Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Alternatively, Tillich presents the above-mentioned ontological view of God as Being-Itself, Ground of Being, Power of Being, and occasionally as Abyss or God's "Abysmal Being". What makes Tillich's ontological view of God different from theological theism is that it transcends it by being the foundation or ultimate reality that "precedes" all ...
Rather, Christians should take their cue from the existentialist theology of Paul Tillich and consider God to be 'the ground of our being'. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's notion of religion-less Christianity is also a major theme in the book. Robinson's interpretation of this phrase is—inevitably—controversial.
Ground of Being may refer to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel#Absolute spirit; Ground (Dzogchen) Paul Tillich#God as the ground of being; Brahman in Hinduism, ...
Tillich, I believe, said doubt is a necessary part of faith. Lamott has said that the opposite of faith is certainty. This idea didn’t originate with either of them.
Paul Tillich held that God is the ground of being and is something that precedes the subject and object (philosophy) dichotomy. He considered God to be what people are ultimately concerned with, existentially, and that religious symbols can be recovered as meaningful even without faith in the personal God of traditional Christianity. [21]
Niebuhr borrowed often from Paul Tillich's notion of God. He was comfortable describing God as Being-itself, the One, or the Ground of Being. In this regard, Niebuhr held something of a middle ground between the dogmatic but dialectical theology of Karl Barth and the philosophically oriented modified liberalism of Paul Tillich.
Bust of Paul Tillich. A few liberal Christian theologians define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being. Many of them owe much of their theology to the work of Christian existentialist philosopher Paul Tillich, including the phrase "the ground of all being". Another quotation from Tillich is ...
Nicaea held that the Christ was “fully God and fully man,” not half-God and half-man. When humanity is defined as God, God is “fully God and fully man,” because God is man. Tillich’s Hegelian dialectic progresses from God (thesis) to man (antithesis, the opposite of the thesis) to God = man (synthesis).