It's been a while since I've been here to catch up-- you guys are getting deep in some of your recent discussions.

I too like to think of unitheism as broad-based, open to new ideas, and still growing and evolving. In my form of the concept I do prefer "being" (as in beingness) to "a being" for the creative and sustaining power of existence. Or perhaps I should capitalize itó Beingó even over any form of God, which has a lot of baggage. Not to mention the fact that I don't consider Being to be almighty, yet you could say most-powerful rather than all-powerful.

I've written most of what's on the unitheist website, so it might be that from my opinions (being the opinion of just one person) unitheism could be construed by an outsider as more focused than broad. Therefore I definitely like the views of Rev. King and other thoughtful unitheists to show the scope of the concept as I envision itó we agree on basics yet each have our own take and individuality on word usage and perhaps a few of the other details. Being could certainly be called God if one prefers. Keep up the good writing and thinking!