R.E. Slater Shorts - Let's Talk About Process Theology v Universalism

I guess I am doing a little advertising for Pete Enns, but I like the guy and think he and his organization can be helpful to Christians looking to grow beyond their faith borders held in check by traditional church dogmas.

I also think Pete is personally exploring process theology while continuing to lean into progressive evangelical theology. I get the latter as it would be the direction I would choose if I hadn't discovered John Cobb et al's process theology built upon Alfred North Whitehead's process philosophy many years earlier when building out this blog/website.

My journey began when concluding my lay ministeries and joining a new fellowship known as Mars Hill led by Rob Bell. Here was spoken a progressive (emergent, or emerging) evangelical gospel as a positive outbreak from the more staid forms of Christian traditionalism I had grown up with. Years later, after Rob had left for California, I realized I needed a new philosophic-theology beyond the one I had inherited from my Baptist roots.

So when deciding to write about my faith journey as I left my classical roots to explore a more progressive (westernized) theology I early on stumbled across (i.e., was providentially led by the Holy Spirit) into what has now become for me the more superior form of theology based upon Whitehead's process philosophy of organism. It became the philosophic-theological base I was seeking and naturally held at it's core God's love, equality of justice, personal liberty within a encorporated democracy, and charitable relations to all.

Before my discovery I was comparatively researching the analytical (~ formula-based) traditions of Christian systematics to the narratival approaches of continental thought. In so doing I realized I could take the art of story telling towards a more thematic approach of the bible which I could then layer on my inductive bible training. And as I did I eventually discovered process philosophy and theology which, like Bartian theology, seems more of a bridge between American and European thinking, or a mediating third way, if you well.

Here were some of my observations back then:

Firstly, process theology naturally comports with the quantum evolutionary sciences which is beginning to abandon its mechanical world of parts-and-pieces for an ever evolving, processual creation when realizing the universe's highly connective and relational cosmology acting more like a "living" organism than as an interconnected system of scientific laws and working parts.

Secondly, process thought helps me extend Jesus as Atoning Savior/God to non-westernized regions of the world, such as the Middle-Eastern and Eastern religions of Asia which look at the world we live in processually. Thus, Whitehead's western-based process philosophy is highly connective to the Muslim and Hindu faiths thus providing an extended metaphysical framework of "common ground" wherein I might describe God and salvation in processual terms rather than in stiff formulaic and non-relational systematic terms.

And thirdly, I find process theology simply works better with my earlier Reformed theology (as I suspect it will with all other forms of Christianity). That is, the Hellenised theology of the New Testament is steeped in Greek Platonic thought forms which give to us a clock-like, mechanical universe reduced to its parts (sic, Newton, Kant, Descartes, etc). Whereas Whitehead picked up Hegel's earlier cosmological insights to re-establish a far more ancient cosmology before the Greeks. One which is far more ancient describing creation as a living complex of organic panrelational, panexperiential, and panpsychic ontological primary elements which are irreducibly One. Thid is retold )or, narrated) again and again over the eons by the ancients in their paleo-stories of God, creation, redemption, provision, and beauty. In essence, creation is irreducibly and complexly One which may further be described as a living, evolving, processual organism.

Lastly, for those more interested in process theology (which is, in its heart, or core structures, naturally "progressive") than in progressive versions of westernized evangelical theology, I would suggest Tripp Fuller's Homebrewed websites as the primary place to go to re-form one's progressive thoughts besides readings in Cobb and Whitehead. Moreover, both he and Pete Enns are loosely working together from their differing approaches to the Christian faith. Tripp from his own Baptist roots and Pete from his evangelical inheritance.

I think this newly forming fellowship between the two can be greatly helpful to progressive Christians looking for a more organic theology than the present westernized Platonic theology which evangelicalism is solidly martied to. Further, Tripp is highly connected to the Whiteheadian/Cobb community of process philosophers and theologians. To help, I've provided their respective websites below.

Enjoy,

R.E. Slater

September 12, 2023

* * * * * * *

Divine Self Investment

by Tripp Fuller

https://trippfuller.com/

---

Homebrewed Christianity

by Tripp Fuller

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSEzrfWmwQaLdnA5XarVomg

---

UNIVERSAL SALVATION IS NOT MODERN

Universal Salvation in Historical and Systematic Perspective.

by Pete Enns

Fall Classroom, 2023

https://thebiblefornormalpeople.com/summerschool/#universalsalvation

---

The "S" Word

What Sin Is & How It Has Infiltrated Our Systems

by Pete Enns

Fall Classroom, 2023

https://thebiblefornormalpeople.com/classes/the-s-word/?mc_cid=5ea3228a02&mc_eid=6bdc0b206b

R.E. Slater Shorts

Let's Talk About

Process Theology v Universalism

My "Shorts" are given as one-offs which I'm thinking about on any given topic of the day which I may have come across in my daily readings. Hopefully they spark another way of thinking  about a subject whether light-hearted or heavy. - re slater

My view on universalism is quite a bit different though it probably gets me to the same conclusion as universalism. But I'd rather approach the story of God's love from a processual gospel standpoint than from a westernized version of systematic theology. In the process approach God is love and will lovingly interact with all of creation in every way possible without circumventing creational agency or freewill. As creation bears the "Imago Dei" of God it thus bears all the ability to bless; to recreate thriving communities; and to enrich generative acts of love across everything around itself. But when not enacting our very creational NATURE (which is not sin but LOVE) than it's consequential actions will not bless, nor create generative thriving, nor enrich. In Whiteheadian-based process theology, a loving God's embeddedness of God's divine Being into creation allows for pancessual evolutionary growth of love against the self - or self will - which inhabits nature's soul and is BASED on LOVE not sin (re: processual pan-en-theism NOT Eastern pantheism). Quite obviously, this approach has removed the classic approach of traditional theism which leans into God's transcendence much harder than it does God's immanence to God's creation. Without denying God's "Otherness" process theology speaks to God's incessant, necessary immanence across all westernized doctrines of abondoness, juegment, separation, and errant beliefs of Divine Holiness. Love than is the coin with two halves... It is why we all have agency and also the reason we yearn to enact beauty... but it is also the curse which pains our souls when we can not, or do not, and which enflames the sin and evil WE do (not God) from the broken mirror of Love's passionate side.

Dante's Divine Comedy in B&W Woodcuts

In contrast, the western doctrine of universalism describes hell as a present condition and not a present expectation of the Christian gospel. It is often depicted in the Dantian description of purgatory in his book, the "Divine Comedy," which shows to readers the horrors their souls would go through if they did not obey God's laws nor live righteously (thus promoting Christian legalism and prideful holiness). And because of Calvinism, though other non-Reformed approaches are likewise as guilty (Wesleyanism, Lutheran, Methodism, Catholicism, Eastern and Russian Orthodoxy), we blame the world condition upon a controlling God determined to enact His will upon all the earth. Consequently, we get divine imprecations throughout the biblical narrative of living up to our contractual obligations under God's covenants or else suffer the consequences of our unfaithful sin and evil. Of course, this would be a gross misreading of the covenants as the Abrahamic beautiful shows salvation as unconditionally laid upon us upon the surety of God's Self who walks through the sacrificial halves; or the Davidic assuring of blessed reign and peace when the godly lead their flocks towards truth and beauty; or the promise of landed communities inhabiting enculturated regions on the earth which may enact the love of God in their own way; or even dramatically in the Cross covenant of "sacrificial selfless service" to others underlaid by Jesus' atoning resurrection and dramatic revelation of God's everlasting love.

Article link - I've followed Ben Corey over the years and like his thinking. His brief article may be helpful in thinking through the more typical approach to Universalism.

Lastly, Westernised "universalism" seeks to delimit and rebound (e.g., as in re-circumscribe theological borders) the prognosticated afterlife of hell (and purgatory for some faiths) by arguing that the Love of God Wins. Or that Jesus Wins. Which is all true in process theology. But unlike process theology, progressive Christian theolgy is trying to heal its systematic doctrines upon Platonic philosophies which are neither processual, pancessual, or center in theologies of love. Remaking a pig by putting lipstick on it won't be enough. The entire affair of Western dogma has to be uprooted and replaced upon Whitehead's process philosophy of organism in order to be able to live up to the God of Love whom we are worshipping on creaky traditional church platforms weeping with theological holes throughout its substructures.

R.E. Slater

September 12, 2023

PS - I forgot to mention that process-based panentheism is inherently combinatory , or re-connective as a processual teleology embedded in God's love. Hence, process theology really doesn't have an eschatology but a teleology which assumes that Jesus in the processual reconnector to a "broken" creation burdened with an agency inclined towards blessing but plagued with unloving responses against it's very ontological structure. You may read more on my website.

PSS - For the process few out there I would welcome further written observation beyond my mere attempts to describe the why's and wherefore's of a westernized religious system that is flawed and unable to work in a postmodern, post-Christian cultural context. Moreover, I find process theology to be able to morph with the times ahead much as the church has used Hellenised/Platonic thought to do the same over the past 2000 years. Thx.

PSSS - My typical (Calvinistic) Reformed soteriological chart in my non-process days focused on the Work & Sufficiency of Christ. Below may be more of a Wesleyan approach emphasizing the importance of a faith verified by it's works lest it simply exists as a useless, or meaningless, faith that "indwells" with "expelling" God's love in action.

* * * * * * *

THE MILESES

Paul and Olena Miles with Grace Abroad Ministries

WORKS-UNIVERSALISM:

CONTRADICTION OR MIDDLE GROUND?

article link

April 28, 2022

We have developed a quadrant model for describing soteriological compromises. The biblical message of salvation is summarized as Faith Alone in Christ Alone (FACA). Two ways to reject this are by rejecting the sufficiency of FACA or the necessity of FACA. Each of these two sides has differing extremes: On the side that rejects sufficiency, a near alternative is Works-Assisted Condition while a distant alternative is Works-Assisted Merit; on the side that rejects necessity, a near alternative is Christian Pluralism while a distant alternative is Christian Universalism.

Not every soteriological view fits squarely in one of these quadrants. Sometimes, there are middle ground views. For example, a Christian Pluralist could say that works are a condition for salvation, such that all “good” Catholics and all “good” Protestants are saved. This view is extremely popular among Evangelicals. It gives a nod to some necessity of belief about Jesus, but in the end, it shifts the object of faith from Christ to self.

Another middle ground that believers need to know about is between Works-Assisted Merit and Christian Universalism. These two extremes at first seem to be contradictory. How can someone believe that everyone is saved while still saying he needs to earn his salvation? Since Universalism is so anti-biblical, it does not have a coherent hermeneutic and therefore comes in many forms. Some forms of Universalism redefine hell in a way that puts them in a Works-Universalism middle-ground.

Hell is a real place. The Bible speaks about hell in the plainest terms. Jesus talked about the rich man going to the torments of hell (Luke 16:19–31). John’s Revelation tells us that the day will come when hell will be emptied and its occupants will be judged and transferred to the Lake of Fire for eternity (Rev. 20:11–15). Universalists abandon grammatical-historical hermeneutics when reading about hell. One move that is becoming popular is to spiritualize hell into a current experience. Instead of hell being a real place that the unregenerate will go to after they die, it is a spiritual kingdom here and now. Since hell is already, then it will not be future and everyone will be with Jesus in the end… or at least this is what some Universalists are saying.

Suppose we have a drug addict living miserably on the street. The Biblicist realizes that this man’s greatest need is to believe in Christ for eternal life (if he hasn’t already). This addict was born spiritually dead and on a path to hell. He will eventually spend eternity separate from God if he does not get saved. This is everyone’s greatest need. The Biblicist would love for him to abandon his lifestyle and become a productive member of a local church—but this is a matter of discipleship, not salvation. The addict can turn his life around and live happily without Christ, but even then, he would still lack his greatest need: eternal life. To the Universalist, there is no final separation from God, so “hell” is the lifestyle that the addict is living now. He does not need to believe in Jesus; he just needs to change his lifestyle. He needs to stop doing drugs and start doing what makes him happy. It is all about works here and now.

In that way of thinking, if someone is miserable now then he is in hell now. In the drug addiction example, for someone to get out of “hell,” he needs to clean up his life. See how salvation from hell suddenly becomes a works-merit system? The Universalist of this stripe teaches that everyone will be with God eventually, but they still teach a works-merit salvation from hell because they have redefined hell in a way that fits with self-righteousness.

There are several trends in evangelicalism today that are making people susceptible to these theological moves, so the modern believer needs to be aware of these maneuvers so he can protect himself and others from these dangerous doctrines. Long story short, if someone starts to spiritualize hell, then beware of hidden self-righteousness.

My First Chats with the Internet using OpenAI's CHATGPT

We’ve trained an artificial intelligence model called ChatGPT to interact in a conversational way. The dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to answer followup questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests. ChatGPT is a sibling model to InstructGPT, which is trained to follow an instruction in a prompt and provide a detailed response. - Open AI

My first question to the Internest using OpenAI's CHATGPT:

#1 Explain how Whiteheadian Process Theology is relevant to the subject of Christology - R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

"Whiteheadian Process Theology is a philosophical theology that emphasizes the ongoing, dynamic nature of reality and the ongoing, creative activity of God in the world. In terms of Christology, Whiteheadian Process Theology emphasizes the ongoing, dynamic nature of the relationship between God and humanity, and the ongoing, creative activity of God in the world through the person and work of Jesus Christ. This understanding of Christology emphasizes the ongoing, transformative power of Christ's life and teachings, rather than seeing him as a static, historical figure. Additionally, Whiteheadian Process Theology emphasizes the idea that Christ is not only the revelation of God, but also the means by which God continues to reveal and transform the world." - The Internet, seconds after asking my question

#2 Explain how process theology is different from traditional theology - R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

Process theology is a theological perspective that emphasizes the ongoing evolution and change in the nature of God and the universe. It views God as a constantly changing and evolving being who is in a process of becoming, rather than as a fixed, unchanging entity. This is in contrast to traditional theology, which often portrays God as a fixed, unchanging being who is outside of the universe and not affected by it.

Process theology also emphasizes the importance of the universe's processes and the role of human beings and other entities in shaping the world and the divine.

It also emphasizes the idea that God is not all-knowing and all-powerful, but rather limited in his knowledge and power. - The Internet, seconds after asking my question

 

*My response to Statement 3 is why review of CHATGPT's statements is required. My revised statement here is that when speaking of God in process terms we speak to God's "self-limitation" by divine fiat not of God's inabilities. However, a truer reply is that my statement is false and that God's love allows for all kinds of responses from a freewill creation. That God created by love before God did by fiat - that God's fiat is always subservient to God's love.

As a freewill Being, God imputed God's Self into creation, and by this imputation came God's freewill love. Hence, God's Self- limitations are not limitations at all but how love works. It does not control. It does not demand. It does not direct.

Further, God's Love flows as an energizing force throughout creation and as an inner divine force, "just is". "Is" doesn't require any qualifications. "Is" is God and "Is" is us.

Love is as Love does... and Love does as Love is. - res

And remember, passion is the other half of Love's coin. By passion we can do evil things: individuals, nations, churches, communities, organizations, businesses. It is how a processual cosmos behaves in its ontological "becoming" - both its good it's and bad overtures to life's symphony.

R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

Transforming Old Wineskins...

to New Wineskins...

My Theological Review of

OpenAI's CHATGPT Response

by R.E. Slater

January 28, 2023

Overall, its answers to my two questions were immediate, relevant, and to the point. However, I had asked it a trick question. The first to summarize a fathomless subject. And the second to trip it up. All-in-all I think we time and acuity this can become a very helpful research too. - res

LET'S EXAMINE MY FIRST QUESTION

I hope to utilize Artificial Intelligence more often in the future in my research and reports. When I do I will notate my use of OpenAI's CHATGPT as opposed to my own writings. In doing so I'm hoping to find the pith of relevance between process philosophy and theology with traditional Christianity which sits upon a plethora of non-process paradigms. Paradigms which require deep extraction and expansion.

The idea of God; of God's activities and agendas; of God's intimate participation with creation and our lives; of God's redeeming, loving, atoning actions; and of our many earthy responses to this God, has shown itself to be a complicated historical and present subjective-objective existential array of good-and-bad responses by man to one another and creation itself.

Process theology is based on how our organic world and socio-eco societies work. We see processual cycles and results reflected again and again in the bible though usually unobserved by the bible's own narratives and Western church theologies.

Process is how the world works. A process-based cosmology and metaphysics of ontology attempts to capture the profoundly-formative nature of God and creation into a resulting processual philosophy and theology made the more meaningful to the world we live in, and lying about us, when understanding its rhythms... and seeing its harmonies... as we learn to "go with the flow" of God and creation.

Overall, one might say Whitehead's process thought (originally called the "process of organism") is all about symbiance (cooperative unions) and holism (personal and communal intersections with self, others and nature). Or in the Chinese/Japanese ?Korean parlances of "balance and rhythm" as reflected by their cultures. But it also is far deeper than those simplified observations... which is why the branches of cosmological metaphyics and ontological theologies, among other derivatives, has arisen through the late 20th century and into today's metamodern era.

It provides promise to religious bodies and religious people that we can act more humanely to one another. More charitably and wisely. That the faiths we carry have relevancy in this world and to those around us when leaning into the love-and-peace paradigms of wholeness and being. Of Beings who are Becoming... more than they are... more as intended by God's Self in God's creational manifestations. When doing so we, as a freewill species, and within our internal being, may find deeper resonance with life, the universe, and God's purpose in this world.

SOME CENTRAL IDEAS OF PROCESS THOUGHT

• Process Thought is a very real reality with the deep promise to value all things as they are;

• It's difference as an applied philosophy is to regenerate and rejuvenate all things about us... itself a mirror image of how God and the cosmos themselves work and function;

• That each living community of communities is filled with loving potential and ability;

• That it recognizes value in difference;

• That it seeks to build peace into all relationships around us;

• And to know that what we see-and-feel by a life-generating metaphysic such as a process pholosophic-theology is speaking to the very vibe which moves God to be God;

• A vibe which tells us the becoming of God, and the cosmos, and ourselves, is a natural socio-eco-spirit evolution of life around us;

• That a processual cosmology is a deeply connected and intertwined panrelational, panexperiential, and panpsychic process between the parts and wholes of God's cosmic universe.

In other words, process theology is simply describing the Christ-event of the bible, but when doing so leaning into all processual forms of this cosmically salvific event rather than the traditional Christian forms which emphasis other observations out-of-sync with the nature and being of God and God's cosmos.

A process-metaphysic is no will-o'-the wisp series of Westernized Platonisms, Aristotelian-Scholastic thoughts, or Classic Enlightenment/Modernal philosophies whether European/Continental or American; all of which seem to argue for various forms of stoicism, legalism, isolationalism, or conformal doctrines of a militarised church socially, economically, politically, and ecologically.

And though Whitehead was seeking to recapture the processual propositions of past philosophers from earlier ages as far back as early religions and non-Hellenised Greek thinking, what his student John Cobb saw in it was a process theology for peace, goodness, and life-generating responses to all errant processes which are devolving forms of processual life changes. 

Process theology then seeks to underline the goodness and love of a life-generating God fully involved in life-atoning-and-redeeming all becoming events towards beautify, wholeness, and solidarity back to itself. To essential "come back into tune" with creation's generative teleology.

And though traditional Christianity says its "all these things" we plainly see that it has not been "all these things" to either man nor beast, stream or wood, communities of difference and communities of others. More rather, traditional Christianity has been and continues to become unholistic to the cosmos around us; harmfully deterministic in its exploitation and oppression to all things its comes in contact with; and deeply "unbiblical" in it's propositions of who God is and isn't in it's estimation. Which means like Christian's professed Savior, the church itself must repent and re-confess what it's all about by getting it's practices, attitudes, behaviors, creeds, and dogmas back in tune with the God they attest but do not know.

CONCLUSION

Lastly, process theology reflects Jesus' atonement as it's divine event is reflected back upon itself to the very "Life-giving" nature of our Loving God indwelling all hearts and world about us. God's atoning and redeeming work at Calvary is but part-and-parcel of life's creational beauty and essence. We see in it cute little puppies, babies, hobbies, and projects of unity all around us. The processual revolution of Jesus' Love speaks to the functional revolution going on about us though we see it not nor live it as we should.

The Cross then was a deep signifier by God of what life consists of around us. Divine-Life is the continual renewal and repurposing of the Spirit-life everywhere indwelling as it wrestles with creational freewill and indetermination which confronts a freewill creational every moment of it's existence. By it's very core a freewill creation must chose life and not death. That life will always be a challenge, filled with hardships and suffering against the very things which would devolve life from it's fuller potentials. Whitehead called them profound consequential results with ongoing potentials of life-releasing generative value. The church calls them the grace and peace of Spirit-filled Living when lived in God's Love. Process calls them one-and-the-same.

That divinity sovereignty is best described as God's giving of God's very Self into the very core processes of creation's DNA. That creation - such as humanity - is plagued with choices of good and evil, sin and love. And that it feels the deep drag and pull of creation's processually generative panpsychic Cosmic Being, it's processual organism, as weighing against all within itself which is out-of-sync.

The Christ event reflects as much. We are out-of-tune with God and with ourselves even as creation is fraught with the indeterminancy of it's freewill being. And yet, the Cross of Christ reminds us that God is intimately present with us and creation in actively transforming wayward fait-accomplis back to itself and to the very meaning of restitutional redemptive processes of the God of the cosmos. (*The meaning of FAIT ACCOMPLI is a thing accomplished and presumably irreversible.)

This then is how I would interpret OpenAI's CHATGPT opening answer to my first question. It's sentences were mundane and repeatitive but got to the general point of how we might intersect the old wineskins of Christian thought to the new wineskins of processual Christology when applied to contemporary thinking today.

A very simple request to speak to how process theology might reflect the very heart of the bible's Christ event deemed by the church as the world's mid-point of salvific history. That all which led before the Cross, and all which resulted after the Cross, - in the best of senses of loving becoming - was fully reflective, instrumental, even significantly recharging, of God's Selfhood in active redemptive participation towards God's insolent, and fully becoming partnerships with creation, with ourselves, and with all those apart from ourselves.

The holograms of our universe are but a microcasm of the stated organic whole we participate within physically, spiritually, emotionally, and theistically. God not only saves all... God is fully saving all each and every moment of every day forever and forever.

Peace,

R.E. Slater

January 28, 2022

It's time for Christianity to EVOLVE!

Describing God's Sovereignty by Love... NOT by Power

Describing God's Sovereignty by Love...

NOT by Power

With Process Theology I've been working towards refilling the phrase "Divine Sovereignty" with "Divine Love". And then, refilling the church's theology built upon Divine Sovereignty (Theodicy sic., Calvinism) with a theology of Divine Love (Theodicy sic. Arminianism, sic., Open and Relational Theology, sic., Process Relational Theology).

I remember an incident in life where I drove out of the driveway in the wrong direction. By the time I remembered I was going the other way I had travelled several miles opposite to where I was going. My conditioned response, based upon behavior, was to go the way I was going without thinking it was the wrong direction to head in this instance. Similarly with the church's theology.

The church has been centered upon Divine Sovereignty for many, many centuries. In fact, millennia, when reading all the way back through the Old Testament to the Genesis account where God is described as creating the earth and all that is in it.

Now you would think the Apostle John's description of God's Love would be front and center as a disciple of Jesus whom Jesus loved. But John introduces Jesus divinity to us ahead of his love and then, speaks to Jesus' ministry of awakening darkened hearts to the atoning work he had come to do in the life of the world, his creation:

John 1.1-13

The Deity of Jesus Christ

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 [a]He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [b]comprehend it.

The Witness John

6 There [c]came a man sent from God, whose name was John [the Baptist]. 7 [d]He came [e]as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8 [f]He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.

9 There was the true Light [g]which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His [h]own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were [i]born, not of [j]blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

So let's ask the question differently... why would an all powerful God come to save his spiritually darkened, religious people from themselves and their ways? They were living by Moses' Laws, the Torah. They were practicing those Laws in their scripted, enculturated lives. And they were perceiving God rightly in all of his divine offices in Temple practices, observances, teachings, rites, and worship. What more could Jesus add to this God they knew?

First, let's look at a few definitions of sovereignty and think how church doctrine has enlivened these teachings and practices into its own beliefs and worship:

Definition: Sovereignty

Noun - supreme power or authority: Plural - sovereignties

Usage: "How can we hope to wrest sovereignty away from the oligarchy and back to the people?"

Similar: jurisdiction, supremacy, dominion, power, ascendancy, suzerainty, tyranny, hegemony, domination, sway, predominance, authority, control, influence, rule, raj, regiment.

Opposite: subservience, subjection: "the authority of a state to govern itself or another state;" or, national sovereignty.

Similar: autonomy, independence, self-government, self-rule, home rule, self-legislation, self-determination, nonalignment, freedom.

Opposite: hegemony, colonialism, a self-governing state.

 

Wikipedia - Sovereignty of God in Christianity can be defined primarily as the right of God to exercise his ruling power over his creation, and secondarily, but not necessarily, as the exercise of this right. The way God exercises his ruling power is subject to divergences notably related to the concept of God's self-imposed limitations. The relationship between free will and the sovereignty of God has been relevant notably in the Calvinist-Arminian debate and in the philosophical theodicy.

Cyber security markets providing protection & controlling information flow

Webster - Synonyms & Antonyms of sovereignty

the state of being free from the control or power of another: "upon leaving home she felt that she had achieved sovereignty for the first time in her life"

• Synonyms for sovereignty
• autonomy, freedom, independence, independency, liberty, self-determination, self-governance, self-government

• Words Related to sovereignty
• emancipation, enfranchisement, liberation, manumission, release

• Near Antonyms for sovereignty
• captivity, enchainment, enslavement, immurement, imprisonment, incarceration, internment, subjugation

• Antonyms for sovereignty
• dependence (also dependance), heteronomy, subjection, unfreedom

2a body of people composed of one or more nationalities usually with its own territory and government: "As parts of the same sovereignty, the states should not enact laws intended to harm one another economically."

• Synonyms for sovereignty
• commonwealth, country, land, nation, state

* * * * * * *

Continuing...

So let's ask the question differently... why would an all powerful God come to save his spiritually darkened, religious people from themselves and their ways? They were living by Moses' Laws, the Torah. They were practicing those Laws in their scripted, enculturated lives. And they were perceiving God rightly in all of his divine offices in Temple practices, observances, teachings, rites, and worship. What more could Jesus add to this God they knew?

When attending church, participating in church ministry and government, it's polities and practices, Divine "controlling power" seems to resonate throughout its structure and missional outreaches. Whether by a dogma, a doctrine, officiating processes of overseership, synods, associations, fellowships, etc. Controlling message, beliefs, and practices is a large part of the church's life.

But What If...

But what if God is defined in terms of God's Love and not by God's Power? What if God's Sovereignty is refilled with the idea of a Loving Sovereignty, a Loving Deity, a Loving ministrations of Deity as versus a wrathful, judgmental exercise of Divine Power? Of seeing Heaven everywhere instead of a Hell everywhere stripped of demons, devils, and works of darkness?

What if God is truly a God of Love through and through and through the church's doctrines, dogmas, messages, and practices?

If seems to me that over the millennia the traditional Church has confused itself when describing God's Sovereignty in terms of power rather than by love. Perhaps it is because of man's insatiable desire to control everything around him - which is no less true of religionists today as in the yesteryears past - perhaps, even more true of the church as we look around seeing it's religious over-reach across all spectrums of life demarcating it's sanctified boundaries it thinks God is pleased with.

To my own personal way of thinking God thinks about love, not power. Not lines and boundaries but love. God is power but it means nothing to God. It just is who God is as upholder and sustainer of the universe.

A Process-Relational Theodicy

But what's more important to God in a freewilled, indeterminant universe, is God's love for creation and in giving God's love away at all times to all things in every way possible.

• Did you notice how I slipped in a "freewilled, indeterminant universe"? If creation is free than it is indeterminate. It's actions are uncontrolled by God. Not dictated to; not circumscribed in its days and life's actions. It is free. It is indeterminate.

• Thus and thus the position of an Open and Relational Theology. God's Love gives away control in order for creation to become wholly what it was created for in God's Imago Dei.

• And thus Process Relational Theology which says this becoming ever gins towards life and love, a composition which is beneficial and valuative as it concreases towards a wholly loving fellowship of creativity, imagination, and unbounded reality of generative acts within and without itself.

• This is the upside of a theodicy unbounded by Calvinism's darkened outlook preached by the church seeing everything in terms of sin and evil, wrath and judgment. Perhaps these statements are a description of positional idealism v practical devolvement but a loving theology seeks an escalating revolution of loving sovereignty as opposed to a bleak Armageddon-like Revelation of the ultimate break down of life by its own hand.

In Summary

God is a God of love and power but it is more correct to describe God as a God of love when describing God's sovereignty by which very term itself implies power as we have seen.

So let's forgive the church for its misuse of labels when thinking of God and man.

Let's preach "God's love as a higher priority than God's sovereignty".

I was raised in my faith to fixate over power. Divine power. Today I would rather revel in Divine Love.

The one theology teaches withdrawal from the world, militancy against the world, and exclusion to the world. Their can be no mission to people when coming with a sword in hand to conquer, forcing ideology and religious dogma. 

Here's a list of what I might call a conscientious theology of welcome when preaching about God's love:

• The first is that preaching a loving God is attractive. It's kind of hard to hate something which loves you back. Which listens and doesn't judge. Which says welcome when all seems unwelcoming. Or you don't measure up to the rules of the game. But e-s-p-e-c-i-a-l-l-y a theology which doesn't judge deficiencies, counts sin, looks at the Scarlet Letter on your forehead, or sets obstacles in front of you to get to God. This doesn't mean we aren't sinners but it does mean we are a lot more than what an austere religion might judge against us.

• Next, preaching God's Love seeks inclusion not exclusion. It is naturally missional and wholly centered in the other by taking in difference and allowing difference to reside with other diversities and dissimilarities. It speaks to cohesion. As illustration, Process Theology not only allows for the racial, gender, ethnic existence and beliefs of "the Other" but provides for equality and fairness in its cultural embrace and loving respect for the Other (whoever that Other is in our lives).

• Process Religions will work this way. And specific process theologies like Process Christianity will share many interfaith or interdenominational ecumenisms with its process brothers and sisters. That is, our fellowship will hold many common foundational elements with one another as we each work together toward shared humanitarian goals. Perhaps these goals may be:

i)  A better visualized humanity (sic, Process Humanism or for myself, a Process-based Christian Humanism being evidenced in progressive evangelical organizations like Red Letter Christians);

ii) Fairer democracies comprised of nurturing equalitarian ecological civilizations;

iii) Promotions of loving temperaments with one another across global societies;

iv) Or, at sites like Relevancy22, one might expect a Christian-form of Process Theology which is centered in God's love and is Jesus centric in the atoning redemption provided to the world who was the Redemptive Midpoint of Salvic History as well as example and model as to how we might think and minister about God.

• Further, a Loving Theology leads with a smile, a handshake, an embrace. It is naturally attractive in its helps, healing, assurance, and welcome to the other. Its transformative power starts (and stays) with the heart, not the head.

• Too, as just mentioned, a theology of a God of Love is Jesus-centered around the incarnational God whom showed us his heart. Not a sword ala the apostle Peter. Not religion, ala the apostle once named Saul who stoned Christians for abandoning the Jewish faith. Not like the unbowed Scribes and Pharisees who eschewed Jesus' salvation (some for good reasons re questions of whether they would be worshipping one or two Gods; but many for reasons of disbelief and works of blasphemy).

• In contrast, the disciple John understood God's love when Thomas did not; or when his fellow disciple Judas fled from God's love losing courage to be love, share love, accept love, forgive self and others, share compassion, thoughtfulness, or let go of himself into belief. Instead, Judas abandoned love and killed himself.

• God's Love is what God is all about. Not power... whether oppressive power, controlling power, or worried power. God is Love. God's power is a derivative of God's Love. God cannot deny who God is. God is Love and Power but God's Love describes God's Power and not the other way around else creation wouldn't be what it is, and is becoming, without Divine Love.

• Hence, God created from love. Sustains in love. Relates in love. Speaks, sings, and flourishes in love. God is wholly about love from which all of God's Self revolves, regenerates, rebirths, and renews.

This is my short list on the God I worship now. Whose songs, poetry, teachings, counsel, and theology I speak to and am in constant wonder not only of my Redeemer, but how my church got it so backwards. So confused. So wrongheaded.

Of a church teaching a God of wrath and judgment and controlling dogma claimed as biblical when it shows itself as not.

Of an oppressing church - whether civilly or religiously - is still oppression. Love does not oppress. It gives, shares, respects, honors, and protects all around, whether human or nature. Love nurtures. Love hugs. Love kisses the other in warm fellowship. Hate cannot and never will. God is Love.

Read the book of 1 John... all of it. And then go back and reread the bible as its narrates its interior struggle with who God is based upon a community's fears and needs. One might say religion has always got it wrong when leading out with a sovereignty build of power and not by love.

Peace,

R.E. Slater

June 14, 2022

1 John 1:1-10 (1 John 1-5)

Introduction, The Incarnate Word

1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— 2 and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. 4 These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete.

God Is Light

5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; 7 but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. 8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

Process Shorts...

PROCESS SHORTS

[brackets are mine - r.e. slater]

R.E. Slater - The unchanging God is always changing!

--- 

Tripp Fuller - Strangely, Christian "orthodoxy" followed a particular philosophy far more than the Bible's [collection of philosophies - re slater]. 

Orthodoxy believed what was really good was what a thing was in itself. That relation(ship)s were limitations on God. That a "proper" God had no relations.

But think [about it] for a moment what God could be before God had created anything when God was all alone by Godself.

• God could not love, for there was nothing to love.

• God could not know, for there was nothing to know.

• God could not cause anything, for there would be no effect.

• Indeed, it is hard to think of God existing at all.

[In contrast], the greater the cosmos which God influences, loves, and knows, the greater God is. It seems rather obvious that a Creator who does not create anything is not much of a Creator.

Moreover, sometimes people don't notice that if they attribute all power to God, they similarly deny any power to God [in other respects to His deity and ontologic Self-history - re slater].

---

R.E. Slater - My definition of Scripture is a  collection of narratives imperfectly describing a loving God. 

This living God-narrative has been with us through the centuries. It's latest rendition being expressed - as it has always been - through all of mankinds beliefs, religions, activities, deeds, structures, art, and such like. 

Some are great. Some are not great. But like its Author, "Spiritos inspiration" was never left within a static, dead book (the bible) but through creation's living incarnational-narratives mimicking Jesus imperfectly, but perfectly, as producing a living, viral salvation.

The writers and commentators of God are God's people regardless of whether they are mentioned in the bible or reside apart from it's page. 

As emissaries of God's love, or of Christ Jesus as the God who serves selflessly, sacrificially, in forgiveness, mercy and grace, this is my broadest definition of the "bible" written upon Creation's hearts of spirit-flesh.

The "written" bible is but a beginning and aspect of the Living God who walks amongst us through His Creation.

Below, Karl carries it more fully as inspirational expressions bedrocked in a relationship between Creator-"C"reation (I like to capitalize the creational "C" as it gives majesty to God's work, rather than detract from it, though it is us who do the subtraction).

---

Karl Streeter - What if we “see” scripture as a “living organism with history and potential? Could it be scripture’s authority lies on whether we engage her with a “I-Thou” relationship instead of a “I-It” relationship? Maybe the deification or demonization comes from the “I-It” relationship? No transformation or inspiration comes from a “I-It” relationship. The evolution of “love your neighbors” to “love your enemies” is the inspiration to move from a “I-It” relationship with others to a transformational relationship of “I-Thou”. Could it be that “you shall not make for yourself an idol” is a warning to engage all things as “living” and not reduce them to an “IT”? True transformation or becoming “anew”(“reborn”) comes from “changing our minds” (repent) from our relationship with reality as an “IT” rather to a relationship as “Thou”. As Process teaches us that we are all in relationship with all things, it is love/life/creativity/freedom which inspires us to encounter those relationship as “otherness” and not in “idolization”.

---

R.E. Slater - Another gem from Karl Streeter speaking to a relational theology pregnant in all its forms throughout our lives and earth's living creational history. His G-d is expressed in a dissatisfied form with the Christianized G-O-D.... and I don't blame him. Though my preference is to spell God as "God" due to my heritage, if I'm dissatisfied with it's expression of G-O-D I do it by stating my disaffection (as you've noticed).

---

Karl Streeter - Some say that the physical is the only reality that exists. If you cannot measure it, see it, touch it or even taste it, it does not exist. Then there are those who say the physical and the spiritual both exist, but the spiritual is the only thing that really matters. The physical is just a shell for the spiritual.

What if the spiritual can be described as love, creativity, freedom, responsibility, potential, and luring/calling and the physical can be described as the other. Then, Incarnation is the spiritual echoing the physical. G-d “spoke”, then there was creation or said differently, creation is the echo of G-d, love, kindness, forgiveness, compassion, creativity, freedom, etc. Incarnation is not about two realities coming together but a relationship of the “two”. The spiritual and physical are partners in all reality. The spiritual does not create the physical, they are in co-relationship with each other. If G-d is relationship and one cannot be in relationship with oneself, then there was not a time when one existed without the other. One might say that incarnation is the covenant of G-d and creation/other.

Are atonement and incarnation related? What if atonement is the mutual cooperation between G-d and "other" or incarnation? Could it be that Jesus’ faithfulness saves us by emulating the mutual cooperation between the spiritual and physical even unto death. Although death cannot “kill” the mutual cooperation of incarnation, it is because of the mutuality of the relationship incarnation re-lives continuously.