Not only do I wish I could write like this, but I also wish I had the ability to express this as it is something I agree with. Below are three excerpts of the original post, if you like these or if they make sense then you will like the original post. Feel free to ponder as you would like.

John Caputo in On Religion and The Weakness of God: A Theology of the Eventargues that if we view the term God as not a strong force but an idea or poetry that calls us – an idea of passion that sits in the center of the human condition – then there is no line between theism and atheism. This works if we take seriously Caputo’s notion of God not as a being but as a word we use to describe love. This, Caputo insists, relies on a passionate religious awe of life – or a recognition that awe for life is what makes one religious, not creed, doctrine or theology.

“Our ignorance of the cosmos is too vast to commit to atheism, and yet we know too much to commit to a particular religion. A third position, agnosticism, is often an uninteresting stance in which a person simply questions whether his traditional religious story (say, a man with a beard on a cloud) is true or not true. But with Possibilianism I’m hoping to define a new position — one that emphasizes the exploration of new, unconsidered possibilities. Possibilianism is comfortable holding multiple ideas in mind; it is not interested in committing to any particular story.”

"Faith becomes less a position on the eternal soul of humanity and more of a comment and conversation on the eternal possibility of the human condition."