Monotheism Reduces to Monism.

I will be arguing for a somewhat unintuitive proposition and b/c of this i am positive that many people will vote against me without fully reading my arguments. I ask anyone voting to please read the debate carefully. There are two ways of persuading an individual; -Emotive Cajoling -Logical Reasoning (since this topic has elicited confusion on this site in the past i will provide this link to clarify the meaning of Logic. http://philosophy.hku.hk...) Emotive Cajoling is an ineffective method for discerning truth and I ask my opponent to refrain from using it. Obviously most arguments people make are interlaced with both types of persuasion. Please be conscience of this fact. Now to address the topic. There are many kinds of monotheism. I am concerned only with Omniscient Monotheism. The claim that there is a God/Being who knows everything. All other attributes about this God are irrelevant. There are many kinds of Monism as well. Most notably the various forms of substance monism. I am not concerned with substance monism per-say. I am concerned with the notion that there is only one being or self. That is how i am defining monism in this context. So to be completely clear I am arguing that if a Being exists that knows everything then only one being exists. That is to say that every human being is this greater being in actuality. Human beings do not exist in and of themselves but merely as a part of this greater being. The only unjustified presupposition of this debate is that an omniscient being exists. Nothing else is to be assumed without just reason. If my opponent wishes to evoke notions such as the soul, or freewill. We can only talk about the possibility of these things existing. There is no reason to suggest that they actually exist so we can't simply assume that they do. These are the conditions of the debate only accept it if you are willing to comply. My argument is simple and much related to Descartes' Cogito Ergo Sum. 1. Being a Self is identical to an experience. 2. An Experience is a form of Knowledge. 3. Ergo Being a self is identical to a form of Knowledge. 4. If a being exist who contains all knowledge then it contains such knowledge. 5. The knowledge of every self would be a part of the knowledge of this greater being. 6. Since being a self is identical to such knowledge every self would be identical to a part of that greater being. What i mean by this is that you are a self in so far as you experience. Right now you are looking at a computer. That is an experience. That experience is a form of knowledge. I don't necessarily mean that you know about the experience but that the experience itself is a form of knowledge. You may be unaware of your own experience but the experience itself is a form of knowledge, not necessarily the awareness of the experience. Because the experience itself is a form of knowledge an omniscient god would have to have the exact same experience. Meaning there would be no difference between you and God. At least a part of God. You would simply be a part of God. If you are identical to god in this respect then there is no differentiation. Only one thing exists. Consider if x is identical to y then there really is only one thing. x and y are two symbols that describe the same thing.