Dio esiste?

by Hans Küng

Does God exist? The question implies another: Who is God? This book is meant to give an answer to both questions and to give reasons for this answer. Does God exist? Yes or no? Many are at a loss between belief and unbelief; they are undecided, skeptical. They are doubtful about their belief, but they are also doubtful about their doubting. There are still others who are proud of their doubting. Yet there remains a longing for certainty. Certainty? Whether Christians or Jews, believers in God or atheists, the discussion today runs right across old denominations and new ideologies - but the longing for certainty is unquenched. Does God exist? We are putting all our cards on the table here. The answer will be "Yes, God exists," As human beings in the twentieth century, we certainly can reasonably believe in God - even more so in the Christian God - and perhaps even more easily today than a few decades or centuries ago. For, after so many crises, it is surprising how much has been clarified and how many difficulties in regard to belief in God have melted into the Light that no darkness has overcome.

Genres: Religion, Philosophy, Theology, Christianity, Nonfiction, Spirituality, Atheism

783 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1978

About the author

Hans Küng was a Swiss Catholic priest, controversial theologian, and prolific author. Since 1995 he had been President of the Foundation for a Global Ethic (Stiftung Weltethos). Küng is "a Catholic priest in good standing," but the Vatican has rescinded his authority to teach Catholic theology. Though he had to leave the Catholic faculty, he remained at the University of Tübingen as a professor of Ecumenical Theology and served as Emeritus Professor since 1996. In spite of not being allowed to teach Catholic theology, neither his bishop nor the Holy See had revoked his priestly faculties.

Reviews

[Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was not an easy read, but I found it very engaging. Rather than "Does God Exist? An Answer for Today" the book could easily be titled "Who is God?" It's focus is not so much apologetic but a historical and philosophical analysis of how we think about God, beginning with the Enlightenment and working through to the present time. Küng is to be commended for treating the critiques of Nietzsche, Feurbach, Freud and Marx with seriousness and respect, and not merely as critics to be dispensed with as quickly as possible. Indeed,his analysis of nihilism (as he calls it) and the writings of the existentialists Sartre and Camus plays a crucial role in the development later on. Also refreshing was the treatment of Eastern religions, notably Confucianism and Buddhism, which I found remarkably insightful if a bit dated.

The scale of the book is imposing, and the author's historical approach makes it difficult at first to follow his arguments, but the logic becomes clear as the book progresses. Küng is a Roman Catholic theologian, but he goes to pains to make the book relevant to both Catholic and Protestant readers. Still, it seems to me that not having some basic familiarity with both traditions could prove an obstacle. Finally, it should be noted that this book is meant to complement the author's "On Being A Christian" but can certainly be read independently.

[Evan · Rating 1 out of 5]

The Jesuit institution of higher learning from which I graduated required a certain number of theology courses. So a good father laid this bulky tome onto us, and yes, I read the whole thing. Kung tirelessly and tiresomely goes through all the arguments in favor of the existence of God and when it comes time for him to bring it all home and hit the big home run guess what? It's all just a matter of faith after all. Wow. Of its type, I can't fault it as a theology classic, but it will only persuade those already converted. -EG

[нєνєℓ ¢ανα · Rating 5 out of 5]

This quite interesting book addresses two main and fundamental questions on theology and on philosophy alike: Does God exist? and Who is God? Its intended readership is also twofold: those who are ''doubtful about their belief'' and those who are ''doubtful about their doubting.'' Thus, not all theists will like this book, and not all atheists will want to reject it out of hand. A compelling as well as daunting exercise of reflection...

Reading it, one discovers that this book is a labor of love. It reveals itself as a deep work at once conservative in its faith and substantive in its scholarship. The famous father Hans Küng argues for the existence of God and debate about his true nature as being, but in a manner that undermines at the same time biblical and dogmatic fundamentalisms... a real adventure!

[MF · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book took me 5 months to read on and off, not because it was boring -it was anything but- or because it was too difficult -though sections I do admit were complex and hard to comprehend, it was immensely intelligible-, no, I took my time with this one because I wanted to savour each and every page. There was so much to discover in every paragraph, or to re-think -lots to re-think indeed-that I couldn't manage more than a few pages at a time, followed by sometimes days to digest its wisdom. Küng to his credit doesn't shy away from difficult questions and treats them seriously, and gives them his best shot. He traces philosophy's search for certainty from the time of Descartes and Pascal, and how that impacts the question of the rationality of belief in God. Can reason permit us the liberty to ascent to belief in God, when we are fundamentally uncertain of reality itself, let alone God? Küng is clear sighted and strong when dealing with the philosophical questions, and argues convincingly both that there is an internal consistency in a fundamental trust in reality, as opposed to a nihilist view, and also building up particularly from Pascal and Kant that while God's existence can't be proven, it is nonetheless at least as consistent with reason as non-belief in God. (The case is made stronger than this in his elaboration of God being not just a Supreme Being among beings, but the utmost foundation of Being.)

I found Küng's treatment of Hegel insightful -I finally understood what all the fuss about him was. He also was meticulous in dealing with chief critiques of belief in God by Feuerbach, Marx and Freud (and many, many more in passing.) The book represents a prodigious amount of research and thought, and it boggles the mind how he managed to grapple with so much, so broadly, so deeply, and so well.

Küng, I thought, was only inconsistent when dealing with Catholic beliefs -who he is a supposed proponent of. He was ambiguous in places about things that are core matters of faith for Christians, let alone Catholics: existence of demons, the real resurrection of Jesus and the possibility of miracles. I think he seemed so eager to make his faith agreeable to modern man that he was willing to throw anything difficult to accept. He gave too much credence to David Hume's criticism of miracles that the laws of nature must either be universal -in which miracles can't happen- or they are not universal. Considering that Hume didn't even believe in the principle of causality and therefore the laws of nature, perhaps he gave this too much credence himself as a critique of miracles. Küng is very wooly on this and at least as best I could tell he was very uncomfortable in accepting miracles occur. Laws of nature apply to nature: why can't a supernatural being/agent act within a natural system? I simply think it is a sleight of hand to refer to it as a suspension of the laws of nature: to me it is an addition to the system, not a changing of the rules: all within in nature still must abide with these laws, it is just that God is the free agent. (Considering that Küng emphasises at length God's radical freedom, I thought he was inconsistent in determining that God has his hands tied and therefore, miracles don't occur.)

But those quibbles aside, I will be reviewing the book again. I have underlined and made notes of so much of this book, that it may take several more weeks to fully appreciate its immense contribution to the question of whether it is reasonable to believe in God. Spoiler alert: he believes it very much is reasonable.

Other gems of interest:
-relationship between science and religion
-meaning for suffering and evil
-arguments for and against the existence of God

It is a very long book, but well worth the read, you will deepen and sharpen up the knowledge of your faith. (And possibly, may make you consider faith as a possibility, with intellectual credibility.)

[Christopher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely one of my favorite books of all time.

"Serious theology does not claim any elitist, privileged access to truth: It cannot in any case be meant to be intelligible only to believers [...]

Serious theology does not claim any complete, total possession of the truth, nor any monopoly of truth: It cannot in any case be a comprehensive ideological system, worked out to the last detail, which would ultimately render superfluous any further reflections on the part of sociologists, psychologists, economists, jurists, medical experts, scientists

[...] we cannot neglect consideration of critical arguments by appealing to some authority within the system, we cannot evade the competition of ideas, suppress temptations to doubt, exclude possibilities on the part of certain persons or in certain situations."

[Russ · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don't feel qualified to comment extensively on this book, as I am no philosopher. I've learned a lot from it. I don't think his argument for the existence of God is particularly convincing. Perhaps it is not meant to be, but only to allow one permission to have faith in God (which most days I do anyway). But it is engaging, and relatively accessible. It's given me much to consider.

[Bruno · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really interesting book… it took me a lot longer than I expected, and that is a good thing.

First, this book is from 1978, which gave a nice window into the past. Some thinkers (like Hegel, Marx) are less popular now, but that doesn’t diminish the value of the discussion. Lamenting about people lost in “modern times” and turning away from God seem, on the other, to be from all times.

I especially liked the really thorough discussion and approach on engaging with philosophy. About 2/3 of the book is a deep dive from Descartes to modern thoughts about God from Einstein. It is a really deep approach, engaging fully with the arguments. This part could even be considered an introduction into philosophy of religion. There is no upfront agenda when treating these thinkers, including ardent atheists. Arguments are followed through, criticisms and even countercriticisms are formulated.
A minus however is that atheists are considered to have become atheists because of “something” in their personal history. That may be true, but then the same argument should then be investigated for religious persons, too, just to be honest.

Then there is an important step into the proving of the existence of God, by argument a fundamental trust (Grundvertrauen) in the “I”, “the world” (science) and “ethics”. It is a well thought argument, and I would be inclined to follow it. However, and that is a bit of a strawman and false dichotomy, it is positioned against nihilism. That seems a bit too fast, as other approaches to reality and the self and ethical behavior like humanism could also profit from this fundamental trust, without going further into the existence of God.
I do however like the argumentation that to have human worth (and therefore a just society), one needs to engage in trust in the self and world. This is a critical argument against relativism, even though current science has brought additional input on conscience and passage of time.

The final part, to be expected, is the proving of God’s existence. Kuhn’s approach is very honest NOMA (no overlapping magisterial), meaning that there is no rational-only proof of God, but also, and very interestingly, there is no “just believe it” without rational input and engaging with the philosophical arguments as outlined. Even though the domains of ratio and belief are separate, both are equal and need to be respected.
In the end, Kuhn even indicates the valid belief in the Christian God, engaging also in arguments about the Trinity and with respect of (then current) knowledge within exegesis of the Bible. The result, to me, is a bit of a wishy-washy God, which certainly is more interesting than a fundamentalist or literalist belief, but insufficiently indicates why this is different from other religions or humanism (even though Kuhn engages this topic too). Maybe, in another time, this would have fully convinced me, but now it left me hanging a bit. Especially given his criticisms of the Church (nothing new there) and in light of his interdiction to teach that came hardly a year later.

In any case, this book, because of the sheer breadth of the argumentation and honest intellectual discussion, is worth the read. Even if you disagree with the conclusion, you come away with a lot of interesting and engaging arguments. I recommend this book.

[Jc · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another one of Küng’s “weighty tomes,” this one being a 1980 follow-up to his 1974 “On Being A Christian.” On Being, which I first read in the late ‘70s was actually one of the two books that initiated (much to the would-be disappointment of Küng if he knew) my regress (to borrow C.S. Lewis’s term) into atheism (the other was Brothers Karamazov). I do admire Küng as a thinker, but also vehemently disagree with most of his conclusions. All that is lead up to me saying that this work is not among his best, and certainly does not compare well with On Being. On Being made me think, made me question (and still did after my 3rd read through of it). This one? Well, Hans K. DOES do a very good job here at laying out how philosophy and theology (mostly limited here to their Western/christian forms) has evolved over the history of the church (that is, he mostly concentrates on how they affected Roman Catholicism, though some discussion of other forms of christianity do enter the discussion). So, Does God has lots to offer in the way of a dense, introductory text into the history of [mostly] Western thought. But, when it comes to his main thesis, that is, dealing with the question as to whether “God Exists,” he mostly just spends 700 pages repeatedly saying Yes, God Exists (even says that verbatim on the back cover!) dismissing those who disagree with him as not really considering the question or the OBVIOUS answer (he basically never addresses the question). So, A+ as an overview of Western Thought, D- as a open discussion regarding the existence of a deity (let alone "the" deity). I still enjoy reading and arguing with Küng, but this one I could have skipped. (Also, unlike On Being, this one needed some serious editing, I don't know if that problem is due to the translation or is in the original German edition as well)

[Tyler · Rating 4 out of 5]

1. This feels like four or five books crammed into one, so it's not always clear how different sections fit with others and with the whole. But this book is pretty good, and Küng is obviously a brilliant guy.

2. Whether the book is convincing to skeptical, agnostic, and atheist readers is another question. My own view is that it ends in kind of a stalemate. Küng's "Yes" to the question of "Does God Exist" is an appealing one, probably one of the better apologetic defenses for belief in God I've read so far, and Küng writes beautifully of it.

3. The book is worth reading just for Küng's exposition of Feuerbach, Pascal, Descartes, Hegel, Marx, Freud, and so forth. He puts things into historical context and brings out the essence of each philosophers' thought in an engaging way, not a small feat.

4. On the other hand, there is too little attention given to the problem of evil and the thought of Eastern religions.

5. Küng is clearly intellectually honest and generous, and isn't afraid to give some justified punches at the irrationalist and fundamentalist wings of the Christian tradition, both Protestant and Catholic.

[Patrick Murray · Rating 1 out of 5]

Without doubt the worst book I have ever read. I recommend the objections raised to it in the Dominican Fergus Kerr's Theology After Wittgenstein, which offer a correction to Küng's characterization of Wittgenstein and the Vienna school. I agree with Kerr's claim that Does God Exist? fails to overcome its own skepticism and essentially encourages the reader, after a very long survey of the history of philosophy, to take a leap of faith not only in God but even in anything outside the confines of his or her own mind. In short, Does God Exist is nothing more than a long preamble to skepticism.

[Mar · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is generally well written and has very useful information, yet it is also misleading, imprecise and incredibly biased.

[فلاح رحيم · Rating 5 out of 5]

Astonishing representation of the main Western philosophers since Descartes. Unique in clarity and fairness to each one of them weather believer or atheist. His answer to the question of the title is "yes" but his openness and respect to philosophy as a major human endeavor makes his book a pleasure to read whatever your own answer to the question is. Strongly recommended.

[Tully · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty comprehensive and clear treatment of the past 300 years of thinking about God. Predictably weak on negative (& liberation) theology, but still an excellent resource for undergrad philosophy of religion courses

[Natalie Baer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Difficult, did not finish, will someday

[Ayre Loam]

Does God Exist? An Answer for Today

[Michel Van Goethem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hans Küng