Using the "room" analogy Hal brought up in another thread, this is how I see God:
Here's me.
Imagine a complete lack of things, a void. Into this picture we introduce a room. In this room are all things, the entire universe, with us (me) standing at the door, observing. We cannot see outside the room, because it's just void. We cannot see behind us, because if we could turn around there's just more void. We cannot even see ourselves from here at the door, but we can see into the room, and we can see all 'things' in it. (That is to say, if its capable of being observed, it's in the room.)
'Good' is in that room, as well as 'evil', and Images of God. 'Happiness' is there, and 'sad', and flights of fancy. My reflection is in there, and my shadow. Maths is there, and rivers and trees. My mom is there, and my cat --my cat as friend, my cat as "animal companion" (the new word for "pet"), my cat in all his contexts, they are all there. And there, floating off to the side, there's Alpha Centari. All things I know, and all things I can know are in this room --even the ones I don't know yet.
"Behind" me and outside the room, is the void, that which cannot be known. How can I believe that god is there? How can I believe in a concept of god that is more than just the void itself (agnostic theism)? Well, I can reason it. I'm here, at the door of this room. I have a choice: I can imagine myself stepping into this room and consider myself as if one of the 'things' (i.e. look at myself objectively, which allows me to describe myself via characteristics), or I can remain here on the threshold looking into the room (remain subjective to the world). If I remain here, as a subject, then there is at least one thing that is not in that room but still undoubtedly exists, but that I cannot look at and cannot be described, because everything I can observe is in that room...
If there is one thing that I know, and that is not in that room, namely 'me' as subject, that opens up the possibility to believe that there could be an "Other". I can't know there is an Other (agnosticism), but I can believe it.
There is plenty of room to poke holes in this model/argument as I've presented it. I am currently reading up on philosophy, so that I can explain it better, and more fully.
Dualism is to be found in the room itself: it is the world of knowable 'things', all of which have some means of comparison to other 'things'. "Things as they really are" (to use PureX's phrase) are 'things' extant from the void (the act of creation) --we can't know how they "really are" in their "true" state. We can only know what we can know --we can only know 'things' --and we do, we do know what we know. And we delight in discovering new 'things' in the room to know (science).
Unity is regarding 'me' and the 'things' in the room in relation to the void; all and nothing as One; 'thing' as extant from the numinous.
A few more terms: A thing's Nature is described in characteristics. Characteristics (as opposed to properties) are what we observe about 'things'. Supernatural is the numinous void. It has also come to mean instances when we become aware of the numinous --that which we describe as "that which we cannot explain".
Things I suspect to be so: a State of Grace is awareness of the void, a mind-set which fixes our place in a larger picture of the universe, and this may also be what some refer to as the Experience of God. And Sin is mentally "stepping into the room" and mistakenly thinking that you actaully live there (i.e. ignoring the void and god). Salvation then is found in understanding that if we are all One "behind" the world of things, in the numinous void from which we are all extant things, there is no need to treat each other so poorly as we do. We're only hurting ourselves.
I know --it's very Platonian. Feel free to comment or discuss points of interest or concern to you.
