Panentheism Archives - CrossExamined

Most people believe in God. The question is, which God? Who is this God? Is He personal? Impersonal? An “it”? A vague source or amorphous energy? It’s important to think this through because if God exists, then there are spiritual ramifications for this.
Christians understand God to be personal. They’re not pantheists or panentheists where God is equal or a part of His creation, but that He’s separate yet still personal with His creation. In other words, the Christian God is above His creation, not equal to it. There’s a difference between God and what He has created. Many Christian theologians and philosophers believe this isn’t only biblical but logical. Let’s look at a few of these arguments.

It’s pronounced parh-MEN-i-deez

Let’s start with Parmenides, a 6th-century Greek philosopher who’s known for his view on monism, the belief that everything is one, and that there’s no duality or distinction between mind and matter. His argument went like this:

Premise 1: There can only be one thing in the universe.
Premise 2: If there were two things in the universe, they’d have to differ in some way.
Premise 3: But there is only one way to differ: Either something exists (has being) or it does not (has non-being)
Premise 4: Metaphysically speaking, all things that have being are united/“one” since they are made up from the same “stuff.”
Conclusion: Therefore, there is only one being, and monism is true.

This argument might be confusing, but it’s actually valid.[1] What he’s arguing for is the idea that there is no distinction between anything that exists on a level of transcendence. We see this argument surface different ways among New Age and New Thought teachers as they like to claim that there is no duality, there is only One. Therefore, the Universe is one big spiritual being. And we just need to recognize our connection with it.

Along came Aquinas

Parmenides’ argument actually stumped people for centuries until a Christian philosopher named Thomas Aquinas answered his challenge. Aquinas points out the flaw in Parmenides’s argument: his use of the word being. Aquinas argued that there are different meanings to being, not just one, as Parmenides used.

To explain Aquinas’s argument, let’s take a tree for example. You can look at a tree and ask the obvious, “does this tree exist (have being)?” The answer, of course, is “yes” since if it didn’t exist, you’d be staring at nothing. This is where Parmenides’ questioning stops but Aquinas takes the investigation further.

Once the tree’s being is confirmed, we must then ask, “why does it exist?” In other words, what’s causing the tree to exist? Rather than only focus on being (or existence) Aquinas used ‘potency’ to distinguish metaphysical categories. If something has potency, it has the potential to change. All things, including the tree, have potency. But there must be something immutable (unchanging) to cause the tree to first exist (to have being).

In other words, is the being that’s ultimately causing the tree something that’s also caused? That’s impossible because of infinite regresses, where everything is caused by something else, which is caused by something else, and so on for infinity. If everything is one, and yet everything changes, then what is causing everything to have its being? Eventually, you must arrive at something that philosophers call Pure Act, an uncaused, first cause. This is the one Being with no potential to change, it is immutable and uncreated, yet gives existence to everything else…. Sound familiar?

So, what’s the motivation here?

There’s an incentive to believe that we’re “one with the universe” as spiritual beings. People tend to spiritually elevate humanity, and predictably they end up demoting God to get there. This then, becomes a matter of Lordship. If God is the author of everything and separate from you, then you must submit to Him and His will as Lord. He’s in charge either way, whether you align with and submit Him or oppose and resist Him.

But, if God is within you as some sort of universal source or energy waiting to be awakened, then you only need to submit to yourself. The “God-is-the-universe” theology takes on a self-serving tone.

So, why can’t God be the universe?

To summarize, monism (the belief that all is one and equal to God) is illogical because it leads to an infinite regress of causes. If all things have the ability to change (potency), there must be something unchangeable. If all things are caused, there must be something uncaused. God is that something, He’s a separate unchangeable, and uncreated Being who gives existence to His creation.

Endnote

[1] When an argument is valid, that means that the premise are organized so that if each of the premises are true then the conclusion must be true. When an argument has both validity and true premises, that argument is “sound.”

Recommended Resources Related to this Topic

How Can Jesus Be the Only Way? (mp4 Download) by Frank Turek
Person of Interest: Why Jesus Still Matters by J. Warner Wallace (Paperback), (Investigator’s Guide).
Another Gospel? by Alisa Childers (book)
What is God Like? Look to the Heavens by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)
How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (DVD Set, Mp3, and Mp4)
Debate: Does God Exist? Turek vs. Hitchens (DVD), (mp4 Download) (MP3)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Melissa Dougherty is a Christian Apologist best known for her YouTube channel as an ex-new ager. She has two associate’s degrees, one in Early Childhood Multicultural Education, and the other in Liberal Arts. She also has a bachelor’s degree in Religious Studies at Southern Evangelical Seminary.

By: Brian Chilton

Before the website transferred from pastorbrianchilton.wordpress.com to bellatorchristi.com, I had written an article on the major worldviews across the globe. I presented six major worldviews at the time. While I still think the previous article treated the most major of worldviews, I have come to realize after reading Douglas Groothius’ book, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith, that other major worldviews exist that should be discussed and incorporated into the list.[1] So, let’s revisit the major worldviews in this article. The goal of the article will be to notify the reader of each belief and will show how Christian theism triumphs. In addition, the Christian apologist will need to understand the starting points that must be taken with each worldview.

Atheism/Naturalism: Rejection of God’s Existence, Only the Physical World Exists.

The term “atheist” is taken from the Greek term “a” meaning “no” and “theos” meaning “God.” Placed together, the term means “no God.” The atheist, therefore, is one who does not believe in the existence of God. Atheists are often termed “naturalists” as they only accept the existence of the natural/physical world, thereby rejecting the existence of things like God, spirits, the human soul, angels, and demons. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss are good examples of atheism.

Atheism holds a problem as it pertains to the immaterial world. Naturalism cannot explain the existence of human consciousness. Even if the consciousness could be shown to derive from material means, naturalism (or materialism) faces a great problem as the human consciousness is a non-material thing. A scanner can see brainwaves, but not mental thoughts and the like. Naturalism holds two additional problems. On the one hand, naturalism cannot answer why anything exists. It has been mathematically demonstrated by the theorem of Borg, Vilenkin, and Guth (i.e., the BVG Theorem) that there cannot be an infinite regress of material worlds. Every material world must have a beginning point. On the other hand, naturalism fails to account for the mounting evidence of near death experiences.[2] Atheism and naturalism hold great problems serving as a cohesive worldview. The Christian apologist will need to demonstrate the reasonability of God’s existence and the means by which naturalism fails.

Agnosticism: God’s Existence is Unknowable.

Agnosticism comes from two terms: “a” the Greek term meaning “no” and “gnosis” the Greek term meaning “knowledge.” The agnostic does not necessarily reject belief in God. The agnostic claims no knowledge on the issue. There are at least two forms of agnosticism. Atheistic agnostics incline to reject belief in God, but are open to the possibility of God’s existence. The atheistic agnostic claims that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not. Bart Ehrman and Neil deGrasse Tyson are examples of atheistic agnostics.

Theistic agnostics are individuals who are inclined to believe in God’s existence. However, they are doubtful whether individuals can know anything about God. The theistic agnostic may either reject divine revelation altogether and claim that no religion is correct, or the theistic agnostic may reject exclusive revelation and will claim that all religions are correct. When I stumbled into my time of personal doubt, I became more of the theistic agnostic (one who claimed to be spiritual but not religious). The Ba’hai religion and Morgan Freeman may be considered examples of theistic agnosticism.

The trouble with agnosticism is with divine revelation. If God can truly be shown to exist, then atheistic agnosticism begins to wane. If one can demonstrate that God has revealed himself to humanity (particularly through Jesus of Nazareth), then theistic agnosticism begins to fade. The Christian apologist will need to understand, first, that agnosticism can cover a wide variety of flavors. Second, the Christian apologist will need to describe the evidence for Jesus of Nazareth’s life, miracles, and resurrection.

Pantheism: The Force is With You.

Pantheism comes from two Greek terms: “pan” meaning “all” and “theos” meaning “God.” Pantheism may look quite a bit like panentheism and even theistic agnosticism. However, generally speaking, pantheism is the belief that God is an impersonal force. Buddhism is the greatest example of pantheism. The Star Wars idea of the “force” is another example of pantheism. Buddhists claim to be agnostic concerning God’s existence. Yet, the Buddhist believes in impersonal forces (i.e., the force behind reincarnation). The goal of such a worldview is to become nothing. In fact, the Buddhist concept of Nirvana means that one has become so enlightened that he or she escapes the wheel of reincarnation and becomes nothing.

The trouble with pantheism is diverse. On the one hand, the pantheist will speak of such forces in such a way that intelligence is necessary. For example, why is there a wheel of reincarnation? Why is it that good behavior elevates one to a higher level and vice versa? On the other hand, pantheists have great trouble in explaining why anything exists at all. Much more could be said on this issue as it pertains to the trouble of pantheism. The Christian apologist will need to describe the internal inconsistencies of pantheism as a starting point as well as note the personal nature of the divine.

Panentheism: Everything is God.

Panentheism comes from three Greek terms: “pan” meaning “all,” “en” meaning “in,” and “theos” meaning “God.” Therefore, panentheism is literally defined as “all in God.” Panentheists hold that God penetrates everything. While the Christian may initially be inclined to agree, one must understand that panentheists believe that everything is God. Thus, the panentheist would agree that Jesus of Nazareth is God. But, the panentheist would also agree that you are God, he is God, everyone is God, and even your kitchen sink is God. The panentheist does not distinguish between the personal God and the physical creation. Hinduism is the greatest example of panentheism.

Panentheism, however, holds issues as it pertains to the world. If the world is God, then why is there so much evil? God is certainly good. So, if everyone is God, then wouldn’t everything be perfect? To accept such a claim, one must have a flawed idea of God’s nature. With the panentheist, the Christian apologist will need to begin by teaching the distinction between the personal divine being of God and the physical, material creation that is the world.

We have investigated the first four of the eight major worldviews. In our next article, we will describe the final four: polytheism, dualism, deism, and monotheism/theism.

Notes

[1] See Douglas Groothius, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2011), 50.

[2] Here, I do not mean heavenly or hellish experiences. I am addressing the scientific verification of such events in this world. For instance, if one were to see something that could not have been otherwise seen after one’s death, then this would serve as a verification of the soul’s survival past death. Soul survival discredits naturalism.

Resources for Greater Impact