check out the 2 articles on disability at the bottom of these notes (url below) for a more thorough consideration

of why we do not devalue any part of the spectrum of our human engagement of God!

In terms of knowledge and love, Christians are nondualists. Ontologically, though, neither dual nor nondual models are conceptually coherent; it seems we invoke the former to stop infinite regressions and the latter to avoid causal disjunctions, while neither escapes tautological question-begging. It seems to me that, dualistically, we experience a robustly relational intersubjective intimacy even as, nondualistically, we enjoy a sort of intraobjective identity vis a vis God, what some panentheists describe as an immersion in a divine matrix, all which leaves us as quasi-autonomous creatures, while beyond both of those putative realities there lies what would be an interobjective indeterminacy to which we can refer but not describe. These may roughly correspond to our (manifold and mulitform & varying in degree) experiences of 1) unitive, 2) unitary (or unity) and 3) ultimate reality, which, in my view, respectively convey, albeit inchoately, 1) how, 2) how much and 3) how very much beyond our ability to imagine — we are loved. I appreciate that some dualistic paradigms imagine that we enjoy varying degrees of beatitude both per some sort of spiritual meritocracy as well as per various types of growth paradigms but … having been loved just as I am …


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful