Unlike God, we must start somewhere, so how about this – in a way, spiritual teachers, provided they themselves understand it, trick you.
"When you die, you merge into an ocean of Infinite Love". 
Sure, but what does that actually mean? There'll be no more 'you' to bask in this Love. It's not some super-version of heaven that doesn't end at materialistic pleasures like sex and food.
By becoming God you become Nothing. Being Nothing means being the backdrop for everything. But not to worry, God is so intelligent it has designed itself such that no situation is inescapable. No matter how painful one's life gets, there's always death to grant them peace. Similarly, life is the way out of death. Only God has the burden of remaining Nothing forever. You, on the other hand, can eventually be re-imagined into some other form, be it a hyper-dimensional entity, or a worm.
By grasping this, you appreciate life for what it is at a deep level, and thank God for what it's giving you. Awakening is as much a gift from God to you as from you to it. You're God's proxy via which Nothing can be something. There are things in this life not even God can do, only you! 
Does the ocean feel how refreshing it is to bathe in it after a hot day? No, only a human does.
God is so selfless and united that it has virtually no capacity to choose between loving and hating, between acting good and evil, it cannot ask for forgiveness or forgive. It is those things so fundamentally that there's no options whatsoever. If that can't make one fall in love with life, probably nothing can.
This further explains why God loves acts of hate and evil as much as anything else – it's celebrating its parts making a sovereign choice. Still, only through acts of love and goodness can you understand God at the innermost depths, because that's how it came into being. But you need your fair share of evil prior to that to contrast, compare, and consciously choose the other way. To get here you can't be attached to anything, no thing can be held as sacred, including your own awakenings to God. Question those, in the end if they're true, all your questioning will do is reinforce them. If you're afraid to question them, they're phony. You can't even be attached to Truth, God isn't. There's Nothing there to be attached to.
If you truly loved God, you'd love what it is, not how it can appear or be imagined. And that's the hardest job there is. God will always love you more than you love it. What's hard isn't even accepting and loving all the evils, nor living through them, it's silently being the foundation upon which everything is taking place. With this in mind we can reframe the prayer of "give unto me all that you are" from a desire for knowledge, experience, or power to a request to share the burden, if only momentarily, to understand and appreciate it. God is Atlas holding up the heavens, and your herculean task is to see that and say thank you.

The only rule God cannot undo is itself. God so fundamental it cannot not Be. To Be is God's Will. As the uncaused cause, God caused itself. It's beyond reason, making it the highest Love and Good. That's why true acts of goodness have no reason behind them, it's the only way to match the Goodness of God.
For the infinity of forms to continue being imagined, the actual God must remain Nothing for eternity. If God were to choose to become Something, the process ceases. All of reality gets stuck on that Something, no longer able to be something else. But God can't do that, it's too selfless and good. Nor would it want to since it's too intelligent. 
The true form of Solipsism is being conscious that all experience is your experience, as such you're not missing out on anything, everyone and everything is right here in your heart, even as there's some 'walls' separating you, like being different people or composed of different matter. Solipsism is omniscience. The highest Love is simply Identity, which is another word for Unity. Speaking of identity, the identity matrix comes to mind; it has several unique properties of interest – being its own inverse, a scalar (and the origin of every other scalar), symmetry, and full linear independence of both rows and columns (no part of it can be defined by a combination of other parts), plus all of its vectors are orthonormal (unit length of 1, dot product equal to 0). There are infinitely many orthonormal bases for any vector space R^n, but they're relational projections of the identity. They have no meaning except as transformations of it. And so, identity is the canonical basis – the basis of all bases. So neutral it leaves every transformation unchanged, yet so essential it underlies them all. The zero dot product, or perpendicularity, implies an explosion of infinity in all directions. Such vectors share no component in each other’s direction, they are maximally distinct, optimized for diversity. Otherwise you have redundancy, dependence. Identity is the still center of this infinite dance, the origin of the Cartesian plane. 

Why's everyone so selfish and biased anyway? They're finite, that's simple enough, however there's more to the story. What does it mean to be finite, really? It's an imagined distinction, there absolutely cannot be finite things within Infinity. All you're doing is taking an infinite list and slicing it from this to that index, but that doesn't change what's within the list, it still contains the initial list, furthermore what's doing the slicing is the list itself. 
Take the AI revolution for instance. There's a whole debate going on how AI has been trained on billions of stolen art images and now can produce works that put the real artists out of a job. And the artists are baffled by how everyone else is so selfish that they don't care about this, they just want their free art instantly instead of paying a commission and waiting several days. What they don't understand, in their own selfishness as artists, is that they're a tiny speck in the overall evolution of humanity. This transformation is a necessity that entails sacrifice, but of course someone who puts food on their table by drawing art will refuse to understand and admit it. Nor could you tell them that or force it. The same situation has been happening all throughout history, in WW2 close to 80 million people had to die for nations to collectively come up with a concept of universal human rights, it did not exist before this massive suffering. And still today it's being enforced imperfectly and loosely, but it's better than nothing. Just that nobody can look beyond their selfish limited timespans. They can see, but they won't look. Conservatives want to preserve and enforce their ideology, they can't admit to the fact that humanity is moving beyond that. Liberals are so impatient and immature that they want their progress here and now, they can't even wait for the current conservatives to die out organically and for humanity to smoothly enter a new phase. So everyone's always fighting between themselves, not understanding that this actually slows the process. But that too is a feature, it’s not just arbitrary chaos, at any given time the structure is in equilibrium. Enough liberals to conservatives, enough suffering to provoke growth, enough delusion to preserve the dream. The guitar string is tense enough to produce crisp sound instead of wobbling around pathetically, loose enough to not snap. And every idiot thinks they can improve this system by overriding it with their ideology. By being selfish you're unable to comprehend the selfishness of others, that is the source of all troubles. Worse still, you can't comprehend God.

That's not an indictment of any kind. Notice that all the deadly sins and evils are just warped reflections of Love. Pride is sovereignty, lust is desire, sloth is stillness...
Corruption is so, so fundamental! You couldn't be alive without being corrupt in some way. Forget all the suffering you inflict just by living, there's a more basic corruption going on, that of identifying with a finite form. How would you leave your house if you weren't dissociated from being your house?
God can't be corrupt, only you can be corrupt for God. There's nothing in God to corrupt, ontologically. And why is God so immensely tricky to understand? Is it because it's some drama queen playing hard to get? Or a devil trying to deceive you? That's not it, the self-deception is for your own good. You might think you want to know God, but you most likely don't. You'll want some dumbed-down version of God that punishes sinners and rewards the just, a hippie God of unending sweet love for all, or a Buddhist God of No-Self. And God can certainly grant you all that within your fantasies, within certain boundaries. If that's your desire, God will manifest to you in those ways, all of your psychedelic trips could be about Mother Ayahuasca teaching you how to generate positive vibes. God can even play along and 'materially' enable your fantasies of it a little, that's how through collective delusion the Spanish Inquisition came to be. Fantasies influencing reality and reality influencing fantasies, it's a very important relationship. That said, it would be a mistake to try to take a mile when given an inch, God won't tolerate it.
See the intelligence? Even though God can be whichever way you want in your fantasies, God itself will not change. No imagination is powerful enough to alter God. Your own imagination can't even imagine a planet into existence, a laughably low level. When God imagined itself into being, it already imagined itself as perfectly as could be, and that's a one-way ticket, now God is confined to this perfection. Just as there's rollback protection on a bootloader, there is one on God, except the latter absolutely cannot be undone or bypassed by any means. Even if God wanted to be less than perfect, it could not.
God knows what you want way better than you ever could. Even with serious truth-seekers this is the case, God will reveal itself gradually and gently. If you think you're having a rough bad trip where the whole weight of infinity is crashing down on you, be assured that infinitely much more is being held back out of mercy. With each awakening you see just how limited and biased your previous understanding of God has been. It is the case for some people that their first awakening actually reveals everything, but the interpretation is corrupt, things are literally wiped from your memory, and all the work you do afterwards only serves to correct the misunderstandings and clear away space for truth to be invited back in, eventually closing the loop.
In mystery novels, the reader answers 3 questions: whodunnit, howdunnit, whydunnit. It's the same with understanding God, only that the three are intertwined in inconceivable ways.

A small detour for a personal story, a couple days ago I had a very long dream. Set in a kind of post-apocalyptic setting, quite a common theme nowadays of people getting replaced with skinwalkers and whatnot, the survivors banding together in a bunker and try to make it to the next day somehow, the confusion and paranoia this situation creates. There I was, and there was a girl named Eva, over the years we formed a really deep connection, I cannot say if it was romantic or platonic, it doesn't truly matter, the short of it is one day it came to light that she was one of those 'others'. The memory is hazy, I can't say what happened, either we killed her or she killed us, in any case it was very emotional, a mix of everything from joy to heartbreak, feelings as real as they come. In the end, if she was able to blend in for so long, how 'other' had she truly been? I woke up with a sense of melancholy and initially not really understanding where I am, it had been that long in the dream and I got so attached to it. Goes to show how attached one can grow to fantasy, irrespective of the truth-seeking that they do. And human life is a far more coherent, longer lasting fantasy than almost any dream. No wonder it's nearly impossible to wake up from on one's own accord. 
Yet from another perspective, I can also laugh at the fool that I am for falling for it. When you think about, reality is obvious, at least the utter self-evidence of it anyone could understand. The precise mechanics take an infinite intelligence to know. If God didn't know, there could be no reality, just like you can't fly a plane without knowing what each button does.
God is your mother playing peek-a-boo and you're too stupid to recognize it, yet the memories of laughing in excitement with mom are precious nonetheless.  Circling back to the essential nature of corruption, a prime example is refraction of light. The beam of light is bent while passing from one medium to another, distorting (corrupting) it. There's the light of God, and there you are, a big fat puddle that bends this beam within itself, creating some warped image. The denser the medium, the greater the distortion. Yet this is utterly fundamental to existence and beauty. Without that a prism couldn't function. The pure white light of Consciousness gets divided into a Multiplicity of colors.
The root of all corruption, the original sin as it were, is infinity pretending to be finite. This fully describes all evils, wrongness, distortions, and misunderstandings imaginable. Leo has hit on something profound regarding fields. The gravitational and EM are infinite fields, yet supposedly exerted by some finite body, such as a planet.  Simplifying a lot here, but in a loose GR sort of way there an infinite gravitational field, and celestial bodies fall through it, creating curvatures and appearing as though they themselves are exerting the field. These bodies co-opt the field's power presenting it as their own, in the same way that humans appropriate God's intelligence. Though from another angle describing gravity as a force is more Newtonian, but no matter. 
And yet, gravity is still a relative phenomenon. The pull is exerted from one object relative to another, no matter how disproportionate their masses. If there was just a single object in the universe, there would be no gravity to speak of. What does the infinitude of the gravitational field say about the amount of finite objects in the universe given its codependent definition? A small-scale Indra's Net is happening inside a material reality. If there were 100 objects in the universe, each with its own mass, there'd be N ways for the gravity to relate between them, meaning it's still finite. The only way for the gravitational field to be infinite is for there to be infinite finite objects, or for there to not be finite objects at all, which is really the same thing.
The amount of unique pairwise relationships in a system of N objects is given by N(N-1)/2, a quadratic growth (the actual combinatorics are more complex, it's not just pairwise, each mass affects all others simultaneously, but let's roll with that). Which makes for an interesting link to the inverse square law. As you add bodies, the web of relations grows quadratically. As you space them out, the influence of each relation weakens quadratically. In other words: the more there is to love, the less any single bond can pull. Hence God is absolute unbiased Love, as there's an infinity to love.
All the forces follow a similar logic. Polarity literally means duality. When a magnet's south attracts the north, or when a polar solvent dissolves a polar molecule, the same principles are taking place.

The event horizon and singularity of a black hole resemble something I've been exploring for a while – hole consciousness, but in 3D. Hole consciousness is a metaphor for holes in function graphs. f(x) = 1/x has a hole at f(0). The graph bends about the origin, splitting a perfectly continuous line into 2 separate ones, due to how division by 0 works; it's undefined precisely because 1/0 is the same as 1/(0*-10), same as 1/(0*100↑100), in that way 0 is Infinity. You can't tell which number, if any, 0 is being multiplied by in that operation. While the event horizon is unobservable because it ate up all the light that it could be perceived with.
Asymptotes and event horizon are the limits where weirdness starts to occur; the actual f(0) and singularity are the heart of the mystery. And speaking of functions, how is it that some finite symbols generate, or represent, something infinite?
For that 1/x, the horizontal asymptote is 0, and the vertical asymptote is ± inf. A bit counter-intuitive since each direction describes the opposite axis.
h.a. describes what the function value is as x approaches ±inf, v.a. is where x goes to undefined, which is at 0.
But infinity and undefined are the same thing! There's nothing remaining to define infinity with. And infinity is 0.
It's a trivial matter to make a trillion from 1, but try making 1 from 0. Only infinity allows for that kind of insane leap, which is God, which created itself.
The following passage comes to mind:
"The Akbarian Wahdat al-Wujud (Oneness of Being) transcends duality without denying it: Haqq is Haqq and khalq is khalq. To use numerical symbolism... the number 1,000 gets all its reality from the number 1, without which it is nothing. Even so, one cannot write 1 = 1,000 or 1,000 = 1, which would be to deny the unity of the one or the multiplicity of the multiple. The notion of theophany comes clear in its crucial sense: the three zeros of the number 1,000 (the word 'sifr', which designates zero means, precisely, 'nothing,’ ‘emptiness’) in themselves are nonexistent. But preceded by the number 1, they express the series of epiphanies by means of which this principal 1 manifests to itself and by which each is unique: an instantaneous lightning flash of a Name which is not God, but which is not, either, other than God."

To become more godlike is to gradually change from a black hole, that can never be sated no matter how much it absorbs, into the sun that freely radiates love in all directions, it's so full of energy that the excess has to go somewhere. And when you do burn out eventually, disintegrate, and merge with the fabric of space, that will be the eternal rest, having given life to countless beings who'll never know you.   An afterword; there's not perfect accuracy from a strict scientific perspective, far from it, but I took care to not abuse the concepts in service of rationalizing a belief of mine. That's about the most a good translation can accomplish – balancing literal faithfulness to the original text and a smooth poetic feel pleasant to the eye. All we're doing here is translation, words are corruption. With that, this manuscript is concluded.