The Experience of God

1. "God" is a concept, not a proper name, distinct from "gods."

To speak of “God” properly, then—to use the word in a sense consonant with the teachings of orthodox Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, Hinduism, Bahá’í, a great deal of antique paganism, and so forth—is to speak of the one infinite source of all that is: eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, uncreated, uncaused, perfectly transcendent of all things and for that very reason absolutely immanent to all things.

Two distinct meanings. The word "God" (capitalized) refers to the singular, transcendent source of all existence, while "gods" (lowercase) denotes finite, powerful beings within the cosmos. This distinction is crucial, as many arguments against God mistakenly target a demiurge-like figure rather than the classical concept of God.

• "God" is not a being among beings, but the very ground of being.
• "gods" are part of the created order, subject to time and space.
• The difference is ontological, not merely numerical.

Beyond monotheism vs. polytheism. The real distinction is not about the number of divine entities, but about the nature of the divine. Many traditions, often labeled "polytheistic," acknowledge a single, ultimate Godhead beyond the many gods. The key is understanding the difference between the transcendent and the immanent.

A lexicographical exercise. This book aims to define "God" according to classical definitions found in major religious traditions, not to argue for or against belief. The goal is to clarify the concept of God, ensuring that debates about belief are based on a shared understanding of what is being discussed.

2. Modern atheism often misunderstands the classical concept of God.

An absolutely convinced atheist, it often seems to me, is simply someone who has failed to notice something very obvious—or, rather, failed to notice a great many very obvious things.

Straw man arguments. Much of modern atheism attacks a caricature of God, often depicting him as a magical, invisible friend or a cosmic mechanic. This approach ignores the sophisticated philosophical and theological traditions that have shaped the concept of God for centuries.

• Atheist arguments often target a "demiurge" rather than the transcendent God.
• They misinterpret classical arguments, such as Thomas Aquinas's Five Ways.
• They fail to engage with the strongest formulations of theistic claims.

Lack of intellectual curiosity. Many contemporary atheist polemicists demonstrate a lack of curiosity about the religious beliefs they criticize. They often make sweeping pronouncements based on a superficial understanding of complex theological and philosophical ideas.

• They often fail to consult experts in religious thought.
• They mistake fundamentalist interpretations for the whole of religious tradition.
• They often rely on simplistic caricatures of religious belief.

A symptom of cultural forgetfulness. The rise of the new atheism is symptomatic of a larger cultural forgetfulness on the part of both believers and unbelievers. It reflects a lack of engagement with the rich intellectual and spiritual traditions that have shaped human civilization.

3. The universe's contingency points to a necessary, uncaused source.

The only fully consistent alternative to belief in God, properly understood, is some version of “materialism” or “physicalism” or (to use the term most widely preferred at present) “naturalism”; and naturalism—the doctrine that there is nothing apart from the physical order, and certainly nothing supernatural—is an incorrigibly incoherent concept, and one that is ultimately indistinguishable from pure magical thinking.

The problem of existence. The universe's existence is not self-explanatory; it is contingent, meaning it could have been otherwise or not at all. This contingency points to a source of existence that is not itself contingent, a necessary being that does not depend on anything else for its existence.

• Naturalism cannot explain the existence of nature itself.
• Existence is not a natural phenomenon; it is logically prior to any physical cause.
• The question of existence is not a scientific question.

The principle of causality. All things that do not possess the cause of their existence in themselves must be brought into existence by something outside themselves. This principle leads to the conclusion that there must be an uncaused cause, a necessary being that is the source of all contingent existence.

• An infinite regress of contingent causes is impossible.
• A first contingent cause is also impossible.
• The uncaused cause must be outside the realm of contingent things.

Beyond temporal origins. The argument from contingency is not about the temporal beginning of the universe, but about its ontological dependence. Even if the universe has always existed, it would still require a necessary source of being to sustain it.

4. God is not a being but Being itself, encompassing all existence.

To speak of “God” properly... is to speak of the one infinite source of all that is: eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, uncreated, uncaused, perfectly transcendent of all things and for that very reason absolutely immanent to all things.

Beyond finite categories. God is not a "being" in the way that a tree or a person is a being. He is not one more object in the inventory of things that are. Instead, he is the very act of being itself, the infinite source from which all finite things derive their existence.

• God is not a "being" but "Being itself."
• He is both transcendent and immanent.
• He is the unity and simplicity that underlies all diversity.

The ontological cause. God is the ontological cause of all things, the source of existence itself. He does not merely shape or arrange pre-existing materials, but creates all things from nothing.

• He is not a demiurge or a cosmic craftsman.
• His creative act is eternal, not temporal.
• He is the infinite wellspring of all that is.

Necessary being. God's being is necessary, meaning he cannot not exist. He is not merely a being that happens to exist, but the very ground of possibility itself. This necessity is not a property he possesses, but his very essence.

5. Consciousness is a mystery that resists purely material explanations.

The one thing of which it can give no account, and which its most fundamental principles make it entirely impossible to explain at all, is nature’s very existence.

The limits of naturalism. Naturalism, the view that only the physical world exists, cannot account for consciousness. It struggles to explain how a purely material system can give rise to subjective experience, intentionality, and abstract thought.

• Consciousness is not a natural phenomenon.
• It is a "supernatural" form of the natural.
• It is a mystery that points beyond the physical.

The problem of qualia. Qualia, the subjective "what it is like" of experience, cannot be reduced to physical processes. The feeling of redness, the taste of chocolate, the sound of music—these are all private, incommunicable experiences that resist objective explanation.

• Qualia are intrinsic properties of consciousness.
• They are not reducible to physical properties.
• They are the very substance of subjective experience.

The failure of reductionism. Attempts to reduce consciousness to brain activity or computational processes fail to capture its essential nature. The subjective experience of being a conscious self cannot be explained by purely objective, third-person accounts.

6. Intentionality reveals the mind's inherent directedness beyond the physical.

The human longing for God or the transcendent runs very deep—perhaps far too deep to be trusted, but also too deep to treat as mere primitive folly—and it has produced much good and much evil in human history.

The "aboutness" of mind. Intentionality is the mind's capacity to be directed toward something, to have a purpose or meaning. This "aboutness" is a fundamental feature of consciousness that cannot be explained by purely physical processes.

• Intentionality is the mark of the mental.
• It is the mind's power to refer to something beyond itself.
• It is present in all acts of perception, thought, and desire.

Beyond mechanical causality. The mind's intentionality is not a mechanical process, but a directedness toward an end. It is a form of causality that is not reducible to physical forces.

• The mind is not a passive receiver of information.
• It actively interprets and organizes experience.
• It is drawn toward meaning and purpose.

The limits of naturalism. Naturalism cannot account for the mind's capacity to transcend the physical world. The mind's intentionality points to a reality beyond the material, a realm of meaning and purpose that cannot be explained by purely natural causes.

7. Bliss, as a transcendental desire, points to God as ultimate fulfillment.

God is not only the ultimate reality that the intellect and the will seek but is also the primordial reality with which all of us are always engaged in every moment of existence and consciousness, apart from which we have no experience of anything whatsoever.

The longing for the absolute. The human mind is not content with finite objects; it is driven by a desire for the absolute, for ultimate truth, goodness, and beauty. This desire is a transcendental orientation of the will, a longing for something beyond the limits of the physical world.

• All finite desires point to an infinite desire.
• The mind seeks an end that is beyond all finite things.
• This longing is a natural part of human consciousness.

The nature of bliss. Bliss is not merely a feeling of pleasure, but a state of perfect fulfillment, a union with the source of all being. It is the ultimate object of desire, the end toward which all rational beings are drawn.

• Bliss is the perfect coincidence of being and consciousness.
• It is the joy of knowing and loving the absolute.
• It is the ultimate satisfaction of the will.

God as the object of desire. The desire for bliss points to God as the ultimate object of desire, the source of all goodness and beauty. God is not merely a being to be believed in, but a reality to be loved and enjoyed.

8. The search for God is a journey into the depths of being, consciousness, and bliss.

God is not only superior summo meo—beyond my utmost heights—but also interior intimo meo—more inward to me than my inmost depths.

The path of contemplation. The search for God is not merely an intellectual exercise, but a journey into the depths of one's own being. It involves a turning inward, a seeking of the source of consciousness and the ground of existence.

• Contemplation is a discipline of the mind and will.
• It involves a stripping away of illusions and attachments.
• It is a path toward union with the divine.

The unity of being, consciousness, and bliss. The journey toward God is a journey toward the unity of being, consciousness, and bliss. These three aspects of reality are not separate, but are different ways of experiencing the same divine source.

• God is the infinite fullness of being.
• He is the infinite act of consciousness.
• He is the infinite bliss of perfect union.

Beyond the limits of reason. While reason can lead us to the threshold of the divine, it cannot fully comprehend God. The ultimate knowledge of God is a matter of experience, a union of the soul with its source.

Last updated: January 14, 2025