Page History

...

¹Cf., for the original of this formulation, the transcrjpt of my lectures, "The Problem of God: A Discussion with Langdon Gilkey": 43 f.

Wiki Markup² In the past I have charactl'rized classical theism as "supernatural\[listic\] theism." What I've had in mind in doing so is the third kind of metaphysical interpretation clarified above (¶ 4), according to which the extraordinary reality or existent properly called "God" is related to the world only externally, or logically, not internally, or really. At the same time, I have never been comfortable accepting "natural\[istic\] theism" as an apt characterization of my own metaphysicaI interpretation, which I take to be of the second kind (¶ 3), according to which "God" refers to an extraordinary, generically different reality or existent that, being literally "the universal individual," is as eminently related to the world internally, or really, as externally, or logically. In other words, God, on my position, is "dually transcendent" (Hartshorne), in that, in one respect God is (eminently related to all things externally, or logically, even while, in another respect, God is just as eminently related to all things internally, or really---at once the unsurpassably concrete as well as the unsurpassably abstract.

n.d.; rev. 15 February 2009