Intellect, or any abstraction of mind, is to God what the ox-cart is to the starship.
Here's my take on this:
The way most people approach "intellectualization" is as a form of linear thought. That means comparing single factors, one to the other, and backward-deriving a causal relationship.
My method is pattern comparison, which requires more of than not a sense of aesthetics and proportion than it does any kind of linear thinking.
I think this is analogous to what crow is talking about above.
Neither of us are talking about a leap of faith, which isn't the worst approach ever but is baffling to nerdcore logic-heads.
My vision of the leap of faith is like this: you either believe the universe is a good place, that fundamentally tends toward order and goodness, or you think it is something else. Not necessarily bad but perhaps not ordered.
If you believe life is good, then it makes sense -- not linearly, but emotionally -- that it has an underlying goodness, a managing force of goodness, and a not-terrible consequence after death.
As a lifelong anti-dualistic and inveterate blasphemer, I have trouble with where my realization has led me to on these issues. The fact is that it doesn't very well fit within how we use language to describe these things, mainly because language is socially-mediated (think of Whorf-Sapir but in reverse).
However, as a nihilist, I deny all that is not correspondent to reality. This includes all human wishful thinking, both materialistic and dualistic. Once one recognizes what Schopenhauer unleashed with Idealism, there is no turning back.
You must go on. There is no non plus ultra. It is, as Huxley surmised, infinite, once you clear those doors of perception. Doesn't even require LSD.
That's the point. God is within reality. Reality and God play by the same rules. There may be additional dimensions, afterlives, alternate realities, occult dimensions, etc. but they are not dualistic, e.g. of an entirely different logical rule-set than reality itself.
If only I could reason people into this idea. This is like the very last concept that people (spiritual, religious, superstitious, atheist, whatever) want to accept. I don't know what is so difficult about accepting the idea; it practically shines with righteous truth.
Let me say a few things here that I find comforting because they restore order to what otherwise appears disorded.
Nihilists negate truth, knowledge and communication; this is because nihilists recognize the esoteric nature of such things. Truth requires human minds, and those aren't uniform; rather, truth is something perceived by some in varying degrees. This means it doesn't exist in an objective sense, but in an objective sense within subjective minds, and other subjective minds can deny it. Thus, negate truth. Knowledge exists only where it corresponds to reality, and that occurs through a process of learning like The Scientific Method, but not as linearly. Thus, it aggregates. However, it is also cumulative, and thus, one doesn't move on to the next level without conquering the previous. That is esotericism. There is no communication because people make subjective choices, and have objectively subjective differing abilities to perceive and different levels of esoteric experience. Thus not everyone can understand everything, and thus even if they're forced to accept it, they will simply pervert it back to the usual suspects of human mental fallacy: universalism (a form of mirror fallacy of the ego), false dichotomy, cherry-picking, etc.
"That wasn't very comforting," you might be saying right about now. "Instead of believing in a world where we can all work together through reason, you've shown me a new Dark Age based in a complete lack of certainty."
Well, true -- except for reality itself. That is consistent, which is the essence of its function. There is no cure for the fact that on any given point, most of us know less than jack, except to find those who have the gut level instinct to not only know jack but to re-invent that knowledge out of love for the subject. This is the underlying principle behind aristocracy, as well.
Back to knowledge and aduality/monism: do most people need to know the truth? They need to function, and believe the universe is a good place so they don't get bitter and vandalize it (see: consumerism, egalitarianism). Those who seek more should be able to do so, and be put in charge of the rest.
In summary however I have to say that it is ironic how many of the best truths in life are hidden in plain sight. It has been some time now since I realized that the authors we champion as "genius" are those who tell us what we know on a subconscious level to be true, but deny for demands of the ego. It's a useful mission statement for those here who want to help nudge the human world back toward sanity.