BM:Deist/Theist consider God as separate from the universe? That is news to me. In fact, I would argue that it is virtually impossible to sustain the principal of a creator God without the basic assumption that it was inextricably intertwined with the natural world, regardless of your particular theology.-I agree. See my other entry on the subject today.

Deist/Theist consider God as separate from the universe? That is news to me. In fact, I would argue that it is virtually impossible to sustain the principal of a creator God without the basic assumption that it was inextricably intertwined with the natural world, regardless of your particular theology.-I have not followed your posts carefully B_M, so apologies if misrepresent your point of view.-The very word you you chose "intertwined" hints at the duality, theisms in particular, point to.-Creator and creation - a duality.
In the Christian tradition we have the trinity. 
God loves us - again a duality (God and us)-I think it is great that your are striving for a monistic interpretation of our existence. I think Joseph Campbell has a great quote describing this:->> ... But the ultimate mystical goal is to be united with one's god. With that, duality is transcended and forms disappear. There is nobody there, no god, no you. Your mind, going past all concepts, has dissolved in identification with ground of your own being, because that to which the metaphorical image of your god refers to the ultimate mystery of your own being, which is the mystery of the being of the world as well.

David - We had this exchange:->> Now if you would not mind and answer my question, do you believe in an intrinsic self?
> Absolutely. I am me, not someone else.-According to my axioms I use for monism your belief in an intrinsic self (free will etc.) is not compatible with monism or at least with monism as I see it.

ROMANSH: Now I happen to think that monism is a better description of the universe than either dualism or pluralism. [...] When science looks at the world it takes on a pragmatic pluralistic stance (I think) while recognizing underneath the world is monistic in nature. Thoughts?-DAVID: I don't know which science starts with your definition of monism. I get all tangled up in these philosophic terms.-So do I. If we argue that the universe is composed of energy, we have monism. But if we argue, as David does, that energy comes "in different forms, as matter and mind", we have dualism. If we argue that there are different forms of matter (or different forms of mind), we have pluralism. The more ...isms we play with, the less clear the picture seems to become. I'm reminded of Osbert Lancaster's comment on John Ruskin, "whose distinction it was to express in prose of incomparable grandeur thought of an unparalleled confusion."