Process Theology is rooted in the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead, known as Process Philosophy or Process Thought. Whitehead revived an ancient Greek philosophical belief that reality is "becoming" rather than "being." This concept basically states that everything is in a state of flux, and that it is dynamic rather than static.
Charles Hartshorne developed Whitehead's thinking and applied it to the field of theology, which is a discourse about God. For Hartshorne, God is the ultimate reality, and subsequently, God is "becoming" rather than "being." God is subsequently, part of the evolutionary process of nature. As a participant in the evolutionary process, God is not subject to either an initial or final form. God in this concept is constantly evolving with everything and everyone else in the universe.
John Cobb, another Process theologian, later on elaborated on Process Theology's idea of God luring us to Godself. In other words, since God is in all (not is all), and all is in God, we are also involved in this evolutionary process of becoming and not being final. Unlike conventional Christianity which emphasizes the end of history, Process theology stresses the constant movement of history and nature. There appears to be no "final stage" in history in the sense that Christians speak of matters such as "the Second Coming," or the "kingdom of God." This does not mean, however, that in Process Theology there is no design or purpose in the sense of the Greek word "teleos," which means that God or nature have an end in sight. What it does mean is that since God is a participant in this evolutionary process. the evolutionary process is not a blind natural force running amok. Since it is God, an entity with intelligence, that is participating in and moving the process, the notion is that the process is designed to insure the good. The concept of God alluring us to Godself is one that stresses invitation rather than coercion. There appears to be an element of "universal salvation," in Process Theology in that God's alluring really leaves no room for eternal alienation between God and humans, or for that matter, between God and everything and everyone in the universe.
Process theologians tend to subscribe, by and large to the historical criticism of the Bible, which as pointed out in my previous postings, is a method that interprets the content of Scripture in the light of culture, language, and history. Historical criticism emphasizes authorship, audience, reasons for writing, date of writing, styles of writing, sources of information, and the issues of redaction. The historical-critical approach to the Bible leaves very little room for the notion of inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible because it acknowledges the role of frail humans in its writing. Some scholars and theologians who resort to the higher critical approach to the Bible subscribe to the theory of evolution in the sense that Charles Darwin expounded it.
Process Theology does not have a strict emphasis on a "Christ-centeredness" relative to either theology itself or to a relationship with God. If anything, Process Theology appears to have elements of both "universal salvation," and of the "Cosmic Christ," who is not only the Christ of Christian believers, but the Christ of everyone who will eventually be allured to God.
Unlike the emphasis in the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic tradition on a transcendental God, Process Theology sees God in a horizontal and immanent form. The idea of God "up there" is alien to Process Theology, because it runs the risk of believing in a God who is detached from everything that is going on in history and nature. God is not "up there" in Process Theology, but rather "down here" and "among us," and "among everything." Process Theology believes in the biblical concept of the God who is "in all" "through all," and "with all."
How do you as a believer evaluate Process Theology? Is there anything in Process Theology which resonates with what you as a believer in the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic tradition believe? Is Process Theology's utilization of the historical critical approach to the Bible beneficial or detrimental to the construction a "sound" doctrinal and theological position? Your responses to these questions and/or your formulation of other questions and/or comments will make for healthy dialogue on this subject.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona
No comments:
Post a Comment