Response to the Logician: 070611: Part II of IV
...Logician: You are no better than the Bible.
Djs: The phrase “no better” is not analysis rather the phrase “no better” is judgmental in nature. I am not taking offence here, rather I am simply pointing out how easy it is to digress from a strictly analytical path.
Logician: True, it is a very judgemental statement.
Djs: So why use it? I thought we were using ‘reason’ and dialectics as opposed to personal attacks.
Djs: I don’t believe I stated anywhere in the work that I was not a “Christian”.
Logician: I apologise for this misconception, I re-read your work and saw my mistake so anything else that you can attach to this misunderstanding is therefore based upon it, maybe you’ll understand why the rest of the reply is also tainted as this was a major fault of mine.
Djs: I do not perceive it so much as having “ventured from” as “broadening” and thus “broadening” their doctrines.
Logician: Again, semantics.
Djs: When you state: Your work like all others I have met along my journey stop at the creator’s door. I think you missed a few sections including:
Logician: I probably did, but the statement is still valid, your work depends upon the creator.
Djs: That is true.
Djs: Sorry but you have error of analysis here. The model of reality, symbiotic panentheism, in no way puts humankind back on its knees to another deity, rather it elevates humankind to the level of divinity.
Logician: No, no error here, just an interpretation.
Djs: OK
Djs: You have misstated symbiotic panentheism, the model of reality, perhaps because do not understand it.
Logician: Probably, but then again I understand the word “symbiotic” as a mutual existence, and I do believe (without going through it all again) you said God can exist without us yet we cannot exist without God, to a layman like myself, mutual just left the stage.
Djs: I understand the confusion here and it is not your fault but lies in the inadequacies of my writing. Therefore let me take this opportunity to explain.
‘God’, the whole, exists and ‘created’ virgin entities of consciousness which then ‘experienced’ causing its virgin consciousness to be no longer ‘virgin’ but rather to have consciousness of …
One aspect of experiencing could be the process of experiencing the physical via journeying through the physical.
Once having been ‘created’, however, the discrete entity of knowing exists timelessly and thus once created God cannot be God without the discrete entity of knowing for without the created entity of knowing God would not be the All should the created entity of knowing no longer exist.
In short God can exist without you if you have not yet been created but once created this is no longer the case. Once you are created, once you exist, God cannot be God without you.
Djs: You have touched upon a really exciting aspect of symbiotic panentheism although it is not the direct aspect to which you refer but rather an aspect which is indirectly indicated by your comments.
Logician: OK
Djs: Absolutely not! The model in no way indicates the soul is the property of the creator!
Logician: Certainly looks like that to me, I could be wrong.
Djs: Can you explain why it looks like it to you?
Djs: You totally misunderstand the model if this is what you conclude.
Logician: I don’t think I totally misunderstood anything. I may have misunderstood some of it.