God has been given many different attributes as humans wrestle with ways to understand and explain who God is. Several of the most common attributes have been:
- Impassibility – cannot experience emotions such as pain, suffering etc.
- Immutability – changeless
- Omnipresence -present everywhere
- Omniscience – all-knowing
- Omnipotence – all-powerful
Process theologians argue that these attributes have been falsely given or at least wrongly defined, and that this has led to a grave misunderstanding about God’s interaction with the world and why evil exists. In this post I will explore each of these attributes very briefly from a process theological perspective. (Since omnipotence is the most difficult attribute to see differently, and the attribute that most informs how one answers the problem of evil, I will attempt to explain why process theologians argue that omnipotence is a false attribute while dealing with the problem of evil in the next post.)
In classical theology God “is not subject to suffering, pain, or the ebb and flow of involuntary passions.” As I shared in the last post (part 1), at the very foundation of process philosophy is the belief that all of reality is relational, and because all reality is relational, God must also be relational. By definition a relational entity must be able to affect and be affected by others. Central to Christian theology is the idea that God has incarnated Godself in Jesus who suffered and was crucified on a cross. In other words, God suffers in Jesus who hangs upon a cross. How could one suffer and not be changed? It is impossible. Process theologians deny the impassibility of God and instead see God as one who not only affects, but is also affected by others.
Immutability is the belief that God cannot change. Early Christian theologians – influenced heavily by Greek philosophy – believed that God’s perfection must mean that God cannot change. Process theologians argue that God does indeed change because God, like everything else in the cosmos, is relational (see previous post on more concerning this). In essence, God is not the “unmoved mover,” but the “most moved mover.”
Omnipresence is an attribute that both process theologians and traditional theologians agree upon. Process theology may differ slightly in that process theology often leads to panentheism. Panentheism is not to be confused with pantheism, and is not exclusive to process theologians as some non-process theologians would also consider themselves panentheists. Pantheists believe that “all things together are God” while Panentheists believe that “all things are in God.” Process theologians tend to view the entire cosmos as part of God, though God is not limited to any one part of the cosmos. In a process perspective the interconnectedness of all things is central, and this includes God’s interconnectedness to all of creation.
Omniscience, or all knowing, has been traditionally interpreted to mean that God knows everything past, present, and future. Omniscience is an attribute that process theologians tend to keep, but they redefine this (similar to open theists, but with slight variations). Many have understood God to be outside of time. One way to understand this is to think of God as viewing time like we read a book. God can turn the pages from past, present, or future as God looks on from beyond. Process theologians agree with traditional theology in that God knows the past completely and the present perfectly as it unfolds, but differs in that they believe even God cannot yet know the future. Since actualities (e.g., humans) have some self-determining power and are partially self-creative, the future is not yet determined and thus cannot be known as determined. In this regard, process theologians believe that God’s knowledge is omniscient in that it is perfect knowledge – full knowledge of all that can be known including complete knowledge of the past and present, and full knowledge of all future possibilities. One process thinker explains this by writing, “if God has perfect knowledge of the world and of me, God will know exactly what all of the possibilities are and how probable they are. But even with perfect knowledge God could not know what I will choose in the future because that choice has not yet been made and it is a real choice.” Process theologians argue that if God knows the future as determined than real freedom would be impossible. Hartshorne summarizes this by writing, “future events, events that have not yet happened, are not there to be known.”
Next post I will explore the attribute of omnipotence and the problem of evil from a process perspective.
 Ibid., 30.
 C. Robert Mesle, Process Theology: A Basic Introduction (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1993), 137.
 John B. Cobb, Jr. and David Ray Griffin, Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), 52.
 Cobb, Jr. and Griffin, Process Theology, 52.
 Ibid., 52.
 Mesle, Process Theology, 37.
 Ibid., 37.
 Charles Hartshorne, Omnipotence and other Theological Mistakes (New York: State University, 1984), 39.