There is another perspective, and it challenges us to test God (or better to test our idea about God).

With choosing God, we stepped up from our daily reality, and in our daily reality we can actually step up to a fantasy perspective as well. This means that we must test our step up toward God, because we need to make sure we did not follow the fantasy path.

An important question for testing God is to ask what God used to create creation.

This is an important question, and we have to be careful not to follow the fantasy path.

If, for instance, we say that God willed creation into being, then we doubled down on the fantasy path; we did not make God real. We can't believe in something that requires us to step up twice, right? Stepping up once is where we find the demand to make God real. We can't step up a second time without having established solid grounds underneath our feet with the first step up.

To create creation, God must have used something and the only aspect available is God godself.

We are getting somewhere, but there are still question marks.

If God used the whole of God, then it is very unlikely that God-in-created-format could have endured 13.8 billion years. It is illogical to have the material creation be the result of everything God is. A reversal would have occurred long ago, and we'd all be God as God always was.

We have to accept that only parts of God were used for creation. We see an expelling, if you allow me the use of that word. An additional layer got established in which we find ourselves, away from the original reality.

I hope you see how that is a rather doable construction.

It does require, however, that we must talk about God 1.0 and God 2.0.

When parts of God were used for creation, then God would not be exactly like the original God any longer.

--

Let's jump toward our physical reality, because we actually find two realities in our material reality.

1/ In the center of atoms we find quarks. Quarks cannot exist by themselves, and as groups they form the neutrons and the protons.

Important to note is that the neutrons and protons let each other be. That tells us that this Rejecta has indeed become self-based. It is no longer God-based but rather self-based. The neutrons and protons don’t become an additional single outcome of matter collectively.

Of great interest is of course that quarks do not exist by themselves, so we know that something very special happened to create the quarks after which they ended up 'clinging' to one another until that self-establishment.

2/ Equally important is that the neutrons are neutral in charge, but that the protons are positive in charge. Something had to be done about this charge, and this occurred almost instantaneously: electrons came to the rescue and the Universe is indeed neutrally charged because of the electrons.

That means that while we can declare neutrons and protons as Rejecta, we can also declare the electrons as the Direct Aid from God.

These two aspects about all atoms in the universe give us various important insights.

There are no problems for electrons to always neutralize the positive charges of protons. Meaning: there is plenty where that came from.

This fits in with the idea that only a small part of the original God ended being the Rejecta, and that additional parts of God were sent as Direct Aid. This indicates that there is plenty of God remaining.

What it also tells us is that we are indeed no longer with God in as far as our neutrons and protons are concerned, but that our electrons are directly from God.

We can say that we are alive, exactly because of our electrons. Still, it explains why not everything is always wonderful and rosy: we are indeed both kinds of material outcomes and when focusing on just one, we will not see ourselves in the correct light.

I hope you liked reading this, Mark. We are from God, and we are still carrying parts of God directly with us. The neutrons and protons are warped, but the electrons are undamaged yet inserted into this environment.

-

I am a structural philosopher, and I am interested in religion, politics, science, all from a structural perspective. As I see it, understanding structure can declare certain truths about reality that we cannot achieve via other ways.

When starting out with God, we must test ourselves and make sure that the version we hold dear is not the fantasy version but the real version.

I have a scientific model for this as well that I call the Big Whisper model.