It is the doctrine of panentheism (all in God) as distinct
from classical theism (Birch 1990).
Whatever orthodox believers may think of Kenny's journey over these decades
from classical theism to something vaguer, he is at least an equal - opportunity basher: For his aversion to absolutism can equally well be employed against the New Atheists, who affect an apodictic absolutism in their argumentation that makes them as impregnable to counterevidence as anything found in a creationist textbook.
Not exact matches
The God of
classical theism is a being who is, in principle, ontologically independent
from the world.
In terms of Whitehead's total philosophy the move toward a temporal nature of God seems easy enough, but it was such a novel departure
from traditional Western
classical theism that it is no wonder that Whitehead was so long blind to these possibilities.
This traditional Western conception of deity — this
classical theism — also teaches that God exists
from the divine and of the divine; aseity is taken to be the root attribute of the divine.
The rest of the book rehearses the main tenets of
classical theism, all of which can be inferred
from the deceptively simple premise of God's immateriality.
So they transferred the concept of infinity
from matter to the divine, which laid the foundation for most of the philosophical moves that have come to be associated with
classical theism.
From the perspective of black theology, the prevailing
classical Western (white)
theism is logically, existentially, and religiously anathema.
There is nothing in the theory of evolution, nor in astronomy, or in geology, nor in paleontology, or any other branch of the sciences which contradicts Christianity, or any other type of
theism (except Mormonism — we know scientifically that the Indian peoples of the Americas are not descended
from the Jews — which is a key point of belief for them, much more central than there having been a literal Garden of Eden is for
classical Christianity or Judaism).
Alston quotes a passage
from Man's Vision of God which he takes to imply that if one rejects any of the propositions of
classical theism one must reject them all, since they are «inseparable aspects of one idea.»
Process theologians can share with other critics in pointing out that
classical theism developed its doctrines on assumptions derived
from Greek rather that biblical thought.
Instead of rejecting every idea of an active and acting God when she rejects
classical theism, Sölle might profit
from approaching empirically the working of grace as Wieman did.
Postconservative theologians are moving away
from classical Christian
theism and toward an «open view of God.»
By working out a neoclassical theory of nonliteral religious discourse consistent with his neoclassical
theism generally, he has not only overcome the notorious contradictions involved in
classical theism's use of analogy and other modes of nonliteral language, he has also given good reasons for thinking that our distinctively modern reflection about God results
from two movements of thought, not simply
from one.
Yet
classical theism is acutely aware of its divergence
from most philosophies.
One can not sensibly dispute that the unchanging, simple, and necessary God of
classical theism, if he exists, would differ
from our changing, composite, contingent universe in requiring no cause of his own.
She critiques
classical theism for modeling divine being on the root metaphor of motion derived
from the non-personal physical world.
I should now be willing to suggest that it is a willingness to take the axiological feature as ultimately determinative for the attribution of divinity that characterizes all modern forms of so - called ethical
theism and distinguishes them
from the
classical tradition.
Panentheists of the Whiteheadian and Hartshornean variety have much to offer at this junction (since a very explicit effort is made to reconcile
classical theism and pantheism), but considering that position would be a digression
from our purpose here.
It was this understanding of the relation between accident, chance, self - determination, evil and suffering, and a persuasive God that was the light I needed in order to escape
from the omnipotent God of
classical theism.
Classical theism, understood
from within a Trinitarian framework, is fundamental to their theology.
As Hasker emphasizes, his free will version of traditional
theism differs
from the
classical version, held by Augustine, Thomas, Luther, and Calvin, precisely on this point — that this
classical version held that all of our feelings, thoughts, and actions are in reality wholly determined by God, so that we have freedom only in a compatibilist sense — or, otherwise stated, that our feeling of freedom is an illusion.
For twenty - five centuries of Western philosophy and theology, apart
from Judaism, only two forms of philosophical
theism were widely known: what I call
classical theism and
classical pantheism, the latter best known as Stoicism (until Spinoza); the former was chiefly Islamic or Christian, except for some among the Jews.