Schubert Ogden My Process Theology source

2,783 Views | 19 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by Waco1947
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.umnews.org/en/news/theologian-ogden-pushed-himself-and-his-students#.XQF_dHia5qE.facebook
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"(Ogden) is most noted among theologians for a kind of blend of the existential theology of Rudolph Bultmann and the neo-classical metaphysics that comes out of Charles Hartshorne," Wood said.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.
I'm ready for debate any time, as you well know. But your method of debate is exactly what Devenish seems to caution against. You conflate your philosophical judgments with what is accurately Christian and present them as one and the same, even though they're miles apart historically.
curtpenn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.
Pot, meet kettle....
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As I said in the other thread: if you want to follow process theology, then follow process theology. Just don't make the mistake of confusing it with Christianity.

https://carm.org/what-is-process-theology

https://www.theopedia.com/process-theology
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.
I'm ready for debate any time, as you well know. But your method of debate is exactly what Devenish seems to caution against. You conflate your philosophical judgments with what is accurately Christian and present them as one and the same, even though they're miles apart historically.

Nope there is no conflation.
What is real is real.
What can be Christian is real like love or grace or hope.
What Can be Christian May not be real in accords with science such as an all power God.
An all power God although seemingly real to conservative Christians is not real scientifically.
Your faith in an all powerful God is only your personal revelation and real in real life - existence.
My faith in the notion God is love is real and provable in real life - existence and in scripture. I don't need science to back up my claim of God is love.
You need science to back up your claim of an all powerful God. There is no physics, chemistry or biology the "real stuff" of life to support your claim.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

Phillip Devenish took his own crack at explaining Ogden's work:

"Among his important contributions to Christian theology is the recognition that what is Christian and what is true are independent of each other," he said. "There's a historical judgment about what is accurately Christian and then there is a philosophical judgment about what is true. Something being Christian does not make it true, and something being true does not make it Christian, and Christian theology is responsible for both judgments."
My main problem with your posts is that you usually don't recognize this principle.
And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.
I'm ready for debate any time, as you well know. But your method of debate is exactly what Devenish seems to caution against. You conflate your philosophical judgments with what is accurately Christian and present them as one and the same, even though they're miles apart historically.

Nope there is no conflation.
What is real is real.
What can be Christian is real like love or grace or hope.
What Can be Christian May not be real in accords with science such as an all power God.
An all power God although seemingly real to conservative Christians is not real scientifically.
Your faith in an all powerful God is only your personal revelation and real in real life - existence.
My faith in the notion God is love is real and provable in real life - existence and in scripture. I don't need science to back up my claim of God is love.
You need science to back up your claim of an all powerful God. There is no physics, chemistry or biology the "real stuff" of life to support your claim.
And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Christian process theology addresses both historical Christianity and what is real.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am not orthodox nor fundamentalist nor conservative nor evangelical. I reject an old theism.
I "do" theology. I don't memorize doctrine to refute opponents. I appeal to ideas and theologies and cosmologies and reality as defined by physics, chemistry and biology.
I am an exegetical, existentialist and process theologian but not a purist on those beliefs.
I am a Christian Existentialist in the school of Paul Tillich; an Exegetical Biblical theologian in the school of Bultmann;
and a process theologian in the School of Alfred North Whitehead.
So here goes
Cosmology and Reality (Existentialism)
All we humans, have ever known in this life is this moment - now. We accumulate history but We move from the -
Has Been to the NOW to Not Yet.
But no sooner than we say "now" than it moves into the "has been" but the "not yet" is not yet BUT now as you read these words "not yet" becomes "now" and quickly the "has been."
We, humans, experience reality as the now moment but a changing moment as "time passing."
"Now" is all we have!

Every human born was, and is, will be born into this reality -including Biblical people and events and writers.

Process Reality and Theology - So what impinges on this now moment? Alfred Whitehead said that there are four grades of experience.
1. Grade 1 - Physics- Natural forces i.e. gravity, electromagnetic fields, wind, water, erosion et. All responding to each other whether a human wills them to stop or not. This was true in Bible times too.
2. Grade 2 - Rocks, dirt, Mountains, inantimaye objects on which physics acts.
3. Grade 3 is living beings me, you, my dog, etc. We are temporal - with a beginning date and an expiration date and we live in the NOW moment.
4. Grade 4 / We are human beings and of a different order by ability to think, write, speak. and we live this existential, now moment.
Physics act upon us too. For instance gravity holds us to the earth or wind can knock up down. Grades 1,2,3 do not "know" or "conceptualize." We, Grade 4 beings, feel, think, prayer, relate, etc and through those functions we influence, direct, or experience this moment.
5. The Bible Exegetical/Faith/Relational/Spiritual is Grade 5. All humans share and exist in this Grade 5 reality. For me, the proof of the Bible and its authority over is the transcendent love of God. It is a part of our lives and beyond our lives because God is a love beyond all human love in whom we have our hope.
As God transcends this world it means that God is here and beyond. God was most clearly seen in this world in Jesus Christ. God loves us and in Jesus God showed how much God loves us.
God also commanded we love (not suggested). Love especially self sacrificing love as shown by Jesus is the greatest sign of fulfilling God's love command.
If one chooses to argue with me one must begin with my premise - reality (Grades 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) is as I describe it and all humans in time lived in this reality.
Waco1947
I start with reality and then go the Bible to support the reality of the nature of God as love.
I do not start with an unsupportable premise "God is all powerful." That belief is a personal revelation that no one can argue with because it's your revelation.
Secularist believes it is magical thinking. Grade 1 reality is real to them not magical, wish fulfilling God.
"God is all powerful" is a physics statement with 0 zero proof in science. Let that notion sink in. "God is all powerful" is a scientific physic statement by definition- it has the word "power" in it and that places it within science's purview. You can't win there.
If you truly want to reach a secularist then the reality of God as love is your best course.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Christian process theology addresses both historical Christianity and what is real.
Not only addresses, according to your OP, but also distinguishes them. So the question remains, which one are you preaching?
applemacg4
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

And the main problem with your posts is You declare assertion as truth without actual debate.

This is Waco's main problem with God as well.

"Yea, hath God said?"

There is nothing new under the sun.
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Christian process theology addresses both historical Christianity and what is real.


There is no such thing as "Christian process theology."
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JXL said:

Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Christian process theology addresses both historical Christianity and what is real.


There is no such thing as "Christian process theology."

Yes there is. Here it is.
I am not orthodox nor fundamentalist nor conservative nor evangelical. I reject an old theism.
I "do" theology. I don't memorize doctrine to refute opponents. I appeal to ideas and theologies and cosmologies and reality as defined by physics, chemistry and biology.
I am an exegetical, existentialist and process theologian but not a purist on those beliefs.
I am a Christian Existentialist in the school of Paul Tillich;
An Exegetical Biblical in the school of Bultmann;
and a process theologian in the School of Alfred North Whitehead.
So here goes
Cosmology and Reality (Existentialism)
All we humans, have ever known in this life is this moment - now. We accumulate history but We move from the -
Has Been to the NOW to Not Yet.
But no sooner than we say "now" than it moves into the "has been" but the "not yet" is not yet BUT now as you read these words "not yet" becomes "now" and quickly the "has been."
We, humans, experience reality as the now moment but a changing moment as "time passing."
"Now" is all we have!

Every human born was, and is, will be born into this reality -including Biblical people and events and writers.

Process Reality and Theology - So what impinges on this now moment? Alfred Whitehead said that there are four grades of experience.
1. Grade 1 - Physics- Natural forces i.e. gravity, electromagnetic fields, wind, water, erosion et. All responding to each other whether a human wills them to stop or not. This was true in Bible times too.
2. Grade 2 - Rocks, dirt, Mountains, inantimaye objects on which physics acts.
3. Grade 3 is living beings me, you, my dog, etc. We are temporal - with a beginning date and an expiration date and we live in the NOW moment.
4. Grade 4 / We are human beings and of a different order by ability to think, write, speak. and we live this existential, now moment.
Physics act upon us too. For instance gravity holds us to the earth or wind can knock up down. Grades 1,2,3 do not "know" or "conceptualize." We, Grade 4 beings, feel, think, prayer, relate, etc and through those functions we influence, direct, or experience this moment.
5. The Bible Exegetical/Faith/Relational/Spiritual is Grade 5. All humans share and exist in this Grade 5 reality. For me, the proof of the Bible and its authority over is the transcendent love of God. It is a part of our lives and beyond our lives because God is a love beyond all human love in whom we have our hope.
As God transcends this world it means that God is here and beyond. God was most clearly seen in this world in Jesus Christ. God loves us and in Jesus God showed how much God loves us.
God also commanded we love (not suggested). Love especially self sacrificing love as shown by Jesus is the greatest sign of fulfilling God's love command.
If one chooses to argue with me one must begin with my premise - reality (Grades 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) is as I describe it and all humans in time lived in this reality.

I start with reality and then go the Bible to support the reality of the nature of God as love.
I do not start with an unsupportable premise "God is all powerful." That belief is a personal revelation that no one can argue with because it's your revelation.
Secularist believes it is magical thinking. Grade 1 reality is real to them not magical, wish fulfilling God.
"God is all powerful" is a physics statement with 0 zero proof in science. Let that notion sink in. "God is all powerful" is a scientific physic statement by definition- it has the word "power" in it and that places it within science's purview. You can't win there.
If you truly want to reach a secularist then the reality of God as love is your best course.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Cosmology and Reality (Existentialism)
All we humans, have ever known in this life is this moment - now. We accumulate history but We move from the -
Has Been to the NOW to Not Yet.
But no sooner than we say "now" than it moves into the "has been" but the "not yet" is not yet BUT now as you read these words "not yet" becomes "now" and quickly the "has been."
We, humans, experience reality as the now moment but a changing moment as "time passing."
"Now" is all we have!
I could swear I've had this conversation before. Did we smoke weed together in 7th grade?
JXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

JXL said:

Waco1947 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Waco1947 said:

"And this is all according to historical Christianity or your own philosophical judgment?"
Wrong question
'Historical Christianity?' Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Luther, Calvin, Neo orthodoxy, liberalism, existentialism, process, liberation theology? It's not an unbroken line even in , Catholicism.

It's the question you raised in your own original post. Not surprised you're afraid to address it.
Christian process theology addresses both historical Christianity and what is real.


There is no such thing as "Christian process theology."

Yes there is. Here it is.
I am not orthodox nor fundamentalist nor conservative nor evangelical. I reject an old theism.
I "do" theology. I don't memorize doctrine to refute opponents. I appeal to ideas and theologies and cosmologies and reality as defined by physics, chemistry and biology.
I am an exegetical, existentialist and process theologian but not a purist on those beliefs.
I am a Christian Existentialist in the school of Paul Tillich;
An Exegetical Biblical in the school of Bultmann;
and a process theologian in the School of Alfred North Whitehead.
So here goes
Cosmology and Reality (Existentialism)
All we humans, have ever known in this life is this moment - now. We accumulate history but We move from the -
Has Been to the NOW to Not Yet.
But no sooner than we say "now" than it moves into the "has been" but the "not yet" is not yet BUT now as you read these words "not yet" becomes "now" and quickly the "has been."
We, humans, experience reality as the now moment but a changing moment as "time passing."
"Now" is all we have!

Every human born was, and is, will be born into this reality -including Biblical people and events and writers.

Process Reality and Theology - So what impinges on this now moment? Alfred Whitehead said that there are four grades of experience.
1. Grade 1 - Physics- Natural forces i.e. gravity, electromagnetic fields, wind, water, erosion et. All responding to each other whether a human wills them to stop or not. This was true in Bible times too.
2. Grade 2 - Rocks, dirt, Mountains, inantimaye objects on which physics acts.
3. Grade 3 is living beings me, you, my dog, etc. We are temporal - with a beginning date and an expiration date and we live in the NOW moment.
4. Grade 4 / We are human beings and of a different order by ability to think, write, speak. and we live this existential, now moment.
Physics act upon us too. For instance gravity holds us to the earth or wind can knock up down. Grades 1,2,3 do not "know" or "conceptualize." We, Grade 4 beings, feel, think, prayer, relate, etc and through those functions we influence, direct, or experience this moment.
5. The Bible Exegetical/Faith/Relational/Spiritual is Grade 5. All humans share and exist in this Grade 5 reality. For me, the proof of the Bible and its authority over is the transcendent love of God. It is a part of our lives and beyond our lives because God is a love beyond all human love in whom we have our hope.
As God transcends this world it means that God is here and beyond. God was most clearly seen in this world in Jesus Christ. God loves us and in Jesus God showed how much God loves us.
God also commanded we love (not suggested). Love especially self sacrificing love as shown by Jesus is the greatest sign of fulfilling God's love command.
If one chooses to argue with me one must begin with my premise - reality (Grades 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) is as I describe it and all humans in time lived in this reality.

I start with reality and then go the Bible to support the reality of the nature of God as love.
I do not start with an unsupportable premise "God is all powerful." That belief is a personal revelation that no one can argue with because it's your revelation.
Secularist believes it is magical thinking. Grade 1 reality is real to them not magical, wish fulfilling God.
"God is all powerful" is a physics statement with 0 zero proof in science. Let that notion sink in. "God is all powerful" is a scientific physic statement by definition- it has the word "power" in it and that places it within science's purview. You can't win there.
If you truly want to reach a secularist then the reality of God as love is your best course.




You say "yes there is" (such a thing as "Christian process theology") and then you give a lengthy statement proving that there isn't.

Process theology is the philosophical and theological position that God is changing, as is the universe. Therefore, our knowledge of God must be progressing as we learn more about him and it can never rest in any absolutes, which is why process theologians deny the absolutes of God's immutability and truth. Furthermore, this would mean that absolute knowledge of God would not be achievable, and a self-revelation of God (in the person of Jesus Christ and the Bible) would also not be possible. This would open the door for humanistic philosophy and/or false theological systems to be "rationalized" by process theologians.

Logically speaking, if process theology maintains that God is progressing and changing, then given an infinite amount of time in the past, God may not have actually been God. Also, it could be argued from this perspective that there is something outside of God that works upon him, bringing him into a greater knowledge and increased greatness. This would be problematic because it would need to study what that "something" is.

In process theology, God does not know the future exhaustively. He can guess at what may or may not happen, but absolute knowledge is not attainable until events actually occur.

Process theologians deny that Jesus Christ is God in flesh and therefore mankind has no need for salvation.

Process theology denies the Scriptures which teach that God has always been God (Psalm 90:2) and that God is unchanging (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8). Of course, it denies and contradicts God's word regarding the necessity of the Savior and the deity of Christ (John 1:1, 14; Colossians 2:9).
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Process theology is the philosophical and theological position that God is changing, as is the universe. Therefore, our knowledge of God must be progressing as we learn more about him and it can never rest in any absolutes, which is why process theologians deny the absolutes of God's immutability and truth. Furthermore, this would mean that absolute knowledge of God would not be achievable, and a self-revelation of God (in the person of Jesus Christ and the Bible) would also not be possible. This would open the door for humanistic philosophy and/or false theological systems to be "rationalized" by process theologians."
You are right. God is constantly creating. Process philosophy can open the way to humanism but my mine opens to scripture because God is love. The scripture says so time and again. That's my God. Christ on the cross in love.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.