So in that sense, the whole acceptance thing is actually pretty transcendent even as it works to accept "what is."
This is why the two systems bump heads... especially when you involve people some of whom are very literal and concrete thinkers along with the abstractors who think in terms of fuzzier pictures and intuitions. The literalists translate the fuzzy intuitions as rejecting God and personal responsibility and not fighting to stop evil and whatever else, the abstractionists are seeing this bigger picture where everything is more of the same being and needs to be integrated, not eradicated, and that the fight itself just is missing the point.
There's a lot that can be said about this. But I've had the same basic struggle as well. I used to see God as very personal and specific because that is what the Bible told me (at least, in the tradition I was raised); I feel that, as I have gotten older and changed and experienced more of life, the very specific details I once believed about God have become very very fuzzy, but it's more than I am finding myself changed and shaped and "being god" more to others and wanting them to be a part of it. I have a lot of trouble explaining it clearly, because it's a picture/metaphor, not a linear statement.
You know how, when you have food or medicine or something outside your body, you can pick it up and hold it and look at it and examine it, so you can see all the details and it's all very easily described? But it's not part of you. It's outside of you. Then, when you eat it or administer it and it enters you and becomes part of you, you no longer can examine it in the same way, see all the lines and colors and shapes and whatever else? Yet you don't really NEED to do that, because more importantly it is now INSIDE of you, and actually has become part of who you are, and you are acting out of it as part of your identity? That's kind of how I view the whole "god" thing -- you have integrated more with it, so you have less need to explicate, define, and separate yourself from it for the purposes of defining it. But it's still very personal, in a sense, as it's part of you. You see the effects of it, rather than "it" anymore.