It is said that “I am not what you think I am; You are what you think I am”, and given this aphorism must be even more applicable to an incomprehensible God than to comprehensible human beings, then the question of God is very telling.
What kind of person would say of God that he requires blood, belief, and baptism in order to right the cosmic wrong He allowed in His creation?
If I am willing to risk the eternal damnation of such a God because it literally is a deplorable view of God and humanity I do not except and vehemently reject, what does that say of me?
If it turns out that God is in fact exactly as those have imagined, then holding the idea that ontological arguments for God are meaningful … such thinking has no value at all for I scarcely doubt we’ve ever created such a horrific monster as this God; and all aims of ontological arguments are the extention of our own characteristics in a perfected sense. And so, either this God exists and is so beneath any sense of perfection we have and we literally can and do conceive of something greater than God, or, this notion of God cannot stand under scrutiny of any ontological argument for the existence of God at all.