Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Streaming of thousands of movies and TV shows with limited ads on Prime Video.
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$20.00$20.00
FREE delivery on orders over $35.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $13.05
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss Paperback – September 30, 2014
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
Purchase options and add-ons
Despite the recent ferocious public debate about belief, the concept most central to the discussion—God—frequently remains vaguely and obscurely described. Are those engaged in these arguments even talking about the same thing? In a wide-ranging response to this confusion, esteemed scholar David Bentley Hart pursues a clarification of how the word “God” functions in the world’s great theistic faiths.
Ranging broadly across Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Vedantic and Bhaktic Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism, Hart explores how these great intellectual traditions treat humanity’s knowledge of the divine mysteries. Constructing his argument around three principal metaphysical “moments”—being, consciousness, and bliss—the author demonstrates an essential continuity between our fundamental experience of reality and the ultimate reality to which that experience inevitably points.
Thoroughly dismissing such blatant misconceptions as the deists' concept of God, as well as the fundamentalist view of the Bible as an objective historical record, Hart provides a welcome antidote to simplistic manifestoes. In doing so, he plumbs the depths of humanity’s experience of the world as powerful evidence for the reality of God and captures the beauty and poetry of traditional reflection upon the divine.
- Print length376 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherYale University Press
- Publication dateSeptember 30, 2014
- Dimensions5.5 x 1 x 8 inches
- ISBN-10027475441X
- ISBN-13978-0274754410
Frequently bought together

Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Editorial Reviews
Review
"Hart marshals powerful historical evidence and philosophical argument to suggest that atheists—if they want to attack the opposition's strongest case—badly need to up their game."—Oliver Burkeman, The Guardian
". . . there is something evangelical about this study: it is at once both the most valuable discussion of the doctrine of God to have appeared for decades, and a witty, often mordant, defence of Christian belief. . . . The Experience of God is still an outstanding addition to the literature on God, not least for its survey of so many of the world’s great faiths. It is also a fine piece of work of Christian apologetics, and a major contribution to debate on science and religion."—Andrew Davison, Times Literary Supplement
"Hart . . . recalls believers of all faiths to the best of their traditions, challenges unbelievers to examine their own metaphysical presuppositions, and does these with tremendous gusto. . . . A necessary book."—Michael Robbins, Commonweal
"Bracing and eloquent . . . fans of Hart’s winsome prose will not be disappointed . . . a fine work."—Edward T. Oakes, S.J., National Review
"Stunning . . . bracing and bold. . . . For provoking deep thought about the profoundest human questions, and for taking an intelligent stand in defense of faith. . . . Hart deserves the gratitude of a large and appreciative audience."—Damon Linker, The Week
"A thoroughly entertaining and engaging read. It’s difficult to convey to those who are unacquainted with Hart’s writing the sheer exuberance of his prose and the bite to his wit."—Ryan Marr, Catholic Books Review
"Impressive."—David Gibson, Religion News Service
"Hart is a phenomenally gifted thinker who recalls believers of all faiths to the best of their traditions, challenges unbelievers to examine their own metaphysical presuppositions, and does these with tremendous gusto. . . . A necessary book."—Michael Robbins, Commonweal
"Magnificent. . . . Massively learned and gorgeously written, The Experience of God should entirely transform contemporary debates concerning the validity of belief in the divine."—Mark Anthony Signorelli, University Bookman
"Creative and engaging . . . a stunning and provocative achievement."—Kenneth Oakes, Reformation 21
"A classic of Christian apologetics."—Francesca Aran Murphy, First Things
"Hart is as skilled a rhetorician as he is a theologian, and is able to deliver a punchy verbal image of the God who transcends all images."—Francesca Aran Murphy, First Things
"[Hart] retrieves and celebrates the classic Christian understanding of God . . . [with] rigorous logic and a caustic style. . . . His elegant prose and witty invective bring Evelyn Waugh to mind. . . . Hart’s exuberant writing unmasks the false pretensions of secularism."—Sidney Callahan, Commonweal
"David Hart can always be relied on to offer a perspective on Christian faith that is both profound and unexpected. In this masterpiece of quiet intellectual and spiritual passion, he magnificently sets the record straight as to what sort of God Christians believe in and why."—Rowan Williams, University of Cambridge
"David Hart’s new book is nothing less than astounding. He is liberal, conservative, radical, theological, philosophical, and historical all at the same time – that is his genius. There is no American writing on religion as intelligently, bravely, and originally as Hart."—Conor Cunningham, University of Nottingham
"David Bentley Hart’s new book is a feast- stylish and substantial. Bringing together Sanskritic analyses of God’s being with Latin and Greek and Arabic ones, this is a considerable achievement by one of the most distinctive voices in contemporary theology."—Paul J. Griffiths, Duke Divinity School
"Writing at a high philosophical level with a sharp sense of humor, Hart argues for an ecumenical Theism. Devastatingly accurate, imaginative, and immensely readable, this is David Bentley Hart’s best book."—Francesca Murphy, University of Notre Dame
"Magnificent . . . a book unlike anything done in recent times and one that only Hart could write."—Robert Louis Wilken
About the Author
Product details
- ASIN : 0300209355
- Publisher : Yale University Press (September 30, 2014)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 376 pages
- ISBN-10 : 027475441X
- ISBN-13 : 978-0274754410
- Item Weight : 2.31 pounds
- Dimensions : 5.5 x 1 x 8 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #211,202 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #255 in Comparative Religion (Books)
- #275 in History of Religions
- #377 in Religious Philosophy (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Important information
To report an issue with this product or seller, click here.
About the author

David Bentley Hart is the author of several volumes of fiction, philosophy, religious studies, and literary criticism, among them Roland in Moonlight, Kenogaia, The Experience of God, The Devil and Pierre Gernet, and You Are Gods. He is also a translator from various languages, and has produced a critical edition of the New Testament. He is co-author with his son Patrick of two children’s novels.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Long story short: if you have read Hart and enjoyed his learnedness and witticism in the past, buy this book. If you haven't read Hart but are intrigued: this, or Atheist Delusions, are the places to start. In short: buy this book. Read it, Enjoy it. Pop some popcorn and wait for the fireworks. There really is no second guessing (especially at the affordable price). I was initially expecting something of a sequel to Beauty of the Infinite (which I still consider my favorite of Hart's books, despite its difficulty) but really for those interested I would consider this more akin to Atheist Delusions than anything. Much like Hart taking great pleasures dismantling many of our august myths regarding Christian history, here Hart takes aim at much of the tosh that passes for "talk about God," in the modern arena--particularly in the "God debates" between Fundamentalists and New-Atheists of all sorts. If you were like me, and were confused by the description of the book (Sanskrit? Hinduism? What is going on?) Hart attempts to dismantle--in classical Hart style--all these poor imitations of the Almighty by marshaling the resources of the "Classical theistic traditions" (note the plural, Hart includes Judaism, Islam, several forms of Hinduism, and others alongside Christianity). Here Hart thus takes an interesting--and perhaps controversial, for those of us still riding the avalanche of trinitarian scholarship of the last thirty years--approach by noting many of the conceptual similarities between these traditions and their theological and philosophical attempts to come to a "rational" picture of God. Thus Hart explicitly marshals the language of Thomas (which I'm sure many will recognize from Rahner's criticism of it): "There is an old Scholastic distinction between religious treatises written 'De Deo Uno' [on the one God] and 'de Deo Trino' [on the Triune God]..between, that is, those that are 'about the One God' known to persons of various faiths and philosophies, and those that are about the 'Trinitarian God' of Christian doctrine. I want to distinguish in a similar way between, on the one hand, metaphysical or philosophical descriptions of God and, on the other, dogmatic or confessional descriptions, and confine myself to the former." (4)
In doing so, Hart opens with the wonderful line "this is either an extremely ambitious book, or an extremely unambitious book." Which is to to say the goal of the book is such: "My intention," says Hart, "is simply to offer a definition of the word 'God' or of its equivalents in other tongues, and to do so in fairly slavish obedience to the classical definitions of the divine found in the theological and philosophical schools of most of the major religious traditions." As such, Hart wants to clarify just what this "God" is that we should, or should not believe in. He organizes this task around three themes familiar to anyone who has read the subheading to the book: Being, Consciousness, Bliss. Which is to say, how these "moments" or "concepts" implicate, and are implicated by, God: (taking some limited examples from the chapters) our Being as contingency implying an Ultimate non-Contingent, our conscious orientations to the world presupposing in every mundane thought, act, and supposition a reference to the infinite, and indeed a saturation by it--or that the mind and reality should be compatible with each other at all, and (to those familiar with Hart's work on Gregory of Nyssa this will sound familiar) our "bliss" or the ecstatic moments of rapture and joy, our "stretching out" or epektasis into infinity. Thus Hart provides three basic reasons for these terms: 1.) They more or less adequately summarize three concepts by which classical theism represented God (here those with Trinitarian hesitation to Hart's "separation of Treatises" will be relieved to note Hart's extensive talk of the Cappadocians, Augustine, Maximus the Confessor, and Bonaventure's concept of God as Love in Trinitarian form, a la Beauty of the Infinite. Hart has not strayed from his roots) 2.) Represent how humankind's relationship to God can be summarized by concepts and 3.) These three "moments" represent that which, it seems to Hart (quite rightly, I think) cannot be "metaphysically accounted for" by assuming metaphysical naturalism (42-45).
Thus, following Beauty of the Infinite's discourse of the "beautiful rhetoric" of Theistic discourse's ability to "illuminate existence," there is here a limited apologetic purpose; Hart repeatedly affirms that he is not attempting to "prove" God, yet he also frequently repeats that authentic theology and apologetics have a fuzzy line, and that part of the task of unburdening us of idols and caricatures of God is also to bring forth the true power of the theistic tradition's actual "picture of God" (for lack of a better term) and how it represents a rationally, emotionally, and aesthetically robust "explanation" (again, for lack of a better term) of reality. This is, of course, not "God-of-the Gaps" here, where God appears in spaces allowed by the aporia of some natural mechanism: "All the classical theological arguments regarding the order of the world" in fact "assume just the opposite: that God's creative power can be seen in the rational coherence of nature as a perfect whole; that the universe was not simply a factitious product of a supreme intellect but the unfolding of the omnipresent divine wisdom or logos." (38)
It would be difficult to summarize further without simply spoiling the book, but I will end with a few anecdotal observations of my own. The first is that one of the great surprises of the book is its readability. Atheist Delusions was of course quite readable, but this book represents Hart at his most "purified" and understandable (contra another reviewer, in my opinion); he is of course classic Hart (thus there are still flourishes that will make one reach for the dictionary), but classic Hart, I might say, doing his best Chesterton impression. His lucidness here is uncanny, as his ability to calmly explain and lay out themes one may already have familiarity with. There are--at least there was for me--many "wow" moments when Hart shows you something you have been looking at but did not quite recognize you saw. This is also, in my opinion, Hart's funniest book, with Hart's typically penetrating observation producing (at least for me) some actual laugh-out-loud moments. There is for example (I won't ruin it) a particularly great moment where Hart is tearing into analytic theology by telling a brief story of a coffee-loving dolphin; or there are great one-liners like "I am enough of a romantic to believe that if something is worth being rude about, it it worth understanding as well." Other surprises abound. For example, Hart takes on analytic theology repeatedly (though he is quite respectful of those like Alvin Plantinga, he is almost palpably frustrated by others), and I for one was quite surprised with Hart's extensive engagement with evolutionary and cognitive science literature (some of Hart's book reads very similar to his friend Conor Cunningham's book Darwin's Pious Idea). These are fun new territories to watch Hart turn his immense talents and intellect toward. Further, if I had a complaint about Atheist Delusions it was that Hart, despite his obviously immense learning, is often coy about his sources. I do not doubt the veracity of his claims, but for those like myself who like to hunt down new avenues of reading, the sparse annotations and bibliography were irritating. Here, Hart does follow much the same formula, with very few endnotes trailing his oceans of prose. However he adds a wonderful (and surprisingly fun to read) "Bibliographic Postscript" which is a sort of annotated bibliography (343-350), but reads more like one is having coffee with Hart and he is giving his opinion on sources used, and others which should be read by those interested.
But enough of my review, go start reading. Get lost in Hart's beautiful prose and wonderful mind. Even if you end up disagreeing with everything he wrote, I think you will have at least left the encounter having learned quite a bit.
"Experience" is what I have been looking for in my frequent dialogues and debates with atheists: a definitive definition of what is meant by the term "God." This is needed because, IMO, atheists generally argue about God's existence based on a Straw Man God of their own creation, which Hart identifies as a problem in the God Debate on page 1 of his introduction: "...the concept of God around which the arguments have run their seemingly interminable courses has remained strangely obscure the whole time." Consequently, the contribution of a clearly articulated definition of God to the debate is helpful for us believers to analyze and refute atheists' arguments against God as well as for atheists to become aware of what they are truly up against when venturing into theological discussions rather than resorting to mockery and ridicule against their believer interlocutors. Many atheist debaters insist upon following the rules and structure of formal argumentation in talking about "claims" and "evidence" for God's "existence" without having done the heavy lifting of arriving at stipulated definitions of terms based on "...how the word "God" functions in the intellectual traditions of the developed religions..." (p. 2). Hart's book offers atheists the challenge and opportunity to explore a commonly agreed upon definition of God, although I anticipate that only the most dedicated will, since Hart puts a torch to their straw men and leaves them speechless before they can make a counterclaim to the claim that God exists. How does one argue against the existence of reality?
From the beginning, Hart establishes the validity and credibility of his definition of God according to "...how the word "God" functions in the intellectual traditions of the developed religions" so that we dismiss the frequently used ploy of atheists that places different religious traditions in competition with each other as "evidence" that all of them are false as a basis for belief in God. Hart states that "[R]eligions ought never to be treated as though each were a single discrete proposition intended to provide a single exclusive answer to a single exhaustive question." Instead, he explains how all rigorous philosophical systems "...may be making more or less proximate approaches to some dimension of truth." This analysis affirms the reality of different linguistic, cultural, symbolic, mythological and mystical elaborations on a common and universal understanding of God. I think of this in terms of the notion of "God as I/we understand God" or the "God of our understanding" that both transcends and unifies religious diversity. It also means that in the rhetoric of atheism, a lack of a clear and common agreement as to what we are talking about when we talk about God, is a prerequisite to meaningful dialogue about whether or not "God" "exists." Hart points out that although God is "essentially beyond finite comprehension," God can genuinely be known, encountered and experienced "...with a fullness surpassing mere conceptual comprehension." Hart thoroughly analyzes and debunks the "demiurge" conceptualization of God, as well as the "God of the gaps" approach to defining God.
Hart's treatment of the ontological question of God is masterfully straightforward and comprehensible, as he argues how historically more "spiritual" or "immaterial" causes "...had to be invoked to explain how the potencies of matter could be made actual and integrated into the coherent wholes of which nature is constituted." Hart has a complete command of the metaphysical arguments that support his concept of God as "the greater spiritual order of all things" with the human mind as the instrument "to interpret" physical reality. Hart expounds on the limitations of science, since science must presume the "lawfulness" of physical reality as a prior condition to its investigation. Hart successfully makes the argument that the universe "...as a physical reality, lacks the obviously supernatural power necessary to exist on its own" and this is what classical metaphysics identifies as God. His argument reminds me of the words of St. Thomas Aquinas: "This all men speak of as God."
Hart brilliantly describes the simplicity of God as "the infinite unconditioned source of all reality" and thus sets aside arguments that there is only a numeric difference between polytheism and monotheism, as some atheists claim. Hart's nuanced and articulate argument supports his claim that "materialism" or "naturalism" has absolutely no logical superiority over theism. The theme of "bliss" is interwoven in these arguments, as he talks about consciousness and the human ability to know "the extraordinary within the ordinary, the supernatural within the natural." The concept of "qualia" or the qualitative dimension of experience serves to illustrate and affirm how God is known through our subjective consciousness, and even that the pure subjectivity of our experiences is a "primordial datum" and our ability to integrate experiences with a "transcendental grasp of the empirical data as a constant totality" pointing to God.
Hart's book is full of priceless sayings and clever and razor-sharp quips that are unforgettable. One of my favorites is this: "Wisdom is the recovery of innocence at the far end of experience." I love this saying because it resonates with my own faith journey, where the more I learn about God and experience God, the more I recoup that innocence of my experiences of a powerful connection with my Creator, before knowing anything more of Christianity than the 23rd Psalm and the Lord's Prayer.
I highly recommend David Bentley Hart's "The Experience of God" to those in search of fine-tuned intellectual arguments in defense of his/her faith as well as a spiritually uplifting and affirming experience for the soul.
Top reviews from other countries
David Bentley Hart has written a book that is the clearest possible guide to the conception of God I have ever read (the classical conception that is). Unfortunately, despite his clarity in both writing and in thought, one doubts along with Hart in the ability of reason to convince anyone ultimately committed to Metaphysical Naturalism/Physicalism. The fact that someone like Jerry Coyne could read this and still so completely miss the point makes me seriously doubt his self-touted objectivity. Learning what great theologians actually thought, and about the intellectual heritage that was the background to that thought, makes the modern debates over the existence of God - or of the conflict between religion and science - seem suspiciously manufactured and forced.
For a work by an Christian Eastern Orthodox theologian, it is surprisingly ecumenical towards other religions (where true concord can be found). If I had to chose one book on religion to give to the nonreligious or to the curious spiritual seeker, it would be a toss up between this and The Perennial Philosophy by Aldous Huxley.
What it says about metaphysics, philosophy, consciousness studies, theology and so forth is for the most part simple and, in philosophical terms, fairly obvious. What it says about God would be a different matter, but it is not obscure. It is fearless in its adherence to sound reasoning and common-sense and takes no prisoners.
The meaning of the word `God', when this is used in its most profound or fundamental sense, in other words its correct sense, is carefully proscribed, and this ultimate phenomenon is clearly distinguished from the various non-reductive and anthropomorphic ideas of God that are invariably the target of atheist preachers and quite often objects of faith for their opponents.
God is defined in such a way that it becomes quite easy to speak of Him in terms of Being, Consciousness and Bliss, and thereby almost casually to syncretise the world's main theistic and atheistic religions. The idea that the God of Christianity, Islam and Judaism would be inconsistent with the discoveries and teachings of Buddhism, Taoism and advaita Vedanta is explicitly rejected in the sub-title and is not entertained for a moment. Rather, there is a cross-referencing of quotations that indicates the commonality of their core doctrine.
The lunacy of modern philosophy of mind is exposed for what it is, with no sleights of hand and no attempt to make the discussion incomprehensible. Metaphysics is not ignored, as it so often is for contemporary discussions of consciousness, it being an inconvenient reminder that almost all current theories fail trivially in logic. Materialism, specifically, is shown to be logically indefensible. Atheism may sometimes be a subtle thing, but in any of its common forms it is dismissed as nonsensical. Most popular forms of theism are rejected, not necessarily as misguiding in their effects but as being non-reductive, thus at least to some extent naïve in their ontology and conceptualisation. There is something to upset almost everyone.
This is not yet another long and inconclusive discussion of things we can never understand, replete with tedious rehearsals of arguments that we can never settle. It is an attempt to explain, or this is its effect, that in fact we can know these things, we can settle these arguments, just as long as we apply our reason carefully, maintain a disinterested approach and keep our thoughts as simple and direct as possible, or at least sufficiently simple that we do not become lost in our own sophistry. It is a demonstration that this achievement is possible.
We may not be quite sure of how authoritative is the author, or of whether his arguments are quite as conclusive as he makes them out to be, but the easy simplification of the issues is clear evidence that he understands the issues comprehensively, is confident of his facts and sure of his reasoning. There is no need to dissemble under these circumstances.
We cannot explain anything completely without positing a phenomenon transcendental to the psycho-physical or space-time universe. For Hart this is perfectly obvious. Why not call it God? Then we can progressively narrow down the definition of this phenomenon by a process of empiricism and logic and see what emerges. Inevitably, various articles of religious faith and some popular secular beliefs about God and the universe will have to abandoned along the way, they cannot all be correct, but we need not be anxious. Hart shows that religion, science and metaphysics would emerge unscathed from such a process. It is only that along the way we may gain a clearer idea of how these bodies of knowledge are related and of how their respective discoveries and results may be aligned for a fundamental theory. Crucially, we may come to see how an atheistic Buddhism may be explained as consistent with a theistic Christianity, simply by rendering one particular form of atheism and one particular form of theism indistinguishable. Then it becomes possible to reduce the argument between theism and atheism to a matter of terminology.
The only passage that bothered me, or at least gave my neck a rest from nodding in agreement, was the discussion of miracles. It seemed to assume, or at least suggest, that theism must demand their possibility, and that, therefore, it must demand the rejection of naturalism. I do not believe that this is the case, nor that it would necessarily follow from any of the argument presented by the author. I would rather believe that where an event seems to us to be a miracle it is evidence of our ignorance, and that it would appear to be a natural event to someone with a correct understanding of Nature, Her laws and their relation to any higher laws. This quibble seems almost certain to be a matter of terminology and definitions, the use of the word `naturalism' in particular, rather than a difference of opinion about miracles. All the same, the idea of asking a materialist to swallow the idea that the laws of creation can be broken seems strategically flawed when it should be enough to simply point out that we do not know or understand these laws yet, so have no method for distinguishing between a miracle and a law-governed event. After all, that the universe can make itself a cup of tea and sit down to read a book might easily be viewed as a miracle.
I would have liked a bit more metaphysics, simply because it would have strengthened the arguments even further to show that God, as defined by Hart, would solve all `problems of philosophy' in principle, and not just those that are mentioned in this discussion. But one book cannot do everything.
As another reviewer has mentioned, what is surprising is the readability of the book and, for a discussion of this kind, that it brings to mind Chesterton. In this sense it is 'popular'. It is no more than a personal judgement, but I would not hesitate to recommend this book to any person of any age or philosophical persuasion who cares about the rationality of their world-view and who would be capable of reading it.









