God and the World: Panentheism in Modern Orthodox Christianity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Panentheism is an unsettling and controversial notion in modern Orthodox Christianity. Some Orthodox theologians explicitly identify themselves as panentheists, while others reject panentheism as incompatible with Orthodox tradition. Sergius Bulgakov presents his theology of Divine Wisdom (sophiology) as panentheist, distinguishing it from pantheism. Orthodox theologians such as Kallistos Ware and Andrew Louth associate with panentheism. Whereas Orthodox critics (notably, Georges Florovsky and Nicolas Lossky) see panentheism as a subspecies of pantheism (hence, unacceptable), Bulgakov and other modern Orthodox theologians regard it as a subspecies of theism (hence, acceptable). The issue revolves around divergent theologies of creation and how God relates to creation. Earlier, the issue was entwined in the controversy over Bulgakov’s theology of Divine Wisdom. By the twenty-first century, the focus is on looking for compatibilities in patristic theology, especially the logoi of creation in Maximus the Confessor and the divine energies in Gregory Palamas. The transition in Orthodox thought from a mostly aggressive stance towards panentheism to an irenic one is promising, but Orthodox theologians have yet to engage meaningfully in the ongoing dialogues on panentheism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".