True Autonomy
I just posted this question on the excellent blog: Ponderings on a Faith Journey.
But I will restate. To what extent does Process Theology advocate a free will? Process theology advocates an openness to both God and the future. However, is the best most creative imaginative off the wall thought a person could ever have, an actualized potentiality offered by the divine? If so - is it really that creative? Is it free? It doesn't really feel that free if the best we can be is already in the mind of the divine.
A corollary question: Is it only human sin, that is, humanity's tendency to not choose to live in accordance to what God's will that creates the openness of reality? In other words, IF all humans and all created beings were to choose to be fully in accordance to the divine lure would the future, in a sense be determined? Is it theoretically possible to "fast track it" to God's ultimate vision of reality?
Diminishing Returns
If each moment is open to influence by all past moments and also by a novel divine lure, does the quantitative power of that novel lure have to increase? Or do past moments diminish or disintegrate over time? This is to say, if the force of past moments do not diminish then as time moves forward all past moments will accumulate and grow larger and larger with each passing moment. Thus their force will grow by (+1) after every moment. Given an infinite amount of moments their force will have to be or will be (depending on one's conception of the origin of time) infinite. If this is the case, then any novelty suggested by the divine must also increase in force or appeal to have the capacity to overcome the weight of past moments. But can anything be bigger than infinity? So it must be the case that past moments deteriorate in their force, if true novelty is a possibility at every instance. This is obviously a more technical question, but I raise it because--correct me if I'm wrong--I've heard it said that past moments don't go away in process thought. What say you?
A Logical God and the Role of Faith
Up to this point in my life there has always been a characteristic in my faith life that I learned to live with. It is summarized in the great dictum by Anselm, "Faith seeking understanding." To me this has meant that faith precedes understanding (which is why it is faith) and the task of theology is to seek to understand. There is not promise that one will ever get there, to total understanding. But the finer point is that faith precedes understanding. For this reason any metaphysics that explains God in such a way as to seamlessly integrate into science, reason, and everything else we know about the world seems too good to be true. What's the use of faith at that point?
Neo Neo Platonism
Is there a qualitative difference between a divine lure and a platonic form? If so please explain.
Hopefully this is enough to get some conversation going. Thanks for your consideration.
