Originally posted by karoly aczel
The word is tainted, yes. But it is a very useful word when looked at in the right spirit.
No, not like in "Steve", lol
It sounds you are drawn toward Apophatic theology. Edit: Although not completely, as no outside definition can be expected to hit the mark as to what is internal. It seems paradoxical to think that words for what is inside such an approach, can fully apply.
In brief, negative theology is an attempt to achieve unity with the Divine Good through discernment, gaining knowledge of what God is not (apophasis), rather than by describing what God is. The apophatic tradition is often, though not always, allied with the approach of mysticism, which focuses on a spontaneous or cultivated individual experience of the divine reality beyond the realm of ordinary perception, an experience often unmediated by the structures of traditional organized religion or the conditioned role-playing and learned defensive behavior of the outer man.
Reference #1 at that link appears to be its main source.
I note you did not rule out a similarity to hallowed principles like Truth, as a explanation for the big "G" in "God".
I am tempted to believe too, that you concern yourself less with the ontological content expressed by belief in God, in favor of the attitudinal content, where one's choice of attitude is not subject to proofs and argumentation.