Re: [asa] Providence?

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Date: Thu Sep 11 2008 - 17:46:49 EDT

Were your argument of inclusiveness valid, pantheism would have to
specifically involve the randy woodland deity with the hips and legs of a
goat, as well as a cooking utensil for a deity. Pantheism makes all to be
god. Panentheism puts all into god. Polytheism involves many gods.
Monotheism says there's only one. But the derivation is not always the
correct clue to the meaning and usage. Note "let" as verb and noun.
Dave (ASA)

On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:35:20 -0400 "David Opderbeck"
<dopderbeck@gmail.com> writes:
Actually, if "theist" is in the name, we can't really say a panentheist
isn't talking in some way about "god," can we? But I agree with Dave S.
-- classical theism, and particularly Christian theism that is at all in
the tradition of the Apostle's Creed, seems incompatible with any notion
that God is not ontologically "other" than creation, however much God is
"in" creation or "sustains" creation or is the "source of" creation.
____________________________________________________________
Hotel pics, info and virtual tours. Click here to book a hotel online.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nLmLPUAtwl4EDtgFDKzmrQKXuhPgJZzN35moaRb2LuU1XOt/

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Sep 11 17:51:08 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 11 2008 - 17:51:08 EDT