Definition and Implications of Immanentism in Theology
Immanentism in theology refers to the belief that God is present within the created order, actively involved in and sustaining the universe, rather than being entirely separate or transcendent [4, 5]. This concept contrasts with deism, which posits a God who creates the world but then withdraws from it. The biblical understanding of God's immanence emphasizes His continuous activity and presence in all things [4].
The Apostle Paul, in Acts 17:28, articulates a key aspect of immanence when he states, "For in him we live, and move, and have our being" [4]. This statement, which echoes a Greek poet, suggests that God is the "living, immanent Principle" of existence for humanity [4]. Charles Hodge, in his Systematic Theology, explains that the existence of every created substance is dependent on God, and His upholding of creation is "altogether equivalent to an immediate production out of nothing, at each moment" [5]. This perspective highlights God's constant and active role in sustaining the universe, implying that without His continuous power, creation would cease to exist [5].
However, the concept of immanence can be understood in different ways, some of which diverge from traditional Christian theology. Hodge identifies a philosophical movement, particularly "speculative, transcendental, or pantheistic philosophy," that led to a "regeneration of theology" by promoting Monism [7]. Monism, in this context, denies any real dualism between God and humanity, suggesting that "man is only the modus existendi of God" [7]. Such a view, according to Hodge, eliminates traditional understandings of sin and grace, as human activity becomes merely a form of God's agency [7]. This pantheistic interpretation of immanence blurs the distinction between Creator and creation, effectively making God and the universe one and the same.
Theological traditions, such as the Reformed tradition represented by Hodge, emphasize that while God is immanent, He is also transcendent. God's immanence means He is intimately involved with His creation, but His transcendence means He is distinct from and superior to it [5]. The Scriptures are understood to provide the authoritative framework for understanding these divine attributes, and any philosophical system that contradicts the "plain historical sense" of the Bible is to be rejected [6]. The danger of an unchecked immanentism, particularly in its pantheistic forms, is that it can undermine core doctrines such as the nature of sin, human responsibility, and the need for divine grace [7].
The doctrine of God's immanence also has implications for understanding divine judgment and human destiny. While God is present in all things, His presence does not negate the reality of sin or the consequences of human actions [2]. The Scriptures teach that the wicked will experience "everlasting punishment," which includes exclusion from God's presence and the unrestrained dominion of sin [2]. This demonstrates that God's immanence does not imply universal salvation or an eventual absorption of all beings into the divine, as some immanentist philosophies might suggest [3]. The conditions of such ultimate realities are beyond human grasp and can only be understood through divine revelation [1].
Sources
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 96: obvious that this is a question which can be decided only by divine revelation. No one can reasonably presume to decide how long the wicked are to suffer for their sins upon any general principles of right and wrong. The conditions of the problem are not within our grasp. What the infinitely wise and good God may see fit to do with his creatures; or what the exigencies of a government embracing the whole universe and continuing throughout eternal ages, may demand, it is not for such worms of the dust as we are, to determine. If we believe”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 96: § 6. Future Punishment. Our Lord in his account of the final judgment says, that the wicked shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal. The sufferings of the finally impenitent, according to the Scriptures, arise: (1.) From the loss of all earthly good. (2.) From exclusion from the presence and favour of God. (3.) From utter reprobation, or the final withdrawal from them of the Holy Spirit. (4.) From the consequent unrestrained dominion of sin and sinful passions. (5.) From the operations of conscience.”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 96: a rational creature, then we may assume that some, perhaps many, perhaps all, in the course of ages, will repent and turn unto God and live. 3. Others again teach that the sufferings of the impenitent are only relatively endless; that is, it will forever be true that their condition will be inferior to what it would have been had they been better men. 4. Others hold that the life promised to the righteous is immortality, and that the death threatened against the wicked is the extinction of life, or, the cessation of conscious existence. T”
- Acts (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Acts 17:28: For in him we live, and move, and have our being--(or, more briefly, "exist").--This means, not merely, "Without Him we have no life, nor that motion which every inanimate nature displays, nor even existence itself" [MEYER], but that God is the living, immanent Principle of all these in men. as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring--the first half of the fifth line, word for word, of an astronomical poem of Aratus, a Greek countryman of the apostle, and his predecessor by about three centuries. But, as he hints, the s”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 49: in proof of that point is, that “the existence of every created substance, is a dependent existence, and therefore is an effect and must have some cause; and the cause must be one of these two; either the antecedent existence of the same substance, or else the power of the Creator.” It cannot be the antecedent existence of the same substance, and therefore must be the power of God. His conclusion is that God’s upholding of created substance “is altogether equivalent to an immediate production out of nothing, at each moment.” 228 228 Ibid.”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 114: as the object of faith. We are bound to understand the Scriptures in their plain historical sense; and to admit no philosophy to explain or modify that sense, except the philosophy of the Bible itself; that is, those facts and principles concerning the nature of God, the nature of man, of the world, and of the relation between God and the world, which are either asserted or plainly assumed in the Scriptures. To depart from this principle is to give up the Bible as a rule of faith; and to substitute for it the teachings of philosophy. Tha”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 142: of the speculative, transcendental, or pantheistic philosophy effected an entire revolution, which even such writers as Dorner are accustomed to call “the 731 regeneration of theology.” The leading principle of this philosophy, in all its phases, is Monism, the denial of all real dualism between God and man. If man is only the modus existendi of God, then of course there is an end of all questions about sin and grace. Sin can only be imperfect development, and man’s activity bcing only a form of the agency of God, there is no place for w”