Discarded Notes (Creator)

**-The Only TBB That Gives Certainty Is Widest-Net, because only than can you absolutely be sure you've got everything you \*should\* have.**

>Questions of the Shifting are Endless.

>Creator wins Widest-Net because it has all objects as its principle objects; in theory, Creator TTB could go on even without the object of God existing.

>All objects should be your principal objects; because the etymology of a TTB will eventually lead to exclusion; therefore a TTB with one or a few principle objects will allow the mind to really want to be about them and ignore all else. Etymology equals mindset.

>Etymology = Mindset.

**>The TTB of Widest-Net is Creator: because Creator as a concept is about all of Existence, all object, all A-Infinity. This is proven from personal experience. Everything can always be connected to an Aspect of Existence/Creator.**

**>Only-Half afflicts both Theist and Creator; as Theist, you find it difficult to relate to stuff that is not seemingly-directly connected to the Supreme.**

**>One way to prove Creator is TTB of Widest-Net is a question of loss: Theist can't lose the Supreme, but Creator can lose any object and still keep going as long as something is left.**

### ---

**-Unless you've seen all of A-Infinity, you can never be sure what God exists as or what He would want as a TTB. Ergo, we must take the braoder appraoch to ensure we don't miss it, which is the Widest-Net/Creator.**

**>If God didn't want this, He would not have set up reality like this. Widest-Net is the logical conclusion of livin within infinite existence!**

**\*Widest-Net is the Anchor, the thing you should hold fast to while pushing past the Shifting.**

>Yes, Creator is the "true" Widest-Net, because Aspects prove that it is!

>"Advanced Awareness" of the A-Ideal is not necessary, since we cannot be sure of It. Great Hope in general is sufficient for evil, especially since there are other powers besides that of God.

-Because the only actualization of Almightiness id directed by a mind (the mind of the Supreme) and we can't know His thoughts or existence in detail for sure; therefore, Almightiness cannot be fully known, except for as It exists in concept form. Which is only one half of the total, so still no Affinity!

-Almightiness can be whatever It wants; but what It actually wants to be righ tnow cannot be known - hence, no Affinity!

-Darkness proves Creator!

>Only an open-ended TTB, a general Great Hope and Ind. are what stops the Darkness (known from experience).

>Theist is too specific to stand test of time.

-If you can't know what the Actualized A-Ideal exists as, you can never be fully sure of what you need! So why not be about everything as Creator TTB?

-Only the Widest-Net gives lasting Certainty against the backdrop of A-Infinity.

-Having just the Supreme makes your TTB automatically an ubber-TTB, since the Actualized A-Ideal is Infinite-Sufficient in all ways!

-Protected-Knowledge:

>God-talking doesn't really occur, not enought o be viable. And Natural Theology is so nuanced and based on incomplete knowledge that particulars cannot be figured out concretely!

>In order to understand Protected-Knowledge fully, we must ask ourselves how exactly does the Supreme becoming known to us: in our current reality, it is eiher God-talking or Natural-Theology.

>The existence of Natural-Theology itself does lend credence to the idea that God wants us to aspire to (and acquire succesfully) the truth about Him. However, God-Talking has yeiled contractidory or false answers even in my own personal experience; and Natural-Theology is always incomplete because we cannot fully know what an Actualized A-Ideal would exist as!

>Xtrianity believed in a Truine God and yet still has miracles and whatnot. How, then, do you square that with an absolute-sense of Protected-Knowledge?

>If God is slowly bringing Xtrians away from the Trinity into truth (or vice versa) how do you know the same isn't true for you and Theist? Maybe your just not ready yet?!

>The real problem with Protected-Knowledge is that God doesn't 'talk' enough for it to really count in a really precise way. God is distant and silent, and so most questions related to Him don't get answered. At least not in this life.

>We only have Natural-Theology in this life, and the problem with NT is that you never know when it is 'finished' because there is always more of God to discover.

>The history of the Shifting in my own ife is proof of the failure of Protected-Knowledge, that you never know for sure that you know enough about God to ansnwer the really big questions.

>

Only-Half Not That Important:

-It's natural to emphasis the part o an object that aligns with your TTB. Theist does this when you tend to emphasis, for instance, kings who were theistic when studying the subject of King. Guys like Cyrus the Great, etc.

Just Be Both Creator & Destroyer (Dualism):

-Thanks to Dualism, you can be Creator/Destroyer and thus truly about all objects, just with an emphasis on Creator.

-Theist is no different, it's always with an emphasis on God or that which is closer to God.

Connectivity Is Access To Objects:

-Ie, whatever gives you the most objects and the strongest links to them.

Both Theist & Creator Have Total Connectivity:

-Names and Aspects are the same damn thing, both NO-Half and Only-Half can be overcome with intermediaries, and Creator and Theist in potential can connect with any other object out there (OESDE).

-Ergo, Connectivity fails as the Anchor.

Point of Infinity:

-Only way to know you got everything.

-The minute you move away, you're into the Endless-Arguments and argumentation.

-Theist or any specific TTB will always have the lingering question of 'did I miss somethng?'

The Real Anchor Is Point Of Infinity:

-Ditto.

-We should totally be about all things, for we never know if God migh eventually reveal a truth to us that totally changes everything, and may do so again. A static, unchanging, specific TTB is just not feesible in the face of what God might do.

Takes Time In Correcting You:

-We know God doesn't always correct immediately, it may later be revealed that a Name is wrong, or that God doesn't even want Theist!

You Can't Kill No-Half With Arguments:

-Of Argumentation, there is no end...

Why No-Half Matters:

-If anything is possible, it is possible for God to exist in a way that limits connectivity somehow.

-No-Half is an issue precisely because it kills connectivity.

"We Must Trust In God" Argument:

-It's true we must trust in the Power That Be, but the Will of God is vague, especially on a macro level. Besides, how do you know its not God pushing us to be Creator TTB!?

-We must trust in God, but it's a recognized fact confirmed by personal experience that God is vastly unknown, and that unknown fucks with connectivity. Again, this is confirmed from personal experience multiple times.

-The problem witht he We Must Trust In God argument is the deciding fact that we simply do not know the Will of God!?

Protected-Knowledge:

-A more specific form of the We Must trust In God Argument.

-PK states that we need God to be protected from a Cosmic-Trickster. This is true but it doesn't mean that God gives us exact, detailed knowledge. Obviously.

-In practical terms, it's the hope that God guides to Him and lets us operate with faulty theology that is at leat within acceptable parameters.

Most Of God Is Unknown: PK Doesn't Change That:

-Even if the few Names and info we have on God is 100% true and certain, that doesn't change the fact that God is massively an known.

-It is confirmed by pesonal experience that not knowing your OOR seriously compromises connectivity!

But Some Of The Names We Know Grant Total Connectivity!:

-But how do you know there aren't other truths about God that are unknown to us and somehow compromise or change those Names?

-Again, even if God guided you to total knowldge of those Names, that doesn't change the fact that some other facet or truth of God is somehow altering them or changing the truth of them withot you realizing it.

-And before you start trying to find some hidden truth that will somehow save Theist, realize that at this point you are into argumentation and the Endless-Questions.

We Must Trust God To Decide Not To Exist In A Way That's Bad For Us:

-This presupposes that Theist is the TTB that God wants.

-Conversely, if God didn't want us to be Creator, why not allow us to know most or even all of Him? Is He not capable of all things?!

-The Will of God is unknowable.

-While it's true we must trust God to look out for us, perhaps it is God's will for us to be Creator precisely beause it's better for connectivity!!!

-We don't know all or even most of God's values or motives!

-Point of Infinity!

We Are Already Dependent On God:

-We are already dependant on God, why not just be Theist?

-This idea does make sense, that since we are already dependent on God for protection from The Darkness and Cosmic-Trickster, He would want us to be about Him alone.

-But if that's true, why stick us in a world full of other objects, some of which we must depend on for our lives? And why make Himself so distant and unknowable?!?

-Rather, God wants to be the foundation, but not the everything of our lives.

-It's true that we depend on God vitally for our existential needs, but that doesn't mean we know all of God's motivations!

-God doesn't want our sole attention otherwise He wouldn't have made other things too.

-Also, if God wanted us to use Him as our sole OOR, if He wanted Theist TTB speciically, why does unknowability fuck with connectivity! He set things up, remember!?

-Also, what's with the Point of Infinity if God wanted us to be Theist alone?

Blight-Druid Test:

-You can be anything s Creator, even something closer to Destroyer (check out Blight Druids for an example of a Creator who is intermixed with Destroyer) but as Thiest you cannot be something that is wholly non-Theist.

-All objects are of Creator, so that's why it is technically impossible not to be non-Creator. But Theist is only about object of God.

-As per Point of Infinity we must be open to all things. Creator is defined as being all things, all objects. Only-Half is the result of an artificial dichotomy, it can be overcome.

-Theist is funamentally only about rerouting through one object, therefore cannot reroute through others. Fails PoI.

Theist Leaves Door Open To Argumentation:

-This will continue as long as you don't know all of God! The feeling of No-Half will lead to endless rounds of argumentation as Theist.

Object Of Not Being About God?:

-As Theist, you cannot not be about the object of God somehow, thus violating being open to all things as per Point of Infinity.

The Anchor is Point of Infinity:

-This is the only way to end argumentation/Endless-Questions. I knew this from age 12.

-If anything is possible, we must be open to anything.

-No matter what argument you develop for how God would never teach something else besides Theist; the simple truth is that we don't know all of God's motivations.

>It's not just what you know but also what you don't know. Which is a lot!

>God exiss beyond the need for evil, yes, but that doesn't mean we have a blueprin to His character.

>You can't know everything about God, therefore you can't totally predict Him.

>

Adepthood is Categorization:

-Adept is Categrization which is boring by itself and lacking in identity.

-Besides, Creator as categorization too via the Aspects!

Creator vs Adept:

-Creator also has categorization and an identity. Creator is Adept but with an artificial dichotomy emphasis inserted for the purposes of having an identity in the TTB!

Point of Infinity Kills Solus-Deus:

-Word.

Only One TTB At A Time:

-Theist/Adept fails, regardless of the merits of Adept, because in practice we see that you can only have one TTB as your foundation.

-Your primary stuff is going to be about that thing. A risk of it going bad will always kill it.

-You need something to be interested, this means the same thing will be consistently what you are about. Ergo, that's the only thing you are truly about in any practical sense. Theist/Adept looks great on paper, but the bare basic of psychology kill it.

-But if God changes TTB, that will undermined faith!
>Except that that has already happened before! When we have left behind false religions!

>God has allowed nasty things to happen before, even if it was for the best in the long run. How can you conclusively prove that changing TTB at a later date won't constitute the same principle!

-Believing God is good and believing God will never teach you something tha will change your worldview ae not the same thing.

The Weakness Of Theist Is Now Adept's Too:

-If Adept requires Theist to not duffer Blandness, than Theist is an essential part of the Adept TTB. Which means Adept TTB is no longer knowable (lack of Certainty/Knowledge) and Connectivity too!

## Creator Can Do Nothing But Be About God:

-Creator is defined as being about existence, but the only pure existence is the A-Ideal (God, The Supreme)!

>All else is an imperfect copycat of A-Ideal.

-This is the answer of Solus-Deus.

## Questions About The Shifting Are Endless:

-You can (and might) waste your life away doing nothing but this, obsessing over the Shifting.

-Nothing ever gets hammered down fully.

-The closest we ever get to real certainty is the Great Hope.

-More specific stuff like Protected-Knowledge fails because of our inabiliy to fully know the Mind of God and what He might do.

\*See Connectivity & Certainty sub-section down below.

## God or Everything?:

-Everything, because it has all that God does and more. Added security.

-Creator is an object itself, yes, but it is defined as being about all existence (A-Infinity) and it will always exist in Potential.

-There is no reason to be specifically about God, see Indetermiante Argument for more info.

*-It is obvious to the mind that the point of infinity is to be about infinity (ie, all objects).*

### But It Feels Like Theist Is Right?:

-You also felt Cathoicism was right too for the longest time....

### But What If There's a "Trick" To This?:

-So far, searching for a "trick" that allows Theist to win in the God vs Everything debate instantly leads to the Endless-Questions.

### The "We Need To Stick To God Specifically" Argument:

-Yes, we need the Supreme to fulfill certain roles (combat The Darkness, etc.), but the Point of Infinity (which is obvious to the mind) is to be about all objects. Theist locks you into being about one object and all things through that.

-Yes, Creator is itself an object, but it is the object of being about all objects. The idea of being about all things.

-Out of principle alone, we must not bind ourselves to the Supreme specifically forever.

## Indeterminate Argument:

-Because God is not fully known, no argument to support Theist is immune from future revealed truths. This isn't to say that we can't know things about God, only that nothing is immune to future changes of understanding.

## Risk of Losing Everything Argument:

-The Risk of Losing Everything argument is that we should be about God specifically because without Him, Cosmic-Trickster and The Darkness will rob us of certainty or hope in knowing things. Without God, we can have nothing.

-The argument from Theist TTB is that with Creator there is at least some risk of wandering away from God, since anything is possible, but not Theist because it's only principal object is God.

-Basically, the Protected-Knowledge principle in argument form.

-The problem with this argument is OESDE. It has to totally be possible to wander away from God even as Theist OESDE. And because this is infinity, the integers are infinite numbers. So it there is an infinite amount of ways to accidentally wander from God even as Theist.

But Don't We Need To Know About God?:

-Yes, but clearly He's not telling you everything. Most of God is still unknown.

## Point of Infinity:

-The only real Anchor is Point of Infinity.

-What should we be about? Everything. We should be open to all things. Because if anything is possible, only by being about all things can we hope to have our bases covered.

-How do you know that God has not made something or somehow has an equal or nearly equal thing out there, something that must also be main foundational to us? Do you know all of God's motivations and actions!?

-The issue of the Anchor being Connectivity is pretty much dead because both Theist and Creator have connectvity-Issues and can be made to connect with all objects. It's a constant back-and-forth.

-The minute you move away from this, you're into argumentation and the Endless-Questions.

## No-Half: Counter to 'Only-Half':

-Just because Creator has a potential internal-weakness like Only-Half doesn't mean Theist is free of its own.

-No-Half, a reiteration of the Mind of God problem, is the idea that as Theist you can't know what God favors or not, and therefore cannot connect with things.

-All things may correspond to some portion of God's potential, and may exist becae He allows it, but that doesn't mean He necessarily likes it? Maybe He disfavors objects apart from Himself in certain situations or maybe He disfavors certain stand-alone iterations of portions of Himself? He is universally regarded as hating evil, and yet evil correspond to something within Himself!?

-The point is that we cannot know for sure that God favors all objects, and doubt is introduced in the effort to connect with all things.

-If the point of infinity is to have access to all objects, than Theist fails in that endeavor as we cannot know which objects God may or may not dislike.

-OESDE.

-Is it possible for God to exist in a way that limits access to objects? Yes, everything is possible. Can we be sure He does not exist like that? No, since we don't concretely know what He exists as.

-God could exist in a way that thwarts Theist. anyting is possible.

-Adept and Creator have same definition, although Creator has artificial dichotomy for purpose of identity.

-Why keep existence as backup ttb and risk ppl learning just be Theist when you can only Creator TTB.

-In practice, TheistAdept is really just Theist.

-God is good but some Names are already known to be fale.

-Categorization is a copout and the Names feel silly after awhile.

-Being able to trust versus knowing enough for connectivity. WE can trust that God is good and protects from Cosmic-Trickster, but that doesn't mean we can know Him enough to always connect.

### No-Half:

-There is no way for us to know all of the ideas and values that go into the decisions God makes. Ergo, No-Half can never be ruled out.

-God can totally be good and care about us and yet have a reason to exist in a way that limits access to objects if you follow Him exclusively. It's at least a possibility.

-Arguments against No-Half can't change the fact that at the end of the day, we don' tknow the Mind of God or what He exists as. Ergo, doubt is added and ruins the connectivity of Theist.

-Trying to argue that God is good and cares about us doesn't change the fact that God does allow bad stuff to happen anyway.

>Theist may indeed limit our connectivity and God simply hasn't taught us that yet? He doesn't teach us everything at once.

### God May Have A Reason To Limit Theist:

-God may indeed be good, but He may still have a reason to make Theist have limited Connectivity. Again, it all comes down to not knowing the Mind of God.

-Maybe the Shifting is His way to forcing off of Theist and unto Creator which is where He wants us?!

### Connectivity Is The Anchor & Question of Performance:

-It is obvious to the mind that the point of all of infinity is to be about all of infinity (defined practically as having access to all objects).

-In the past, using Connectivity as the Anchor has run into the issue of Performance, since each TTB seems to wax and wane in how well it performs for Connectivity.

-But thanks to No-Half and Only-Half, we have a system to concretely display how well each of the chosen TTB candidates performs.

-Creator suffers from Only-Half but Theist has No-Half, since there is no way to conclusively prove that God doesn't exist in a way that nullifies any particular Name. Thus, any Name could prove to be false, which introduces doubt into all Names.

>Unknowability and the Mind of God issue.

-Attempting to erect and argument that God is open to all Names will always prove hollow since you must know all of God to cinch it shut. After all, any unknown within God could \*somehow\* always change things that could disqualify any argument.

### Infinite-Variation As Example Of Over-Focus:

-You can focus on an argument so much that it appears to conquer all else, even though it doesn't.

-Theist tried to counter-argue that Infinite-Variation killed No-Half because any particular Name would have both an infinite list of variants that God would like, or else something didn't exist.

>While this argment makes sense by itself, when introduced into the rest of infinity it runs into the problem that Infinite-Variation is but one truth amid many, most of which are unknown. It is totally possible that another actualized metaphysical principle could totally skew or alter this truth. After all, if that isn't possible, than OESDE.

-The problem with proofing Theist is that it always runs into the hard reality that we don't know all of existence. In order to truly nail down any argument against No-Half, you'd have to practically know all of God, otherwise any unknown portions could potentially house truths that are gamechangers. Anything is possible, after all.

### Constant Source of Doubt:

-The problem with complex metaphysics is that they never really get resolved to the level needed for TTB. It will be a constant source of Doubt which will kill Connectivity anyway.

### Metaphysical Argument for No-Half:

-Can God exist in such a way that dedicating ourselves to Him alone denies access to some objects? Yes, anything is possible.

-Can we prove definitely that He doesn't? Not without knowing everything about Him, for any unknown 'part' of God will always be a source of Doubt since anything is possible.

>Arguments like Infinite-Variation miss the point that one truth can be true and yet still be changed by another truth. Put simply, Infinite-Variation must be true, and is true, but that doesn't mean there's another truth out there that doesn't still totally change it and deny Theist full Connectivity. Perhaps it keeps some Names stuck in potential forever where they are useless?

>Put another way, is it not possible for Theist to still lack total Connectivity even with Infinite-Variation being true? Of course, anything is possible!

### Cosmic-Trickster Makes Dedication To God Necessary:

-Yes, but Creator TTB allows us to have other OORs in our TTB to use for connecting as well. It is possible that, if God exissts in a way to limit connectivity, something else in our TTB can get passed that.

-Just because you dedicate to God doesn't mean you have to have Him alone in your TTB?!

### Doesn't Cosmic-Trickster Kill No-Half?:

-The idea that God would exist in a way to liit connecitivty and the idea of Cosmic-Trickster are certainly county to each other, but relying on God to protect against Cosmic-Trickster does not automatically equaate with Theist.

-Perhaps the pull to Creator is God Himself, trying to push us towards the true and right TTB?

-God could totally be trying to help steer us in the right direction. But there's no gaurantee that diection is Theist.

-Cosmic-Trickster says only the Supreme can protect from deception, it does not say that Theist is God's chosen TTB.

### Infinite-Variation Refuted:

-It could come up against something that also has an infinite number of variations (something else with the power of variations), another great truth that can counter it.

-If anything is possible, nothing is certain unless you know all things. Which you don't.

-This is obvious to the mind.

-The unknowability of questions regarding IV allows for Doubt which itself kills Connectivity!

### Doesn't No-half Apply To Existence As Well?

-Yes, but it's different with Creator.

-We know the parts to Creator, that it is defined as being about all of existence both in whole and in parts.

### Notice How No-Half Instantly Leads To Endless-Questions:

-If you can't shore up and fortify against No-Half quicky, that usually means its true.

### Unknowability of God Kills Connectivity:

-This is No-Half in a nutshell.

-The doubt of not knowing how God exists and if the Name or object you are using/connecting with is blocked off from Him.

-Any argument gainst No-Half fails because no matter how good it is, there is the chance there is something else within God that counters that and we just haven't learned it yet.

-There probably is no such thing within God. But the fact that we do not know in and of itself is blockage.

### Perfect Being Argument Refuted:

-By this reckoning, I should be able to "feel" God with my hand, and yet I cannot beause He is immaterial. Ergo, becuse I cannot do something with God, therefore He is imperfect!

-I should be able to use God as step at work when I need to reach the higher shelf. And yet I cannot!

### The Darkness & Cosmic-Trickster Combined Argument Refuted:

-Cosmic-Trickster must be true, yes, but The Darkness does not force or prove God to want us to be Theist. God could totally want us to be Creator and the principle itself would be the same.

-There is nothing in The Darkness that proves what TTB God wants us to be. Certainly not in a defiitive way, immune from some later discovery about God.

### Illusion of Connectivity:

-In the beginning, Theist seems like it can connect with anything. But when you start to ask the 'how' of it, it starts to break down, beause God may exist but we know very little of Him and that leaves a lot of doubt and darkness for Theist's connectivity.

### Unknowability of God Kills The Names:

-Ditto.

### Doesn't No-Half Affect Creator As Well?:

-Yes but also No, while it may be possible that just including existence negates some connectivity to objects, there is the posibility of using other OORs in your TTB to connect with if possible. Creator has multiple things to connect with or use as secondary OORs. Theist doesn't, so if God happens to exist in a way that limits connectivity for Himself alone but not other objects, you'll still need to break Theist to connect.

-Put simply, No-Half may or may not affect Creator but Creator has multiple secondary OORs to work with, while Theist doesn't thus increasing the chances of still connecting. If existence turns out to limit connectivity only by itself as an object, you can just use secondary OORs.

### The Flaming Sword of Truth:

-Is it at least possible that God could exist in a way to deny an object and its variants? Yes.

-Can we prove that God must exist in a way that includes all things?

>No, any argument for God is always incomplete, for we knownot the fullness of God. When anything is possible, nothing is certain unless you know all things.

### Truth Unseen:

-Any argument for why God simply must exist in a certain way that includes all Names will always ignore the fact that we can't know all things.

-The fact that you don't know all things will always be a source of Doubt for Theist.

-You don't know all the rules or principles that reality is playing off of, you can't know for sure what truth is out there.

### Killing the A-Ideal Argument:

-There is an infinite amount of reasons both for and against everything in potential.

-This helps to illustrate that we don't know why God makes the decisions that He does, or what passes for 'decisions' by Him. Therefore, we don't have the full picture and therefore cannot declare the A-Ideal argument to be absolute, established and true no matter what.

-It also helps to remember paradox: if there can't be anything greater than A-Ideal, than something doesn't exist!?  ???

-Clearly human knowledge and logic is finite.

-Also, the A-Ideal always leads straigt into the Endless-Questions.

### Behavioral-Argument Defeated: Individual Names Can Still Be Doubted:

-Out of principle, we should be prepared in the event that God may not be inclined to help in all matters. God allows people to suffer and die, so we must assume sometimes He will let connectivity fail too.

-Obviously, the Supreme always matters. But principle demands we be open to any and other alternatives as well.

-Also, if anything is possible, we may one day exist without the need for protection from Cosmic-Trickster.

-Even if God never fails to help in connetivity in the long run, out of principle we must also be open to other alternatives. Such is the nature of A-Infinity!

-God is known to delegate responsibility to others. It may be His will for us to look to lesser authorities for connectivity as well, for whatever reason.

-Limiting ourselves to looking to God alone for connectivity, be it from the object of God Himself or another, seems silly. Better to be open to help from anyone who can be trusted enough to give it!

-it is obvious to the mind that we can both look to God principally first and yet also be open to others as well for guidance in connectivity.

-Also, trusting that God may reveal to us later that a Name was invalid the whole time doesn't help matters that much. Even if He immediately points to some other object that can fulfill that same function for us.

-Names should be trusted from the outset to exist!

### But At Least All Names Exist In God's Capacity!:

-Yes, but if it turns out His structure prevents connectivity with any object, that object is lost forever.

-Just because God may exist in a way to prevent connectivity doesn't mean He won't allow us to use something else as an OOR to connect. Which is why we should be Creator, keep an open mind.

-Creator explores God's capacity as well. All of it, since all Names are also Aspects too!

-The whole 'Any Name Explores God's Capacity' argument pretty much concedes the argument, that there is always the threat that God/Theist might prove to not have connectivity with some objects. But we know Creator's definition and that it is about all objects.

-If there's even a chance that we could find out one day that God's structure bars certain objects to Theist, that's No-Half. Even if the time spent before that was not wasted, from that point forward, you don't have that Name. Even if other Names take it's place, that's still an object you can't have. And there's no way you can know what other objects could be axed in the future.

-Why take the risk of losing objects when Creator has all of them, even if it struggles a bit for the ones closer to Destroyer?

### Trust In God's Judgement Argument:

-But we rarely know for sure what God's judgements are, especially on specifics!

-Besides, you can trust in God and His judgment as Creator too, but have a backup plan of other OORs just in case God permits it. So why take the risk of a specific TTB like Theist!

### Unknowability Will Always Kill Theist's Connectivity:

-There really isn't getting around this. Only-Half is still better than No-Half.

-The precious "arguments" you make to ensure God has total connectivity with all objects will always collapse under the Endless-Questions.

### Getting Creator To Associate With God:

-All of existence is God for the simple fact that everything either is actually God Himself or a copy of portion(s) of Him.

-It is obvious to the mind that the point of infinity is to be about infinity, so God Himself set things up this way.

>Creator, the mindset produced by this, is thus the Will of God.

### Solus Deus Is Objectively Wrong:

-The heart, soul and foundation of Abrahamism is the idea of Solus Deus, to be all about God alone.

>But this is patently false: you annot go through life without at least temporarily being about other objects as well, especially important ones life survival, government, strength, industry, etc.

>In order to just baseline survive, we must include other objects in our attention and our worldview.

-It's pretty obvious to the mind that God wants to be first before all else. That just seems fitting with His status as Supreme.

>But He clearly also wants us to associate with other objects.

>And it is also accepted wisdom that a creation harkens back to its creator, so all of Infinity is immediately about God, essentially making Theist and Creator the same.

-You never know - there might be another object out there The Supreme has put on equal measure with Himself? How can you be sure otherwise?

### Unless You Know Everything, There Will Always Be Doubt:

-No matter how good the argument is. Trust me.

-All attempts to circumvent this have ended in the Endless-Questions.

-Creator is the only TTB known to get past this because its defined as being about all objects. So nothing is missed.

### Immediacy of Answers:

-Complex arguments fall down the hole of Endless-Questions.

-What is the will of God!? That is the only question that truly matters.

-The whole point behind Infinity is to be about all of Infinity, less we miss something. This is how God Himself set things up, ergo it is His will that it be so.

-Obvious to the mind.

### Impartial-Admirer: More Honest With God As Creator:

-Theist tends to be fawning and creates an obsessive need to please and connect with God, where else Creator lets us be semi-independent, enough that we are more honest with God and with our feelings about God.

-This counters the feeling that being Creator is somehow idolatrous and makes us ignore God or be distant from Him. In reality, it actually makes us more honest in our relationship to Him.

### There Is No Certainty, Only Trust In God:

-There will be no end to doubt. You just learn to live with it.

### But Are You Sure?:

-No, I'm not sure, and that's the point behind Creator!

### But What About Principle X?:

-Theist gets its foot in the door through strong feelings of presumptive truth. Ask yourself: do you really know that? Are you absolutely certain there isn't the chance of some other truth out there somehow changing that?

### Perfection-Argument Killed By OESDE:

-You can't know all truths that are relevant.

-There's an infinite amount of reasons for and against everything, so how does God make judgements? WE don' tknow, and that creates a door for doubt!

-Perfection-Argument works in a metaphysical vacuum, but in real-life, we know pitifully little about the Big Picture or what is going on. And if anything is possible, nothing is certain unless you know all things.

### Supreme-Being Must Be A Perfect-Being?:

-This is a compelling argument, in a vacuum by itself, but there is no Immediacy of Answers here.

>This line of questions gets flushed away in the tide of Endless-Questions with enough time!

-And don't forget the havoc from OESDE.

### Adepthood Refuted:

-If Theist were to fall, there would be nothing to take its place which universally applies.

-That is, Theist is about all things and holds it together. But if Theist gets knocked off by Unknowability, what other Order is there that is truly Widest-Net?

-In practice, Adepthood is really just Theist.

-Besides, apart from Theist, Adepthood turns out to be Creator!

-If Theist gets taken out or expereince connectivity error due to Unknowabiliity, there really no other Order that has the spirit of Widest-Net. And being "Adept" in general without Theist turns out to be Creator anyway.

-Without Theist, Adepthood doesn't really work and morphs into Creator anyway. But why be Theist when you have No-Half!?

-Unknowability still brings No-Half back as a thing! No argument can stand against No-Half in the face of Unknowability.

-To put this another way, arguing that a Supreme would need to be perfect and throwing in AotA just brings us to the Endless-Questions. There is no Immediacy of Answers here!

### Adepthood is Categorization:

-Adept is Categrization which is boring by itself and lacking in identity.

-Besides, Creator as categorization too via the Aspects!

### Creator vs Adept:

-Creator also has categorization and an identity. Creator is Adept but with an artificial dichotomy emphasis inserted for the purposes of having an identity in the TTB!

### Point of Infinity Kills Solus-Deus:

-Word.

### Only One TTB At A Time:

-Theist/Adept fails, regardless of the merits of Adept, because in practice we see that you can only have one TTB as your foundation.

-Your primary stuff is going to be about that thing. A risk of it going bad will always kill it.

-You need something to be interested, this means the same thing will be consistently what you are about. Ergo, that's the only thing you are truly about in any practical sense. Theist/Adept looks great on paper, but the bare basic of psychology kill it.

### Locked In Place By Logic:

-The struggle between Creator and Theist can be boiled down to a single question: can we be just about God or is there something else out there that for some reason we must be about as well?

>The answer is that we can't know, or at least can't be sure, that there isn't something else out there besides God that we absolutely must be about as well. Anything is possible. Any attempt to seek out some 'great truth' to shield Theist from this just ends in the Endless-Questions.

>This is logic and immediacy, so if God is angry with us for following logic, that breaks down Natural Theology itself.

>ie, this is the Point of Infinity argument.

### Adept Has No Identity, Theist Is No-Half:

-In practice, both parts of Theist/Adept fall apart.

### Adept Too Bland To Connect:

-As Adept, you can guage what is more or less Adept, and so you can't connect with things.

>Adept works by being about Orders, but each Order feels like something separate, a separate TTB, which kills connectivity for Adept. This is proven from personal experience.

-Of course, you can do that as existence vs non-existence, but then your just Creator TTB by another name!

### Adept Has No Value-System:

-There's no way to judge whether something is more or less Adept than something else. Connectivity works by allowing you to see Creator (or whatever TTB) in something and to hold on to that. But everything is equally Adept, so things become bland.

-This is why Creator has the artificial dichotomy of creator-vs-destroyer within it, to give it a value system.

### Each Order Feels Too Separate:

-The Orders of Adepts feel too separate for Adept to work. Like each is too distant and a TTB in and of itself.

### In Practice, Adept Becomes Creator:

-For Adept to work you must have non-existence identified as something to fight against.

-And the Adept Orders and Aspects are really different words for the same thing, Categorization.

-Adept is Creator by any other name.

-Why not be Creator with a sub-specialty in being about God to fulfill Solus-Deus?

### Adept Has No Central Order: No Concrete Identity:

-Creator has a founding idea, but Adept doesn't. Both are defined about existence, but there is no "central" Adept Order, so there's nothing to really give Adept a definitive identity like with Creator or Theist whose OORs are definitive and can be known.

-Which Order is the Adept Order of existence!?  ????

### Adept Has No Definition, Nothing To Hold Onto:

-Adept has no central Order.

-Adept is loosely defined as being about existence, but the Order(s) for existence and those counter to that idea both have equal standing in the eyes of Adept. Ergo, neither is more or less Adept, and what this means practically is that you cannot apply a definition to Adept because all counters to that definition will also apply as well.

-Adept looks great at first sight, but in practice is a vague, bland mess that has nothing of substance to hold onto for purposes of connectivity!

### TTB of Existence = The Aspects:

-For Adept to work, your character must switch between Aspects, but that just lands you right back at Creator.

### Adept Will Still Struggle With Solus-Deus:

-Adept, like Creator, is still about A-Infinity immediately and primarily. You will still find yourself seeing God as secondary and must deal with that!

### Immediacy = Connectivity:

-Creator has immediacy, unlike Theist which requires complex arguments to establish itself.

-This isn't to say that Creator doesn't have needs, only that the part we need for connectivity is instantly available, unlike with Theist.

### God is Good, But He Sometimes Takes His Time:

-We know false Names do exist, and we don't know to what extant God allows it. We trust Him to be good, but we also recognize that He sometimes takes His time in revealing truth to us.

-Do you want to spend your life using some major Names which turn out to be false?

-Why take the risk when all Aspects exist as they are automatically?

### God is Good, But We Already Know Some Names Are False:

-Both of these things are true.

-If God directly and immediately corrected all false knowledge of Himself, why are there competing religions about Him on earth?

### Protected-Knowledge Doesn't Kill No-Half:

-EVen if 100% of what we learn about God is completely true (which we know it is isn't, as per man-made religions showing that God doesn't stop all false knowledge of Him immediately) there is still the issue of how much of God we know.

-What we know of God is certainly a infinitismal amount against the infinite being that is God. That unknown in and of itself creates doubt, as who knows we might learn about God down the line, it could \*somehow\* interfere with connectivity (anything is possible).

-Why take the risk?

-And the problem with declaring that we should trust in God is problematic because it might be God pushing us to be Creator, because He wants us to be Creator because that is better than Theist!

### Example of the Exterminator:

-It is totally possible for something close to Destroyer to still be brought into the fold of Creator.

-While the artificial dichotomy of existence vs non-existence is added to Existence TTB to make it into Creator TTB, it is still possible to use Aspects to connect with things "of Destroyer." The Exterminator is just such an example.

-Simply put, an exterminator is about elimination, a power of destruction, yet pest control as a whole is meant to be constructive. Pest Control is often about preventing as much as causing elimination!

### No Immediacy With Connecting To God:

-Arguments work great against The Darkness but fail in the turmoil of the Shifting.

-God is not solid enough.

### No Immediacy To Defend Against Unknowability:

-It's great to have fancy arguments, but any argument pales in comparison to the amount of stuff we know we don't know.

### Only-Half vs No-Half:

-Both can be overcome, via respective Names or Aspects, but at least with ONly-Half you have Immediacy.

### If Anything Is Possible...:

-Only by being open to all things can we be prepared or have all our bases covered.

### Demonstration of No-Half:

-God allow people the world over to believe contradictory truths about Him.

-This ruins Theist completely since it shows that, while we must trust God to be good, He does allow falsehood about Himself.

-You can never be sure you are in the wrong and God hasn't gotten around to correcting you yet.

-Do you want to dedicate your life to Theist only to find out He hates that?

### Immediacy = Connectivity:

-Creator is right there, the thing you are dedicated to is right there in your head.

-Where is God? How much of God do you know?  ???

-In times of Chaos, you will not have those extended arguments of Theist.

+Theist requires argument(s) to make God connectable, such as the multi-pronged argument to prove that No-Half isn't real. Meanwhile, Creator TTB is right there already in your head.

## Umbrella-Model Refuted:

### Umbrella-Model Refuted:

-Theist doesn't allow you to use other secondaryOORs, only the object of God, thus automatically failing Point of Infinity!

>Umbrella-Model claims to be a continuation of PoI, yet fails its fundmental tenet.

-Yes, you need an identity which means you need a constant, but Theist is a separate object from God; and so as Theist you can only use God as your secondary OOR, blocking off the chance to use other secondary OORs.

-The study of the absence of God is also the study of God, yes, but not in a long-term and meaningful way. You can't really be about non-God stuff as your secondary OOR indefinitely without feeling foolish.

-Doing so will certainly lead to connectivity-issues.

-Also, it's kind of an assumption that Theist is even the TTB that God would favor, even if UM is true! Maybe God does favor Creator TTB because creating is His signature characteristic?!

-Even wtih Aim of the A-Ideal and the need for Protected-Knowledge/Cosmic-Trickster; there still must be an infinite number of truths that if actualized would make God not want Theist TTB, OESDE.

-The amount of God that is unknown will always introduce doubt even into arguments that seem air-tight.

>Because at the end of the day, all arguments are based on the assumption of human logic being sufficient somehow.

-God may not have taught us or we aren't yet ready for unknown truths which could change things drastically.

## What is God To Creator TTB?:

-He is the Allfather, the Everything, the A-Ideal. The more pieces of existence you acquire (Aspects) the more you slower work your way towards God.

## God is Infinity:

-The purpose of Infinity is to be open to all of Infinity.

-God is the Soul of Infintiy.

-God is Infinity itself. Everything is either God or a copy of a portion(s) of God.

-It is obvious to the mind that we should be about all things, even if only in a "just in case" mindset. God Himself set things up this way.

## Object-Of-Redirection:

-In the face of Infinity, it is obvious to the mind that we must be about all things together, that is the only way not to miss anything important.

-The two candidates are Creator and Theist.

-But to have an identity, which is crucial, we must be about one thing, a concept, through which we are about all other things.

-Connotation is crucial because your OOR can only solidly connect with objects in its Connotation.

-While Theist claims to be able to connect with any other object, in reallity only objects closely linked to God can be connected with. In the field, Creator connects with everything, even objects closer to Destroyer once you realize that the Creator/Destroyer dichotomy was introduced only to give Creator a value system.

-Want proof Creator is the better OOR? Just try either of them out in the real-life and you will see that Creator connects with all and Theist doesn't.

>No, not even with the Natural Names, because the more specific something is, the more you have Multiple-Patrons and the harder it is to connect it to a particular Name.

-There is also the fact that we don't know what God exists as!

-It is an objective difference between Creator and Theist that Creator's connotation is all of infinity but not Theist. Given how we should assume the worst, should we not assume that the OOR with the infinite Connotation will be the one able to redirect to any other object in Infinity?

### Object-Deleted Test Reaffirmed:

-All concepts exist in potential, but is there really a point to Theist without an Actualized Supreme?

-Out of principle alone, it is obvious to the ind that your OOR should be able to keep going regardless of whether any other object is somehow deleted.

-While the Supreme will always exist, out of principle alone your OOR should be principally based on all objects and not just one (not even the Supreme).

-Questions of the Shifting are endless, but to end the stalement between Creator and Theist OORs, we need to nail down something definitively different about them. One of that is the question of Connotation or Principle-Objects which a TTB/OOR is based upon. Creator has all objects as its principle while Theist only has the Supreme (obvious to the mind).

### In The Field:

-Try it in the field, with specific objects, and see which is better at connecting, Theist or Creator.

-Creator wins the day because its a concept we know exists, is simple, and its Connotation is all objects.

-Creator is also up close and real, while we don't even know what God exists as exactly and He is distant!

### Knowledge & Connectivity Go Hand-In-Hand:

-When you realize how little of God we can know, and the Mind of God can never be known fully - that messes with Theist's connectivity.

## Being About All Things Immediately: The Only True Anchor:

-In the face of Infinity, where anything is possible, the only way to exist is to be about all things. To be open to studying and being in any way. That is Widest-Net.

-Widest-Net is therefore the Anchor.

### Exclusion Test:

-Creator excludes nothing, enither object or reourte. Because Creator's connotation is all objects, you can be or be about anything and still be Creator. (Creator is Color White).

-Theist only reroutes through the object of the Supreme.

-It's that simple.

### Diversity of Reroutes:

-The test for Widest-Net, and what is a better OOR, is how many objects you can reroute through as a particular TTB.

-Theist has only one OOR which is the Supreme but Creator can use any object as an OOR.

-Contrary to what Theist argue, Creator is not truly a single object but an object(s) (a class or related objects).

-To word this test another way, if you can make any object your primary one, and still keep your TTB, than that TTB is Widest-Net.

>Solidity: Arguing that Creator is too diluted by having all objects as its principle objects completey ignores the fct that we don't know what the Supreme exists as. He could exist as multiple objects!

>Even if God is just one object, that doesn't change the fact that as Theist you are not open to existing in certain ways, totally contrary to sense and Widest-Net.

>Even if God is just one object, something down the line might demand other things as well, you can't rule anything out!

### Creator Is An Object(s):

-Creator has infinite variations, which must be possible OESDE, and these win Widest-Net for it because there is a Creator variant for anything and everything out there.

### Simplicity = Better Connectivity:

-Widest-Net is The Anchor, and OOR is the key to the Anchor!

-While the totality of existence is unkown, Creator(s) can at least be held in the head and understood more so than God.

-At the very least, we know we know more about the Creator concept-variant in our heads than we do about the Supreme.

-Everyhing relates to Creator immediately as an Aspect.

-Creator allows you to approach any object from any angle via one of the infinite number of Aspects.

-It is easier to connect with a simple concept than an unknown, distant being whose nature and mind you cannot really know.

-Creator is thus the better OOR because it is simple and easy to understand and connect with.

-The inability to know the mind of God kills connectivity. Even if all Names exist in potential, God could actively dislike any of them for all we know?

### Your Principle Should Be All Objects: "Generated" Objects:

-This way, you can temporarily be perfectly about that one object without referencing another object (especially an actualised object like the Supreme).

-To be Widest-Net is to be open to all things, including being about select portions of existence by themselves (all be it temporarily).

-Both Theist and Creator are their own standalone objects but Theist is 'generated' by the object of the Supreme Alone while Creator is generated by any and all objects.

-No matter rwhat object you have or decide upon, Creator exists alongside that object in one variant or another.

### Objected Deleted Test Updated:

-In theory, if God ceased to exist, you could still be Creator.

-The counter-argument to this is that if you delted the object of the concept of Creator it would be the same.

-However, Creator concept is not a single object but instead an Object(s) (class of object variants).

-Also, Creator exists always in potential.

-Also also, Creator is 'generated' by all Objects.

-The problem with the counter argument is that conceptual TTBs will always exist in potential. But this is about ACTUALIZED objects that they are based upon.

>The actualized Supreme, if It didn't exist, would nullify Theist even though it kept on existing in potential. But Creator has all objects as its Principle Objects (its actualized foundation of objects). You would have to delete everything in order to nullify Creator!

### Replaceable Principle-Objects:

-To be Widest-Net is to be all things, including being able to trade objects.

-Theist has only one object but Creator has all of them!

-Remember, if you can't trade an object you are about, than you are not open to all things.

\*Creator is not itself a single object, but a class of object. All objects share in existence/Creator and therefore all objects are of Creator. Full destruction doesn't exist!

### Object-Of-Redirection Test Refuted:

-See Replaceable Principle-Objects for more info.

-OOR also fails as the Test for Widest-Net because both Creator and Theist relate to all things. Both make fine OORs in and of themselves. Therefore, it can not discern between them.

-Being able to redirect is one thing, being able to redirect through any object is more truly of Widest-Net.

-You can never tell for sure which TTB is truly the better OOR, because there could always be something out there that will one day be revealed and make the otehr better after all!

### Can't-Be Test:

-A variation of the Replaceable Parts Test for Widest-Net.

-If your TTB doesn't allow you to be about something, to be something, than that is not Widest-Net!

### Justification:

-In the face of the vastness of Infinity, it is obvious to the mind that we must be about all things. That is the natural mental consequence of an infinite existence.

-Between the two candidates, it is Creator that is Widest-Net as per Delete Object Test.

-God cannot be known, nor can His mind be known. He is first among all Creators, the Creator of Creators, however, and so Creator TTB is still principally about Him alone in a way.

-Questions of the Shifting are Endless.

### Deleted-Object Test for Widest-Net:

-In the abstract, if the object of God were to be deleted but everything else remained, you could still be Creator (but not Theist). Ergo, between the two candidate TTBs, it is Creator that fulfills Widest-Net.

### Unknowability Kills Connectedness:

-Knowledge and Connectivity go hand in hand.

-You don't really know what God is or does, that kills connectivity and thus Widest-Net.

-Creator(s) can't be known in its entirety, but at least you can know the variant in your head.

-God's distance and unknowability reduces Widset-Net. But with Creator, you have it on hand and know it well.

-Somethings about God can be known, but not that much, and something unknown can always be revealed that will change even what you do know.

-God is an unknown, and unknowns make for poor connectivity, thus failing Widest-Net.

-Theist reroutes through God via the Names, but the Names are really just assumptions!

-If the existence of something is legitimately cast into question, that does make it harder to connect with. That is a fact born from experience. Ergo, the lack of knowledge of God thus makes rerouting through Him very hard.

-This is another variation of the Mind of God argment against Theist as well.

### Theist Suffers From Only-Half Too:

-If Creator struggles with things that \*seem\* far away from the concept of Creator, than things that also seem far from God are hard to connect with as Theist as well.

### Etymology:

-Don't kid yourself, Theist suffers from Only-Half too.

-Creator is etymologiocally designed to be about all things, while Theist is principally about only one Object.

-All TTBs are about all objects through extension, but not all are about all objects principally. The distinction is important.

### Least-Parts:

-Theist must go through the Object of God to connect with things; while Creator immediately connects with all objects.

### Monodominance of Theist Precludes Widest-Net:

-To be Widest-Net means being open to all things, including being open to all ways of being. Being without God is not possible as Theist, therefore Theist fails Widest-Net in its fullness.

-Creator doesn't play by the same rules because Theist has only one principle object, while there are an infinite number of variations of the concpt of Creator.

-Creator is both a single concept and a class of variations of that concept, since all is possible at least in potential.

### Doesn't Only-Half Prove Theist Is Widest-Net?:

-No, becaue Only-Half results from an artificial separation placed within Creator TTB in order to give it a value system.

-Theist has its own version of Only-Half in the form of Multiple-Patrons!

-Some things don't connect immediately with any known name, not in a concrete and solid way, like with 'Batman' or something else.

-The point here is that both Theist and Creator will occassionally suffer from Connectivity-Issues. All TTBs will at some point (OESDE).

### Questions of The Shifting Are Endless:

-There are an infinite number of questions pertaining to just this one question (or any question really).

-You will waste your life away trying to hammer them all down!

-Just go with Widest-Net and trust that somewhere in there, you have all that you need!

### Theist/Adept Isn't About All Things Immediately:

-Theist falls the test of being about all things immediately because it requires Redirection.

-But Theist/Adept still requires Redirection, since being Theist is your primary thing.

-As Theist/Adept, all your important stuff still needs to be about Theist directly somehow. That's Redirection!

-Theist/Adept cannot really put your passion into being something that feels apart from God. Therefore, it is not truly about all things, even if it does have 'Adept' in its name.

-Creator can operate apart from God if need be, but Theist/Adept can't.

-Theist/Adept also requires God to exist. While God must exist to combat The Darkness, for idealistic resons let's set this aside and say God doesn't exist but the rest of infinty does. Creator can still operate, but neither Theist nor Theist/Adept can!

### Theist Can Go Negative:

-God Himself may exist and be good, but its totally possible the concept of redirecting through Him could somehow still be bad. Anything is possible, and there's not solid argument against this.

-It could later revealed that being about God principally alone distracts us from other things, potentially something important?!

-Or God may exist in such a way that is incompatible with this. Nothing is impossible.

-Theist and God are two separate objects.

-This invalidates the entire argumet of Go-Negative!

-Therefore we revert back to Being About All Things. Creator wins that because, in theory, it can continue on without God while Theist cannot.

### We Should Be About Al Things:

-Only this removes all doubt.

-Theist doesn't have this in its definition.

-Creator and Adept do, but Theist/Adept is really just Theist, since everything has to be centrally about Theist anyway.

-Creator is Adept with a slight sub-emphasis for utilitarian purposes.

-Theist isn't directly about all things.

### Is Creator TTB Only One Object & Cant It Go Bad?:

-Theist makes the argument that Creator TTB is itself a single object and therefore runs the risk of going negative somehow.

-Creator is an idea but there is no single object of Creator but instead an infinite number of variations of it.

-There is only one A-Ideal, which is God, but there are an infinite number of objects which are all the idea of Creator.

>Remember, if there aren't an infinite number of variations of Creator, than there is something that doesn't exist!

### Shouldn't OOR Be The Anchor?:

-Theist only appears to have Solidity (being a single, solid object) from a distance. In moments of distress or upon closer examination, God Himself has blurry lines.

-Having multiple Names with which to connect with things also intrduces doubt, as it implies that your single object is complex and may compose multipe parts in and of itself.

-Being an OOR means being open to all objects. Theist is closed off to anything that is not directly of God. Non-God stuff must \*somehow\* exist or else something doesn't exist!

-Theist only connects with one object while Creator connects immediately through all.

-Creator is its own object! Thus fulfilling OOR!

-The whole point behind an OOR is Solidity, to have a single, solid object through which to rerout to all other objects. But God is an unknown and His lines are blurry upon closer inspection.

-Creator has Solidity because it has Simplicity.

-Creator is a single concept in the mind, simple and concrete, it's base is known (being about all things) even if the content of infinity is largely unknown.

-The whole point behind Theist was that it was a solid object, bug God is unknown, could exist as multiple objects anyway, and the A-Ideal could be subject to other great truths as yet unknown.

-Creator is the better OOR because it can be known, and thus you can know that it is an object. The same cannot be said for Theist.

-The whole OOR thing is really a violation of Questions of the Shifting are Endless. Creator is immediately about all things, can survive the lose of any single object, and is of itself an object that will always exist even if only in potential. Now that we've gone down the OOR rabbit hole, we find ourselves once against asking all sorts of questions that rarely get answered definitively.

-Creator is the better OOR for the same reasons it wins Widest-Net! Doesn't it make sense that if Creator won Widest-Net, therefore it would also win OOR!?

-OOR fails as an Anchor because both Creator and Theist are perfectly objects in-and-of-themselves. Anotherwords, both Theist and Creator fulfill OOR just fine.

### Further-Notes:

Object of Rediretion:

-Both Theist and Creator are about all things, the only quesiton remaining is which OOR to be about.

-Theist claims it should be OOR because God may not be known in His entirety, but at least He exists and must be good.

-Questions about the Shifting are endless.

-Creator counters that if God is good, all knowledge is protected.

-Creator

=Theist is a separate object apart from God, adnd it too could turn out to be negative. Which means you could potentially spend your only life being about a falsehood!

-The Will of God cannot be known. Makes it hard to be Theist, and leaves the object of Theist vulnerable to being neagtive.

-Remember that Theist and God are two SEPARATE objects!

-Theist has an OOR is meant to be only about one object principally, while Creator is etymologically about all objects. This makes it more suited to being an OOR.

-God can be known to exist and must be good, but that vlaidates both Theist and Creator because both are about Him!

>Dedicating yourself to both gaurantees your life will be spent dedicated to something known to be good and true.

>But at least Creator also includes other objects just in case.

>Remember that Creator is principally about God as well, since He is The Creator.

How To Choose OOR:

-While anything can be used as an OOR (Object of Redirection, to be about all things through it) this comes naturally to Creator but unnaturally so to Theist.

-The fact that you need to attack Adept to Theist (to make Theist/Adept) shows you that Theist is not suited to being an OOR.

-Theist/Adept doesn't work becuase its just Theist, without Theist Adept cannot stand on its own. Should be discarded out of principle if nothing else.

-"Adept" is not a single thing but is instead a bunch of things, the opposite of a TTB/OOR!

-Creator is the healthy middle between the singleness of Theist and the entropy of Adept.

All Good Things:

If the best we can hope for is to dedicate ourselves to that which we know exists and is good, that would be existence at large and not just God, because its reasonable that other good things exists besides God.

-Theist is etymologically only about God, but Creator isn't. Creator is etymogically about creating or existence which encompasses all objects.

-Creator also leads to the idea of pick-and-choose, which is being about the good before the bad.

The Only True Mark Is Connotation:

-Both Theist and Creator are principally about that which we know to be true and good, which is God, so our lives are not wasted.

-But it is Creator which is etymologically about all things and not Theist, which is the heart and soul of Connotation, or Being About All Things!

Concept of Creator Could Go Negative:

-Creator TTB is being about creating, but is God not The Creator!?

-Being Creator is therefore being about The Creator, making it the same as Theist except it champions God's aspect as The Creator instead!

-Creating is changes within existence. Is God not existence itself!?

-If God is existence, and Creator is about existence, than Creator is no different than Theist!

The Question Is Which TTB Is Best OOR?:

-Questions of shifting are endless, but we know both Creator and Theist are principally about God who we know exists and is good.

-But it is Creator that is etymologically better suited to being OOR because it is about all objects etymologically.

Risk Is Unavoidable:

-Neither Theist or Creator are beyond risk. But time's a wssting. Narrow this down to the question of Connotation.

The Bigger-Tent:

-Creator has the bigger-tent beause It is principally about all objects while Theist is princiaplly ony about A-Ideal.

-This makes Creator the better OOR (Object of Redirection).

-The Anchor is Connotation (being about all objects, the TTB that is better at being about all objects).

-Creator is an umbrella-term for having a relationship with all of existence. You can select a portion of existence and be the Creator of only that. Therefore, Creator is more than just one object in and of itself.

-The fact that Creator can be divided into factions, such as concentrating on being only the Creator of a certain thing, shows that Creator is more than just one object in-and-of-itself.

-This way, if an object proves negative, you can still be the Creator of other objects.

#### Creator Cant Go Negative:

-Because there is no single 'Creator' to speak of, but instead an infinite variety of them. There is always one at least in potential that is good for any situation.

Being About All Things Is The Only True Mark of Anchor:

-Theist doesn't count because it works through redirection. The TTB that is truly about all things is about all things immediately.

-Creator suffers from Only-Half only because for practical reasons it has a sub-emphasis. That can be overcome with intent.

-Theist/Adept doesn't count because it's really just Theist, all of your important stuff still needs to be redirected through Theist, you can't just do it. Personal experience has proven this. A true TTB of all things should just allow for immediate connection of anything without need of redirect.

-Remember that only-half can be overcome through the Aspects, or by redirecting through Destroyer if you like.

-Problem with the Marks o the Anchor is that they are always changing.

-The only stable Anchor is a single mark or anchor, such as the idea of being about all things immediately.

### What If A-Infinity Goes Negative?: Shouldn't We Dedicate To One Thing We Know Is Real & Good?:

-Being About All Things = Being About Each Object INdividualls:

-Even if the totality of A-Infinity, all objects, go bad; we know there are some good objects (ie, God) and being Creator means being about them as well. WE know this because that's the etymological and functional idea of being Creator, being Creator in general but also Creator of specific things.

-Therefore, being Creator includes being Theist, with all the attending benefits of Existence and Good.

-If the questions of the Shifting are endless, and we mortals can only hope to dedicate ourselves to what we know actually exists and is good, than Creator would win out because it includes both God (who we know exists and is good, as per Ind. and PK) but any other objects as well.

-Even if the sum total of infinty turns out somehow to be negative, being Creator also means being about the individual objects as well.

-Being Creator also means picking-and-choosing the good from out of the bad!

-Being about all things is best so we miss nothing, but also knowing that it includes God which we know exists for sure and is definitely good. Theist only has one of those, but Creator has both!

-If you dedicate yourself to Creator, your life will be spent in dedication both to A-Infinity and to each of its parts all on their own. Because that mechanism exists within Creator, to be about all things both as a whole and individully.

\*Remember that Creator is idealogically structured to be about all things and yet also each thing all on its own. This is evident in how you can be Creator in general or Creator of specific things!

\*Yes, being Creator may turn out to be a bad TTB somehow. The same can be said for Theist, it could totally turn out that God doesn't want that!

\*

### Further Notes:

One-Thing:

-Creator fails because its ust not one single object but instead many. Theist is a complete and solid object that counts as all other things as well. That's what I need.

-Because there is no single original Creator, and because Creator represents all things together, there is no value system to Creator. No way to make judgments about what you are for versus what you are against.

-Eventually, Creator blands itself into oblivion because of this.

-If you try to make Creator a solid thing, it ends up ramping up Only-Half!

-"us vs them" mindset?

-I can't use Creators as my primary literary works because of this. To function best, I need a solid object to represent and be about in my stories. Creator is too open and difused.

-Having a basic value-system will not change the fact that Cretor has no real boundaries and no single object. STanding for it really means standing for anything and therefore nothing at all.

-Creator therefore fails as a TTB, because it is not a single thing but instead all things. A true TTB must be open and connected to all, but still its own indviidual thing.

Immediacy Test for Widest-Net:

-As Creator, you have to work to connect with things closer to Destroyer.

Everything Must Be Treated As Potentially God:

God Is Still Unique As Creator TTB:

## Staying Up To Date On God Refuted:

-Why not stay up to date on all things?

-It must be possibe that in the future we could exist in a way that The Darkness wasn't a threat, OESDE.We mus tbe open to that as well.

## OOR?:

Connotation is the Test of Widest-Net:

### Widest-Net vs OOR:

-OOR does not gaurantee total inclusion, therefore is a faulty principle to use as the Anchor. In the face of infinity, anything is possible somehow.

-You can have an object that connects well itself but does not allow for secondary reourtes at all, such as with Theist.

-Anotherwords, something like Theist can only reroute through the object of God but nothing else.

-In the face of infinity, only being about all things gaurantees we miss nothing. You cannot have total inclusion if you exclude anything, and Theist objectively does just that!

-Creator also reroutes only through itself but there's a trick: because Creator's connotation is all objects, you can reroute through any object regardless and it will always still 'count' as Creator TTB.

-Remember that Theist and Cretor are both objects in and of themselves, but that doesn't mean they have the same Connotation, and that matters!

-Creator is also all other TTBs or objects combined, so you can use it as anything and it will always count as everything or anything as well. Being Creator-centric is really the Color White.

Everything 'Generates' Creator:

## Multiple-Patrons:

Theist doesn't work in real-life because trying to be about an object leads to conflict with its patron concept.

-For instance, trying to be about art as a Theist leads to conflict with the Muses, etc.

-Creator doesn't have this problem because all concepts are internal to it, beause all objects are its principle objects.

-But Theist has only one principle object and so all other objects and concepts feel 'external' to Theist and any attempt to be about them in the long-run begins to feel disengenous and out of place.

-Neither Theist nor Theist/Adept solves this. I can confirm this from personal experience.

-Theist doesn't work because all other concepts are "external" to it and therefore competitors. Creator encompasses all other concepts and so does not suffer from this!

\*The Will of God removes Go-Negative, so remember that before Theist argues against using Connectivity first as the primary Mark of the Anchor.

\*

## Go-Negative:

-Theist and Creator both have the same Marks of the Anchor, except for the last one which is Cause.

-Cause is the question of Go-Negative, which of the two TTBs are most likely to go negative at some point in the future?

-Theist is about one object while Creator is about one object with infinite variations.

-Theist has principles like The Darkness, Protected-Knowledge, ect. But there is also NUOR.

\*The need to be about that which is true and good is understandable, but we have other existential needs besides that. Like being open-minded and simplicity. These are other, known existential needs besides Go-Negative.

### Creator Redirects Through Existence:

\*Creator is always about existence, or the mystery of existence, which is clearly God. Therefore, Creator is always about God. It is always redirecting through God via His name as Existence.

### The Aspects Kill Go-Negative:

-Because all Creating corresponds with an Aspect, all acts of creating must reroute through God (portions of God).

-The Creator mindset tends to be open to all things, therefore cannot distantce yourself from God without foregoing much of Creator itself.

-Creator harkens back to the idea of the Great Mystery; all Creators everywhere think of terms of the big picture, thus all Creators are about God via His name as Great Mystery.

### Widest-Net Kills Go-Negative:

-You don't really know what other truths are out there. Better to be about all things just in case, especially when Creator already fulfills Go-Negative through the Aspects!

-If the whole point behind G-N is to be about that which is true and good, even if the exact TTB is wrong; then Creator fulfills this too, since all acts of creating harken back to God and all creating reflects Him.

### It's Impossible NOt To Be About God:

If everything is either God or a reproduction of portions of Him, than being about anything will always mean being about some portion of God!?

### Widest-Net Precludes:

-WN comes before Go-Negative because we don't know what other truths or rules are out there. We must remain open to all possibility and Go-Negative doesn't allow for that, and that is obviously wrong.

### Go-Negative Is Close-Minded:

-This is obvious to the mind.

-Redirecting through God only precludes redirecting through other objects without God. Theist cannot ooperate without God and so fails WN.

-The idea that Creator is the same is false: while the notion of Creator is singular, there are infinite variations of Creator. There is a version of Creator for all truths or potentials, but there is only one God (A-Ideal).

-Therefore, it is Creator that keeps us open to all possibilities and not Theist which has only one object of redirection.

\*Remember: Creator actually has many variation objects of itself, a variation for any potential things. OESDE.

\*Creator is actually a collection of Objects. This whole Go-Negative thing got started by the idea that Creator was a singular object that could somehow go negative. There are actually infinite variations of Creator and no single one of them is master of all.

-Therefore, Creator can never go negative because there's always a variant somewhere that's perfectly fine.

### Go-Negative Refuted:

-Go-Negative makes little sense when you realize that Creator is also principally about God.

>God alone is The Creator, the Creator of Creators. Thus, to be Creator is to forever reflect upon Him, since the glory of a creation reflects its creator.

-The idea that Creator isn't about God but the concept of creating is sophistry; creating is about existence, which is what God is. He is pure existence, as per Ind.

>Creator TTB = creating = existence = God.

-Both the ideas of Creator TTB and Theist TTB stand a chance of being negative. But at least with Creator, you base your life on God first and foremost and also includ eall other objects just in case.

-The reason you shouldn't bse your life just on the Object of God is because you might need something else later. If God is first and foremost, you should include everything else secondary simply out of principle. This is obvious to the mind. Why take unnecessary risks like leaving things out?

-Go-Negative begins to fall apart when you realize how little of God we know and howmany unknown problems with Him as an OOR there could yet be. For simplicity's sake, better to just be Creator.

-At least with Creator there is an inherent idea of pick-and-choose.

-Go-Negative doesn't give us a list of ways a TTB can go negative. Because we don't know all the ways a TTB can go negative, there's no way to truly know for sure that Theist/God can't go negative even with PK and Ind.

-Even if God is true and good, there must be an infinite list of ways He can still go-negative (as a TTB/OOR) despite PK an Ind. This has always been the problem with Theist, the unknown and uncertain.

-Next week, down the road, we could discover a way God as an object is negative despite stuff like PK and Ind. You don't know everything about God!

-Creator is its own object but its an object meant to attach to all other objects. Being Creator is inherently meant to be about all objects. That's radically different from Theist which is structured to be principally only about one Object.

-Without Go-Negative, we revert back to Widest-Net which is clearly Creator.

-Both Creator and Theist are principally about God. Being Creator means you dedicate your life to God which we know to be true and good as well. But as Creator you have other objects too, just in case.

-Both Creator and Theist cause you to dedicate your life to God who is true and good, but Creator also includes other objects. In the event God is negative, there's at least the chance you included an object(s) that were meant to be followed.

-The whole point behind Go-Negative makes no sense when your realize that Creator is also principally about God.

>The idea that we should concentrate on God makes no sense either when you realize how little of God we can actually know.

\*Go-Negative fails to usurp Widest-Net because it misses the while point behind WN: to include all objects just in case.

### Mind Of God Kills Any Form Of Theist:

-The problem with Go-Negative is that it makes the assumption that whatever form God takes that that can be an OOR, but that is not gauranteed. God doesn't have to cease to exist or go evil somehow in order for Him(s) to not work as an OOR.

-This is why we should have a TTB that is principally about all objects. Theist has only one Object (seemingly) and thus cannot afford to lose it, but Creator has all of them.

-For instance; God could be not one object but several competing objects? How can you be so sure it would be possible to redirect through all of them and remain coherent as a TTB?

-Or what if God changed Himself, maybe made everything somehow the Supreme equally? The need for a value system would thus make Theist absolutely useless in such a scenario.

-These examples and more demonstrate that there is no gaurantee that the object of God can or always will be feasible as an OOR.

-Because Go-Negative is based on assumption, we thus revert back to Widest-Net, which is clearly Creator TTB.

-Remember that both Creator and Theist are principally based off of God who must be true and good.

-Part of being Creator, as demonstrated by people with this mindset, is maximizing the good we can find and minimizing the bad.

### -Go-Negative Violates Future-Uncertain:

-You could dedicate your life to God alone and later discover something else that, for whateve reason, you also need to be about principally.

-In such a scenario, your TTB would have to be changed and expanded to include it. But not with Creator!

### Can Creator Go-Negative?:

-Any TTB itself can Go-Negative, but as Theist demonstrates, we must accept this as a risk. However, we can console ourselves that the object(s) of our TTB at least are true and good.

-God is true and good for sure, and He is the principal object of Creator and Theist alike!

-It is reasonable to assume that there must be other objects out there that are also true and good.

-This is especially the case in Potential, where there must be an infinite number of true and good objects, OESDE.

-If God is Existence and all of creating is changes to existenc, than there is no creating that does not immediately involve God. Therefore, being Creator involves the same 'percentage' of God that Theist does.

### Will of God Kills Go-Negative 4 Theist:

-God could totally want us to know that He exists, to know that He is good, and to study Him - and still want a TTB other than Theist. It is at least possible.

-Whatever Actualized Reality we have, there is some variation of Creator that is viale (OESDE).

-NUOR

-God is good and is probably guiding us, but He allows us to believe errors, ostensibly for a time. This creates an opening for doubt into the Cause of Theist.

-You can never be sure God hasn't yet revealed some great truth that will invalidate Theist even without invalidating Himself. AFter all, God and being about God are two separate things.

### How To Judge Cause:

-It comes down to variations and epistemology.

-Cause is the question of that which can go negative. Creator is both one thing and many, an infinite number of them, so there is always at least in Potential some answer to any problem. OESDE.

-We can't know ACtualized Reality, so trying to judge by that is impossible. But in Potential, Creator always at least some viable variations. That should win Cause for Creator over Theist!

-To judge Cause, we must look to Potential and not Actualization, because Actualization can only be trusted to be good but not known in certainty. But in Potential we can know things for certain.

-It comes down to what can be known. And while Theist will be quick to assert Protected-Knowledge, the Great Hope also applies, as does NUOR!

-As per the Great Hope, our knowldge is secure, and we can know that in Potential it is Creator that wins Cause (through variation) and not Theist!

### Will of God Invalidates Go-Negative:

-WE cannot know the mind of God or what He intends. This doubt disrupts the more specific kind of trust required to be Theist.

-God could even potentially choose to change or replace Himself, and with something that does not allow for Theist, such as separate Supreme Beings. Theist doesn't work with multiple objects!

-You cannot prove that God won't remove Himself someday, for whatever reason or in whatever fashion. Not knowing what this means will kill the trust required for Go-Negative to work.

-Even if God keeps changing or replacing Himself, that still kills Go-Negative because it introduces future unknowns into its equation.

\*Both Creator and Theist are based princiaply and primarily on God, so each of them benefits from definitely being about that which is true and good. It's just that Theist claimed dominance because its only about the object of God. But if that object keeps changing or may change Himself for whatever reason...

\*The inabillity to know the Mind of God thus adds doubt to God's existence. Even without questioning His goodness. God may change Himself or do any number of things in the future that \*somehow\* take Him off the board... and without God, the TTB of Theist is pointless. No Go-Negative if God doesn't exist or keeps changing!

-TTBs only really work if their objects are more-or-less static. At the very least, the one that is least likely to change is preferable.

-Because God might changing, again and again, therefore Theist fails Go-Negative.

-+Without Go-Negative, dominance swings back to Creator because it has Widest-Net!

### Go-Negative Is Useless:

-Both Creator and Theist are principally founded on the Object of God, who is true and good for sure.

-Creator is about the concept of creating, but the concept of creating is about existence which is God. So it's like saying Theist isn't about God because its about the concept of Theist - which is etymological error.

-Creator is about creating/changes to existence!

-Creator can also be defined as being about 'features' of existence or existence in general. Which, again, is God.

-Go-Negative is therefore useless as an Anchor because it cannot determine between Theist or Creator as which is the better TTB by itself. Both Creator and Theist have their principal object which cannot go negative!

\*Creator TTB isn't about 'creator' etymologically but about Existence which is God. What is ceatings but features of existence.

--

-Both Theist and Creator are principally about the object of God but their etymology creates two different mindsets. Creator allows for other objects while Theist is restrictive and doesn't.

### Further-Notes:

Go-Negative Is Useless:

-Both Creator and Theist are principally founded on the Object of God, who is true and good for sure.

-Creator is about the concept of creating, but the concept of creating is about existence which is God. So it's like saying Theist isn't about God because its about the concept of Theist - which is etymological error.

-Creator is about creating/changes to existence!

-Creator can also be defined as being about 'features' of existence or existence in general. Which, again, is God.

-Go-Negative is therefore useless as an Anchor because it cannot determine between Theist or Creator as which is the better TTB by itself. Both Creator and Theist have their principal object which cannot go negative!

\*Creator TTB isn't about 'creator' etymologically but about Existence which is God. What is ceatings but features of existence.

--

### Go-Negative Fulfilled:

-The idea of being about God specifically could prove to be wrong, also the idea of being about all objects could somehow go negative.

-This is a risk we must accept.

-Go-Negative, from Theist perspective, at this point argues that we should at least be about the one thing that can't go negative.

-But if we are Creator, and God alone is The Prime Creator, than being Creator means still basing yourself on that which cannot go negative.

### The Prime Creator:

-God alone is the Prime Creator.

-Therefore, anything about creator or creating reflects back on Him.

-Because He cannot go negative, therefore anything done or about creator or creating will always also be about God as well, thus fulfillng the principle of Go-Negative.

-The whole point behind Go-Negative is to at least base your life on something that can never go negative. But both Creator and Theist are principally based on God and each redirects to God through its own concept (ie, the concepts of creating and solus-deus specifically).

\*Creator means being about all of existence, and the Supreme is the only true existence there is.

### Go-Negative vs Widest-Net:

-Questions of the Shifting are endless.

-Both Theist and Creator are based on God, who can never go negative.

-But at least Creator leaves the door open to anything else we might run into down the road. Who knows what other truths are out there?

-It's true Creator is also based on the concept of creating, but Theist is also based on a concept apart from God, which is Solus Deus. Both creating and solus deus could turn out to be negative some day.

-The one ironclad thing we know is that we need to be about all objects. Theist in the long run just narrows our mind to anything immediately of God, but Creator makes us open to everything, either through itself or its partner Destroyer.

## Creator Vs. Theist/Adept:

### Theist/Adept Isn't About All Things Immediately:

-Theist falls the test of being about all things immediately because it requires Redirection.

-But Theist/Adept still requires Redirection, since being Theist is your primary thing.

-As Theist/Adept, all your important stuff still needs to be about Theist directly somehow. That's Redirection!

-Theist/Adept cannot really put your passion into being something that feels apart from God. Therefore, it is not truly about all things, even if it does have 'Adept' in its name.

-Creator can operate apart from God if need be, but Theist/Adept can't.

-Theist/Adept also requires God to exist. While God must exist to combat The Darkness, for idealistic resons let's set this aside and say God doesn't exist but the rest of infinty does. Creator can still operate, but neither Theist nor Theist/Adept can!

### Specializaiton Needs To Be A Known: Assume The Worst:

-When you see so many different people get iracles who believe in wildly different ideas of God, it makes it hard to want to base so much of your life, your content and choices, on something that is seemingly so little known (and outright contradictory).

-Why make A-Infinity your backup as Adept when you can just dedicate to it directly as Creator? It is at least known in some parts, which is more than Theist? You at least know the blueprints in your head.

-Theist/Adept fails because it still requires most of your life, your choices and content, to be based on something that is largely unknown.

-Arguing that your okay with that so long as you get to be Adept doesn't work because you can be Adept as Creator too. They have the same definition and Connotation.

-Being Adept shouldn't cost basing most of your life on what very well be a lie. We must assume the worst: that Theist will prove to be wildly different than what we expected. Therefore, we should not make it the sole foundation (or even the cornerstone, which usually ends up being the foundation anyway(assume the worst)) of our identity and work.

-Do you want your life's work to make people more likely to fall into error?

-Adept by itself is bland, can't judge what to connect or side with.

-We should assume the worst, that Theist/Adept will just end up being about Theist all the time anyway, with very little actual Adept TTB.

### Life Choices & Content:

-No sane person bases their life choices and content on that which is less known and therefore more uncertain. It is wise to base your cornerstone on the stronger foundation from the start.

-Even as Theist/Adept, most of your life choices and content will be as Theist. Should that go negative, your work is invalidated for it.

### Theist/Adept In Practice: Assume The Worst:

-Most people will effectively just be Theist, and so your life's work will be weaker for it.

### But Theist/Adept Has A Backup!:

-You should assume the worst, that most of your work will be about Theist and therefore should it go negative, most of your work will be invalidated somehow.

-Better to go with Creator which has greater Connotation and is itself a backup anyway.

But Creator Is An Object Itself, Could Go Bad!:

-Arguing that Creator is itself an object that can go negative also applies to ADept! Adept is itself an object in-and-of-itself!

-Any TTB is an object that could \*somehow\* go negative, but Creator has more objects, more Connotation than Theist; therefore it is slightly more solid a foundation than Theist is.

### Problem With TTB Backups:

-What good does it do me to have Adept as a backup, to reach the end of my life and then realize Theist was wrong?! It's too late to change anything!

-Better to go through life with the most certain TTB as your specialization from the start!

-Remember, as Theist/Adept, most of your life choices and content will have revolved around Theist!

### Creator vs Theist/Adept:

-Theist is overhwelmingly unknown, we must assume the worst that God will prove to be wildly different than what we expected. We should base our cornerstone, which is what our life choices and content revolve around, on that which is best known and most certain.

-Having Adept as a backup will not change the fact that most of our life choices and content will have been based around Theist.

-Having Adept as a backup won't do anygood when you reach the end of your life and then realize that Theist was wrong!

### Only An Object: Not A Person: Theist/Adept Invalidated By Theist's Personhood:

-Can't follow a person!

-It's not enough to have a backup or diversifiation of objects when being Theist - it feels stupid to follow a person whose will you can't know and who doesn't communicate with you.

-Save your metaphysical arguments on how we need to be able to trust God. The hard reality of life is that people follow God with wildly different theologies and they are not corrected for it. At lesat to some extent, God is distant and doesn't intervene.

-Theist/Adept will still have us base most of our work on Theist, especially the important parts. Theist and Creator are both objects that can later prove to be negative, but Theist is known to also be a person who I can't know. Creator at least is ONLY an object and not a person.

-You could make the argument for Adept, but then why not just be Creator which is the same thing but easier to be about.

-Metaphysical arguments do nothing in reallife to assuage the problem of Divine Aloofness. It feels stupid to be Theist like that.

-It's true that there might be a manifestation of all of Creator TTB out there, but we already know Theist's only Object has personhood!

-Theist/Adept still doesn't work for the exact same reason: the Theist part is still a person who you can never truly know!

-In real-life, the inability to follow a person still invalidates even Theist/Adept as a TTB!

\*Remember that Only-Half can be overcome by remembering that anything that feels weakly connected to Creator can still be connected with through Its opposite, Destroyer.

#### Personhood Argument In A Nutshell:

-God does not communicate clearly or all at once. Theist or anything could later prove to be against His wishes, for whatever reason. Therefore, since nothing can concretely be known to be His will forever, we should be about all things, which is Creator (Adapt too Bland).

### Sophistry: Theist Is Good At Building Arguments:

-Thigs like Protected-Knowledge sound great on paper but are dashed against the rocks of hard life. Is is objective fact that God allows people to believe falsehoods about Him all their lives.

-It feels stupid to be Theist and not be able to know the will of God. That's not something you want to be the cornerstone of your work!

## Connectivity & Certainty:

-These are the two Anchors I have always used. And they are the only Anchor(s) for the simple fact that all other potential Anchors are already represented within them.

-In truth, they themselves are really one and the same Anchor, the idea of holding on to a single thing that unites all of infinity. Their differentiation being purely pragmatic.

Connectivity Before Certainty:

-This is the real-fight beneath the usual Theist vs Creator dichotomy.

-Creator wins Connectivity, which is the true Anchor,

-Creator wins Connectivity because it can go on without the object of God (in theory) while Theist can't.

-Theist inevitablyc laims soe form of Certainty, but this is also inevitably udone by the inability to know the Will of God / Mind of God.'

## Allure of Specialization:

-The allure of specialization must bow to the hard reality of Widest-Net. Theist is specifilizaiton, even with Adept. Creator is Widest-Net.

### Creator/Adept Vs Theist/Adept:

-No sane person wants their specialty, their life's work, to be based on that which is most likely to not be true or be very different from what is expected. To put it another way, they would want to base the cornerstone of hteir work on that which is most or best known, the one with the most knowability. This is obvious to the mind.

-Creator is already about all of A-Infinity, making it Adept as well.

-The only real difference is what is your Specialty as Adept, Creator or Theist?

-Because your Specialty will be what you are about the most, it should be the one which is most Knowable.

-Knowledge precedes all other Anchors, for all other Anchors are based upon it. Remember that.

-Theist/Adept has only-half as well, things not reedily immediate to God may be difficult to connect with, or things which have too many allegiances as well.

-The only Anchor(s) is Connectivity and Certainty, between the two specialties of Creator and Theist, it is Creator which has both, so it should be paired with Adept.

-Theist/Adept is an illlusion, both Theist and Creator are about Adept, since both relate to all things. The only real question is the difference of specialty.

-Theist becomes Theist/Adept through the literary Ordes of Adepts, but Creator can do the same through the Aspects and with Destroyer!

### Creator Vs Adept: Why Not Be Adept Alone?:

-Theist will retreat into Adept and use that as a standalone TTB against Creator, claiming it has greater connectivity and equal certainty (or even more).

-The problem with Adept is Blandness, it is supposed to be a TTB, a specialty, yet it stands for all things equally. It is a specialty without anything to specialize in.

-Thus it requires Theist or something else to give a specialty, which just brings us back to Creator vs Theist!

-instead of being something new and innovative for Theist, Adept is really just kicking the proverbial can own the street, since it will inevitaly lead to the question of Creator/Adept vs Theist/Adept.

-Remember that your specialty will be the basis of your life. Do you want it to be known or only half-known?

### Specializing In Theist Same As Regular Theist TTB:

-If your specialty is Theist even as Adept; your life-choices will bemade as a Theist, you'll organize your life as a Theist, your main characters will be Theist, the content of your works will surround the Theists... even if you include hte other Orders, you're life will be cemented on Theists and if Theist later goes negative...

-Your specialty is as important as being about all things!

## Knowledge Is The Anchor: Knowledge Of Your TTB:

-Widest-Net has failed as the Anchor because both Creator and Theist/Adept are about all of A-Infinity.

Do You Want To Found Your Magnum Opus On A Fully-Known TTB Or A Partially One?:

-Only a fool would choose to base their existence on something only partially known, even if that thing is supposed to be the greatest.

-The title of this section is a thought experiment that finally puts paid to Theist!

-Both Creator and Theist suffer from Connectivity-Issues, since not everything is seemingly immediately attached to them. But you can push through that.

-You can push past connectivity issues. The real quesiton is which TTB to mix with Adept, and it should be Creator because only a fool bases his life on that which is only half-known.

-Ignore the fact that Theist relates to God for a minute; it is true that a fully known TTB is preferable to a half or dimly known one. This is obvious to the mind!

>Connectivity and Knowledge are the two anchors I use. Creator fulfills both and better than does Theist.

>

### Why Not Be About All Objects Instead Of Just Knowledge As The Anchor?:

-Because being 'about all objects' is itself a concept and therefore an object. Which means it can always \*somehow\* become negative. Anything is possible.

-Remember, Creator TTB is about all objects as well!

### What If Creator Goes Negative?:

-Because Creator is about all objects, it can change. As I learn, I can choose which parts of existence to endorse or deny. Thus, Creator (or my variant of Creator TTB) is both the same and yet forever adapting as well.

### But what about Only-Half?:

-Adept suffers from Blandness, which is itself a type of connectivity-issue!

### What About Theist or Theist/Adept?:

-In practice, Theist/Adept is just Theist because everything is founded on Theist anyway.

-The problem with Theist is Unknowability. We simply cannot know enough about God, let alone His will. It would suck to base one's life on Theist, only to discover at the end that God actually dislikes Theist as a TTB or something similar.

-You can't use Theist as a standalone TTB or even as a specialization because anything you try to do with it could, at least potentially, eventually turn out to be against God's will. Nothing can really be known concretely about the Divine will. It's an annoying feeling to have while trying to work on projects.

What About Other Potential Anchors?:

-All other anchors predicated on knowledge, since you must have knowledge of them in order to 'have' them.

-knowledge leads to adaptability, the ability to change to new actualized realities in A-Infinity! Knowledge is the blueprint of reality, allowing you to know what you don't have and try to acquire it.

### Future-Insurmountable:

-A related topic to knowing Creator TTB is whether you can also knew whether it will "go negative" somehow at some point in the future.

-Creator means being about all of existence, which means youc an pick and choose among all objects of A-Infinity, so you can choose that which is good and reject or downplay that which is evil. Creator TTB, and Theist too, allow for you to adapt to changes in the future.

### Pick-And-Choose Does Not Apply To Theist As It Does Creator:

-Creator is known to have many objects, infinitely so! But Theist probably has only one, something which is strongly backed up by Ind. Because of this, Theist both in its "blueprint" form and Object are a package deal. If either goes negative, you lose Theist permanently. But Creator has many objects!

### Creator As TTB Does Not Mean 'Absolute' Fullness Of Existence:

-Should the Fullness of Existence \*somehow\* go bad, you still have Creator as TTB anyway.

-Creator is defined as being about all of existence but with an emphasis on the Fullness of Existence. But this is understood to mean all object, and it is open to pick-and-choose. Should the Fullness somehow go bad, the mindset of searching for what's good over what is bad is still there. At the very least, we can keep searching for unity or a good fullness anyway, in the hopes that the estimation was wrong.

-You can be Creator even if you only dedicate to a single set of objects, although admittingly this won't be the fulllness of Creator either. But it can be done. Unlike Theist which is a total package.

### Must We Dedicate Ourselves To The Object(s) Of Creator?:

>Theist has only one object, presumably, and we can't know if it has more. INd. impleis only one at least. It's a package deal with Theist, especially when you throw in the Mind of God concept.

>Creator, on the other hand, has an infinite number of objects. While collectively about them all, it is possible to pick and choose.

>It is possible that actualized or potential reality may turn out not to allow for this. But the same can be said for Theist. Personal experience so far says that you can pick-and-choose.

-pick-and-choose.

-Theist TTB is about both the TTB itself and the Object (God) but Creator TTB is only about its own TTB concept.

-It's true there is necessary metaphysical framework for both TTBs to work, but once you get the Great Hope/Protected-Knowledge done, the single concept of Creator TTB can be known in its entirety while Theist and its Object cannot.

-Some things can be known, as well as anything can be known, such as the concepts in your head. Everything exists somewhere in A-Infinity!

-Pick-And-Choose is what allows Creator to decisively beat Theist as the TTB of Knowlege as the Anchor!

### Any Argument Against Creator's Object Always Applies To Theist's Object Too:

-Or else There Is Something That Doesn't Exist!

-The object of both TTBs will always have some doubt. It has to be possible, somehow, for the Object of Theist to totally exist but to exist in a manner that makes any semblance of Theist unfeasible. This is why we have Widest-Net in the first place, because whatever is right, has to be in there somewhere!

### Adept Becomes Creator TTB Eventually:

-You don't need Theist to give 'flavor' to the blandness of Adept. Adept is bland because it has no value system, but in practice it will always become Creator which does!

-It is Creator which gives 'flavor' to Adept and not Theist, because when you are Theist, everything must involve Theist but that is counter to the spirit of Widest-Net. What if Theist prove sto be Negative!

### Theist/Adept Is Still Tied To Single Object:

-You have connectivity issues with anything as Theist/ADept not connected to God. That creates a problem.

### Creator Flavors Adept Better Than Theist:

-Creator and Adept are both Widest-Net, so you don't feel pangs of doubt when basing your life on either of them. Unlike Theist which is distant and nebulous.

-No one wants their specialty, their cornerstone work, to be at risk of turning out to be somehow negative. Most of your projects will be about that! So play it safe and be Widest-Net with both parts of your TTB, and be Creator.Adept (which is really the same).

-No sane person bases their life on something they don't know. Similarly, no one bases the cornerstone of their work on that which is most likely to turn out negative in the end. That is wisdom.

-Since Theist is a smaller "set" thatn Creator in terms of objects, it is mathamatically therefore more likely to be different or negative than presupposed by our human TTBs.

-Knowing the Almighty exists ala Ind. doesn't change this. It has to be possible for God to exist in such a way that invlidates Theist as a TTB or else SDE.

### You Can Waste Your Life Trying To Answer All Questions:

-Of questions about anything, in Potential, they are endless...

-You can spen the rest of your life going through endless questions about what it means to have knowledge, the anchor and other TTB-related question.

>But what is obvious to the mind that is obviously the best known, Theist or Creator?!

>Which "blueprint" can you draw out in your head, Creator or Theist/God!?

>

## Who Has Better Connectivity?: Why Do You Shift?:

-You leave Creator because you find it hard to be of things that are close to Destroyer.

-You leave Theist because its only about one object. Also, can't confirm that God is good towards us, hard to trust Him.

-Distrust for God steals all connectivity, but Creator at least has some. Pretty much any TTB will have connectivity issues, even Adept which comes across as too abstract. But Creator is both specific and yet encompasses all of A-Infinity's objects as well.

\*Creator and Adept are the same thing. If Creator goes negative, so will Adept! Also, Creator is different from Theist in that it is about multiple objects, in the event of going negative, it can be broken down and the better parts favored. Any TTB can somehow go negative, but the point is to have the TTB with the least risk.

\*When you are facing death, you don't want to worry that that one object you dedicated to turns out to have been in error. Be about all objects. Creator is Adept but with identity!

>This applies to Theist/Adept as well. Theist/Adept is 90% Theist because all the important stuff has to be your specialty. You don't want to face death and somehow discover that all the important stuff you dedicated to Theist was somehow negative, do you? I've already tried this out in person as Theist/Adept TTB.

\*Theist/Adept = No man can serve two masters, eventually one of those TTBs put together must take precedence, and it will always be Theist. But Theist fails Widest-Net!

## Following God As Creator:

-God is one thing in and of Himself. But He is also all things, and anything in and outside of that exists because He allows it, which still makes it a part of Him.

-To be Creator TTB is to be about all things.

-To follow God, we must therefore be about all things, thus Creator.

## Only-Half vs No-Half:

### -Conforms to what's In Your Head: Specialty Must Be Concrete:

>If your specialty is going to receive te bulk of your work, you want to know it!

>Creator has no original, as per A-Infinity, so whatever variant of Creator is in your head is as valid as any other, sans any actually meta-truths of course. But we can do nothing about them.

>But we can never know for sure that the idea of God in your head is accurate, or to what extant. That will always make Theist obscure and smokey, while Creator is hard and concrete, something you can hold on to!

>The idea of Creator is something we have with us, inside our heads. God is not.

>

### -Only-Half Before No-Half:

>You can know all of your variant of Creator in your head and that is as valid as any Creator TTB variant. But with Theist, there is only one object, and while somethings of that Object can be known, we can never know how much, or what He truly wants for sure.

>There is also the issue of emotional moments where you cannot tand that the Supreme stands by and lets such evil happen!

>God is too unknowable to be your Specialty with Adept because most of your great works would be based on something you could never, ever be sure of!

>With Creator, there is personalization, and therefore certainty (as much certainty as us mortals can get, even with Protected-Knowledge).

>It doesn't help that God lets people believe things about Him that must be in error. Trinitarians, anyone?

>No-Half is the same as Unknowability.

**>The question between Creator and Theist boils down to this: do you want to base your magnum opus on something you know fully or something only partially?**

>

-We can never know how much of God we know that is accurate, but we can know that our idea of Creator in our heads is 100% accurate. And that is more than Theist!

>Yes, all knowledge is predicated on Protected-Knowledge. Creator relies on God just as much as Theist does!

>

## Only-Half vs Untrust:

-only-Half is the weak point of Creator TTB, while Untrust is the weak point of Theist.

-Untrust is more than just not trusting God logically, but emotionally as well. God has allowed so much evil, highly rational arguments for why He wouldn't allow cosmic deception and other evils fall flat in the face of that.

-Because we cannot trust God, we cannot have Him. Only-Half is therefore preferable to no-half of anything!

-Even if we can know somethings about God, like Almightiness via Indivisability, there is always the threat that unknown truths make negate Theist to us.

-While any object can be negated, Creator at least tries to be about all objects, while Theist has only one object. Should that object go negative, all of Theist TTB is finished forever!

-Untrust is also related to divine aloofness: God is distant and doesn't seem to get involved in our lives.

## Godanger:

-It's impossible to be Theist in life because the harshness and unfairness of life grates on you.

-Also, God is a person, and you can never know if He is on your side. He may not be evil, but He could be indifferent. You can't totally detach from the emotions of that, no matter how intellectual you are. Life is unfair and that sucks.

-It feels really stupid to dedicate your life to a thing and person who could turn out to totally not care about you.

## Untrust:

-If you're being honest with yourself, God can never truly be known, and the extent of His goodness can never be known either. God can be good but bad still can still happen to us. Therefore, Theist TTB can never be known for sure, and neither can it be trusted for sure.

## Why Not Just Be Adept?:

-Theist/Adept is really just Theist. If God urns out to be a negative, 90% of your work as Theist/Adept TTB will have been for naught.

>This is basic math: most of what you do as Theist/Adept is just plain Theist. All of that will turn out to have been for naught or negative, if God turns out to be a negative somehow.

>Does having 90% of your work be Theist sound like adhering to the spirit of Widest-Net!?

>

-Being Adept alone, a generic Adept TTB, lacks a strong identity and does not contain within itself a strict idea of being about all of existence at once. In fact, the word Adept carries witiin itself an etymological urge to specialize, which is the opposite of Widest-Net.

-In practice, Adept will always be the same as Creator, since you will oppose the foes of existence (forces of destruction).

-Etymologically, Adept doesn't hammer home the sense of being about the full granduer of existence that Creator does. That's why Creator, etymologically, is superior to Adept even though technically they are the same thing.

-Theist should not be your specialty for the same reasons it should not be your sole TTB. It is unknowable and cannot be trusted.

-Untrust

-Every TTB suffers from connecitivity-issues, even creator or Adept, you just have to push past it.

-Creator is the right TTB because it is about all of existence and is awlays striving to include all objects.

-Even things closer to Destroyer will always have something of Creator in them, even if it is only on how to make them. Use that to push past connectivity-issues.

-Adept and Creator are the same TTB, both have the same definition. Creator is just a more refined version to give it identity and a value system.

-Adept leads to the Grey!

-Theist isn't Widest-Net, Adept leads to the Grey, only Creator gives you something definitive to be about which is all things.

-Theist/Adept will always just be Theist in practice.

-Creator/Adept is a better combo-TTB than is Theist/Adept.

-Any TTB of Widest-Net can suffer from Only-Half or other Connectivity-Issues. A Cthulhu-Doubt can strike any TTB of Widest-Net and so neither Creator nor Adep nor any variation of Adept is totally immune. Sometimes you just have to push through!

>You can be Widest-Net and still feel like the wholeness of existence makes that TTB uninteligble or unknowable and therefore unsuable. It's happened before. Neither Creator nor Adept (including Theist/Adept) is immune to this feeling.

### -Cthulhu-Doubt:

>This one makes Adept and Creator TTBs equal in regard to Connectivity-Issues, including stuff like Only-Half.

### Theist/Adept Refuted:

-Theist would have to be the cornerstone of everything. If God is revealed to somehow be a negative, that would fatally damage your overall work. Best to have a pure Widest-Nest TTB to ensure you don't slip back into simple Theist.

### -Adept has no identity:

>In case of the original Adepts, there is no single Order which is the central order, therefore there is no known 'base' Adept. Which means there is no identity to tie them all together.

>Even if you expand to a gneric Adept idea, that there are no Orders and just Adepts with Aspects of Existence, you still run into the problem of not having a definition as being about the fullnss of existence.

>It's not enough to be about existence, your TTB/Concept must inherently be defined as being about ALL existence at large. Otherwise, you have no identity because the central idea of Adept can never be known. A-Infinity is wacky place.

>

### Adept & Creator TTBs Are The Same:

-Arguing that Theist/Adept is really just Adept is pointless. Since Creator is Adept but with an internal emphasis for identity.

-Adept is also immediately about the existence/non-existence dichotomy.

### -Adept TTB Becomes Creator In Practice:

>What are enemies of existence? The Forces of Destruction. In practice, Adept will always become Creator because you will find yourself siding with the Forces of Creation against the Forces of Destruction!

>Destroyer gaurantees that Adept will always become Creator in practice.

>

### -Creator Is More Grounded:

>Adept is a bit too abstract for people, I prefer Creator because its still about all existence but is also its own concept and is easier to identify and be about.

### At Least With Theist/Adept, Everything Is Covered:

-Not true. Everything is either relatable to Creator or its opposite, Destroyer, so Creator TTB can cover everything. You can study everything as either Creator or Destroyer.

-Theist/Adept really is just Theist, and so comes with all the flaws and risk that that entails.

### Theist/Adept Is Still Just Theist:

-You know this because Theist/Adept loses appeal when God appears to become a negative.

-Without Theist, Adept alone has no appeal (no identity) so either of these doesn't count!

-Theist alone is not Widest-Net, and Adept as a standalone TTB lacks identity. Only Creator is, therefore, the TTB of Widest-Net.

>Arguing that Adept is a pure form of TTB while Creator isn't is not true. Creator and Adept has the same definition. Adept as a whole is tied to the concept of existence too.

>If Adept can be broken into pieces to avoid any meta-concept it must be tied too, how is Creator not the same way, since all things must be made?

>

## Theist/Adept: Why Not Tie Theist To Adept TTB?":

-IF Creator TTB couldn't generate interest in things strongly associated with destroyer, than the military-supernatural wikia wouldn't exist.

-Theist/Adept doesn't work because God cannot be trusted. Principally speaking, of course.

-Adept as a standalone TTB is exactly the same as Creator. If you are about Existence as Adept, you prefer the fullness of existence over lesser existence, and thus feel strange surrounding yourself with things that are about lessening existence.

-You can't connect with total destruction as an Adept, or at least can't connect with it completely and wholly, because destruction in totality is the end of all existence and thus Adept TTB. Therefore, Adept is really Creator TTB under a new guise.

-Adept is too abstract. Doesn't feel right.

**-If Theist/Adept isn't really just Theist, then why does everything have to be shifted to Solus Deus?**

-Creator is the same as Adept except it has an identity!

>Through the Aspects, Creator/Destroyer is about all things, and can approach all things as any concept (by being about the Maker of Said Concept).

### Counting On Human Habit Is A Poor Bet:

-The idea that as long as you include the other Orders, Theist/Adept will be fine is a bad idea. From personal exerpeience, Theist/Adept in practice is really just Theist.

-We need to assume the worst and that human fallibility will always cause Theist/Adept to devolve back into just plain old Theist.

\*All TTB suffer from Connectivity-Issues, even Adept. The point is to find the best one and push pass all CI with that one TTB anyway.

### Widest-Net Specifically:

-To be the TTB of Widest-Net means more than just being about Existence.

-Creator contains within itself a conceptual pre-notion of being about the Fullness of Existence. This means that Creator TTB must be about all things, all the time, on at least some level. Adept doesn't have that! In fact, Adept is etymologically inclined to specializing, which is slightly counter to the spirit of Widest-Net. Also, should someone fall into the trap of Theist or something similar, Adept TTB would not offer an impetus to think outside their box and thus escape it. Creator can and has done that.

-You need not just a TTB that is open to everything, but as a conceptual-notion also drives you forever onward to be about everything. Adept doesn't do that.

### Notes:

-Connectivity-Issues Occur To Every TTB:

-Adept vs Creator

>Preference actually goes to Creator because it gives Identity and purpose.

-Adept in practice isn't a single thing, so its not actually a TTB.

-Invalidating Adept TTB:

>In prctice, Adept means standing for the fullness of existence against lesser forms of existence. Which means its exactly the same as Creator TTB.

>ADept feels silly. Creator makes sense, its aspects make sense, but writing about Adepts and trying to implement them in real-life, it feels silly.

-Adept invites over-specialization, which ultimately does counter Widest-Net. To be Adept is to put one Order before all else eventually.

### Names Vs Aspects: Which One Lets You Be Widest-Net?:

-The real question is which TTB lets you actually be Widest-Net by connecting with other objects. And that is their methodology (Aspects or Names).

-Names feel silly, but the Aspects are fine!

-The Orders of Adepts also feel silly too and also lack an identity.

-In practice, Adept Order must become interchangeable or they are tribal and competitive. If they become changeable, then tey are the same damn thing as Creator Aspects!

### Names Vs. Aspects:

-Judging TheistAdept or Creator/Destroyer with Widest-Net as the measure really comes down to which allows for the best connecting with other objects. This means what is their methadology, which is the Aspects and the Names.

-Creator has connectivity issues too, but the Aspects are objectionable easier and allow for harder connectivity while the Names come across as silly.

- Creator = Aspects (Hard Connectivity)

Theist = Names (Silly)

### Which Is A Better Vehicle For Widest-Net:

-That's the real question of which is the better TTB.

### Hard Connectivity: Test For Widest-Net TTB:

-Widest-Net means being open to all things, so the TTB that lets you be open to all things must therefore be the vehicle of Widest-Net!

-Theist/Adept is really just Theist with some approved orders to hang on. It doesn't work.

-The Aspects feel fine, but the Names are often weird. Therefore, it is Creator and not Theist that lets you have Hard Connectivity with all things!

### Which TTB Is Champion Of Widest-Net?:

>Creator/Destroyer, for both are about all objects, both by themselves and more so together.

>Theist is about one object, and Adept is really just Creator.

>The idea that Adept is more 'pure' than Creator because it is about all concepts is symantics; Adept is about concept, but what if concepts went away?

>Creator and Adept are the same thing because both are immediately about all objects.

>Anything is of Creator because anything can be made, therefore, everything falls within the category of Creator.

>If the Names let Theist be about everything, than the Aspects do the same for Creator.

>The key to proving which TTB is of Widest-Net is the question of objects. Creator/Destroyer are both about all objects, while only the Adept in Theist/Adept is about all objects. And Adept is the same as Creator.

>If Creator and Adept are both defined as being about existence, they are the same. Creator might have an inherent emphasison the whole of existence, but so will Adept in practice.

**>Arguing that Creator/Destroyer can't be the TTB of Widest-Net because it prevents you from approaching things outside that concept is meaningless: Creator is about all things, any concept is Creator and therefore you can 'approach' things with any concept as Creator without any problem. That's what the Aspects are!!!**

>For anything out there, there is an equivalent ASpects!

>Creator is not a single Concept but is actually all concepts at once.

>If you can't be Creator/Destroyer because everything you do has to be about the concept of Creating, then being Adept is also off the table because everything Adept does is about the concept of concepts or existence too!

**>Theist is just about one Object and Adept has no identity, so it could never work on its own! That's not being the champion of Widest-Net!**

>

## Epiphany-Urge: Theist Forever On The Horizon:

-It's common to have a feeling of imminent discovery that will somehow make Theist more secure and absolute than Creator TTB.

>The problem is that even if you get some new truth, there's always the potential for another discovery down the road that could reverse that?

>This is the heart of the Shifting, being stuck in flux because you can never lock on to an identity permanently. Widest-Net is the only TTB that gets past that by just accepting everything out there at once.

## Connectivity-Overload:

-If you're being Creator TTB and find there's too much to connect with, use your Chapter to widdle down the options and stick to that mostly.

## Don't Put All Your Eggs In One Basket:

-A major attraction for Theist is the desire to be about one thing, and the simplicity that comes with that.

-If you lose that one thing, however, you've lost everything!

## True Widest-Net?:

-True Widest-Net:

>The spirit of Widest-Net is to be about all things, including all variations of anything.  Theist is always about the object of Supreme alone, while Creator is that and every other TTB/Re-Routing as well.  It matters not that Theist and Supreme are All-Sufficient, it is merely the spirit of Widest-Net to be about all things, bar none.

>The Aspects cancel out Only-Half, the same as the Names do for Theist.

>Theist may be about God and not-God, but what about just being not-God?

>The unknowability of God makes Theist as Widest-Net untenable; we can't even know for sure that God even wants Theist TTB!

>As Theist, your primary object is always Supreme, you can't have anything else as your primary object. That is counter to Widest-Net.

>

### -Theist Suffers From Only-Half Too:

>Things not immediately of God also come across as hard to be about.  Mundane concerns, scientific topics and the like.

>There must be other things that connect immediately to everything besides the A-Ideal OESDE.  You must be about them as well.

>Things that aren't supernatural or topical in nature do not appeal to the Theist mindset, and so do not generate interest.

>In practice, some Names are just too weak to generate interest.

>If difficulty generating interest when Creator counts, so too does it count when as Theist.  As Theist, you struggle to connect God to mundane, secular things.  That is also Only-Half.  So the argument that Theist is the 'True' Widest-Net because of ONly-Half is invalid.

>More to the point, experience in the field shows that as Theist you tend not to feel interested in things that are 'shared' with other topics like War, Knowledge, etc.  Things also associated with other topics tend to draw less interest.

>To get to the point here, if Creator as a TTB for Widest-Net is invalid because of difficulty in generating interest, the same can easily be shown for Theist.  Even as Theist, some things can't be connected with at times.

>If Theist makes you open to everything, why does it often lead to a lessening of interests? I have more projects going as Creator?

>It really is obvious to the mind that Theist isn't Widest-Net.  WN is all TTBs combined, but Theist is about one specific Object, even if It is the best Object.

>If you can use the Names for Theist, why not use the ASpects for Creator to be about all things?

>Just like with Creator, it's hard to be something when something else more closely associated with the Supreme is nearby.  Things closer to your TTB's concept generate more interest, anything else is thus harder to be about around that.  This is true for both Theist and Creator!

>

## When Push Comes To Shove (In Real Life):

-You choose the wider TTB, which is Creator, because that is simply the safer bet. It is obvious to the mind.

-Theist is just a temporary infatuation. Creator is what is natural and enduring.

-Even if all we know is true, all the principles, given how much we don't know, we have to assume there is something actualized out there that can still totally alter the specific TTB even without violating those principles.

## Future-Insurmountable:

-This is the argument that Creator may encounter an Actualized truth in the future that completely counters it, since all is possible, but not Theist because God wouldn't actualized against His own TTB.

-The problem with this is that that assumes Theist to e God's actual TTB.

### Human-Logic: Our Logic Is Regional:

-Human-Logic kills Theist because for all we know, \*somehow\* the lanes of casualty we are used to could be revealed to be regional to our section of Existence and do not function outside of it.  All-Reasons could be shown to be pointless or somesuch, with something else in its place.  Who the hell knows!

>You cannot use finite-logic to lock down infinite-logic.  That makes no sense.

>If our sense of logic and casualty is regional, than we cannot use it to beat down the meta-truth of existence into a logic-cage.

>The fact that Theist uses the phrase "God would want to be" clearly shows Theist doesn't quite get it.  The Supreme might be functioning on logic which is wholly different to us.

>You can't imagine 2+2 equalling anything other than 4, but it must be possible for God to be supreme.  Likewise, there could be rules and other things out there that can totally change our way of thinking, and the conclusions we reach.

>What if God wanted to create something even better than the A-Ideal, or the fact that there must be other A-Ideal, other things with All-Reasons? We clearly don't know enough about the meta-truths of A-Infinity to really be declaring absolute truths over them.

>There is simply no real gaurantee that what we know truly covers everything, even with All-Sufficiency in mind.  All-Sufficiency in the hands of Theist ignores the fact that there must be an infinite amount of other things with All-Reasons besides the A-Ideal or else something doesn't exist!

>

## We Can't Know What God Would Actualize:

-There must be other things besides Oneness that also possess all reasons as well. Or else there is something that doesn't exist.

-Therefore, we can never know for sure what God exists as.

-To be clear, there must be things which AREN"T Oneness and also possess all reasons as well. OESDE.

-To word it differently yet again, there must be things other than the A-Ideal which also possess all Reasons or else there is something(s) that doesn't exist!

## Targeting Culmination: Killing A-Ideal:

>There must be other principles besides Culmination that also acquire the traits of other things and yet are different to Culmination or there are things that do not exist!

>These other principles would also acquire the traits and abilities of all else, but be different.

>Any of these could prouce something to an A-Ideal equivelant that i radically different to Theist TTB.

>To put it more simplistically, there must be other things in A-Infinity which also have all other traits of infinity (just like the A-Ideal) but are themselves not the A-Ideal or else there is something that doesn't exist!

>These things too would be equal to A-Ideal, and we can't know which of them the Supreme would choose to be!

>There must be an infinite number of other things in A-Infinity that have all other traits as well, but are different to A-Ideal!

>

## Niggling-Supreme:

-Niggling-Supreme is the idea that you can't be Creator because Theist will always be a niggling doubt in the back of your head. Theist demands sole attention to the A-Ideal.

-But the A-Ideal does not cinch everything.

-How can you prove conclusively that there isn't something somehow greater than the A-Ideal by being by itself, un-added with everything else? Or that the A-Ideal when Actualized is something wholly enimical to Theist, since we cannot know the content of the A-Ideal o what it would play out as?

-You can never be sure there isn't some "trick" that would make Theist undesirable.

-Even if you created a seemingly perfect Cage-of-Logic, you could never be sure a new principle could be introduced from outside our section of existence that throughly debunks it.

-Finally, God would not blame you for not being Theist in the face of so much unknowing. Otherwise, He is unreasonable.

-It goes against reason and common sense to try and force yourself to be Theist when there is so much potential and unknown in existence. That makes no sense! God would not fault you for it.

-It is precisely because ther is so much unknown that Natural-Theology actually favors Creator over Theist!

### There Is Always More:

-Unless you've seen all of A-Infinity, you can never be sure there isn't a principle equal to Aim of the A-Ideal that changes the TTB but without \*somehow\* violating AoTAI. Anything is possible.

### But Without Theist, The Darkness Wins!:

-If that is the truth, than that is the truth.

-However, Creator TTB accepts a Supreme Being, but recognizes that we cannot know all that the Supreme exists as or allows to exist!

### Aim of the A-Ideal vs Widest-Net: Defeating AotAI:

-It must be possible for some things to still change TTB even if the Supreme has AotAI, or there is something that doesn't exist! The question is, are they actualized? We don't know!

-There must b things in A-Infinity that can counter Aim of the A-Ideal is actualized, or there is something that doens' exist.

### It Comes Down To What Is Actualized:

-The truth about God's specific TTB comes down to what is Actualised, but we can't know that.

-We can't know what is Actualized and what is not because we can't know God's total motivations.

-Even the supreme, in all its AotAI glory, can potentially be changed, shifted or even cancelled by something in Potential, or else there is something that doesn' exist. And we don't now what is and not Actualized!

-unless we know all of God or what is actualized, even a specific TTB backed up by something like AotAI can't be trusted completely.

## Cages-Of-Logic:

-Specific TTBs like Theist want to built a veritable Cage of Logic from which their TTB cannot be assailed. But this is not possible.

>No matter how ironclad your argument might seem, all arguments rest on human logic, and how can we know we have the fullness of logic? Or what of NUOR? There is always the threat of a "trick" out there in the Sea of Infinity that can always somehow turn it around!

-This is what Theist keeps doing, trying to build a Cage of Logic, but it never lasts.

>The problem with Logic-Cages is that they can never give certainty because we cannot know all that God has Actualized.

>Even with the A-Ideal being Actualized; it has to be possible that all the principal parts of that argument are true, and yet, there must be other things which can be Actualized as well and would somehow totally change the TTB. If there werent, then something wouldn't exist!

>We cannot know EVERYTHING that God has Actualized, and that will always matter.

>You can never be sure there isn't a "trick" somewhere. Even with a Logic-Cage.

>

## Never Air-Tight:

-The allure of Theist is certainty in the face of the great unknowns of life.

-But no argument for Theist can be truly air-tight for us because we can't see all principles and forces at play.

-The all-inclusive attempt like with the A-Ideal simply doens't work.

>You simply can't know what an actualized A-Ideal would look like or want, or that there aren't other priciples out there that work even better on their own apart from others, etc.

### Getting You To Assume It Will Pan Out:

-Notice how Theist works me up into a reverie and gets me to asume that, since now I've got it figured out, the rest will just fall into place? Don't o that!

-Common problem for scholastic types.

## God Wants Us To Keep Our Mind Open:

-Widest-Net is direct causation of existence as it is. We cannot know everything that is, or what God will do. Keeping an open mind is therefore what God wants.

>Anyt argument otherwise leads imediately to contradiction.

## Perfection Argument Denied:

-The Perfection Argument is a slim-downed version of Aim of the A-Ideal, which holds that the Supreme would only need be about Himself and the same for all else. But the problem is that there may be other 'rules' besides Perfection out there - we just haven't encountered them. And considering how God lets ppl follow false religions on earth, it's not hard to imagine He'd let us wander around in some wrong TTBs too.

-All arguments for Theist are based on rules or metaphysical principles. But no rule, no matter how obvious to the mind or casuality backed, is supreme. At least oone that we can verify!

>The idea of Perfection can have exceptions too!

>

### What About Perfection + A-Ideal!:

-How do you know there aren't other things within the Sea of Infinity that also have a similar mechancims like A-Ideal and how it already has everything?

## Cosmic Rules Don't Matter:

-No matter how good a single rule or group rules are, they will never match up against the Sea of Infinity.

>Anything is possible!

## The Will Of God:

-Direction in life comes from the faculty of Wisdom, which is regarded as being that which our Creator gave us to know what to do.

-Wisdom dictates that we should be about everything (Widest-Net) just in case we missed something.

-Because Wisdom is from God, and Widest-Net is dictated by Wisdom: therefore Widest-Net is the Will of God according to Wisdom.

\*Aim of the A-Ideal says nothing of real substance about what God wants, it just states a bland truth that imparts no real information. It's like saying that a cow is anything that adheres to whatever makes a cow a cow. It's true, but useless for identifying cows if you've never seen on.

## Imitators of the Will Of God?:

-Worrying about finding the Will of God is pointless because personal experience shows that there are multiple 'voices' supposedly from God and they both contradictory and impossible to judge. The history of the Shifting itself is proof of this!

-When Theist, feel pulled to Creator. When Creator, feel pulled to Theist!

-At this point... what can you do?

## Lest It Turn Out To Be God:

-Natural Theology has been shown to contradict, or at least shows that our understanding of God is incomplete, too incomplete to answer our questions. And God-Talking often results in a plethora of 'quickenings' that do nothing for us!

-The existence of Imitators (of the Will of God) prove Creator over Theist. Widest-Net.

-Because we can never be sure what is or is not God, therefore we should be all things. Widest-Net. After all, who can say or know all hat God has done or been?

## Theist Feels Unreal: Splinters Apart Over Time:

-God is too distant, unreal to hold onto. In the wake of A-Infinity, and anything being possible, any specific TTB feems t fall apart.

-The need to constantly refer back to Natural Theology is tiresome and doesn't really work leads you feeling fatigued and open to doubt.

-In the long haul of the toil of life, Theist splinters apart.

-The Splintering: Theist falls apart over time as it is assailed by the endless possibilities of A-Infinity.

-You have to understand: God-Talking doesn't work because the Shifting never, ever, ever freaking ends... and Natural Theology can't keep a solid system together because of nuance. NT can give us some workable stuff, but there's always a weak point that opens up to the Grey.

## Protected-Knowledge:

-Protected-Knowledge is the idea that God guides us to correct knowledge of Him, ostensibly as long as we seek Him earnestly. Protected-Knowledge is probably the last bastion for Theist since without it, any argument for the specific Object of Theist falls to the doubt of A-Infinity and Widest-Net.

-The problem with Protected-Knowledge is Multiple-Religions. It is an objective fact that lots of people spend their lives honestly following God and yet hold to theologies which clearly teach falsehoods about Him, including what He wants us to do and to be in this life.

-Methodology has nothing to do with it: people spend their lives in falsehood. That is objective fact. And it bursts the dam that is Protected-Knowledge.

-Creator's version of Protected-Knowledge is the Great-Hope.

-Let's be honest, it's pretty obvious that a principle like Protected-Knowledge is just too immaculate to survive in the daily grind of our world. It's not going to work.

### God Has Upset Your TTB Before!:

-God has upset your TTB before! AS Catholic, as Xtrian, as Theist/Creator... He could totally do it again!

-The Supreme does draw us towards Him, but that doesn't guarantee any specific theological argument/fact as infallible no matter what!

### Protected-Knowledge Is Relative:

-PK does exist, it does stand to reason, but it also stands to reason that PK is relative.

>In my own experience I followed God as a Catholic for years and had arguments and everything for it. They turned out tobe wrong anyway. How can you ever truly be sure Theist isn't the same?

### Protected-Knowedge Doest Mean You Have All Knowledge:

-PK does not gaurantee God will not shake up your specific TTB as that has already happened.

### Uniformity of Religion:

-If PK were true, we would see auniformity of religion across the world. But instead we see variations and a lot of missing answers.

-Yes, most religions are roughly panendeistic, but thre is still variation. How can you be sure Aim of the A-Ideal doesn't fall iwthin that variation?

-You may not know what goes on in other people's heads, but in your own experience, existence is murky and NT is prone to nuance.

### Un-Uniformity of Results:

-Both myself and others have noted that when you use various methods to discern God's answer or truth about God; you get multiple notes. I've experienced this first hand in the past. God-Talking has frequently resulted in multiple answers being given and NT is subject to crazy levels of nuance.

>How can Protected-Knowledge be true when questions about even basic truths of God are met with multiple and often contradictory answers!

-This doesn't necessarily negate all of Providence; God could still act through intermederries as most human religions as believed. But He's clearly not directly involved to the level of Protected-Knowledge.

-Without PK, there is no Theist. Creator/Widest-Net is the natural standard, it is nature's TTB. Theist claims to have validation from the Supreme, but that can't be true without PK to back up any arguments in its favor.

-Protected-Knowledge is the cornerstone of all arguments for Theist. UUR punches a big hole right in the center of that.

-Arguing that humanity proves PK because human religions tend towards panendeism is insufficient. There are other explanations for that, such as us living in a section of Existence that tends sentient minds towards that outlook. It doesn't concretely prove that that i the meta-reality.

**-Can we trust that God has led us to the Aim of the A-Ideal as truth? No, not since Uniformity of Results shows that He doesn't lead us to truth in all quests.**

### How NUOR Kills Theist:

-Non-Uniformity of Results (NUOR) robs Theist of its spirit of infallibility.

-Once Religion has let you down, you can never rely on it solely ever again.

-Infallibility is an all-or-nothing sort of thing; once it is broken, it is broken forever.

-Once you realize that God allows false imitations of the VOT, you can't really go full Theist anymore. The level of trust required just isn't possible anymore.

-Do yo believe God always leads you to the truth of Him if you have good intentions and seek Him out?

>No, because then we wouldn't have multple, conflicting religions on Earth. Clearly, for whatever reason, God does let ppl come to he wrong answers.

>Even if He corrects them in the afterlife, if there is one, that doesn't change the fact that God lets ppl spend heir lives in the wrong TTB.

>We know that God allows ppl to come to the wrong answers when seeking Him. Therefore, God doesn not always guide us to the truth. Therefore, PK is nothing, it is beaten by NUOR, because PK does not always work.

>Do you really want to base your life on a principle that doesn't always work?

>PK, like infallibility, only works so long as it remains unbroken. Once it is shown that God allows ppl to remain in falsehood, for whatever reason, the spirit of PK is gone forever.

>

-NUOR kills Cosmic-Trickster because it shatters Protected-Knowledge.

>The Great Hope replaces it.

-Personal experience shows that Cosmic-Trickster cannot survive NUOR.

### Doesn't NUOR Lead Inevitably To Relativism:

-No, NUOR actually compliments Protected-Knwoledge!

-NUOR gaurantees you can never be sure AotAI is the whole and complete truth about God's TTB! Maybe in the next life He teaches us something that totally changes that! Anything is possible.

-Creator TTB has Protected-Knowledge as well. It does not inevitably lead to relativism and thus the Darkness. In fact, Creator TTB is more honest about PK than Theis TTB is becaues it has Widest-Net, remembering that there is never a gaurantee that God is finished teaching us.

-NUOR isn't sayng that God doesn't guide us at all. It is saying that things are complicated. We can't know things exactly and in a universal sense.

-NUOR and Protected-Knowledge are totally comptabible and keep each other in balance.

### But I Have A Strong Feeling About Theist:

-I have this powerful feeling inside about Theist. Maybe it's God alking to me!

>You had a strong feeling about Catholicism too. How'd that turn out?

### But Protected-Knowledge and NUOR Are Incompatible:

-NUOR is fact. You can gather people together and have hem seek out an answer about God and arrive at different answers. Some of them are incompatible.

-Direct0Observation, Natural-Theology and Unfiormity of Religion are also fact.

-When facts exist that seem counter, in reality they are somehow synthesized. God guides us to truth of Him, but that is no an exact thing. God clearly is willing to let us arrive at a wrong answer (with the assumption He will corret later).

-This makes sense given that no finite being could ever truly know Him.

-Arguing that NUOR kills PK because you can never know the percentage of wrong answres God allows is semantics. PK combined with NUOR dictates that that percentage of wrong answers is never too much.

-At the end of the day, NUOR is real and kills Theist because you can never be wholly sure of God or what He wants.

### Perhaps There Is A Practical Reason To Be Theist Rather Than an Ideological One:

-God could at any time reveal a truth that would force you to change or shift your TTB or anything else. You must be open to all possibilities.

-Theist is specific and could make this transitio difficult, thus leaving you unusable to the Creator.

-Besides, all practical reasona rae relative. It would only be a matter of time before circumstances dictated you left Theist anyway for something easier.

### Can you have NUOR and Protected-Knowledge at the same time?:

>Yes, because NUOR doesn't necessarily mean God lets us arrive at falsehood or stay there; He could simply be waiting until later to fully correct us. This makes sense when you realize that we are finite creatures speaking of infinite truths.

>The above example is a logical way of thinking about things that holds to both PK and NUOR, thus proving they need not always be hostile to eachother.

>

-NUOR makes any TTB other than Widest-Net impossible, because anything more speicific needs an argument to support it, and that argument is composed of facts which any one of them could turn out not to be true.

-But if we can't trust God to let us have the correct TTB in this life, can we trust Him at all?

>We've already established that people spend their entire lives loving Him and yet spend it in religions which teach false theology, some of which teach meta-truths about God (ie, the Trinity) which are clearly incorrect.

### Perhaps NUOR Only Means WE Can't Know The Mind Of God?:

-NUOR just means we can' tknow the Mind of God, but we can use other means to decide upon the best TTB?!

>NUOR means we can't know anything for sure except what is immediate and that God must be good.

>The natural TTB is Creator (Widest-Net) whie everything else is spefific and must have an argument behind it (which NUOR promptly destroys).

>If anything is possible, only by having all things in your TTB can you have all your bases covered!

>Also, if there are an infinite number of reasons/Anchors, only Widest-Net has them all!

### Direct-Observation Combined With Obvious To The Mind:

-Does Direct-Observation conclusively prove or disprove the Trinity? Does it show us whether the Supreme is Arminian or Calvanist or something else?

-DO only shows us some of God. The idea that finite creatures can understand the entirety of the infinite is absurd.

### Killing The Urge To Shift To Theist:

-First off, no rule in metaphysics, no matter how true or all-powerful, can never, ever be shifted to another TTB by another rule. Anyting is possible.

-Second off, if youre ever just "feeling the pull," return to NUOR. It helps wonderfully to scare you back down to terra firma and out of your flights of philosophical fancy.

### Notes General:

-NUOR can be explained away, but that's not proof against it.

>NUOR can exist alongside Protected-Knowledge; it is a basic fact of life that the Creator doe snot share all His knowledge with you.

-We should be Theist because we need to be eve-ready to repel the Darkness.

>Yes, but there must be other threats out there, just as bad as the Darkness and can we be sure Theist can beat them all with the A-Ideal alone?

>

-There are other threas besides the Darkness. Using the Darkness alone to stick to Theist doesn't work. What about the Grey!? Theist doesn't do shit against the Grey, especially now with NUOR!

-NUOR mere existence makes all knowledge less than precise enough to support a specific TTB like Theist.

-Organized religions have some uniformity because Natural-Theology is a thing. But beyond that, especially in regards as to what the Creator wants, hey diverge off into countless rabbit holes.

-The Creator can be good, but that doesn't mean He's obligated to speak to us.

-You can know that the Creator is good, without knowing all of His plans.

### There Is NO Guarantee Direct-Observation Won't Exhibit NUOR eventually:

-Will God Change Things Later?

>God has totally shaken up our lives before. Why not do it again?

>God could totally change our TTB and have an infinite number of ways to bring us back to Him.

>

-As Things Stand Now:

>It's true that right now Aim of the A-Ideal shows that God is principally about the Object of Himself. But it is also Natural-Theology that Widest-Net is a thing, and that there is an infinite amount of things we as yet still do not know about God.

>

-Natural-Theology Is Never Finished:

>It's true that the only real and reliable theology we learn is from the structure of Nature; but that is never finished, and if we are being honest, there is no real gaurantee that it has reached any kind of pinnacle in our lives. Certainly nothing to justify a specific TTB like Theist!

>

We Can Never Know For Sure What God Will Teach Us Next:

-This is just as much Natural-Theology as Aim of the A-Ideal or any other teaching that Theist can produce!

>And because of this, we should be open to anything, which is Creator.

>

Theist-Killer:

>NUOR is the Theist-Killer.

>NUOR need not lead directly to the Darkness, thanks to Indivisability; but it does show any of our individual facts can still be wrong.

>Theist is a specific TTB backed by an argument (a series of facts) of which any of them could later prove to be mispercieved or wrong.

>To put it bluntly, a Supreme(s) does exist but It doesn't automatically intervene when we receive false knowledge. Therefore, any knowledge we have is generally liable to be corrected at any time.

>How many years was I a Catholic and was convinced that God approved of it? I had arguments back then to support it too!

>

\*An ubber-TTB doesn't have to be Actualized for Creator TTB to still be usable. Creator is just the idea of being about everything or nearly everything (as much as possible).

\*Aim of the A-Ideal does not say how God actually wants to be followed. It says He is about Himself, but about HImself in any way like Theist, or creatively like with Creator!?

\*There's no real gaurantee that Direct-Observation won't one day exhibit NUOR either. Be honest with yourself, that's just an assumption.

## Reasonable Protected-Knowledge:

-God does indeed prtect knowledgeof Him, but He is Existence itself, and against the infinite variety of A-Infinity/Existence, the only sensible TTB is Widest-Net. For God can exist as anyway He wants, and probably eixsts as all ways at ounce. Therefore, we must exclude nothing, for all is of God one way or another!

-Because we can never know the Fullness of God, we must be open to anything and everythng. God can exist any way He wants too. Therefore, Widest-Net!

-Widest-Net actually ensures we miss nothing of God!

-Who knows the things that God has done, or the things He has been; therefore we should be Widest-Net and open to all things, lest they turn out to be God.

-We should also be Widest-Net because God may have designated something as important as He is, or very nearly so, for whatever reason. Can you prove He hasn't?!

## Aim of the A-Ideal:

-AotAI suports Creator as well as theist. Creator is all about Existence (which is What God is!) hence it too is AotAI.

-Theist can be broken down too, since all things are possible.

-Remember that God alone is true Existence, so Creator is principally only about Him as well!

## The Grey: Can't Know Actualized A-Ideal For Sure:

-You can never be sure what exatly an actulized A-Ideal (ie, the Supreme) wuld exist as or want. No matter how good your argument is, there is always the possiility of more than can smehow change it all.

-You need Creator which is immediate and is the Widest-Net to beat the Grey. Theist cannot do that becaus eyou can' tknow all of God.

### But Can U Trust In Pick-And-Choose:

-The foundation of the Great Hope against the Darkness is the Great Hope.

-If the Supreme allows us to live in a world where pick-and-choose is evil somehow, than He is evil and cannot be trusted, and no knowledge can be trusted either.  Ergo, we have no choice but to believe in pick-and-choose.

-Pick-and-choose is inevitable because God cannot be known fully, and so we are constantly learning new things to be dedicated too and to value.  At the end of the day, P&C is really just the art of learning and growing.

-We know pick-and-choose works because of God's goodness.  If God is beyond all evil, He would not put us in a reality that forces us to adop pick-and-choose if it were evil somehow.

-The Great Hope is the foundation for pick-and-choosing to be able to work in whatever Actualized reality we happen to have: the powers that be would not gain by deceiving us otherwise, nor would they want too, since it would be unethical.

-If God didn't want pick-and-choose, why did He put us in a world with other people to be loyal to, other authorities, other things which have inherent goodness to them? This proves that the Creator int

### We'll Lose Supreme Unless We Stick To It?:

-The Supreme could hate Theist for reasons beyond your knowing, despite your needing to stay close to Theist.

>Besides, even if God is good, what about other higher beings? The Great Hope in general is best.

>Ind. makes knowing God both simple and immediate; the idea that you need to constantly work to stay close to God is wrong.

>If you don't know what something exists as, you can never be sure your singular devotion wasn't in vain. Anything is possible.

### We Can Trust God To Guide Us To Proper Knowledge Of Him:

-People spend their lives with very, very different ideas of God; some think He is finite or infinite, loving or angry, distant or interactive, and yet they all spend their lives like this. Clearly, you can dedicate yourself to God and spend your life following a falsehood.

-If this worked, why did I spend two decades of my life finishing Infinity Theology!

-Ppl love God in our won real world and spend their lives in religions that offer conflicting teachings of God. The existence of so many often conflicting ideas of God strongly argues against this point on some level.

-The exisence of so many different ideas of God is problematic to this notion.

-Being beyond all evil, as per Great Hope, is not the same as guiding you to the correct idea of Himself.

-You can totally believe God is beyond evil and yet allows us to suffer ignorance, ostensibly for a variety of reasons.

-The problem with trusting that God will bring us to the proper knowledge of Him if we are wrong is bad because it leaves us perpetually in limbo worrying that God will one day tell us we've been wrong this whole time.

-Our knowledge of God is never complete, God is always teaching us more. There is no guarantee that Aim of the A-Ideal won't later be contradicted or made invalid by some new revelation about God. Ergo, we should be about the many (Creator) just in case rather than just the One (Theist).

### Protected-Knowledge Dashed Against The Reality Of Multiple-Religions:

-Protected Knowledge is the idea that God always guides us to proper knowledge of Him.

-But the objective truth is that ppl believe in all sorts of conflicting ideas of God in the real world and they are never corrected. The Trinity, for example, cannot be true, and yet how many ppl sincerely believe even as they try to be spiritually active. And yet they are never corrected en masse?

-If God allows Xtrians to be wrong in their theology, will He not allow me to be wrong about Theist as the TTB?

-We can look at history and see people follow logic into errenous beliefs like Thomas Aquinas who dedicated his life to a false idea of God in Catholicism. He spent his entire life dedicated to it and it was wrong. God does not protect all natural theology clearly.

-Natural Theology is limited by how much of God you know!

-In the past, I've followed lines of Natural Theology to different answers concerning the same question!

-The very fact that you can't prove that God protects all instances of Natural Theology is itself proof that Protected-Knowledge fails as a foundational principle.

### Protected-Knowlege Is Inconclusive:

-Both Creator and Theist have bits of Natural Theology and insistances of God-Talking behind them!

### Never Finished Teaching:

-God can totally lead us to true knowledge, but His teaching would never be finished, since there is always more.

-You can never be sure there isn't some new bit of Natural Theology just around the corner that will change everything, even your TTB.'-The idea that God wouldn't pull the rug under us after dedicating ourselves to Him in a special way is totally false since it has already happened to me. I was staunchly Catholic for many years before I was forced to admit the truth.

-Aim of the A-Ideal is just ne bit of Natural Thelogy. There is always more!

### Arguments Based On God:

-All the many, many, many arguments of Theist all fail in the end because we simply can't trust them 100%. Ind. is different because it is based on immediate perception; but arguments, especially ones with lots of parts, fail because we cannot know that there is something else about God that somehow counters them.

-The same holds true for piffy little sayings like No Man Can Serve Two Masters.

-Nuance is the enemy of Theist, because time and again I've found that Creator and Theist are simply too alike to be really separated, and yet neither can exist alongside the other.

-God is under no obligation to tell us everything about Him all at once. We can't know the factors that go into His plan for teaching us.

### Interrupting-Voices:

-What do you do when you get conflicting messages from or about God? What do you do when your ask for an answer and get static or confusion? Or get a cerain notion or two in your head and can't get it resolved, like the notion of Creator or Theist. When basic questions about God can't be answered compleely, what then?

-Life is full of false answers to prayer, much to the counter of what is said in the bible.

-How can you be Theist when questions to or about God go unanswered indefinitely?

-In the past, I felt genuinely called to Theist; while at other times, I felt genuinely called to Creator. What do you do in the face of that?

### False-Starts Make Protected-Knowlege Imperfect:

-I've been called to both Creator and Theist in the past. Both with God-Talking and Natural-Thelogy. The existnece of False-Starts is absolute. But in a world with False-Starts, you have to wonder if Prtected-Knowledge has stipulations or limits.

## Natural-Theology Does Not Lead To A Specific TTB:

-Years of research has yielded no way to really tell specific theocentric TTBs from one another. Even to this day either Creator o Theist culd be God's preferred TTB. There is no way fr us to tell.

## Aim of the A-Ideal:

-The AtAI is only one bit f Natural Theology. How can yu know that there isn't more to God that will disprove Theist and prove Creator?

-God may take His time in leading you to the rest of NT, how can you know that God somehow has to reveal all of Himself to yu at once?

-Creator also fulfils Aim of the A-Ideal, since Creator is being about Existence, and God alon ie sall of Existence at once. That is, He alone counts as Existence. So both Creator and Theist fulfill AotAI. It is useless as a way to distinguish between them.

>Remember that Theist is about God and God's stuff, which is all of Exisence. Same as Creator's parameters after all.

### Aim of the A-Ideal vs Widest-Net:

-Aim of the A-Ideal is only one bit of Natural Theology and cannot cover all of God. God could still have features or traits that would make Him want another TTB besides Theist. Also, Aim of the A-Ideal only says God is all about Himself, but can't speciic how precisely God exists as. Therefore, saying God exists only about Himself still doesn't say much about His exact nature and traits.

## Creator TTB In The Face Of Mortality:

-I suspect there is an afterlife, but if there isn't, if this is the only life we have, I would still want to do everthing.

-It is better to live and die, than to not lie and die anyway.

-While we are here, we can participate in existence. Taht fact will never change, aand so something of us will always exist after we are gone.

## Theist Will Never Work Because Our Perception Of God Keeps Changing:

-Things like Aim of the A-Ideal combined with Protected-Knowledge still doesn't work because God is forever revealing more of Himself to us, thus our idea of Him is always changing.

-God can be good and protect knowledge, but that doesn't mean Aim of the A-Ideal is absolute and beyond reproach! Remember that we've had other bits of Natural Theology that 'proved' Creator or some other TTB as well! I once had an entire argument that proved the Trinity,f or crying out loud!

-In an existence where any specific TTB, even Theist, can be proven wrong at any moment, why wuld God not want us to be Widest-Net?

## Powering Through The Shifting:

-Unless you know 100% of God, you can never be fully heist. AT that point, Widest-Net kicks in.

-The Shifting is inherently an emotional thing. You've just got to power through it.

## Does Object of Creator Actually Exist:

-The object of Theist is the Supreme which we know exists. Does the object of Creator (A-Infinity) exist or is it even possible for an 'ubber-TTB' to cover all of existence?

>Yes, TTBs are mental classifications. WE can make one in our head that includes all things in exisence, even if Existence is forever divided somehow.

-Besides, having the Supreme in your category automatically means your TTB has at least one o f everything anyway.

-The very existence of the Supreme sort of bridgs all divideds automatically, at leas for classification purposes!

## Simplify The Equation:

-Your options are Creator (A-Infinity/Existence) or Theist (A-Ideal/Supreme). Unless you know what exactly the Actualized Supreme exists as, you never be sure there's still more out there you need, hence only the Widest-Net (Creator) will do.

>Even though the Supreme has Almightiness, because you can't know what an Actualized Supreme would actually exist as, you can never fully rule out the rest of A-Infinity.

-Which Anchor exactly? There are an infinite number of Anchors! But only A-Infinity can be known for sure to possess all of these Anchors!

\*See Darkness vs Affinity:

\*Unless you've seen all of A-Infinity, you cannot know for sure what an Actualized Supreme would actually be!

\*If your having trouble connecting as Creator, you're not using your Aspects!

### Final Test Is Not Knowing Actualized Supreme:

-You can't follow that which you don't know well enough. We can know the Supreme in parameter but little else.

-If you can't know for sure what the Actualized Supreme exists as, how can you be sure your TTB isn't hated by It? Or something similar. Do you want to base your life on something that could turn out to be false?

-Can't rely on Actualized Supreme alone to wipe out the Darkness if you can't be sure what the Actualized Supreme even is!

>The idea that we can trust God to lead us to truth about Him violates the basic principle of Certainty. We can never really know? Also, if we find out were wrong once, that kicks off a domino effect.

## Widest-Net!

>All other Anchors faill prey to the question of what if there's something greater or something else? But with Widest-Net, there is nothing else.

-Widest-Net is therefore the best Anchor.

\*Widest-Net is the actual All-Sufficient Anchor because it posseses all other possible Achors within itself (Widest-Net is about all of A-Infinity).

### Finding The Will Of God & Other Objections:

-As long as anything is possible, no argument will be good enough. There will always be the chance of something else; a hidden principle that changes God's mind, another factor, etc.

-If God didn't want our TTB to be Widest-Net, why did He design reality like this? Widest-Net is simply the proper mental attitude in lieu of the vastness of our infinite existence. How's *that* for some Natural Theology!

-The Will of God is inscrutable, certainly in the finer details. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have spent twenty years looking into Creator vs Theist.

-In the past, I've felt genuinely called to be Creator; while at other times, I felt called to be Theist. So much for trust and faith in God's will.

### Only Widest-Net Has Ever Given Genuine Certainty:

-Only WN has ever given me real and lasting certainty of TTB, because only it can be trusted to not have left anything out.

### But Doesn't Creator Only Relate To Parts Of A-Infintiy That Are Creator-Oriented:

-Anotherwords, Creator is really only about 'half' of A-Infinity, because things like military, death, war, thanatology, etc., these belong to Destroyer. You can't access them as Creator TTB.

>Wrong. All things are immediately related to Existence/Creator, but you need to use your Aspects.

*-If you are having trouble relating Creator TTB to something, than you aren't using the Aspects!*

### Widest-Net vs the Grey:

-The Grey is the Great Confusion which comes from the simple fact that we mortals cannot know all things.

-Widest-Net beats the Grey by making sure you don't miss anything. You may not understand it all, but you can know that somewhere in there is whatever you need.

### Widest-Net vs Foundational-Truths:

-Foundational-Truths, truths that connect us to God in existentially necessary ways (ie, knowing why God is good or beyond evil, being able to dismiss the Darkness, defense against the Cosmic-Trickster threat, etc.).

-Foundational-Truths are used by Theist to claim that we can be about all things, but we need to keep God close to us so we don't forget these Foundational-Truths.

-But you can't know if God will change the scenario in the future. Anything is possible. In some other life, the Foundational-Truths could be so different that the strictness of Theist is incompatible.

## How Do You Know Actualized Reality Allows For A Single Uber-TTB:

-Yes, because we have the Supreme.

>The Supreme is about all things, and so any TTB hat is about Him, is automatically covering all things. The Supreme is Almighty and so all exists as either as direct creations of Him or because He allows it.

>We can know for sure that an uber-TTB exists, a TTB that covers all things truly!

-As long as your TTB has the Almighty, It has one version of everything in itself automatically.

-Ostensibly, the sum of our Actualized reality could prove hostile to any TTB. Unlesss you know all of A-Infinity you can never be sure. But that's the same for any TTB!

-Creator is about any variation of Existence, it would be hard for our particular version of reality to not somehow fall under that TTBs purview anyway.

-Creator is being about existence, thee is always some version of Creator we can adopt that allows us to accomodate the Actualized reality without losing the spirit of Creator!

## Shouldn't It Be God?:

-You can't know what an actualized A-Ideal would actually be!

## All-Sufficient Thing Refuted:

>What is the point of having something that is All-Sufficient if you can never be sure even of what its TTB is? Or what it exists as exactly!

>If It is all-sufficient, why does it not have perfect Affinity? Why is knowing It so vague and distant? If you can't know It for sure, is that not somehow a defficiency!?

>All attempts to follow the All-Sufficient fail due to vagueness as The Grey.

## Why Affinity Is The Primary Anchor:

-Affinity is about the very concept of 'having' and it is obvious to the mind that to be about any TTB you must first have it. We humans exist principally as minds and therefore we 'have' TTBs by having **knowledge** of them.

>You cannot follow any Anchor or TTB unless you 'have'/know what it is!

>You can never be sure what the whole truth of All-Sufficent is unless you've seen all of A-Infinity; and the Darkness is cancelled out by the Great Hope in general which is more reasonable and less risky thatn the stricter version of Theist.

-Affinty is the Anchor of Knowledge and Knowledge is about having Existence. Because Existence is the greatest thing of all (A-Infinity) therefore, Affinity is the greatest Anchor!

>You cannot defeat the Darkness without also being able to know your TTB!

>You can't 'have' any TTB without Affinity because Affinity is about having in the first place. >The First Thing is Knowledge, which I learned back in the days of Darkness: Affinity is the Anchor of knowledge! Therefore Affinity is the First Anchor and the most imortant.

>All other Anchors must be variations of Affinity because Affinity is the very essence of 'having' or 'being about' something.

>You cannot be about something if you don't know what it (exactly) is; therefore, Affinity is the most important Anchor because of this.

>The above statement is Obvious to the Mind and immediately knowable!

>

>

\*It is obvious to the mind that Afffinity is the greatest Anchor and should be the sole factor in finally deciding which TTB. Creator has Affinity but Theist does not!

\*Widest-Net is the reason for why Creator TTB is nominated. A-Ideal is the reason for Theist TTB (and Abrahamic notions). But Affinity is a demonstratable method to show how Creator is better than Theist.

-Certainty before Supremacy, therefore Affinity is the one and only Anchor!

-Only a fool dedicates his existence to that which he does not know. Wisdom dictates this is a truth!

-Creator is the Widest-Net!

\*See All-Suffient Thing Refuted for more info.

## Is 'Almightiness' The Only Part That Matters:

-The whole point behind Affinity is not to dedicate yourself to that which you don't know. While we can know Almightiness, it is tied to the actualized Supreme, the exact nature of between these two things is unknown! Thus violating the core reason behind Affinity!

-It has to be possible that something about the Supreme could mess with Alightiness and make it something else somehow!

-The problem with Almightiness as a TTB is that it fails for the same reason Theist TT does: it is tied to a single actualization, of which we can know nothing since you can't know for sure what an actualized A-Ideal would be. Almightiness is but a part of a greater whole, which it cannot exist without, and we know nothing of that! How is that not the fool dedicating himself to that which he does not know!?

>While you know the Supreme is Almighty, you don't knwo why or how It is structured, Its value system, etc.

>You cannot dedicate yourself t a component of a greater whole, since that's still dedicating to something you don' tknow.

-The problem with Almightiness is the same for Theist in general: it is dependant on an Actualized thing, and while we can know that thing exists, we don't know what It exists as. And while all is related to It, that doesn't mean that It likes everything?

-While an Almighty something does exist, we can't know what Its TTB is for sure, or other things either.

-Also, is there one or many Almighty things?

-Almightines is only one part of a greater actualized whole (that whole being the Supreme) but what is the rest of it? That's where Affinity comes in again.

Your Idea Of Almightiness CAn Be Skewered:

-You can never know that \*somehow\* something is skewering your mental sight of what Almightiness is. And because there is only one actualization of Almightiness, you could still be ddicating your life to that which you don' tknow.

>Even though your idea of Almightiness exists in Potential, it would have no strong rleations unlike Creator which has infinite variations and actualizations.

## Further Notes:

-The Darkness if fear of a finite existence. But Ind. clearly proves that this isn't so!

>What's more, it's easier to accept an infinite existence full of things than to use Intelligent-Design and Ind. to prove God (by ignoring the myriads of other possibilities out there).

-'The Great Mystery' is probably a better, more accurate name than 'God.'

-God is vague:

-We can't know what final form the A-Ideal would take when Actualized. You can't really know without knowing all of A-Infinity. Oneness might not even be something the A-Ideal would like per se!? After all, how can you prove otherwise definitively?

-We know there are thing(s) out there that are almighty as per Ind., but without seeing all of A-Infinity, you can't be sure of the oneness of it all.

-We know Creator is greatest concept becuase of how it is defined: being about all of existence, with existence being all things. The Wider Net.

-Supremacy Equals Vagueness:

>

-While the Supreme and A-Ideal each are needed to deal with certain metaphyscal problems, they are not enough for everything. And they are hardly Certain. And only a fool dedicates his life to anything other than what he knows with the most certainty.

-Aim of the A-Ideal is in ignorance: unless you've seen all of A-Infinity you cannot know that there is something that would change the A-Ideal's prefernced TTB. At the very least you cannot be sure it wouldn't add another qualifier to the mix.

-The Darkness is not enough to overcome the fact that you cannot trust people.

-CAnnot Trust Persons.

-What is the point of following God purely intellectually, as a simple cure for The Darkness, if He might actually be against that and you couldn't know it?

-Icharus Cycle

-Can you imagine trying to explain to people that you've dedicated your life to God, but you are incapable of trusting Him on a pesonal level because of Don't Trust Persons?!

-The Darkness is an intellectual argument but it is not enough for the personal baggage that comes with Theist.

-How stupid is it to follow God intellectually when you cannot trust Him completely on a personal level!

-The Pagans understood this; they always knew the 'King of the Gods' was beyond being fully trusted by mortals. Look at Odin.

-Why only God if He is distant and closer powers are willing to help?

## Affinity Principle: Wisdom-Dictates:

-Wisdom-Dictates = Which are you more certain of; Actualized Creator or Actualized God?

>You know Creator as a concept exists more than you do that God is Actualized because of **Least-Parts**. You start off knowing Creator exists and moves from there unto what else you could need; but Theist requires argumentation just to prove Actualized-God and then move on from there as needed as well!

-With Theist, ther is always the fear that you are dedicating your life to something that doesn't exist. Creator doesn't have that problem.

-There may be something(s) out there that makes Creator somehow 'go bad,' but there must always be something that can make it go right again (or there is something that doesn't exist).

-All we have is Concepts and the greatest of them is Creator, because it is all about creating (possessing the traits) of all other Concepts! Therefore, by having Creator, you have all other concepts too!

-Theist comes up with hyper-mental arguments against AFfinity, but those break down in the rubrics of real-life.

-What does all-sufficiency matter if the Supreme fails at Affinity!? If there is something with more Affinity, than Theist has indeed failed!

### You Can't Know All Of The Supreme:

-Sorry but you just can't. And therefore it doesn't jibe with Wisdom-Dictates.

-What TTB does the Supreme want? You've spent years fathoming that!

### Only A Supreme Can Give Certainty, So Isn't It Alone Certain:

-The Supreme is needed to give certain types of certainty, but other things can be known for certain. You exist, for instance. You can do addition/creator in your head.

-The Supreme requires argumentation to arrive at. During doubt storms, this can be difficult.

-The first premise of the statement is wrong: other things can be known certainly. The Supreme is needed to tie everything in existence and metaphysics together. However, It alone is not the only thing that can be certainly known.

-While the Supreme may be most needed, that doesn't mean It is known with the most certainty. You cannot 'see' all of Actualised Supreme, but you can see all of the concept of Creator in your head. -

###  Voice of Inspiration Can Lie:

-We all have had it, that tiny little voice in the back of your head that ushers you onward, to keep trying. The only problem is that that voice has been proven wrong before (it has also pushed me onwards to multiple TTBs, so there's that). When you are trying to prove or disprove Theist, and you think you hear the proverbial voice of inspiration (or maybe God, if you're particularly superstitous) to keep going, that you're going to discover something that will crack this open and somehow make Theist just as immediate as Creator, it won't work. We've already proven you can't see all of God and but you can of Creator!

### Time-Invested:

-If you spend a few hours questioning your TTB, don't let that be a mental pressure in your head that you have to keep going and Shift again.

### Tribalism:

-One of the appeals to Theist, and thus the Abrahamic faiths, is that its nice to stand for something against all else. We humans evolved as a tribal race and that sort of thinking really appeals to our instincts. But it doesn't change the fact of Wisdom-Dictates, and it leads directly to Connectivity-Issues!

### But What If God Wants Something Else?:

-God's will is expressed in Wisdom, and Wisdom does dictate you should base your life on that which is most Certain.

-Besides, God's just a little inscrutable. If you take this principle to the extreme, how can you know anything of His will? You can't, and you never will. You can spend the rest of your life trying to figure that out and get nowhere.

-The problem with trying to discern God's will is that people can employ different techniques and come to different results. So what do you do?

-Even if you arrive at an answer, how can you be Certain that there isn't something right around the corner that will totally change that!!!???

### The Darkness:

-I've beaten The Darkness as Creator TTB before. I can totally be done. Ind. kills The Darkness handedly.

### How Can You Be Sure Creator Is The Thing-To-Be?:

-Creator is the widest net, is about all things, all of existence. Whatever the proper TTB/BTI is, it's going to be in there somewhere!

### You Can't Fit All Of Actualized Existence In Your Head:

-Creator does not require all of Potential, you can pick and choose what you want.

-No matter what, if something sours all of Creator when Actualized, there must be something to turn it back in Potential, or there is something that doesn't exist!

### What If The Fullness Of Creator Is Bad:

-Both the Fullness of Creator and the Fullness of Theist could be bad... but Creator TTB at least starts out with something you know definitely exists. Make sure to look up Can Never Know Personhood below.

-For the record, this same argument applies to any TTB, since none of us can see all of A-Infinity, the fullness of any TTB could turn out to be somehow 'bad.'

-However, the great thing wtih Creator is that you can pick and choose. Choose that which is good for you and use it to the best you can.

-The idea that the Fullness of Creator can ruin all forms of Creator contradicts A-Infinity. Even if the Fullness of Creator can ruin all forms of creator, there must still be something that can undo or counteract that or there is something that doesn't exist in Potential.

### But The Supreme Is The All-Sufficient Thing:

-What's the point of having a TTB that is all-sufficient when you can't hardly know anything about it!

-Certainty comes before Supremacy. What point is there in having faith in something that is supposed to be supreme if it turns out not to exist.

-Besides, all of A-Infinity is Creator, and whatever problem exists, there is an answer somewhere in Existence. Therefore, Creator also covers all potential problems.

### God Can't Be Known Enough: Weak Connection:

-It is not enough to know that your TTB exists but to know enough of it as well!

-An ever-changing, ever-unknowable TTB isn't going to last very long in the vagaries of life!

-Out of principle, you should not dedicate yourself except to that which can be known best. Otherwise you risk wasting your life!

### But You Can't See The Fullness Of Creator:

-You don't have too. Unlike Theist, where the Supreme either can or cannot be seen, there are many things of Creator and variations of Creator. All you need is a piece/version of Creator in your head to know that it fully exists.

-You cannot see the fullness of either Theist or Creator, but at least Creator starts out with the knowledge that its object actually exists! And you know it fully!

-Creator is being about existence, therefore the Fullness of Creator is the Fullness of Existence which we know is the A-Ideal.

### Out Of Principle Alone:

-It is obvious to the mind that you should dedicate yourself to that which you have in front of you simply out of principle.

### Affinity:

-Affinity is not the same as Certainty: Certainty is about whether a TTB actually exists, but Affinity is about whether you can even know the thing regardless.

-Both Creator and Theist have issues of not knowing everything related to them, but with Creator at least you start out at least knowing the object completely in your head. With Theist, you don't know what an actualized Supreme would be. You can't even be sure it is one thing or something else? At least you know the concept of Creator in your head is one!

### Starting Off With Your Own Version Of Creator:

-Your conception of Creator TTB might not be the fullness of the actual one, but even so, you are still starting off fully knowing the thing it is that you stan for. Theist still doesn't have that!

-Wisdom-Dictates still applies.

### But You Can't See All Of Existence:

-Unlike Theist, which is about the Supreme as its Object, and you can't see all of the Supreme as it actually exists; but it's different for Creator which can pick-and-choose which parts of Existence (which is Creator TTBs object) that it wants. Therefore, you know what you stand for and you know those parts of the object you choose to stand for as well.

### Can You Really Pick-And-Choose From Existence As Creator:

-While what I pick may or may not be what I think, the TTB itself is still viable, since what matters is that the concept itself is what I think it is. Affinity is about knowing that the TTB itself is what you think it is.

-I have the TTB immediately in my head, I know for sure what it is I stand for.

-Even if there is something that is Actualized and is screwing with my mental perception of what Creator TTB actually is, that doesn't change the fact that Creator is Defined as being about all of Existence and Existence is definitely real. Ergo, whatever Creator is, it is there.

-Both Theist and Creator start off with the threat of our mental perception being off of what they really are, but that doesn't change the fact that at least with Creator I know what its one part is (and I have multiple objects, so I don't need to worry about it being Actualized). Theist doesn't have that!

>Once you get past that question, of your mental sight being correct, Creator still has Affinity because you know its one part. You don't see all of the Supreme and thus Theist's one part if blinded to you!

### What If All We Can Know Is What Is In Our Heads:

>Even if all you have is the ideas in your head, the idea of Creator in your head is fully known or at least is better known than Theist; because you know what Creator is about, what it implies, what it'sopposite is, etc., You don't know that with Theist!

-Creator alone as a concept is stil usable, but Theist without an actualized Supreme is useless. If all we have is the concepts in our heads, than Creator still wins hands down!

### What If The TTB In Your Head Is Somehow An Illusion:

-At least Creator is still an illusion with knowable parts? Unlike Theist...

-Besides, all things in exist in potential, including any illusion. It's still something that's real somehow. And so it is a part of whatever the 'real' Creator or Existence might be.

-Theist would argue that you can't really know Creator either since you can't see all of its connections or rammifications. But thanks to Cosmic-Deceiver, both Creator and Theist start out this way. And we know that all things exist in potential - so the outline of Creator in my head does definitely exist. And it calls for being about all of Existence, whatever that is.

>We can't see all of the connections/rammifications/further-parts of either Theist or Creator. But the general outline of Creator TTB is still more known than Theist which requires both the concept and the actualized Supreme. Ergo, more Affinity for Creator.

### What About Unseen Necessary Parts:

-Creator is simply the drawing upon of all of Existence. You get to pick-and-choose which parts of Existence as Creator. Thus, all parts are open, and not knowing the parts to choose is not the same as not knowing what Creator as a concept is!

-The idea that the way Creator TTB is actualized right now might have unseen necessary parts does not really counter Affinity as a principle. Regardless, we still know the concept to which we are dedicated, even if we aren't cognizant of all of the necessary rammifications in our actualized reality of it. Besides, both Theist and Creator start off with this threat, yet we still start off fully knowing that portion of Creator which we are dedicated too. Since you do not need to know all of Creator, only that portion you edicate yourself too!

-What is the point of Affinity if you can't be sure you know all of Actualized Creator?

>In the world of potential, there are no unseen necessary parts because there is infinite variation to choose from.

>In the world of actuality we may be stuck with parts we can't see, but the parts we are dedicated to we still know fully. And we at least have the hope of being able to change it. Also, the Supreme (being beyond evil) may not allow us to be stuck in such a world.

\*The version of Creator in my head definitely exists and I am dedicated to that. Affinity requires nothing more.

-Either Theist or Creator could turn out to have bad parts unseen right now, but you still start off knowing all of Creator and not Theist. Also, you can pick-and-choose with Creator, hopefully, since Creator is about all of Existence instead of just one object (A-Ideal) as Theist does.

>At least with Creator there is only a question of unseen parts, with Theist you know there are!

-Theist is about a single Actualized thing that we know we can't see all of. Creator is about the concept which we can hold in our heads. Even if that concept has unseen necessary parts, and our Actualized reality won't allow for us to draw upon the infinite variety of Potential; we at least still start off knowing Creator

-Theist is all or nothing with the actualized Supreme, Creator is pick-and-choose from Existence itself. There are different ways to be Creator TTB! The whole point behind Affinity is whether you can know your TTB or not, and you can with Creator but not with Theist!

-Both Theist and Creator suffer from them. You still start off knowing more of Creator than Theist.

-At least I know fully what I am dedicating myself to!

-In potential, both Creator and Theist have infinite unseen optional parts!

-In potential, everything has variation, so any 'unseen' necessary parts at least have the potential to be changed to something better if they end up being problematic.

### -What if your mind can't see all of Creator concept:

  >There is no single Creator but instead infinite variations of Creator in Potential. My idea does exist somewhere. While the Actualized Creator TTB could be something else, no matter what, any idea of Creator does exist in Potential somewhere!

>This is a response to Unseen Necessary Parts sub-section.

\*Things that exist only in Potential still count as things that do exist. Concepts are real and existing things!

### What If A 3d Party Or Supreme Is Changing Your Idea Of Creator In Potential:

-That wouldn't change the fact that my idea of Creator still does exist at least in Potential. For God to be Supreme, all things must be possible, which means all things must at least exist in Potential.

-Also, remember Spiral-Staircase.

### Why Any Variation Of Creator Must Exist In Potential:

-Even if something messes with Potential, there must always be the Poential for Potential to revert back!?

### What If Your Specific Idea Of Creator Is Lacking/Needs Further Parts:

-Functionality depends entirely on the Actualized reality. Any concept is functional in an infinite number of realities that exist in Potential.

>Thereofre, 'unseen necessary parts' is wholly relative.

-Needing further parts doesn't change the fact that what percentage of Creator you are dedicated too, you know completely and for sure.

### Can't Creator Keep Being Broken Down Into Further Unknowable Parts:

-The parts of Creator are obvious to the mind. Creator is being about Existence in its most basic form. That is parts, yes, but the parts are immediate to the mind and knowable.

### Further-Parts Refuted:

>The idea that Creator TTB fails Affinty because it can keep being divided into further concepts, all of which couldn't possibly be known, fails due to the fact that A-Infinity does not require knowledge of how something is, only that it is. Soemwhere in the sea of infinity is my specific idea of Creator TTB, there are an infinite number of ways it could exist, but it does exist at least in Potential!

>Claiming that you can't know the concepts behind my concept of Creator TTB is stupid because in the sea of infinity, there are an infinite number of variations of concepts supporting my idea of Creator TTB.

-Knowing all the concepts behind the definition of either Creator or Theist TTB is impossible, because each has an infinite number of variations to the concepst that lead to their Definition. What matters is being able to look and see with the mind what parts are immediately used to make those Definition. You know the exact Definition to Creator but not to Theist. That matters!

>Creator means being about all of Existence and participating in Actualization, which is the various ways that things exist. If not knowing all the concepst behind that statement renders it unknowable, than how does that statement convey any information at all? It does convey information, principally because the mind is able to look and see what those concepst are and know them immediately. The mind'seye can know concepts in their entirety immediately, otherwise the transfer of information through symbols would not be possible at all.

>Creator TTB's relationship with other objects in A-Infinity does not convey a lack of internal knowledge of itself, but an external one. You can know a concept completely and not know how it interacts with everything else in Infinity. Again, if applied to both Theist and Creator, at least we know some of the ways Creator is and interacts, but not Theist. We don't even know what Theist is exactly because you can' tknow what an actualized A-Ideal would exactly be!

>The Concept of Creator is Creator at its most basic. There is infinite more variations to it, infinite ways it interacts, but the concept is Creator in its most basic. This is not a lack of information of itself, only a practical minimilizaiton of such knowledge. You can know Creator but not know everything related to Creator or attached to it. They are two different things!

>Knowing Creator in its most basic form is, admittingly, ignorance of info of Creator; but this is a practical ignorance. Creator in its most basic form is all that is necessary to truly know it as it is - the rest is the sea of Infinity.

-Remember: Creator TTB need not necessarily mean being about all of Creator - only that which you know. You can pick-and-choose from Creator, unlike with Theist which tends to be all or nothing. I need not know all of Creator; but that which I am dedcated to, I know completely. That is Affinity.

### Is Almightiness Enough To Satisfy Affinity:

-Almightiness has only one Actualization, which is headed by a mind we cannot know. While Almightiness as a principle can be understood with no parts, in practice, for some unknown reason, the Mind of God could have Actualized something that gave Almightiness further-parts or limitations and we couldn't know. The point behind Affinity is not to dedicate yourself to that which you don't know.

>If you don't know the mind that leads the only Almightiness, than you don't know Almightiness.

### Does Questioning Creator TTB Reveal That You Don't Know All Of It:

-You can't know everything about anything. But those 'parts' of Creator TTB we don't know are open to Infinite-Variation, and we can rest assured that an infinite number of those variations are always positive for our needs somehow.

-What is Creator's relationship with God? What is the end-goal of all creating? It's all open to Infinite-Variation!

### The Thing Itself: Mind's Eye Vs The Questioning:

-That portion of Creator you are dedicated to, you know that you definitely know. Even if other portions of Creator are prone to infinite-variations which means you can't know them as readily.

>Affinity is a necessary principle, obvious to the mind. That neither Creator nor Theist have infinite Affinity does not discount it as the deciding Anchor to be used!

>You may not know all of Creator? But you have no idea what an actualized A-Ideal would be!?

-You can, in fact, pick-and-choose from Creator because unlike Theist which has only one Actualization; Creator TTB has many actualizations and variations!

>That version of Creator you choose, even if you can't see all of its connections, at least you know it in its basic form!

>The rest is left to Infinite-Variation, which allows us to know that no matter what there is at east a positive variation of it no matter what!

-There are infinite implications to any concept, that doesn't change the fact that you can see them with your Mind's Eye!

-Mind's Eye is the answer to Theist's accusaiton of questioning.

### Theist-Shifting:

-Think of how much you don't know the actualized Supreme. You can't know what God is!

### Portion Of Creator, Not All Of Creator:

-Somewhere in infinite-variation is my idea of Creator without any further-parts (or something doesn't exist).

-Besides that, Mind's Eye allows you to see what something is without knowing all of its backing concepts.

-Asking questions about Creator may make it seem like you don't know all of Creator... and you don't. But that part you know, you know for certain. You can never know all things, but you can dedicate yourself to a portion of Eistence that you know for certain!

### Cosmic-Deceiver Does Not Win Affinity For Theist!:

-We cannot know what an actualized Supreme would be like, nor what Its values would be exactly. Even if the Supreme is beyond evil, there could always be an actualized reason for It to mess with our minds. Anything is possible!?

-The general rule for trusting that there is no Cosmic-Deceiver is that beings that are powerful are removed from any need for evil. This applied both to the Supreme and to mortal things as well. We can see this in our own race: as people agea nd grow more wise and powerful, they usually feel less of a need to be evil or bullyish.

-The general concept of things not feeling a need to mess with our mind is more realistic than the idea that the Supreme alone is like that.

-Even if the Supreme alone is above all evil: how do you know there aren't multiple Supremes as one, and thus no oneness which is foundational to Theist!? After all, can't know what an actualized Supreme is after all!? Or maybe that Supreme for whatever reason hates Theist!?

>This is the founding question to Affinity itself: we know a Supreme exists, but we can't know enough about It!

\*Besides, even if what we are seeing is an illusion, at least the illusion is real and must have close alternates in Potential!?

-The primary issue with the Supreme being relied upon to protect us from cosmic-level misinformation is that we see people leading lives of misinformation here on earth. And God does not stop it. He may wait to rectify it but He does not intervene in a forecful and immediate way.

### The Great Hope Cancels Cosmic-Deceiver:

-The Great Hope (the idea that advanced entities have no need for evil) works with the Supreme but also with other 'higher' things as well. Therefore, it is not specific to Supreme/Theist.

-The problem with the idea that the Almightiness of the Supreme is all we can know is that since we can't know what an actualized Supreme would be, we can't confirm we are right?! If you can't know for sure what the Supreme is, how can you ever know for sure that your knowledge of Him is correct?

-We can't know the Supreme but through the Great Hope, we can trust that we are able to know individual concepts in Potential. It is no less an act of faith than to trust that the Supreme lets us know Him anyway.

### Potential Also Saves Creator From Cosmic-Deceiver:

-Potential has to exist if the Supreme and Its Almightiness do as well, which means my version of Creator TTB must exist as well!

-Somewhere in Potential is my idea of Creator and in a version that is ultimately good.

-Cosmic-Deceiver takes second-place to Can't Know Actualied A-Ideal. Against the backdrop of A-Infinity, nothing can be known for absolutely certain about the A-Ideal aside from what is immediate. This makes it impossible to follow the A-Ideal, but does prove the existence of Potential, thus meaning that any idea of Creator we hold in our heads must exist in a positive way within Potential soemwhere (or there's something that doesn't exist!).

>Because you can't know God for sure without knowing all of A-Ifninity, you therefore cannot know how true it is that God protects knowledge of Himself?

>That we live in a world with multiple, major religions of conflicting theology, that doesn't play too well for Theist.

>Both Creator and Theist have a way of dealing with Cosmic-Creator (Theist claims Supreme wants Itself to be known; Creator argues existence of Supreme means all exists in Potential including positive version of whatever my idea of Creator TTB is) however, Creator still has the advantage of Affinity! Both have a way to deal with Cosmic-Creator but afterwards, Creator still has Affinity because you fuly know what you are dedicated to specifically. Not so with Theist wherein we cannot know what an actualized A-Ideal would be like!

>

### Protected-Knowledge:

-Creator is protected knowledge since somewhere in Potential is my idea of Creator in a positive way; and screwing with that would mean having to make a change to God Himself since Potential is produced by Him as light is produced by the sun!

>Remember that all concepts also exist within God. In order for something to screw with my positive conception of Creator TTB there, it would have to be by God Himself.

>So it still comes down to being about a definitive concept or the unknown whole?

-Protected knowledge is pointless if you can't know it.

-Affinity makes Creator definitive.

-Protected Knowledge is still incomplete knowledge, you could be basing your life on something that is shockingly different than what you think!

-There are an infinite amount of potential dangers in A-Infinity regardless of whatever TTB you choose, Creator or Theist, it holds true for both. The idea of bad things being out there connected with Creator is assumed.

### You'll Never Know Supreme Anchor:

-The day will never come when you've seen all of A-Infinity, so you will never be totally sure which Anchor is the greatest. But you must dedicate your life to something! So, dedicate yourself to that which is both the Widest-Net and has Affinity. That is Creator and not Theist!

### Just One MOre Part:

-Even if a Cosmic-Deceiver is fucking with your perception of your idea of Creator TTB, there are infinite variations and somewhere in Potential is your idea of Creator but which is ultimately good and somehow is only different by one single part. Meanwhile, you can't know the Supreme beyond Almightiness, to say nothing of how many part(s) It may ultimately have?

-Whatever a Cosmic-Deceiver is doing, in Potential it has to be possible for Creator to fix all of it with just one more part.

### In Real Life:

-In real life, the sophistry of Theist fails. Creator TTB is a hard, concrete, knowable TTB while Theist is vague and murky!

## The All-Sufficient Thing:

-Creator fulfills the All-Sufficient question because it is the Widest-Net. Creator can call upon all of Existence itself.

## Why Not God Alone:

-You cannot see all of God and therefore Doubt eventually eats away at you.

-Both Theist and Creator are about God, but Creator is about God in His conceptual form of Creator TTB which you can have inside your head. Better to dedicate your life to that which you know than you don't.

-The next time you wonder "why not just be about God?" the answer is simple: you cannot see or know all of God. That is why. And there is no possible answer for this conundrum!

### Theist's Many Arguments:

-Theist is good at coming up with arguments as to why Creator TTB somehow still can't be known for sure in your head and why it is actually the actualized Supreme that alone should be your TTB. Of course, this only rams itself up against Wisdom-Dictates again and again.

## How Do You Know There Isn't Something That Can Ruin All Of Creator TTB:

-Because whatever it is, there must be an opposite than can undo all of that in Potential, or else there is something that doesn't exist.

## Can Never Know Personhood:

-Life has taught me that you can't trust people, not even a divine person.

-I know in classical studie they teach that a perfect being is beyond the need for evil, but when you've lived long enough to see all the shit that goes on in this world, after awhile it just doesn't work anymore.

-Besides, maybe God isn't evil, but what if He simply doesn't care? Why dedicate to a force that will never take an interest in you?

## The Darkness:

-The Darkness is the threat of a finite reality; but Ind. instantly cancels that out. Creator is about Existence and so being Creator will not carry a threat of atrophy of the sense of Ind.

-An infinite-existence is what repels the Darkness, not just the Abrahamic concept of God. I've proven this already through experience.

-There are other issues besides that of the Darkness, like the question of which TTB God wants, or epistemology in general. It's wrong to base an entire TTB just off of one-issue, even what could be the biggest issue. Both Creator and Theist has been proven to deal with it!

-Creator can beat the Darkness too and it adheres to Wisdom-Dictates, so why not be Creator TTB?

### Darkness vs Affinity:

-Theist argues that we should be Theist becuase the TTB should always be immediately about the sole thing we know can beat the Darkness. However, Supreme fails Affinity and cannot be a solid foundation for all issues in life. In practice, you cannot base your life off of that which you know so very little!

## The Widest Net: Why Creator:

-Creator is about Existence which is all things. Being Creator makes sense because it means being about all things, the reasoning of which is obvious to the mind!

## Only An Actualized-Supreme Can Guarantee Certainty:

-If that's true, then there are a host of other things that don't exist even in Potential!

-The A-Ideal doesn't give Certainty of what TTB to be, or what God always wants or is about!

-A Benevolent Supreme that is Actualized can still be Distant and Unknowable!

-During times of extreme doubt, you can't hold all of the Supreme in your head to give you something to hold on to during the storm.

-Least-Parts champions Creator, which requires only the Concept of Creator and the overall idea of higher-up things being benevolent (because they have no need for evil).

-There are different types of Certainty, certainty of eternal existence is one. Certainty of correct TTB or knowing what to do in life is another. Certainty of knowing the entirety of what you stand for is also another!

## When Wisdom Speaks, God Speaks:

-Wisdom is from God and is what is principally used to make decisions in life.

-Answer this question: does Wisdom dictate that we should base our lives on that which is most Certain?

>Nothing else matters if it doesn't exist!

>Yes, throughout history it has been recognized that certainty and importance go hand in hand.

\*Look at all those religions in the world that believe in God yet follow false teachings? Clearly, being Theist alone is not enough!

## But You Don't Know All Of Existence!?:

-Creator is about being about Existence, both the ideal Existence and all existences. This means being about my own and pursuing my own interests as well.

-The argument that there could be something 'hidden' in the fullness of Existence that ruins Creator ignores this finer point.

## The Means To Make The Decision:

-I haven't been just searching for a BTI/TTB all these years but also a means with which to make that decision. How, exactly, do you make such a decision? What metaphysical principles do you use?

-Wisdom is universally recognized as that part of the psyche which operates as the faculty by which we make decisions in life, especially the Big Questions in existence.

-Wisdom dictates that you should base your life on that which is most certain, since Supremacy is important but there's no point in believing in something if it aint true!

### Further Notes About Other Stuff:

-But wouldn't the existence of an Evil God throw all thins into doubt!? Therefore you have to be Theist in order to keep your mind certain that all is well!

>Wrong: the Concept of Creator inside your head will not solve all questions by itself, but it is the best STartoff point because it can be entirely known.

>An Evil God makes no sense in light of the truth that an Almighty being would have no need to be evil. This truth can be known regardless of whether you are Theist or Creator!

-The Pull to Theism

>The emotional pull to Theism is just that, pure emotion. Epistemology and Wisdom both champion Creator TTB over Theist TTB.

>See it for what it is, just Fear and Doubt masquerading as a quickening of the spirit (but its not).

>Wisdom dictates that you base your life on that which is most certain!

>

-Creator-Eternal

>Creator as a concept will not sit idle in emptiness at some horrible point of ending in the future. Ind. shows that Existence is infinite and has always existed. There will always be creating!

>

-Indivisability

>The sequence of logic goes like this; we exist within something that is Existence and that thing exists with infinite spatiality.

>Does Existence need to be 'generated' or can't It just exist forever? Cause and effect is universal to the Ind. because as we divide into It, It never allows parts to truly break apart. Presumably because once the substance of Ind. is torn that's a problem. But what matters is that this shows that cause and effect is universal 'up and down' all of Ind. because otherwise Ind. keeping itself together means naught.

>Ie, things are held together by the Ind. and this is true across the length of Ind. That is Cause and Effect.

>Cause and effect is important because it then begs the question of where Ind. itself came from!

>Is Ind. existing on a 'linear plane' or does It truly go everywhere? Because Ind. is forever going outward, It must come up against (and induct) any other 'planes' of existence, or whatever.

>Even if there are other 'planes' of existence, they too would need to be infinite in scope in order to "wall off" the Ind from overtaking them.

>Since Cause and Effect is infused into Ind., it begs the question of where Ind. itself came from? Either Existence created Itself or there is an FBE.

 >That FBE is capable of infinite creation.

>All you need to do to prove FBE/A-Ideal is to show that something, or even somethings (plural), have almighty power. Because then It (or they) can be whatever they want, so why not be (come together) to be the A-Ideal!?

>

-Just Prove Almightiness-Intelligence

>There can be no 'hidden factors' or rules or laws or other things actualized which change this: if something is Almighty and it exists, It will want to be A-Ideal.

>Being Almighty implies being Actualized, including having an intelligence!

>

-Almighty Intelligence

-Sole-Relationship

>If God wanted us to be completely about Him and nothing else, why did He put us in a world where we are so dependent on other mortal things!?

>And why is HE so distant and hard to know!!!???

>Divine Intent can be discerned from structure of creation.

>

## Wisdom Dictates That You Base Your Life On That Which Is Most Certain:

-Wisdom is of God and is universally recognized that it is the faculty God meant for us to use to judge teleological questions in our life.

>Wisdom is of God and therefore cannot contradict anything else of God, since that would make God contradictory.

-It is obvious to the mind.

-Wisdom dictates that we base our lives on that which is most certain. Uncertainty makes for poor material to found your entire existence off of.

>The most certain thing is the Concept of Creator that fits entirely in your head!

## Nothing Left To Discover:

-Supremacy and Certainty, with all variables for worthiness of a TTB being bound up in the single factor of Certainty. But Certainty must come first, for what good is there to dedicate yourself to a supreme good if it doesnt actually exist?

-This mental, metaphysical equation tidies this affair up nicely and gives you the simple ultimatum you need.

## You Have No Choice But To BE Creator:

-As long as your TTB relies on parts or unknown sections, there will always be Doubt and the Shifting/Grey!

-Only Creator TTB and Eternal-Potential can end the Shifting!

>You can still have God and Ind. to fight The Darkness! But wisdom dictates that God's conceptual form, Creator TTB, comes before God Actualized!

## Notes About FBE Being Almighty & Intelligent:

-Infinite scope and infinite capacity of creating equals Almightiness.

>Energy can be made into anything, since we can see that energy forms all known things in our own universe and look at all the variety! As a coder can build any program using code, a Being that can create reality itself can use unlimited energy to form any reality It desires. >How do we know Infinite-Scope of creating? How do we know the FBE can actualize any portion of Potential that It wants too? Because the FBE has already demonstrated that It can create infinitely in terms of spatiality, and has already created several different types of things within our own universe; hence, It can keep creating different types of things ad infinitum.

-All things exist within Potential,an infinite number of variations, and the capacity for Potential is inherent within Existence. Obvious to the mind.

-Intelligent-Design = The FBE has clearly created a complex universe, pointing to intelligence on Its part. Even if we live in a simulated universe, whoever put us here must be the product of a complex universe.

>A complex simulation is itself proof of a complex parent 'real' world universe.

>If intelligence arises out of relatively nothing with no real effort, than the FBE would be intelligent too simply because why not. If intelligence is the product of complexity, complexity points to intelligence on the part of the Creator.

>Intelligence by itself is complex, something we can know because we all have it, and complexity points to an orchestrated origin, thus clearly indicating Intelligent Design, and all Intelligent Design leads back to an initial Intelligence.

>Mortal creaturs can only exist in pockets of un-Actualization, something which doesn't make sense in light of an allmighty FBE. Why would an FBE create anything at all besides just being Itself? If The FBE is doing anything than just existing as pure existence all by Itself,that indicates willfullness to create mortal things.

>Whatever consciousness is, it arises from nature, and so is inherent in nature.

>The best argument for the FBE having sentience is the concept of complexity. The fact that anything other than the FBE in its perfect state exists implies complexity and thus design.

>Ind. shows that the FBE is Almighty, which means that It is fully Actualized-Potential, and thus possses the fullness of consciousness already!

>Since creation is actualization, which is obvious to the mind because we ourselves do it all the time; the FBE draws only upon Itself to create, and so by creating sentience thus proves that It has sentience actualized to begin with.

>If we do exist in a simulation made by other mortal beings in an alien universe, that universe must be complex beause building a simulation like this is super-complex! And complexity always leads back to the notion of Design!

-Actualized-God Can't Be Entirely Known

>All those 'parts' you can't see will always cause Doubt.

-Certainty Is Also Closeness

>Nothing s closer than in your head and only Creator's Essentials fits entirely in your head, not Theist's!

>You don't want to dedicate your life to something that doesn't exist or is actually very different. The only absolute way to avoid this is to dedicate yourself to a concept in your head, since only those can be absolutely known. Remember that Creator is God's Conceptual Form.

>

-Concepts & Potential

>All we really have, that gives immediate Certainty without any real argumentation and parts, is the concepts in our head and the reality that things will always exist at least in Potential.

>The greatest concept is Creator because It can be and do anything and is about all Existence/Infinity.

>

☀

-Smart Thing To Do:

>Even if Ind. is true, it is still wise to make your TTB to be the one most thing you can never lose. This is Wisdom and God is Wisdom.

>The Concept of Creator is God in His conceptual form. Ergo, Creator is still all about God.

>

-Complete-Knowing:

>What if God is inactive or mostly inactive? How do we follow Him then without seeking to emulate His Internal-Action!?

-Specific-Worship + Variations of Existence = Divine-Will

>There is only one True Creator, all others are Imitation Creators. Hence, Aim of the A-Ideal is not violated.

-Certainty Before Divine-Will

>Unless you know all of the A-Ideal, there will always be the chance that you missed something and are interpreting the Divine-Will wrong. Divine-Indifference is also a problem since there is no certainty that God even cares about us that much.

>The idea that Creator will cause doubt because you can't always be certain it is the supreme concept has truth to it, but that is lesser than Theist which starts off not even being able to know for certain that the object of its attention even exists! At least Creator knows that something of creating really does exist beyond all doubt!

-Certainty Before Supreme-Being:

>The idea that only a Benevelont-Actualized-Supreme-Being can give Certainty is wrong, since an infinite number of alternatives must at least be possible that also give Certainty or there is something(s) that doesn't exist!

>Ind. is useful but the fact still remains that you can't see all that is Actualized and therefore there will always be that niggling doubt that something is out there, actualized, that will fuck up Theist.

-Creator may not start off knowing it is the greatest concept, and have to prove that second-hand, but at lest Creator TTB starts off knowing its object really does exist. Theist starts off unsure beyond all doubt that God really does exist! Creator starts off knowing that something(s) of Creator do exist and then works from that to show that it is the greatest concept

>The idea that Ind. allows Theist to start off knowing that God exists is also wrong. We can't see all of A-Infinity or know A-Ideal perfectly in Its fullness, so many there's something there that would make the FBE exist as multiple things or something else! .

-Starting-Off

>See above note!

-Purpose Comes From Structure

-Least-Parts vs Indivisability

>You can't see all of Ind. and so it will always remain an unknown to you. At least we know the Concept of Creator does exist!

>Reaching For The Sun

-Pragmatic Certainty = Only that which you can see with your own eyes, and hold in your head, can you truly know. All else is educated theory.

-Levels of Certainty = You are more Certain that Creator, as a Concept, exists than does Theist and the Supreme. Therefore, Creator before Theist!

-Certainty or Supremacy

>Certainty first. No point in believing in something that appears to be supreme if it turns out not to have existed at all!

-Theist Always Involves Parts

>A-Ideal, Actualized God, Ind., FBE... Theist is a web of different concept that are meant to portray the ultimate truth, but it doesn't change the fact that it is parts.

>Creator needs actualization too, but you can do it in your head and know that it exists. It's not the same thing as with Theist which needs a single, specific ACtualization or the whole thing falls apart.

-Requirements-Numbered

>A TTB's count of 'parts' is equal to how much you need in order to be all about it. Creator requires only the Concept of Creator, where else Theist involves several things. The Concept of Creator immediately connects to all that it needs (such as Ind., etc.). But Theist needs multiple parts that are interconnected and thus open the door to the Shifting.

-Parts & Unknowns

>Creator is a simple concept which you can fit in your head. Absolute and total certainty. Theist, however, requires both the A-Ideal and Actualized God, which also entails the Mind of God and that definitely brings parts and the unknown into things...

-Incorporation

-Infinite Creator's List

>Existence is all Attributes. Creator is defined as being about all Existence, therefore It is about all Attributes. Therefore, same List as A-Ideal.

>Creator is defined as being about Existence, including the ability to make changes to Existence. Any Actualized Infinite-Creator would be able to alter Is own Attributes List to be the A-Ideal.

>You may not have every Attribute on the list, but if the Actualized thing in question can make any change It wants, than It can have any Attribute regardless.

 >And an Infinite-Creator could \*somehow\* totally still be primarily Creator and possess the List of Attributes from A-Ideal!

>Creator is about Existence, which is all Attributes. Therefore, it has all Attributes as a concept, which makes it A-Ideal.

>Creator is about Existence, and A-Ideal only counts as Existence, therefore same Attributes List.

>Existence, for the record, is A-Infinity/A-Ideal. There can be nothing outside of it for it is already all things!

-Mighty Lead Pencil Refuted = This so-called proof only works because you prescribing all the powers of Creator unto a single object, using a quirk of infinity.

That Which Can Create An Attribute = An Infinite Creator can create anything, including giving Itself all Attributes possible, which is what A-Ideal's List is. Therefore, Creator and A-ideal have the same Attributes list!

-Why Creator?

>Creator is being about all Attributes, which is what the A-ideal does. The A-Ideal is about Itself, has no parts, and is all Attributes, therefore It is about all Attribues. And Creator is About Existence which is all Attributes. Therefore, same Lists of Attributes, same nature!

>Creator is the verb form of A-Ideal/Existence.

-Incorporation

>Whatever is out there, it cannot cause a surprise upheavel of anything, because Creator must be about that as well. The exact same arguement for A-Ideal! Creator must be about all Attributes and possess them. Therefore, there is nothing left to unseat it as the substance of A-Ideal.

-It is obvious to the mind that hte Internal-ACtion of the A-Ideal is to Self-Create. Because the one-thing that It does is also an infinite number of things, all done with the end goal of fulfilling the A-Ideal's existence, which Transferance of Attributes shows to be Actualization!

>End Goal proves Creator!

-Wandering From God

>All acts of creating relate back directly to an Aspect of God.

>Besides, strict Theism leads to Connectivity.

-End-Goal = This is what cements A-Ideal as being Creator in nature.

-Ending the Shifting = When we finally know what God wants us to be.

-Reaffirmation - When in doubt, remember to remember that A-Ideal makes God solely The Creator.

>REmember the Religion Aspect!

>Remember to ask yourself how God wants us to follow Him!

>We either know that God is One and Creator or we know nothing at all, and maybere there are many Gods! Either you have Certainty or you have nothing at all!

>

-The Shifting Ends = The Shifting will end when we deal with the issue of BTI and the TTB.

-To be about Object of A-Ideal, one must be about all objects. Truth statement: if all is related to A-Ideal, than not being about something is therefore missing something of A-Ideal and thus not being ALL about it.

>This includes being able to temporarily be about other objects for some time. That is a thing that you must be able to Actualize, even if you never want to use it.

>

-Right Mindset

  >Creator TTB is the right mindset, the mindset of God, the mindset that makes people be Good, good with a capital G.

  >Theist offers multiple mindsets to choose from. This is immediate to the mind.  When Theist, you can't always be sure what God is about or what His values are, and saying God is about Himself doesn't really convey much actually useful knowledge. Creator can convey what God is about.

>You can be Creator and completely and immediately be about God, and only God!

>

-Creator As A Concept

   >Is immediate, unless God/A-Ideal as a Concept, which requires multiple acts of metaphysical proving to understand and believe. Therefore, Creator as a Concept is inherently more Certain than any variation of them!

Certainty is the Anchor

  >I have no choice in this, my entire life has been a desperate search for Certainty. I cannot funciton withoutit, so questions of whether it should be the Anchor are, at this point, really academic and useless.

\*Certainty is the Anchor, add it to Anchor page!

-Theoectivity Is A Skill

>Theoectivity is a skill, one you master all on its own. Both Creator and Theist have PTBASE, so simply having a TTB will neither guarantee for or against having Theoectivity. You must gain this through practice!

>

-All Things Related Principles

>Only A-Ideal is necessary. But when other things are made, they are thus related to the A-Ideal (unless the A-Ideal doesn't want them to be, but this position is the presumed default, as per the truth statement behind this principle).

-A-Ideal is about all creatings!

>Not because It needs to be, but as consequence of Its nature!

*-All Things Related To A-Ideal, Therefore All Creatings*

*-Related But Not Needed (Can Cease Existing Without Change).*

*-Being All About A-Ideal (all objects).*

 *>If you ignore anything, than ther eis something of A-Ideal you don't have! Vilating the nature of A-Ideal!*

*-Definition of A-Ideal actually includes all creatings = A-Ideal is primarily about Itself but must also be about anything related to Itself!*

-Why not be about all of God?

>Theological Responsibility

>Hard Reality!!!

-Creator builds up, I slide back into Theist, then Hard Reality keeps hitting me until I give up Theist. Then the cycle repeats itself.

\*The Names do not work. Theist only works when dealing directly with the Object of God. As Theist you can keep up the emotional connection for some time, but it always fades eventually. Or doubt attacks. Only Creator is immune to this for obvious reasons.

\*Do you really think Creator would have lasted this long if not what God really wanted?

 -The problem with Aim of the A-Ideal is that it does not define A-Ideal clearly. Does this mean just the Object or the actions too?

>

-The internal action of A-Ideal is Combination, which is a form of Addition and thus Creator.

-The Aim of the A-Ideal does not change other facts known about the Object of the A-Ideal. It simply restates something that other principles also reveal, that the A-Ideal is all-sufficient.

>Both Aim of the A-Ideal and Sum Of All Addition can both be true at the same time. There is no conflict there!

-Aim of the A-Ideal still leads to Creator because A-Ideal has no parts, all is Actualized Perfect-Existence, therefore all is created and existing! If Aim concerns anything else but full Actualization, it is wandering away from Object which violates Solus Deus!

>Aim of A-Ideal only concerned with how A-Ideal actually exists, since all other things are potential variations of A-Ideal including Its destruction.

 >It concerns the potential Death of God and other such Destroyer things, but God as He exists is pure potential which is Creator.

-Because all of Existence is variations of A-Ideal, Aim of A-Ideal, to truly be about everything related to A-Ideal, must also be about all of Existence!

>This is the caveat of Theist, everything is variations of A-Ideal, therefore to be all about just God is still everything. God may just be one Object but everything about that Object goes infinitely beyond it!

>The concept of 'being only all about' doesn't truly apply to the Object because everything else is immediately related to It!

>A-Ideal and A-Infinity go hand-in-hand!

>Can you truly be only all about the A-Ideal when you haven't studied all other objects which exist as flawed copies of A-Ideal?

>

-Technically speaking, everything is a Name somehow.

-Even if you never need Both Whole & Parts, because A-ideal is all sufficient, the option should still be there because It exists within God and therefore should be regarded.

-God prefers Creator because that which creates, ACtualizes or makes Existence 'better,' is therefore a reflection of HIm and His nature!

>The more Actualization, the more like God!

>God is Creator Of Perfect Existence!

-The A-Ideal is both many actions and yet one, and that one action is the Addition of A-Ideal, and that meta-action can only be one action otherwise the A-Ideal has parts!

-All Cages of Logic rely on a principle, but you can never be sure there isnn't an equal or greater principle that will somehow change it. Anything is possible.

Cages & Doubt:

>You can't follow aTTB if it can't stop doubt leaking into it. Unless you've seen all of A-Infinity, you'll never be absolutely sure that your argument for a specific TTB is correct.

>For instance, all of Theist relies on the principle of Culmination (the A-Ideal being the Culmination of Culmination, after all) but how can you defintitively prove there isn't anothe rprincple out there which leads to a different result beyond the A-Ideal and is superior somehow to Culmination? You can't. And so you will always have doubt!

>No argument for a TTB is so ironclad that it is immune to a new principle being introduced by God.

>

## Further-Notes:

-If Theist goes negative, Adept is too Bland, we will snap back to Creator anyway!

-The key to only half is nailing everything either to Creator or Destroyer. Because all things are categorized as either Creator or Destroyer, Creator therefore has same Certainty and Connectivity as Adept.

-Creator and Adept have same definition, except we make Destroyer a thing too to give it something to fight against.

-Technically, all things ae of Creator, as per its definition, but to give Creator something to fight against, we allow Destroyer (its opposite) to be a thing too.

-C&C (Connectivity and Certainty) thus applies equally to Creator or Adept!

-Flagship Order?:

>Orders and Aspects serve the same purpose.

>Why use Theist as your "flagship" to keep Adept from being Bland when you can base most of your work on Creator?

>Creator is mathamatically less likely to go negative over Theist. It is therefore illogical to make Theist your flagship and not Creator.

>Creator makes a better Flagship to keep Adept from going bland.

>The question here is Theist/Adept vs Creator/Adept.

>Creator does not "replace" Adept because they have the same definition. Both Creator and Theist/Adept suffer from the occasional connectivity-error. If you play as Theist.Adept, you sometimes can't connect with things which are too specific and tied to something seemingly unrelated to God like the Arts. (main characters msut be overhwemingly Theist, having too much of a specialization doesn't feel right, etc.).

>

Theist/Adept Has Connectivity-Error Too:

-Remember playing Fallout New Vegas as a Theist with WhiteGloves but it felt too much like Muse?/

-Theist/Adept can struggle with stuff not enough of God if it is supposed to be Protagonist.

Bulk Of Work Should Be Based on Who?:

-Creator/Adept is mathamaticaly less likely to go negative than Theist is. Therefore, your specialization, which is what the bulk of your life choices and work will be based on, should go with Creator. More C&C there!

-It is totally possible for Theist to go negative, and yet God is still good and trusting. Anything is possible. But Creator has infinite objets, while Theist has ostensibly only one.

Certainty, Connectivity & Connotation:

-Conotation and Connectivity aren't the same thing: Connotation implies FOUNDING objects. Theist without God is useless but Creator as a TTB is supposed to be about all objects.

-Theist will try to invoke Adept again but this is about Specialization. Both Theist and Creator are Adept, in that they have full Connectivity, but Adept needs a specialty to not be Bland, so which one should be your Speciality?

-It should be the one with all three factors of the Anchor. Creator has full Connotation so it is least likely to go full negative, meanwhile Theist has only one Object!

-Remember, it's Thesit/Adept vs. Creator/Adept. Creator goes better with Adept because it has full Connotation. You don't want the bulk of your work to be the one thing most likely to go negative.

-Connotation is Foundation.

-Just as everything must have a concept, it must have an aspect as well. Since they are really the same anyway.

-Even if you go with Adept as TTB, you need a specialization. Why not choose Creator which has infinite Connotation instead of Theist which has just one object?

-Your specialization will be what the most important parts of your life are founded upon. Make it the best foundation possible.

-Even if you go with Theist/Adept instead of just Theist; you will still be basing the important parts of your life on the subject of Theist as it will be your specialty and thus what gets used most.

-Isn't Theist/Adept Just Theist As A TTB?:

>Creator is only about 50-70% of existence, with things strongly of Destroyer being hard to identify with.

>Theist/Adept might be mostly Theist, but that 10%or so is still everything else. If Theist proves wrong, at least that 10% can inspire others.

>If Creator is proven wrong, you lose everything too.

>No TTB has no risk whatsoever. It's about getting the TTB with the most coverage and least risk.

>The point here is that Theist/Adept covers everything, while Creator only 70%. That's still better, mathamatically speaking.

>At least with Theist/Adept, all of existence is truly covered, unlike with Creator TTB.

>

-Adept has no identity.

>There is no single 'Adept,' just countless variations, therefore nothing to actually latch on to to emulate. The whole point behind having a TTB is to grant onse's self an identity!

-Adept doesn't actually mean being about existence, because there are an infinite number of versions of Adept that are somehow against wider existence, and there is no reson some of them aren't dominant within A-Infinity.

>Without Theist, Adept has no appeal.

>Adept has no unifying defiition, and so isn't a real TTB.

>I know this doesn't sound important but it is: being Adept isn't being about the Fullness of Existence, just any and all things. That's not a TTB, not an Identity, there is no idea to unite all variations of Adept, not even existence itself since some Adept variations must be against existence and still count fully as Adepts. Creator at least has a sliding scale between itself and Destroyer.

>Which Order or version of Adepts is the "most" Adept of them all. You can't tell, and therefore there is no unifying definition or identity to Adept TTB.

>If you can't say for sure which Adept Order is the main one, you can't definie Adept TTB.

>And you can't just say that the main Adept Order is the one about existence in general, because you never know what is out there in A-Infinity. Unless you TTB starts off with a definition to give identity, it doesn't get any.

>

-Adept is the same as Creator

>Adept is being about the fullness of existence, means you never want to move awway from that fullness, start being conservative about it. That's the Creator mindset.

-Creator as a concept is about all of existence. Therefore, it and Adept are one and same.

>Anything is relatable to a Name.

-You can't have two TTBs at once, as in this Theist/Adept combo. One must take dominance.

-The problem with Adept is that it has no identity by itself. It's not really a thing but a stitched up collection of things?

>Creator grants an identtity, something to stand for!

-Both Creator and Adept claim to stand for the totality of existence (Widest-Net) but Adept has no inherent focus on the totality concept. That is, you can be Adept and decide to stick to just one order. Creator as a concept is inherently about the bigger-picture always.

-In practice, Adept would eventually become Creator, because Adept is about existence which leads to all the same value judgement as Creator. It would be Creator TTB but with a different set of names and labels for the same things.

>And trying to make your TTB Theist/Adept won't work because if you lock your specialization into Theist, then de facto you can't specialize later on in other things, which is counter to the spirit of Widest-Net.

>Widest-Net and permanent specialization don't mix well, in case you havent noticed.

-Theist/Adept is a cop-out, the truth is that you are really just Theist and witout that, the whole things falls apart.

-There is no such thing as 'Adept TTB' because there is no central Adept identity. There are many Adept Orders, some of which are designed to be couner to the fullness of existence. So which one is central or takes front lead? None of them do. Ergo, Adept has no identity, and therefore cannot be a TTB.

>What is the point of teaching a TTB that has an ever-changing makeup!?

-Adept does suffer from Only-Half, because the opposite of the fullness of existence is parts themselves! You would struggle to identify with things that are really specific!

>I've seen this already previously.

>As Adept TTB, you would also struggle to be about things which are independent of the rest of existence or want to be more separated.

-As Adept, which is about the fullness of existence, you would show favor to things which are geared towards the fullness of existence over those things which were lesser. Which is the same as Creator.

>Life before death, peace before war, etc.

>As such, you would also find it harder to connect with those lesser things when in the presence of other things that represent a more fullness of existence. Again, the same as Creator.

>As Adept, you couldn't connect with total destruction, now could you!? That would be the end of existence, the end of Adept TTB!

>

-Hard Connections:

>Theist requires things that are blatantly about God to be Theist connectivity. Creator doesn't, and so you can be Creator TTB with soft connections.

>

Creator Is All Concepts:

>Anything can be made, therefore anything is immediately relatable to making or Creator, therefore all concepts are covered by Creator TTB. Just ask yourself how is soemthing made.

>Anything, any concept, dicotomy or anything, be immediately related to CReator TTB by trying to figure out how its made.

>Therefore, the Creator/Destroyer dichotomy is identical to Adept in general.

>And therefore, the Theist.Adept TTB is mathamatically just Theist, which is mostly just one things and thus violates the spirit of Widest-Net which is being about everything at once.

>Thefore, the TTB of Widest-Net is Creator/Destroyer and not Thest/Adept for percentage reasons.

>

\*Personal experience proves that Theist/Adept falls depending on Theist. Adept has no identity and so no appeal on its own.

-Creator/Destroyer is the TTB of the Widest-Net Anchor because allows for connectivity, for you to be about any and all objects in A-Infinity, unlike Theist/Adept which is really just Theist and Adept has no identity.

>

-My Life Is Shit:

>I can understand God being distant, but what about the endless parade of "Murphy's Law" incidences? What about all the times things come together, despite my precautions, and I get reamed anyway?

>I've been Theist for over two decades. Look at me!

>If you can't be sure God is for you, there is always that doubt that He is against you in trying times.

>

When Creator TTB Feels Blande:

>You need something to, or something to fight against, as Creator in such situations.

>Find that which is most Creator and stand for it against other things which are less-Creator.

>This restores Connectivity.

-Adept isn't one thing, it's a bunch of things.

Without Theist, it has no appeal. Which makes Theist/Adept just Theist TTB.

-Of course everything is tied to Creator if you are Creator TTB' but if you want just one thing to be about and be about all things through that, that's how it is!

-Theist doesn't have any hard connectivity!

-Creator/Destroyer is applicable regardless of what is actualized; there is always the change that Theist is somehow negative and Adept isn't really one TTB but all of them.

-You cannot serve two masters, as Theist/Adept all the important stuff must still be about Theist immediately. You will never be able to be about all of Widest-Net that way!

-Aspects feel fine, but the Names feel goofy when used in real life.

-Theist/Adept feels appealing at first glance because it appears to be unfettered by ties to any single concept. But in practice that is bad; you need a solidifying concept to bind it all together.

-The problem with using Theist with Adept is that Adept is really a whole bunch of other TTBs, and they end up competing with Theist for ownership/connectivity of objects. The restult is that Theist can't get any Hard Connectivity because everything is already closely relatd to other established concepts/TTBs.

>You can't connect to things in nature because they are tied to stuff like Beat, Gaia, Weather, etc.

>Creator/Destroyer is different becaue all things that exist are just sub-divisions of Creator. They are not competitors.

>

-Technically speaking, Creator/Destroyer is actually Creator/Adept/Destroyer, because Adept is inherent within Creator TTB.

-It really comes down to being one thing which gives you all things. That is Creator and not Adept. Adept is all TTBs together, which means it is not any single TTB.

--Adept isn't one thing, it's a bunch of things.

Without Theist, it has no appeal. Which makes Theist/Adept just Theist TTB.

-Of course everything is tied to Creator if you are Creator TTB' but if you want just one thing to be about and be about all things through that, that's how it is!

-Theist doesn't have any hard connectivity!

-Creator/Destroyer is applicable regardless of what is actualized; there is always the change that Theist is somehow negative and Adept isn't really one TTB but all of them.

-You cannot serve two masters, as Theist/Adept all the important stuff must still be about Theist immediately. You will never be able to be about all of Widest-Net that way!

-Aspects feel fine, but the Names feel goofy when used in real life.

-Theist/Adept feels appealing at first glance because it appears to be unfettered by ties to any single concept. But in practice that is bad; you need a solidifying concept to bind it all together.

-The problem with using Theist with Adept is that Adept is really a whole bunch of other TTBs, and they end up competing with Theist for ownership/connectivity of objects. The restult is that Theist can't get any Hard Connectivity because everything is already closely relatd to other established concepts/TTBs.

>You can't connect to things in nature because they are tied to stuff like Beat, Gaia, Weather, etc.

>Creator/Destroyer is different becaue all things that exist are just sub-divisions of Creator. They are not competitors.

>

-Technically speaking, Creator/Destroyer is actually Creator/Adept/Destroyer, because Adept is inherent within Creator TTB.

-It really comes down to being one thing which gives you all things. That is Creator and not Adept. Adept is all TTBs together, which means it is not any single TTB.

-It really come down to Creator vs Adept.

-Adept doesn't stand for Existence/Widest-Net because it stands for nothing. It's really just a bungled term that stands for all TTBs everywhere.

Disqualifying Theist/Adept As TTB of Widest-Net:

-Theist alone isn't the TTB of Widest-Net and Adept isn't because it doesn't stand for anything, existence or otherwise.

War For Your Specialty:

-Now that Thesit has been tipped over thanks to Widest-Net, the argument now is that you should just be Adept with theist as your specialty.

-Theist even as specialty will lead to Only-Half, because that's exactly the setup with Creator (Creator is all things with an internal emphasis on fullness of existence).

-If including the other Orders in what you do frees Theist from connectivity-issues, shouldn't doing the same with Creator also free it of only-half?

-Theist shouldn't be your speciaty because you can never actually know God.

-Your TTB should be all objects with a 'specialty' on the Fullness of Existence so your mind is forever open and always searching for more!

-The difference between Theist and Creator becomes the question of which specialty should you prefer as ADept?

>If Widest-Net is truly the Anchor, the Reason, than it would be Creator as your sub-specialty, because being about the Fullness of Existence on top of being open to everything is the very epitomy of Widest-Net.

Creator Isn't A Single Object After All:

-How can 'addition' or being about existence in general go bad... when everything is an adition to other things?

-To put it anotherway, how can the concept of Addition go bad when t