First of all, I'm drunk. Not just drunk, not too drunk, I'm on Goldie locks status. Like, a bottle of Jameson and a bottle of Maker's Mark deep drunk. And it occurred to me: dichotomy. If what happens could or could not happen then the outcome is up to chance (from an objective, universal standpoint (i.e. we could make an action to set forth a desired outcome, but the desired outcome doesn't have to occur)). There's no right or wrong path, if you will, just the path, whatever happens. This dichotomy disproves god, or at best renders him irrelevant, in any context. For if god was to set forth a plan, his plan would be subject to chance (as god has the ability to make choices). If god is subject to chance, he is not god. If god is not subject to chance, no choices are made, thus no subjectivity, no choice, no presence, he is not god. If 'god is not subject to chance' he is not subject to the dichotomy, thus he is not subject (or even relative) to the universe and is irrelevant in the context of any universal phenomena. I'm sorry folks. I don't really do this. But revelation has come. We must move on. Choice > god
I agree with a lot of what you say.. except god is the objective reality.. . It is technically irrelevant when making a decision, but it still remains that without the objective, life would not exist. Once you can see the objective perspective, you realise the duality humans make in decisions, but ultimately are not right or wrong. They just are. However, it is important to still make subjective interpretations of "right" and "wrong" or "good" and "bad" or "light" and "dark" because these decisions still have consequences. It is true that the objective god made it ALL possible though. Not just the light side.. although I believe it is the "right" path. Human minds are the ones that create a subjective duality in an objective reality, and they do this through choice.
Perhaps god is too vague of a term. Let's say 'conscious objective influence'. Consciousness is relegated by is and is nots, if the whole is not about either it can't be conscious because actions, or things taking place, are subject to the possibility of their not taking place. If the whole is about either it doesn't matter if it's conscious because there was still the potential of another choice being made which would mean 'god' would be influenced. So I guess what I really mean is everything is choice because you have to choose whether everything is or is not choice, and a conscious objective influence wouldn't be able to make choices. There's really no point in me saying this but I felt it was important. :/ I could never really define my feelings on these things but now I have to conclude that I'm atheist. I saw evidence of 'god' but I think now it is again the human mind recognizing patterns inherent in it's own complexity.
I consider myself pantheist, but if that is your choice... I agree the objective consciousness doesn't determine the subjective decisions we ourselves make as individuals, but I still understand my beliefs enough to know it is still there, and it is what connects all life to this objective reality. I think too many atheists focus on the modern day bible to actually think it through for themselves. IMO, the bible started out pantheist, and Jesus was just human like the rest of us.
There is no such thing as chance and people really cant make choices, they simply do what they cant help but do. We are no different than machines.
I believe the energy you put into your choice determines the outcome......whether postive or negative....the choice is ours.