Processual Doorways in the Book of Revelation

PROCESSUAL DOORWAYS

in the Book of Revelation

A Processual Theology of Thresholds

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Introduction

The Book of Revelation is often approached with apprehension - its apocalyptic imagery, cryptic messages, and cosmic drama can intimidate even the most earnest readers. Yet, embedded in its pages are recurring symbols of doors - symbols that invite rather than terrify, that open rather than close. These doors are not merely thresholds in a visionary narrative; they are theological invitations to step into new ways of seeing, being, and becoming.

In process theology, where all things are in dynamic relationship and unfolding through God’s ongoing call to novelty, doors serve as metaphors of transition. They represent God's gentle lure—what Alfred North Whitehead called the "initial aim"—offering each person, community, and cosmos a path forward. To pass through a door is to enter a new phase of concrescence: to bring together the past, respond to the present, and shape what will be.

This work explores the symbolism of doors in Revelation as portals of transformation. From the church in Philadelphia's open opportunity to John’s heavenly ascent, these doors reveal a pattern: God invites, we respond, and together we shape what comes next.

---

"Come, All Ye Who Will."

I. Scriptural Doorways and Processual Interpretations

1. Revelation 3:8 — An Open Door for the Church in Philadelphia

“See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut...”

• Context: Spoken to a small, faithful community.

• Meaning: A divinely ordained opportunity for mission, growth, and endurance.

• Whiteheadian Interpretation:

  • God offers an initial aim—a pathway for co-creative action.

  • The church’s faithfulness becomes the actualization of this divine lure.

2. Revelation 3:20 — The Door of the Human Heart

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock...”

• Context: Invitation to intimate relationship with the divine.

• Meaning: Relational openness to Christ.

• Process Insight: The moment of invitation is a prehension of divine nearness, where openness births transformation.

3. Revelation 4:1 — An Open Door to Heaven

“After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven...”

• Context: Marks the transition from earthly messages to cosmic vision.

• Meaning: Access to divine mysteries and the heavenly realm.

• Whiteheadian Interpretation:

  • A transition from one level of actuality to a higher dimensional perspective.

  • A lure toward a vision of divine ordering and cosmic process.

4. Revelation 21:25 — Eternal Gates of the New Jerusalem

“Its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there.”

• Context: Vision of the world remade.

• Meaning: Full and open communion with God.

• Process Insight: Fulfillment of divine intention; telos (ultimate aim or goal) as a participatory welcome.

---

II. Typology of Doors in Revelation

Symbolic Door	Meaning in Revelation	Processual Insight
🔓 Open Door	Invitation to opportunity, insight, or mission	God's initial aim opened to conscious participation
🚪 Threshold Door	Liminal moment or crisis of change	A transition in becoming under tension
🔒 Closed Door	Resistance or foreclosed potential	Rejection of offered potential
💓 Heart Door	Entry to the soul, intimacy with God	Invitation to relational becoming
🌐 Heavenly Door	Apocalyptic revelation and cosmic vision	Expansion of awareness, call into divine rhythm
🧠 Cognitive Door	Shift in mental framing or worldview	Moment of rupture and reorientation
🕊️ Eternal Gate	Final telos of welcome and communion	Ongoing divine hospitality within fulfilled process

---

III. Poetic Meditation

The Door

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

I saw a door, not locked, not shut -

But open wide with silent hush.
A whisper echoed, Come and see,
As time bent down on bended knee.

A door to mission, set in stone,
For those with little strength alone.
No riches bought this threshold prize -
But faith that dared to lift its eyes.

Another knock upon the wood -
If you will open, I will come.
A heart’s own hinge, a soul’s small gate,
Where God still waits to sup and stay.

A trumpet’s voice, a higher call,
A heaven’s door revealed to all.
The throne room glows, the glassy sea -
Creation’s rhythm, wild and free.

And at the last, those golden gates
Will never close, will never wait.
No night shall fall, no door be barred -
The world remade, the gate ajar.

For every door that once we feared
Now stands transformed -
The Way is clear.

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT
August 3, 2025

@copyright R.E. Slater Publications
all rights reserved

---

Besides doors there are lampstands, bowls, temples,
angels, dragons, beasts, serpents, cities, witnesses,
horsemen, trees, and rivers, etc. What could be said
of each of these images using Process Theology?

IV. Study Guide: "Walking Through Revelation's Doors"

Each session includes:

• Scripture Focus

• Theological Reflection

• Processual Insight

• Discussion Prompts

• Spiritual Practice

Session 1: The Door of Opportunity (Rev. 3:8)

• Focus: Mission amid limitation.

• Insight: Faithfulness draws forth God’s possibilities.

• Prompts:

  • Where do you see "open doors"?

  • How do you walk through them?

Session 2: The Door of the Heart (Rev. 3:20)

• Focus: Relational nearness.

• Insight: God persuades, never coerces.

• Prompts:

  • What knocks on your heart right now?

  • What blocks your openness?

Session 3: The Door to Heaven (Rev. 4:1)

• Focus: Cosmic perspective.

• Insight: Crisis and vision often go together.

• Prompts:

  • What is your current threshold?

  • What new awareness are you being invited into?

Session 4: The Liminal Door (Crisis and Change)

• Focus: Transition and discernment.

• Insight: Becoming is often born in ambiguity.

• Prompts:

  • Reflect on a past threshold. What was transformed?

Session 5: The Ever-Open Gate (Rev. 21:25)

• Focus: Telos as communion.

• Insight: The future is participatory, not predetermined.

• Prompts:

  • How might you live now as though the gates are already open?

---

Conclusion

In the final vision of Revelation, the New Jerusalem descends, and we are told:

"Its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there" (Rev. 21:25).

Here, the door becomes the gate eternal—not a barrier, but a perpetual welcome. In a world often marked by locked doors and shut hearts, Revelation offers a cosmic reversal: the future is not closed off, but ever opening. This vision is not about finality, but fidelity; not about endings, but evolution.

Through a processual lens, every door in Revelation is a divine whisper:

"Come up here..." (Rev. 4:1)

It is an eschatology not of doom but of participation—a call to step into the unfolding co-creation of heaven and earth. Whether we face personal loss, communal crisis, or global transformation, the question remains: Will we walk through the door?

In every threshold stands a choice.
In every doorway, a becoming.
And through each door,
the God of process calls -

not with coercion, but with possibility.

The doors are open.
The thresholds await.
Let us walk forward.

---

Appendix: Visual Map

Forgive the diagram... my talents with

computerized drawing is rather crude.

- res

[Rev 3:8]
     ╔══════════════════╗
     ║ 🔓 Open Door to                     ║
     ║     Mission                                 ║
     ║  (Philadelphia)                        ║
     ╚══════════════════╝
              ↓
      [Faithful Response]
              ↓
         [Spiritual Call]
              ↓
             [Rev 3:20]
     ╔══════════════════╗
     ║ 💓 Door of the    ║
     ║   Human Heart     ║
     ║  ("I stand and    ║
     ║  knock…")         ║
     ╚══════════════════╝
              ↓
        [Relational Entry]
              ↓
             [Rev 4:1]
     ╔══════════════════╗
     ║ 🌐 Door to Heaven ║
     ║  (Apocalyptic     ║
     ║   Vision)         ║
     ╚══════════════════╝
              ↓
        [Cosmic Perspective]
              ↓
           [Thresholds]
     ╔══════════════════╗
     ║ 🚪 Liminal Doors  ║
     ║  (Crisis/Choice) ║
     ╚══════════════════╝
              ↓
     [Transformation / Becoming]
              ↓
            [Rev 21:25]
     ╔══════════════════╗
     ║ 🕊️ Eternal Gates  ║
     ║   (New Jerusalem)║
     ╚══════════════════╝
              ↓
      [Full Communion with God]

Revelation Beyond Literalism: A Process-Based Reading of Apocalyptic Imagery

Traditional Christian Apocalyptic

Reimagining Christian apocalyptic using Process Theology

REVELATION BEYOND LITERALISM:

A Process-Based Reading

of Apocalyptic Imagery

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Embracing the Lamb amid Empire Horror

“The gospel is fiction when judged by the empire;

but the empire is fiction when judged by the gospel.”

- Walter Brueggemann

I. Introduction: Why Revelation Needs Reinterpretation

For generations, the Book of Revelation has been misread as a literal forecast of destruction - a final divine war plan. Especially in evangelical circles, Revelation has morphed into a horror story of rapture, wrath, and punishment. The literalist lens creates:

• A theology of fear, not freedom;
• A theology of coercion, not compassion;
• Often justifying power, empire, and exclusion in the name of a violent God.

But Revelation, when interpreted through the lens of process theology, becomes something else entirely. It becomes:

• A call to resistance against domination systems,
• A poetic vision of divine lure toward justice, and
• An open invitation to co-create a new world.

This project proposes that Revelation is not about divine violence, but divine vulnerability. Not about eschatological finality, but relational becoming. Not about destruction, but about deep unveiling - an apocalypse of love.

II. A Very Short Process-Based Summary of Revelation

Revelation is not a forecast of destruction, but a symbolic protest against empire and a call to faithful co-creation with God. It envisions love's ultimate triumph—not through violence, but through persistent, transformative presence.

III. Key Themes in a Processual Interpretation

**1. God’s Power as Persuasive, Not Coercive**

Revelation presents Christ not as a warlord but as the Lamb slain—a symbol of radical vulnerability. The power of God is not displayed through domination but through the invitation to love. The Lamb's 'victory' is not a military conquest but the triumph of relational fidelity.

**2. Symbolic Protest Against Empire**

The apocalyptic imagery is not predictive but poetic. Babylon is Rome—and every empire like it. The beast is a symbol of imperial force, economic domination, and religious manipulation. Revelation's drama urges readers to 'come out' of these systems, not to wait for their collapse.

**3. Hope Without Guaranteed Certainty**

Process theology does not teach predestined outcomes. Instead, it sees the future as open and becoming. Revelation is a vision of what could be, not what must be. The New Jerusalem is a lure—a divine possibility calling creation forward.

**4. Freedom within the Process of Redemption**

Love does not coerce. Even in judgment, Revelation does not depict God as cruel, but as one who reveals the true nature of all things. The apocalypse ('unveiling') is the peeling back of falsehoods so truth may shine—inviting transformation, not demanding it.

**5. A Call to Cosmic Renewal, Not Cosmic Erasure**

Revelation ends not with the annihilation of the earth but its healing. “Behold, I make all things new,” not all new things. The new creation is not a replacement but a renewal. The eschaton is not escape but embrace.

IV. Dialogue with Classical Views

• Literalism turns Revelation into a fear-based map. Process reads it as a vision of hope.

• Classical theism sees God's sovereignty in unilateral action. Process sees God's power in participatory becoming.

• Traditional eschatology implies divine coercion. Process insists on divine invitation.

• Evangelical frameworks lean on divine violence. Process theology emphasizes divine love.

V. Scripture as Poetic Lure

Revelation is not a newspaper headline from the future. It is a theological vision composed in apocalyptic imagery, political resistance, and pastoral urgency.

Like dreams or parables, it conveys deep truth through metaphor.

• “Every knee shall bow” is not a divine threat, but a poetic aspiration.
• The beast, the dragon, and the throne are archetypes.
• The scrolls and seals are cosmic metaphors.

To read Revelation faithfully is to read it processually, not literally.

VI. A Creed for Reading Revelation in Process

We believe the Book of Revelation is not a timetable of terror but a vision of divine love resisting empire, inviting all creation into the journey of justice, beauty, and peace.

We believe God's power is persuasion, not domination, and that the Lamb reigns not by violence, but by witness, vulnerability, and persistent love.

We believe that every image in Revelation invites us to become co-creators of a renewed world, where God makes all things new—with us, never without us.

VII. Conclusion: Apocalypse as Revelation, Not Ruin

The word "apocalypse" means unveiling, not catastrophe. In process theology, the Book of Revelation is the unveiling of what *could be* if love wins - and what happens when it is resisted.

It is not the end of the world. It is the divine lure toward the world's rebirth.

Revelation, reimagined, becomes a manifesto of hope, resistance, and transformation—one in which God calls us to join the procession of the Lamb in building the New Jerusalem (sic, a cosmic metaphor not a literal Jewish city) here and now.

Appendix A - Diagram

Classical vs. Process Readings of Revelation

See visual supplement: Revelation_Comparison_Diagram.png

The following table compares key theological elements in classical versus process readings of Revelation:

Theme	Classical Reading	Process Reading
God's Power	Coercive Sovereignty	Persuasive Love
Future Outlook	Predetermined End	Open & Becoming
Salvation	Guaranteed for Some	Hope for All
Violence	Divine Judgment & Wrath	Divine Vulnerability & Lure
Reading Method	Literal Forecast	Symbolic Protest
New Creation	Replacement	Renewal

 

Appendix B - Poem

New Heavenly Earth

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

Not by fire, nor by sword, nor sky undone,

But by the slow, burning light of a rising Son.

Nor by bright new city fallen from clouds above,

But by such a one rising in hearts awakening to love.

Nor by wrathful scroll, nor cold iron stylus -

But by Jesus doorways opening sightless hearts.

Despite beasts and wars and trumpets dread,

Leaving lambs leaderless when fear has fled.

Nor worlds remade by fierce divine decrees,

But by each divine/humane act which sets love free.

Behold, says God, all things can be made new -

And I will make them new with you too.

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

August 3, 2025

@copyright R.E. Slater Publications

all rights reserved

Appendix C - Study Guide

A Processual Reading of Revelation

Section I: Introduction

How has a literalist reading of Revelation shaped Christian imagination in recent history?

What dangers arise from reading Revelation as a divine war manual?

Section II–III: Process-Based Vision

What does it mean to describe God's power as persuasive, not coercive?

How does reading Revelation as poetic protest shift our understanding of its symbols?

Section IV: Dialogue with Classical Views

How does process theology challenge the idea of predestined finality?

In what ways does process theology make space for human freedom and divine persistence?

Section V: Scripture as Poetic Lure

How can apocalyptic imagery be understood symbolically rather than literally?

What role does metaphor play in revealing theological truths?

Section VI: Creed

What key affirmations stand out in the creed? How might these reshape a community’s eschatology?

Section VII: Conclusion

How does reimagining the apocalypse as an unveiling of divine love affect our present engagement with the world?

What does it mean to co-create the New Jerusalem in the here and now?

Processual Meaning in Motion, Part 2

Processual Meaning in Motion:

Frege, Process and Developing

a Living Language

Part 2

Metamodern Theosophy:

Semantic Reinterpretation in Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

continue from Part 1

move forward to Part 3

Question 1 - Using Frege's semantic analysis, briefly, give an example of using the same sentence with unequal, separate senses.

ChatGPT

Sure! Here's an example of the same sentence used with unequal, separate senses:

Sentence: "She broke the silence."

1. Literal sense: She suddenly spoke after a long period of quiet.

2. Figurative sense: She challenged a taboo or unspoken rule by revealing a hidden truth.

Though the wording is identical, each use carries a distinct and unequal meaning—one social and emotional, the other physical and acoustic.

RES

 

Now do the same where both sentences carry the same referent...

ChatGPT

Certainly! Here's an example where the same sentence is used with unequal, separate senses, yet both refer to the same event or referent:

Sentence: "The glass shattered."

1. Literal sense: The physical object (a drinking glass) broke into pieces.

2. Figurative sense: A tense or fragile emotional moment collapsed—e.g., a moment of calm or pretense was broken dramatically.

Here, we use the same referent: A single event where someone drops a glass during a heated argument. The literal shattering is real, but it simultaneously represents the breakdown of emotional restraint.

So the one action - of one referent - serves dual roles: material and symbolic.

RES

Now adjust these answers using the Fregian construction of "sense and reference"...

ChatGPT

Excellent. Let’s now analyze the examples using Gottlob Frege’s distinction between sense (Sinn) and reference (Bedeutung):

Frege’s Definitions (briefly):

Reference (Bedeutung): The actual object or event in the world that a term or sentence points to.

Sense (Sinn): The mode of presentation—the way the reference is understood or captured in the mind, or conceptualized.

Example 1 (Original Sentence): “She broke the silence.”

Single reference: The event of a woman speaking after a period of quiet.

Two unequal senses:

1. Acoustic sense (Sinn 1): She literally made sound, ending a stretch of quiet.

2. Social/emotional sense (Sinn 2): She disrupted a psychological or cultural silence (e.g., revealing a family secret).

✔ Although the reference is the same—an act of speaking—the senses differ: one presents it as an auditory event, the other as a symbolic or social rupture.

Example 2 (Original Sentence): “The glass shattered.”

Single reference: The actual event of a glass object breaking into fragments during a moment of tension.

Two unequal senses:

1. Literal sense (Sinn 1): The glass physically fractured.

2. Metaphorical sense (Sinn 2): The emotional or interpersonal situation collapsed (e.g., a relationship tension snapping).

✔ Again, the reference is one and the same—the breaking of the glass—but the senses present that event in two unequal ways: one as physical destruction, the other as emotional symbolism.

Summary Table (Fregean Analysis)

1Sentence - 2Reference (Bedeutung) - 3Sense 1 (Sinn) - 4Sense 2 (Sinn)

1She broke the silence - 2A woman speaking after a period of quiet - 3End of acoustic silence - 4Social/emotional rupture

1The glass shattered - 2A glass breaking during a tense moment - 3Literal, physical shattering - 4Metaphor for emotional breakdown

This shows how Frege’s model elegantly explains how the same reference can support distinct and unequal conceptual pathways, deepening semantic interpretation.

RES

Frege's philological construction had three operandi, the sign, the reference, and the sense...

ChatGPT

You're absolutely right—Frege’s philological (or more precisely, semantic) construction involves three components:

🔹 1. Sign (Zeichen)

The linguistic expression or symbol used in language (e.g., a word, phrase, or sentence).

• Ex. “The morning star”

🔹 2. Sense (Sinn)

The mode of presentation—how the referent is conceived or understood. The sense determines how we think about the referent, not what it is.

• Ex. “The morning star” = Venus as seen at dawn

🔹 3. Reference (Bedeutung)

The actual object or entity in the world that the sign points to.

• Ex. The planet Venus (which is also the evening star)

✴ Applied Example: “The glass shattered”

Let's reconstruct this Fregean-style, fully:

Element        Literal Sense                                   Figurative Sense

Sign                 The glass shattered                              The glass shattered

Sense (Sinn) A fragile object broke into                 A fragile situation or emotion collapsed                                      pieces suddenly

Reference      A specific real-world event: the breaking of the glass (possibly during a moment of tension)

🔁 Note: The sign is the same in both readings.

➡ The reference remains unchanged: one real-world event.

🧠 The sense differs: one physical, one metaphorical.

✴ Applied Example: “She broke the silence”

Element            Acoustic Sense                Social/Emotional Sense

Sign                    She broke the silence            She broke the silence

Sense (Sinn)   A voice interrupted               A taboo or emotional
                              a quiet environment             restraint was broken

Reference         A single utterance or           (same act in both cases)

                               verbal action by "she"

🧠 Frege’s Contribution

Frege helps us see how multiple senses can arise from a single expression, even when the reference remains constant. This is especially important in poetry, metaphor, and symbolic language—where one referent may carry many conceptual layers.

Here is a multilayered poem constructed to reflect Frege’s three-part semantic model—sign, sense, and reference—unfolding over metaphor, symbol, and concrete reality.

The Shattered Glass

a poem by ChatGPT

(A Poem in Three Layers)

I. Sign (Zeichen)

The words that tremble on the surface

>The glass shattered - three words, bare,

Framed in sound, suspended air.

A sentence whispered, sharp and clean,

With syntax taut and meaning lean.

II. Sense (Sinn)

The thoughts that shape what’s seen

> It cracked not just with brittle edge,

But like a vow near breaking’s ledge.

The silence screamed through sudden gleam,

A fracture in the woven dream.

> The moment held a double weight:

A hand let go - a held-back state.

The glass, a mirror, caught despair,

The room no longer breathing air.

III. Reference (Bedeutung)

What truly happened - there, out there

> A vessel fell. It met the stone.

It splintered sharp and left alone.

No metaphor, no echo’s lie -

Just shards beneath a kitchen cry.

🌀 Commentary

The first stanza focuses on the Sign—the linguistic shell, "the glass shattered."

The second stanza offers the Sense—how we might interpret or experience that phrase: metaphor, emotional collapse, or psychological turning point.

The final stanza anchors the Reference—a real event in spacetime, regardless of interpretation.

---

Below is a sublime, interwoven version of the poem that blends sign, sense, and reference into a seamless tapestry—so the reader experiences them all at once, intuitively, without explicit division. Each line carries linguistic form (sign), evokes layered understanding (sense), and gestures toward lived or living truth (reference).

Where the Glass Remembered

a poem by ChatGPT

(A Fregian Poem in One Breath)

>The glass remembered how silence held,

until her hand spoke louder than lips.

It leapt - no, it fell - no, it was freed,

like truth unlatched in a locked-up room.

A ring of sound stitched through the hush,

as though quiet itself had broken open,

not just the glass, but something beneath:

a decade of dinners, unspoken things.

Shards mapped the floor like stuttered thoughts -

some still, some screaming in sunlit flecks.

Her breath returned, a wave on wood,

soft as a storm, unbrushed by apology.

And though they swept the pieces clean,

the absence never quite stopped gleaming.

The glass had shattered, yes, and still -

the silence never truly mended.

🔍 Notes

• “The glass remembered…” — personifies the sign; it already holds its meanings and histories.

• “…her hand spoke louder than lips” — overlays literal and metaphorical rupture.

• “like truth unlatched…” — blends referent (shattering) with layered sense (emotional disclosure).

• Final couplet — circles back to permanence in impermanence, the residue of meaning even after the reference has passed.

continue to Part 3

Processual Meaning in Motion, Part 1

Processual Meaning in Motion:

Frege, Process and Developing

a Living Language

Part 1

Metamodern Theosophy:

Semantic Reinterpretation in Process Philosophy

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT

move forward to Part 2

move forward to Part 3

Introduction

I.

This dialogue explores the reclamation of theological meaning through the lens of Frege’s triadic semantics - sign, sense, and reference - as reinterpreted within process theology and metamodern philosophy.

Rather than allowing the discipline of theology to determine either the absolute or fluid philosophical categories on it's own apart from any philosophical guidance, we reverse the religious construction by first starting with a dynamic metaphysical framework such as process philosophy that is grounded in dynamic relationality, creativity, and becoming. From this foundation derivative categories such as theology, sociology, science, and ecology may then be birthed and enlivened having established a sufficient structural framework for each to flow and explore within.

II.

Of note is the fact that process philosophy in all its forms is a responsive framework which morphs with acknowledged academic studies so that it keeps its currency. But as a framing conceptual ideology it also guides as well as grows in response to era-specific discovery, need and demand. Thus, process philosophy is a guide as much as it is a companion on the journey of life previously walked by both the ancients and modern society.

This also addresses the question of which comes first, theology or philosophy? Loosely, "Did we think about God before we formed our earliest hominin patterns?" Though each affects the other the proper order is always philosophy first, theology second. And if this is so, then theology, doctrine, denominations, and theologians alike must be built upon a philosophy that is itself worthy and aimed at worthy valuative goals.

Historically, the church has built it's theology upon an eclectic base of philosophies appealing to an admixture of era-specific ideas and principals. In contrast, a rigorous theology is always built upon a rigorous philosophical base and not the other way around. Thus the importance of discovering a worthy philosophical framework so that the subjectivity of a theology is reigned in from excess and abuse.

Without a guiding philosophical reference, a theology, a faith, or a religion, can set it's own tone according to it's own "philosophical bias" so that it is unrestricted to the harm and oppression it can - and most likely will - create upon it's own members and society at large. As example,

today's American "Maga-Christian movement" is a perfect illustration of a faith and a religion gone wrong, though many within it's movement completely assent to its claims, practices, and cultural identity, believing them to be faithful expressions of Christianity, when in fact they reveal the dangers of a theology unmoored from a sound and humane philosophy.”

In counterpoint, process theology is a worthy derivative of process philosophy as it flows in sympathy with an enlivening processual foundation. A foundation as much committed to value, worth and ethic as it is to metaphysical and ontological discussion within process philosophy. Whereas other Western philosophies have subscribed to the goal of "the worthy life" yet in historical reflection this worthy life came to mean separation from the world - and perhaps one's body  - for purposes of Christian sanctification and holiness.

In contrast, process theology does not withdraw from the world but embraces it as the very arena of God’s creative becoming. The body, the earth, and history are not obstacles to transcendence but the very mediums through which divine value, worth, and love are made real. In this way, process theology affirms sanctification not as escape from life, but as deeper participation in life’s ongoing renewal.”

In process theology the sanctification and holiness striven for in Christianity is always focused on loving outcome to the other as well as one's self. Hence, the worthy life is a life which loves others and self because of God's love given to mankind and creation at large. To Jesus, the purpose of sanctification and holiness had only one goal which he exemplified - to love one another. In themselves, the pursuit of sanctification and holiness is bankrupt before God. Without meaning. Meaningless. But in context to loving and serving others, one attains sanctification and holiness by one's selfless acts of sacrifice, thoughtfulness, kindness, and gifts of helps.

III.

Theosophy

Metaphorical usage (critical):

Theosophy — a careless mixing of philosophy and theology that results in a diluted or incoherent framework. Like a meal of mismatched ingredients, such “theosophy” may be consumed by culture but lacks the rigor, clarity, and worth of process philosophy and its derivative processual theology.

Historical usage (strict):

Broadly: any mystical or philosophical system that seeks direct insight into the divine through spiritual wisdom; a mystical synthesis or esoteric wisdom tradition that tries to merge philosophy, theology, and spirituality.

Academicians, and culture at large, have often intertwined philosophy with theology creating what we might call a semantic admixture of “theosophy.” But too often this knee-jerk blending produces a sloppy mixture of intellectual goop that society readily consumes at its dining table - however untrue or unhealthy or deadly to it's cultural body.

By contrast, in process philosophy, the soul of its core is already worthy, and for this reason the heart of its derivative process theology also proves worthy. In this mutuality, each nourishes the other in healthy ways, just as our own wise actions nourish body and soul together, shaping the culture in which we live.

This is also why a process form of Christianity can help the Christian faith remain within the bounds of a healthy and healing vision of God and its practices. The theosophic boundaries of process thought, grounded in its very core, always affirm the worth of God and the value of all humanity.

It is important to stress, however, that in using the term theosophy in this shorthand, critical sense, I do not mean in any measure to invoke esoteric mysticism or occult movements. Why? Because processual panpsychism itself provides a more rigorous grounding for spirituality, locating divine connection within human experience and within this world. This framework has already been shown above in relation to sanctification and holiness.

Processual panpsychism, arising from the more disciplined path of process philosophy, thus undergirds process theology in its movement toward divine wisdom and human salvation. It revives religious language with enough depth to meet the reality of human suffering, betrayal, and abandonment in a world saturated with flattened signs and meaningless reference points.

Consequently, this discussion - especially in dialogue with Frege’s analytic focus on language - seeks to integrate poetry, diagrams, and semantic analysis in order to bridge logic and spirit, language and life, theory and beauty. To begin, we now proceed by developing this investigation from the simple to the complex.

Here we go....

Who Is Frege?

I.

Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege was a late 1800s German philosopher, logician, and mathematician, he is considered to be the father of analytic philosophy concentrating of the philosophy of language, logic and mathematics. Introduced to academia by later noted philosophers, Frege became widely considered as the greatest logician since Aristotle, and one of the most profound philosophers of mathematics ever (as noted by Bertrand Russell who, with Alfred North Whitehead, had jointly published Principia Mathematica)

In Frege's 1892 paper, "On Sense and Reference" he explained that expressions of language may have more than one meaning - or, multiple modes of representation - for the same referent. In practice, the one who is communicating may wish to differentiate what is being talked about (qua, refence) from how it's being described (qua, sense).

This is used all the time by artificial intelligence (AI). As example, Google's semantic search relies on Fregean-like logic to understand user queries in terms of sense and referent. If a user states they are going to NYC, AI might determine NYC as referring to New York City or The Big Apple as the user's destination. In law, the sematic frame of a minor may refer to an underage person. This would help in differentiating between intent (sense) from application (reference).

Essentially, a technical communicator may need to clarify intention from meaning so that they are not misunderstood by his audience. This helps in conflict resolution or intercultural communication, so that one might distinguish "how" something is said from "what" is meant.

II.

When coming to philosophical theology Frege's form of semantic communication can be quite helpful in modifying and expanding older descriptions and meanings towards newer descriptions and meanings.

As example, literalist readings of Scripture and doctrinal theology often collapse sense and reference to the modern mind whereas a process-based reading of Scripture or doctrinal theology will often expand traditional / classic sense and meaning.

Hence, Frege's work states that belief is more than just knowing what something refers to, but how it is understood. To say that God exists is not a sufficient explanation of "faith". It also involves "grasping the sense" of the meaning that "God exists". As such, an existent God may suggest that this God is loving, just, triune, incarnational, redemptive, etc.

Philosophical theology is always driving towards clarity while at the same time expanding the referent of its subject beyond the simple "senses" which sects, denominations, creeds, and doctrines have filled it with. In this case, process-based philosophical theology challenges the delimiting views of classical or traditional creeds and doctrines. Since God exists, then why does God exist? For what reason? And if for love, then what does God's love mean, imply, communicate, intends to do?

Earlier beliefs have insisted that God exists to be worshipped but today's progressive faiths wish to error on the pragmatic. The practical. And so they teach that God exists to serve humanity through all human institutions - including the church. That worship alone is not enough. That the church must act in love. Vote in love. Provision in love. Reach out in helps, in aides, in practical means, modes, and methods.

So when using Frege, "worship" may have a reference not only as "adoration of God" but now, in a processual sense, have another meaning, that of "self-sacrificial service."

continue to Part 2