Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Religious Qualities of Naturalistic God Metaphors: Introducing the Debate

The Religious Qualities of Naturalistic God Metaphors: Introducing the Debate The Religious Qualities of Naturalistic God Metaphors: Introducing the Debate Demian Wheeler and Daniel J. Ott hat follows is a continuation of a debate that dates back to at least John Calvin and Jacobus Arminius but took on its naturalistic guise Win the third generation of the Chicago school between Bernard Loomer and Bernard Meland. Basically, the argument pertains to whether God is to be associated with everything that is, including suffering and evil, or whether God is more rightly associated with what we take to be good or redemptive. Loomer defended the former position. Late in life, he came to embrace pantheism, arguing that God and nature are identical. The thesis of his 1987 essay, “The Size of God,” was that the divine is to be equated with the world in its ambiguous and mysterious entirety—with the “Whole Shebang,” to borrow Nancy Frankenberry’s clever phrase. “God,” wrote Loomer, “is to be identified with the concrete, interconnected totality of this struggling, imperfect, unfinished, and evolving societal web.” In a number of recent writings, including his new book on pragmatic histori- cism, Demian Wheeler has aligned himself with the later Loomer, the pantheist Loomer. Three years ago, in a paper http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Theology & Philosophy University of Illinois Press

The Religious Qualities of Naturalistic God Metaphors: Introducing the Debate

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-illinois-press/the-religious-qualities-of-naturalistic-god-metaphors-introducing-the-Oayly2DiCs
Publisher
University of Illinois Press
ISSN
2156-4795

Abstract

The Religious Qualities of Naturalistic God Metaphors: Introducing the Debate Demian Wheeler and Daniel J. Ott hat follows is a continuation of a debate that dates back to at least John Calvin and Jacobus Arminius but took on its naturalistic guise Win the third generation of the Chicago school between Bernard Loomer and Bernard Meland. Basically, the argument pertains to whether God is to be associated with everything that is, including suffering and evil, or whether God is more rightly associated with what we take to be good or redemptive. Loomer defended the former position. Late in life, he came to embrace pantheism, arguing that God and nature are identical. The thesis of his 1987 essay, “The Size of God,” was that the divine is to be equated with the world in its ambiguous and mysterious entirety—with the “Whole Shebang,” to borrow Nancy Frankenberry’s clever phrase. “God,” wrote Loomer, “is to be identified with the concrete, interconnected totality of this struggling, imperfect, unfinished, and evolving societal web.” In a number of recent writings, including his new book on pragmatic histori- cism, Demian Wheeler has aligned himself with the later Loomer, the pantheist Loomer. Three years ago, in a paper

Journal

American Journal of Theology & PhilosophyUniversity of Illinois Press

Published: Sep 16, 2021

There are no references for this article.