Process Theology - A Brief Analysis (not comprehensive)

The discussion of theology has many voices and many trends involved, some which differ greatly from one another and others which are virtually identical. This paper is focused upon a theology that differs greatly from Orthodox Christian theology; this theology is known as process theology. Samuel Powell defines process theology as “a set of ideas” rather than “a church that demands total belief from its members.” This theological trend strives to harmonize faith and science and so abolish the controversy that is constantly taking place between the two. In the words of Powell: “Theology has nothing to fear and much to learn from science.” This theology believes that everything is in process and that the God and creation never stop progressing and developing toward some unknown point at which the task of the process will be fulfilled; everything is constantly in process. In order to comprehend what process theology believes we must take a look into its various doctrines regarding God, Christ, Scripture, revelation, etc. For this paper we will examine the four specifically mentioned and strive to discover what is so appealing about this theology and what its implications are for Christian faith.

The doctrine of God that one finds in process theology has some similarities to that of orthodox Christian tradition, but it also differs on specific points which are important to the Christian faith. One point of interest is that process theology believes that God is constantly changing as he experiences new things. Powell writes that “events in the universe have an impact on God’s experiences and being. They contribute to (they constitute) God’s life.” This stems from the philosophical side of process theology which holds to a naturalistic theism. According to John Write, naturalistic theism dictates that “God is every bit as ‘natural’ as the ‘world.’ God and the world comprise a common, natural realm in which all is ‘becoming,’ except God’s primordial (eternal or abstract) nature.” This supports the process theory that God does not change in that he is constantly striving toward a specific goal for himself and the rest of the universe, yet at the same time process theology also indicates that God changes as he progresses toward that goal, with only his focus and intent being unchanged.

Process theology understands the role of God as creator in a different way than Orthodox Christian tradition. In process thought, in order for God to be God he must always be creating, just as he always has been creating. Thomas Oord considers the idea that God created out of nothing to be wholly unbiblical, even opposed to Scripture, and proposes that such a belief should be thrown out. Oord instead brings a different way of viewing creation to the table, a view in which “God creates out of creation, because God’s nature is love.” Love is of primary importance to Oord and it drives his entire understanding of creation. He considers that a true view of creation must recognize the existence of something because of the important fact that the Word was with God at the beginning and God’s loving and creating nature suggest that he has always been acting in this way. “In each moment of God’s everlasting life, God creates something new from what God created in the past. God’s creating has always been occurring in the past and will always occur in the future.” Thus we find that in process theology, God as creator is essential, but it must be in the understanding that God is always creator and thus is always creating.

John Cobb, Jr., agrees with Oord and considers that Genesis 1:1-2 is not speaking of Christ creating out of nothing; he instead looks at the description of the world as formless as indicating that God is creating out of something and thereby is “bringing into being richer and richer forms, or formed things” out of that which is described as formless. Just as in Oord’s description of the creating God, we find the idea of an ongoing process of creating, not a singular event, but a process working toward some future fulfillment. “In the beginning, in every beginning, God was creating, and in the continuation, God continues to create.”

Process theology also questions the omnipotence of God. David Ray Griffin sums up the argument when he says that “a theistic postmodernity, to be viable, must challenge the idea of divine power traditionally associated with the generic idea of God.” For Griffin, understanding God to be omnipotent makes believing in him impossible, and so Griffin rejects the idea of an omnipotent God. He claims that this view of God drove the modern world to reject God; thus, in the postmodern era we must bring to light the understanding of God that is not omnipotent, in order that people might once again believe in God.

Process theology understands Jesus Christ in a totally different way than Christian tradition. Nathan Kurr explains that the Jesus of process theology “unveils what God is like by demonstrating what human life can become when its potential is fulfilled.” This view destroys the idea that Jesus Christ is anything but a perfect human being; it promotes the idea that any person can achieve a state of Christlikeness in that they reach the full potential that God desires for all humanity to reach. Jesus is not the only incarnate one, but anyone may be incarnate because it is a “human decision to accept the divine aim [of God for man], a decisive moment in one’s own subjective self-determination.”

Process theology also addresses Scripture quite differently than Christian tradition. Process theology considers the Bible to be “one illustration of how God is active in all history – except for one important difference. The Bible is a record of the many different kinds of divine messages received throughout history.” This view makes the Bible into merely a kind of guidebook to God, a tool to understand how God might act in the future rather than an authoritative Word to live by. The Bible is also considered to prove that God is changing and that he can be changed by external influences. Stories like that of Abraham pleading for the life of the city of Sodom in Genesis 18 indicate that God is capable of change depending upon the circumstances involved, and process theologians use many other texts to argue this point as well.

This brings us finally to the topic of revelation and this one has implications in the understanding of all three of the doctrines previously mentioned: God, Jesus Christ, and Scripture. Process theology looks to nature as the primary source of revelation about God, and diminishes the role of Christ and Scripture in that task. The experiences of the world and of individual lives are how God is revealed, and serve as a “provisional guide for anticipating God’s future goals.” This stems from what was earlier mentioned about the doctrine of Christ wherein Jesus is no more than just a perfect person, rather than the only incarnate Son of God. Christ is only a single revelation of who God is, not the complete revelation of who God is, just as Scripture is a revelation of something that God might do as opposed to something that God will do. “Instead of the Word made flesh (John 1:1-19), process theology delivers a God made fully present through human activity and divine intent.”

Understandably these doctrines are a source of concern for Orthodox Christian tradition. The doctrines described carry severe implications that challenge orthodox theology and place quite a bit of authority in hands of mankind, rather than God. God has been revealed through creation certainly, but to say that Christ is not the Christ and that Scripture doesn’t reveal God but illustrates to us about God, is heretical, just as to say that God is not omnipotent is to deny the power, love, and creative potential of God.

Orthodox Christian tradition holds to the idea that God created out of nothing. This directly ties into our understanding of the omnipotence of God in that anyone is capable of making something from resources, but to create from shear nothingness, is beyond the capacity of any mortal being, and thereby requires the omnipotence of God. The idea that God has always been creating and is still creating is not a thought that is necessarily destructive to the faith; I see it having very positive potential. However, when the idea goes on to stress that God could not create out of nothing, as both Oord and Cobb argue, the problematic implication arises. It raises the question as to just how powerful God truly is, and Scripture reveals to us a God who is all powerful and has no equal.

The idea that Jesus Christ is merely a perfect person, and that anyone can become incarnate, is heretical. Christ was not merely a perfect person, he was the very Son of God who became incarnate in order to restore the relationship between God and creation. If this is not so, then Scripture is in error when John 3:16 quotes Christ as saying, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son.” In process theology, it would appear that this verse could be modified to suggest that God would give his sons rather than his only Son. This doctrine of Jesus Christ is for me the most disturbing aspect of process theology, because it reduces the person of Jesus into just a mere man who served God with all that he was. If that is the case, then why was it necessary for Christ to die on the cross for the forgiveness of sins? The implication becomes that it was not necessary, but that we can attain perfection with God upon our own merit, as Christ must have done.

The implication that the Bible does not reveal God, but merely the possible actions of God, is very disturbing because it brings into question that which we hold to be authoritative in our understanding of God. Orthodox faith holds that the Bible is the written and inspired Word of God, but process theology appears to place the emphasis on the writers of Scripture rather than on the inspiration of Scripture. The implication that the Bible does not reveal God to us is that the Bible would become worthless as we draw closer to perfection and know about God for ourselves through our own interactions and experiences of Him. This leads to the potential of limitless theories and possible understandings of God, and the only judgment as to whether they are correct would be an individual’s personal conviction.

The revelation of God is seriously undermined in this theological trend. Christian tradition holds that God is revealed through human experience and creation certainly, but he is revealed in his fullness in Christ as made known to us in Scripture. The idea that creation and experience alone reveal God leads to the possible outcome that I mentioned for Scripture, limitless understandings of God, both correct and heretical, with no way to judge which is which. God is revealed in Scripture and we find nothing contrary to Scripture in the life of Christ who revealed to us the nature of love that is God. Oord is right to believe that God is love and created out of his loving nature, but that love is ultimately revealed to us through the life and sacrifice of Jesus Christ that brought us the potential to once again fully commune with the Father.

Ultimately this theological trend is going to appeal to people because of the stress it makes on human capability. It takes away the need for God to a certain extent and places responsibility upon the person. People want to believe that they have control over their own lives and destinies, and do not want to entertain the thought that there is some force who is determining everything that happens. A God who is capable of change is appealing because it means that we can pray and ask him not to do something and He might not do it; and we could expect him not to do it.

A postmodern generation would definitely find this approach appealing because of its attempt to reconcile faith and science in how it approaches creation. The idea that something already existed and that God has always been creating, even before the creation of the world, entertains the possibility that the evolutionary theory is correct and that the creation account found in Genesis is simply man’s understanding of that event. Postmodern people want to discover answers for themselves and this approach allows them to do that. They do not have to rely on God at all times for all things; they are capable of doing some things on their own apart from God, and it also promises that at some point they can reach perfection, and that is a very enticing proposition.
 
Bibliography:
Cobb, John B., Jr. Can Christ Become Good News Again? St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1991
Griffin, David Ray. God & Religion in the Postmodern World. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989.
Oord, Thomas. The Nature of Love: A Theology. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2010.
Truesdale, Al, ed. God Reconsidered: The Promise and Peril of Process Theology.
Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 2010.