For a long time I have identified closely with the perspective of panentheism, but only by this definition:
“Every created thing exists within God.”
Panentheism means, literally, ‘all in God’. I have understood the ‘all’ to mean all of creation. I think that by my own definition this is correct. However, after the Lord led me through a thought process this evening, I am now seeing a logical contradiction in the expression ‘all in God’. It creates distinction rather than oneness, placing God as separate in some way from creation.
Pantheism, to me, seems like a more accurate way of describing the great I AM, as long as the definition of pantheism is accepted as ‘all is God’. This seems purer and contains no distinctions. Or does it?
The phrase is still complex, as it contains a determiner (all), a verb (is), and ‘God’ (who defies grammatical categorisation). Perhaps we need to refine our definition even further and more simply.
We might perhaps describe God as ‘the’ (as in panen’the’ism, pan’the’ism, ‘the’ology or ‘the’ism). The word ‘the’ would seem to almost perfectly capture God’s nature as self-existing. When anything exists, it is ‘a the’, and God might be described as ‘the the’, or Thee.
Even better still, when trying to understand who ‘Thee’ is, we may remain silent.
“Be still and know that I am God.”
Reflections 