In order for a hypothetical creator and sustainer of all...

In order for such a being to have any meaning, proof, falsifiability…

It needs to be omnibenevolent.

The other possible omnis don’t make for a meaningful quality of such being as all beings desire, when they contemplate such things …

I’ll extend this…

The only quality we NEED from the idea of the BIG ONE… is omnibenevolence!

Otherwise it has zero or negative meaning

I want to expand upon this.

An omnibenevolent creator would create a universe where even with freewill, it would not only be impossible to make a bad decision, everything we do makes our lives better and better

You should read David Lewis, “Evil for Freedom’s Sake?”.

It would do this for each of us in some, potentially, mysterious omnipotent way

No, and I think the idea is absurd. People may want to be evil, but it doesn’t take much life experience to realize that they don’t want evil to happen to them.

Everyone wants omnibenevolent creation, there are no exceptions. Perhaps there’s reality splitting when something gets harmed, so that it continues on without being harmed, for example

Clearly you didn’t read the paper. It doesn’t advocate evil.

Ok

" … there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" - Hamlet

This is merely a subset of my thesis, God is an impossibility because an absolutely perfect holistic God is an impossibility.

This omnibenevolent is equivalent an absolutely perfect God who is absolutely benevolent or omnibevolent. This is impossible in reality due to the Problem of Evil. In addition who is to judge what is good and evil - thus ultimately this is subjective or intersubjective, therefore cannot be omnibenevolent.

Note omnibenovolent is merely an ideal in thought only and such an ideal is an impossible rational empirical reality.

The other omnis that make up an totally absolutely perfect God is critical. If your God is not all-powerful, then your God is inferior and dominated by another ALL-powerful God, e.g. has a smaller ‘dick’ than another.
If your god is not omnipresent, then your god could be existing within a piece of shit excreted by another God.

Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so.

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

Like I stated earlier, some people like to be wicked, but not one being in existence wants wickedness to fall upon them. Every being wants an omnibenevolent universe. In order to be omnibenevolent, a being is likely required to have the other omnis as well.

The tools for omnibenevolence are, molding/formation, copying, pasting, splitting

All normal human beings, except the psychopathic and the evil prone would expect benevolence. This is why we have the Golden Rule to promote it.
In addition, the trend of evolution in parallel with apes and other higher animals, the inherent compassionate and empathy tendencies represented by mirror neurons and others are increasing with time.

However you are going too far in postulating the existence of a “being” as an omnibenevolent universe.

The most we can expect is, human beings [not a Universal Being] will be more benevolent in time in relation in the increasing numbers of mirror neurons and its connectivity.

The normal inclinations of one in veering towards some kind of Universal Being with whatever omni-properties is merely psychological like what Hume discovered for induction.

“Good” and “bad” are not properties of objects and events … they are evaluations of objects and events. They are thoughts about objects and events. You can choose your thoughts. You can decide how you evaluate things, whether good, bad or neither.

“The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts” - Marcus Aurelius

No copying, cutting or pasting required. :wink:

Bad states of being exist, actually, only a really deranged person would argue otherwise … probably because they are self serving as a sadist. But even the sadist doesn’t want those returned upon them; thus: copy, paste, molding / forming, splitting, to form a cohesive omnibenevolent whole for all beings

Let me explain it this way, people are individuals and it is self evident to them when they experience reality molded to it, that it is good. To say there is no bad, is to make the claim that I don’t like or am allergic to certain foods, that I do enjoy - both are expressions of bad in my individuality.

Reminds me of this story:

Of course, I might be deranged. :evilfun:

I wanted to add this post here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193545

It’s important to note:

The path: fantasy becoming reality in a no harm way

The desire of all beings: omnibenevolent universe

The method: molding / forming, copying, pasting, splitting - all into a cohesive whole

The evolution - mass media about what to manifest and how

Since all beings want an omnibenevolent universe, one will manifest for everyone if it already hasn’t