Thesis Statement..3
Research Question3
Introduction.3
1. Background of Process Theology3
2. Core Concepts of Process Theology4
2.1 Concept of World Creation4
2.2 Concept of God Immutability5
2.3 Concept of God Sovereignty.5
2.4 Concept of After-Life6
2.5 Concept of Trinity.6
2.6 Concept of Jesus Christ7
3. Relation between Process Theology and Bible..8
4. Criticism of Process Theology...8
Process Theology
Thesis Statement:
The concepts of process theology are quite different from those people used to associate with traditional Christian theology.
Research Question:
Does process theology represent a relevant alternative to traditional Christian thinking?
Introduction
This research paper aimed at description of the process theology as an independent movement and how it is different from core Christian beliefs. The process theology offers another view at the ideas represented in the Holy Scriptures that many Christian people used to believe in. The main concept of process theology are described and compared to those of traditional Christian theology. The relation of process theology to the Bible was described and discussed in detail. Criticism of process theology was represented with the discussion of contradictory issues between Christian and process theology.
1. Background of Process Theology
Process theology has emerged in the nineteenth century and was developed by A.N. Whitehead (1861-1947) and Charles Hartshorne (1897-2000). It represents a wider view at Christian religion offering a picture that is distinct from what people used to reconstitute in their mind. The founders of process theology movement deny static nature of reality. They consider reality as ongoing process1. God is seen as an active participant of the process. Besides, in accord with process theology, God has two natures – eternal and temporal. Like in panentheism, God simultaneously presents beyond and within the world. These are the main differences of this movement from Christian religion core concepts.
Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas were the first thinkers who had greatly contributed into the development of this movement. They distinguished between “being” and “becoming” characterizing process theology. Further, the movement was influenced by Swiss and French philosophers Secretan and Lequier who stated that the liberty of becoming is above His sustainability. Then it was influenced by the number of Jewish theologians, such as Max Kadushin, Levi Olan, Milton Steinberg and Harry Slominsky. Some of process theologians attempted to integrate process theology and The New Thought alternative of Christianity. This attempt was made by Deb Whitehouse and Alan Anderson. Richard Stadelmann offered his view protecting the figure of Jesus Christ in process theology.
2. Core Concepts of Process Theology
Difference between process theology and traditional views are represented by the difference in interpreting several concepts related creation of universe, immutability of God, God’s sovereignty, the concept of after-life and Trinity doctrine, concept of Jesus.
2.1 Concept of World Creation
In accordance with the Bible, God created earth and heavens (Genesis 1:1). On the contrary, in accord with process theology, God modified the world which was already created, but He did not create it by Himself2. The supporters of process theology stated that the world is eternal and it did not emerge from nothing3. Also, they questioned God’s absolute authority unlikely to traditional Christians who used to rely on Bible which stated that all things were created by the word of God4. Thus, God is not seen as powerful and omnipotent on the contrary to traditional views.
2.2 Concept of God Immutability
Another difference relates immutability of God. Christians consider God as someone static who never changes under any circumstances5. Process theologians believe that the world and God could change together with processes that occur in the universe. Interestingly, the universe is supposed to obtain greater power than God6. They also consider that God and the world change with the changes that occur in the universe. These are the two mutually-affected processes. Besides, God is not seen as determinative entity of the world processes as believed by the Christians. The power of God over evils is questioned as He does not change together with people and circumstances. This is supposed to be the main difference between Christian view and process theology.
2.3 Concept of God Sovereignty
In Christianity, God is vested by absolute power. He is considered the beginning and the end, He controls the processes on earth and in heaven, life and death. Thus, God possesses
immeasurable power over everything and everybody7. Process theologians do not consider God to be absolutely sovereign. God is endowed by relational power which assists realization of people’s desires and aspirations. In the opinion of process theologians God does not have any power over negative forces8. Thus, He cannot save the mankind from evil; hence, Christians cannot be protected from sufferings by Him. Also, the followers of that school deny the ability of God to deliver people. On the contrary, process theologians stated that God can crumble influenced by social injustice and negative powers9. As God’s saving and protecting power is questionable, He is submitted to the universe processes, He is becoming similar to plain people, therefore, and His power is not universal. Both the followers of
2.4 Concept of After-Life
Christian and process theology agree that there is after-life. The similarity is that both theological schools consider that after the end of physical life, a new life begins. However, there are many differences in the perception of relation between people and God after physical death. In accordance to Christian theology human beings die, resurrect and then live eternally. God remains distinct and should be worshiped. Unlikely to Christian theology, process theology stated that people are transformed to gods and become immortal after physical death. Thus, they do not distinguish between human beings and God vesting them with divine power.
2.5 Concept of Trinity
Christians worship triune God who is God the father, God the son and the Holy Spirit. These three persons in one are interdependent and have equal divine power. The concept of Trinity
is totally denied by the process theologians.
In addition, the concept of Jesus Christ as a divine person and the son of God is also denied by this school. As they refute the existence of Jesus Christ the existence of Trinity is also questionable.
However, the followers of process theology are convinced that the world as it is is an evidence of supremacy of evil. Hence, the Holy Spirit cannot be recognized since it is to provide self-control for people in Christianity. Process theologians do not recognize the power of the Holy Spirit. They also asserted that the power of evil is incontrollable.
2.6 Concept of Jesus Christ
Finally, the concept of Jesus in Christian theology is definitely distinct from the concept of process theology. In Holy Scriptures calls Jesus the son of God being one of the three persons in the Holy Trinity10. In the process theology Jesus is considered a human being like any other person. They refute the fact that Jesus possesses divine power as well11. However, process theologians acknowledge the fact that Jesus was assigned by God to undertake a mission due to his special nature. As it is known from the Holy Scriptures, Jesus Christ was born from a virgin. Also, he is considered by Christian theologians to be a reason of all things that exist in this world. Process theology contradicts Christian conviction that all thing could have existed unless Jesus foreordained them. Christians put virgin birth in the first place unlikely to process theologians. On the contrary to this view process theologians pay little attention to the fact. They are more inclined to consider Jesus human being rather than god of demigod. According to the Holy Scriptures, Jesus is equal to God, he saw Him and propagated His word. The fact is disputed in the process theologians’ circles. They stated that Jesus was not a divine person, thus, he cannot be assumed to be equal to God12.
3. Relation between Process Theology and Bible
The Bible has been considered the main book for Christians for many centuries. The Bible is often identified as God himself¹³. There was the word in the beginning and that word was God himself. The Bible represented Ten Commandments which are the rules good Christians should obey accordingly to supreme prescription. Accordingly to process theology assertion, the information represented in the Bible is not accurate.
In the opinion of process theologians, in the Bible the human expressions were describedi. Besides, they consider that the facts described in the Bible could have been changed because of different purposes or in accordance with the difference in perception of reality by different people. Hence, process theologians do not attribute any divine power to the Bible noting that it does not have any authority in contemporary society14.
4. Criticism of Process Theology
Process theology represents the view that is significantly different from what people used to believe in. In fact, process theologians offer an opposite view to that was formed by the
centuries15. They questioned the authority of the Bible, the origin of Jesus Christ and even attempted to change the cornerstones of Christian religion. However, many of their assertions are disputable and can be easily demolished.
For example, process theologians do not distinguish between human beings and God. They also stated that people are transformed to God after death16. However, it is not clear whether any person can be transformed to God. Christian religion offers a distinction of after-life for just and unjust people.
Secondly, process theology undermines the foundation of Christian faith not offering anything instead. In addition, they stated that God does not have power over evil. This assertion can destroy the initial faith. There is no need in faith which does not give the confidence in better future. It is in human nature to aspire for good life and delivery rather than being frustrated because of hope for the best17.
Another objection related the assertion that Jesus Christ was not the God’s son or was an ordinary man. However, many historians prove that Jesus Christ was a historical person and he could work miracles and heal people. However, most of his deeds were described in the Bible that was called untrue18.
The Bible was also called a collection of human experiences by the process theologians. They stated that the life of any person cannot be documented and then referenced like the life of
________________________
16Simoni-Wastila, Henri. “Is Divine Relativity Possible? Charles Hartshorne on God's
17 Mesle, Robert C. Process-Relational Philosophy. An Introduction to Alfred North Whitehead. New York: Templeton Foundation Press, 2008.
18Sherburne, Donald W. “Whitehead's Psychological Physiology.” Southern Journal of Philosophy no 7 (1999): 401-407.
Jesus Christ19. However, there are many examples of great human lives people lived and those examples are worth being followed20. The Bible is an example of how people should live and what they should do to be just. The Bible is a unique book and there are no any
analogues to it21. Jesus Christ is the person who played an exceptional role in the history of mankind. No person had the honor to be worshiped like Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ would be an ordinary man his honor never expands all over the world without a strong reason.
Conclusion
Process theology is a movement that emerged in the middle of the nineteenth century A.N. Whitehead and C. Hartshorne. This movement represented an alternative to the traditional Christian theology attempting to offer the view that was quite different from existing Christian concepts. However, process theology does not seem viable alternative to Christian theology. Undoubtedly, the concepts of process theology are interesting because they provide an alternative opinion that has a right to exist. On the other hand, process theologians are
prone to offer groundless arguments which do not constitute a valid point. Thus, traditional
