Back
Table Talk
Process Theology and Finite Godism
"Process theology is the most dangerous heresy presently
threatening the Christian Faith. Process thought is a total capitulation
to paganism."
(Ronald Nash, Professor and Head of the department
of philosophy and religion at Western Kentucky University)
Our discussion this evening centers around
the belief that God is not infinite in nature and power but finite or limited.
Variations of this view are held by such cults as the Jehovah's Witnesses,
Mormonism, and Unitarianism and advanced by a number of "Evangelical" thinkers
in recent years.
Our interest in the subject in important
not only because of the cults advocating this view, but also because of
its far-reaching theological implications; if this doctrine is true, as
process theologians maintain, it will require a complete re-thinking of
traditional theism by Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox scholars. If it
is false and cannot stand the test of orthodoxy, it must be rejected.
So, our goal this evening is to examine
process theology or finite godism, discuss its theological implications
and test it by the Scriptures to see whether it is in accord with God's
revealed truth.
History of "Process Theology"
"Process theology" is a modern colloquial term for
a view dating back to the early 5th century B.C. The pre-Socratic philosopher
Diogenes of Apollonia argued that everything must be constituted of fundamentally
the same sort of matter, on the ground that radically different kinds could
not interact. Hence God is in the world the way a soul or mind is in a
body. Today this doctrine is called panentheism. (Not to be confused with
pantheism which is the belief that God is the world and the world is God.)
A panentheist holds that God is not infinite in nature and power but finite
or limited and is in a continual process of change. The panentheist god
is viewed as having two poles: an actual temporal pole (which stresses
the organic relationship God has with the world process- His immanence)
and a potential eternal pole - His transcendence), hence the term, bipolar.
Another 5th century philosopher, Heraclitus,
taught that there is no "being," but all is "becoming" in a dynamic process
of constant change. His famous saying was "No one steps in the same river
twice." He believed everything was in a state of flux; nothing is fixed,
perfect, immutable, not even the gods. Parmenides, on the other hand stressed
that all is "being," static, fixed, and immutable.
This seeming contradiction led the great
philosopher, Plato, to find a synthesis between "being" and "becoming"
eventually advocating a concept of a finite god who exists between the
World of Ideas and the World of Matter. The Demiurge or finite god of Plato
was not omnipotent (all- powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), or sovereign.
In fact, Plato's god did not exist prior to or independent of reality but
was a finite part of a finite world.
Scholars are quick to point out that the
Demiurge of Plato and the Unmoved Mover of Aristotle (both finite gods)
fit neatly into the broad category of panentheism. The process view of
the world was later developed by George Hegel (1831) who taught a developmental
unfolding of God in history; Herbert Spencer (1903) who taught a kind of
cosmic evolutionism; Henri Bergson (1907) who identified God with a creative
evolutionary process -reviving the Heraclitian concept that "all is in
flux;" Samuel Alexander (1920) who taught a finite view of a god who did
not make the world but "emerges" from it; Edgar Brightman (1884-1953) who
was responsible for introducing the concept of a finite god into the United
Methodist Church, tried to solve the problem of evil by limiting the power
and knowledge of God. The person known more than any other for his contributions
in modern process thought is Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) whose books
Process and Reality (1929), Adventures of Ideas (1933) and Modes of Thought
(1938) represent the first systematic presentation of bipolar theism. Benard
Loomer, Bernard MeLand, Charles Hartshorne, John Cobb, and Shubert Ogden
represent variations of Whitehead's theology.
As mentioned above, there are a number of
"Evangelical" scholars who hold a finite view of God. For the purpose of
this paper, we will only mention a few worth noting. Richard Rice (a Seventh-day
Adventist and associate professor of theology at Loma Linda University)
advocates an "Open" God theology, in which God is defined as a finite being
ignorant of the future and is himself caught up in the "process of becoming;"
Stephen T. Davis who states that "God has the ability to tell a lie...to
do evil...to break a promise;" and, Clark Pinnock (once a strong defender
of inerrancy and authority of Scripture) stands against classical theism,
rejecting God's immutability, infallibility, and perfection.
There are also a number of cults which follow
in the train of finite godism. Mormonism teaches that God was once a man
as we are now and has reached a finite state of exaltation but continues
to grow in his "godhood." The Jehovah's Witnesses teach that God does not
know all the details of the future; that He is not omnipresent, immutable,
perfect or triune in nature. Anyone familiar with the Witnesses view of
Christ know also that Jesus is a created god, a spirit creature as finite
as the rest of creation. Then, there are the Unitarians who are the modern
counterparts of the Socinians of the 17th century. They taught that God
was finite, limited in knowledge (He knows all that is "knowable") rejecting
the orthodox doctrines of the Trinity, the Fall, redemption, the deity
of Christ and the Holy Spirit, and the inspiration and authority of Scripture.
The Socinians were also the first to place the theory of a finite god in
a confession of faith (1652, John Biddle).
At one time the Worldwide Church of God
(Herbert Armstrong) held a panentheistic view of God; since their reform
several years ago, they have rejected these teachings and maintain orthodox
trinitarianism across the board!
Issues as Stake
Process theology or finite godism has become a very
complex study. There have been literally volumes written in its defense.
In order to get at the heart of the matter, we will condense the processian
viewpoint (remember there are variations- not all will agree with each
other on every point) and then discuss the theological implications to
those points.
Process theologians argue their finite god
beliefs on the basis that the traditional view of God is tainted with pagan
Greek philosophy, particularly the Aristotelian notion of God as an "Unmoved
Mover." They advocate we return to a "Hebraic" conception of God-a God
who is dynamic, changing, relational, and eminently personal rather than
the classical view of God as static, unchanging, and unable to relate to
His creation on a personal level. In effect, the process theologians are
concerned with having a God who is actively involved in the affairs of
this world. Therefore, their god is a god who lives in time, who responds
to our actions as they occur, and who lives not in the eternal "Now" of
classical theism.
Process theologians also argue that the
God of classical theism leaves no room for man to be significantly free
if He has perfect knowledge of everything we will choose. Our choices are
therefore fixed.
Finally, process theologians would argue
(as would the Mormons, the Unitarians and the Jehovah's Witnesses) that
God's nature is incomprehensible and therefore subject to the limitations
of human understanding. Process theologians are rationalist at heart- the
"final court of appeal" for them is whether their system of belief is coherent
and best explains human experience in the world.
As we stated earlier, a process or finite
view of God has serious theological implications. If their view is correct,
the whole of Christian theology needs re-thinking by those of us who consider
ourselves classical theists. The issues at stake are these: 1.) the doctrine
of Creation ex nihilo ("out of nothing")- Process theology teaches three
ultimate realities: creativity (philosophical idea of "substance," eternal
objects (similar to Platonic "forms," and actual entities (of which God
is the greatest); all three have always interdependently co-existed; 2.)
the doctrine of God itself (His nature, character, attributes, and decrees)-
Process theology's god is finite, limited, bound in time, unable to know
the future- He is not Omniscient; He is not Omnipotent (all-powerful) and
Sovereign, but ontologically limited by the freedom of all other creatures
in the universe and He is not Perfect; He changes and grows through interaction
with other existing entities in the world; 3.) the doctrines of the Incarnation
and the Atonement- Process theology leaves no room for finality regarding
these doctrines simply because their god doesn't know the outcome of future
events; 4.) the doctrine of Special Revelation - because of their interpretation
of the priority of "events" or "moments," Process theology rules out any
real distinction between natural and supernatural acts or decrees of God.
Biblical Response to Process Theology
The best response to process theology or finite godism
is found in the Scriptures themselves! The Bible claims to be the special
revelation of God to mankind (along with creation (general revelation)
and testifies to His nature and character. God's Word is His self-disclosure,
His revealing of Himself to His creatures. Therefore the proper approach
to the subject is to ask "What does the Bible teach regarding God's nature,
character, attributes and decrees?" Those who hold to finite godism speculate,
philosophize, and debate over the nature of God not from the biblical data
available but from human experience and rationality. Because they cannot
comprehend fully the nature of God (who can?!), they humanize Him in order
to bring Him down to their level.
While we recognize that God gave us minds
to think, reason, and ponder all that is before us in both general and
special revelation, our understanding is limited by virtue of the fact
that we are finite, and He is infinite! Therefore, if the Scriptures affirm
a doctrine such as the Trinity (Gen. 1:27; Prov. 30:4; John 20:28; Heb.
1:8; 2 Cor. 3:17,18), or that God created the universe out of nothing and
is distinct from it (Gen. 1:1,2; Ecc. 12:1; Isa. 40:28; Rom. 1:20) or God
became man in the miracle of the Incarnation (Matt. 1:18-25; John 1:1,
14), we must believe it! Whether our finite minds can fully comprehend
these doctrines or not is irrelevant! When the Jehovah's Witnesses reject
the doctrine of hell because it is an "awful" doctrine and "a loving God
would never send someone to a place like that," they exalt "reason" over
faith and deny clear biblical teaching. When a process theologian or a
cultist says that God is changing, that He is finite, limited in His knowledge
of the future, we need to find out what the Bible has to say on the subject
and draw conclusions from the revealed facts. For example, James 1:17 states
"Every good thing bestowed and every perfect gift is from above, coming
down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow
of turning." The text literally says God is immutable or unchangeable.
God is not subject to change in His being, attributes, or determinations.
Other passages of Scripture indicate the same thing: 1 Sam. 15:29; Ps.
102:26,27; Heb. 6:18).
What about God's knowledge? Is He in fact
Omniscient as classical theism claims or is He limited in knowledge as
process or finite godism teaches? What does the Bible say? Notice the following
passages: Psalm 147:5..."His understanding is infinite." Matt. 11:21,23:
God knows all things, actual and potential; Isa. 41:22: God knows all things
past; Heb. 4:13: present; and Isa. 46:10: future. The facts of Scripture
present God as the All-knowing God. All things, past, present, and future
acts are eternally present to God. Because God is all-knowing, infinite,
perfect in His own being, He cannot by definition be limited in any way;
there can be no increase or decrease in His knowledge.
What about God's immutable counsels or decrees?
Process theologians teach God is limited in knowledge and by his relation
to other entities in the universe therefore he cannot know the future nor
predict its outcome. But the Scriptures clearly declare that God's purpose
is "unchangeable" (Heb. 6:17), that He "works out all things after the
counsel of His own will." (Eph. 1:11), whatever He plans comes to pass
(Isa. 46:10) and cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2). Process theology is refuted
on this point by detailed, accurate divine prophecy which clearly speaks
of God's decreeing them and bringing them to pass in minute detail. (Acts
2:23; 1 Peter 1:20, and Rev. 13:8 all speak of a contingency plan of God
and teach that Christ was crucified by the predetermined and foreordained
councel of God.) The god of process theology provides little if any confidence
that he is in control of our lives, never mind the rest of the universe!
As Charnock once said, (permit me to paraphrase) So what if the foreknowledge
of God and the liberty of the will cannot be fully reconciled by man. Should
we deny a perfection in God to support a liberty in ourselves?
Conclusion
When we are dealing with those who hold a process
or finite view of God, we need to remember that many of them present their
views fully ignorant of the ramifications of their view. They simply have
not thought out, from a purely biblical perspective, the dangers inherent
in believing in a god who is unable to save them for all eternity! This
is a classic doctrine invented by fallen minds, skewed by sin and depravity
and energized by the god of this world who takes every opportunity to turn
the hearts of men and women from the true Gospel to myths and heresy.
It is the God of classical theism which
offers to the world the plan of the ages, not the god of process theology
who second guesses the future and cannot offer real hope and assurance
for an eternity in heaven! It is the God of the Bible who is both transcendent
and eminent revealing Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ and indwells
the believer by the Person and power of the Holy Spirit. The God of the
Bible is sovereign over His creation though He acts and intervenes in the
affairs of our life as He so chooses. He is not the absentee landlord of
the Deist' but our loving heavenly Father who cares for us more than we
could ever imagine (Matt.6: 25-34; 1 Pet. 5:7)!
We need to pray for and reach out to the
panentheist in our community- they're here in different shades and varieties:
the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Unitarians and perhaps others.
Though they deny the "Lord that bought them" (2 Pet. 2:2), He is no respector
of persons; He loves them as He loves us!
Dan
|
