Science & Theology
In todays dialogue between science and theology (as well as in the broader science and religion field), the kenotic paradigm for understanding God's relationship to the world is one which has received a large amount of attention. This attention has come from a variety of participants, such as Ian Barbour, John Polkinghorne, Nancey Murphy, and Jurgen Moltmann, to name a few notables. Basing their investigations on both Christian theological understandings of God and God's relationship to the world, and on the developing picture of the way the world is found in modern scientific understandings, this paradigm has been found to be of use. Polkinghorne is relatively indicitave of many, in his assertions that kenosis allows for a fruitful dialogue between theology and the developing scientific understanding of the world (Read more on Polkinghorne's understandings of kenosis and creation). Saying that a number of people have developed a kenotic understanding of God must come with a strong caveat, though. We are not saying that they all have the same understanding of God. Some apply this understanding to a very general idea of God, others identify this God with the God of process theology (such as Barbour), others come from an Anabaptist understanding of God (Murphy), and still others have more traditional understandings of God (Polkinghorne). I believe this relative diversity in understandings of kenosis and kenotic theology is at once problematic and promising. It is certainly problematic, because we must define very carefully what is meant by God and by kenosis in light of the variance among definitions that are in use. Thus, some may dismiss "kenotic" theology all together simply because of some preconceived notion of what "kenosis" or "kenotic theology" is going into the discussion. Along with this caveat, though, goes a large measure of promise. I believe that the relatively broad usage of the kenotic paradigm in the dialogue between science and theology allows a point of contact for serious theological discussion between those who hold different understandings of God, and of theology's methodology and doctrinal content, while at the same time holding that discussion in concert with the ongoing dialogue between science and theology.
It is at this point of promise that I find myself entereing the science and theology dialogue. I believe the kenotic paradigm is an extremely promising paradigm for understanding God and God's relationship with and activity in the world. Yet, I do not subscribe to the paradigm as all others do. I find my own version to be at once share much in common and holding much in distinction from other kenotic understandings of the world. I trust you as a fellow reader and developer with me will at least afford the developing kenotic theology here espused with a careful reading before dismissing it. I trust that I am at once looking for new models and expressions and understandings of the faith, while always and ever holding firm to Scripture and the faithful traditions of theology found throughout the ages.
