Re: On supernaturalism

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Wed Jun 13 2001 - 08:52:51 EDT

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Griffin #7"

    From: David F Siemens <>

    Burgy and Howard,
    My quick appraisal of this interchange suggests that Howard and Griffin are
    talking about two different things. Howard's version of naturalism is a
    matter of the way in which scientists look for answers, one without
    metaphysical assumptions. Griffins "naturalism(ns)" has a load that makes it
    compatible with deism (a deity who does not interact with an independent
    nature), process theology (a deity which is part of the universe) and
    probably Spinoza's deus sive natura, but not with Christian theism.

    Yes, Griffin's 'naturalism(ns)' would be considered incompatible with
    traditional Christian theism, which is clearly 'supernaturalistic' in
    character. The question is whether or not there is a (process) version of
    Christian theism that includes naturalism(ns). Griffin, I believe, would
    say Yes, but I suspect that most members of the traditional Christian
    community would say, in effect, "Sorry, but the 'Christian' label is no
    longer applicable. Call it 'process theism' and be done with it."


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 13 2001 - 08:59:44 EDT