Talk:Theistic personalism

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Theology Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]