In this study, we have tried to analyze Charles Hartshorne’s understanding of neo-classical theism. The word “classic” evokes us to hold much of what is available.The word “neo” (new) also adds something to what is available and emphasizes innovation. Hartshorne’s objective is to give a new perspective to classical Christian theism. God problem is in his direct philosophical/theological interest. He refers to a range of theological mistakes. Immortality, revelation, apathic love of God, omniscience, omnipotence, unchanging absolute perfect God are theological mistakes. The problematic background of classical Christian theism required to deal with theological mistakes. Therefore, Hartshorne has determined to produce alternative, original, rational and plausible resolutions to ecclesiastical approaches. Hartshorne goes through some changes in the content of the definitions of God’s attributes. He attemps to solve some philosophy of religion problems in this manner, especially the problem of evil. The reinterpretation of God’s attributes brought with it a limited understanding of God. Neo-classical theism sets forth the relationship between God-universe-human, together with the concepts of relation and process. In Hartshorne, the love of God has been prioritized and the atmosphere of love wrapped up his mindset. He tries to strongly prove the existence of God with his own global version of argument and revised ontological argument. He also does not want God to be cited with any gender pronoun. In this ecole, God and the world cannot be considered independent of each other, the existence of one necessitates the existence of the other. He offers panentheistic moderate middle way to people. He wants us to catch the unity of contrast and he notices that esence has two sides/poles (abstract-concrete). In a sense,in cosmology which is enframed by Hartshorne, man has position as sort of the writer of his own history. One raises his own future. In his system, he does not make two separate ontological positions as creator and created. In his neoclassical metaphysic both man and God collectively take an active part in creative transformation. On the plane of reciprocative relationality, his neo-classical theism melts religion and science in the same pot holistically.