I believe I shall leave to next weak the difficulties I've perceived in Monism and Pantheism.
Well here we are again. I'll divert all the entries relating to my following Jesus by the guidance of His Spirit under the rule of His Father to here henceforth.
I take it that Monism, of the Spinoza form (or any other I've encountered) runs something like this: all of us are really one. Thus our perceptions of difference are either a game or a tool designed to bring about self awareness. This answers some ethical questions-why should I trust or even like Others? But I find this position's theodicy of ignorance uncompelling. In particular, I am in the philosophical sense a realist regard evil: I think it has a positive form and end apart from good.
I don't think I've ever given Pantheism a fair shot. I take it that a basic corollary to multiple Divinity is multiple possible goods (which we commonly observe) and even multiple, possibly conflicting Bests (which in our finitude I take it that we probably could never know). This would mean one god's meat would be another god's poison. I suppose that possible world would include some more or less factual account of the existence of things, proper ends for each god proper, and separate ways to live; even diverging peoples according to each telos. Each would seem incomprehensible and perhaps evil to one another after a time, due to observer bias relative to that which is supposed to be good. Frankly I see such problems regarding how we would know ourselves to be in this situation that I've never traveled far down this path. It seems a waste of time, even as an intellectual exercise.
Next week at http://absentthee.blogspot.com: Mrs. Christ, or My (Mis)Understanding of John Sewell's Best Understanding of Christianity.
Next week here: _Eragon_ review, On Cheap Conflicts, An Alpha Version of Collaborative Fiction