If we personally believe in absoluteness, we must believe in God, necessarily, because the absolutely completed must be explained only with God, even if atheism must be seen so correct idea, its thing must be caused from that God is being as necessary as us, but it must be illusion. Because God is nevet as natural as us, because only God could have generated the universe contains the earth with all of us. Hence, ultimately if we think about somewhat so perfection, it necessarily means the presence of God. Because anybody could have the idealist idea as completion and perfection, and that must be necessarily the act only by God.

Then, how should we regard absoluteness?

Probably, we all potentially even if it could be just only subconscious mind, but actually aware of our own inabsoluteness, or incompletion, imperfection.
And its fact as it to be is absolutely certain evidence that we at least subconsciously believe in God. If in terms of that thinkng circuit, even atheists could never evade so well.

By the way, ethics could never be set, in having no God, as the presence for us, at least in terms of our own mindset, inherently we'd be given since we've given birth to us as capabily we easily judge, because ethincs need absolutenes as norm, standard, criteria in practicing everything in society, from the beginning of our own social life, our act, manner, behavior, and mind itself toward all of these, our mind bottom heart must have the idea of God.

Absoluteness means having no wander, and practicing, occasionally executing by ourselves, only its act base must make us ethics.

As long as we all could never give up the idea that absoluteness must exist, in which we must have the ideal idea in having self-confidence, that conviction by itself must be conving evidence that we have God in mind.

Eventually, we intrinsicly not to be concerned with rationally understandable idea, could never deny the notion of God, as the presence of social norm, criteria, or standard credo.
Conclusively, God's presence would be the complete entity for our personal mind, at least onlh that God's interpretation could exist at anybody's mind.

By the way, that absoluteness is necessarily different from nature law as the truth, because God only is our subconsciously holding mindset, then substantially very differentiated entity in reality, that must be very exceptional mind, because when we need absolute trust or belief in so hard distress, only God comes up to our own mind. Then God's notion in having absolute belief is not scientific interpretation, or along the reseached evidence, because generally belief means that we can positively believe in not confirmed at correspondance nor reference, that must be physically shown thing. Not sciebtificly evidenced matter.

In fact, this absoluteness could be universal only for human. Then its realization along with universal absoluteness could hardly realize, we all know it, thereby it must be God's perfection. It could never usual nof daily aspect we can easily confirm.

Hence,  that could be ethical value, and standard it. ( Or, normativity or criteria.)

Why nature law and its generating reality and our absolute values as ethics have mutual gap as consequences we'd face and be given as reality, thus, we must need absolute idealy developped or deployed process we could easily picture in mind.

And that gap must be our reason of what inherently we must believe in absoluteness. Thus, if if we had no gap between these two things, we could never have notion of absoluteness, in other words, then ultimately, absoluteness as our integral notion means that we really in world have never been given any perfect completion at any occasion, at least by only ourselves.
Eventually only our own power is very limited, restricted, and only partially universally abled. Therefore, we inherently need God as supposed realizer of absoluteness.

In other words, our understandable tear between our wishing clinging onto absoluteness and really realized nature with every factual truth must have had us destined at absolute correct way to be beyond way should be usually, as human.
Then ethics must be what we all implicitly share as absolute value. Rather because we all from the beginning we could have language as activity to keep society and mind we can believe in toward our own it and other all's them as a common functioned thing.

Certainly, that absoluteness could never be compared nor ifentified so the same to any each person, however, rather the essential issue does not belong to what any individual person's it must be in accord to be absolute. It's the most integral fact that anybody could or must think that there must be present, the absolute truth as the correct, the universal, although we could never ascertain all ones' it at the complete accord, in other words, we all can have  think so easily, that we can have sharing regarding it as the most important and indespensable, in no wander.

That factual truth must be more important that things' accord at anybody or in all ones.

Namely, that thing is just the vitalist truth, as absolutely general fact, beyond all skepticism, or to say, definitely absoluteness must be set as nortion only accompanied with another concept as relativeness, or relativity.

Intrinsic justness must be kept researching by analytical philosophers either from now on but for general citizens as usthat intrinsic vital mind turned to external value, that fact must be so vital.
Ethical issues or theological suggestive issues must get themselves started with its cognition.
(to be continued)

(Sep. 9th. 2020)