 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
a_theist
"Thy will be done."
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 286
| Posted 1/2/2003 8:32 AM (GMT -6) |   | I asked you if you had read Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes, and you replied that it was a good book, but to be careful because Hartshorne espouses a process view of God (roughly paraphrased). I am currently reading the book (Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes), and I must say that I find it highly readable (except for some parts [this scares me from reading his other works for fear that they are a lot more technical and harder to read--what process thought isn't?]) and consistent with the open view, very consistent. You mention in the preface of Trinity and Process that:
"It is our conviction that the fundamental vision of the process world view, especially as espoused by Charles Hartshorne, is correct."
Do you still hold to this view of Process Thought? It has been about 11 years since Trinity and Process was published; has your process world view changed, or do you still respect Hartshorne's theology as much as you did when you wrote the book? I earnestly want to subscribe to a process world view of God, but I am a bit apprehensive that I might be delving into the wrong theology and wasting my time to ultimately have to change my views, thus wasting precious time from books that might be of use. I value your opinion, so hit me with it Doc, is the process world view worth persuing? It seems like it from the book I am reading, but one can never truly know.
Agape,
Paul 
P.S. After Trinity and Process, did Hartshorne ever concede to a trinitarian view of God and abandon his di-polar theism? I would be interested to hear that maybe he changed his metaphysics over the years before he died. Please let me know.
P.P.S. Did Hartshorne ever change his view on a "immortality as a career after death?"
"The Creator's power (by which I mean the capacity to influence the world) is made manifest paradoxically in the vulnerable defenselessness of crucified man."
-John F. Haught
Edited by - A_Theist on 01/06/2003 10:03:41 PM
Edited by - A_Theist on 01/09/2003 10:50:56 PM | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/2/2003 11:07 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm listening too!
Tom 
"When you mix things up they get messy" Fred | | Back to Top | | |
|
SeanG
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 278
| Posted 1/3/2003 8:23 PM (GMT -6) | | Interesting question. I am just finishing up a book that deals with confronting process theology as well as the open view [theism] that the doc seems to adhere to. The book, God Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents God, mentions specifically that if it can (and it does) refute the Open View, then Process and the other theologies naturally fall to the weigh side. So obviously the book is geared at dismantling the open view, causing me to come closer to rejecting this view on both philosophical and theological proofs.
Some of my favorite contributors (although there were others) are: D. A. Carson, R. Douglas Geivett, William Lane Craig, and Eric L. Johnson. The book is a high recommend for those shoring up either viewpoint. And it deals quite a bit with the Doc specifically.
SeanG!"Evolution is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links not seen." ~ An adaptation of Hebrews 11:1 | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:54 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|