For the context of the following comments please click on the hyperlinks above them.
Needing to refresh a bit, and review the WHY of this project, I’ll repost a fragment from an interesting conversation from the early days (2013/06/19).
The following list of “working theories (and questions)”, was offered up for comment and comparison at “Agnostic Universe“. The conversation was quite interesting for quite awhile. Before degrading into a ridicule session.
(note: this has been lightly edited for better readability. Mainly in the form of fiddling with commas.)
– The only reasonable definition of God would have to be something like; “The Emergent Property of Infinite Potentiality”. Emergent property and infinite potential not separate. The Entirety.
– God thus neither exists nor does not exist. The concept of “existence” requiring “non existence”, belongs in the world of opposing forces. The manifested, ever changing Universe. The realm of Laws. The inevitable expression of God’s nature.
– Existing or not existing does not in anyway change God.
– God being the Entirety simply is.
– The fundamental question is not about existence but rather about “sentience”. Is the sense of “I Am” the first effect of infinite potential?
– Is the sense of “I Am” a singularity only seeming to manifest in endless iterations? Like light, a property shared by the candle and the sun alike, but itself fundamentally integral to the Entirety.
– What would the relationship of the sense of “I Am” experienced as “me” be to a sentient singularity?
– If, as Zen masters and Yogi’s testify, the relationship is in reality, seamless, how should I spend my life if I want to know this?
– Who would actually know it? The distinction between knowledge and knower now being under re-evaluation.
– Upon the resolving of a paradox, what remains?
– The primary practice of Zen and Yoga is “unknowing”. Extracting oneself from concepts and habits of thought, making way for direct experience. This is a similar to, but not the same as, what you (Jeff) have described. Perhaps it could be called “Agnostic Theism”.
– The “Entirety” being a priori.
(And, unable to let sleeping dogs lie. Like a Jehovah’s Witness ringing the bell for the inevitable followup.)