Introduction: Is Theological Difference an Illusion? 

	A complex set of arguments in the form of a short essay/chapter. Essentially, these arguments fall into two sections: establishing first that the general concept of the Divine is a possible conception that can be coherently conceived in a non-contradictory manner, but, not arguing from there for the actual actuality of the Divine. Then, taking a humanitarian perspective, I now ask “what are the existential ramifications of a positive theological sense of difference?” If a theologically oriented religionist finds value in their vision of the cosmos and try to truthfully live in conformity with this vision of the world what existential value might arise from that type of position that would be different from that experienced by an atheist, e.g., who also truthfully tries to live in conformity with their vision of the world? My thesis being that it is the task for a theologian to establish that there are indeed positive existential ramifications for the acceptance of a positive theological difference. The point of this exercise is to discover, explore and define just what those existential differences might be on the grounds that a theologian must be able to argue that a person who adopts this type of viewpoint would find that it does make a difference in how we authentically live in this world. Are they right or are they wrong on this particular issue?! Hence the point of our research program in this regard (since I wish to seek from others their opinions on this type of topic). Ultimately I ask “is this theological difference an illusion?” (517)

Some of the presuppositions behind these two sets of arguments:

1.	Theological difference is the ‘difference’ between a vision of ‘the world with some sense of the Divine’ and a vision of ‘the world without some sense of the Divine’. A positive theological difference being the religious acceptance and perception of the world as possessing an actual sense of the Divine.
2.	The ‘Divine’ is defined as that sense of the divine that is epistemologically more organized that the psychic organization of any human being, a group or institution of persons, etc. (and, that which must be there-for-us in the Life-World!).
3.	Truth is defined as being in conformity with reality (however that is defined). Living truthfully therefore would demands that the theologically oriented religionist live truthfully in conformity with their vision of the world. That the same applies to the atheist or any other type of non-religionist, or religionist.
4.	A claim could be made for the existence of the existential ramifications of a theologically oriented point of view by virtue of the existence of religious institutions of that type of persuasion.
5. 	From the apparent integrity of the Life-World it could be argued that there is already a de facto theological positioning by all persons, wittingly or unwittingly?
6.	But what are those positive existential ramifications, if any, for one who holds such a point of view – the main objective of this research program?! (518)
							    Noël Tointon, Sydney, 10.4.05