Talk:Theistic personalism

Untitled
This article should be deleted if it cannot be rewritten. The present form uses a definition from 1942 that is without relation to the contemporary usage of the term- current usage uses the phrase as a contrast with "classical theism." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.241.80.73 (talk) 03:03, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I absolutely second this. The contemporary use of the term is typically for describing a model of theism in which God is significantly more anthropomorphized than in classical theism—for example, capable of changing His mind and experiencing passions in the same sense that humans do (so neither immutable nor impassible), and possessing attributes in a way that does not really square with at least the way classical theism would define divine simplicity. One scholar of religious studies, David Hart, defines theistic personalism in his 2013 book, "The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss", as, "a view of God not conspicuously different from the polytheistic picture of the gods as merely very powerful discrete entities who possess a variety of distinct attributes that lesser entities also possess, if in smaller measure; it differs from polytheism, as far as I can tell, solely in that it posits the existence of only one such being. It is a way of thinking that suggest that God, since he is only a particular instantiation of various concepts and properties, is logically dependent on some more comprehensive reality embracing both him and other beings." 72.19.43.63 (talk) 10:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I forgot to finish my attribution, that definition is I believe on pages 127 to 128. 72.19.43.63 (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have added the outdated template to inform the reader that this is not how the term seems to be used anymore. Article needs to be updated using sources that use the modern definition. Squidroot2 (talk) 15:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)