This excerpt is misleading because apparently it is leading people to believe that the author is creating a theory against God - which is not the case. If you read further you will find it is a theory FOR God, not against God.
kosta50, in truth someone can find evidence for just about anything they want to in quoting from the bible. You're right that that's not the main point.
In fact, the point being made is identical to the one you made in your post. Having God as undefinable should not be a negative - it should be a positive. So, I don't see what your main disagreement is.
The fact that we can't know God's nature shouldn't stop us from theorizing what it might be most like and constructing patterns and extrapolations towards it. That is really all this piece appears to do.
My background in Eastern Orthodoxy is free from "humanizing God" and "deifying man." Eastern Christianity has from the start (the Desert Fathers) asserted apophatic knowledge of God -- i.e. one that actually negates, not affirms; therefore affirmation by negation (of our own selves). God is ineffable, unscirumscribed and indivisible, simple, eternal, omnipresent, transcendental, etc.
This theology gave rise to monasticism and has become the doctrine of the Eastern side of the Church through the works of St. Gregory Palams. This theology is free from the Renaissance tendency to elevate human reason to divine heights. God is a Mystery that is not ours to solve. As the OT says "My thoughts are not your thoughts and My ways and not your ways." Yet through our Lord Jesus Christ, a perfect God and a perfect Man, we can relate to God in a personal manner that no other faith can.
Perhaps so traviskicks. On Free Republic if you can not hit someone's "hot button" within the subject line, first few sentences or paragraph it is usually not worth reading the conclusion which requires further effort. This post hit my hot button because the author is obviously an intellectual or pretends to be one. In this particular case I believe 1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise...; Free Republic!???
God does not need to be explained by intellectuals ...only feared, worshiped and glorified. If the author is making the case for salvation all he needs to say is "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already..." John 3:18