Theism, Pantheism, Panentheism

I think Panentheism could be compatible with a biblical and sacramental worldview ("Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?"), but it depends on the definition of Panentheism. A quick Google search gives me two definitions:

1. the belief or doctrine that God is greater than the universe and includes and interpenetrates it
2. the belief that the divine pervades all of space and time and extends beyond it

Christians have to flatly reject 1. God does not include the universe. The universe (i.e. cosmos), as creation, is distinct from God, as Creator.
However, I could probably endorse 2, depending on how it is interpreted. The traditional understanding of God's eternity and omnipresence seems to allow for this. My (developing) sacramental worldview encourages the belief that God is everywhere present and working in all things for our good and his glory. Yet, is "everywhere present and working in all things" similar enough to "pervades all of space and time"? I'm not sure.

I wonder if we could use the concept of Panentheism to speak of the (Ontological) Trinity (to the extent we can speak of the Ontological Trinity). For instance, can we say, "The divine pervades and extends beyond the Father in the begetting of the Son and the procession of the Spirit."? Could this be a legitimate/orthodox way to speak of One God in Three Persons? Am I suggesting a long-refuted heresy here? My initial thought is that it's probably not particularly helpful to use this sort of formulation in most contexts. It would probably just confuse people... (though what else is new in discussions of the Trinity?)

 

I would have no problem with the second definition and none either with the last three words of the first definition. The problems begin with the word 'includes', if by that it is meant that the universe itself is integrally a part of God. Clearly it isn't, because God is 'Spirit' not matter.

However the way I see creation happening would be the Spirit of God brooding over a yet uncreated cosmos. When that cosmos began to be created it could not displace God in either dimentions of time or space, therefore God is in and pervades everything because everything is in God. Sustaining a universe is still a 'creative' process and God is still intimately involved with the material universe. That would be why prayer is an intensely intimate communication. God is not ever far from anyone or anything, even though they may be far from God, in a way of speaking.
.

 

I posted a comment a year ago about this idea, so I think I'll cut & paste it here:

Panentheism is very often understood by its supporters to posit both:

• that God is in all things, and
• that all things are in God.

Evil is one such thing. If evil is in God, then there is no absolute good.

If the earth is in God, then since the earth is corrupted and decaying and under a curse, a part of God is corrupted.

Let's face it, the Bible teaches that God is omnipresent and that He sustains all of His creation by His word and power. But the Bible does not teach that God is in all of creation or that all of creation is in (a part of) Him. The Bible best supports an understanding that God and creation are distinct.

Everywhere =/= in everything
They sound similar, but they are different.

Let me add that it's important to draw a distinction (and it's a subtle one, but vital) between God "being present everywhere in creation," and God "being in creation." The best example I can think of offhand is myself; as a Christian I say that God the Holy Spirit came to live in me, but a non-Christian panentheist would also say that God is in him (making himself out to be somewhat of a divine being). If we say, "God is in all of the creation," it is deceptively easy to then think of creation as a divine thing because it is by its very existence infused with divinity.

 

Evil is not a tangible, material reality. Evil is not matter. We are not gnostics. Evil cannot be in God, but God can be in matter. Namely Jesus Christ. God knows the difference between good and evil and the Spirit God is impenetrable by evil, as Jesus Christ proved to be.

The earth is not part of God, even if it 'lives and moves and has it's being in Him'. The earth is matter, and God is not part of matter, God is SPIRIT.

And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; Acts 17:26-28. God and creation are distinct, but because God is Spirit and everything else we see, touch and are is matter, matter cannot displace god if God is truly omnipresent. God can walk through walls and doors. There is nowhere you can go to get away from God, because God is EVERYWHERE.

The distinction that needs to be drawn concerning God's omnipresence throughout the universe that God has created is that God's Spirit, (therefore his very self), may be EVERYWHERE, (therefore in EVERYTHING), BUT the Spirit of God is not present in a spirit, in whoever the Spirit of God chooses not to be. Ps.51:11. Isa.59:1-3. God is spirit and as Spirit God can be anywhere and in anything that God chooses to be.
.

 

I think this interpretation of Acts 17 misunderstands what is meant. It is saying: by the power of God our lives, bodies, and existence are sustained. Taking it as "we are literally inside of God" (or "a part of God") is not supported as 'good theology' by other scriptures.

Let's take note that this passage is an accurate record of a sermon delivered by Peter, and we know that sometimes in the heat of the moment people (including Peter) could say some misleading or incorrect things. We would not, for example, take as theologically accurate statements every utterance made by Job or his 'friends,' even though they are recorded in the Bible.

I agree that evil cannot be in God (and I made a point about that) because He is holy and righteous. I also agree that evil is not physical matter; but what does that matter? (pun intended.) We are matter, yet non-material evil can be within us. Demons are not matter, and non-material evil is in them, too. The matter of matter is immaterial, if you get my drift!

I don't think the earth is alive, either.

 

To post something I’ve shared previously:

Because panentheism attempts to be halfway between theism and pantheism, one would expect its treatment of God’s omnibenevolence to be problematic, and that’s exactly what one finds.

 

I am speaking scientifically, not literally. God is Spirit, we are matter, matter cannot be Spirit, matter cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. Matter cannot be 'part of God' any more than the goldfish can be 'part' of the water and bowl that it 'lives and moves and has its being' in. Nevertheless the goldfish 'lives and moves and has its being' in the medium of water and is even mostly water itself. It cannot exist far away from water. In the same way WE all exist within the Spirit of God, which is God. Once we are regenerated, God then resides in our spirit, as well as in our body, or rather we reside in Him. Our spirit, (soul) is no longer part of the physical creation, it is dimentionally somewhere else altogether, with and in, God. God cannot die, that is why we then have eternal life.
.

 

The word "incarnation" is properly used to indicate the taking on of flesh and blood by God. Note the similarity to the word "carnal" (which relates to the body of flesh) and the Spanish word "carne" (which means meat, flesh). So I don't agree with Rohr.

 

But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

The resurrection body of Christ was not a natural body. Natural bodies do not just appear in rooms behind locked doors or vanish from rooms after breaking bread in a distinctively characteristic manner.

Christ's body had become something other than that body which was sown in the ground, and so will ours. We do not get our old bodies back in the resurrection of the body. We get NEW, CHANGED, bodies fit for the kingdom of heaven.

The 'seed' does not contine to exist once it has grown into the plant. The seed has gone, vanished. In its place is a greater quantity of new seed. You need to get the idea of bodies coming out of the ground and walking around, out of your head. The resurrection will not be an invasion of decomposing or drowned, cremated or otherwise utterly atomised zombies climbing out of their graves, if lucky enough to have one. We need to get away from literalist notions based upon medievil artistic conceptions of the dead coming forth from their graves, summoned forth by a trumpet fanfare from the heavens.

Our resurrection will be modelled upon that of Jesus and we simpy do not know what happened to his earthly body when it CHANGED into his heavenly one. All we know from scripture is that WE shall be LIKE HIM. For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
.

 

I concede the point that "matter cannot inherit the kingdom of God" in the sense that our current physical bodies cannot and will not be brought into the kingdom at the resurrection. (Good thing too, because who wants to take their arthritis with them? )

On the other hand, it is undeniable that Jesus' "spiritual body" was corporeal (Thomas was invited to feel the nail holes and spear cavity). He had the power to dematerialize and rematerialize it at will, though (as shown by His sudden appearance in the upper room). And we are told that we will have physical bodies (new, perfect ones that cannot rot or die) given to us at the resurrection. Our existing, decaying bodies will not "inherit the kingdom," yet the new heavens, new earth, and new bodies will have physicality. We will be able to hug our Savior! Lord knows I could use a few of His hugs.

 

I don't think God created the heavens and the earth out of himself. The universe is not an incarnation of God. It is God's handywork. Scripture contains nothing that teaches us that the work of His hands is actually, in any way, God, who is Spirit not matter. If it does, then I have missed it. The visible and invisible universe was created entirely within God because there is nowhere anyone can go within the universe to escape the presence of God. Even hell itself is no bastion of defense against God's omnipresence. Hell is a prison, not a fortress.
.

 

I am uncertain as to whether a learned theologian would agree or not. It does sound like a good question to pose to some theologian or other. Since God is spirit, it might be considered the correct way to look at things. I am a bit concerned, though, about the possible implications of a cursed world and sinful mankind existing within the holy, perfect Creator.

 

There must be a difference between being physically and spacially 'within' a Spirit, and being morally and spiritually connected to that Spirit. God is unaffected by the universe and everything physically and spacially within it, but the universe cannot affect God, who created and sustains it. God, because God is spirit, is totally independent of the created universe. This principle is even true of God in Christ on earth. Jesus Christ could never be defiled through association with sinners. They could only be sanctified by their association with Him. That is even how our salvation works, 'because the one who is in us is greater than the one who is in the world'.
.

 

I would say that He is in us and we are in Him, but that is a statement of spiritual unity and not a statement of physical location. You are saying that we and the universe are "physically and spacially within" God, even though He is a spiritual Being and is not bounded by the laws of either time or space. I'm not sure I am ready to make that leap.

 

Could Adam and Eve before the fall walk though walls and appear in closed rooms at will? What ever 'material' Christ's body was after the resurrection, it was, according to scripture a 'spiritual' body. Perhaps we need to change our understanding of 'spiritual' from being unsubstantial, to being sometimes even a tangible reality.
.