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

From: Steve Martin <steven.dale.martin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu Jan 31 2008 - 21:13:28 EST

Burgy:

you said:

Two things I hold rather strongly:
> All of the scholars above have insights which can be useful.
> None of the philosophical positions seem to be of any lasting importance.
> One's relationship to God and Christ takes precedence over all.
>

Very true, very true. And I read your online testimony for the first time.
It was beautiful thanks.

This reminds me of something George Murphy posted a while ago in regards to
Howard Van Til's movement away from classical theism. I think it is
relevant here.

> I can't say whether or not Howard considers himself a Christian today. I
> will comment though - & this is a statement about what he has written & said
> in the public domain - that christology played a fairly small role in his
> discussions even well before he shifted significantly from traditional
> Christian views (e.g., in _The Fourth Day_ of 1986). (Again, I am
> speaking of his writings, not his personal piety.) I commented a number of
> times to him that his discussions of such ideas as "the functional integrity
> of creation" and "robust formational economy" were good as far as they went
> but were lacking in what seems to me the essential christological
> grounding. Without that they are just "theism," & whether "classical"
> theism or not makes relatively little difference.
>
> Since I seem to be the only person on this list willing to say a good word
> for process theology, I will just repeat that there are a lot of things
> worse than that. For all its problems, a process theology which has a
> strong christological emphasis is preferable to a classical theism which is
> only philosophy.
>
My own instincts say that "preferable" is probably not the right word here,
at least not for myself. (I just posted some of my own thoughts on
Polkinghorne & Process Theology at:
http://evanevodialogue.blogspot.com/2008/01/polkinghorne-quotes-7-rejecting-process.html).
 But I emphatically agree that a classical theism whose focus strays
from
the incarnate crucified & resurrected Christ is definitely a problem. And
to carry David O.'s (touch-in-cheek) statement above just a bit further:
Open theism might be "less heretical" than Process Theology, but it may also
be less heretical than a Classical Theism that demonstrates more of a
dependence on Aristotle than Jesus Christ.

-- 
Steve Martin (CSCA)
http://evanevodialogue.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 31 21:14:39 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 21:14:39 EST