Post by Maverick Christian on May 17, 2013 6:12:08 GMT -5
Replying to this comment:
I like to ask if "be-ing" rather than "existence" provides the "necessity of his own nature." Be-ing is primal (in my view prior to existence) as God's nature. "Why is there something rather than nothing?” question is also answered by "be-ing" God is. God's existence notion falls very alien when be-ing is where our focus need be. Arguments to prove God's existence are all not necessary (in fact futile in view of transcendence) when be-ing is all--God is.
First off I’m not really sure what this is saying here. In this context, what exactly is “be-ing”?
"be-ing" with the dash wants to convey being and not being something as in "human being". "to be or not to be" informs a state detached from an object to be which is the realm of existence. The realm of pure be-ing: can we enter it by detaching from our existent identities?