exercise in anti-imperial politics. The vision of communal life in Torah is a counter-vision to the notion of life expressed in Egypt’s ways of domination. So, the exodus story includes both a critique of centralized, unjust power and a vision for an alternative community of freed slaves, an alternative vision for human life.

The community is meant to operate in a way that prevents a return to slavery. The anti-slavery dynamics of Torah include both a rejection of centralized power (initially, no human king and no permanent military; when allowance for the possibility of human kingship is made, precautions are still provided to prevent aggrandizement of power and wealth) and an affirmation of the center of power being the community and not some kind of small elite.

Along with Egypt, later empires are also critiqued throughout the Bible. Assyria, Babylon, Persia, and Rome are often presented as God’s enemies, as oppressors of the Hebrew people (and so many others), and as the sources of most of the world’s violence and injustice. The entire project of the exodus, Torah, and the sustenance of the community of God’s people is framed from the beginning in terms of God’s work of blessing all the families of the earth. Resistance to power politics is one of the main aspects of this work, along with constructing communities that model genuine justice and empower the vulnerable.

One of the most politically significant parts of the Bible is the account of the post-exodus community. Though gifted with Torah as guidance to just living, it struggles from the beginning to actually embody such just living. They end up with a homeland, gained by morally ambiguous means, including a great deal of violence. What’s not ambiguous is that in time, this territorial kingdom departs from Torah’s guidance for just living:

As the kings and power elite imitate the ways of the nations and exploit the vulnerable, prophets arise who reemphasize the perennial relevance of Torah and the politics of decentralized power and empowered self-determination. In the end, the territorial kingdom is destroyed, and with it that model as a channel for God’s promise is ended.

 So, the relevance of Torah is multifaceted, in many ways hinting at an anarchistic sensibility—especially in its critique of centralized power, attention to the needs of the vulnerable, providing guidance for shared power in the community, and empowerment of the prophets as a source of insight and direction from leaders outside the elite establishment.

The Bible’s “anarchistic” politics: New Testament

It is possible to read New Testament politics as being in continuity with the Old Testament when we recognize how central to the story is the failure of the territorial kingdom as the locus for God’s work among human beings:

The Hebrews were given the Land as a place to embody Torah and fulfill their vocation to bless all the families of the earth. For various reasons, they failed to do so. The leadership class became corrupt, and Torah was disregarded. Ultimately, the territorial kingdoms were destroyed by a couple of the great empires, Assyria and Babylon. The key message of this tragic story, though, was that the destruction of the territorial kingdoms was not actually a defeat for Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews. This destruction was actually a vindication of Torah and of the warning God gave the people back when they entered the Land in the time of Joshua: Disregard Torah and your kingdom will fall.
When the territorial kingdom had been established the people gradually turned from Torah. At the last minute of this kingdom’s existence, the law books were rediscovered. With Torah back in hand, the community managed to find sustenance for their peoplehood. They didn’t need a king nor a territorial kingdom to witness to the truth of Torah and to bless all the families of the earth. The political message of the Old Testament thus ends up being an affirmation of peoplehood and politics apart from existing as a territorial kingdom.

With that anti-territorial kingdom message in mind, the political dynamics of the New Testament make more senseand it’s easier to see continuity between the two testaments:

Jesus framed his ministry as an expression of the kingdom of God. But politics of the kingdom of God as presented by Jesus has to do not with a territorial kingdom but with embodying Torah in decentralized, shalom-focused “assemblies.” The common life and witness of these assemblies was about politics in the same ways that the original Torah-centered community following the exodus was—practice generosity, justice for the vulnerable, non-acquisitive economics, no centralized power elite, reconciliation rather than retaliation when there is conflict.

Both testaments show optimism that the dictates of Torah that especially empower vulnerable people are followable. Certainly, we read of many failures to embody the way of Torah consistently, but the main responsibility for such failures generally lies with the powers-that-be in the community and with the impact of the great empires on the people (from Egypt to Rome). Human nature is not the problem so much as the imposition of power politics from the top down. The Bible, as a whole, undermines the domination of hierarchies in human communities. Do not be like the tyrants of the nations, Jesus insisted.

Transforming politics

An Anabaptist reading of biblical politics has much to gain from a conversation with postanarchists. The potential of useful connections with postanarchists may also be present with other anarchist thinkers as well. Anabaptists suggest a line of continuity from the formation of the people of God around the liberating work of Yahweh (with the prophetic word and not human power politics at the center) through the failure of the geographically bounded kingdom option through the continuation of peoplehood based on Torah and not the sword culminating in Jesus as king, reinforcing a politics of servanthood. Many of the classic anarchist thinkers and practitioners (maybe most especially Peter Kropotkin) have sought a similar kind of politics.

My concern is not so much with converting anarchists to Christianity or to convert Christians to anarchists. I don’t even know yet if I want to call myself a full-fledged anarchist. More so, I want to work at a way of reading the Bible that would challenge Christians to embody a radical political philosophy. And with that, I suspect more awareness of the anarchist tradition, including the recent thought of postanarchists, would be very helpful for that task. And if doing so would make biblical and theological resources more available to anarchists and other activists, so much the better.