Re: [asa] Re: on TE and PT, a response to Gregory

From: David Opderbeck <>
Date: Thu Jan 31 2008 - 15:58:14 EST

Burgy -- sounds more like open theism than PT. They are distinct though
possibly overlapping categories. Open theism is less heretical :-)

On Jan 31, 2008 3:57 PM, j burg <> wrote:

> On 1/31/08, Michael Roberts <> wrote:
> >
> > The main problem with a discussion on PT on this list is that none hold
> to
> > PT so wont be the best to lead a discussion on it.
> I think that I may hold to a variation of process theology.
> My theology holds that God and the created universe are separate; God
> existed before the universe. I am not sure the creation was ex-nililo,
> but it may have been; that point seems to be unimportant.
> I hold that God can be -- and often is -- surprised by our decisions.
> How far that goes I do not know.
> It seems likely to me that over the eons God has "played" with his
> creation. Does that mean that there have been evolutionary paths not
> taken -- or paths taken which could not, even in theory, be explained
> by natural causes? I think so.
> I hold that humanity is, itself, non-natural -- supernatural, if you
> will. All I mean by that is that any of us is capable of changing the
> material universe, usually very slightly, in ways that cannot, even in
> principle, be "explained" by natural causation. I suspect that to some
> extent the animal kingdom (my lab, for instance) also participate in
> this.
> But all the above I hold only provisionally; none of it seems to be of
> primary importance to my Christian faith. It is just philosophical
> rambling, akin to a group of college sophomores with a buzz on. <G>
> Burgy

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 31 15:59:25 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 15:59:25 EST