I doubt the sincerity of this comment.
Let’s uphold reason.
Given that you now seem to be trying, I’ll repeat myself again.
Because we are not all omnipresent/Existence and you cannot be omniscient if you don’t have access to all things/omnipresence
Once again: We are existing in Existence/God, but we are not Existence/God.
Us being in Existence/God or
Existence/God being in us is not the same as:
Us being Existence/God
Non-existence being in us is paradoxical. So is:
Us being Existence or:
Existence being us. Which just leaves:
We are in Existence/Existence is in us
The rest of your argument doesn’t follow because it assumes that the following statement is rational: We are all God/Existence. As demonstrated above, this statement is paradoxical and therefore not rational.
The rest of your argument doesn’t follow because it assumes that the following statement is rational: We are all God/Existence. As demonstrated above, this statement is paradoxical and therefore not rational. Again to demonstrate the same paradox using different words: If we change/sin in Existence, this is not the same as Existence changing/sinning. It would be absurd for Existence to ever change. Things in Existence change, but Existence itself never changes.
First give me a basic argument that doesn’t contain a paradox in its first premise, then try giving me harder ones.
If that is the case, then why bother?