The God-idea Is A Definition For Irrelevancy

MV Conversation Continues
Future Time

"So, how do people re-center themselves?" replied MV.

"It's not easy, and I suspect some luck is involved." I said. "New
beliefs have to be emotionally gratifying, and if they are they tend
to be similar to already existing emotional needs and beliefs. Asking
a person to consider new ideas, especially when those ideas are
God-centered, is, however, akin to pulling teeth. The Buddha and Jesus
had some success, but they were promoting beliefs about suffering and
salvation--universal emotive responses to universal desires. Trying to
get people to emotionally connect with the God-idea, especially one in
conflict with their own, is a definition for irrelevancy. If, on the
other hand, I was appealing to more prurient interests, I probably
would have found a few interested people."


"So, asking an audience to see the world from a totally new perspective
is doomed?" MV responded.

"It appears so," I said.

"Maybe you have it wrong," replied MV. "It wouldn't be the first time
you know."

"Yeah, wouldn't that be nice,” I said, “I don't believe in miracles and,
according to some people, it's even worse than that.
Bertrand Russell, arguably one of the brainiest men who ever lived,
concluded towards the end of his life that arguments--to get people to
pay attention to logic and reason--are ineffective tools if one's goal
is to get another person to recant his/her beliefs. Russell was a
lifelong champion of liberal and `just causes.' He died frustrated
and despondent."

"Yeah, I know," responded MV, "but I do not consider dying frustrated
and despondent a disappointment, if you know what I mean! So your
God-idea was an automatic disconnect with people?”

“Yeah, finally I got it,” I replied.

But how could it be any other way,” said MV. “Where's the emotion in your
X/Y form?"

"It's there," I replied. "It's just that I’ve never been asked that
question before. Here's my quick answer:

"Think of the information gradient X (subjective aim) embedded in Y
(the aesthetic informational continuum). In its simplest form, this is the
meaning of duality, but when X experiences itself in a
higher dimension, 'subjective aim' experiences itself within the
aesthetic gradient of emotional information, information that both
helps and hinders the survival of X. That's not the end of the story
however. Because X, in an even higher dimension, creates/discovers its
own information gradient, an information gradient consisting of
symbolic forms, symbolic forms which are embedded not just in emotion,
but also in aesthetic facts, facts that change as new symbolic forms are
created/discovered. Aesthetic facts survive the death of X;
they are not subject to death. These facts are
limited only by the validating connection that exits between
prediction, explanation, and observation. In other words, these
aesthetic facts, all of which are embedded in emotion, remain subject
to explanation by the best science available." Bottom line: aesthetic facts are first experienced and then explained—without the aesthetic informational continuum there would be no X/Y form.

Mud Slinging And Lies Will Change Minds—Logic And Reason Not

Emotion Of Reason Concluded


"What good is reason then?" said MV.

"Good question," I replied. "I'm not sure I have the right answer,
but I do have an answer. In the sciences, reason and logic, more or
less, define the process that provides an understanding of law and
change, but in the social fabric, reason and logic come up
short—sometimes way short. In the technical fields, reason and logic
are used to create energy saving strategies. In so far as technology
saves time and labor, it may also mitigate unnecessary suffering. But, in
the social fabric, reason and logic are more allied with the pursuit of power,
status, dominance, and control then with the mitigation of unnecessary suffering. `Feelings of empathy,' or the desire to eliminate suffering, are not allied with the
pursuit of power, status, dominance, and control. Legitimate social reformers and spiritual leaders, however, are almost always motivated by sympathy,
understanding, and compassion."

"So I guess your `God talks' didn't go very far, eh! Did you connect
with anybody?" responded MV.

"Probably not," I replied, "It was basically a hopeless situation."
"Why then did you persist?"

"Hey, when you've seen God you don't walk away," I said. "In some way
you respond. I suppose different people respond differently, but for
me it was with talks, at least for a little while anyway."

"Did you learn anything else, or was it mostly a waste of time?" MV
replied.

"You're not listening very well are you," I said, "God-centeredness is
not a waste of time?"

"But if it's impossible to communicate, why try?" responded MV.
"I didn't say it was impossible, I only said I couldn't do it. I
didn't have the talent," I said.

"But it sounds like it’s impossible," said MV.

"Not really. Emotional centers breathe life into self-determining
acts," I said. "People can re-center themselves. To suggest otherwise
would be wrong. Emotions are everywhere, and significant emotional
events happen all the time. Some make you think, and some do not;
some—few, spark life-changing behavior."

Pre-Determined By Significant Emotional Events By Age Ten

The Emotion Of Reason Continued
Future Time


"Okay,” I said, “here goes. The self, the one that
buys groceries, goes to the movies, enjoys a cold beer—you get the
picture, consists of two components—memories and the capacity for
self-determination. The self is not an `autonomous will,' nor is it a
chameleon like entity that transforms itself anew every time it comes
in contact with some significant other, nor is it merely a product of
the environment. Rather, it is the body's most active component."

"That's it, where's the emotion?" replied MV.

"Be patient. At least, you haven't changed in that department," I
responded. "More specifically, the self may be defined as the locus of
memories embedded in an information gradient, a gradient
resistant to self-determination possibilities. We know this
information gradient in terms of physical, social, and psychological
events—the raw materials out of which memories are woven. Behavior,
most assuredly, is a product of environmental stimuli. But, it is not
totally determined by these stimuli; to the degree that the self
willfully acts (a reflective, evaluative response) it expands the
information gradient. In other words, to the degree that behavior is
based on critical thinking and judgment, a self-determining agent
determines his/her own behavior—the self becomes the determined
determiner of itself."

"Hey, I'm still all ears; but I haven't heard anything about emotion
yet," MV responded. "Where does emotion come in and overpower reason?"


"It's right there in the information gradient, and a good thing, too,
because you're really patient! When the self is considered in this
light, the cold, independent nature of logical and rational thought
loses its independence. Self-determining agents are anchored in the
same information gradient that is `home' to more powerful libidinal
instincts and drives; and, as such, willful acts of self-determination
are never free of emotion, both conscious and unconscious emotion.
Rationality is grounded in this emotion, the emotive content of our
environment. That is why the psychologist, Morris Massey, can say,
`…by age ten, significant emotional events have already pre-determined
who we will be for the rest of our lives.' Early on, significant
emotional events are seminal in forming the emotional base out of
which we will respond throughout life. That is what has to be dealt
with, and that is what prevents new ideas from taking root."

And That Is What Prevents The Acceptance Of New Ideas

The Emotion Of Reason
Future Time



"What did you do after that," said MV, "I mean you never really had
the `smarts' to compete on the level of the really talented, so how
did you handle it—emotionally I mean."

"I was really conflicted," I replied. "I had something important to
say, but I just couldn't get it done. I felt duty-bound to try,
though. What I found was that I was in over my head."

"How so," MV responded.

"After a couple of failed attempts I got the message," I said. "It was
right in front of me. I just never saw it until I had too."

"Saw what?"

"The problem," I said. "I saw the problem that prevents new ideas from
taking root. Instinctively we are forced to hold on to our
convictions. It's all about who we are. It follows from my own
philosophy in fact."

"I don't understand. What the hell does that mean?" said MV.

"But that is the problem," I replied. "I can't explain it unless
emotionally, we're already on the same page; unless we are already in
tune, so to speak. Otherwise, anything I say amounts to no more than
wind blowing through the willows."

"Aw go ahead and give it a shot, I'm all ears."

"What! Is that a joke?"

"You decide," MV responded. "After all it’s not like we're two
different people, you know."

"Humor; what’s next?"

God—The Two Sides Of Divinity

In the middle of my structuralism posts (on my other blog), I also posted: God—The Two Sides Of Divinity. This writing project was inspired by a phone call from an old High School buddy who wanted me to attend my High School class reunion. This took place back when George W. Bush was preparing to invade Iraq (the Bush Presidency left me severely depressed). I told my old friend I would not be good company under any circumstances, least of which a High School class reunion. I never did go to the reunion, but instead penned God—The Two Sides Of Divinity. Posting it now, after my God Connection Paper, should be illuminating. Below are CSN lyrics to the song Yours And Mine (a song that never made it to the hit list).

Written by Craig Doerge, David Crosby and Graham Nash
(c) 1990 Fair Star Music (ASCAP)

“I see a boy of fourteen; he's got a rifle in his hand.
He's dying to defend his desert land.
He's got an arm around his father, another arm around his gun.
Must the child in the father die so young?

There's a teenage girl in Belfast, playing in the street.
Her brother plays a different game and he's turning up the heat
On the soldiers around the corner and the powers overseas.
And who are they to ruin lives like these?

`Cos they're yours and they're mine, they're yours and mine.
`Cos they're yours and they're mine, yours and mine.

So you think that it's so easy just to let I pass you by
You watch T.V. and pretend it's all a lie.
But you know there is no Third World, it happens to us all.
There's just one world and the kids are the first to fall.”

Okay, the other day I found myself mulling over whether or not I wanted to go to my next High School class reunion and almost immediately I was overcome with this feeling of dread; after all, do I, a life long janitor, really want to throw myself into that mix of story telling, story telling that on one level amounts to real communication, while, on a different level, offers up the evenings real entertainment of pinning the tail on the people who made it as opposed to the under achievers. Well, I didn’t have to think very hard before I came up with my “no answer” to that question. The problem was, though, that I couldn’t help but keep thinking about what it would be like if I did go to that class of ‘66 reunion. It was a slow Friday at work, so I proceeded to follow my imaginings until I had enough content to proceed with this writing project, which I now offer up as a light hearted “time out” from my structuralism posts. I guess I should point out that it’s been twenty years since I last attended my high school reunion. I do not feel bad about that, but I do feel a bit guilty about not attending the last scheduled reunion because a high school friend telephoned to encourage me to attend that reunion and begged off. Anyway, what follows is a bit of what I imagined I would say to my friends if indeed I ever do attend a future class reunion, but first some context details.

In high school I grouped with the smart kids (I was kind of an outlier, but my curiosity and enthusiasm for learning always garnered approval). All my friends were on the fast track to success. I came from a small school in a small town, so the kind of success I’m talking about is mostly the kind that keeps society moving along on an even keel-- middle class success, but there were/are always exceptions. For instance, after I googled the name of the friend that telephoned me (let’s call him Paul), I stopped clicking the computer mouse after page seven. The list of his accomplishments continued, however.

So, to begin this imagined conversation: after a few beers and the friendly chit chat out of the way, and after hearing the life stories of everybody sitting at the table, it was my turn to contribute to the conversation. After verbally celebrating my wife, two children, pets, and my never ending love for music, I had run out of things to say; that is, until the conversation had turned away from health issues and the topic of religion came up. After listening to my friends religious views which ranged from non-belief to Christian belief to a belief in a kind of pantheism, I surprised everyone by giving a different point of view. I said, “I’ve been searching for God most of my life, but after about 40 years of searching I found something to believe in.” Well, as you might imagine, everyone wanted to know which God I had found. So I told them—“God, the God of all religions, even the God that is purported not to exit, is alive and well and doing just fine.” And again, as you might expect, this assertion was quickly challenged and even became the object of some ridicule. Paul, however, came to my rescue when he asked me to expand on what the God of all religions means.

“For me,” I said, “God is not only one with nature, God is also one with the learning process that both asks and answers questions, questions pertaining to God, nature, and everything else. And because of this, God has many names; in fact there is no one name that can fully express God’s divinity. The expression of ‘difference, no difference,’ since that expression encompasses all distinctions, all identities, all differences, all that ‘is’ and ‘is not,’ seems to me to be the best description of the God that I believe in. So, basically, my search for God ended when I found that I could express God, the functionality of God, in the linguistic expression ‘difference, no difference.’”

“And what pray tell is the functionality of God?” asked Paul.

“The short answer to your question,” I replied, “is that there isn’t a short answer to your question, but I’ll give it a go anyhow. We encounter the manifestation of ‘difference, no difference’ in the physical nature of ‘quantum strangeness,’ and again in the terminal state of death in the biological sciences, and yet again in the maintenance of our own ‘conscious identity,’ the identity that demonstrates a degree of permanence in the midst of constant change. All of this and more is the functionality of God. In other words, everything—our physical environment, life, identity, analysis, truth, justice, and religious meaning, are attributes of the functionality of God.”

“So how is your vision of God different from pantheism,” replied Paul.

“As functionality,” I responded, “God manifests ‘difference,’ but as Divinity, God manifests ‘no difference.’ In other words, God is both immanent in nature, while being transcendent to nature. Also, God’s functionality, as it evolves, evolves qualitative differences, differences that emerge in the human being as the quest for truth, justice, and religious meaning. Functional differences, all of them, are made whole through Divinity, but in human consciousness, the qualitative difference of free will emerges. Free will separates and divides Divinity, but even this divided Divinity is made whole in the God of transcendence, and that is why the concept of pantheism is really not adequate when it comes to expressing my vision of God.”

“Christians understand ‘judgment day,’” responded Paul, “as a balance to free will. How does this God of yours handle unnecessary suffering, rewards and punishments?”

“Even though I am expressing my own personal vision of God,” I replied, “others have expressed concepts of Divinity similar to mine. In Whitehead’s process reality, for instance, the judgmental God of Christianity does not exist, but Divinity exists, and within this Divinity judgment, rewards and punishments also exist. God is ‘eternal presence,’ for Whitehead, and as such God bears witness to all past and present occasions. The future, however, is like an unused role of film. Being exposed, it is always in the process of being developed. God works through the transition from the eternal to the actual, and from the actual back to the eternal and in this respect, the entire physical universe is processing its way back to God. God is the reason for all becoming, and nothing exists that is separate from God. So how does Whitehead deal with unnecessary pain, cruelty, and injustice? He combines freedom with feelings and that unique combination changes everything because if a retributive justice is called for here, then one has to look no farther then the first mirror to pinpoint the guilty. Insofar as occasions conform to their environment, insofar as the ‘self-aim’ conforms to its immediate past, there is determinism, but insofar as any entity modifies its response through the subjective element of feeling, there is freedom. Feeling and freedom are codependent for Whitehead, and God is in touch with all feelings. God is there, inside agonizing screams, and God is there in suffering, especially suffering caused by injustice. God is there also, however, in all hopes, joys, and happiness, in addition to fears, regrets, and sorrows. Good feelings move the world forward to a better place. It is feeling that gives subjective aim to occasions. We encounter, in good feelings, the ‘allure of realization.’ It is possible to create a more humane, peaceful, and loving world. Whitehead said as much, and Gandhi told us how to proceed, ‘You must be the change you want to see in the world’—both in life and love.' This is the Divine dynamic that shouts out for change in the world and if no action is taken to prevent unnecessary pain, cruelty and injustice then we only have ourselves to blame. In my vision of God, feelings and freedom are necessarily connected also. Ultimately then, all that is meant by spirit and the spiritual— all intuitive sensitivity and religiously felt compassion—is there in the whole of Divinity, embracing human nature and nature’s creatures, up through the many levels and transformations of freedom until it finally becomes manifest in the life long pursuit of love, caring, happiness and reverence. And, all of this too, represents the functionality of God."

On The Other End Of The Phone Mother Said Dad Died

The God Connection
Future Time

"So, when you did get to talk with your Professor? Did she get
it?" said MV.

"I don't really know," I said, "I'm sure she picked up on my strong
feelings, but that was probably about it. As I found out later, she
had other concerns. All her energy was focused on the affair she was
having with the professor in the next office. Before our class had
even ended, she had filed for divorce from her husband. Before the
year was out, she had totally left the university. But, in all
fairness, I guess you could say that at that time I had preoccupying
concerns also."

"What could possibly be more preoccupying than God?" replied MV.

"Death," I said. "While I was writing that final paper, I had a
premonition that I was going to die. I hurried the paper I was writing
because I knew time was running out. That was a very strange feeling."

"A misplaced one, though," said MV, "or am I missing something?"

"What's that supposed to mean?" I replied.

"So, what's the point? Nothing happened," MV responded.

"That's not quite true, something did happen, and my father and I
shared in it."

"Okay, I'll bite, shared in what?"

"My father and I weren't very close," I replied. "Sure we loved each
other, but when it came to sharing common interests, we were worlds
apart. It's not absolutely accurate, but in a word, I was the `black
sheep' of the family. My fear of impending death, however, helped me
overcome those negative feelings, so I went home to say goodbye."

"Did you have any physical reason to think you were dying?"

"None," I replied, "I was in perfect health, but that didn't matter.
I knew I would be dead soon."

"So, what happened?"

"Nothing happened," I said. "I took Thursday and Friday off work, and
went home for the long week-end. But on my last day, Sunday, it was just my father and I
alone in the room talking; he told me he admired what I had done. He
was referring to my bicycle trips. Although I am not sure how we got
around to it, we ended up telling each other that we loved one another.

"I had done what I had set out to do, and I felt really good about it.
It was a beautiful day outside, so I decided to go back to Mt.
Pleasant early. Back home, I hopped on my bicycle and took off for
Coldwater Lake, a thirty-mile round-trip bicycle ride. Shortly into the trip, my hand
started going numb. That numbness was not unusual for me, but when it
moved up my arm, and beads of sweat broke out on my forehead, I knew
something was wrong. When the left side of my torso got real hot, I
wanted to cut the trip short and head home. But, after a time, all
those symptoms disappeared, so I just kept pedaling. After returning
home, just as I walked through the door, the telephone rang. It was my
mother. My father had died. Apparently, while my mother was at work,
he had sat down in his favorite chair, fell asleep, and never woke up.
The doctor said it was a heart attack."

First Person God Experience

The God Connection
Future Time


"So what happened?" said MV. "How did you go from a third person to a
first person God experience?"

"Like I've already said," I replied, "it was a Gestalt thing. In one
instant I was thinking about the X/Y form, and in the next, I was
inside the X/Y form. From inside the X/Y form, all past history identifying me as
David Heyl became a first person God experience. Obviously,
that was an emotional event for me, an extremely shocking emotional event!"

"After you left the library," responded MV, "what did you do?"

"Leaving the library was not an option for me, at least at first," I
replied, "I was in too much shock. Instead, I had to talk to
somebody, and the only person I could turn to was Mary, the Professor
I was doing my independent study with. On the phone, her husband told
me she was out of town. That was disappointing news. I was exploding
inside, and I had nobody to talk to. Then I remembered a book I had
read once, and in that book was a description of an experience that was
very similar to what I was feeling. I went to the shelf and removed
the book. As soon as I found the part I was looking for, I began to read:

"'She brought me my hat, and I knew I was going out into the warm
sunshine. This thought, if a wordless sensation may be called a
thought, made me hop and skip with pleasure.

We walked down the path to the well house, attracted by the fragrance
of the honeysuckle with which it was covered. Some one was drawing
water and my teacher placed my hand under the spout. As the cool
stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the other the word water,
first slowly, then rapidly. I stood still, my whole attention fixed
upon the motion of her fingers. Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness
as of something forgotten—a thrill of returning thought; and somehow
the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that w-a-t-e-r
meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my hand. That
living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, joy, set it free!
There were barriers still, it is true, but barriers that in time could
be swept away.

I left the well-house eager to learn. Everything had a name, and each
name gave birth to a new thought. As we returned to the house every
object which I touched seemed to quiver with life. That was because I
saw everything with the strange, new sight that had come to me' (Helen
Keller, 1936, p. 23).

"Reading through that passage made me feel better. It was Helen
Keller's description of her first experience with language. She was,
like me, alone with her revelation, and she remained that way until,
in her autobiographical account of her life, she was able to put that
experience into words, something that I am still unable to do with
my own awakening experience."

God’s Freedom In The Human Dimension Implies Knowledge

Human Meaning Is A Product Of God’s Freedom

God Connection Paper Concluded
April, ‘81

The possibilities contained in human experience are immense, but the
immediate consequence is that the person who we are is able to
maintain some degree of permanence in the midst of constant change.
This becomes clear when you consider that in the experience of
the negative space of nothingness (Sartre’s for-itself consciousness),
by implication, we identify being. This is not the end of it, however,
for in that this negation occurs in our awareness (self-awareness)
while at the same time occurring within the space of our environment, we experience
the forward movement of freedom in the form of an implied knowledge (facts) of
our environment. In itself, this "passage of time" does not produce a
great deal of knowledge, but because we bring the logical
relationships implicit in God’s freedom to bear on an event,
we may form judgments concerning the significance and the probable
cause of that event. These judgments are determined valid
across a continuum which ranges from sensation divorced from theory at
one end, to, at the other, sensation reinforced by the most advanced
and respected scientific theory available.

[It is probably not a coincidence that the universal constant of
duality, as defined in this paper and resulting from the phenomenon of
awareness becoming aware of itself as not being itself may be further
identified as number, and that this number, upon a prodigious
extension of freedom, may give rise to the logically sound
relationships of mathematics. This being the case, we cannot be
surprised to discover that the results from a rigorous investigation
of number, when applied to our spatial environment, in many cases,
corresponds to the events which have been predicted to occur in that
environment.]

Many of the judgments we use to define our experience result from our
ability to identify non-being. In that we may identify a particular
state of affairs as occurring or not occurring, it becomes prohibitive
that this same state of affairs may occur and not occur at the same
time. This principle (of self-contradiction), when applied to
analytical thought becomes a powerful tool, but, more informally, this
principle also may be used to determine a person's priorities and
consequent behavior; that is, making one's behavior and beliefs
consistent. For instance, if I quite my job in order to experience
more time form myself, I would, in a very brief time, come to realize
that employment is an essential prerequisite for the experience of
satisfying free time, hence quitting my job would be inconsistent with
my desired goal.

With the creation of priorities, awareness expands, and here we see
the guiding light which illuminates our future possibilities, however,
if there is one lesson which we have to learn again and again, it is
that when a person's priorities, either by choice or by a deficiency
in the basic necessities of life, are solely determined by a desire
for immediate sense gratification, that in almost every case, those
people become the victims and the prisoners of their own fear,
prejudice, greed, and sometimes even violence.

The above state of affairs, which I have just described,
is graphically captured in the Tai Chi Symbol—by the black circle in white (white/awareness) i.e., Sartre’s for-itself consciousness, while the white circle in black represents God, i.e., the freedom upon which all existence rests, thus, in the Tai
Chi symbol we have a complete representation of God’s freedom to not be God so that God can be free, free to become self-aware in human consciousness. Here the experience of the experience of the experience of God's freedom—human experience—becomes totally symbolized—and you and I are that experience.

Chinese Tai Chi Symbol And The Logic Of Existence

God Connection paper continued
April, ‘81

Fortunately, the Tai Chi symbol is sufficiently rich to express the
relationships implicit in God's freedom, a freedom that represents
the functional reality, which ultimately, develops into the relationships
that human analytical thinking takes for granted-- space, time, and number.
To simplify, here’s my own interpretation of the Tai Chi symbol.
God’s freedom, in terms of 1) human consciousness on the one hand, and
2) God's freedom to be on the other, may be conceived symbolically
in the Chinese symbol Tai Chi, or what is commonly recognized as the
yin/yang symbol. The line dividing the circle into two parts symbolizes
the freedom of God not to be God (while, at the same time, logically implying
God’s existence). In other words, all possible realities are grounded in this duality.

The logical operator “And,” in my interpretation of the Tai Chi symbol, becomes the analogue to duality—the ground of all possible realities. Reasoning, in terms of logic, is grounded in the logical operators And, Or, and If/Then. Since humans are distinguished by their reason and ability worship a creator, and, since the nature of God's freedom already manifests one of the key logical operators that contribute to reason, then God's freedom, we may speculate, is profoundly tied to the logical operators which union, in then, permits human behavior. The remainder of this paper will explore this possibility and the inevitable consequences that follow.

Life Is God’s Freedom In A Higher Dimension

Freedom is not static; while preserving duality, freedom unfolds more expressive, dynamic, and stabilizing possibilities of itself, thus giving rise to a new dimension of itself. Life—energy far from equilibrium, becomes God's "being of passage" within
a spatial environment, and the “Or” logical operator—the homeostasis of an organism is maintained or it dies—co-evolves with life. In the Tai Chi symbol this experience is represented by the complementary back and white colors (historically these colors were red and black) In this sense, the black (or white, depending on your preference) represents the negative space of God's freedom (death), while white represents the awareness of this space!

The nature of freedom is such that it must move forward into new
areas of experience or cease to exist. If you pick up a book on
ecology you will find that there is hardly a space on this planet
where some organism has not gained a foothold. In this sense, freedom
is spatially extended, but freedom is not limited by space.
As the complexity of freedom increases, new
dimensions of experience become possible. Life, once
again moving in a direction not contained in itself, after achieving a sufficient complexity, gives rise to a new dimension of reality, the human dimension.
This experience is especially interesting because we, the
human species (the dividing line separating species is always a gray area),
is this experience. Here, in the human dimension, we
are the experience of the experience of the experience of God's freedom.