Hello there. It's been awhile since I commented. I think it is better to identify God in the category of Analogy of Being. Metaphor is one type of analogy. There are 4 basic distinctions of being as analogy. The analogies lie somewhere in between univocal and equivocal.
For a good breakdown see here:
https://thomism.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/analogy-in-st-thomas/

and here:

https://www3.nd.edu/Departments/Maritain/etext/LOA5.htm

this lecture gives a sense of analogy, only George seems to identify it as "topology"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWYaoAoijdQ&feature=youtu.be

The links in the above article at least have helped me to understand the concept of 'poetry' - extended to poiesis, auto-poises, which would include not only self-determination but individual responsibility, and thus feel I have indeed found what I was searching for, as an interpretation of Heidegger's philosophy. I am also satisfied that I have at least understood what I assume to be a conception of a 'human' freedom of will, examined with respect to external and/or institutional power and/or authority over the individual. Surely such distinctions can be regarded as helpful in coming to an understanding of the 'personal' and/or the 'divine', and/or even such distinctions as that between the empirically external, in contrast to the many possible 'modes' that can describe the experience of thought 'within'? You will of course note my failure tp achieve 'perfection' with respect to my choice of words!! Yet I am satisfied that this exercise of responding to comments, as a means of searching for answers has been sufficiently productive 'for me'....at this time???..Thank you for your patience with me. I do appreciate the links I find, even on the post that has been published following this one, and possibly too, you will find the following links of some relevance to today's topic. They do after all, do they not? reflect a post-modern, post Christian perspective!!???? .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Oedipus and although there are many excellent links within this article, there is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poiesis

Edit: This comment is being placed here some time after the original posting. Perhaps though, it will be found by someone who is interested. https://books.google.ca/books?printsec=frontcover&vid=LCCN88019831&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

"Why should we presume that the Church brings us closer to God?"

Good question. The Church, as instituted by Jesus Christ, offers us the opportunity to confess our sins against God's will, be given the grace of forgiveness, and partake in the communion of Christ. That is as close as you can get to God while in this present human form.
I can agree that there is a higher form of flourishing, that is man's response to God's gifts, such as a painter painting a masterpiece.

I wouldn't call it utilitarian. If our goal is to actualize human potential, I don't think living virtuously adequately captures what it means for humans to flourish. For instance, painting a masterpiece is clearly flourishing for the painter, but I do not see how it falls under a virtue.
I'm also curious as to why the Catholic Church reject that homosexuals should actualize their sexual potential, which is clearly an example of human flourishing.

Finally, what Marc offers as examples of religious virtue respect for authority, deferment to priests, genuflecting etc is not conducive to human flourishing. Slavery is not flourishing.

Let us suppose that you are correct. Our goal in life is to grow closer to God. Why should we presume that the Church brings us closer to God?

Today is All Saints Day, our potential to be actualized is for us all to be Saints. A Saint is an individual who lives in the presence of God. The purpose of the Church is to teach everyone how to do that, such as by teaching us to live virtuous lives. Is that utilitarian?

So it utilitarian? Greatest realization of potential for the greatest number?

When you deny Divine Law, anything can become permissible including professing to be Christian while not desiring to abide in The Word of God.

Yes, should be our full potential rather than singular. Trying to be concise.

So, actualizing your full potential is the purpose of human existence? It is the good that we should aspire to?