Not exact matches
«Sure,
eternal life
is transcendent life,» they admit; «but in the meantime, we
're called to love our neighbors as ourselves, which means attending actively to the welfare of the world.
Over and above the «special relevance» which selected
eternal objects may have in relation to particular, finite actual entities, it
is necessary that there
be a kind of «relevance in general,» a real togetherness of all
eternal objects amongst themselves, effected by an
eternal, infinite actuality: «
Transcendent decision includes God's decision.
It takes our divine praises into the realm of the
transcendent and the
eternal, and it
is the music's sacred character which enables this.
So long as Christianity knows the Crucifixion as a vicarious sacrifice for a totally guilty humanity, as the innocent sacrifice of the
eternal Son of God to a just but merciful Father, it can never celebrate the definitive victory of the Crucifixion; for such a redeemed humanity remains in bondage to the
transcendent Judge, and must continue to
be submissive to his distant and alien authority, ever pleading for mercy when it falls away from his absolute command.
We may summarize its affirmations as holding that God
is a nontemporal actual entity,
transcendent, immanent,
eternal, cause of itself, the basis for reasons of the highest absoluteness, and possibly the source of the
eternal principles of value.
Eternal objects, for example,
are connected inter se: they
are all mutually
transcendent in respect to their individual essences; but many
are mutually immanent in respect to their relational essences (SMW, chapter X).
Moreover, as eternally ingressed in God's primordial nature, each
eternal object
is, relative to the temporal actualities, a
transcendent capacity for their determination.
nihilism: compassion doesn't really exist evolutionary naturalism: compassion
is a foil for survival goals religion: compassion serves a
transcendent reality (in so far as it reflects that reality) Christianity (in particular): compassion
is the most powerful force in history, and reveals God's
eternal heart
Hence, new qualities that emerge
are not merely empirical qualities of new «occasions,» they
are also «
eternal objects,» belonging to a world of what Plato called forms or ideas; they
are both immanent and
transcendent: «Here Alexander inclines towards an empiricist tradition... which identifies that which
is known with the fleeting sense - datum of the moment; Whitehead, with his mathematical training, represents a rationalist tradition which identifies that which
is known with necessary and
eternal truths.
But there
is a tension between that ministry — our ministry as followers of Christ — and our tendency to view these words as timeless,
eternal and
transcendent.
As Ogden indicates, this can
be expressed in nonmythological language: «Jesus» office as the Christ consists precisely in his
being the bearer, through word and deed and tragic destiny, of the
eternal word of God's love, which
is the
transcendent meaning of all created things and the final event before which man must decide his existence.»
In a physical feeling, an
eternal object
is felt as immanent, while in a conceptual feeling, the
eternal object
is felt as
transcendent (see PR 239f.
A satire in dialogue form: «A Dissolution of the Many into One Act (Which
is indubitably an Epiphany of
Eternal Being, Immanent in that Act, which
is History, but which inevitably shatters History, and
is thus Dialectically
Transcendent...)»
Thus there
is a polarity in this concept of God: he
is both abstract and concrete; he
is both «
eternal» and «everlasting»; he
is both himself and yet endlessly related; he
is both
transcendent and immanent; he
is both the chief principle of explanation and yet participant, working with, and influenced by, all that
is to
be explained.
A Dissolution of the Many into One Act (Which
is Indubitably an Epiphany of
Eternal Being, Immanent in that Act, which
is History, but which inevitably shatters History, and
is thus Dialectically
Transcendent, and so on.
Can he
be both temporal and
eternal, loving and removed, personal and metaphysical, immanent to the world and
transcendent of it?
He
is both abstract and concrete,
eternal and temporal,
transcendent and immanent.
The history of salvation as it consummates in Christ, must
be presented as an organic whole, in which «all things do hold together» in Christ» (Col. 1:17) and in which the personal, authoritative revelation of a personal and
transcendent God comes to its fulness in the Incarnation of God, personally in the
Eternal Word, made esh for us men, and for our salvation.
Another set of predictable terms and themes
are pressed into service to describe Calvin's vision of God: distant,
transcendent, sovereign, omnipotent, electing some to salvation and reprobating the rest to
eternal damnation and misery
Since it excludes the possibility of a temporal aspect in God, the presentation of God as «a
being at once actual,
eternal, immanent, and
transcendent» (Process 94) could not have
been written from the standpoint of the concept of God in two natures developed in the last chapter of that book.
If norms
are something like
eternal objects, not like actual entities, then their normativeness can bind the progress of the actual world without
being transcendent individuals, Platonic realism does not entail that the Form of the Good
is an individual
being.
To speak of «God» properly — in a way, that
is, consonant with the teachings of orthodox Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, Vedantic and Bhaktic Hinduism, Bahá» í, much of antique paganism, and so forth —
is to speak of the one infinite ground of all that
is:
eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, uncreated, uncaused, perfectly
transcendent of all things and for that very reason absolutely immanent to all things.
Other qualifications
are not thereby excluded, of course, and, as we noted earlier, Whitehead says that, besides
being eternal, God
is also actual, immanent, and
transcendent.
God
is presented there as «a
being at once actual,
eternal, immanent, and
transcendent.»
The notion of God, which will
be discussed later (cf. Part V),
is that of an actual entity immanent in the actual world, but transcending any finite cosmic epoch — a
being at once actual,
eternal, immanent, and
transcendent.
The beautiful
is how the
transcendent draws our desire for pleasure away from the mutable and toward the
eternal.
It may
be that words like «
eternal,»
transcendent» and «sacred» offend some intransigents, cut the crowds, and alienate the cheap thrill - seekers in a buyers» market of religion.