How can Process Theology be refuted?

Okay, so a lot of atheists say that there is no scientific proof of God, but why are there a fair number of scientists who are promoting Process Theology? It’s not a religion but it uses only science and math to explain the existence of God rather than God’s moral implications (which admittedly can only be assumed from this standpoint). Not to convert anyone, because I myself don’t subscribe to a religion, but just curious to anyone familiar with the theory and how he/she refutes it.

Posted: August 29th 2008


I have been unable to locate anything on process theology that argues for god from first principles. At least in a way that seems unique.

One of the references that I looked at said the following:

The process theologian contends that if metaphysics describes those general concepts or principles by which all particulars are to be explained, and if God is the chief exemplification of those principles, then talk about God is eminently meaningful and basic to the meaningfulness of everything else.

I place very little credence in explanations that use such phraseology. Its goal is not to inform, but to obfuscate.

Process theology strikes me as a redefinition of god in a way that is somewhere between christianity and deism. I’m deeply skeptical of the philosophical underpinnings of the system, but that may be because of deeply skeptical of philosophy as it relates to the real world in general.

Posted: September 18th 2008

See all questions answered by Eric_PK

Reed Braden www

Saying that something is a valid belief because “a fair number of scientists” believe in it is a logical fallacy and an appeal to authority.

Posted: September 16th 2008

See all questions answered by Reed Braden

SmartLX www

Process theology is not in itself scientific, but I can see why some religious scientists would be advocates.

It’s well named, as theology is fundamentally hypothetical discussion of the nature of (some) God. Process theology advances various hypotheses about exactly how God works, and why he does what he does and doesn’t do what he might.

Here’s an example concerning divine intervention: “God is not omnipotent in the sense of being coercive. The divine has a power of persuasion rather than coercion.” So God doesn’t force us to do anything, but guides us in the right direction. This has a certain appeal because it’s close to what many people think.

While process theology presents plausible ways in which a god might function, it does not provide any evidence of or argument for a god’s actual existence. For someone who believes in God but doesn’t buy the theology of their religion, process theology is simply a way they might think about God in order to maintain their belief.

Like any other concept of God, process theology is a human fabrication and likely has no bearing on reality. Refuting it would be like trying to punch holes in a shadow, and there’s no point because it’s not intended as an argument at all.

Posted: September 15th 2008

See all questions answered by SmartLX


Is your atheism a problem in your religious family or school?
Talk about it at the atheist nexus forum