What in the World Is Process Theology?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 січ 2018
- In this video Kyle helps to unpack what people mean when they talk about "Process Theology".
Subscribe: ua-cam.com/channels/nhFs.html...
Share this video: • What in the World Is P...
Patreon: / theologymatters
Email: yestheologymatters@gmail.com
Facebook: / theologycomrade
Twitter: / theologycomrade
Instagram: / theology_comrade
PayPal: paypal.me/TheologyMatters
Video Resources:
Why Go Process? w/Monica A. Colemann and Tripp Fuller: • Why Go Process? w/ Mon...
Thomas J. Oord and Tripp Fuller talk about "Christian Process Theology" at the Seizing an Alternative Conference: • Tom Oord, "The God of ...
Thomas J. Oord - What is Process Theology?: • Thomas Jay Oord - What...
Marjorie Suchocki - An Introduction to Process Theology: • Marjorie Suchocki: An ...
Online Resources:
Jay McDaniel - What Do Process Thinkers Believe: www.jesusjazzbuddhism.org/what...
Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson - Constellation of Process Theology - An Invitation: www.openhorizons.org/a-very-sh...
Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson - God Almighty? No Way!: www.openhorizons.org/god-almig...
Jay McDaniel - What is Process Thought?: www.jesusjazzbuddhism.org/what...
www.openhorizons.org/
Book Resources:
"Process-Relational Philosophy: An Introduction to Alfred North Whitehead" by Robert C. Mesle amzn.to/2DrazYD (affiliate)
"Process Theology: A Basic Introduction" by Robert C. Mesle amzn.to/2Dh1xtP (affiliate)
"Creating Women's Theology: A Movement Engaging Process Thought" by Monica A. Coleman amzn.to/2DnAJMP (affiliate)
"God Christ Church: A Practical Guide to Process Theology" by Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki amzn.to/2BeeiU9 (affiliate)
"God of Becoming and Relationship: The Dynamic Nature of Process Theology" By Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson amzn.to/2FQFYSL (affiliate)
Disclaimer:
All copyrighted material falls under the category of "fair use" for educational purposes and/or commentary. If you believe that we have misused your material, please contact us.
Some of the links in the description are affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I will receive a small commission.
Music:
www.bensound.com
Video:
www.videezy.com
I have returned to ths video dozens of times, and it's the best intro to Process Thought I've found, which I share with friends.
I am currently working on my doctorate in theology. My dissertation is based heavily on Charles Hartshorne. When you said that it is a tough subject, that is an understatement. This seems to be an especially difficult subject for Christians. When I was shopping my proposal, I got several letters from several schools using the word "heresy" several times each. I appreciate your intro here. You made it simple without oversimplifying the subject as a whole. Process Philosophy/Theology is anything but simple. Thanks for what you do. And thanks for this.
This is still the best short intro to process I’ve ever found. I’m so thankful that you responded to God’s lure to create this content and gave it as a gift to the world. I heard from Mason Mennenga that you got busy and your life took you away from more content. I’m glad you gave us what you did and hope one day it will once again be ideal for you to take up this channel again. Either way keep becoming the best sack of bones you can be!
Very informative thank you! I guess I am a process theologian and didn’t even know it!
LOVE THIS! Thanks, Kyle!
Nice summary! Well done!
This is really great stuff. Thank you Kyle.
This is SO helpful! A really good and understandable description of Process Theology. Thank you, Kyle!
Mary, I appreciate the feedback. I do think something that I didn't mention, which is important to note, is that process theology, because it is based in a metaphysic, is not confined to the Christian tradition. There are interfaith dimensions to process theology as well that I failed to cover in the video.
Thank you. My journey is taking me to an overlap of process theology, panentheism and the Trinity (the latter via Wm Paul Young's books). As an ex-evangelical I find this fascinating and beautiful. Thanks again.
Same, coming from scoffing at everything faith-related
Thank you for helping me understand this complicated subject, and well done!
Great video and good explanation. I'm a new subscriber and looking forward to future videos!
Thanks for the positive feedback. We hope to keep a consistent stream of videos coming your way!
Cool video, great analogies, and meaningful substance. *SALUTE!* Thank you!
Great video. Wonderful explanations.
Process teology is so non dualistic, I love it, make so much sense
GREAT....YOUR EXPLANATION OF A VERY COMPLEX THEOLOGY IS VERY HELPFUL....I TOOK A CLASS IN SEMINARY ON PROCESS THEOLOGY....CHANGED THEY WAY I VIEW THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING...THANK YOU FOR A GREAT VIDEO
These are great! Thank you for saving my philosphy of religion-exam!
love the video and love the hat!
helllooo,
tank's for your job.
very nice this video. One big hug from Brazil.
this is great, this can help to frame and understand the problem of evil
Brilliant video!
Hey. That was super easy to understand...even for a musician bird. I get the jazz analogy! Yay
Great video explaining process theology! Keep up the good work!
Great video!
Thank you!
I hope Kyle hasn't given up on this channel. Just found it.
Rip
Whitehead developed his philosophy in response to the findings of modern science and mathematics, not because he was inspired by an ideal of freedom. Modern science simply presents a future that is indeterminate.
Thank you fir such a clearly articulated summary of the key points of process theology - endears me more to it than the linear mechanistic view of God I held before
This looks like a process relational panentheism hipotesis, and it is like how the cosmos works according to our actual knowledge of nature and cosmology.
Well done.
FINALLY I found a clear, brief and easy-to-digest description of Process Theology (although I’m sure all of its implications can’t be summed up in one video)... Thank you!
Awesome video 😎 keep it up! I’m currently studying theology too. Process theology resonates a lot with me. I agree with most of it, that we are co creators but I’d say that god has all the power AND we have some power. We couldn’t co-create anything if it wasn’t for the power of god. Like the course in miracles say, any act/creation of darkness doesn’t really exist at the fundamental level of creation - it’s just a temporary nightmare.
Process theology can get really complicated, but at its core, it’s far more intuitive than classical theology. It just makes more sense with the world as we know it.
"Theology Comrades": I like this.
Thanks
Really enjoyed this succinct explanation that is so relatable. However, the background music made it very difficult for me to take it in and I would appreciate a way to remove the music from the settings.
Just heard about about process theology, and found your video. Thank you for a clear and excellent introduction to this topic.
Very cool, thank you so much
Nice, thank you! Whitehead also thought that our moment-by-moment 'choices' make us 'co-creators' of the universe, constantly unfolding, 'process by process'. And we should probably mention the importance he gives to our relationships with each other, as 'no man is an island'. It's also this larger 'relational' social context, along with the ways it compliments Confucism, Taoism, the I Ching, and even Buddhism, that have made him very popular in China, of all places, where the Chinese government has even funded many schools expressly devoted to his work!
Process theology also concurs with Buddhism in replacing any notion of being, substance or permanent reality with becomings or experiences.
love this. moving.
Yep...moving in the WRONG direction.
I don't believe this myself , however you explained something really complex well so you get a like for that 😁
Beautiful!
i enjoyed the background jazz more than the video
can you please do a comparison of Process Theology to someone like John Piper or John MacArthur and present the gospel from a PT POV thank you...
They can’t. There is no need for the gospel on this view peculiar, fringe philosophy. You that look in his eyes? He is not all there
yes, please. that would be interesting.
@@jml04 He cannot. As Confessions above points out, there is no need for the Gospel in this incoherent philosophical mess.
Could you do one of these for Liberation Theology and/or its variations?
I will definitely be outlining liberation theology and its variations in the future. Is there anything in particular you would like to see in a video that might cover this topic?
Theology Matters Why do people see single out liberation theology be as a having an effect in the world, when (for example) Arius vs Athanasius had empire-shaking effects?
What is the significance of Near Death Experiences to Process Theology?
Relates back to the overarching notion of Panentheism. Basically returning to a state of consciousness not bound by the notion of self.
God is not love, God is infinite strife.
Serious question; upon what basis do Process Theologians come to these conclusion that God is faithful or loving? How do they know that to be true?
It's a matter of faith.
Those concepts aren't part of Process theism per se, it's not the main focus. Whitehead is driven primarily by explaining the relationship of abstract values like goodness or beauty to the world, in a way that doesn't contradict science.
Nice summary. I'm Catholic and don't believe any of this stuff.
However, I went to a Mormon university and this is really close to how they understand God. They call it "eternal progression". They go a little further with God's omnipotence, suggesting that he COULD assert omnipotent control, but that it would be counter-productive. They conceive his unchangeability to be in his divine character, which they also link to his power, but they place him in a state of becoming continually greater. They understand him to be omnipotent in that he has all power that it is possible to have, with all power being relational, so as God engages in more and more creation he increases the amount of power possible by increasing the number of relationships. Thus, creating things makes God more powerful and adds to his glory. Sort of like God always owns the whole pie, so he's always omnipotent cause he has all power it's possible to have, but he's always making the pie bigger so he's always becoming greater. God's greatness thus being a state of eternal becoming rather than static being.
Interesting ideas.
This is an incredibly well-informed, thoughtful, and respectful approach to LDS theology. I am a graduate of byu as well and a student of LDS theology. I find the first 100 years or so of LDS theology to be incredibly profound, even pre-empting and superseding much of process theology’s hard won insights. I recommend Blake Ostler’s “Exploring Mormon Thought” book series for a massive survey of these topics. Process theology is a beautiful thing, as is LDS theology. Despite a few minor points of contention on your explanation, I thank you for your fair portrayal of some of the nuts and bolts of our beliefs! Cheers!
These are both false teachings, creating a god or gods in their own image..."21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. 22 Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.">>>Romans 1:21,22. For goodness sake, read and study God's Word for yourselves, and stop trying to learn about God from these false teachers.
@@Narnian77there’s an episode of south park on mormons. worth a watch
Might you have peuberphonia? Do some vocal exercises if that may help.
I know that Bracken (Catholic) and Cobb (Methodist) are Process Theologians, but are their denominations generally hostile or open to their ideas? I don’t believe Bracken has been censured in any way yet by church hierarchy (as was Teilhard - who was arguably in the Process school). Are there any Christian denominations openly embracing Process Theology?
Violence does not create, love does
thank you 🙏
Thank you for explaining as this Muslim was incredibly confused
Life is a Theology.
Really good food for thought
Uhhhh...Nope.
Good
Good jazz improvisation is impossible without reliance upon static concepts and realities.
Neither Anselm not Aquinas are Church Father. They may be Church Doctors. Church Fathers refers to the Patristics. For example, Gregory of Nazianzus or Augustine.
Correct. Aquinus is a "doctor."
Wonderful
Is this the answer? I’ve been searching for a long time and my old religion doesn’t cut it anymore. Thanks for this. I’m going to explore and see what I find.
HeidiSue60 what was your old religion, if you don't mind me asking.
How did the search go? Process thought has been exactly what I’ve been looking for
I just hope you did not go down that path. Try ready the Bible.
I love You!
You need much higher standards.
It is an interesting thing, though I do not completely agree with it, much like I do not completely agree with the mechanistic view either. I think relationalism is important but ultimately essence is more fundamental than existence and relations. This is not to say I subscribe to the vinyl model of theology/B-theory of time model, I think its somewhere between the two- the essence comes first, then the relational/existence part comes in and pushes towards an outcome. In this, all possible things that can happen (an unimaginably broad range of possibility but exhaustive nonetheless) can be listed, all things that have happened can also be listed; but in the span of time, the things that have happened would only be a small subset of all things that could have happened in that duration, so most possibilities don't end up becoming even though they could have from a very broad but definite list and have some kind of 'being' on that list. I do not know how this happens, I suspect it is truly random and doesn't necessarily aid a notion of free will. On the other hand if one wanted to apply a notion of free will to this described system perhaps free will can tilt and alter the chances of what the outcomes will be. It can work either in the presence or absence of free will. At least that is my hunch.
🕯🕯
Would have liked to have seen Scripture to support your assertions.
What do you think about God?
So many people would actually accuse "the almighty God" for allowing painful and disgusting things to happen. But perhaps my thinking of a dynamic God may be in line with processes theology. Very interesting
prehension jazz, bounce
Theology comes full circle - see Vedas. Humans have been doing this for millennia
Sounds very similar to Buddhism
So could this be interpreted by calling it a Theology of Relationship where we are all connected to every one and everything on planet earth and beyond? Akin to the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings in China can effect, to some degree, the path of a hurricane near the United States? Just trying to simplify a complicated theology to help explain it to others.
The original name Whitehead gave it was a philosophy of organism (as opposed to the established philosophy of a mechanical universe). The philosophy of a ‘living’, relating, changing, experiencing universe
I'm finding myself completely lost trying to understand this. On this view, can God be wrong about something or do something wrong? Is there such a thing as divine foreknowledge on this view? How exactly does this relational view differ from a mechanistic one? Specifically, what does physics look like on Process Theology? Does Process Theology require Libertarian Free Will to work? How does Process Theology account for the instances in the Bible where God is clearly depicted exercising power and authority in an authoritarian way, such as during the plagues of Egypt?
Also, I can quite easily imagine a world which contains only a single entity which is not in relation to any other entities. Even if that does not seem to be the world we inhabit, it seems perfectly coherent to me. I can also imagine a world which contains many entities, but these entities are so far apart that they have no ability to interact with one another at all, and can thus have no relation with one another. To each individual entity, it would be as though they were the only thing in existence. Again, nothing about this seems incoherent or even difficult to imagine.
>Specifically, what does physics look like on Process Theology?
I can try to speculate on that: perhaps it would be a model like possibilism whereby the past exists, the present is becoming and the future is yet to be. Relating to the theology: As the world grows so does God, and ideally it would grow in a good direction.
@@thelivingtribunal8494 Thank you for the response, but I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. Let's try using a concrete example to get a feel for my confusion about the physics. Let's say I let go of an object at some height above the ground. On a mechanistic view, the object will fall at 9.8 m/s^2 toward the ground until it reaches its terminal velocity due to air resistance or impacts with something. Repeat this a million times, and the same thing happens every time. Does a relational model predict something different?
As for your comment on the theology... I'm completely lost. What does it mean for the world to grow? What does it mean for God to grow? Is God the world? Is the world part of God? If the answer to both the previous questions is no, why does God grow with the world?
@@AndrianTimeswift Regarding physics, IDK how the macro world would relate to this: but looking at the micro, an ontology that is compatible with possibilism is objective collapse. In that case you can start with an initial state of something, say a particle and it could result in many possible outcomes, lets say 3 of them. If A has a probability of 50%, B has a probability of 30% and C has a probability of 20%, you will get some kind of result. Now if you could somehow repeat the experiment either in an identical setting or setting the thought experiment back to the beginning of it, and perform it again you will get another result but it need not be the same as the original one in an objective collapse ontology. Doing it again and again over an N number of times will give a tally of 0.5N A results, 0.3N B results and 0.2N C results. In this ontology, every single time it would be impossible to tell what would happen because the future would be indeterminate but no matter what, as long as it is repeated that often, the results will have the distribution as predicted by the wavefunction probability. On the macro world: the idea is that the collapsing probability densities result in the macroworld. Unlike the Copenhagen interpretation, this doesn't need a 'measurement' for collapse. So on the macro level I'd imagine its a bunch of probabilities of what can happen constantly collapsing into an outcome that just simply happens. *Note: I am not saying this is how the world actually is, but this is a proposition that works with possibilism model of physics which might work with process theology.*
>As for your comment on the theology... I'm completely lost. What does it mean for the world to grow? What does it mean for God to grow? Is God the world? Is the world part of God? If the answer to both the previous questions is no, why does God grow with the world?
The growth of the world/universe here would be the growth of the spacetime continuum from the past. Here the past would be things that have happened, which are real. But the future wouldn't be real because it is indeterminate (in contrast with a full B theory of time where the future is fixed and real). Growth for God would mean the world/universe to grow such that the outcomes are good. Now, what is good? My understanding of theology isn't developed enough to answer that but one could say harmony is good as an example. In particular the role of relations is interesting ( although I personally think that essence is foundational, not relations). In an objective collapse ontology/formalism the interaction of stable systems would result in the collapse of probability densities this can be seen as relations pushing this world forward in process theology. Still, I don't want to come across as being too certain, this is just me brainstorming how process theology can work with an example of a proposed physical ontology. Though it should be noted that objective collapse ontologies have an objective reality or an essence, meanwhile process theology is relational, so while it can carry attributes of process theology it doesn't have a relational ontology. If you want the ontology to be relational (instead of relegating relations to a mechanism) then you'd have to look elsewhere instead of objective collapse.
@@thelivingtribunal8494 Okay, I think I get your drift. I don't really get how objective collapse is any more relational that a mechanistic model (or how it even doesn't count as mechanistic in and of itself), but I do get how someone could think so.
Also, I'm surprised to see that your proposal for the ability for God/the universe to grow is in a very literal physical sense. I'm not clear on what the difference between good growth and bad growth would be (and if bad growth would even be a valid category) under the definition you've outlined, but I get that this isn't your own personal belief and it does seem rather complex.
@@AndrianTimeswift The relationality in objective collapse is important because without it, the wavefunction collapse would take much longer and as per the proposition, in that scenario (without interaction) our physical world wouldn't emerge like this. It isn't non-mechanistic, rather tries to link a classically mechanical world that we see with a quantum mechanics-like fundamental ontology.
I am not sure what the good vs bad difference would be either since I don't have a mature understanding of the good. But you can take a proxy for what is good and that could be the good for sake of reference. The world could head in that direction or in one of many others. The key in this proposition is that the future of the world is open.
I think your understanding of traditional theism is very weak. The phrase unmoved mover was not invented by Christians because God was impassable. It came from the Greeks. It predated Christianity. Augustine did not say God is not relational to us because he said God is nearer than our in most being.
Thank you for your reply! I certainly didn't mean to suggest that Aquinas invented the idea of the immovable mover, or that it was a uniquely Christian concept, but Aquinus was certainly one of the first Christian thinkers to adopt this Greek concept and use it as a rhetorical tool to help prove God's existence. I was thinking specifically here of his work, "Five Ways". His adoption of this concept, along with many other ideas influenced by Greek philosophy have no doubt had a profound impact on much of Christian history. Augustine privileges the ideas of immutability and impassibility over God's relationality, this ultimately results in a theology in which we can be in relationship with God, but that God cannot be in true relationship with creation. Augustine puts it this way, "Since God is outside the whole order of creation and all creatures are ordered to him and not conversely, it is manifest that creatures are really related to God himself, whereas in God there is no real relation to creatures, but a relation only in idea, inasmuch as creatures are referred to him." (Summa Theologica I, 1a 13.7).
How is this different from Buddhist interdependence, which implies a lack of substantiality?
Hmm.. well if I follow your logic God/man power relationship argument correctly, it is self-defeating. God would still be all-powerful if He chose to co-create with His creation. If He has power to yield power, therefore He is the source of power. Mankind creates because he acquired power from the source, making him less than its Creator.
Exactly. Preach it!!!
Sounds like process theology believes they can create their own morals, that they can be as gods. Where am I getting this wrong?
? that’s not what he said. do u just listen to ur own logic or what..
@@careforjusticealways Did I make any Quote? Or did I make an inference and question my own logic? Are you searching for an excuse the argue with a stanger on the internet? Not every person who makes a comment is smug and righteously indignant. If your purpose is to gain a dopamine hit from a meaningless argument with a stranger, you will get none from me. If you actually want to engage in the topic in good faith, I'm here for it.
@@Chi_Loutman um based off the video it doesn’t seem like that’s what he said. it’s not argument it’s just asking , cus what ur saying doesn’t make sense
@@careforjusticealways Where does process theology derive their moral framework?
I think that you may have misunderstood Whitehead's notions about the meaning of "prehensions". Wrong. Yes, the present is influenced by the past... but not determined by it. God is "the fellow companion" upon the way. And therefore, even God is in the process of LEARNING through It's creation. This deep insight gives rise or may unfold into a world, a new... world... where each atom comes with new and deep... and abiding sense of the eventual rightness of all things. And this abiding sense gives to creation a sense of self-determination. Eventually, WE have to remember and learn thereby. The One Great ALL THERE IS, didn't make a few mistakes... here and over there; God made them all. Remember! Now we have to consider a larger circumference upon the nature of responsibility, immanence and concresense. (Sorry, I spelled the word wrong.) I am... a student of Alfred Korzybski, Fredrick Chopin and Count Dracula , Late of Transylvania. That means, I'm an idiot. And just in case you haven't noticed; you're a kid. With lots to learn. Congratulations!!!!!!
Passive voice incantations don’t logic
Sounds a lot like panentheism.god makes the world and acts in it but is not just in the world as in pantheism or pandeism extending outside of the universe too.
It certainly in not biblical, that I am sure of.
Except that mechanistic philosophy is modern and not classical in anyway. Also, just because one speaks about God the creator as omnipotent and ontologically different and separate from His creatures does not mean He is relationally seperate, silent, and distant from us.
I see... Theology is philosophy with a much more defined purpose. Still broad, but a much more defined focal point.
God sounds more like a muse
Yes, inspiring us to more unfolding beauty, goodness and truth
I think Adam and Eve ate the apple infecting
the Garden of Eden with sin.
And God was deeply appalled, and was like,
"Wait, how offended can I be if I knew this
was going to happen ?
If I didn't know I was going to be asking
myself these kind of questions,
I wonder what happens next."
So even though God was like,
"Eff this." and was about to pull the plug
on Eden and nuke the site from orbit,
he realized he was experiencing something
new, which is even better than why he
created the earth in the first place,
which was for us to just predictably
praise him like his angels already were.
So it's kind of like God knows what will
happen next but isn't quite sure the
affect it will have on him.
Ever since, then god has been being
by becoming (process theology), and has
been always changing yet perfect like
a sky full of clouds.
Likewise, we are his first creation
that creates. The best way we can imitate
him is to be patient and stable through love
and create using the highest facilities of
mind. This shows gratitude and love for him
by exploring and cultivating the gifts he
has given us.
trombone7 extremely well said.
Ascribing emotions to a construct of inability to understand is god
So Political Conservatism is wrong then..?
I can see why Process theology is a problem from a Christian perspective. You have to twist and turn to make God fit into how you see Him. But, if you simply drop your preconceptions, open up to viewing God in a more Eastern tradition then, instead of being something which is problematic, God becomes more real and becomes Existence itself.
The problem for Christians is that you want an anthropomorphic God, full of feelings and desires. Drop this childish concept and realise that It is way beyond such simple ideas.
Here is the proof for the Construct theory:
Infinity = 1/x(change) + 1
This equation is God's mathematical name.
God's name in this equation reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God.
Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity
In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore man is a fraction of God
Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind.
Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something.
There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something or someone is complete and individual from all the rest.
Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed ( delta) With (+) God (1).
Scientific Method
Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4
Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth?
Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist He should be found in the house of mathematics
Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation
Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1))
Again: All and any number is a set in space that change with space
Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise
This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance but they represent changes in their measurement of distance.
Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consist of 3 domains of space
a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space or the whole of knowledge a.k.a. information
Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exist otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
As we can see God is fundamental in the cross between information and physical relationships
I wrote a research doc looking deeper into this matter. Anyone who wants a free copy can contact me at:
william.mabon@yahoo.com
God's Mind Is Man Changed With God
It seems as if every spiritual leader has started out with the fundamentals for a long time then suddenly taken a path at right angles leading their followers into many different & diverse camps, effectively dividing the body of Christ into thousands of camps which have no relation to each other. They do not speak to each other. They do not address each other. I am not even certain that they see each other. Pastors are blind to whatever is going on around them. 9-11-2001 was an example of this, most buying the official story hook line & sinker as if the news media was putting out GOSPEL. The few received the minority report(s) which made more sense. Why are pastors so invisible to each other unless it is in their denomination?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenism it's far from perfect, but it's an attempt to address the problem you name here
I'm so glad I believe in the simple reality of Jesus Christ. It's that simple.
Is he God or man or both or neither, and in which way is he both?
Process Theology is a false dynamic, in which the philosophy of man creates an absolute duality rule while completely ignoring the prophecies and power of God in Revelation.
PROPHET KACOU PHILIPPE :
The Gospel of the Kingdom of Heavens always comes from Heaven through an angel while there is another gospel that comes from the abyss through pastoral school for God fills the heart while the devil fills the head. Remember how on April 24, 1993, the sound of his voice came into me and I fell dead. You see? It’s the devil that has instituted pastoral school. For, if I send someone to call my wife who is on a journey to the village, this messenger doesn’t have to receive any instruction from anyone. I am the only one who should tell him what to say to my wife and I know that she will believe him. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”].
2. Let Satan and his children have pastoral schools, Bible institutes and the Internet, me and my house will stay with the prophetic revelation. And after pastoral school, seminaries and theological degrees, when those hypocrites, sons of the devil stand in the pulpit, they say: "O God may I decrease and you speak through me." You see? It's a confusion! If you know that you can decrease for God to speak through you, so what did you go and look for in pastoral schools?
Pastoral school is nothing but a place where people go and learn techniques of psychological manipulation. You see? They study the reactions and behaviours of people. This is all that is called mysticism. And that's what they hide from people.
Dude what in the world are you talking about? Please go that pastor school you hate to learn how to write a coherent statement.
IF you talk like that you shouldn't have a mustache like lol
Since the process God is dependent on our volition, he can only persuade us into doing good will. This persuasion would hardly qualify as an action on his part. All this just overplays our ability to act actively and on the flipside his inability to act actively. Moreover, for all the free will contenders, this passive act of persuasion still inhibits libertarian human free will.
So basically process theology is pantheism
If what you say is true, then god is not god, and differs not a whit from us. Furthermore, you have not a shred of evidence for your views. In fact, yours is an useless thesis that makes not the blindest bit of difference to anything or anyone. It is as pointless as it is unfounded.
This is a heretical viewpoint and is a theology that is thoroughly unbiblical
Logically incoherent gobbledegook. They are creating a god in their own image..."21 Yes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship him as God or even give him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused. 22 Claiming to be wise, they instead became utter fools.">>>Romans 1:21,22.
Thank God He is greater than this philosophical garbage.
scripture quote count: 0. This is man-made philosophy, it's not even disguised as theology
Yep. They do not need Scripture to create a god in their own image. They just make stuff up as they go along.
@@Narnian77 well based off forgeries in testaments , biblical god is the arch nemesis of satan , somehow someway also that allow Job to be terrorize by satan for a bet?? Also Satan never existed in Hebrew Bible
@@aqilshamil9633 Ummmmm, you need to back up your statements with facts and sources, and you really need to read the Bible VERY carefully. We'll say a prayer for you, Aqil, that you would allow the God Who created you to speak His truth into your life👍
@@Narnian77 amen
@@Narnian77 if I'm a Christian , my name would be Sataniel my friend
You have to throw out most of Scripture in order to adopt this philosophy.
Process theologians have just created a god in their own image.
Respectfully, I disagree. I don’t think Scripture has to be thrown out to adopt process theology, rather you have to throw a literal/fundamentalist view of the Bible. The view actually helps move away from dogma and predestination.
garbage
Hmm. Very nice word salad. But zero meaningful content.
If process theology is true either God is insane for overlooking all that humanity has done or He is the most hateful and unfair being in the whole universe. #returntoortodoxy