I'm not sure about you, but I've always had this thing about calling God "God". And for various very valid reasons, so it seems:

Various religions have their own gods, and their own names for them. Some even claim their deities as having no name. But most of us admit that deep down inside, we are all referring to the same entity. 

the name "God" has been historically meant to imply a male diety, while not all of us are in accordance there. Personally, mine feels more feminine, but that is how I chose to be this time around. 

We could call it "All that Is", or "Source", but although factually correct, this does not convey the essence of this Being of Beings.  But then Denisa came with an enlightening idea: rather than asking herself: "What would God want me to do?", which sounds quite submissive, she coined the phrase: "What would Love have me do now?" Notice how this question isn't submissive at all? Because there is no being-being relationship implied, just one being's adherence to Love is at play here.

So I suggest we reverently put all that Babbylonian confusion aside, and call our Highest Being "Love" from now on, because that is His / Her Essence!

Love your Love, 

Dre'