God is all of the above, but I am in agreement with John D Caputo (The Weakness of God):
As I understand him, Caputo is not in agreement with most of the above, with the exception of a call. His rejection is part of his “theology without theology”. Rather than argue against such views on the same grounds on which those claims are made, he leaves aside such matters altogether because they set limits and conditions on the unlimited and unconditional. Caputo’s deconstruction shows this limiting and conditioning at work even where the aim is just the opposite, as is the case with Tillich’s ground of being, who Caputo says, does not go far enough.
He does accept some notion of God’s absence, but not majesty. See, for example, his essay “Does the Kingdom of God Need God”. https://www.westarinstitute.org/resourc ... -need-god/
He attempts to move beyond, as you quote, the onto-theological circuit that circles between being and beings. This means moving beyond questions of God’s being and existence. In terms of his “theopoetics” he says, that God does not exist, God insists. Rather than either affirm or deny God’s existence, he presents a theology of “perhaps”. This is the theme of his, “The Insistence of God :A Theology of Perhaps”.
In simplest terms, it is not for Caputo a matter of what we say about God or God’s relation to man, but of what we are called to do. This call is not one of obedience to a moral code. There is no road map for the road is always under construction. We must make our way. One’s way is not guided by principles and rules but by love, mercy, and justice. It is a response to those in need.
See how they love one another. How? Without why. Thus does the kingdom come. Period. The end. ("Does the Kingdom of God Need God?")