Does Being Exist?

Does Being Exist? September 26, 2016

It was about 8 years ago that I blogged about the strange question that is involved in debating God as understood by a wide array of liberal, existentialist, panentheist, pantheist, and/or mystical religious people. “Does being exist?” seems to be a self-evidently odd question. But for those who think of God as the ultimate, all-encompassing reality, whatever the attributes thereof may be, one can only say “that God does not exist” if one, in essence, denies reality – which is arguably self-contradictory.

Click through to read that post from 2008. See also the discussion at Friendly Humanist about what deserves to be called “God.”

Finally, the image below came to my attention as part of a Buzzfeed list of things that only people who’ve gone to divinity school will understand:

Grounds of Being

"I'm not quite sure what you mean here? Polidori is well-attested as having been at ..."

Doctor Who: The Haunting of Villa ..."
"Certainly. But once one has adequately reasoned that the Holocaust happened, for instance, I don't ..."

Not Liberal, Just Literate
"I am. It is a word I would never use. Firstly, “denialist” isn’t a word, ..."

Not Liberal, Just Literate
"Are you suggesting that there are no views or ideological stances that merit that label?"

Not Liberal, Just Literate

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • jekylldoc

    Personally I prefer “the Spirit of Love” as the God behind God. “The Ground of Being” has auspicious roots, but the criteria which tend to lead to its being preferred come more from Greek philosophy than from Hebrew community, and its obvious connections to Hindu mysticism do not inspire me at all.

    The essential proposition in Abrahamic faith is that God is Good. In denotation (to borrow from the Friendly Humanist) it is pretty much the same to say “the Ground of Being is Good” as to say “The Spirit of Love creates us”. However the poetry permitted in the connotations of the second is much warmer and more human, less awe-inspiring and transcendent. The second is more Incarnational and Trinitarian, if you like.