DE Weekly: Kierkegaard, Paradox, & Theistic Existentialism
Below is an archived email originally sent on November 10, 2025.
Kierkegaard, Paradox, & Theistic Existentialism
Anthony Bourdain once said something like, “To say you’ve had Mexican food is to say nothing at all.” What he meant was, if one was to explore the different regions of Mexico, the local cuisine varies so much, so drastically that you would almost think you’re eating a totally different type of food.
In the same way, to say you could define existentialism in one sentence is to say nothing at all. You can’t.
I’ve written in this newsletter about many philosophers, some of which are more existentialist in their beliefs than others, but most everyone I’ve written about have some existential beliefs, even if they are only existentialist adjacent.
While Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus might be the first to come to mind when existentialism is mentioned, theirs is not the only kind of existentialism that exists.
On a totally different end of the spectrum, St. Augustine gives way to St. Thomas Aquinas, who gives way to Blaise Pascal, who gives way to Søren Kierkegaard, and so on.
With some of those names mentioned, I’d like to write today about what is called theistic existentialism.
Theistic existentialism is a strain of existentialism which combines key existentialist principles with key principles of Christianity, namely, a belief in God.
It holds simultaneously that life and the universe have no predetermined meaning and that we must create our own meaning through responsible choices, while at the same time espousing God as the ultimate source of meaning and as a reliable guide for finding purpose and value in life.
One of the pioneers of theistic existentialism (also called Christian existentialism) is often considered the father of existentialism itself: Søren Kierkegaard.
I wrote a couple of months ago about Kierkegaard’s “leap of faith,” wherein he argues we should believe in God as the ultimate source of meaning not because we can prove it, not because we can use logic to reason ourselves into it, but because some things in life simply require a belief beyond certainty and finite reason.
Kierkegaard argues, too, that this leap of faith is entirely subjective; it comes down to a choice by each individual. Each individual must surrender themselves totally and transcend themselves beyond reason to achieve this faith.
Through his uniquely theistic existentialism, Kierkegaard touched on all the same themes we are used to seeing, such as authenticity, subjectivity, rationality, and more.
He agreed with the likes of Sartre in that each person suffers from their freedom to make choices which constitute their existence, which can lead to anguish and failure to make a full commitment to life.
Also like Sartre, Kierkegaard viewed the relationship between humans, God, and the world as contradictory; as a paradox.
However, where Sartre saw the concept of the Christian God as contradictory claiming He could not exist, Kierkegaard took the other side, arguing that it is the universe that is fundamentally paradoxical, with the foremost paradox being the union between humans and God that transcends all reason.
By now, it should be clear that even when discussing the same philosophical themes and even agreeing on some major points, those we call existentialists today arrived at radically different conclusions.
This is why, at the top of this newsletter, I said it means almost nothing to try and define existentialism in a sentence. With all the different thoughts that have been written, we can explore almost any avenue of belief if we wish.
One more thing Kierkegaard had in common with Sartre was his recognition of the fact that our radical freedom in life and our responsibility to make choices that constitute our existence often leads to anxiety and dread.
To realize we are responsible for creating purpose and meaning in our own lives can be a lot to swallow. If we dwell too much on the monumental task, we might be led to despair.
Here’s where Kierkegaard is truly set apart from the other existentialists.
For him, as for other Christian theologians, the notion of despair is considered a sin. This goes back to the story of Adam and Eve, and man’s fall from the Garden of Eden.
Eating forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge was our way of choosing a path different from that of God’s will and, in turn, establishing a path of despair that many of us take in life.
The way back from this, Kierkegaard argues, is to reestablish the right path––that is, one that is in accordance with God’s will; this path is the one that offers true purpose and meaning, stemming from the source of purpose and meaning Himself.
In traditional existentialism, we accept our responsibility to make choices and deem whether they are good or bad when making them. Then, we decide whether those choices have helped inch us closer to a meaningful existence.
In theistic existentialism, we accept our responsibility to make choices but, rather than judging their merit ourselves, we orient ourselves toward God and evaluate those choices in the face of God.
Søren Kierkegaard is one of the most fascinating philosophers and certainly one of the most fascinating existentialists for this conclusion and his entire understanding of the world as a whole.
For him, his existentialism expressed itself uniquely through the lens of his devout Christianity.
“I found I had less and less to say, until finally, I became silent, and began to listen. I discovered in the silence, the voice of God.” –– Søren Kierkegaard
Thanks for reading.
Sincerely,
Brandon J. Seltenrich
P.S.––
One of the great things about reading is that, as soon as you think you understand something, you read something else that makes you realize you don’t.
For more content, follow @TheDailyExist on X. For other social links, click here.
I write this newsletter for free–I love sharing my thoughts with you all, and I’ll continue to do so for free. But if you like what I write and want to show your support, you can always click here to share a tip. Thanks for keeping me going–it’s much appreciated.