UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 1 to Meditation 304
On Definitions

From: Maarten van den Driest

To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form.

The argument that the term 'to exist' is not well-defined and that therefore the question about God's existence is meaningless seems rather over-formal to me.

It is indeed true that 'to be' and 'is' are words that are not always clear but they are usually clear in context. It is entirely meaningful to claim that the wind exists and also that a rock exists even though these two exist in different ways. Both are tangible though but almost no one will disagree when I say that love exists, is real.

When I say that God exists I mean to say that God is not just a fantasy, not just wishful thinking but has a presence in our daily lives.

Of course I now have to define God further or risk making a statement that is still meaningless but that is beside the point.

The trouble with most liberal christians (and, supposedly, liberals of other faiths) is that they omit that further definition.

To say that God is love is problematic, you run into all kinds of difficult questions about how that love shows itself. To say that Love is God/godly, is another matter entirely. However, this is not the place for theology..

In short: dictionary definitions aren't always helpful and just because something can't be easily defined doesn't meaning talking about it is meaningless.