Thus, Divine POTENTIAL
is not only at the beginning,
it actually ignites the BEGINNINGâ€¦
and IGNITES the Cosmos.
DIVINE POTENTIAL ignites the â€œjourneyâ€ from
and onward through ever-ascending levels of
and presumably towards
â€œINFINITE DIVINE REALITYâ€.
In my first opus (G & E),
I posit that
Quest for Potentialâˆž
drives the cosmos.
This has the advantages of being
ELEGANT, SIMPLE, POWERFUL.
I posit that POTENTIAL
is at the epicenter of the Divine.
But the stillâ€“openâ€“question here is:
What POTENTIAL â€” or bundleâ€“ofâ€“potentials â€”
was powerful enough to IGNITE the cosmos?
Is manâ€™s potential, and the â€˜cosmic potentialâ€™ a powerfulâ€“enough â€œMATCHâ€ to lightâ€“up the cosmos?
The most awesome potential of all might beâ€¦ after all, Potential Divinity…
To our Readers –
By now you â€œhave-the-driftâ€ regarding the core concept of Quest for Potentialâˆž,
but â€œhaving-the-driftâ€ is not sufficient for a major metaphysics presentation,
â€“ so we will proceed forward in more formal fashion…….
——————- NOTES by KHALIL ——————-
1 Divine Perfection A: With this, “Divine Perfection” which was left somewhat dangling metaphysically in God and Evil, is hereby made crucial for the creation and sustenance of the cosmos. Divine Perfection is rescued, as it were.
2 Divine Perfection B: In God and Evil the prime role of the Divine was as igniter of the cosmos. In God and Evil the Divine was seemingly detached from the dayâ€“toâ€“day maintenance of the universe. Now it is clear, the Divine has a direct role in the perpetual progression of the cosmos, as Quest for Potentialâˆž pierces through time and space to continually energize life and existence.
3 Divine Perfection C: As in Book #1 (God and Evil) the reader is essentially given the implicit option of jettisoning the â€™religiousâ€™ Divine, for a secular divine of pure potential. The author tilts in the â€™religiousâ€™ direction, and writes his works in that context, but both works can be read either wayâ€” and the author is meticulously careful in leaving both options implicitly open. Essentially the author, while writing within the Jewish context he works within, is saying (at not inconsiderable theological peril) that philosophically the cosmos can be viewedâ€” and approachedâ€” either way. The reader must, therefore, muster the courage to make the decision for himself.
|< BACK||NEXT PAGE>|