The Attractiveness of Panentheism-a Reply to Benedikt Paul Gocke

In his recent article in Sophia, Benedikt Paul Gocke concluded that 'as long as we do not have a sound argument entailing the necessity of the world, panentheism is not an attractive alternative to classical theism' (Benedikt Paul Gocke, 'Panentheism and Classical Theism', Sophia 52, no. 1 (2013): 75). As the article progresses, Gocke clarifies his view of what panentheism is, essentially identical to Gocke's view of classical theism in every way, except in the world's modal relation to God. This concept is vastly different to many of the panentheistic notions that are more commonly held. While it is not initially made transparent-especially with the label Gocke chooses to use-it becomes increasingly clear that Gocke critiques a God concept of his own making. More common variations of panentheism are contrasted with Gocke's version, in order to provide a broader and more accurate view of the ancient concept, and to demonstrate that Gocke's view of panentheism is idiosyncratic. It is finally explained that even if Gocke's view of panentheism were definitive, he has not successfully argued for the relative unattractiveness of the concept, relative to his view of classical theism.