A radical thought:
The universe is eternal.
God is eternal.
The universe and God are the same.
And in His immensity He loves us.
The Creation and the Creator are not the same. Worshipping the Creation is what the Greenie Left does.
A bid AMEN to that!
A nice thought, but an incorrect one.
Mathew 24:35
Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away.
Pantheism (wherein God and the Universe are identified with each other) is commonly considered to have been first formalized a few centuries ago by Baruch Spinoza, though numerous pagan religions going back to Antiquity had pantheistic elements.
Given that it's been around for a while, it's not exactly that radical.
It's also heretical, contradicting many aspects of Divine Revelation, and incompatible with what God has revealed about Himself. To quote from the Old Catholic Encyclopedia on Pantheism:
It has often been claimed that pantheism by teaching us to see God in everything gives us an exalted idea of His wisdom, goodness, and power, while it imparts to the visible world a deeper meaning. In point of fact, however, it makes void the attributes which belong essentially to the Divine nature For the pantheist God is not a personal Being. He is not an intelligent Cause of the world, designing, creating and governing it in accordance with the free determination of His wisdom. If consciousness is ascribed to Him as the one Substance, extension is also said to be His attribute (Spinoza), or He attains to self-consciousness only through a process of evolution (Hegel). But this very process implies that God is not from eternity perfect: He is forever changing, advancing from one degree of perfection to another, and helpless to determine in what direction the advance shall take place. Indeed, there is no warrant for saying that He "advances" or becomes more "perfect"; at most we can say that He, or rather It, is constantly passing into other forms. Thus God is not only impersonal, but also changeable and finite-which is equivalent to saying that He is not God.
It is true that some pantheists, such as Paulsen, while frankly denying the personality of God, pretend to exalt His being by asserting that He is "supra-personal." If this means that God in Himself is infinitely beyond any idea that we can form of Him, the statement is correct; but if it means that our idea of Him is radically false and not merely inadequate, that consequently we have no right to speak of infinite intelligence and will, the statement is simply a makeshift which pantheism borrows from agnosticism. Even then the term "supra-personal" is not consistently applied to what Paulsen calls the All-One; for this, if at all related to personality, should be described as infra-personal.
Once the Divine personality is removed, it is evidently a misnomer to speak of God as just or holy, or in any sense a moral Being. Since God, in the pantheistic view, acts out of sheer necessity--that is, cannot act otherwise--His action is no more good than it is evil. To say, with Fichte, that God is the moral order, is an open contradiction; no such order exists where nothing is free, nor could God, a non-moral Being, have established a moral order either for Himself or for other beings. If, on the other hand, it be maintained that the moral order does exist, that it is postulated by our human judgments, the plight of pantheism is no better; for in that case all the actions of men, their crimes as well as their good deeds, must be imputed to God. Thus the Divine Being not only loses the attribute of absolute holiness, but even falls below the level of those men in whom moral goodness triumphs over evil.
There are many more such criticisms of pantheism, but I'll leave off with this one: if pantheism is true (that the Creator and the Creation are one), then what was the point of the Incarnation of Christ?
As you would say MeganC, regarding putting God into a box: that is not the case. Rather, it is equivalent to hearing a false gospel, and declaring it anathema, as St. Paul taught the Galatians.